Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-01-05 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TENTATIVE 9:00 A.M. JANUARY 5, 2005 ROOM 241, COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING 1. Call to Order. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Moment of Silence. 4. Election of Chairman. 5. Election of Vice-Chairman. 6. Appointment of Clerk and Senior Deputy Clerk. 7. Set Meeting Times, Dates and Places for Calendar Year 2005. 8. Set Dates for Hearing Zoning Text Amendments Requested by Citizens. 9. Rules of Procedure, Adoption of. 10. Boards and Commissions Policy, Adoption of. 11. Presentations: a. Recognition of DSS Food Stamp Program. b. Boards and Commissions Certificates of Appreciation. 12. From the Public: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. 13. Consent Agenda (on next sheet). 14. 9:30 a.m. - Transportation Matters. a. Transportation Matters not Listed on the Agenda. 15. 10:00 a.m. - Piedmont Virginia Community College (PVCC) Update, Dr. Frank Friedman. 16. 1Q:15 a.m. Strc3mw3tch Prce:onkltion, John Murphy. (Remove from agenda-to be rescheduled) 17. 10:15 a.m. - Appeal: Belle Vista Preliminary Subdivision Plat, private road waiver request. TM 69, P 50C, consisting of 76.513 acs. Property zoned RA. Loc on Critzer's Shop Rd (Rt 151) approx 0.2 mls S of its intersec w/ Rockfish Gap Turnpike (Rt 250). White Hall Dist. 10:45 a.m. - Recess 18. 11 :00 a.m. - Family Support Program Evaluation Results. 19. 11: 15 a.m. - Bright Stars Annual Report. 20. Closed Session. 21. Certify Closed Session. 22. Appointments. 2:00 D.m. - Public Hearinas: 23. SP-2004-040. Mount Fair Farm (Sians #73&95). Request to permit fill in the floodplain for purpose of constructing 2 stream crossings for second driveway/farm road, in accord w/Sec 30.3.05.2.2(3} of the Zoning Ord which allows for fill in the floodplain. TM 26, P 33, contains 75.3 acs. Znd RA. Loc at NW corner of intersec of St Rt 810 & St Rt 673. White Hall Dist. 24. ZTA-2004-008. Flood Hazard Overlav District (FH). An Ordinance to amend Sec 30.3.01, Intent, Sec 30.3.02.1, Definitions - Generally, Sec 30.3.02.2, Determination of Floodway & Floodway Fringe in the Approximated Flood Plain, Sec 30.3.05.1.2, By Right W/in the Floodway Fringe, Sec 30.3.07, Amendment of the Flood Hazard Overlay District, & delete Sec 30.3.06.2, Finding of County Engineer, of Chapter 18, Zoning, of the Albemarle County Code. The boundaries of the Flood Hazard Overlay District are those areas w/in the County subject to inundation by the waters of the one hundred year flood, based upon maps resulting from a flood insurance study prepared by the Federal Insurance Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Recent detailed studies prepared by FEMA have resulted in new maps that will establish revised boundaries of the Flood Hazard Overlay District. This ordinance would amend Sec 30.3.01, Intent, to also refer to FEMA; amend Sec 30.3.02.1, Definitions -- Generally, to specify that the source for delineating the boundaries of the Flood Hazard Overlay District is the new flood insurance study prepared by FEMA, effective February 4, 2005; amend Sec 30.3.02.2, Determination of Floodway & Floodway Fringe in the Approximated Flood Plain, to provide that the procedure applies only to determine the floodway fringe in the approximated flood plain; amend Sec 30.3.07, Amendment of the Flood Hazard Overlay District, to add that the boundaries of the district may be revised, amended or modified upon completion of an authorized fill operation (superseding & being the basis for deleting Sec 30.3.06.2, Findings of County Engineer), or where changes are indicated through FEMA's issuance of letters of map amendment or letters of map revision; amend Sec 30.3.05.1.2, By Right W/in the Floodway Fringe, to allow pedestrian & multi-use paths w/in County parks & dedicated greenways, & footbridges. 25. ZMA-2004-019. Flood Hazard Overlav District (FH). This proposed amendment to Chapter 18, Zoning, of the Albemarle County Code, would amend the zoning map to change the boundaries of the Flood Hazard Overlay District (FHOD). The FHOD exists for the purpose of providing safety & protection from flooding by restricting certain uses, development & occupancy of lands w/in the district because they are subject to inundation by the waters of the one '"W hundred year flood. The district's regulations also assure that Albemarle County will continue in the regular program of the National Flood Insurance Program. The boundaries of the FHOD are based upon maps resulting from a flood insurance study prepared by the Federal Insurance Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in 1980. Recent detailed studies by FEMA have resulted in the creation of new maps that will establish revised boundaries of the lands subject to inundation by the waters of the one hundred year flood &, correspondingly, the boundaries of the FHOD, affecting approxi 4,120 Ps w/in Albemarle County. As a result of this proposed amendment to the zoning map, some Ps, or portions thereof, will be placed w/in the FHOD, some will be removed from the FHOD, some will remain in the FHOD but wi the FHOD's boundaries changing, & some will remain in the FHOD but wi no boundary change. The general usage w/in the FHOD includes certain agricultural & recreational uses to public utilities & other public service facilities; various water-related uses such as flood warning aids, water monitoring devices, flood control or environmental restoration measures, dams, docks, bridges, ferries, pump stations; certain retaining walls & revetments; hydroelectric power generation; aircraft land strips; & certain towers & fences. The FHOD also prohibits the establishment of structures designed or intended for human habitation; the storage of various petroleum-based liquids, explosives & other materials; the storage of machinery & vehicles as a primary use; & the stockpiling of debris, logs, junk cars & similar materials. The FHOD does not establish a density range, though it does prohibit establishing structures designed or intended for human habitation. The general usage w/in floodplains described in the Comprehensive Plan discourages development & inappropriate uses, the stripping of land, & the creation of impervious surfaces w/in floodplain lands because such development can result in increased danger to life, health & property, increased flood levels, & degradation of water quality & the natural & man-made environment. The Comprehensive Plan does not establish a density range w/in the FHOD. 2:30 D.m. - Work Session 26. Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-2003-006). 27. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. 28. Adjourn CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL: 13.1 Resolution to accept road(s) in Highlands at Mechums River, Section 2C, Subdivision, into the State Secondary System of Highways. 13.2 Requested FY 2005 Appropriations. 13.3 Jefferson-Madison Regional Library Bookmobile Funding Request. FOR INFORMATION: 13.4 Copy of letter dated December 10, 2004 from John Shepherd, Manager of Zoning Administration, to Richard P. Bell, IV, re: Official Determination of Development Rights and Parcels - Tax Map 568, Parcel 32 (property of Shirley L. Hathaway and Charles F. Leake /1/) - Section 10.3.1. 13.5 Copy of letter dated December 16, 2004 from John Shepherd, Manager of Zoning Administration, to Tommy Brannock, re: Official Determination of Development Rights and Parcels - Tax Map 58, Parcel 8A (property of Kevin and Coleen O'Rourke) - Section 10.3.1. 13.6 Albemarle County Service Authority's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for fiscal year ended June 30, 2004. 13.7 Copy of draft Planning Commission minutes for December 7,2004. 13.8 VDOT Monthly Report for January, 2005. ACTIONS Board of Supervisors Meeting of January 5, 2005 January 7, 2005 AGENDA ITEM/ACTION ASSIGNMENT 1. Call to Order. · Meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m. by the County Executive, Mr. Tucker. All BOS members were present. Also present were Bob Tucker, Larry Davis and Ella Carey. 4. Election of Chairman. · ELECTED Dennis S. Rooker for Calendar Year 2005. 5. Election of Vice-Chairman. · ELECTED Kenneth C. Boyd for Calendar Year 2005. 6. Appointment of Clerk. · REAPPOINTED Ella Carey as Clerk for Calendar Year 2005 and APPOINTED Debi Moyers as Senior Deputy Clerk for Calendar Year 2005. 7. Set Meeting Times, Dates and Places for Calendar Clerk: Advertise in The Dailv Proaress and Year 2005. post notice on door of Courthouse. · SET as follows: first Wednesday of the month at 9:00 a.m., second Wednesday of the month at 6:00 p.m., with meetings to be held in the County Office Building on Mcintire Road. In addition, since April 13, 2005 is a County Holiday, the Board amended its schedule and established April 20, 2005 as the alternate meeting date. 8. Set Dates for Hearing Zoning Text Amendments Clerk: Advertise in The Dailv Proaress as Requested by Citizens. required by Section 33.10.2 of the Zoning · SET as follows: September 14 and December Ordinance. 14,2005; and March 16 and June 9, 2006. 9. Rules of Procedures, Adoption of. Clerk: Forward copy to County Attorney. · ADOPTED. (Attachment 1) 10. Boards and Commission Policy, Adoption of. Clerk: Incorporate recommended changes and · DEFERRED the policy until January 12,2005. put on consent agenda. · CONSENSUS that staff develops term limits for Clerk: Schedule on February 2nd agenda. all Boards and Commissions and bring back to Board for review. 11a. Recognition of CSS Food Stamp Program. · Chairman PRESENTED recognition. · Kathy Ralston recognized Social Services staff. 11 b. Boards and Commissions Certificates of Appreciation. · Chairman PRESENTED to Jenny Greenwood of the Housing Committee and Robert Vernon of the Historic Preservation Committee. 12. From the Public: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. · Theresa Tapscott, Executive Director of AHIP, provided a progress report on AHIP activities. 1 13.1 Resolution to accept road(s) in Highlands at Clerk: Forward signed resolution to Greg Mechums River, Section 2C, Subdivision, into the Cooley in Department of Engineering. state Secondary System of Highways. (Attachment 2) · ADOPTED the attached resolution. 13.2 Requested FY 2005 Appropriations. Clerk: Forward signed appropriation form to · APPROVED FY 2005 Appropriation #2005039. Richard Wiggans, OMB and copy appropriate individuals. 13.3 Jefferson-Madison Regional Library Bookmobile Clerk: Draft letter for Chairman's signature. Funding Request. · APPROVED the Library's request to utilize $56,761 in prior year carry-over funds, as well as $88,599 in previously budgeted repair and maintenance funds in the County's CIP. · CONSENSUS that the Chairman send a letter to Mr. Halliday suggesting that the Bookmobile partner with country stores as a drop off site. 14a. Transportation Matters not Listed on the Agenda. Clerk: Forward comments to VDoT. Brent Sprinkle: · Introduced new Resident Engineer for Charlottesville District, Mr. James Utterback, who will officially start on Monday. His email address is: James.Utterback@VirginiaDOT.org · Provided an update of monthly activities. David Wvant: · Mentioned the issue of water in the road on the dead end portion of Blufton Road (672) in Brown's Cove. Mr. Sprinkle said he would pass the information onto VDoT personnel. Sally Thomas: · Has been in communication with Mr. Sprinkle about the Dry Bridge bridge. · Asked that guard rail request not fall through the cracks as VDoT administration changes. Mr. Sprinkle said VDoT will follow up. · She is a member of the Board of Scenic Virginia which annually awards the VDoT Residency that does the nicest job in following VDoT's procedures and guidelines for trimming trees along the side of the road. She would like to nominate this district someday for that award. David Bowerman: · Expressed concern about the safety aspects of the improvements on Route 606, Dickerson Road, near the Airport. Mr. Sprinkle commented that District personnel held a meeting and are looking into some additional actions that they can take until the work is complete. Lindsav Domer: · Reiterated the need for a warning sign near the intersection of Route 708 and Route 20 South at the turnoff to Walton School. Mr. Sprinkle said he will pass information on to VDoT traffic personnel. Dennis Rooker: 2 · Has received calls from constituents about late night noise from work being done on the Route 29/250 bridge. Mr. Sprinkle said the contractor is repainting the bridge as a maintenance project and because of traffic concerns, the work is being done at night. Hopefully, the contractor will be finished in a few weeks. · Said a number of residents have expressed concern about the speed with which vehicles are traveling on Hydraulic Road, pass the Rock Store. Trucks are apparently using this route to get to the work site for Hollymead Town Center. The residents have asked if a safety sign can be installed to slow traffic traveling through the area. · Referring to the Georgetown Road project, he reiterated the need to maintain the concept agreed on by the community and to keep the cost estimate from accelerating. · Reiterated need for classification determination of the Southern Parkway. . The Board recessed at 9:40 a.m. and reconvened at 9:55 a.m. 15. Piedmont Virginia Community College (PVCC) Update, Dr. Frank Friedman · Dr. Friedman provided the Board with an informational packet and gave his annual update on PVCC activities. 16. Streamwatch Presentation, John Murphy. · REMOVED from agenda. 17. Appeal: Belle Vista Preliminary Subdivision Plat. Yadira Amarante: Notify applicant of action. · MOTION to overturn the Planning Commission's denial of SUB 04-077 Belle Vista, request for private roads FAILED by a vote of 4:2. 18. Family Support Program Evaluations Results. Kathy Ralston: Provide requested information. · RECEIVED report. Mr. Rooker requested staff go back to Weldon Cooper and ask for more before and after data, similar to the information provided in the Bright Stars report. 19. Bright Stars Annual Report. Kathv Ralston: Proceed as approved. · APPROVED use of Bright Stars carry-over funds for FY 05. 20. Closed Session. Personnel and Legal Matters. · At 12:15 p.m., the Board went into closed session to consider appointments to boards and commissions and to discuss with legal counsel and staff specific legal issues regarding a matter relating to taxation of real property. 21. Certified Close Session. · At 2:10 p.m., the Board reconvened into open session and certified the closed session. 22. Appointments. Clerk: Prepare appointment letter, update · APPOINTED A. Bruce Dotson, Steve Taylor Boards and Commissions book and notify and Jana Crutchfield to the Housing Committee appropriate persons. 3 with said terms to expire December 31,2007. · APPOINTED Marilyn Minrath to the Public Defender Office with said term to expire December 31,2007. · APPOINTED John deKoven Bowen, III and REAPPOINTED Craig G. Van de Castle to the Public Recreational Facilities Authority with said terms to expire December 13, 2007. · APPOINTED Clarence W. Roberts and County Attorney: Amend bylaws for Police Stephen Smith to the Police Department Department Citizens Advisory Committee Citizens Advisory Committee with said terms to expire March 5, 2006. · Amended Police Department Citizens Advisory Committee from four citizen members to five. 23. SP-2004-040. Mount Fair Farm Clerk: Set out conditions of approval. · APPROVED SP-2004-040, by a vote of 6:0, (Attachment 3) subject to the five conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. 24. ZTA-2004-008. Flood Hazard Overlay District (FH). Clerk: Forward copy of signed Ordinance to · ADOPTED the ordinance and associated County Attorney's office and Jack Kelsey. language by a vote of 6:0, effective February 4, (Attachment 4) 2005. 25. ZMA-2004-019. Flood Hazard Over1ay District (FH). · ADOPTED the FEMA Flood Maps as set out in the staff report, by a vote of 6:0, to be effective February 4, 2005. 26. Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan Amendment Clerk: Forward copy of recommended changes (CP A-2003-006). from work session to Joan McDowell. · HELD. Requested staff provide a copy of the draft ordinance with all needed changes prior to public hearing. Public Hearing scheduled for February 9, 2005. 27. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. Sally Thomas: · Will be attending a Smart Growth Conference at the end of the month. Hopes to bring back a lot of good ideas and information. · Mentioned a report regarding E. coli and other Bob Tucker: Discuss comments with Mr. Brent. pollutants in Moore's Creek. Asked if anyone was cornmunicating with the Albemar1e County Service Authority so when they make their long range plans, they include Moore's Creek. Mr. Tucker said he will talk to Mr. Brent. Dennis Rooker: · One of the water options is expansion of Ragged Mountain Reservoir by raising the dam which would require repair or replacement of the dam in the near future. He asked who owns the land surrounding Ragged Mountain. Mr. Tucker said he would find out. 28. Adjourn to January 12, 2005, 4:00 p.m. · The meeting was adjourned at 3:40 p.m. Idjm 4 Attachment 1 - Rules of Procedure Attachment 2 - Resolution to accept road(s) in Highlands at Mechums River Attachment 3 - Conditions of Approval Attachment 4 - ZTA-2004-008 Flood Hazard Overlay District (FH) Ordinance 5 ATTACHMENT 1 RULES OF PROCEDURE ALBEMARLE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS 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 cerernonial purposes. He shall have a vote but no veto. (Virginia Code Sections 15.2-1422 and 15.2-1423) 2. Vice-Chairman. The Board at its annual rneeting 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 Section 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 Section 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 Section 15. 2-1539 and such additional duties set forth in resolutions of the Board as adopted from time to time. (Virginia Code Section 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 Section 15.2-1416) 2. Regular Meetings. The Board shall meet 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 Section 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 Section 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 rneeting, such rneeting shall be continued to the next regular meeting date. Such finding shall be cornmunicated to the rnernbers of the Board and to the press 6 as promptly as possible. All hearings and other matters previously advertised shall be conducted at the continued meeting and no further advertisement shall be required. (Virginia Code Section 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 Section 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 Section 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. 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 such 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 Section 15.2-1418) The Clerk shall notify the general news media of the time and place of such special meeting and the rnatters to be considered. D. Order of Business 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 moment for silent meditation. 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, no more than three persons will be allowed to speak during the time set aside on the agenda for "From the Public: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda". Each person shall be permitted no more than five minutes to provide comments. 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. 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 Section 15.2-1415) 7 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 such 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 rnajority 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. (Article VII, Section 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 Section 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 frorn 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 rnembers rnaking and seconding the original motion. If the rnotion 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. 6. Motion to Reconsider. Any decision made by the Board may be reconsidered if a motion to reconsider is made at the same rneeting 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 motion 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 for 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 made by any member 8 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 ordinances 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 Board 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. ***** (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) . 9 ATTACHMENT 2 The Board of County Supervisors of Albemar1e County, Virginia, in regular meeting on the 5th day of January 2005, adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the street(s) in Highlands at Mechums River Subdivision, § 2C, described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated January 5, 2005, 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 Department of Transportation has advised the Board that the street(s) meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Reauirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemar1e Board of County Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the road(s) in Highlands at Mechums River Subdivision, § 2C, as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated January 5, 2005, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Reauirements; 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 SR-5(A) is: 1) Amber Ridae Road (State Route 1244) from the intersection of Mechums River Road (Route 1241) to the intersection of Morewood Lane (Route 1269), as shown on plat recorded 03/10/2003 in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemar1e County in Deed Book 2398, pages 661-675, with a 50-foot right-of-way width, for a length of 0.05 mile; and from the intersection of Morewood Lane (Route 1269) to the cul-de-sac, as shown on plat recorded 03/10/2003 in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 2398, pages 661-675, with a 50-foot right-of-way width, for a length of 0.17 mile. 2) Morewood Lane (State Route 1269) from the intersection of Arnber Ridge Road (Route 1244) to the cul-de-sac, as shown on plat recorded 03/10/2003 in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemar1e County in Deed Book 2398, pages 661-675, with a 50-foot right-of-way width, for a length of 0.11 mile. Total Mileage - 0.33 mile. 10 ATTACHMENT 3 SP-2004-040. Mount Fair Fa"" (Sians #73&95). Request to permit fill in the floodplain for purpose of constructing 2 stream crossings for second driveway/farm road, in accord w/Sec 30.3.05.2.2(3) of the Zoning Ord which allows for fill in the floodplain. TM 26, P 33, contains 75.3 acs. Znd RA. Loc at NW comer of intersec of St Rt 810 & St Rt 673. White Hall Dist. 1. With the exception of all changes that would be required in order to comply with the conditions listed herein, the site shall be developed in general accord with the plans entitled, "Mount Fair; Albemar1e County, Virginia; MacFarlane Residence; Whitehall Virginia," dated revised 11/19/04; 2. Approval and bonding of an erosion and sediment control plan; 3. Approval and bonding of a mitigation plan for buffer disturbance; 4. Federal and state agency approval for stream and wetland disturbances; and 5. FEMA approval of a map revision (LOMR or LOMA). 11 ATTACHMENT 4 ORDINANCE NO. 05-18(1) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 18, ZONING, ARTICLE III, DISTRICT REGULATIONS, 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 18, Zoning, Article III, District Regulations, is hereby amended and reordained as follows: By Amending: Sec. 30.3.01 Sec. 30.3.02.1 Sec. 30.3.02.2 Sec. 30.3.05.1.2 Sec. 30.3.07 Intent Definitions Determination of Floodway and Floodway Fringe in the Approximated Flood Plain By Right Within the Floodway Fringe Amendment of the Flood Hazard Overlay District By Repealing: Sec. 30.3.06.2 Finding of the County Engineer Chapter 18. Zoning Article III. District Regulations 30.3 FLOOD HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT - FH 30.3.01 INTENT It is intended that the flood hazard overlay district hereby and hereafter created shall be for the purpose of providing safety and protection from flooding. More specifically, these provisions are intended to restrict the unwise use, development and occupancy of lands subject to inundation which may result in: danger to life and property; public costs for flood control measures and/or rescue and relief efforts; soil erosion, sedimentation and siltation; pollution of water resources; and general degradation of the natural and man-made environment. It is further intended that these provisions shall be adequate for qualification and continuation of Albemarle County on the regular program of the National Flood Insurance Program as administered by the Federal Insurance Administration and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). To these ends, provisions have been developed in accordance with regulations governing the regular program. (§ 30.3.01,12-10-80; Ord. 05-18(1),1-5-05, effective 2-5-05) 30.3.02 APPLICATION 30.3.02.1 DEFINITIONS-GENERALL Y The flood hazard overlay district shall include all areas subject to inundation by the waters of the one hundred year flood. The source of this delineation shall be the Flood Insurance Study for Albemarle County and Incorporated Areas and the Independent City of Charlottesville prepared by FEMA, effective on and after February 04,2005 (the "flood study"). The following definitions shall apply in the administration and interpretation of this section 30.3: 1. One-hundred year nood: The term "one-hundred year flood" is a design storm of a specific intensity and duration with a return frequency of one-hundred years or a one-percent probability of being equaled or exceeded in a given year. The term "one-hundred year flood" is also referred to as the one (1)-percent annual chance flood. 12 2. Base flood elevation (BFE): The term "base flood elevation" is the one-hundred year flood elevation that has been determined at a cross section of a stream reach, as designated in the flood study. 3. Flood plain: The term "flood plain" means any land susceptible to being inundated by the flood waters generated by a one-hundred year flood, as designated in the flood study. 4. Floodway. The term "fIoodway" means the stream channel and that portion of the adjacent flood plain that must be reserved to carry and discharge the waters of the one-hundred year flood, as designated in the flood study, without increasing the flood water surface elevation at any point more than one (1) foot above the base flood elevation and provided that hazardous velocities are not produced. 5. Floodway fringe: The term "fIoodway fringe" rneans that portion of the flood plain that lies between the floodway and the outer limits of the flood plain, as designated in the flood study. For the sole purpose of determining permissible uses under sections 30.3.05.1.2 and 30.3.05.2.2, the floodway fringe also shall include the approximated flood plain. 6. Approximated flood plain: The term "approximated flood plain" means those flood plain regions where base flood elevations have not been determined, as designated in the flood study. 7. Development. The term "development" means, for the purposes of this section only, any man- made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations. 8. Substantial improvement. The term "substantial improvement" means, for the purposes of this section only, any repair, reconstruction or improvernent of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds fifty (50) percent of the market value of the structure either (1) before the improvement or repair is started, or (2) if the structure has been damaged, the market value before the damage occurred. For the purpose of this definition "substantial improvement" is considered to occur when the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor or other structural part of the building commences, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the structure. The term does not, however, include either (1) any project for improvernent of a structure to comply with existing state or local health, sanitary or safety code specifications which are solely necessary to assure safe living conditions, or (2) any alteration of a structure listed on the National Register of Historic Places or the Virginia Historic Landmarks Commission. 9. Start of construction: The term "start of construction" means, for the purposes of this section only includes substantial improvement, and means the date the building permit was issued, provided the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, placement or other irnprovement was within one hundred eighty (180) days of the permit date. The actual start means either the first placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of slab or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns or any work beyond the stage of excavation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation, such as clearing, grading and filling; nor does it include the installation of streets and/or walkways; nor does it include excavation for a basement, footings, piers or foundations or the erection of temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling units or not part of the main structure. (Added 6-10-87) (§ 30.3.02.1,12-10-80; 6-10-87; Ord. 05-18(1), 1-5-05, effective 2-5-05) 30.3.02.2 DETERMINATION OF FLOODWAY FRINGE IN THE APPROXIMATED FLOOD PLAIN Except for such uses permitted in the floodway in accordance with section 30.3.5, no use, structure or building shall be established and no rezoning petition, site development plan, subdivision plat, building permit or other county approval shall be given for lands located within 13 any approximated flood plain, prior to verification by the county engineer as to the limits of the floodway fringe within such lands. In his determination of the limits of the floodway fringe, and one hundred year flood elevation, the county engineer may request assistance from the Federal Insurance Administration, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and such other qualified agencies and persons as he deems appropriate. The county engineer shall require the applicant to provide such information as he deems reasonably necessary to make his determination. The cost of such determination shall be borne entirely by the applicant. (§ 30.3.02.2,12-10-80; Ord. 01-18(6),10-3-01; Ord. 05-18(1),1-5-05, effective 2-5-05) 30.3.05.1.2 BY RIGHT WITHIN THE FLOODWA Y FRINGE 1. Uses permitted by right in the floodway. 2. Accessory structures to uses permitted by right in the floodway, excluding structures for human habitation; provided that any such structure permitted shall be firmly anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement due to flooding. 3. Pedestrian and multi-use paths that are within county owned or operated parks and greenways; provided that any filling of land has been approved by the county engineer in accordance with section 30.3.06.1 (1) through (5); and any footbridges necessary to cross tributary streams, watercourses and swales have been approved by the county engineer. (§ 30.3.05.1.2,12-10-80; Ord. 05-18(1), 1-5-05, effective 2-5-05) 30.3.06.2 Repealed 30.3.07 AMENDMENT OF THE FLOOD HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT The delineation of the flood hazard overlay district may be revised, amended and modified by the board of supervisors in compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program when any of the following conditions are met: 1. Upon completion of a fill operation in accordance with section 30.3.06.1; and, county engineer receipt of notification from FEMA that a map amendment based on the placement of fill has been issued; and, at such time as the county engineer is reasonably satisfied that such fill is stabilized, at a finished grade above the one hundred year flood elevation, and in compliance with any related conditions imposed by the board of supervisors in approval of a special use permit; the county engineer shall notify the board of supervisors of such finding. The board of supervisors shall review such finding for amendment of the flood hazard overlay district as generally provided in section 33.0 and particularly provided in section 30.3.07. In the event of amendment, lands deleted from the flood hazard overlay district shall enjoy all uses of the underlying zone, as such uses are permitted therein. 2. There are changes through natural or other causes. 3. There are changes indicated by FEMA issuance of letters of map amendment (LOMA) or letters of map revision (LOMR). 4. There are changes indicated by future detailed hydrologic and hydraulic studies. All such changes are subject to the review and approval of FEMA. (§ 30.3.07,12-10-80; Ord. 05-18(1),1-5-05, effective 2-5-05) This ordinance shall be effective on and after February 5, 2005. 14 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Board of Supervisors Ella Washington-<:aroy, CMC, C~ December 22, 2004 FROM: DATE: RE: Agenda for Annual (Organizational) Meeting of January 5, 2005 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. Carey and Debi J. Moyers expresses a desire to be reappointed as Clerk and Senior Deputy Clerk, respectively. These positions are reappointed annually. Agenda Item No.7. 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 rneeting 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 2005 as follows: first Wednesday of the month - 9:00 a.m., and the second Wednesday ofthe month - 6:00 p.m., with said meetings to be held in the County Office Building on Mcintire Road. Since April 13, 2005 is a County Holiday (Jefferson's Birthday), the Board is requested to amend its schedule and establish April 20, 2005 as the alternate meeting date. Agenda Item No.8. 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 ofthree months. The dates requested for these hearings for 2005 are September 14 and December 14, 2004 and March 16, and June 9, 2006. A motion is required to set these dates which are then advertised in the newspaper. Agenda Item No.9. A copy of the Board's current Rules of Procedure is included with this agenda item for your review. Agenda Item No. 10. A copy of the Board's current Boards and Commissions Process is included with this agenda itern for your review. Agenda Item No. 20. A copy of an updated appointment list is included with this agenda item. ¡ewc PUBLIC NOTICE Albemarle County Board of Supervisors ... Notice is hereby given that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County. Virginia, has set aside the first two Wednesdays of every month as its regularly scheduled meeting dates for Calendar Year 2005. On the first Wednesday, the meeting shall commence at 9:00 AM., and on the second Wednesday, the meeting shall commence at 6:00 P.M. Since April 13, 2005 is a County holiday. the Board amended its schedule and established April 20. 2005 as the alternate meeting date. All such meetings shall be held in the County Office Building on Mcintire Road. Charlottesville, Virginia . ...Reasonable accommodations will be provided to persons with disabilities. if requested. Requests should be directed to the Clerk at the above address or by calling 296-5827. ... By Order of the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia. '.' Ella W. Carey. CMC, Clerk FAX TRANSMITTAL TO Sandy Key FROM Ella W. Carey CO Daily ProQress CO Albemarle County DEPT LeQaJ Notifications PHONE # 296-5843 FAX # 978-7223 FAX # 296-5800 PUBLIC NOTICE Albemarle County Board of Supervisors ...Notice is hereby given that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, has set aside the first two Wednesdays of every month as its regularly scheduled meeting dates for Calendar Year 2005. On the first Wednesday, the meeting shall commence at 9:00 A.M., and on the second Wednesday, the meeting shall commence at 6:00 P.M. Since April 13, 2005 is a County holiday, the Board amended its schedule and established April 20, 2005 as the alternate meeting date. All such meetings shall be held in the County Office Building on Mcintire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. ...Reasonable accommodations will be provided to persons with disabilities, if requested. Requests should be directed to the Clerk at the above address or by calling 296-5827. ...By Order of the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia. Ella W. Carey, CMC, Clerk *************** Bill to: Albemarle County Account Number 204066 Purchase Order #A3920 Today's Date: January 7, 2005 Dates to Run: January 17 and January 24, 2005 PROOF REQUIRED Office Use: Fax'd and Emailed at on TO Sandy Key FAX TRANSMITTAL FROM Ella W. Carey CO Daily Progress DEPT Legal Notifications FAX # 978-7223 CO Albemarle County PHONE # 296-5843 FAX # 296-5800 PUBLIC NOTICE Albemarle County Board of Supervisors ... Notice is hereby given that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, has set aside the following dates for hearing zoning text amendments filed by citizens during for the 2005 Calendar Year: September 14, 2005; December 14, 2005; March 16,2006 and June 9,2006. All such meetings shall be held in the County Office Building on Mcintire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. ... By Order of the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia. Ella W. Carey, CMC, Clerk Purchase Order No. A-3921 Bill to: Albemarle County Account Number 204066 Today's Date: January 7,2005 Dates to Run: January 17 and January 24, 2005 PROOF REQUIRED Office Use: Fax'd and Emailed at on RULES OF PROCEDURE ALBEMARLE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS 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 Sections 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 Section 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 Section 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 Section 15. 2-1539 and such additional duties set forth in resolutions of the Board as adopted from time to time. (Virginia Code Section 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 Section 15.2- 1416) 2. Regular Meetings. The Board shall meet 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 Section 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 Section 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 conducted at the continued meeting and no further advertisement shall be required. (Virginia Code Section 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 Section 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 Section 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. 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 such 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 Section 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 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 moment for silent meditation. 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, no more than three persons will be allowed to speak during the time set aside on the agenda for "From the Public: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda". Each person shall be permitted no more than five minutes to provide comments. 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. 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 Section 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 such 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 ofthe 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. (Article VII, Section 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 Section 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. 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 motion 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 for 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 made 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 ordinances 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 Board 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. ***** (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). 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. All newly created county-wide boards and commissions which will have the power to impact the health, safety and welfare of all the residents of the County, will be comprised of representatives from each of the magisterial districts. These representatives will be appointed by the members of the Board of Supervisors following the same appointment procedure adopted in Section B for other magisterial appointments. 4. 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. All magisterial positions will be advertised. At the discretion of the supervisor of that district, selected applicants may be interviewed for the position. 2. Prior to each day Board meeting, the Clerk will provide the Board a list of vacancies that will occur within the next 60 days. The Board will then advise the Clerk which vacancies to advertise. 3. In an effort to reach as man v citizens as possible. notice of boards and commissions with appointment positions available will be published throuah available venues. such as. but not limited to. the County's website. A-mail. public service announcements twiGe and local newspapers. listing boards and commissions with appointment positions available. Interested citizens will be provided a brief -1- 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 magisterial 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. 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 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. 7. The members of the Board of Supervisors will conduct interviews beginning with applicants for appointments with the earliest effective dates. 8. Selected applicants will be interviewed within sixty days of the close of the application period, and all appointments will be made no later than 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. 9. All vacancies will be filled as they occur. 10. 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. 11. If a member of a board or commission does not participate in at least fifty percent 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. -2- c. ADOPTION This policy shall be reviewed and readopted by the Board of Supervisors in January. (Amended and/or Readopted 01-07-98) ***** -3- ¡ , " Robert Vernon Historic Preservation Committee The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors expresses its gratitude to Robert Vernon for his service as a member of the Historic Preservation Committee from 2001 to 2004, in which capacity he served the Board and the citizens of the County by providing the Committee with judicious advice on mapping and database issue; by raising awareness of the need for technology and information exchange Countywide; by promoting public accessibility of historic resources information; and, through the consistent implementation of the goals of the Historic Preservation Plan, by protecting the County's wealth of historic and cultural resources. The Board would like to present Mr. Vernon with this Certificate of Appreciation for his service on the Historic Preservation Committee and wish him the best of luck in his future endeavors. ~ .... Jenny Greenwood Housing Committee Jenny Greenwood has been a longtime member of the Housing Committee who worked on the original mission and strategies and then helped advise staff and the Board in implanting those strategies. Her efforts were supported by her knowledge of the real estate industry and by a desire to improve housing both in terms of affordability and quality. Her work and commitment were important in developing the County's Affordable Housing Policy that was adopted last February. The Board would like to present Ms. Greenwood with this Certificate of Appreciation for her service on the Housing Committee and wish her the best of luck in her future endeavors. The Board of County SupeNisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, in regular meeting on the 5th day of January 2005, adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the street(s) in Highlands at Mechums River Subdivision, § 2C, described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated January 5, 2005, 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 Department 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 SupeNisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the road(s) in Highlands at Mechums River Subdivision, § 2C, as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated January 5, 2005, 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. * * * * * Recorded vote: Moved by: Kenneth C. Boyd. Seconded by: Sally H. Thomas. Yeas: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Boyd, Mr. Dorrier, Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas and Mr. Wyant. Nays: None. Absent: None. l In the County of Albemarle By resolution of the governing body adopted January 05,2005 The following Form SR-5A is hereby attached am! incorporated {(.~' part (!{ the governing boily's re.50!utiOll for changes ill the !>'ecom!ary !>y.~1el1' of !>1ate highwaY.5. A Copy Testee Sigllel! (Couuty Offici,,/): ~~7' /' Ci¿ä ?L~ Repoli of Changes in the Secondary System of State High Form SR-5A Secondary Roads Division 5/1/99 Project/S ubdivision Highlands At Mechums River Section 2-c Type of Change: Addition The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested, the right of way for which, including additional easements for drainage as required, is guaranteed: Reason for Change: Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: Route Nurnber and/or Street Name Amber Ridge Road, State Route Number 1244 Description: From: Intersection Rt.1241 Mechums River Road To: Intersection Rt.1269 Morewood Lane A distance of: 0.05 miles, Right of Way Record: Filed with the Albemarl County Clerks Office on 3/10/2003, Deed Book 2398 Pg.661-675, with a width of 50' Addition, New subdivision street §33.1-229 Description: From: Intersection Rt.1269 Morewood Lane To: Cui De Sac A distance of: 0.17 miles, Right of Way Record: Filed with the Albemarl County Clerks Office on 3/10/2003, Deed Book 2398 Pg.661-675, with a widt~ of 50' Morewood Lane, State Route Number 1269 Description: From: Intersection Rt.1244 Amber Ridge Rd. To: Cui De Sac A distance of: 0.11 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed with the Albemarle County Clerks Office on 3/10/2003, Deed Book 2398 Pg. 661-675, with a width of 50' Page 1 of 1 l The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, in regular meeting on the 5th day of January 2005, adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the street(s) in Highlands at Mechums River Subdivision, § 2C, described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated January 5, 2005, 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 Department 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 road(s) in Highlands at Mechums River Subdivision, § 2C, as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated January 5, 2005, 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. ***** Recorded vote: Moved by: Seconded by: Yeas: Nays: Absent: A Copy Teste: Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC Board of County Supervisors ~. The road(s) described on Additions Form SR-5(A) is: 1 ) Amber Ridae Road (State Route 1244) tram the intersection at Mechums River Road (Route 1241) to the intersection at Morewood Lane (Route 1269), as shown on plat recorded 03/10/2003 in the office the Clerk at Circuit Court at Albemarle County in Deed Book 2398, pages 661-675, with a 50-toot right-at-way width, tor a length at 0.05 mile; and trom the intersection at Morewood Lane (Route 1269) to the cul-de-sac, as shown on plat recorded 03/10/2003 in the office the Clerk at Circuit Court at Albemarle County in Deed Book 2398, pages 661-675, with a 50- toot right-at-way width, tor a length at 0.17 mile. 2) Morewood Lane (State Route 1269) tram the intersection at Amber Ridge Road (Route 1244) to the cul-de-sac, as shown on plat recorded 03/10/2003 in the office the Clerk at Circuit Court at Albemarle County in Deed Book 2398, pages 661-675, with a 50-toot right-at-way width, tor a length at 0.11 mile. Total Mileage - 0.33 mile. l "'O'?A~ .;<."" ~<;?;~ u. ''J.7i':¡ vIRGn'\~ County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To: From: Division: Ella Carey, Clerk, Board of Supervisors Greg Cooley, Roads Engineer Inspections December 6, 2004 Board Agenda - January 5, 2005 Road Resolution for Amber Ridge Road and Morewood Lane Date: Subject: Attached is the original of Additions Fonn SR-5A for the following roads in Highlands at Mechums River Section 2-C: . Amber Ridge Road (State Route 1244) . Morewood Lane (State Route 1269) We would like to have this included on the Board's January 5th agenda so that a resolution can be adopted requesting VDoT add these roads into the secondary system of state highways. If additional infonnation is needed, please do not hesitate to contact me. Attachments I ~ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE APPROPRIATION APP# DATE BATCH# 2005039 EXPLANATION: Various Education Programs and Donations SUB LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT DESCRIPTION CODE AMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT 1 3131 61311 160200 Stipends J 1 33,642.26 1 3131 61311 210000 FICA J 1 2,786.82 1 3308 61101 601300 Instructional Supplies J 1 46,719.12 1 3302 61101 112100 Salaries - Teacher J 1 4,656.00 1 3302 61101 210000 FICA J 1 357.00 1 3302 61101 221000 VRS J 1 597.00 1 3302 61101 601300 Instructional Supplies J 1 8,813.00 1 3302 61101 800700 Data Proc Equip J 1 2,489.33 1 3104 60204 312500 Prof Svc - Inst J 1 468.00 1 3104 60206 312500 Prof Svc - Inst J 1 446.00 1 3104 60253 312500 Prof Svc - Inst J 1 935.00 1 3104 60252 601300 Instructional.Supplies J 1 500.00 1 3104 60253 601300 Instructional Supplies J 1 500.00 1 3104 60254 601300 Instructional Supplies J 1 500.00 1 3104 60301 601300 Instructional Supplies J 1 500.00 1 3104 60302 601300 Instructional Supplies J 1 628.03 1 3104 60304 601300 Instructional Supplies J 1 500.00 1 3104 60252 312500 Prof Svc - Inst J 1 6,500.00 1 2212 61411 580500 Staff Dev. J 1 100.00 1 2214 61101 601300 Instructional Supplies J 1 1,600.00 1 2301 61101 601200 Books/Subscriptions J 1 1,837.38 1 3502 60606 601300 Instructional Supplies J 1 2,014.96 2 3131 33000 330125 Tech Sub - Grant J 2 36,429.08 2 3308 33000 330001 Calculator Grant J 2 46,719.12 2 3302 33000 330001 Reading First Grant J 2 16,912.33 2 3104 24000 240329 Va Comm Arts - Greer J 2 468.00 2 3104 24000 240362 Va Comm Arts - Jouett J 2 935.00 2 3104 24000 240365 Va Comm Arts - M-L J 2 446.00 2 3104 18000 189900 Wal-Mart Grants J 2 3,128.03 2 3104 18000 181221 Upton Grant J 2 6,500.00 2 2000 18100 181109 Donations J 2 1,700.00 2 2000 18000 189900 Misc Revenue J 2 1,837.38 2 3502 51000 510100 Fund Balance J 2 2,014.96 2000 0501 Est. Revenue 3,537.38 0701 Appropriation 3,537.38 3131 0501 Est. Revenue 36,429.08 0701 Appropriation 36,429.08 3308 0501 Est. Revenue 46,719.12 0701 Appropriation 46,719.12 3302 0501 Est. Revenue 16,912.33 0701 Appropriation 16,912.33 3104 0501 Est. Revenue 11,477.03 0701 Appropriation 11,477.03 3502 0501 Est. Revenue 2,014.96 0701 Appropriation 2,014.96 TOTAL 234,179.80 117,089.90 117,089.90 PREPARED BY: BD. OF SUPV APPROVAL: ACCT. APPROVAL: ENTERED BY: Melvin Breeden Ella W. Carey DATE: DATE: DATE: DATE: 1/5/2005 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Requested 2005 Appropriations AGENDA DATE: January 5, 2005 ACTION: INFORMATION: SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation #2005039 providing funds for various School projects CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Davis, Breeden, Wiggans; Ms. White REVIEWED BY: ~ ATTACHMENTS: Yes LEGAL REVIEW: Yes BACKGROUND: The Code of Virginia § 15.2-2507 stipulates that any locality may amend its budget to adjust the aggregate amount to be appropriated during the current fiscal year as shown in the currently adopted budget. However, any such amendment which exceeds one percent of the total expenditures shown in the currently adopted budget or the sum of $500,000, whichever is lesser, 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 of this requested additional FY 2005 appropriation is $117,089.90. It is anticipated that this appropriation will be incorporated into the next budget amendment, possibly in February. STRATEGIC PLAN: 4.2 Fund County services in a fair, efficient manner and provide needed public facilities and infrastructure. DISCUSSION: This request involves the approval of one (1) new FY 2005 appropriation as follows: · One (1) appropriation (#20050039) provides $117,089.90 for various education programs and donations. A detailed description of this appropriation is provided on Attachment A. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the FY 2005 Appropriation #2005039. . . . 04.207 .~ Attachment A Appropriation #2005039 $117,089.90 The Albemarle County Public Schools received the Enhancing Education Through Technology (Ed Tech) Sub-Grant in the amount of $36,429.08 for FY04-05. These funds will be used to improve student academic achievement through the use of technology in schools, providing funds for teacher training and curriculum development. Several years ago, the Virginia Department of Education was able to provide school divisions with graphing calculators using funding provided by the General Assembly. These calculators were purchased through a state contract and were shipped to divisions for instructional and assessment use in mathematics and science. Calculators were provided for 9th and 10th graders and for some 8th grade students. Since that time, replacement calculators, repairs and batteries have been the responsibility of the divisions. Federal funds have become available to help school divisions implement the statewide Standards of Learning assessment system. These funds can be used to purchase new scientific and graphing calculators, repair non-functioning calculators, or purchase calculator batteries. To afford maximum flexibility and accommodate the time available, the department will provide direct grants to school divisions for the calculators. The grant distribution for Albemarle County Schools is $46,712.12 based upon a proportion of each division's enrollment in middle school (6th, ¡lh, and 8th grades) mathematics and science, Algebra I, Algebra II and Geometry in 8th, 9th, and 10th grades. The Reading First Grant is a federally funded program designated for Yancey Elementary School. The grant funds support a comprehensive K-3 reading instructional program and the implementation of prevention and intervention services to include; hiring a literacy coordinator to work with staff to provide high quality research based classroom reading instruction in grades K- 3, purchasing research based instructional materials to be used for reading instruction in K-1, providing professional development related to implementing the research based reading instructional materials purchased, purchasing research based intervention materials to be used for reading intervention in 2nd and 3rd grade classrooms, and purchasing a variety of pleasure reading books for students to read in addition to those books read during core reading instruction time. Funding for FY04-05 was increased by $16,912.33 from the original budget amount of $90,577.00. The Virginia Commission for the Arts awarded Touring Grants to Greer Elementary in the amount of $468.00, Meriwether Lewis Elementary in the amount of $446.00 and Jack Jouett Middle in the amount of $935.00. These grant awards will help fund the Theatre IV performance at each school. The Wal-Mart Foundation awarded several Albemarle County Public Schools grants totaling $3,128.03. The awards were made to Henley Middle in the amount of $500.00, Jack Jouett Middle in the amount of $500.00, Walton Middle in the amount of $500.00, Albemarle High in the amount of $500.00, Western Albemarle High in the amount of $628.03, and Monticello High in the amount of $500.00. These funds will be used for community service opportunities or service learning projects. The Frederick S. Upton Foundation made a grant award in the amount of $6,500.00 to Henley Middle School. This award will support Henley's Cultural Enrichment Program in funding three artists-in-residences programs. The project will involve interactive activities to include hands on learning experiences for students with performing, visual, and musical arts. Wood brook Elementary School received a donation in the amount of $1 00.00 from Mark and Michelle Conner. This donation will be used by the School Community Group to assist with neighborhood based activities and to train parents and teachers on focus areas and to support the homework club for the students at Wood brook Elementary School. Cale Elementary School has received donations in the amount of $1,600.00. Ronald and Cynthia Michener donated $100.00, Jeffrey and Christine Riley donated $500.00, and TIFF Advisory Services donated $1,000.00. These donations will be used to support the Science and Social Studies activities, projects and materials. Albemarle High School has received a refund check from the National Organization Service, Inc in the amount of $1,837.38. In FY03-04 the Albemarle High School Media Center held their annual magazine subscription fundraiser. Albemarle High School incurred expenses; however, the company did not issue a refund check during last fiscal year. The company has now issued a refund and it is requested that this refund be appropriated for use in FY04-05. Various Shannon Foundation Grants have an unexpended fund balance from FY03-04. Holders of these grants have been encouraged to expend these small balances. It is requested that these funds in the amount of $2,014.96 be re-appropriated for FY04-05. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Jefferson-Madison Regional Library Bookmobile Funding Request AGENDA DATE: January 5tn,2004 ACTION: INFORMATION: SUBJECT/PROPOSALlREQU EST: Request to use JMRL prior year operating and capital carry-over funds to purchase a new Bookmobile. CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACnS): Tucker, White ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: LEGAL REVIEW: BACKGROUND: The attached letter from John Halliday, Director of the Jefferson-Madison Regional Library, requests the use of prior year carry-over operating funds, in addition to previously approved library maintenance and repair funds in the County's capital budget, to help fund the County's share of a new Bookmobile. STRATEGIC PLAN: Strategic Direction: Provide High Quality Educational Opportunities for Albemarle County Citizens of all Ages. DISCUSSION: As Mr. Halliday's letter explains, the County's share of the Bookmobile cost is $145,360 or 79% of the total cost of the bookmobile of $184,000. To fund the $145,360, the Library proposes using $56,761 in prior year carry-over funds, plus $88,599 in unused maintenance and repair funds that have already been budgeted in the County's CIP. The Library has justified the need for a new Bookmobile for some time, since the current one is becoming expensive to maintain and is frequently out of service. Using previously budgeted funds to fund the County's share of the bookmobile seems to be good funding alternative. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval for the Jefferson-Madison Regional Library to utilize $56,761 in prior year carry-over funds, as well as $88,599 in previously budgeted repair and maintenance funds in the County's CIP. This approved expenditure requires no additional funds from the County. ATTACHMENTS A - Letter from John Halliday 04.210 ; " Jefferson-Madison Regional Library 201 East Market Street · Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-5287 (434) 979-7151 · FAX (434) 979-0278 Office of the Director November 17, 2004 Roxanne White, Assistant County Executive Albemarle County Office Building 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Roxanne: Jefferson-Madison Regional Library has solicited bids to replace the library's aging, non- ADA compliant bookmobile with an up-to-date vehicle that will provide easy access for small children and people using wheelchairs. The new vehicle, completely road-ready, will cost about $184,000. I am hoping we can count on Albemarle County to provide 79% ofthat cost, or $145,360. City of Charlottesville will provide the remaining 21%. The current division of bookmobile service hours is 79% Albemarle, 21% Charlottesville. Funding rrom the Friends of the Library will cover any enhancements, such as exterior graphics and state-of-the-art telecommunications. To cover Albemarle County's portion of this project, I am proposing using funds rrom two sources. First, the library would like to expend the $56,761 carryover fund that has been held by the library since the 1990's. Second, the library would like to use $88,599 capital money to cover the balance. My understanding is that capital money in the amount of $124,269 is available for library maintenance projects such as carpet replacements and HV AC improvements. In recent years the Library Board has set aside savings rrom operating expenses and used the savings for maintenance projects. Therefore, we have been able to tackle large projects, such as the recarpeting of Northside Library and the HV AC upgrade at Scottsville, without requesting capital money. In short, by using $88,599 capital money for the bookmobile project the library will not be left short of meeting its maintenance needs. To proceed with the bookmobile project I will need your approval to expend the $56,761 carryover and $88,599 capital money, for a total of$145,360. Thank you for your assistance with this improvement of library services. Sincerely, 7 /1./ ~,r/-/h c John Halliday Library Director RECEIVED NOV 1 8 2004 County of Albemarle . . County Executive's Office Servmg Charlottesville, Albemarle County, Greene County, Louisa County, and Nelson County ,. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 December 10, 2004 Fax (434) 972-4126 Richard P. Bell IV 333 West Rio Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 RE: OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF PARCELS- Tax Map 56B, Parcel 32 (Property of Shirley L. Hathaway and Charles F. Leake III) Section 3.1 Definition of Lot of Record Dear Mr. Bell: The County Attorney and I have reviewed the title information for the above-noted property. It is the County Attorney's advisory opinion and my official determination that Tax Map 56B, Parcel 32 is comprised of five separate parcels. These parcels are designated as Lot B, Lot 33, Lot 34, Lot 36B and Lot 40B on a boundary survey by Roger W. Ray and Assoc., dated March 5, 2004. The basis for this determination is provided below. Our records indicate Tax Map 56B, Parcel 32 is zoned Residential- R2 and contains 1.765 acres and one dwelling. The most recent deed for this property is recorded in Deed Book 406, page 200. Lots B. 33 and 34 Deed Book 333, page 366, dated July 2,1957, conveyed two lots from W. Homer Ballard and Virginia S. Ballard to Charles F. Leake and Maxine J. Leake. The lots are described as Lot 32, containing 20,220 square feet and Lot 33 containing 20,640 square feet, both shown on a plat by John W. McNair, Jr. that is attached to the deed. This deed was recorded prior to the recordation of the Laurel Hills subdivision plat. On the basis of this plat, Lot 33, as shown on Roger W. Ray's plat is determined to be a separate parcel of record. Deed Book 334, page 195 contains a plat of the Laurel Hill Subdivision. The plat shows Lot 32, containing 20,220 square feet, Lot 33 containing 20,640 square feet and Lot 34, containing 20,000 square feet, Lot 36, containing 27,500 square feet and Lot 40, - 1:\DEPlìBCZS\Determin of Parcel\56B-32 Bell.doc Dick Bell, IV December 10, 1980 Page 2 containing 30,530 square feet. On the basis of this plat, Lot 34, as shown on Roger W. Ray's plat is determined to be a separate parcel of record. Deed Book 406, page 200, dated March 25, 1965, conveyed Lot 30 and a portion of Lot 31 of the Laurel Hills Subdivision from Charles F. Leake and Maxine J. Leake to Andre A. Nougaret and Lillian G. Nougaret. The Leakes retained a 30.4-foot wide strip of Lot 31, estimated to contain 5,979 square feet, that was added to Lot 32. The redivision of Lots 30, 31 and 32 is shown on a plat by O. R. Randolph, dated January 8, 1965. This reconfigured lot, comprised of Lot 32 and the strip from Lot 31, is designated as Lot B on Roger W. Ray's boundary survey. On the basis of this plat, Lot B, comprised of the original Lot 32 plus the 5,979 square foot portion of Lot 31, estimated to contain approximately 26,199 square feet, is determined to be a lot of record. Lots 36B and 40B Deed Book 359, page 524, dated June 15, 1960, conveyed three lots from Williston L. Clover and Beverly H. Clover to Charles F. Leake and Maxine J. Leake. The lots are depicted on a plat by A. R. Sweet showing the division of Lots 36 and 40 of Laurel Hills. The Laurel Hill subdivision plat is recorded in Deed Book 334, page 195. Parcel 36B, containing 5,882 square feet, was divided from Lot 36. Parcel 40B, containing 4,154 square feet was divided from Parcel 40. On the basis of the A. R. Sweet plat, Parcel 36B and Parcel 40B are determined to be lots of record. NonconforminQ issues: With the exception of Lot B these parcels are nonconforming because they contain less than 21,780 square feet. These lots may be divided, combined with any other lot, or have one or more of their boundary lines adjusted, in accord with Sections 6.4 C.1 & 2. That section contains the following provisions: 1. The resulting lot or lots comply with the requirements applicable to the district in which the lot is located and all other applicable requirements of the Albemarle County Code; or 2. In the opinion of the zoning administrator, the resulting lot or lots more substantially conform to the requirements of section 4.0 (general regulations) of this chapter and the area and bulk regulations applicable to the district in which the lot is located, and comply with all other applicable requirements of the Albemarle County Code. The dwelling that was constructed on this property in 1958 is on the property line between Lot B and Lot 32 as shown on Roger Ray's boundary survey. This line can be adjusted in accord with Sections 6.4 C.1 & 2. - 1:\DEPT\BCZS\Determin of Parcel\56B-32 Bell.doc Dick Bell, IV December 10, 1980 Page 3 Dwellings may be constructed on these parcels containing less than 21,780 square feet if all other regulations are met. If you are aggrieved by this determination, you have a right to appeal it within thirty days of the date notice of this determination is given, in accordance with Section 15.2-2311 of the Code of Virginia. If you do not file a timely appeal, this determination shall be final and unappealable. An appeal shall be taken only by filing with the Zoning Administrator and the Board of Zoning Appeals a notice of appeal which specifies the grounds for the appeal. An appeal application must be completed and filed along with the fee of $120.00. The date notice of this determination was given is the same as the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, John Shepherd Manager of Zoning Administration Copies: Gay Carver, Real Estate Department Ella Carey, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Reading File 29-33 Enclosed: Boundary Survey By Roger W. Ray & Assoc., Inc. dated March 5,2004 1:\DEPT\BCZS\Detennin of Parcel\56B-32 Bell.doc > 'z IJ n"'O-< o>I 3:D.... mnoo ~~;y moo>. þ(J)-t ~~ift mz"'O x D ....Im 001'100 -<Dm ....mz zo-i GJZOO -0» >Z Dooo n C m-<D õI< 001'11'1 D-< om " 0 ...." ~(J)-I nZI 001'1 fg......rn zx -<-< 1'11'1 ZD -I.... o -<D o m 1'10 xc -IZ ....0 Z> GJD C.... ....1'1 WOO Io 0" D-< :x: 1'1 D n 0 :x: GJ -IÞ.....m mJJ-...JD õr~ III ° "-J:::E "U-t I . I-<~ ommD ZW > m<>-< ....õ b.rrCl'1 Wõ.... .b.lT1m> Ie 000 I\) 00 tD<(f)a W»-tn I D' W "'. ~"'", tOI\J-tH UlIO Z o n w . ~ I\) Z o -< "'0-1 '" mI Y:J DI1'1 " om DO 3:C I1'1Z 00 > ....D Z-< "0 1'1> m-< D> C >'" DI -<0 :0: I\)Z o oI A 11'1 D 11'1 o Z .... '" m > w 11'1 o o Z > n C D D 11'1 Z -< " .... 11'1 r o w C D -<: '" -< r > D o ~ . Z ~~þo ~ W· . r~ W :0:0 t'~g-lU1 .....Wrw8J ~~~U1¿, "'01\)11'1 UI õ~-< > 11'1 -< -I > r \ \ \ \ 'v~ I:) 1,' '(; .... .., :t -+-' 0'> .1:)1:) ->,,')~ ,?1, o \ \ ?'~ W~r w 0 AW-< 'UI ~IDW ID'A ~"""/"";/ ........... ~r wo ....;g ffi-< r . W 11'1 WW OJ m "'0 r > -< :0: W n » r [1:1 '" I .... F1 11'1 -< r" '0 D I > -< I > :0: > -< o " \J :c o \J -i m '"': :::I: :c II m ~ Ul \J 0..... r D r 0 .... 0 ° m or 0 \J -inw (D nnm WOH m2;»:::I::C ZG> 3::::I:rri>-i W-iZ(D >HO:C-< W»o :C-i r r" H-ic:: rmomo> zmz m ZW"C::WHOO :::I: :CÄZ > n>w"wm" G»:c °r-i':::I:r W-< C::r H W.... Z >r:C:::I:01' \Jw -ic;;!mrH(D'-I>c:: -<H"'>mr" 01:C:c ° W:c^-<r Uln< <-iO!'1ïW~»PJIT1 H;::C::. (Dn -< c:Cn-iH ":CW >G>-imH:::I: mru rriH (DH> ØW ..Z -i 0 H ê :::I: (D Z 3:> > > 2; :c > n -< :::I: ø !J1 ru o o .to.. -i > X 3: » \J Ul 01 (D L > J: '" o '" ~D:C :-t mC11r~ ~. 0 lfU1~-Ig:; U1mHW[1J ~~~~~ "'0 I\) I ~ rW. > GJ -I 0 C GJ I .....-i . . :0:'-13: Ì:D 01' . UlUl 0>01 Ulnro I :c I ~IT1W wru D", 11'1 X "'.... ....w 0-< 11'1.... Zz friGJ \ \ \ ".... aD Co 15Z U1~ï I\) 0 ....W-I "'O~w r,OJ >rnm -<I\) !> o :'-. r r 0 .0 °0 »U1OJ 0° .-iru ........ ··......A.. ........ o m A o OJ 'r \go 0-1 'm I\) o -0 r > -I w.... ~¡g Lj~·············~~i:····· ............~.. ...., OJ. Wo '0 1'1 ~ 1'1 00 É .. Z CD!D~m -t . m . WW· ~r~ WUI 0 .b.lO-"Tf-t(J1 I I CD...... 01 w~~tj~'f U1-...JmGl w "t)-u-Ç} UJ rrU1þ » r -1-< 0 m C .... r o .... Z GJ J: > o D . L ~o~ ;-4 mtrir~ ~. a WW:IE-tUl J,Q)~Åm I\J?-to, "-JU1a»~ "'U......o J> õOJm > m -< .... Z '" ".... aD Co '§Z Z UI OJ W OJ UI ~ 1'1 > õ o ;::¡ ~~~ :-' ~?J~r~ cr~>~~ ~7~ÞOc:' ~UI W -UtDD 0 'rA' . > -I -I 0 J: w ~ ID m U1 .... "-0 0.... C"'O 1511'1 --- COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 December 16, 2004 Fax (434) 972-4126 Tommy Brannock 813 E. Jefferson Street Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF PARCELS & DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS· Tax Map 58, Parcel8A (Property of Kevin and Coleen O'Rourke) Section 10.3.1 Dear Mr. Brannock: The County Attorney and I have reviewed the title information for the above-noted property. It is the County Attorney's advisory opinion and my official determination that Tax Map 58, Parcel 8A contains at least two (2) and as many as four (4) development rights. The basis for this determination is provided below. Our records indicate Tax Map 58, Parcel 8A contains 8.405 acres and two dwellings. The property is not in an Agricultural Forestal District. The most recent deed for this property is recorded in Deed Book 2837, page 33. This analysis begins with the deed recorded in Deed Book 298, page 542 and dated January 30, 1952. This deed conveyed five tracts of land from Arthur L. Dorsey and Hazel M. Dorsey to Stillman F. Kelley, 2nd and Katharyn N. Kelley. These two parcels were among those conveyed with this deed: (1) 17.5 acres shown on a plat recorded in Deed Book 117, page 29 less a strip containing 0.23 acres conveyed to the Commonwealth of Virginia. (17.5 - 0.23 = 17.27) Parcel 8A is a portion of this parcel. (2) 15.5 acres shown on a plat recorded in Deed Book 255, page 276. Together, these two parcels comprised Parcel 8 as shown on the 1980 tax map. Copies of these two plats are attached. 1:\DEPlìBCZS\Determin of Parcel\58-8A O'Rourke. doc Tommy Brannock December 16,2004 Page 2 This deed established these two parcels as lots of record as defined in Section 3 of the Zoning Ordinance. The most recent deed for this parcel recorded prior to the adoption of the ordinance, December 10,1980, is recorded in Deed Book 489, page 73 and is dated June 14, 1971. This deed conveyed two pieces of land from Stillman F. Kelley,1I and Katharyn N. Kelley to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Dettor, Edwards & Morris, Inc. is also a party to this transaction. Parcel A, a portion of T.M. 58 - 8 containing 0.296 acres was added to the right-of-way of Route 738. Parcel B, a portion of T.M. 58 - 8A containing 0.458 acres was added to the right-of-way of Route 676. On the basis of this deed, Parcel 8 as shown on the 1979 tax map was comprised of two separate lots of record. One contained an estimated 16.894 acres (17.27 - 0.458 - 0.148 = 16.664) and was located on both sides of Route 738. There are five development rights associated with this parcel. This is identified as Parcel A on the attached sketch. The other contained an estimated 15.352 acres (15.5 - 0.148 = 15.352) and was located on the southeast side of Route 738. There are five development rights associated with this parcel. This is identified as Parcel 8 on the attached sketch. Deed Book 754, page 384, dated December 6, 1982, conveyed 8.46 acres from Stillman F. Kelley, II and Priscilla Kelley to Thomas E. Hutchinson and Colleen R. Hutchinson. The property is further described as lying on the north side of Route 738 and as being a portion of a larger tract conveyed by the deed recorded in Deed Book 298, page 542. Specifically, this lot is derived from the 17.5 acre parcel. The property is shown on a plat by Frank A. Gregg dated December 1982. The plat shows a 2.7 -acre residue that is added to Tax Map 57, Parcel 81 B. The remainder of the parcel contains 8.46 acres on the northwest side of Route 738 and an estimated 5.734 acres on the southeast side of Route 738. (16.664 - 8.46 - 2.7 = 5.504) Section 18-52 (p) of the Subdivision Ordinance, in effect at the time of this division, required a note on the plat stating: "The number of lots, as assigned by the subdivider into which each such parcel may be further divided by right pursuant to Section 10.3.1 of the zoning ordinance, if applicable." However, in this case the plat did not assign the development rights. Therefore, the development rights associated with the 17.5- acre lot of record are determined to be allocated as follows: I find that the 2.7 acre piece that was added to Parcel 818 was allocated no development rights because it was added to an existing parcel. (T.M. 57 - 818) 1:\DEPT\BCZS\Determin of Parce1\58-8A O'Rourke.doc Tommy Brannock December 16, 2004 Page 3 I find that the 8.46 acre portion located on the northwest side of Route 738 (T.M. 58 - 8A) was allocated at least two development rights because each of the two dwellings on the property required one development right. I find that the 5.504-acre portion located on the southeast side of Route 738 (Portion of T.M. 56 - 8) was allocated at least one development right because any parcel containing less than 21 acres requires a development right. The two remaining development rights have not been assigned. These development rights are available to either Parcel 8 or Parcel 8A. Parcel 8A has sufficient area to utilize up to four development rights. The 5.504-acre portion of Parcel 8 has sufficient area to utilize up to two development rights. These two unclaimed development rights may be assigned on a plat or plats signed by the owners of the portions of the original 16.664-acre parcel, as provided by the Subdivision Ordinance. Otherwise, these development rights are available to these parcels on a first come, first served basis. Deed Book 2837, page 33, dated July 19, 2004, conveyed 8.46 acres from Thomas E. Hutchinson and Colleen R. Hutchinson to Kevin S. O'Rourke and Coleen M. O'Rourke. The property is described as being the same property that was conveyed by the deed recorded in Deed Book 754, page 384. This transaction had no effect on the legal status of the parcel or on its development rights. This parcel is entitled to the noted development rights if all other applicable regulations can be met. These development rights are theoretical in nature but do represent the maximum number of lots containing less than twenty one acres allowed to be created by right. If you are aggrieved by this determination, you have a right to appeal it within thirty days of the date notice of this determination is given, in accordance with Section 15.2-2311 of the Code of Virginia. If you do not file a timely appeal, this determination shall be final and unappealable. An appeal shall be taken only by filing with the Zoning Administrator and the Board of Zoning Appeals a notice of appeal which specifies the grounds for the appeal. An appeal application must be completed and filed along with the fee of $120.00. The date notice of this determination was given is the same as the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please contact me. 1:\DEPT\BCZS\Determin of Parcel\58-8A O'Rourke. doc Tommy Brannock December 16, 2004 Page 4 Sincerely, ohn Shepherd Manager of Zoning Administration Attached: Deed Book 117, page 29 Plat (PARCEL A) Deed Book 255, page 276 Plat (PARCEL B) Sketch showing PARCELS A & B on T.M. 58 Tax Map 58 Copies: Kevin and Coleen O'Rourke P.O. Box 228 Ivy, VA 22945 Thomas Hutchinson (Owner of T.M. 56 - 8) P.O. Box 168 Ivy, VA 22945 Kelly F. Stillman, II Trust (Owner T.M. 57 -81 B) Fleet Bank of Maine, Successor Trustee C/O Fleet National Bank P.O. Box 55851 Boston, MA 02205-5851 Edith Kelley Manns (a beneficiary of Kelly F. Stillman, II Trust) 170 Beaucaire Avenue Camden, Maine 04843 Ella Carey, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Gay Carver, Real Estate Department Reading File 58-8A 1:\DEPT\BCZS\Determin of Parcel\58-8A O'Rourke.doc ~I'" ~/1 <"' ',~ ....f.o\ /.~~, ...,Q.~\~101(........... :Ç...........9E (~~..D~o~~:'~ \ ~~\.".$ """~".., "::",,j ....""..'-.~.,~~~-,. "'''V, \; ~ ./~;Z; ~ 42'25 .... 'ß~ ::~~~ ~ ~\.l1 ~ -, r ~ \ '1- ~\ ¥/ ,sod! \'& . CD ~,:....~ 0.... .... ~ ~ ~ '$ '" ' 4'.~ I \~ÄI ~ f~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~">A.J'IC ~ IC ~~\ ~ IC. ~ ...'" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ....,.:'('.:~~~~ ¡Ø!I"'Ù.~........,;$,~'OI ~ t ~~ ,,"-, > .': .. /. ~~ +-~.. '~-f: oY-1":...", 58-65D ..... ~ ~\ i..-71 '. ·/:t.''':'' 'r::-- ~ ~" ~ ;.~ ....>1' ....", ~ ~.. '\ ~~Cj;: /;... "(,;<',' ~. ~h" ,~ ", J3. <:J'òx,<:J b ::........;.-,...:..: J::AI" '/, ~ - ; '. ': .. '\ ....'" .f. ~ ! J. ã:/' ..j..~..._...-...-..._ _'. <Ji'ö ./ 'p;, X ~.:.. F~JJ~~}11:.~¡ .. or... ~" '. . róò:!J!J'ò C) ~ ~ ~. '--...1 <ff ¡. ~ '~~j~~~ '- '5:;,íf' ""-" ~ \\ " ~ ~ ~~...." ~ ,\ .........~':;::;., ~ Se-JC '\ ~ ",Y" .<>('" <' <," "'" ~ . '-'....... ... '''" '$ Û h.. ; 58·64A5 ~'o ,J "1" . I .... 58-15/' ;~~¡;~} \ ..,~ ....~ ~. ~ ./ i \ "'.~ J1 ",,,._,\~ ~~.'? 7>;:.) Ì'I'\~ \. ,.;Þ ~ ~ r--... 4>c,;.~ 4>' ...... l'- ..... ~ --.,..' ~ \. ~ ,,-'~ '- .J....:, ,,.- ,".,v ,iij~7 ~ \: I"':{ ~"/~>-/~ ~'J~ ;!; .~~ .". ~ / t...>~)" 'J, $8, $6>'6>06> 58.79B \!JT>.. ã'\ ;1' ~i:~,:\. \' \,....... ì,; / 'i"' ... / ." l ~ "l Jl,"'I" " ::t:~, ~ \. ~'" : / ~ <Ji~0" \ ,"/:..... _ ';~F' ~;S~ þ o :S::. 853 \~ ~ ':(~ ~ ,.....'0 ¿ 'i .> \. j ~./ ~'-":'''Y'')'''-'Y/o}' .' 0..SEE 59C2 ,..... ... -:ø:", ....... :;;.-'~ J> O.....~..... 000' ---Ð':.;~:'". .o~">- ,.',' g ~I- ,0 ~ o , , ~ ".. ~ G1 :.~'~ ... """"III! \., .: - I":.....;¡.: II :';".. ~ ~ ~ /II ~ -- .........!J 1 IV ; \ ~OÞ'" /-:::~ J~ '!,: :.~~;! ;i~" '..' IS.EE.._.59Ek c".. ~ · tI· ~' .:.... ~ c ,... ~.. , ¡¥ ';",' }~i'J' :., ..:~... oY~ 71;!J, . ~ .i '-' ~ 1.6 .~~ - ;. /!,>'i1'~. &1:'< % ~ ~ oó~ \" ~ r:"", ~ ··,-..~5, ~ . ~ ~!t.}[ I!. '" I ~ ......... '" OJ... ì738 ~ lJJ;ö t· ~ .. «;...,~ ~'f~ - f/1.11J: ,/ '4'M..-IØ ( ...... ~ ~ ~ $ c"'" · þ é:, ~~~~'E}\I!: ¡ r--- r ,... ~ ,~ ;... ..:':":'" _. ~> _fd >'.--' , ~ ' oó r-- OJ ¡ 0 . ~ ~It ./ ...-..........-...-...-..,-..<-.. ..'" ~86 r- ~~....~ f'~~ ~~ \1~ ~ ' n'- . 'ft' sa. ,.. ~ $&.9:2A"...~ ""1.¡- ¡ , ~ \ ~t\\~~' .......,: ~~.,~ c ¡ ! ...:~, ~ ...:~T il ~. ~ ll' \:-..:..... \ ....., .... '<.,. ~ ;; "'...." '1; ./ ~~. 58-99A1 ~ oY .".,. ..."M "'3 .. ~'\ j """~) / . .. '\ oY",/ "-58-253 1ft. ..., '''\.. ~ '\" ....... ./ ...,.,('- ·L,,r;:.>vcJ'k'E~ . 'g ~ "> ..: "") ¡637 . ~ 1. ./ <......: .' ~.. .i~ ....", õ \ $6>.., '{;. ,::',; d ~ ~ 6:~;~ 58-95 .....~,.. I) 58-100A ./' ~ ) .. -;. -;,...~....,. ..~! '\ ,J t ,\~.'\'\~ ! 74.17A11\ '\ ~ ,..,'" '<,.. "'''''''' ....., / I (~~ "'\ '-............ '. ;' J AI!" ,..,r,u "II L i 7'" 041 , '. ."i '~:~~:~ : - ~ 14 ~ ~ ~~ ~;>)" ¡ i /" ,- ~ ~~~ l.. ~ ~ '\ \ ß f'., '" ~" .sa. '"" 1""f6J "'" ~ ~)'> ...... . ~7. 6> M,4, ~.:'''' ........ .'q, '- 'Oì 7'. _-Y"" / ,.- / 073 . .- . . . "'" . - " 042 043 I '. /'1.'~ ,-', /..... 62.1(1) c::?~' " .'(" S,;:,\ .,' I co .' :'", -y 1~ .. '.' - ". ;'. ....,,\,...1... 58:".~B.. ~ : " R ....../~ .I ~ / .,,'01' ",. fi / /.\ ~7. "". l 6'$..¡- . (' .-./ ,+ ." ~""'''' ~'" l s:: ,"'~ 41 .1t.,~ '" ~ ...,~ il i ~'q, ....,.., I "\ "', ~ / ... '-"1 '" . i' '" ,~ ." ~ = 74·15J )'....,~ -' '" ~ 74·15N í ~ / . . / /I \~ 140!.W / ßI \:'40""" 074 075 Scale Albemarle County Tax Map: 058 .':"';;~.t, .:!"...'.................~.."...........' "'." -.-. .'" _.c.,..'· .' . ' ;¡;'..: .:,. .,:. - . 800 "- 2._ 1.600 NoIe: This map is for display PUrp0&8S OfIfy and shows parcels as of 12/3112003. See Map Book InftDduction for additional de/ails. .<...( - -J ... ~ ~ . ~. I l "- ~ -(? ()' ~ ~ .? . ·f ¿~I . ( C/" ~ ~ -.'> "-"é:.1 V) ~ .~ .'S, '\ Y ~ ~ ('-. 0- ... ð'"' ~ r ~, ~ ~ ~ L I - ~ L.t ~ ~~. 4 0 1-, ~ \ ~iç ! -c~ ~ r-0 <!.~ ,f"l- CJ ~ ~ ~-~ , ..-- -, "" '" )3 e "'-; C!,.... n ~ -t. () ;l~ ~ r "?;è/ ~~.L >- />.----.. 1- l o DB 15S. , Z"" .... ~ ~ X {¿I ~~ ~ h. \ "If. k,"0 ^o~ ~ ~ .!. ~ ~\ .\'" . ,,- . I'L '" ..0 / ' 1\\" ~ ..' ~-------" ......-------? ) 4- --':",+.~1... " 1 \ II: ""T:- ,.. <".ot. <- - ~... . "1- ~ u ~ ...... " .,. ~ . oF ~ " (.,0 -;( I ~ rf' 4.... ...." .... .. J . .... ~ ", ..". . .- .- ... , ... , I "t / o .- ...-.;.. ;" /' .' , 1'/ .,~I' ,/ ...,.-;/ I /' ~;'" ~... ,./ .¡./ ..... ,.....-(,. c.f'~1' ~ '\..- . ," . '1;'/ .....,.;.... "'~/,. "'Ç;... ..... ....."'.... ... ~ . . ~ "... " 7~ 0" y~ } '. "- f/ ~ " ~... ":,."... ,. <! ~ .( o '" f ..J -...::..., I I ... I I I ... .., ... qj~ 11:1\; ~~K'" :> ~ . .... 1 rQ ~ o .~ ~ ~ Is- --f 1f, ~ ...s \,' ... a I\' 'b -i" "'\~ Þo r::t ~ h '\ r ~. '{- " ,;.- -9.. .... - . > i () I "ì .>... f" t ( s., ~ ) c I". ., ^ ~ . a plat of 15 5/10 A. of land situated in the vici- nity of Ivy Depot, Albemarle County, Virginia, sol~ by My Own Development Corporation to Percy Montague and is bounded as follows: Beginning at an iron in center of Jefferson Highway opposite a post a corner to Linwood Bowles, Bernard A. Garth and Percy Montague, thence along road with Montague 418 feet thence leaving road still with Montague S. 551 E. 475 .feet to a post in cement S. 28 3/4 W. 15 ft. to center branch and down same 260 ft. to a point opposite stake a corner to My üwn Development Corporation, thence with them a new line S. 2S 3/4 W. 820 ft. to an iron on No. limits of C. & O. H.R. . . . Sk'ETCI~ SHoWINc. PARCiLS Å - B ON TA)( MA? 51 « ~ ~':.J ~uJ -1 en ~ co , I t'- l{) I - .' --, < - , . . . .'. . . . -... .- ~ '" ". ~ ,.... : r. '.:-..: < .' . . '. . .. . f7-81M .. ,. .. .... ,-. . .- :'..; : '" . . .:. . . . . ..' . .. ..' .. .: . ." ., .. . '.- . . .'. - # . ." 1'-:." :.' ~ 1M - . . .. ... . . ~,. . , , . . . Albemarle County Service Auth'rity ~""--- =>~ Serving . Conserving December 16, 2004 Ella W. Carey Clerk to the Board of Supervisors County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, V A 22902 Dear Ms. Carey: Enclosed are seven copies of the Albemarle County Service Authority's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004. This report is being distributed to our trustees, financial advisors, underwriters and rating agencies, as well as central depository institutions and other interested parties, in order to both satisfy reporting requirements and provide current financial and statistical data on the Authority's operations. I welcome any comments or suggestions, and hope that you find this report useful. Sincerely yours, L~ ~~øu~~, Raoul James Kister Finance Director Enclosure 168 Spotnap Road · P.O. Box 2738 . Charlottesville, VA 22902 . Tel (434) 977-4511 · Fax (434) 979-0698 www.acsanet.com 1 rn I ...- ~ ""¡.I"~f"';"J'''",,,,,, /' ~ GREE",~ ">-_.", Charlottesville Residency ,.' () ..... ...... -:a. ", ~ ..·.Q~'wOo··.I:... it-,·Q....'" ~:J: ~i'~ {o; ._~ ~ u : ~ 1711 ~: >- ~ ~ "'''''0 ~... § Monthly Report \. ....~~ IfOI\~~'" II~ = ...... III -=0.<>_ 18 3 & 11111\1 -'/'<'''''''~///{J.J1/ January 2005 . Mission · Essential Tasks Assessment · Construction & Maintenance · Planning & Traffic Engineering · Issues Residency Charlottesville II I Monthly Report 111'-'''~'h1'';.".-,,; ....,' GItEE'þ; -'"'>-, ,'" 0'" ...... ~ ... ,,' '" .··.ànwoo·· ~." /~....' ..Q~\''9,,\ ~g: ~'i"~ " . ._:;: ~ LJ :. ~ 1711 ~: > ~ l ...'t"'<) ..~.: § ~ . ~ ~. ~ -=0. ".:'1". HO"~"" I" = ..... ¡\' """<>_ ! 8 :5 6 11/1111 ...........,,,,,,"í/I/J;ji} Mission The VDOT Charlottesville Residency builds and maintains roads, provides transportation expertise and regulatory authority and facilitates traffic engineering issues in ways that are: focused on public safety fiscally and environmentally responsible · · supportive of alternative transportation means · supportive of neighborhood and regional development in order to provide the efficient goods throughout · 2 services and and safe movement of people, Albemarle and Greene Counties. rn . Charlottesville Residency Monthly Report ESSENTIAL TASKS 'JI.ll/~"''''"";,,,,~ "." GREE'ÑE' --.,. ,,~ ....... "'.... /~ ()"';'ci1\woo~"" ~ '\ '\\..........Q...~'; ~~. "Z-~ ~::::.: ..:>~ ~ 0 : '" 1711 0.: ~ ~ u . 0 ~. S ." ......" "'..... I~ ~ ....~". HOI\.~.·· I" '=- ........ III =""'<>_:1 8 :5 ~/lf/ I ..-/....;;,.,..,///1, REMARKS ASSESSMENT TASK e(A) MAINTAIN SECONDARY & PRIMARY ROADS o ROW: mow, ditch, pipes, trim, 1. signs, patrols o ROADWAY: grade, pave, patch o EMERGENCY OPS o REPAIR & BUILD BRIDGES 3 Bridge Rt. 795, Alb. Co. 91 % Repaired damaged rail at Rt 707 & 676 in Albemarle - o MAINTAIN EQUIPMENT Residency Charlottesville rn I I Monthly Report /',I"J';'''''......,I~ ",/1 GII.E~~~ __.", .'.' ~ ......,.. ¡,..... /~ ()...;·Q~'WOOð·... ~ '\ .\\¡..".....Q\~" ~~. . z:: ~;:): ...:~~ ~ 0. : C\ 171& 0.: ~ ::. U ", 0 ~: ~ ' '. 'ð ...... ~ \. ....~'" HOI\~.·· IIII CC . ...... 1\\ ~<> l 8 '.5 !o¡¡dlll ....""'#"""'/'-,-,¿/i.JI/J 4 ESSENTIAL TASKS (continued) TASK ASSESSMENT REMARKS 2. MANAGE CONSTRUCTION . (G) PROGRAM o PE Activities - Revised Secondary 6YP submitted to County Staff for review & scheduling public hearing o Project Construction Preconstruction on Rt 53 Buck Island Creek bridge project is 1/10/05 Charlottesville Residency Report ESSENTIAL TASKS (continued) Monthly ¡11,1l""""""'""" /" GIUE'Ñ '..... ,,',' C"r ...........~ #-.,.~ " ~ .··.01\WOO·· ~ "" 1\J.......Q~..'9-~ g ~/ \~~ ~O: :'&~ ~ ù : ~ 171& w: ;: ~ ~ ....i'ð !... I ~ "<'" HO"..~·.. l ~ ......... ¡II ....""_ :I 8:S & ,1111/1 "'......",.,J///I¡jJi Task Remarks Assessment - 40 land use permits issued - 8 Revised plans reviewed & comments provided as needed - 2 new site plans reviewed - 8 Special Use Permits reviewed & comments provided - 1 0 developments in planning stages 2 Rezonings reviewed e(G) CONDUCT PLANNING ACTIVITIES site plans and rezoning request o Issue and review permits o Review 3. 5 subdivision plans reviewed & comments provided 2 subdivisions inspected for acceptance - 1 subdivision o Conduct studies and advise o Inspect and monitor subdivisions 5 accepted . I Charlottesville Residency Monthly Report f'I"'/"';;.,;...~.,.~ d'" GRE!'AiE' -._. .,' ~ ......... l-.... (~ C.···OnWOO.·.. ~ \. / ",......'Q \~~ §~:. ~~~ '0' &u.~, ~..u : '" 171& ~: ~ '; ....~" ......... f \. ....~~ HO"~.·· \\~ "'- ....... \\\ ""'-<> : 8 3&",1,1\ ..r¿;""'~;.,-,·'/I/¡lJ 6 ESSENTIAL TASKS (continued) TASK ASSESSMENT REMARKS 4. FACILITATE TRAFFIC . (G) ENGINEERING o Request and advise on signals & signs 14 Traffic issues submitted o Request and advise on studies & data 11 Traffic issues outstanding o Assist with design Residency Charlottesville Monthly Report 11'.I"~"'/'",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~ d'" GA.EE.Iy~ _._. .":Ç- .. .... s.... "'J.. ()"'~nwoéiò'" ~ '\ """ ......'Q \ ~.", §~;' ~~~ ~o· Iu.~:\ ~ LJ :.~ 17111 ~... ~ ":. ""'<1 .... f \. .....~'Y HO"~~" IIII ~ .......... \\\ ~<>_:z 8 :5 6'1,,/1\ '-'''-'''"¡,''/í/J,J PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING Status Albemarle County Six-Year Plan Project Primary Projects Description Scoping I Survey JANUARY 05 19-04 Public Mtg. 12-03 03..04 01-06 12-08 (Upda ted 4-04) Public Hearing 3-16-04 8-05 6-06 6-08 (Updated 10-03) 28 Mo. Inactivity (Updated 10-02) 2-07 2-08 (Updated 2-04) (Possible Pave-in-place) 3-08 3-09 (Updated 2-04) - 12-04 (Updated 5-04) 12-04 (Updated 8-041 BAA I 0022-002- ,C501 - J arrnan Gap Rd DWS 0691-002-158,C50 I Mcb1.tire Rd. EXL BAA 0631-002-128.C502 JWH ROOO-002-2 59,C 50 I Dickerson Road 0606-002-P .N Woods Edge Rd. 0623-002-P ,N Gilbert Station Rd. 0640-002-P ,N Allen Road 0666-002-P ,N Co mments PE & R/Wonly; CN byothers (U¡>dated 9-04) Adv R/W mspec P .H Review I HES Intersection Improvement l·t.0:[/. . Secondary Ro_ads - 2-lanes w/bike lanes &sidewalk j Number P rojec De s ¡goer New Alignment MeadowCreek Park'\V'dY Free State Rd.Connector Construct 2 lanes on 4-1ane Route/PPMS r I~ ~ - - 691 11129 63 2530 52393 R/W '7:'../', - ~ Gravel Roads treat treat Rural Rustic Roads Grade, drain and surface Gravel road Grade. drain and surface Gravel road 7 Surface treat gravel Road-Exist R/W Surface treat .f ravel road-Exist R/W 606 54429 623 59274 - - 640 72513 666 72518 ,,, C1 ¡ ,.... 41"- ... tI 1J .;<,~. Charlottesville Residency Monthly Report PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING Greene County Six Year Plan Project Status tll''''''',h.,l'',.,...'':Þ d"l GI\EE1;E' ____ ", ~ ......... ..." ,/~ ~.·;·onWOOþ.....~\ I'i-.....(J ..~., S~:' :~~ ~ ~: 1I.t: >~ ' 0 : '" \71& (): ~ ~ u . 0 ~.. § ." ".'ð ........ ~ ~ ....~... I/O~~.·· IIII ""'- ......... 11\ ~~1 8 :5 "'111/11 -"'/"í'~'''I//jJj JANUARY 05 - - - - - - -- -- rI - --~-- Field Field Route PPMS Designer Project De s c riptio n S cope Survey Review P.H. h1Sp. R/W Adv. Comments Bacon HollowRoad Widen and s tra ¡ghten 2-lane roadway 627 51022 RDL 0627-039-195,C501 Fr.Rte.615 to Rte 632 . .>:. ·c ¡.O{; . >6.04: 12-06 (updated 8-04) Gravel Roads I I I I I I . , . . . . . . 8 Grade and Surface Treat - Gravelroad N/A I 12-04 Rural Rustic (updated 6-04) N/A N/A Gravel Roads N/A N/A n.o3 Watson Road 0640-039-137,N501 IFr. Rte.633 to Dead End 2515 640 ,:.. , I .... 4!"- .. tI U ....;............1- Residency Charlottesville Monthly Report /(II.lN1""".,I''''i, ...." GRE!'Ñ "'-_.,. "C"c ..........~ ~'>;' l..... ..·.Q1\WOOÕ... ~ \. /i'.:" ..(J \ t;!.\ ~:J: ~~~ ~o· ...,',., ~ u : C" 1'7'& 0 : ~ ~ ....~ð ~/ ~ ~ . ~ ..~. I~ "'- ....,.,. 1101'.... I" ~- ......... IIII --"_,7 8 :5 ~JJI(~ .,I'./"'"",////,j CONSTRUCTION PAVING & CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 05 Percent Complete CHARLOTTESVILLE RESIDENCY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS Project Description Street Contract Cost 25 65 25 65 0649-002-158 C501 Continue storm drain installation and some grade work, depending on weather conditions, from the proposed service road to the proposed roundabout. (NFO)0020-002- Bridge O\er Hardware River 126,C501, B608 Demolishing old bridge and remo~ng the existing abutment BP-7A-05 Urban Section Inprovement Name Airport Road Scotts~lIe Road 9 5 5 Bridge Painting Currently prepping and painting Rt 250 bypass bridge over Barracks Road. Various Sec and Primary Roads ,.. . j ,.... ~- ... ~ " ~..:~. I/",-,NJO,,,,,.,,,,,.,, ,/'~ GP.E~...~ ->--__. Charlottesville Residency ,I. 0 ........... ")0, "' ~ .··.onwoo ". ~ ~ i~iQ""\',\ ~~.: ~'i1 ~ 0: ._~ " u . '" 1716 ...: ~ ~ ~ ....C} ~/ f Monthly Report _ .ð~ ~~, ~ '\ ....~ HOIl~"" III S ...... IIII "'<>_",1 8 :5 & 111/11\ """,Ù//ffJJI MAINTENANCE Yancey Mills Headquarters December January Goal: Dav Light Signs. Goal: Guard Rail Mowin. Pr 8 MOWING None None Pr 1 PATCHING RT 690, 802, 636, 64 Rt. 64, 240, 635, 693 Pr 3 GRADE/MACHI NEI ADD RT. 745, 683,611, 707, 758, 787, 637 STONE RT 698" 633, 634, 637, 758, 689, 682, 811, 702. 688 811, 814 Pr 4 DITCHIPIPE Rt. 684, 635,758 RT 690, 802 Pr 2 GUARDRAIL! MOWING RT684, 682, 859 RT 29, 689,240, 250 Pr 6 GUARDRAIL REPAIR RT 29, 64 RT 29, 64 Pr 5 EQUI P MAl NT PER SCHEDULE PER SCHEDULE All equipment repaired for snow season. Pr EMERGENCY OPS High water Rt. 736, 611, 637, 811. Finish Repaired Shoulder Rt. 64, Low Pr 7 OTHER Repaired Shoulder Rt. 250. Rt. 64 Shoulder Rt. 692 Day Light Signs Secondary Roads 10 rn I 4!""- ~ Residency Charlottesville Monthly Report III""'I'I"~,,,,.,,,,, ,/' G~E~Af ~-. \,.' 0<': ..........~ -"'" ", -I. ..·~Quwoó·· I:., ':, ,I'~"" ..GJ···..~,,\ §g; ~'i~ i u :. ~ 1715 ~: ): g '::. . (" ~... ~ '" ·..ð~ "'.... ~ ~ "'~ I/O"...... \\~ "=- '" ...... 11\ "'"<>_,1 8 :5 ! "vii' ",/;;';,"¿o/JJ./JJ MAINTENANCE and Free Union Headquarters January Goal: Repair low shoulders - Prima Secondary December air drop inlet and under drains - Guardrail Mowinn - Rte 250 Goal: Re Rte. 250 Remo\oe trees w/contractor - Rte. 250 Cut Brush from Highway Signs Mowing - Rivanna Lot Remo\oed trees - Rte. 250 Mowing - Rte. 665, 676 Pr 4 MOWING 810 Patching - Rte. 29, 250, 743, 676, 601 Shoulder Repair - Rte. 250, 743, 654 810, 664 Pothole Patching - Rte. 29. 250, 601 743, 665, 1407, 1410 Pr 3 PATCHING 662, Machine and Add Stone - Rte. 606, 643, 661 673,675,756,766,776,671,668,678 Replace Pipe - Rte. 673 Clean and repair drains - Rte. 601, 660 Repair Under Drain - Rte. 250 @ UV A Machine with Stone - Rte. 643, 662. 666, 667 668, 672, 673, 764, 766, 776 Rte. 29, 668, Cleaned and repaired drains/pipes 676, 810, 846, 1650 Repaired Cul\oert - Rte. 776 Pr 2 GRADE/MACHINE/ ADD STONE Pr 1 DITCHIPIPE Rte. 250 CCL to Rte. 240 MOWING Pr GUARDRAIL! Rte. 614 (Whippoorwill Hollow) Rte. 29 @ Forest Lakes GUARDRAIL REPAIR Pr5 Per Schedule As Scheduled PM on Snow Equipment Pr EQUIP MAINT 11 Customer Concerns Good Housekeeping Litter Patrol Snow/Ice Operations if necessary Repair Dig at Rental Property - Rte. 657 Traffic Control - Rte. 29 Accident (2) Snow/Ice Event Debris Removal - Rte. 668, 669, 677, 678, 810 Monitor Tree Contractor - Rte. 250 Repair Sinkhole - Rte. 776 Dust Control - Rte. 668, 671 Ice Control - Rte. 810, 1444 Pr EMERGENCY OPS !? OTHER ..J , i."'" ..- ... ~ \) ..;r~......... ~ f"lll"//""'~~,~, /" GP.EE'~ """_. Charlottesville Residency ,'" O~"'''''''''~ "'.. ,I' ~ .··,onwoo ". ~ .. ,,"u Q ....'t., ~g; ~~~ ~ u : '2, 1711 ~: )II- ~ l ....1""<> .,~.... ¡ Monthly Report ~ <<\' HO""~" I" "- ......... II' -=--<>___}8 3& ¡"pili /"'fll.//,JI . MAINTENANCE Boyd Tavern Area Headquarters December January Goal: Goal: To com uardrail mow-in Pr MOWING/Brush cutting Rte. 164, 53. 22 Rte. 164 22, 231 Pr 1 PATCHING Rte. 1120, 1121. 1122, 1123. 1124 Rte. 1120, 1121, 1123 Pr 3 GRADE/MACHINE/ ADD STONE Rte. 731. 784, 640. 612 Rte. 608. 645, 646. 746 Pr 4 DITCH/PIPE Rte. 641. 747, 744 Rte. 640. 600 Pr 2GUARDRAIL/ MOWING Rte. 53 Rte. 250, 22. 231 Pr GUARDRAIL REPAIR per contract Pr EQUIP MAINT per schedule as scheduled Pr EMERGENCY OPS High Water & Ice control Pr OTHER Tree contract monitoring 12 rn . It ,,·I"~'''''''''J'/''I... "", GlUt", ""-. Charlottesville Residency I"~· o<c.··..·..·..~ "'", I" ~ ".,01\-00" ~... n·· Q........" §gf \~'~ ~ u . C> 1715 ...; >- ~ ~. ···~ð !:" § Monthly Report -. . .. s \. ....~~ HO\l.~~··· II~ = ...... ¡II ~<>__:t 8 :5 ~ 11,~11\ ......."..Ù"¡II/I¡JJ MAINTENANCE Keene Headquarters December January Goal: Completed 100% guardrail mowing Rts. 20, 29 Goal: 75% guardrail mowing Rt. 6 50% patching for next year's surface seal schedule complete ditch and shoulder problems Pr BMOWING Coldmix Rts. 618, 761, 723, 715, 712, 1304,717,630, Coldmix Rts. 742, 795, 622, 618,723,715,717, Pr 3 PATCHING 708 630, 706, 708 Pr 6GRADElMACHINEI Rts. 627, 795, 713, 717, 792, 793, 631, 617, 670, 716, Rts. 712, 713, 728, 704, 714, 761, 734, 733, ADD STONE 721, 630, 722, 723, 761 638, 737, 812, 770, 725, 753, 627, 717 Pipes Rt. 737 Cleaned Ditches Rts. 620, 618,1309,712,53,795,631, Pipes Rts.724, 670 Pr 5DITCH/PIPE 719 Ditches Rts. 719, 630, 627, 626, 726 Pr 4 GUARDRAIL MOWING Rts. 20, 29 Rt. 6 Pr 2 EQUIP MAINT As scheduled As scheduled Pr 1 EMERGENCY OPS 911 - Trees Rt. 631 Ice Spots Rts. 53, 795, 631 Pr 70THER Daylight signs Rt. 29 Complaints Rts. 620, 618, 737, 1309, 712, 795, 631, 719 Complaints Rts. 719, 627, 626, 630, 726 Tree Contractor Rts. 697, 6, 20, 627, 724, 729, 620, 715 13 · , 01/1"- :r Residency Charlottesville Monthly Report """~"'/'~"'I,~ ",,, GRE~....E' --..", .1' ~ ......... loo'>:" /J.. ~";01'WOOO"" ~ '\ /A..:'''Q \~~ ~~:. :=~ ~g~ ..,:~~ ~ .. : '" 1711 ~: ~ ........,. 0 ,_. ~ '- ........, ,,~...,~ ~ <'" I/O~~.· 1,1 -0. ...... 1\\ ~-<>_ :r 8 3"'JII~1 ';/.lJ~~'í/l/I,:J Maintenance ST ANARDSVILLE HEADQUARTERS November Mowina on seconda ng on Rt. 29 Plant mix Rts. 667. 641& patching pot holes as needed Brush cutt ghting signs Rt. 607 Pr 5 MOWING/Brush cutting Day Grade and replace stone on Rts .629, 637, 601 & 677; repair shoulders on Rt 33 little mountain turn lanes Pr 4 GRADE/MACHINE/ ADD Graded& replaced stone on Rts. 629. 605. 614. 676 STONE 632.603, 637, 642, 638, 621 33 & 622. 623 mix on Rt 634. 601 Plant Pr 3 Patching Pr 2 GUARDRAIL! MOWING Rts Pr 7 GUARDRAIL REPAIR Pr 6 EQUIP MAINT Pr 7 Emergency ops drainage pipes on RT 33 Mt 122 & 1021 Rts 29. 670 Clean out drains on Rt 641 ng signs day light Installed under / 810 & 33 Pr 1 DITCH/PIPE repaired by Maca Rt 33 Mtn. 810 per schedule To be 29 South on Rt repaired guardra schedule Maca Per transformer caught fire Closed Rt. 629 14 Pr OTHER ru I I Residency Charlottesville Monthly Report "'-'''/:/'''''''''''''''';.,. ."" GP.EE~~ -_.. .!! ~ ......,.. ..... /~ ~",Qnwooå""~\ '\\ .."......Q...~" g~:" :~~ ;';; g: ....; >- ~ ~ u : C\ 1711 ~: ~ ~ ""'?<I "...... f ~ ....~.... HO~~.·· l ~ ......... 1\\\ -""<>:.7 8 :5 'IIII~ ""-""','íIII"J Current Status PLANNING te plan Awaiting s Site Plan Review Preliminary Site Plan under review. Revised conceptual site plan under review. Awaiting revised conceptual site plan. Initial Road and Site Plan comments sent to County staff. VDOT and County staff continue to explore alternative access solutions for the site. 15 Traffic study under review. Awaiting site plan. Amended traffic study under review. Traffic study under review Traffic study under review Traffic study under review Traffic Study Review Traffic Study Scoping Project Albemarle Towne Center (Sperrv) Peter Jefferson/Martha Jefferson Site Rivanna Village at North Pointe Pantops Ridge Cascadia Belvedere Brass Tract Collier Property Reynolds property Walgreens rn . Charlottesville Residency Monthly Report "1."1/",,;/,,,;,,, ....," GR.EEÑ~ ~-.__ ,,·O~ .......... ~'>;' ,II ~ "';Q~$WOO';'" ~ '\ /~.... ..(J \~~ ~:): ~~§ ~ 0 : '-': ,.. ~ ~ u : C\ 1711 0 : ~ ~ "'~ð ~... f \. ···t... HO\l~~" l ~ ......... 111\ ~<>_I 8 :s & ¡,{,I\ ~"''''''';'-'',;//JljJI TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ISSUES UNDER REVIEW: ALBEMARLE TED TED TED TED TED TED TED ~ Culpeper Culpeper Culpeper Culpeper Culpeper Culpeper Culpeper Received 6/1/2004 5/21/2004 Request to install red flashing light 9/15/2004 Question to remo'Æ stop sign at junction 9/15/2004 Request to extend turn lane 11/8/2004 Request to lower speed limit & post 9/30/2004 Signage review, Speed reduction 9/17/2004 Traffic congestion at school 12/1/2004 Signage, pa'Æment markings l Signage Flashing light Location 29 & Rio to 250W 8B 8048 Batesville Road Ballards Mill Road At Route 250 Ri'Ærbend Dri'Æ&Pantops Intersection T' Speed Signage Intersection Signage Lane ext exit Rt Ashwood 29Bypass 64W to 11 Route 29 29NBL 29 64W 636 671 729 1116 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ISSUES UNDER REVIEW: GREENE W Culpeper TED Culpeper TED Culpeper TED n traffic backing out onto turnlane onto Rt traffic in a.m. backs up onto Rt. 33 request to reloc. flashing sign to Food Shop 29 Received 10/20/2004 10/20/2004 11/3/2004 /, T' - --. Traffic backup Traffic backup Sign relocate Location turning left WB onto 33 turning right onto 29 S Int. of Rt. 1105 Route 29NB 33EB 33WB 16 ," c : .... ~ .... ~ ~ $0"',--... .. Residency Charlottesville Monthly Report ISSUES Ilf.I"~/"""'''~",þ ,I'" GREENE' .....__. .,' ~ ......... ¡"'I. ,\'~ O"'onwo04'" ~ \. / ..".....1Q...~:;, g~:" ~~~ ~ : "": >- ~ ~ 0. :.. 1716 0 : ~ ::u ",0 ~.. ~ ~ ..,.." ....... ~ '" ···t'Y HOIl~.·· 1\\\ ~ ......... II1I ~<>_ ! 8 :5 t.1¡f(~ "'.r,;/,;i~..,/I/I,J Georgetown Road - Plan preparation has not started. Latest cost estimate is based on three lane concept. VDOT will move forward with survey and plan development sufficient to take project to public information meeting. Schedule to be provided. Local · to advise as to whether Secondary Road Funds can Dry Bridge Road (Route 708) - Have reviewed site next to mailbox 717 for guardrail. Due to the existing land contours and sharp drop off at edge of pavement (no roadway shoulder), will need permission from landowner to build up shoulder for proper installation of guardrail. Construction of shoulder could be costly. Will review site for other possible lower cost alternatives. - Ms. Mills has Division, Assistance Estes, Southern Parkway - Mr. be used on this project. · · reviewing site VDOT to 35 mph through the Airport Runway Project (Routes 743/606) - Traffic has been switched to new section of Route 606. continues to monitor site for roadway safety concerns. Speed limit has been reduced construction zone. Additional actions may be required. is Traffic Engineering been contacted and District (Route 53) Silvia Mills petition for potential action. · · is reviewing the County's request and Park/Faulconer Construction Issue - District Staff providing a response Ivy Business anticipates · in early January. Secondary Six Year Plan - Pending approval from County. 17 · . . . . " F COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434)296-5823 Fax (434) 972-4126 November 23, 2004 Tom Gale Roudabush, Gale & Associates, Inc. 914 Monticello Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 RE: SUB 04-077 Belle Vista. LLC Preliminarv Subdivision Plat: Tax Map 79, Parcel 50C Dear Mr. Gale: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on November 16,2004, denied approval of the above-noted petition by a vote of (5:2). The Commission denied the request for private roads in the exercise of its discretion under Albemarle County Code Sections 14-232 and 14-234. The proposed public roads could not be approved by VDOT and, otherwise, the approval of the private road would allow the property to be developed differently than it could be with the public road. In order for the preliminary plat to be approved, the subdivider rnust either amend the plat to show that all the roads would be public roads or provide the Commission with an alignment of the private road that meets the requirements of Albemarle County Code Sections 14-232 through 14-234. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me (434) 296-5823. Cc: Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey Steve Allshouse ~ ROUDABUSH, GALE & ASSOC., INC. A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 914 MONTICELLO ROAD CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22902 PHONE (434) 2934251 (434) 977-()205 FAX (434) 29&5220 INFO@ROUDABUSH.COM LAND SURVEYING ENGINEERING LAND PlANNING J. THOMAS GALE. L.S. MARILYNN R. GALE, L.S. WILLIAMJ. LEDBETTER, L.S EDWARD D. CAMPBELL III, L.S. WILLIAM S. ROUDABUSH. L.S. December 17, 2004 Members of Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: Belle Vista Preliminary Subdivision - Private Road Waiver Dear Board Members: In an effort to highlight the physical constraints of this property and further justify the private road waiver, I have attached the following information for your review: Exhibit A - I' = 200' horizontal scale, 2' contour interval map showing 15% and greater slopes affecting the property. Exhibit B - Sheet 11 ftom the current VDOT Subdivision Street Requirements Manual Showing Terrain Classifications for level, rolling, and mountainous terrain. Exhibit A captures the uniqueness and difficulty of this project in reaching the desirable (flatter) slopes on this property which exist on the higher (rear) portion of this property. If these areas are to be reached, the proposed road corridor has virtually no flexibility to be changed without increasing the environmental impact to the property. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have on the two exhibits. Sincerely, Tom Gale, L.S. Itr Attachments T I. t;" I t=¡.h¡bt+ B ~ Virginia Department of Transportation - Subdivision Street Requirements © 1996 Approval. The resident engineer shall provide written notification to the appropriate county official and the developer, if applicable, regarding the approved functional classification for each street in the subclivision. This approval shall be valid as long as the basic concept for the subdivision's development, as submitted pursuant to 24 VAC 30-90-130 A 4, remains unchanged. B. Projected traffic/capacity analysis. 5. t:·,) '¡, è :~, 2. 1. For the purposes of these requirements, "projected traffic" shall include the traffic resulting from the complete development of all land to be served by the subject roadway facility. This shall include traffic that is forecast to be generated by development, both internal and external, to the subclivision under consideration. The basis for this forecast will be the governing body's current comprehensive plan or other available infonnation pertinent to the pennitted land use and transportation planning for the subdivision and adjacent properties. Traffic projections shall be based on each single-family detached residential dwelling unit generating 10 vehicle trips per day. The trip generation rates in the ITE Trip Generation Report may be utilized in determining the projection of traffic resulting from development other than PUD and single-family detached residential. The use of other bonafide traffic stuclies in determining projected traffic for all types of land development may be considered, subject to their submission for review and approval by the department. In PUD developments, trip generation rates shall be developed for each type of land use and combined to determine projected traffic for each of the subclivision streets. As an alternative to the application of the projected traffic to the applicable geometric design criteria of these requirements, the department will consider subclivision street design based on a capacity analysis concept provided: a. The governing body permits the utilization of this concept in the design of subclivision streets in the county. b. The developer furnishes full ration~le, from an engineer licensed by the Commonwealth to perform such stuclies, to support the recommendations of this analysis. The submission shall include all pertinent traffic data and computations affecting the design proposal for the subdivision streets involved. c. A minimum level of service "C" shall be accommodated in the street design proposed under the capacity analysis concept. C. Terrain classification. The applicable provisions of the current Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, AASHTO, 1990, Terrain Range of topography shall be used as a guide in the determination Classification slopes 'along street of the appropriate classification of terrain .,. alignment. for a subdivision street. (See 24 V AC 30- Level 0% to 8% 90-10 for the definitions of the terrain classifications.) The following table may be used to clarify the application of those classifications. Rolling 8.1%to 15% Mountainous Greater than 15 % f) . 11 .--,^_.... I £'f..h·j b ;1- !\ SCALE l' = 100' 100 ~ 0 ,--- 100 200 I stoU IMf'ElT SKETCH SHOYiING AREAS OF 15% SLOPES OR GRE PRELIMINARY LOT LAYOUl EXISTING COUNTOURS, AN[ PROPOSED STREET GRADI! ",.--"""~-' 'LOj:,-3- -" 22.'1Q4 bç, I ~ ROUDABUSH, GALE & ASSOC., INC. A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 914 MONTICELLO ROAD CHARLOlTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22902 PHONE (434) 293-4251 (434) 977-0205 FAX (434) 296-5220 INFO@ROUDABUSH,COM L'o.ND SURVEYING ENGINEERING L'o.NO PLANNING J, THOMAS GALE, LS. MARILYNN R GALE. LS WIlUAM J, lEDBETTER, L,S EDWARD D, CAMPBELL III, LS WilLIAM S, ROUDABUSH, l,S, November 23,2004 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors c/o Mark Graham, P .E. Director of Dept. of Community Development & Agent to Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: Appeal of Planning Commissions' Decision to Deny Private Road Waiver Request for Belle Vista Preliminary Subdivision Plat. Dear Mark: On behalf of the applicant for the BelIe Vista preliminary subdivision plat, I am hereby appealing the Planning Commissions' decision to deny the private road waiver requested for this subdivision. In an effort to support the rationale for making this appeal, please consider the following: Design Considerations This property has a physical uniqueness, which regardless of the number of by right lots the applicant would pursue, would dictate a road corridor in the exact same location as the proposed road corridor. It is important to note that if the applicant chose to not subdivide this property and pursue a building pennit for the property, a private driveway in exactly the same location as the proposed private road would be desired/needed. If the applicant were to only pursue two lots, this would obviously be true as well. For the applicant to shorten the road and pursue a state standard road for rolling terrain, the cul-de-sac location would arguably have to be in a difficult and undesirable location, and a shortened road would not allow direct access to three building sites, which is the minimum number of lots required for VDOT to accept a state road. Safety Considerations At the Planning Commission meeting, the issue of safety was raised from a comment by the VDOT Residency for denying the waiver request to utilize public road mountainous terrain standards. Specifically, the response lettcr from VDOT by Jim Bryan alluded to the issue of the safety being a factor in his decision. November 23,2004 Mark Graham Page 2/2 Although I am not in any way qualified as a safety expert, I would like to acknowledge that I agree that mountainous terrain standards, and in turn, private road standards, are not as safe as rolling terrain standards due to the steeper grades allowed for mountainous terrain. However, because there are areas in Albemarle County that the County has recognized cannot meet a rolling terrain standard, private roads have been an alternative in Albemarle County if certain conditions, as cited in the County Code are met. To the extent that the applicable code condition has been met, and that all safety criteria required by VDOT's mountain terrain standards would have to be met for this private road request, to bring up safety as an issue would seem to question the legitimacy of the County Code. By applying VDOT and County road standards, it is implicit that an adequate level of safety standards exist. In conclusion, I had two pre-application meetings with County staff at the beginning of this project because it became obvious after a brief review of the property that the tront portion of the property made it difficult to access the desirable upper region to the rear of the property. The proposed road corridor was a result of what the physical constraints of the property dictated, and offers no flexibility to be changed other than being shortened, and yielding inferior results in terms of environmental impact. In working with County staff on this project, I feel that they made every effort to explore other alternatives for this property, which would put the County's best interest ahead of the applicant's desires. However, due to the lack of satisfactory alternatives given by the physical constraints of this property, they reached the most logical recommendation to approve the private road request. On behalf of the applicant, your consideration on this matter is very much appreciated. Sincerely, ~,¿job Tom Gale, L.S. Itr cc: Bill Fritz Yadira Amarante Glenn Brooks COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: SUB 04-077 BELLE VISTA PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT SUBJECTIPROPOSALIREOUEST: Request authorization to allow a private road STAFF CONTACT(S): Yadira Amarante AGENDA DATE: November 16, 2004 ITEM NUMBER: ACTION: INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: Yes ACTION: Yes INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: AGM BACKGROUND: The applicant proposes to subdivide Tax Map 69, Parcel50C, consisting of76.513 acres, into 5 parcels. All five parcels will gain their rrontage and access from a proposed private road. The property is zoned RA - Rural Areas and is located in the Whitehall Magisterial District on Critzer's Shop Road [Route # 151] approximately 0.2 miles south of its intersection with Rockfish Gap Turnpike [Route 250]. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property for rural area uses in Rural Area 3, (see Attachments A & B). REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: Authorization of the private road requires Planning Commission approval. With approval of the private road, staff can administratively approve the preliminary plat. DISCUSSION: The applicant has submitted a request for a private road, (Attachment C).With the request for use of private roads, the Planning Commission must detennine if the standards have been met for approval µnder Section 14-232 of the Subdivision Ordinance. This section of the ordinance requires a subdivider to .demonstrate to the reasonable satisfaction of the Commission, that approval of a private road will alleviate a clearly demonstrable danger of significant degradation to the environment of the site, or adjacent properties, which would be occasioned by the construction of a public road in the same alignment. Engineering and Planning staff supports the use of a private road for the subdivision because the difference in earthwork during construction will be much less than if constructing a public road, (see Attachment D). After reviewing and analyzing the supporting earthwork computations submitted by the applicant, Current Development Engineering agrees that the degradation to the environment will be greater than 30% for the public road when compared to the private road. In other words, construction of a private road will alleviate a clearly demonstrable danger of significant degradation to the environment of the site, or adjacent properties. Per Section 14-234(c), the Commission may authorize one or more private roads to be constructed in a subdivision ifit finds that one or more of the circumstances described in section 14-232 exists and that: 1. The private road will be adequate to carry the traffic volume which may be reasonably expected to be generated by the subdivision. The private road will be adequate to carry the traffic volume expected to be generated. 2. The comprehensive plan does not provide for a public street in the approximate location of the proposed private road; . The Comprehensive Plan does not provide for a public street in the location ofthis private road. 3. The fee of the private road will be owned by the owner of each lot abutting the right-of-way thereof or by an association composed of the owners of all lots in the subdivision, subject in either case to any ¡ 1 ,,/ . / \ ~-'.--J ./ / /" \ ,./"--- /' .".,,----...-.// \ / L~ \ -~/ é// \iJ¡ r-' \ / /i jJ.-I' \" / \ ./ \...,.... ( \ / . iJ, _/:;;;:.:~z "4 .~ (' ... ./ ø-::-';'>' ._. '""""",-_ _=....... _ ~ '\ ' .' ~.,..... -'-"- -..----.......=--."""" .-"",- '1 r ~'-', ''''- , \ ) \-::............),..:.;;~;~:::~~~::;:::..../ ,:, :'-::r"'> \ ....../..7¿..../ -.----- ,\ \' \ ' / ".....,.~ ! ,/ ....... ~~~~~ I '/ \\ \ \ \." \ .... \ r f I I -~ ~:\/<~ ~-~\ IN '~----~-~". ~ .... \ \ " I, , , i '\ , " , '- " // .... . .! " _......._...~._.. \...\ ,W1A ,~1 ¡.l:1 j t I íi ¡ ¡ " ¡ ! ! 1/ I _....-..1.---..--..-.-.-.-.-.\ \( '- . i m1 ..... . A'YON " \ \- ';\ \, L ---) \ /",/ ,.;0 '-, ATTACHMENT A i _h__.....\ ~;\ "',/"-,, <;~ , ..·~"./1" ; \ ;/ Þ £\//// )-t~( ..... \ .\.....--_.-...........~ , " , "-, '. " '-¡ ¡ l"'~m . E ,,,.......-/ (. \ \ \. \\ r:~- i \~ \ ( \ -.... \, \ -....--. \ 'i. \----..---- \ ; \...---.... \ \ ft.... \ \ \ \ \. \--...---... \_m.~_ r"(.~;· \ \ \, ¡ " '. ,-,,~,f'<~. \~>\ -'-\' \ 1 \\ .........---.--- 0''''-- \ \ \.....- \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \, )[~"---~ " 1__- -T ! f I j iìl Ii 3 I ATTACHMENTB ::¡¡ 8 ~~ ",¡Jj tI) ~ :<!ro :;¡::> ~<{ Ol/)~!!! E--4 ~ ~OI $g <0 '('" §~ U~ ItUJ ~~ O <{ 00 uïlL .J Q.:<! ::!~ tl)o It' 5..1 tI) 2 a(/) CJ)~ < '( 0'( ~";I -Y (!] ,00 WQ2..J:<! ~~ ~~ i~ ¡s¡ < ~ O~ . ~ e,:,~ ~:> ~~ ~!!; (/)~ ~~ :I::..,¡ UJ ..I. tI)( ) u.~¡¡j8 ::::H!; a:> ~ ~ ,:q ~ Q:Q: 0 I:: <it Q.UJ::¡¡~ §IU..(/);!... III' "'w ~ z _~o O(!] . it ~~ I I i I l ) f DATE J l MARCH 22, 2 L ¡ ) ( ] (I- 1:5 a.. z o !ã « i ~ ~~! I C ~~' en > ~ ::) w~ en ..J ~ >- ..J 11 a: W ~ en¡.. « z ~ .:J I I W I Œ ' L J_ REVISIONS 7-12-04 11-04-04 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT NOTE: 'l'HIB 18 A L6BOJIlDT SOBDIV1BIOIr JOR WHICH AJI"l'BR DBVBIDPIIBB'l' RUJIIOPI' WILL RlDüIB' ALMœT OOJI8TAJIT, 1tTl'H AJIIY DIIClIBASB BBIlIIG NBGLIGIIIL1 JIBCIIlVlIIIG DRADJAGI! SWAL118 AU WBLL DDDIIIID AJID SHOULD BABILT E!AlIIDLII 'l'BII DBVIIlDPBD B1TB lttJJIOft' PROM 'l'BII BOAD AJID D1UVBWAT CDLvmrre BY 8'1'AIIIDAJU) otJTLII'f PROTI!CJT1011. A BBIJIII' IIIIIrI'Ilm WAS BBLD 1tTl'H )LA]I][ CRAJŒIRS OOJllCBll1llDlG P088IBL1I BlIP KBAStI!IBS APPLICAJ!L1I TO 'l'HIB 8J'1'II. FOe8IBLII KBAStI!IBS DI8COBIIIID WBlIII: A) BlII1WIICDIJIII'1' or 011 B1TB BFA BIJJ'J'BIIS. B) 'l'BII POS8IBJL1'l'Y OP A BFA BIJP1'IIR 011 TmI UPPBR 1IL1!VATJD)f POR'l'IOIr or 'l'BIIl'BDPIIRTr. 'THII STRJ!A)( BUPPJIR( ) BHOWli BBRIIOIi SHALL BB IIA!WBID III ACOOBDA1iUII Wll'H 'l'BII WATJIR PROTBCTIDIIJ ORDIliAJllCDl" BELLE VISTA PRET ,TMTN'ARY SUBDIVISION PLAT - - ,/ -;::::1 ~ I ~ ; I I ",np' ...--L.. - ;ta \ / <Q \ \ SITE DATA OWJIIIII: YLL1I VIB'1'A LLO 110 CIDITJIR PAl\][ DB SUl'1'II 1015 IDIOXVILLB TlII 1I'19IiII LBGAL DII8ClIJP'lIIm': TAX IüP 89, P.A.1IOIIL 800 BOmICII or 'l'1'l'LB: DJ . 88M p. 1141~) DJ . 1849 p. 178 IIAGJS'l'BIUAL DI8T1I1O'1': WEl'1'II HALL ZOIllIJlQ; RA BOmICII or 'l'OPOGBAPII!': 1DmIIa. ABRIAL SOKU!8 BOmICII or BOUlIIDARY SIJRVBY: W. JlOBlUS JOØ'1D, LA1IID tlu..v..uJI. AJID JI01JDABU8H, GALB AJID AI!IIOCI.A1'JII, IIIC. 8OOBQJ œ DA'l'IJII: U.8.ø.8 SII'l'B&QE 1IRQUIBJDIlIII' PBOJI'l' - all', 78' :rROJI 8.B. 1111 R\ W (JIaDIDC) BIDII . all' BJI&1l- 311' 'l'HIB II1'1'B LIE :or TmI 801J'œ JOB][ BIVAJDIA WATJIR PRO'l'BC7l'IOI ADA. ~~. ( I I GENERAL NOTES I. THE DEVELOPER RESERVES A 10' UTILITY AND/OR DRAINAGE EASEMENT ALONG ALL LOT LINES. 2. THE DEVELOPER RESERVES ALL THOSE DRAINAGE EASEMENT AS I^ ILL BE NECESSARY TO PROPERLY MAINTAIN ALL ROADS. Tit'ENTY FOOT EASEMENTS ARE TO BE CENTERED ON ALL DRAINAGE CULVERTS AND EASEMENTS SHALL TERMINATE AT NATURAL V'lATER COURSES. 3. BELLE VISTA DRIVE I^ ILL BE A PRIVATE ROAD SUBJECT TO PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A PRIVATE ROAD V'lAIVER REQUEST. 4. EACH BUILDING SITE MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 4.2.2.2 (8-52b). 5. ALL LOTS SHALL BE SERVED BY PRIVATE it'ELLS AND SEPTIC SYSTEMS. OTHER PUBLIC UTILITIES (POit'ER AND TELEPHONE) ARE AVAILABLE. 6. SUBJECT PROPERTIES APPEAR TO LIE IN FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP ZONES C (AREAS OF MINIMAL FLOODING) AS SHOY'IN EFFECTIVE DATE, DECEMBER 16,. 1<180. FILE NUMBER 8164 r S:~4 \. SHEET INDEX I SBBIITIIIIDID: I 1.) ocmm SBBIIT a. IIO'l'BB a.) PRBLIIIIJILU(!' stJBDI\IlOB PLA'1' . II.) p....u..T1II" A'I\Y lIOAD P1IOJ'ILII i --/~ 1. DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NOTE, TMP 6<1-5OC HAS 4 DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, ONE OF I^ HICH MUST HAVE A KERNEL FROM PARCEL Z (FORMERLY A PORTION OF TMP 6<1-5OA). PARCEL Y (FORMERLY A PORTION OF TMP 6<1-50 AND NOI^ A PORTION OF TMP 6<1-50C DID NOT TRANSFER ANY DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AND CANNONT BE USED FOR A KERNEL. LOTS 1,2 AND 5 HAVE KERNELS IN THAT PORTION OF TMP 6<1-5OC I^ HICH DOES NOT INCLUDE PARCELS Y AND Z. LOT 3 RETAINS ONE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT. IF UTILIZED, THE KERNEL MUST COME FROM PARCEL Z. I "'c., I' tI:)~ Z N¡¡j ~ ~ ~~ ~~ I <I" ... ¡..O¡ $G! ..,;;;¡ a ~ 2' U' « ë c.. a:w '" o S co ;:'1;: I i tI:) a ItZ ::I~I . tI:) ~ a:~ >-'1 <: « c0 æ~ _>oj (.!) 0« I=w I' ""Q~ ~o' ~ _ .. ~ æ~ I ~ ~ ~; ~i I l O:J 0> ð¡ I ~ (/) 0 a:~ I ::I:: (!j" UJG ~~ I tI:)~ u.~ w8' :=>æc>~sl I ~ ~ ~~ §~ I §_ «0 ~~ (.!) "'w , ~ z l~UJ~~j REVISIONS l 7-12..()4 I . 11~4~,* I I I i I I I l J ( DATE ì lMARCH 12,2 SCALE 1" = 100' HORZ [ coor:;Eø;wAL ) z o Ci5 O(~ I > ~ ~ C ~~ m >~ :) ~8 I C/) .J¡ . ~ ¡jJ ~I ~ i l ~ I FILE NUMB~ 8164 ) Il[ SHEET 5] ~J I 213 ATTACHMENT B VIsrr-.ö. -.. BELLE ~ a. I I \ I I I PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Denotes Building Setbo,c.k Line Unless Other..-.li5e Nolea I I TMP 6Cf-5OA I Freeman, Arthur H. or Joann F. , DB 2634 FJ 244<'glat) DB 184Cf P 11 I DB 1245 P 536 I ---- ---- TMP 6Cf-4Cf Ro~als, Osc.ar Dou~las 4 Anne Boswel DB 535 P 315 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- TMP 6Cf-5O Freeman, Arthur H. or Joann F. DB 2634 P 244{plat) DB 1845 P 051 DB 1245 P 536 ~O)~~.~.., J~"~!b. I~~t·~ .oJ~~~..., fo'¡.t) TMP 6Cf-20 Ec.kberg, Dwaln or Rebec.c.a '4 William S St. DB 1825 P 861 DB 861 p305 tOO· ,. , ;,:¡;.u..E .. . ô~ÿ ~ ~ t-N- Q. . ~ ~ ¡¡ TMP 6Cf-ICfA 1 Foster, Arthur C. or Luc.~ A. DB 1642 P 121 Stream Buffer (t~D;C.O¡) TMP 6Cf- CfA8 Tal/ard, Gilbert R. or Edda DB Ib41 P 583 100 TMP 6c'!-lCfACf Tallard, Gilbert R. or Edda DB 1641 P 583 , ~ ~ <""'" -S=¡-¡I i".4!!t' 51.4'" 42'!.65' 2".2~' Af<Co 51Ã2' ~ ~ ~ ~ AADIU5 ~, 1:210.'::12' ïõõ:õõ=" ~ 2õõõë7 ~ \ ~ ~ eD SURVEYING GINEERING LAND PLANNING ATTACHMENT C .. -- - -........- ROUDABUSH, GALE & ASSOC., INC. A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 914 MONTICELLO ROAD CHARLOTTESVILLE. VIRGINIA 22902 INFO@ROUDABUSH,COM J. THOMAS GALE. L.S. MARILYNN R. GALE. L.S. WIWAM J. LEDBETTER. L.S EDWARD D. CAMPBELL III. L.S. WILLIAM S. ROUDABUSH. L.S. September 17, 2004 Gfl-to y AJ: fL~ A~~ Albemarle County Planning Commission clo Mark Chambers Albemarle County Engineering Department 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 RE: Belle Vista Subdivision - Waiver request for private road, based on section 14-232.A.l.a of the County Code, where total volume of grading for construction of a public street would be (30) thirty percent or more than that of a private road in the same alignment. Dear Mark: Attached please find the following: . Exhibit A - showing the plan and profile of the proposed road (Turk's Lane) shown on the Belle Vista Preliminary Subdivision plat using VDOT's rolling terrain standard for public subdivision streets throughout the entire road. Additionally, the cut and fill volumes, determined from the computer generated existing and proposed digital terrain models, are summarized, with the total earth volume movement being 93,823 cubic yards. Exhibit B - Showing the plan and profile of the proposed road (Turk's Lane) in the same horizontal alignment as Exhibit A, but where the vertical alignment has been revised beyond station 9+00 to the end of the road using the County's private road standards in an effort to minimize grading. Additionally, the cut and fill volumes, determined from the computer generated existing and proposed digital terrain models, are summarized with the total earth volume movement being 23,538 cubic yards. Based on the two total earth volume movement summarizes, 93,823 cubic yards and 23,538 cubic yards from Exhibits A and B, respectively, the total volume of Exhibit A (Public Road option) exceeds Exhibit B (Private Road option) by 398.6%. Therefore, it is my understanding that the private road option (Exhibit B) can be supported. On behalf of the applicant, your consideration of this variance request is appreciated. .::>-1~"'~ F,';'"~'Á.Y I~ !f Sincerely 'J;jø dIN- Q~ Tom Gale, L.S. SIÞ ~ 1 2004 . ccl Glenn Brooks En ineering adi a Amarante, Planm COÙ/lrii1lJ~\H ¡ '( LH= ::~;,,,,",~.)<:.-;.¡_r'-\rf' ú ATTACHMENT D COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Engineering & Public Works MEMORANDUM To: Yadira Amarente, Senior Planner From: Mark Chambers, Water Resources, ReviewerlInspector Re: SUB200400077, Belle Vista Subdivision Private Road Waiver Request Date received: 30 Aug 2004 Date of comments: 19 Oct 2004 In regard to the Belle Vista subdivision road, Engineering recommended to the applicant that they pursue a waiver of the maximum road grade requirement with VDOT. The request was denied by VDOT, please see attached letter dated May 18, 2004 from James Bryan. The applicant has submitted a request for authorization to build a private road. After review of the plans and computations, Engineering finds that the applicant meets the requirements of Sec. 14-232 (a) Circumstances when private roads may be authorized and recommends approval of the request. Please contact me if you have questions or require additional infonnation. Copy: file File: memo.doc I . . ATTACHMENT D . COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA PHILIP A. SHUCET COMMISSIONER May 18, 2004 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 701 VDOT WAY CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22911 JAMES L. BRYAN RESIDENT ENGINEER Mr. Tom Gale Roudabush, Gale & Associates, Inc. 914 Monticello Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Subject: Mountainous Terrain Standards for Belle Vista Subdivision Mr. Gale; . This responds to your letter of May 4,2004 in which you requested a waiver to VDOT's standard regarding the maximum grade for a roadway. The standard maximum grade for a new roadway is 10% and you requested a grade of 16% for a distance of700' because of the terrain of the property proposed for this subdivision/development. Unfortunately, we cannot approve this waiver because the benefits you gain by allowing the subdivision development of this property do not out-weigh our requirements for safety and standardized highway maintenance operations, the degradation of which would result in an unacceptable costs to the public. We see nothing in your request that justifies an exception to our policy other than the fact that this alignment is the best place to build the road. To grant a waiver in a non-extraordinary circumstance to this extent would set an imprudent precedent. Notwithstanding the above paragraph, I stand ready to do all I can to work within the standards and guidelines to assist with this project. Please don't hesitate to call if I can do anything to assist. Sincerely, . B TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Family Support Program - Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service Evaluation Results AGENDA DATE: January 5, 2004 SU BJECT/PROPOSALlREQU EST: "Assessing the Near and Long Term Impact of the Albemarle County Family Support Program", an evaluation report prepared by the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service ACTION: INFORMATION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, White, Ralston ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY~ LEGAL REVIEW: Yes BACKGROUND: In 1996/97 the Board approved the addition of one Family Support Worker in the Department of Social Services to work in the elementary schools with children and families at risk of abuse and neglect. At that time the focus was on Stone Robinson and Greer Elementary. In 1998, the Virginia Department of Social Services provided an opportunity for the department to pilot an extensive prevention program expanding the Family Support concept into all elementary schools in the county. The State was particularly interested in Albemarle because of the connection among the Human Services Plan, the Neighborhood Team, the Department's Strategic Plan, the work ofthe Commission on Children and Families and the existing community network of early intervention providers for the 0-6 population that formed a continuum of services for at risk families. Utilizing funds from Title IV-E of the Social Security Act, the department embarked on the design and implementation of an expanded program that became fully operational in January 1999. The new funds not only allowed expansion of the Family Support Program, but also the expansion of Bright Stars through the hiring of a full-time Coordinator and additional hours for the Bright Stars Family Coordinators. The Board of Supervisors expressed interest in learning more about the results of this program over time and the department contracted with the Weldon Cooper Center to conduct an evaluation of the program. The Weldon Cooper Center contracted with Dr. Bruce Gansneder of the Curry School of Education, University of Virginia, for the study. While the department has provided the Board with progress reports on the program over the past five years, this is the first time the Board has received study results from an independent evaluator. STRATEGIC PLAN: Strategic Direction 1: Provide high quality educational opportunities for Albemarle County citizens of all ages Strategic Direction 3: Enhance the quality of life for all Albemarle County citizens. DISCUSSION: To evaluate the effectiveness of the Family Support Program, an evaluation team was assembled with representatives from the Department of Social Services, the Family Support Program, the School system, Weldon Cooper and the Curry School of Education. Weldon Cooper designed an evaluation for the County's Family Support Program that would focus on the program's processes and procedures, as well as begin to identify trend data that could be followed to track both short- term and long-term results of the interventions. The evaluation focused on program process and procedure, description of activities, contacts and services provided, who was served, how many were served and whether the program was addressing the Title IV-E Pre-placement Prevention requirements. It also went beyond that to determine interventions that were "successes" and to build an information system that could be used over time to manage and evaluate the program. The Executive Summary, on page 4 of the attached report, provides information on Weldon Cooper's process for gathering the information and then designing an ongoing data collection system. It also includes a brief listing of the project results, which were: · Development of new or revised instruments to assess and document children and family characteristics and the Family Support Program interventions; · A web-integrated information system to input, store and retrieve all the information; AGENDA TITLE: Family Support Program - Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service Evaluation Results January 5, 2005 Page 2 · An analysis of the descriptive data for the children and families, as well as the services provided; · An assessment of the short-term impact of the program and the capacity to assess the long-term impact. The executive summary also provides relevant information on the family characteristics, school performance, family risk factors and then a description of the case management services provided to the children and their families and the interventions and their relationship to school performance. All of this summary data is backed up by more detailed data found in pages 12 - 41 of the full report. The most compelling part of the evaluation, in addition to the data that the department has collected since the end of the study in 2002, is in the conclusion section found on page 9, where the report finds that the "Family Support Program interventions are both addressing problem areas and beginning to make a difference. Data also indicates that the Family Support Program directs it services to meet child and family needs and provides more interventions in areas of specific need..." The conclusion further states that although it is difficult to prove a causal relationship between services and the improvements, "the correlations between services provided and improvement in client needs is promising". It also indicates that further study will be needed to determine the long-term impact of the program. The most valuable benefit to the Department of Social Services from Weldon Cooper's evaluation project has been the establishment of an effective and ongoing data collection system that continues to provide the department with trend data on the children and families enrolled in the program, as well as the effectiveness of the services that are being provided. This information is then used by the department to make program improvements, change service delivery and most importantly to try to correlate services to desirable long-term outcomes. Some of the additional data that will be presented to the Board on January 5th will be the decreasing number of children, particularly younger children, going into foster care, as well as the continuing reports back from the schools on positive behavior changes, attendance, grades, etc., as a result of the Family Support Program interventions. As you are aware, the Family Support Program has recently learned of severe cutbacks in federal reimbursement dollars that may seriously impact the ability to continue the program. Staff has been working diligently over the past several weeks to develop a plan of action to keep the program going, at least on a temporary basis until permanent funding is secured. More complete financial information on the Family Support Program will also be shared with the Board at the January 5th meeting. I RECOMMENDATIONS: This information is provided for the Board's information and does not require any action at this time. This Executive Summary provides background for the bound report provided by Weldon Cooper. 04.209 Assessing the N ear- and Long-Term Impact of the Albemarle County Family Support Program Prepared for: Albemarle County Department of Social Services NancyJ.H. Gansneder, Ed. D., Editor Virginia Institute of Government Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service University of Virginia based on reports by Bruce M.Gansneder, Ph.D., Project Director with Susanne.Croasdaile, Samantha Gavin, Jennifer Nielsen, David Brewster, Dolly Joseph Curry School of Education University of Virginia December 2004 2 Table of Contents Exec u ti v e Sum m a ry ... ............. .............................. .......................... ................. ........................... ............ .............4 Ba ckg ro u n d ....... ........ ................. ....... ......... ........... ......... ..... ............. ...... ..................... .............. ........... ............ ...12 Ov e rv iew 0 f th e Project......................... ............ ........................... ................... ........ ................ ............ ............. .12 Phase One: Literature Review, Case File Reviews and Service Interventions..........................14 Phase Two: Standardizing the Description and Reporting of Program Activities, Creating a Database and On-Going Data Collection ....................................................................15 Phase Three: Analysis of Data and Identification of Emerging Trends.....................................17 The Family Support Program - Program Description ................................................................................17 The Family S u ppo rt Program - Database .....................................................................................................19 Findings................................................................................................................................................................21 Characteristics of the Children and Families served by the Family Support Program. .........21 Ref erra I Rea so n s ..... ....... ......................................... ........... ...... ............................................21 Th e Child re n ................. ........ ........... ........ ............ .............. ............. ............. ............... ..........2 2 Paren t s/G u a rd ian s ......... ......................... ...... ...... .................................................. ..... ..........2 2 Child, Family and Parents/Guardians Risk Factors and Strengths ...........................................22 Child Risk Facto rs & Strengths .........................................................................................22 School concerns....................................................................................................... 22 Home/community concerns ................. ........ ............ ... ... ... ............ ......... ... ............. .23 Family Risk Factors & Strengths ......................................................................................23 Financial concerns.. .... ...... ........... .............................. ............ .................... ..............23 Child Protective Service Involvement ...................................................................23 Legal involvement. ..... ............ ............... ... .... ............ ................... ... .............. ...........23 Family trauma..... ............ .......................... ...................................... ................. ........23 Parents/Guardians Risk Factors & Strengths .................................................................24 Childhood history. ............................... ................. ................................ .............. ..... 24 Aggressi ve/abusi ve relation ship. ............................................................................ 24 Health risk.. ................ ....... ................... .............. ........... ................... ......... ............ ...24 Substance abuse...............,....................................................................................... 24 Education ................................................................................................................. 24 Resources/S trengths ................................................................................................ 24 Child Abuse and Neglect C haracteristi cs ................................ ........................................................25 C hil dAb use P oten tial Sca Ie ................................................................................................ 2 6 Financial Characteristics....................................... ............................................................................27 ~-- 3 Schoo I Pe rf 0 rmance C ha ra cteristics ............................................... ................................................. 28 A tten d a n c e........ ........... ............... .................... .......... ................. ............................................29 Standards 0 f Learn ing (SO Ls) ...........................................................................................2 9 Rea din ess ..................... .............. ........ .............. ....... ......... ................. ....... .......... ....................29 Spec ial Ed u ca tio n ..................... .............. ...... ..... ............. ....... ............. ........... ....................... 3 0 Sch 00 I Pro b Ie ms .... ...................... .......... ............ ................ ......... ....... ........ ...... .....................3 0 Family Support Program Interventions with Children and Families ........................................31 Con ta cts wit h Families ........... ............. ................... ...... ..................... ........ ................ ..........31 Serv ices Related to Schoo I Perf 0 rman ce ..........................................................................32 Non-school related in terv entio n s .......................................................................................33 Information or General Support Interventions ..............................................................34 Colla bo ra tio ns With Serv ice P rovid ers ............................................................................35 Parenting skills ...................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Family-school relationships.... ................................. ........................... .................... 36 Mental health needs. ...... ......... ...................... ................. .......... ...............................37 Child care needs. .....................................................................................................37 Social, leisure and recreational needs. ...................................................................37 Parental academics and literacy needs. ..................................................................37 Correlations between Family Support Program Interventions and Areas of Need ................38 School Performance and Family Support Program Interventions ..............................38 Truancy. ....................... ......................... ..................... .............. ....................... ...... ...38 Poor Grades. ............................................................................................................ 3 9 Fighting, Disruptive Behavior, and Acting Out. ...................................................39 Homework and Class work.......... ................. ...... .......................... ........................... 39 Attendance. .............................................................................................................. 39 Financial Risk and Family Support Program Interventions ........................................39 Poverty. ........... .......................... ................... ........... ............................. ................... .39 Family Relationships and Family Support Program Interventions.... Error! Bookmark not defined. Con cI u s ion s ....... .................................................. ................. ............ .. ........................... .......... .. ........... ..... ........... 4 0 4 Executive Summary Assessing the N ear- and Long-Term Impact of the Albemarle County Family Support Program The UV A Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service designed aI).d implemented a collaborative, cooperative, multi-level, multi-agency evaluation of the Albemarle County Department of Social Services' Family Support Program under the direction of Professor Bruce M. Gansneder of the UV A Curry School of Education. Representatives from the Family Support Program, Albemarle Department of Social Services, Albemarle County Schools, Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service and the Curry School of Education at the University of Virginia formed a Steering Committee to advise the Project Director on the development of evaluation design goals, the scope and nature of the evaluation, identification of relevant infonnation, instrument design, project progress and completion of project goals. Project Team worked with Family Support Program administrators and staff to design an evaluation that focused on Program processes and procedures - including articulation of program goals; description of the activities of Family Support Workers, their contacts with families, the interventions they provided; developing methods to detennine who was being served, how they were being served and whether the program was reaching the population with focused interventions; and finally identification of emerging trend data that could be followed in the future. During the first phase of the Project, the Project Team hand-audited and coded infonnation in Family Support Program client files in order to determine the nature and scope of services delivered by Family Support Workers, developed instruments, built a database to track service deliver and codified characteristics of clients, and conducted preliminary analyses. In the second phase, the Project Team worked with Family Support Workers to develop and/or revise instruments to assess clients that could be regularly and systematically completed by Family Support Workers. These instruments were used to collect data continuously for one year. During that period, County Information Technology personnel worked with Project Staff 5 and the Family Support Program to build and implement an on-line system for entering and accessing information from these instruments. The Information System continues to be used regularly by the Family Support Program administrators and staff providing data that can be used to manage and evaluate the Program on an annual and longitudinal basis. Res ults The Project yielded the following: A description of the scope and magnitude of the Family Support Program itself; new and/or revised instruments to assess and document Family Support Program children and family characteristics, Family Support Program interventions and delivery of these interventions to clients; a web-integrated information system to input, store, retrieve and analyze information about Family Support Program children and families, and Family Support Program services; an analysis of that data which provided a description of Family Support Program children and families, Family Support Program service delivery; an assessment of the near-term impact of the Family Support Program and the capacity to assess the long term impact of the Family Support Program. Characteristics of Children and Families. Children were most often referred by teachers to the Family Support Program because of emotional problems (36%), limited social skills (29%), and behavior problems (24%). Families of these children were found to be "overwhelmed, requests or in need of support" (54%), poor (36%), or had with difficulty meeting basic needs (25%). Nearly half of the children lived in single parent households. Nearly forty percent of parents lacked a high school education while just over 60% had complete high school or beyond. Nearly 60% of the children were male, 57% were white, 35% African-American. Financial Characteristics. Nearly two-thirds Family Support Program families required outside assistance to meet their basic financial needs. About half receive food stamps and over 80% qualify for free or reduced school lunch. More than 50% of the families were entitled to child support payments, however less than a third were known to be receiving such payments. The percent of families who qualified for free/reduced lunch, who were entitled to child support, who were known to be receiving child support and who had health insurance for their children increased by about 5% during the study period. While those eligible for food stamps, those whose incomes were inadequate to meet expenses most of the time, and those not receiving child support decreased. School Performance. Forty-seven percent (47%) of students in the Family Support Program read below grade level. Teachers reported academic issues to be the most common problem areas for students -low scores (76%), not completing homework (78%), and being inattentive in class (75%). Social-behavioral problems were also common - not getting along 6 with others (48%), being disruptive (44%), and acting out (43%). Even the least common problems reported by teachers (i.e., truancy (20%), habitual tardiness (26%), and fighting (27%) were observed for one fifth to one-fourth of the Family Support Program students. Eighty-one percent (81 %) of Family Support Program students who took the third grade SOLs failed the reading test; 78% failed the 3rd grade history SOL test; 70% failed the 3rd grade science SOL test and 73% failed the 3rd grade math SOL test. Fewer than half of all Family Support Program students were considered by their teachers to be emotionally, cognitively or socially prepared for school. Nearly half of the students in the Family Support Program have Individualized Education Programs (IEPs); this rate is high when compared to the 16% of all county students who receive special education services. Child Risk Factors & Strengths. Fifty-four percent (54) of children received a high-risk rating on school concerns - academic problems (58%), special education! developmental delay (42%) and attention problems (41 %). Thirty-eight percent (38%) of children had a reported high risk on home/community concerns. Limited social skills (41 %), behavioral problems (40%), and emotional problems (39%) were the most often reported. Support from extended family was a high strength for only 14% of the children. Child Abuse and Neglect. Upon initial assessment 40% of children were at risk for abuse and neglect. Unstable employment in the family was a risk for another 45%. Poverty and unmet basic needs were risk factors for 53% and 27% of the children, respectively. Twenty percent of the families had previous involvement with family support or preservation programs. Forty-four percent of children were known to have been referred to Child Protective Services prior to or while receiving family support services. Family Support Program referrals to Child Protective Service were more likely to be substantiated and become Child Protective Service cases. However, the percentage of children removed from the home fell from 13% to 3%. Children who lived with a parent/guardian that acted inappropriately toward the child in stressful situations (42%) remained unchanged. However, children living with a parent/guardian who scored high on abuse and neglect potential decreased during the study period from 38% to 32%. Family Risk Factors & Strengths. Parenting concerns had the highest instance of high risk (72%). The most prevalent were discipline issues (50%), conflict within household (46%), and lack of parenting skills (44%). Forty-six percent (46%) offamilies had a high financial risk rating. The most common factors were poverty (53%), employment situation (45%), and money management (41 %). Thirty-three percent (33%) offamilies had high trauma risk. The most common risk factors were injury/loss/death (36%) and violence (26%). 7 Twenty-eight percent (28%) of families had a high Child Protective Service/foster care risk. Eight percent (8%) offamilies had current Child Protective Service involvement, 37% had previous Child Protective Service involvement, and 12% of the children experienced previous or current out of home placement. Twenty-two percent (22%) of families had high legal risk. Fifty- one percent of families had few supportive systems or coping skills. The most common risk factors in this category were limited coping skills (52%), and limited support systems (52%). Parents/Guardians Risk Factors. Forty-two percent (42%) of primary parents/guardians and 39% of secondary parent/guardians had a high childhood history risk. Both had a similar pattern of childhood risk factors - poverty (PP/G 51 %, SP/G 49%) and emotional abuse (PP/G 28%, SP/G 35%). Forty-seven percent (47%) of primary parent/guardians, and 44% of secondary parent/guardians had a high risk of aggressive/abusive behavior in the parent/guardian's current or previous adult relationships - emotionally (PP/G 55%, SP/G 39%), physically (PP/G 38%, SP/G 34%), or verbally abusive (PP/G 46%, SP/G 46%) relationships. Forty-seven percent (47%) of primary parent/guardians and 31 % of secondary parent/guardians had high health risk. Mental health (PP/G 46%, SP/G 30%) and physical health (PP/G 28%, SP/G 22%) concerns were the most prevalent for both. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of primary parent/guardians and 63% of secondary parent/guardians had a low risk of substance abuse. However, alcohol abuse was a high risk for 23% of the primary parent/guardians and 31 % of the secondary parent/guardians. Illegal drug use was a high risk for 5% of the primary parent/guardians and 18% of the secondary parent/guardians. Forty-three percent (43%) of primary parent/guardians, and 39% of secondary parent/guardians had a low risk in terms of their education. However, difficulty in school (PP/G 42%, SP/G 53%) and limited education (PP/G 40%, SP/G 53% were concerns for many parents/guardians. A majority of parents/guardians had moderate strength/resources ratings (PP/G 54%, SP/G 50%). Sixty-eight percent (68%) of primary parent/guardians and 58% of secondary parent/guardians had adequate housing. Many (54%) of primary parent/guardians and 38% of secondary parent/guardians had support from extended family. Description of Case Management Services to Children and Families Family Support Workers provided case management services to children and their families in the following areas - academic, relational, employment, financial, health and legal. These services were provided via a variety of contacts with children and their parents/guardians including telephone calls, letters and notes, home visits, school meetings, transports and other meetings. As might be expected the type of contact changed across time. Early contacts with 8 families were more likely to be by telephone or via letters or notes and home visits and were followed by meetings at school and providing transportation to parents to attend meetings at school. It appears that as Family Support Workers established relationships with families, services became more targeted toward school related activities. Interventions Related to School Performance. Family Support Workers provided sixteen types of school performance interventions which were defined to include any contact between an Family Support Worker and a child as well as contact between an Family Support Worker and the family or school personnel regarding that child and his/her performance and behavior in the school setting. Family Support Workers reported on interventions at three time periods - summer, fall and winter of 200 1-2002. While children received a number of these interventions in the summer, they were more likely to receive them in the fall and winter. Four interventions were provided to by more than half of the children or families: informing school personnel about problems in the home (63-71 %), working with family and school personnel in a collaborative effort (50-59%), meeting with the child outside the classroom (47-53%), helping the family to communicate effectively with school personnel (46-51 %). In the fall and winter a third or more of the children/families received the following kinds of assistance: promoting family involvement (40- 48%); facilitating meetings between school personnel and the family (29-40%); encouraging school personnel to contact the family (37-44%); and, helping the family become more involved with the school (28-40%). Other interventions. One-third to half ofthe families received clothing services in the three time periods (41 %,51 %,33%). One fourth to one third of the families received food services during these times (24%, 34%,23%). This is consistent with the finding that over 60% of families require continued support to meet basic needs. Of the six categories non-school related interventions - financial, relational, academic (parental), health, employment, and legal- financial (47-59%) and relational (22-35%) were the most frequently provided by Family Support Workers. Information and general support provided by Family Support Worker tended to follow seasonal patterns. Social/leisure/recreational information and support was higher in the summer, while information about mental health was lower in the summer and information about health, financial assistance and food stamps remained the same. Collaborations with other agencies to provide services most frequently occurred with teachers and school administrations, followed by various social services agencies and health and mental health providers. Case management and planning with other agencies focused on child and 9 family issues in the following areas: parenting skills, family relationships, mental health, childcare, social/leisure and parent academics & literacy, all intended to prevent out-of-home placement. The vast majority of these services were provided via information and support or referral for services. Over 60 percent of families received information or support or were referred for service regarding parenting, mental health, childcare and literacy during the study period. Over ninety percent of families received social, leisure, or recreational services in the summer. Correlations between Familv Support Program Interventions and Areas of Need School Performance. Children for whom truancy and poor grades "was a problem but improved" received more financial and relational services. Children for whom fighting, disruptive behavior and acting out "was a problem but improved" received more school-related services from the Family Support Worker. Students who tended to have incompletes on in-class assignments tended to receive more school services from Family Support Workers. However, no direct relationship was found between Family Support Workers homework services and student's homework performance. Students identified by Family Support Workers as having attendance problems were more likely to be provided with school services by the Family Support Worker than were other students. Financial Risk. Families with greater financial need received more employment services and more financial services. Families with more financial need in the summer continued to have more financial need six months later (winter). Familv Relationships. During the summer, the families of children with greater risk of abuse and neglect, tended to also receive more of every kind of service. During the winter, families of children with greater risk of abuse and neglect also tended to receive more legal services, health services, and financial services. However, children with a high score on the scale initially tended to also have a high scale score six months later. Conclusions The Family Support Program identifies and provides case management services to children of at-risk families to address their most serious needs - school performance, financial need and family relationships. Family Support Workers provide interventions to the most at-risk families with school age children in Albemarle County. Characteristics of children and families cited above clearly indicate that the program is identifying and serving children and families that, lacking these interventions, would be at serious risk for a number of unwanted outcomes. A typical child receiving Family Support Program interventions is a third grade, white, male that has school attendance problems, has failed all SOLs. He is in a Special Education program and has difficulty completing schoolwork. He receives free/subsidized lunch. He lives in 10 a household headed by a single mother who has employment and literacy problems. His mother was a victim of abuse or neglect as a child, she is overwhelmed by the demands of child rearing and needs financial assistance to make ends meet. One of more of these factors put him at-risk for eventual removal from his home. Case management services provided by the Family Support Program address problems identified by the families and by the schools. Through a variety of means Family Support Workers provide interventions that include sharing infonnation, linking families to services and monitoring the case plan that is developed between the family and the worker. Information collected and analyzed in the study tends to indicate that Family Support Program interventions are both addressing problem areas and beginning to make a difference. Data also indicates that the Family Support Program targets its services to meet child and family needs, and provides more interventions in areas of specific need (i.e. families with greater financial need received more employment services and more financial services.) The Family Support Program shows promise in delivering outcomes that benefit the children and families it serves. In a teacher survey conducted on 136 students in the program, children who were rated as having a problem "but improved" were recipients of a variety of Family Support services. These areas include completing homework (40% of students improved), getting along with others (32% of students improved), fighting (20% of students improved), being disruptive in class (24% of students improved), acting out (26% of students improved), displaying aggressive behavior (22% of students improved) and being withdrawn (27% of students improved). The area in which teachers reported the most improvements was "completing homework" in the academic category and "getting along with others" in the social-behavioral category. Children for whom fighting, disruptive behavior and acting out "was a problem but improved" were recipients of more school-related services from Family Support Workers; children for whom truancy "was a problem but improved" were recipients of more financial and relational services, as were children for whom poor grades "was a problem but improved." Although the evaluation did not attempt to prove a causal relationship between services provided and these improvements, the correlations between services provided and improvement in client needs is promising. Further study of these children and their families and the Family Support Program is necessary to determine the long-term impact of the Program. The development of the database enables the Family Support Program to continue to follow these children and families to determine if the Program meets its long-tenn goals of providing prevention and intervention services though home, school and community collaboration to prevent child outplacement from the home, support children's growth and development, strengthen families, and promote school success. 11 12 Assessing the Near- and Long-Term Impact of the Albemarle County Family Support Program Background In mid 1999, the Director of the Albemarle County Department of Social Services (ACDSS), Kathy Ralston, contacted the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service (WCCPS) at the University of Virginia to enlist the Center's help to design an evaluation of the County's Family Support Program. In their conversations, ACSS and WCCPS agreed that any evaluation project would need to be a collaborative, cooperative, multi-agency endeavor; and the evaluation would be both "formative" or process and "summative" or outcomes oriented. Based on a previous WCCPS project to study the impact of welfare refonn in Lynchburg, Virginia, three additional factors were identified as essential to the success of the project: · A Project Director who could design an evaluation that would enable ACDSS and the Albemarle County Schools to look at the near-term and long-tenn impact of the Family Support Program · Significant involvement, from the outset, of representatives (both leadership and staff) of the principal agencies - Albemarle County Department of Social Services, the Family Support Program, and Albemarle County Schools in the evaluation design and implementation · The creation of an electronic database to enter, retrieve, store and analyze infonnation gathered to assess the near-tenn and long-tenn impact of the Program. In addition, the unique cost sharing and reimbursement provisions of the Act that pennitted the Albemarle County Department of Social Services to contract with Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service and the University of Virginia for evaluation design and implementation services were discussed. In consultation with The Virginia Department of Social Services, a complex funding and reimbursement fonnulae was developed to fund the Family Support Program Evaluation Project. Overview of the Project Early in 2000 the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service contracted with Dr. Bruce M Gansneder, Curry School of Education, University of Virginia, to design an evaluation for the Albemarle County Family Support Program. He, in turn, assembled an evaluation team. In addition, representatives from the Family Support Program, Albemarle Department of Social Services, Albemarle County Schools, Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service and the Curry 13 School of Education at the University of Virginia fonned a Steering Committee. The Steering Committee met regularly to advise the Project Director on: · Development of evaluation design goals · The scope and nature of the evaluation · Identification of relevant information · Instrument design · Monitoring project progress and completion of project goals The Steering Committee and Project Team gave serious consideration to the possibility of conducting an evaluation that would compare families/children in the Family Support Program with families/children not in the Family Support Program - a "summative evaluation." Such an evaluation would only be a pretense without some very important program conditions: · Families/children that qualified for the program would need to be randomly assigned to receive the program services or not. · The program would be withheld from half the families/children. · Each family/child in the program would then receive the same (or at least very similar) servIces. · A family/child would not be allowed to choose one service or another. ~I A number of factors moved the Steering Committee and Project Team away from the notion of carrying out a quasi-experimental design format. An example of this would be choosing some program outcomes (e.g., out of home placements) to study and comparing Family Support Program participants to similar children or families who were not program participants. Further, the Family Support Program did not fit the characteristics usually thought necessary for that kind of evaluation: a specific program delivered to all program participants and not delivered to a "control" group, evidence that the treatment was delivered as intended (i.e. treatment fidelity), and random assignment to either receive (treatment group) or not receive (control group). Instead, the Steering Committee decided to focus on describing the characteristics of families/children in the program, identifying the specific case management activities carried out by Family Support Workers and look for emerging outcome relationships/trends that could be monitored more closely in the future. As a program, Family Support has four broad goals for all recipients: ... To reduce out-of-home placements ... To maintain children safely and securely in their own homes ... To help families access appropriate community services ... To build bridges between home and school in order to help children succeed in school 14 I Family Support Program is not a singular program that is delivered in the same way to all participants. Individual families have particular goals of their own that may relate to overall Family Support Program goals. Through discussion, the family and the Family Support Worker identify and plan for ways to accomplish these goals. Furthennore, eligible families and their children are voluntary participants and are not required to receive any specific "intervention". Family Support program staff believed that a standardized program for all participants and/or withholding the program services from people who needed it was inappropriate. As a result, the work of the Project Team shifted from a strictly outcome evaluation or "summative" evaluation to an evaluation designed to focus on Program processes and procedures (case management) including articulation of program goals; description of the activities of Family Support Workers, their contacts with families, and the services provided; developing ways to detennine who was being served and how they were being served and to track how the program was addressing the Title IV-E Preplacement Prevention requirements. The resulting evaluation plan was closer to what some evaluators might refer to as "formative" evaluation but is actually a step before that. The aim was to articulate goals, describe program services or interventions, develop instruments to collect data on these goals and services, collect data that would begin to provide a sense of program interventions that were "successes", and to build an information system that could be used to manage and evaluate the Program across time. Phase One: Literature Review, Case File Reviews and Service Interventions When the Project began, information about the Family Support Program and its clients was on paper. Family Support Workers kept basic intake information and description of their work with clients in folders. The only way to determine specific services provided by Family Support Workers to families was to read the family logs kept by each Support Worker. There was no Program-wide list of services that ought to be provided nor was there a monitoring system to detennine whether services had been delivered. Outside auditors (Virginia Department of Social Services) had to read the case files to detennine simple things like the number of families or children served. As a result the Project Team spent the first year reading case files, identifying the kinds of services delivered, the various purposes of the services, who the services were delivered to, how often they were delivered and the like. The Project Team developed lists of services and eventually developed instruments that could be used to describe and track these services. Individual family goals proved, as expected, to be different from one family to the next. Families had different needs. In addition, since participation in the program is entirely voluntary, support workers could only work with families 15 on the things to which the family agreed were important. Part of the Family Support Worker's task over time was to encourage families to work on needs that would facilitate children being able to remain safely and securely in their homes, children being more successful in school and families taking an active role in their child's education. This meant that at any point in time, if there were three hundred families in the program, that there might actually be three hundred different individual programs being delivered. In fact as data presented later in this report shows, at any given point in time, only 10 to 40 percent of the families might be receiving a particular kind of services. To adequately describe the Family Support Program and its clients, Project staff hand- audited the forms or read each client's folder. Project staff spent hundreds of hours retrieving and codifYing data rrom case files to develop an initial database on existing Family Support Program clients. The intensive and extensive hand coding of case files provided Project staff with a sense of the breadth and depth of available data elements and provided an understanding of the client population served by the Family Support Program. Project staff also worked with Family Support Program staff to clarifY the Program's mission and goals and to understand and describe how the Family Support Program operated. Phase Two: Standardizing the Description and Reporting of Program Activities, Creating a Database and On-Going Data Collection Analysis of initial data-collection practices and discussions with Family Support staff resulted in an agreement to develop a web-integrated client database. Such a database would allow Family Support Workers to regularly input data on clients and would allow both workers and administrative staff to access client data on an on-going basis. This would eventually lead to the ability to perform both cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses for evaluation purposes. A documentation workgroup, composed of Project staff and Family Support Workers, was formed to identifY specific information needs and develop instruments that could be used to input data into the database. Eventually these included the following: · Face sheets (providing demographic information) · Referral forms (listing reasons why the child/family was referred to the Family Support Program and more demographic information) Service/action plans (detailing the goals of the services to be provided) Initial assessments (describing the caseworkers initial assessment of services needed within the family) Family assessment checklists (describing the level of risk present in the family) · · · 16 · Recertification forms (detailing the risk factors still present within the family at various pre-determined intervals and connecting these risk factors to "reasonable candidate for foster care or other out-of-home placement") · Contact logs (providing written narratives that describe the services that the caseworker provided to Program participants, the outcomes of the services, observations about the family situation and their progress in the Program, and other such descriptions of the family) In 2001, the project added a new focus - school performance of Family Support Program students. Albemarle County School officials agreed to provide access to data for Family Support Program clients from school records. These student data were made available only on a one-time basis and were not included in the web-based system. Student data in the Albemarle County School System were stored in the Schools Administrative Student Information (SASIxp) system and at the local school level. Each school office maintained individual student information in the student's permanent record folder and in individual teachers' grade books and records. Relevant data from the SASIxp system include: · Demographics (i.e., ethnicity, gender, DOB) · Special program classification (i.e., gifted and talented, special education) · Free and reduced lunch information · Attendance information · Discipline referrals · Test scores Relevant school level data include: · Test scores (i.e., SOLs, standardized tests) · Discipline information · Attendance information · Tardiness information · Data regarding other school services · Grades · School behavior Instruments were also developed that teachers and administrators could use to evaluate the Family Support Program and to assess its effectiveness on their student's performance. Project staff developed a Child Abuse and Neglect form, which was completed by Family Support Workers to capture previous or current involvement of each family with Child Protective Services and Foster Care/Adoption. Two other data collection forms were developed in 2001 - the Financial Study form and the Family Contact form. The Financial Study form was developed to assess the financial status offamilies. The Family Contact form was developed to examine the Family Support Workers interactions with families. 17 Phase Three: Analysis of Data and Identification of Emerging Trends By the end of 200 1 and through 2002 data collection proceeded. Data were collected using each of the sources/instruments described above. Data were collected on 145 families and the 210 children in these families. Since that time data have been continually added to the database. The remainder of this document provides infonnation on the Family Support Program from infonnation and data collected by the Program staff and Project Team from September 2000 through March 2002. The Family Support Program - Program Description The Albemarle County Family Support Program is ajoint venture of the Albemarle County Department of Social Services and the Albemarle County Schools. Under provisions of the Social Security Act, Title IV-E Pre-placement Prevention Services, localities can work through the Virginia Department of Social Services to draw down federal, dollars to fund this Program. The long-tenn goal of the Family Support Program is to provide prevention and intervention services though home, school and community collaboration that will · Prevent child outplacement from the home · Reduce the number of Child Protective Services cases · Support children's safety and healthy growth and development Strengthen families, and Promote school success · · Inclusion of children and their families in the Family Support Program was guided by federal and state requirements and the in-house criteria established by the Program that identified at-risk clients. Criteria to identifý an "at-risk" child: Emotional or behavioral problems, developmental delay, lack of social or personal skills, truancy, school phobia, habitual tardiness, radical changes in school and behavioral perfonnance, depression, fatigue, excessive hunger, poor hygiene, low esteem. Criteria that may place a fàmily "at-risk": Domestic violence, poverty, substance abuse, chronic illness, limited education, illiteracy, language barriers, overwhelmed families, and large families that have trouble meeting basic needs. In a 1998 presentation to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors introducing the Family Support Program criteria for inclusion was stated as follows: 18 Administrative costs associated with pre-placement prevention for every child provided the case plan for the child stipulates that, absent the provision of pre-placement preventive services, the child would be a "reasonable candidate" for removal from his or her home. For purposes of this prevention initiative, "reasonable candidates" are those children that, absent effective preventive services, foster care is the planned arrangement for the child. The Albemarle County Family Support Program serves families with children that attend Albemarle County elementary schools. Referrals are made to Family Support Workers who work out of the elementary schools of Albemarle County. Although any community member may refer a family for services, school personnel, mainly teachers, make most of the referrals. A standard referral form informs the caseworker of critical indicators of possible risk factors present within the family. The caseworker then follows up with the referral source and attempts to contact the family. Because participation in the Program is voluntary, the family can refuse or accept servIces. If a family agrees to participate, the Family Support Program provides case management services designed to stabilize families and empower them to positively parent their children and promote a positive relationship and interactions with their children's school. The Family Support Program works closely with families to make use of community resources that target their specific problem/risk areas. Family Support Workers are responsible for working with any eligible referred child and his/her family. Once the family is referred, Family Support Workers establish rapport with the families through frequent contacts in their homes, at school and at work. Family Support Workers assist families to identify goals that will increase positive family functioning and self-sufficiency, which will ultimately maintain the child's presence within the home. Based on the initial assessment, the Family Support Worker connects the family to the appropriate school and community services and acts as a case manager to monitor family progress. These services are intended to lead the family to the desired level of stability, independence and self-sufficiency that will reduce their risk factors allowing them to achieve the Family Support Program goal of keeping families intact. Family Support Workers model appropriate parenting skills, help families manage crisis situations, link families with community resources that can help them develop more effective problem-solving skills, empower families to meet their objectives, act as a school/home liaison and help families develop skills to positively engage with the school and community. They connect families with appropriate agencies and resources to facilitate self-sufficiency, stability and positive interaction with community services and activities. The Family Support Workers 19 encourage parents to be responsive to their children's educational concerns while supporting parents in their efforts to nurture their children by meeting their physical, emotional, social, leisure and recreational needs. As the Family Support Worker works with a family, he/she gathers and records information and documents interactions with the family using a variety of forms and assessment tools: face sheets, referral forms, service/action plans, initial assessment, family assessment checklists, recertification forms and contact logs that include the written narratives describing progress towards goals and safety and security of the children. The Family Support Program - Database The creation of the electronic database was an important and significant outcome of the Project because it makes long-term evaluation of the Family Support Program possible. From the outset, a major objective of the Project was to develop an electronic database to support a systematic and on-going evaluation of the Family Support Program. The Project began with the challenge of moving from a hand-written, hardcopy form of recordkeeping to the design and development of an SPSS electronic database. Once the initial database was designed, Project staff hand-coded identified data elements from existing hardcopy case records. This resulted in a database that could be used to describe characteristics of families and the details of case plans developed to prevent out-of-home placement. The problem with the initial database was that subsequent entries had to be input by hand from paper records. What was needed was an online electronic system that Family Support Workers could use to record data on families from which information could be easily retrieved. To this end the Project set about to develop an online relational database. In order to move from paper-based to web integrated electronic recordkeeping, paper forms had to be updated and revised. These forms were then emulated in a secure, web-based environment. An on-line, secure, web-integrated database was designed by Bryan Betts of Albemarle County Information Technology Services, and tested and revised by senior Family Support Workers. Project staff developed documentation describing the data entry procedures and Family Support Workers trained each other in the use of the database. The Family Support Program Database contains 11 major categories of data. Child data includes academic and home issues/behavior including interventions and contacts by the Family Support Worker. Family data includes the following categories: child abuse and neglect, drug/substance use, family trauma, financial, history of violence, parent education, legal, health 20 and parenting concerns. Interventions and contacts by Family Support Worker are also included. The 11 major categories are described below: 1. Academic data on the children include school perfonnance and behavior such as attendance, social skills, emotional problems, and academic problems, as well as many others. Data were collected from referral sources, the Family Support Worker, teachers, and school academic and attendance records. Services by the support worker, such as help with homework, behavior, facilitation of school meetings, and observation of the child in the school setting were also recorded. 2. Child issues/behaviors data deal with home and community behavioral, health, and emotional concerns. Behavioral concerns include abrupt change, resistance, and aggressive behaviors. Health concerns include fatigue, hunger, and hygiene. Emotional problems address self-esteem, depression/sadness and limited social skills. Data were from referral sources, stress inventories, and risk factors. 3. Child abuse and neglect data document the history of out of home placements and child protective services interventions for the family and by parent. There were also data available on behaviors that may indicate neglect. 4. Substance use data record suspected drug use, confinned use and alcohol abuse. Data were also available on parent and guardian participation in rehabilitation and counseling. Data were also collected on the incidence of family trauma such as accident, fire, death, natural disaster or violence. 5. Financial data were collected in several broad categories. Employment data records unemployment of parent, time in job, and services by the Family Support Worker including job training, general employment, and work compensation support, transports and referrals. 6. Housing data deal with homelessness, length of time in house, the number of people in one house, and number of bedrooms. There were also data available on services by the Family Support Worker in this area. Infonnation is available regarding income and expenditure by family. General indicators are also available, such as poverty risk factor, large family, and unmet needs. Other family support intervention data were also available. 7. Childhood history of the parent/guardian data reported prior emotional, physical, and sexual abuse that the parent/guardian may have experienced. 8. Parent education data. These data reported illiteracy, limited education, and language barriers. Also included was infonnation regarding Family Support Worker contacts in the form of support, transportation, intervention, and referral. 9. Legal issues data detailed court involvement, arrest, custody issues and probation for guardians. Family Support Worker contact data describe legal assistance provided. 10. Health data for parents. Health concerns included physical or mental illness, lack of illness, or hospitalization. Family Support Worker contact infonnation included insurance, disability, mental and physical health intervention, support, referrals, and transports. 11. Parenting concerns covered a wide range of topics. Data were available on topics such as conflict in relationships, minimizes/ignores problems, single parent, and issues with child discipline. Contact infonnation tabulated the contacts that the family support worker had in the areas of parenting skills, childcare, social/leisure activities, and mentoring. The Family Support Program Database operates from a secure web site that is not accessible to outside Internet users. Individual Family Support Workers can access their own files from any computer with Internet access. However, Family Support Workers are not able to access another Family Support Worker's files. Full access to all Family Support Program cases is available only to Albemarle County Department of Social Service administrators, Family Support Program administrators and the County Information Technology database manager. The web-integrated electronic database met many needs of the Family Support Program and Project. . Data analysis is more easily accomplished via electronic than through paper- based records. 21 · Program administration is facilitated by the immediate access of caseload information at a central location, rather than necessitating travel to at least 10 satellite locations. · Supervisors can use the database to keep track of their supervisees' work with clients. · Caseworkers can use the database to inform themselves about their work with their clients. Implementation of the Family Support Program Database achieved these efficiencies and others. However, as with any technological advance, "bugs" needed to be worked out. Previous and current information needed to be accessed simultaneously so that changes in families could be identified, (i.e., has the financial or Child Protective Service status of the families improved from year to year). Family Support Workers needed training in completing the online forms and in retrieving information about their families. Administrative staff also needed to be trained in retrieving information about the families to evaluate program success or to supervise Family Support Workers. Findings Findings presented below are based on data collected in the summer, fall, and winter of 2001-2002. Data are reported on a sample of 21 0 children from 145 families. In addition to the data collected on regular program forms, the Family Support Workers also completed the Child Abuse and Neglect Form, the Financial Study Form, and the Family Contact Form. School data came from school records and from the children's teachers. Characteristics of the Children and Families served by the Family Support Program. Referral Reasons. Children and their families were referred to the Family Support Program for 22 reasons. Referral reasons could address problems specific to the child or present in the family. Reasons related to the child included emotional and behavioral problems, school issues, or health concerns. The most prevalent reason for child referral was emotional problems (36%); the second most common cited reason was limited social skills (29%), followed by behavior problem (24%). The least cited reasons (5% or less) were excessive hunger, school avoidance, and abrupt behavior change. The most prevalent family referral reason, by far, was "parent/guardian overwhelmed, requests or is in need of support" (54%), followed by poverty (36%), and large family with difficulty meeting basic needs (25%). The least common referral reasons were language barriers (3%) and mental illness (9%). 22 The Children. The 210 children ranged in age from six to 12 years old. The mean (and median) was nine years old. Fifty-nine percent (59%) of the children were male, 57% of children were Caucasian, 35% were African-American, 7% were biracial, 5% were Hispanic and 2% were reported as other. The children were enrolled in ten Albemarle County elementary schools with 12% of the children in Kindergarten, 14% in 1st grade, 15% in 2nd grade, 14% in 3rd grade, 17% in 4th grade and 4% in 5th grade. Parents/Guardians. Seventy-six percent (76%) of208 primary parents/guardians were mothers. Twelve percent (12%) were fathers. The remainder were aunts, great-aunts, grandmothers, foster parent/legal guardian or other. They ranged in age from 22 to 77 with 45% between 30 and 39 years old. Sixty-one percent (61 %) had completed high school/GED or beyond. Of the 110 secondary parents/guardians, sixty-three percent (63%) were fathers, and 8% were mothers. Other primary caregivers were parents' boyfriends or girlfriends, uncles, great- uncles, grandparent, siblings, stepfather, foster parent, or other. They ranged in age from 23 to 60. Sixty-two percent (62%) had completed high school/GED or beyond. Education Primary Parent/Guardian Secondary Parent/Guardian (n=208) (n=110) Mother 76% 8% Father 12% 63% Others 12% 29% Education> HS/GED 61% 62% Child, Family and Parents/Guardians Risk Factors and Strengths The Family Support Worker assessed the child, family and parent/guardian risk factors and strengths. Risk factors for children consisted of two types - school concerns and home/community concerns. Child resources and strengths were also assessed. Family risks included financial concerns, Child Protective Service/foster care involvement, legal involvement, parenting concerns, support systems, and family trauma. Parent/guardian risks were assessed for each parent/guardian, and consisted of childhood history, aggressive/abusive relationship, health, substance issues, education, and resources strengths. Within each of these groupings, a rating of high, moderate, or low concern was given. Child Risk Factors & Strengths School concerns. (13 indicators) Fifty-four percent (54%) of children received a high-risk rating on school concerns. The most prevalent concerns were academic problems (58%), special 23 education/ developmental delay (42%) and attention problems (41 %). The least reported concerns were abrupt change (6%), school avoidance (12%) and hygiene (12%). Home/communitv concerns. (11 indicators) Seventy-seven percent (77%) of children had a moderate to high risk on home/community concerns. Limited social skills (41 %), behavioral problems (40%), and emotional problems (39%) were the most often reported. Verbally abusive toward others (8%), abrupt behavior change (9%) and destructive behavior to property/animals (11 %) were the least reported. Resources/Strenzths. (7 indicators) The most frequently reported resource/strength was extended family support (49%). The least frequently reported was membership in a group (10%). Extended family was a high strength for 14%, a moderate strength for 47% and a low strength for 39% of the children Familv Risk Factors & Strengths Financial concerns. (8 indicators) Forty-six percent (46%) of families received a high financial risk rating. The most common factors were poverty (53%), employment situation (45%), and money management (41 %). The least common economic issue was homeless (3%) and health insurance (19%). Child Protective Service Involvement (3 indicators)-Forty-nine percent (49%) had a moderate to high risk of Child Protective Services/Foster Care involvement. Eight percent (8%) of families had current Child Protective Service involvement, 37% had previous Child Protective Service involvement, and 12% previous or current out of home placement of at least one child in the family. Lezal involvement. (6 indicators) Twenty-two percent (22%) of families had high legal risk, 21 % had a moderate risk and 51 % had low legal risk. The most common risk factor was court involvement - custody (25% of families). The least common risk factor was probation (3%). Parentinz concerns. (11 indicators) Parenting concerns had the highest instance of high risk at 72%. The most prevalent were discipline issues (50%), conflict within household (46%), and lack of parenting skills (44%). The least common risk factors within this category were custody issues (20%), caring for a child with disabilities/health concerns (26%) and large family (33%). Familv trauma. (5 indicators) Thirty-three percent (33%) offamilies had high trauma risk, 28% had moderate and 39% had low trauma risk. The most common risk factors were injury/loss/death (36%) and violence (26%). The least common risk factors were natural disaster (0%) and fire (1 %). 24 Support svstems/copine skills. (6 items) Fifty-one percent (51 %) had high risk in this category, 37% had moderate risk. The most common risk factors in this category were limited coping skills (52%), and limited support systems (52%). The least common problems within this category were social avoidance (11 %) and relocation problems (12%). Parents/Guardians Risk Factors Childhood historv. (4 indicators) Forty-two percent (42%) of primary parents/guardians and 39% of secondary parent/guardians had a high childhood history risk. Both had a similar pattern of childhood risk factors - poverty (PP/G 51 %, SP/G 49%) and emotional abuse (PP/G 28%, SP/G 35%) and the least common risk factors - sexual abuse (PP/G 9%, SP/G 7%) and out of home placement (PP/G 8%, SP/G 8%). Aeeressive/abusive relationship. (4 indicators) Forty-seven percent (47%) of primary parent/guardians, and 44% of secondary parent/guardians had a high risk of aggressive/abusive behavior in the parent/guardian's current or previous adult relationships. Items included emotionally abusive relationship (PP/G 55%, SP/G 39%), physically (PP/G 38%, SP/G 34%), sexually (PP/G 5%, SP/G 7%) or verbally abusive (PP/G 46%, SP/G 46%)relationships Health risk. (6 indicators) Forty-seven percent (47%) of primary parent/guardians and 31 % of secondary parent/guardians had high health risk. Mental (PP/G 46%, SP/G 30%)and physical (PP/G 28%, SP/G 22%)health concerns were the most prevalent for both, and terminal illness (PP/G 1 %, SP/G 0%) and hospitalization (PP/G 0%, SP/G 0%) were the least for both. Substance abuse. (3 indicators) Sixty-seven percent (67%) of primary parent/guardians and 63% had secondary parent/guardians had a low risk of substance abuse. Alcohol abuse was a high risk for 23 % of the primary parent/guardians and 31 % of the secondary parent/guardians. Illegal drug use was a high risk for 5% of the primary parent/guardians and 18% of the secondary parent/guardians. Seven percent (7%) of primary parent/guardians and three (3%) of secondary parent/guardians were reported as recovering addicts. Education. (7 indicators) Forty-three percent (43%) of primary parent/guardians, and 39% of secondary parent/guardians had a low risk in tenns of their education. The most common reported problems were difficulty in school (PP/G 42%, SP/G 53%) and limited education (PP/G 40%, SP/G 53%). The least common reported problem was language barrier (PP/G 2%, SP/G 4%) for both guardians. Resources/Streneths. (12 indicators) Most parents/guardians had moderate strength ratings (PP/G 54%, SP/G 50%). Sixty-eight percent (68%) of primary parent/guardians and 58% of secondary parent/guardians had adequate housing. Fifty-four percent (54%) of primary parent/guardians and 38% of secondary parent/guardians had extended family support. Four 25 percent (4%) of primary parent/guardians and seven percent (7%) of secondary parenti guardians had participated in a treatment program. % High Risk Parent Risks and Resources Primary Secondary Parent/guardian Parent/guardian Childhood history 42% 39% Poverty 51% 49% Emotional abuse 28% 35% Sexual abuse 9% 27% Out of home placement 8% 28% Aggressive/abusive relationship 47% 44% Emotional abuse 55% 39% Physical abuse 38% 24% Sexual abuse 5% 25% Verbal abuse 46% 46% Health 47% 31% Mental health 46% 30% Physical 28% 22% T errninal illness 1% 0% Hospitalization 0% 0% Substance abuse 67%* 63%* Alcohol 23% 31% megal drugs 15% 18% Recovering addicts 7% 3% Education 43%* 39%* Difficulty in school 42% 53% Limited education 40% 53% Language barrier 2% 4% Resources/strengths 54%** 50%** Adequate housing 68% 58% Extended family 54% 38% Treatment program 4% 7% * Low risk ** Moderate risk Child Abuse and Neglect Characteristics Family Support Workers reported on the Initial Assessment Form that 84 children (40.0%) were at risk for abuse and neglect. Employment situation was a risk factor for the families of94 children (45%); poverty was a risk factor for the families of 111 children (53%), and unmet basic needs was a risk factor for the families of 56 children (27%). Family Support Workers reported that 20% of families were previously involved with Family Support or Family Preservation Programs. Approximately 44% of the 210 children in the evaluation sample had been referred to Child Protective Services either before or during the program. The leading reasons for referral to Child Protective Services was physical neglect and 26 injury. Child Protective Services referrals made after October 2001 were more likely to have been substantiated (82%) than those made prior to the family coming into the program (41 %) or between entering the program and October 2001 (60%). Substantiated Child Protective Services allegations since October 200 l were also more likely to have become Child Protective Services cases (71 %) than those with substantiated allegations prior to the family coming into the program (54%) or between entering the program and October 2001 (52%). The percentage of children removed from the home by the courts prior to families coming into the program was higher in the summer (13%) than in the winter and spring (3%, 2%). Approximately one in ten children were in need of supervision during the week or weekend. The percentage of children living with a parent/guardian who scores highly on abuse and neglect potential has decreased between the two time periods (38% to 32%), however the Prior to the family coming into the Since coming into the program Child Abuse and Neglect program Summer Summer Winter Referred to Child Protective Service 44% 24% 13% Leading Reasons for Child Protective Physical Neglect Physical Injury Physical Neglect Service referral Substantiated Child Protective Service 41% 60% 22% allegations Became Child Protective Service cases 54% 52% 71% Removed from home by courts 13% 3% 2% Child is in need of supervision during -- 10% 10% the week Child is in need of supervision on -- 7% 12% weekend Child lives with a parent/guardian who -- 38% 32% scores highly on abuse and neglect potential Child lives with a parent/guardian who -- 43% 42% reportedly tends to act inappropriately toward the child in stressful situation percentage of children living with a parent/guardian who reportedly tends to act inappropriately toward the child in stressful situations remained unchanged (43%; 42%). Child Abuse Potential Scale During the time period that the evaluators were collecting data on the 145 families and 210 children, Family Support Workers rated families on each of thirteen characteristics. The ratings were on a four-point Likert style scale that ranged from never (1) to a great deal oftime (4). The percentages of families that were rated 3 or 4 (indicating the characteristic occurred frequently) on each of the characteristics in the summer and winter are given below. ResDonses to the Child Abuse Scale. Five items showed a reduction in negative responses from summer to winter, one showed an increase in negative responses, and four remained the same. The percentage of families that "engaged in harsh discipline" often or a great deal of the time went down from 17% to 14%. Decreases were also seen in "Make degrading remarks about the child" (13% to 3%); "require the child to complete tasks that are not age-appropriate" (23% to 18%); "allows the child to act in ways that are not age-appropriate" (28% to 22%). Two items showed an increase in the percentage of parents exhibiting negative responses. "Maintain emotional and/or physical distance from the child" increased from 24% to 28% while "elicit negative response from the child" increased from 23% to 27%. Five items remained essentially unchanged - "raise his/her voice to the child frequently" (35% to 33%); "avoid interaction with others outside of the home" (23% to 21 %); "engage in corporal punishment frequently" (6% to 7%); "consider physical punishment to be the best response to child misbehavior" (6% to 6%); and "act inappropriately toward the child in stressful situations" (46% to 48%) positive responses Child Abuse Scale Summer Winter 6% 7% 17% 14% 13% 3% 35% 33% 23% 27% 24% 28% 23% 18% 28% 22% 6% 6% 23% 21% Engaged in corporal punishment frequently? Engage in harsh discipline? Make degrading remarks about the1:hild? Raise his/her voice to the child frequently? Elicit negative response (physical, verbal, etc.) from the child? Maintain emotional and/or physical distance from the child? Require the child to complete tasks that are not age-appropriate? Allow the child to act in ways that are not age-appropriate? Consider physical punishment to be the best response to child misbehavior? Avoid interaction with others outside the home? Financial Characteristics Almost two-thirds of the families in the Family Support Program required continuing outside support for basic needs. Nearly half of the families involved in the Family Support Program received public assistance in the form of food stamps, with more than four out of five families (85%) qualifying for free orreduced lunch and approximately one in five families (19%) residing in Section 8 housing. 27 o + + o + + o o 28 More than half of the families in the Family Support Program met criteria to receive child support payments (55%). During this study period, 25% - 30% of these families were known to be receiving those payments. Thirty-five to forty-four percent (35% - 44%) of those families were reported as not receiving child support. For 30% -35% of those families it was not known if child support payments were being received. Eighty-five to ninety-one percent (85% -91 %) of families had insurance for their children. Sixty-eight percent of families were reported as having insurance for the parents/ caregi vers.,. Financial Characteristics Number (percent) of families N=responses Summer Winter Families requiring continuing outside support for basic 85 (63%) 85 (66%) needs N=136 N=128 Families receiving food stamps 61 (46%) 56 (46%) N=132 N=122 Families qualified for free/reduced lunch 108 (83%) 108 (88%) N=130 N= 123 Families with income less than their essential expenses most 63 (54%) 35 (36%) of the time N=117 N=96 Families entitled to child support payments 72 (53%) 72 (57%) N=135 N=126 Families known to be receiving child support 18 (25%) 22 (30%) N=72 N=72 Receiving child support with income less that their 14 (77%) 14 (64%) essential expenses N=18 N=22 Families not receiving child support 32 (44%) 25 (35%) N=72 N=72 Families whose receipt of child support is unknown 22 (30%) 25 (35%) N=72 N=72 Families with insurance for their children 117 (85%) 114(91%) N=137 N=125 Families with insurance or the parents/caregivers 72 (68%) 65 (68%) N=I06 N=96 Families living in Section 8 housing 27 (19%) 24 (19%) N=142 N=I27 Families owning a vehicle that works all or most of the time 121 (86%) 110 (85%) N=140 N=130 School Performance Characteristics Approximately one fourth of the children were in third grade (28%) and (23%) were in second grade. Twenty percent (20%) of students were in the fourth grade; sixteen percent (16%) in first grade, thirteen (13%) in kindergarten and only one percent (1 %) were in fifth grade. Twenty-two percent (22%) of students in the program had repeated a grade. Nineteen percent (19%) of students had been in the current school less than a year, 22% had been in the school for 1 to 2 years, 22% had been in the school for 2 to 3 years, 20% had been in the school for 3 to 4 years, and the remaining 17% had been in the school for 4 or more years. 29 Attendance. Forty-four percent (44%) of students missed five or fewer days in the 2000- 01 school year and 46% of students missed five or fewer days in the 2001-02 school year. Forty- eight percent (48%) of children missed between 6 and 20 school days in the 2000-01 school year and 46% of children missed between 6 and 20 days in the 2001-02 school year. Eleven percent (11 %) of students missed more than 21 days in the 2000-01 school year, while 7% of students missed that number in the 2001-02 school year. # of School Days Missed 2000-01 2001-02 < 5 days 44% 46% 6 - 20 days 48% 46% > 3 1 days 11% 7% Standards of Learning Standardized Tests (SOLs). Students were assessed with the Quality Reading Inventory during 2nd grade. Forty-seven percent (47%) of students in the Family Support Program were reading below grade level, 22% of students were reading at grade level; 31 % of students were reading above grade level. All students take the Standards of Learning (SOL) standardized tests in third and fifth grade. Eighty-one percent (81 %) of Family Support Program students who took the third grade SOLs failed the reading test; 78% failed the 3rd grade history SOL test; 70% failed the 3rd grade science SOL test and 73% failed the 3rd grade math SOL test. SOL data was only available on one 5th grade student. This student failed all but the science test. SOLs % of Family Support Program 3rd grade students failin¡!: Reading History 81% 78% Science 70% Math 73% Readiness. A measure of school readiness was obtained from teachers' reports of whether students were cognitively, emotionally, and socially prepared for the school year. The readiness of the students is defined as the teacher's judgment of readiness in each of the three categories above. Teachers considered 55% of the Family Support Program students to be emotionally prepared for the school year, 51 % to be cognitively prepared, and 51 % to be socially prepared. Students who were less ready for school received more school services during the year from their Family Support Worker. 30 Special Education. Special education data were collected from the school records of 203 students in the Family Support Program. Over two-thirds of Family Support Program students (n=139) had been referred for child study at least once. Information regarding child study decisions was available on 129 of the 139 students. Special education arrangements were made for 92 students. For the remaining 37, either a student assistance plan was created, other arrangements were made for eight students and no services were deemed necessary for the 29 students. Nearly half of the students in the Family Support Program have Individualized Education Programs (IEPs). This rate is high when compared to Albemarle County Public School Annual Progress Report data indicating that 16% of all county students receive special education servIces. The primary disabilities of special education students in the Family Support Program include learning disabilities (28%), other health impairment including ADD/ ADHD (26%), developmental delay (16%), emotional disturbance (15%), mild mental retardation (7%), speech and language impairment (6%) and "other" which includes autism and multiple disabilities (3%). Twenty (20) special education students have a secondary disability listed, including 10 students with speech and language impairment. Information on Individual Educational Plan (IEP) accommodations was available for 78 of the 90 special education students. Of the 78, all received academic accommodations. In addition, two students received health-related, physical, or psychological accommodations. Information on the amount of time spent in special education per day was available on 84 of the 90 Family Support Program children receiving special education services. Fifty-two percent (52%) of the special education students spend more than half of the school day in special education. No relationship was found between child study referral and the amount of school services provided to the student by the Family Support Worker. In sum, large percentages of the children served by the Family Support Program have academic difficulties in school and/or have been classified as special education students. These Family Support Program students receive special services from school staff. In addition, Family Support Workers tend to provide more school related services to the students most in need. School Problems. Teachers were asked to complete a Teacher Survey for each Family Support Program child in their classroom indicating areas in which the student had presented problems and whether this problem had improved during the school year. Teachers reported academic issues to be the most common problem areas for students, including low scores (76% of students exhibited the problem during the year), not completing homework (78%), and being inattentive in class (75%). Social-behavioral problems were also common, with 48% of students 31 reported to not get along with others, 44% to be disruptive, and 43% to act out. Even the least common problems reported by teachers (i.e., truancy (20%), habitual tardiness (26%), and fighting (27%) were observed for one fifth to one-fourth of the Family Support Program students. Teachers also reported areas of improvement during the year. These areas include completing homework (40% of students improved), getting along with others (32% of students improved), fighting (20% of students improved), being disruptive in class (24% of students improved), acting out (26% of students improved), displaying aggressive behavior (22% of students improved) and being withdrawn (27% of students improved). The area in which teachers reported the most improvements was "completing homework" in the academic category and "getting along with others" in the social-behavioral category. Family Support Program Interventions with Children and Families Interventions provided to children and families by Family Support Workers fell into the following categories. · Academic - literacy, parent academics, school-related services · Relational - childcare, social leisure recreational, mentoring, parenting skills · Emplovment - job training, gaining and maintaining employment, work compensation · Financial - food, clothing, housing, transportation, financial assistance, financial counseling · Health - mental health, physical health substance abuse, insurance disability · Legal- child-related legal issues, parent-related legal issues, child custody, child support Contacts with Families Infonnation from the Family Contact Form was analyzed to determine the frequency and nature of contacts between a family and their Family Support Worker. A family contact was defined to include any communication between the Family Support Worker and family but does not include contacts with others on behalf of the family. During the data collection period, Family Support Workers had between one and ten contacts with approximately two-thirds of their families. Those contacts included one or more telephone calls to over four-fifths of the families and one or more letters or notes to two-thirds of families. Between 57% and 70% of families received at least one home visit from the Family Support Worker and between 56% and 74% had at least one school meeting. As can be seen in the chart below, over these three periods there was a decrease in the number of phone calls, letters and home visits but an increase in the number of meetings at the school as well as "other" types of meetings and an increase in the provision oftransportation. It 32 appears that as Family Support Workers established relationships with families, interventions became more targeted toward school related activities. Frequency and Type of Family Contacts Percent (%) ojjàmilies Type of contacts Frequency of Summer Winter Spring contact (N~145) (N~145) (N~121) Total o contacts 4% 8% 1% (includes all types of 1-5 contacts 6% 22% 31% contact listed below) 6-10 contacts 37% 34% 39% 11-15 contacts 11% 24% 8% 21 + contacts 0% 10% 11% Telephone Calls o calls 13% 16% 17% 1-5 calls 64% 61% 58% 6-10 calls 17% 17% 15% II + calls 7% 6% 1% LettersINotes o letters 28% 35% 39% 1-5 letters 69% 61% 60% 6+ letters 3% 4% 2% Home visits o visits 30% 39% 43% 1-5 visits 61% 54% 51% 6-10 visi ts 7% 6% 6% II + visits 2% 1% 0% School meetings o meetings 44% 34% 26% 1-5 meetings 54% 59% 66% 6+ meetings 2% 7% 8% Transports o transports 83% 77% 76% 1- 5 transports 16% 20% 21% 6+ transports 1% 3% 3% Other meetings o meetings 89% 75% 74% 1-5 meetings 10% 22% 26% 6+ meetings 3% 3% 0% Interventions Related to School Performance A school perfonnance intervention was defined to include any contact between a Family Support Worker and a child as well as contact between a Family Support Worker and the family or school personnel regarding that child and his/her perfonnance and behavior in the school setting. Sixteen types of interventions were identified. Percentages in the table below indicate the percentage of children receiving each type of intervention at least once during each time period (summer, fall, or winter). Interventions with the child and family focused on monitoring all elements of the service plan: work with the child included meeting with the child outside the classroom, observing the child in the classroom, working with the child on school behavior, attendance, or homework; work with the family focused on assistance to improve the child's homework or school behavior; helping the family meet with or communicate with school 33 personnel, and helping the family become more involved with the school; and work with school personnel included facilitating meetings between school personnel and the family and promoting family involvement. Although children received a number of these interventions even in the summer, they were more likely to receive them in the fall and winter. The interventions occurring with (or for) the largest percentages of students were: informing school personnel about problems in the home (63-71 %), working with family and school personnel in a collaborative effort (50-59%), meeting with the child outside the classroom (47-53%), helping the family to communicate effectively with school personnel (46-51 %). Almost all of the other interventions were received by a third or more of the children/families in the fall and winter that year. Notable among these were: working with school personnel to promote family involvement (40-48%); facilitating meetings between school personnel and the family (29-40%); encouraging school personnel to contact the family (37-44%); and, helping the family become more involved with the school (28-40%). School Performance Interventions Provided by Family Support Workers to Students and Their Families Percent (%) of children receiving the School performance interventions service one or more times Summer Winter Fall (N~210) (N=210) (N=147) Helped the child complete his homework 10% 13% 18% Helped the family help the child with his homework 21% 37% 32% Helped the family to improve the child's school attendance 20% 24% 19% Worked directly with the child on school behavior 20% 27% 33% Worked with the family on child's school behavior 21% 38% 35% Worked on school behavior interventions with school personnel 24% 39% 39% Helped the family with school-related paperwork 36% 38% 29% Facilitated meetings between school personnel and the family 29% 40% 30% Worked directly with school personnel to promote family involvement 40% 48% 42% Infonned school personnel about problems in the home 71% 71% 63% Encouraged school personnel to contact the family 37% 44% 40% Helped the family to communicate effectively with school personnel 46% 51% 47% Helped the family become more involved with the school 28% 36% 40% Worked with family and school personnel in a collaborative effort 51% 58% 59% Observed the child in the classroom 38% 27% 26% Met with the child outside the classroom 53% 51% 47% Non-school related interventions Clothing was the most frequently provided non-school related intervention. One-third to half of the families received clothing interventions in the three time periods (41 %,51 %,33%). One fourth to one third of the families received food interventions during these times (24%, 34%, 34 23%). Very few families received interventions related to work compensation, disability, or parent academic/educational needs. Non-school Related Interventions Most often Summer Clothing (41 %) Food (24%) Literacy (30%) Disability (0%) Work compensation (0%) Parent Academics (] %) Insurance (I %) Percent offamities Fall Clothing (5] %) Food (34%) Financial Assistance (] 9%) Disability (0%) Work compensation (0%) Parent Academics (] %) Substance Abuse (] %) Winter Clothing (33%) Food (23%) Literacy (20%) Disability (0%) Work compensation (I %) Parent Academics (2%) Substance Abuse (0%) Least often Project staff categorized each intervention into six categories: financial, relational, academic, health, employment, and legal. The most frequently occurring were financial (47-59%) and relational (22-35%). The least frequent were related to employment (6-8%) or legal problems (6-13%). Non-school Related Interventions by Category Most often Summer Financial (53%) Relational (35%) Academic (3]%) Health (]6%) Employment (6%) Legal (6%) Percent offamities Fall Financial (59%) Re]ational (22%) Academic (] 7%) Health (23%) Employment (7%) Legal (10%) Winter Financial (47%) Relationa] (26%) Health (28%) Academic (21 %) Employment (8%) Legal (13%) Least often Information or General Support Interventions Family Support Workers provided information or general support about various family needs. The provision of different kinds of information (or support) tended to follow seasonal patterns. Almost half of the families received parenting skills information or support in each time period (i.e., 42%, 49%, 50%). The percentage of families receiving social/leisure/recreational information and support was higher in the summer than the fall (46%, 29%), probably due to the change in the amount of children's need for recreational activities to fill unstructured summer vacation time. Information and support related to mental health was also lower in the summer than in the fall (34%, 41 %), however physical health services remained unchanged across the three periods. Information and support related to clothing was lower in the summer than in the winter (34%, 41 %). About one-third (33%) percent of the families received information/support related to financial assistance and food stamps at each of the three time periods. Fewer families 35 were provided information about work compensation, disability, and transportation. Only three to five percent (3-5%) of the families received these in any of the three time periods. Information or General Support Interventions Most often Summer Parenting Skills (42%) Mental Health (34%) Clothing (34%) Food (32%) Financial assistance (32%) Childcare (32%) Socia l/leisure/ recreati onal (46%) Work compensation (3%) Disability (4%) Transportation (5%) Percent of families Fall Parenting Skills (49%) Mental Health (41%) Physical Health (38%) Food (33%) Financial assistance (33%) Literacy (30%) Socialll e isure/ recreati onal (29%) Work compensation (6%) Disability (5%) Transportation (5%) Winter Parenting Skills (50%) Mental Health (41%) Physical Health (42%) Clothing (41 %) Food (33%) Financial assistance (32%) Socia IIlei sure/ recreati onal (28%) Work compensation (6%) Disability (6%) Transportation (4%) Least often Provision of information about relationships was highest in the summer and lowest in the winter (72%,62%,59%). Information and support provided to families related to health services was also lower in the summer than in the winter (55%, 63%). The percentage of families receiving financial information ranged from 53% to 60% across the three time periods. A larger percentage of families received information about legal services in the fall and winter (30%, 28%) than in the summer (23%). About thirty percent (30%) of the families received academic information/support and twenty percent (20%) of the families received information about employment across the three time periods. Information or General Support Interventions by Category Most often Summer Relational (72%) Health (55%) Financial (56%) Academic (30%) Legal (23%) Employment 21 %) Percent of families Fall Relational (62%) Health (59%) Financial (53%) Academic (34%). Legal (30%) Employment (24%) Winter Relational (59%) Health (63%) Financial (60%) Academic (35%) Legal (28%) Employment (24%) Least often Collaborations With Service Providers As a part of their case management responsibilities, Family Support Workers collaborated with service providers to coordinate services for families in the Program. The most ftequently mentioned other service provider was school personnel, primarily teachers and administrators. The second most frequently mentioned group was social services agency personnel, encompassing a wide variety of service providers. The third most frequently mentioned group was health and mental health providers such as physicians and counselors. Other community members such as court officials, landlords, and police officers were also mentioned as key collaborators. These collaborations with other service providers focused on both child and family issues. Child-related collaboration issues were either school-related, such as school related behavior, or non-school related needs such as daycare. Family issues tended to be more crisis- oriented. Collaborations with other service providers occurred frequently, almost daily and "as often as needed". Face to face meetings tended to take place at the child's school or home. Family Support Workers indicated the extent to which they provided case management interventions in six different areas provided by other service providers: · Parenting skills · Family-school relationships · Mental health · Childcare · Social, leisure and recreational · Parent academics and literacy Parenting skills. Over half of the families received help with parenting skills. There was an increase in information and support and referral for services regarding parenting skills from the summer through the fall and winter. Small percentages of families received direct interventions in parenting skills each time period. Parenting Skills Percent of families Summer Fall Winter Direct intervention 14% 12% 11% Information or support 42% 50% 48% Referred for services 12% 16% ]8% Familv-school relationships. At least 30% offamilies received some assistance with relationship needs. There were two distinct patterns in the family-school collaboration relationship. Help with meeting school personnel and help communicating with school personnel increased ITom summer to fall and then declined slightly in the winter. Working with school personnel to promote involvement and helping families become involved in school had an upward trend across the three time periods. During the fall and winter, Family Support Workers worked with about half of the families to help them communicate effectively with school personnel and worked directly with school personnel to promote school involvement of about half of the families. 36 37 Percent of families Family-School Relationships Summer Fall Winter Faci]itated meetings between schoo] personnel 31% 39% 30% and family Worked directly with school personnel to 43% 48% 52% promote involvement Helped family to communicate effectively with 45% 5]% 47% school personnel Helped family to become more involved in 30% 36% 40% school Mental health needs. Relatively few families received help with mental health issues via Family Support Workers direct intervention. A larger proportion offamilies were assisted with information and support and referral for services. More families received mental health assistance in the fall and winter than in the summer. Direct intervention ]nfonnation or support Referred for services Summer 8% 34% ]9% Percent offamilies Fall ]0% 4]% 23% Winter 13% 41% 26% Mental Health Childcare needs. Family Support Workers efforts to assisted more families with childcare issues in the summer and fall than in the winter. Childcare Percent offamilies Summer Fall Winter Direct intervention 13% 12% 7% Infonnation or support 32% 27% 12% Referred for services 19% 13% 15% Social. leisure and recreational needs. Over 90% of the families received some kind of intervention about social, leisure, or recreational needs in the summer. As would be expected, fewer families (a fourth to a fifth) received these kinds of services in the fall and winter. Social, Leisure & Recreational Direct intervention Infonnation or support Referred for services Summer 16% 46% 31% Percent offamilies Fall 7% 29% 19% Winter 7% 27% 17% Parental academics and literacy needs. Very few families (15% or fewer) received assistance with regard to the academic needs of parents. 38 Parent Academics Percent offamilies Summer Fall Winter 1% 1% 1% 8% 15% 15% 2% 9% 10% Direct intervention Infonnation or support Referred for services Literacy interventions were provided to a greater proportion offamilies (25-30%) than parent academic services. Direct intervention regarding literacy services decreased between summer and fall, and then increased between fall and winter. Information or support about available literacy services stayed constant. Referral to literacy services increased between summer and fall, and then decreased between fall and winter. Percent offamilies Literacy Summer Fall Winter Direct intervention 30% 18% 28% Infonnation or support 26% 30% 24% Referred for services 10% 17% 8% Correlations between Family Support Program Interventions and Areas of Need - School Performance, Financial Risk and Family Relationships School Performance and Familv Support Program Interventions As reported above (see School Performance Characteristics) teachers completed surveys on 136 of the students in the program. Teachers rated the students on each of fourteen problem areas indicating the "status of the problem for each child as "not a problem this school year," "was a problem but improved," or "was a problem but has not improved." The problem areas were truancy, habitual tardiness, danger of failing, poor grades, low scores, not completing homework, inattentive in class, insufficient effort, fighting, not getting along with others, disruptive, acting out, aggressive behavior, and withdrawn. In an attempt to see if the interventions Family Support Workers provided to families were appropriately targeted or if they "impacted" school problems, we compared the number of school related, financial and relational services received by children in each of three categories (not a problem this school year, was a problem but improved, or was a problem but has not improved). The number of services provided differed for only five of the problem areas. Truancv. Children for whom truancy "was a problem but improved" received more financial and relational services than children for whom truancy was not a problem or those for whom it was a problem but had not improved. The number of school services provided was not different for the three categories. 39 Poor Grades. Children for whom poor grades "was a problem but improved" received more financial and relational services. Fif!htimf. Disruvtive Behavior. and Actinf! Out. Children for whom fighting, disruptive behavior and acting out "was a problem but improved" received more school-related services from the Family Support Workers. Homework and Classwork. No direct relationship was found between Family Support Workers homework services and student's homework performance as reported on the Teacher Survey. Students who tended to have incompletes on in-class assignments did tend to receive more school services from Family Support Workers s. Attendance. Family Support Workers provided school services focused on improving attendance to 35% of the students. Students identified by Family Support Workers as having more total days missed, more truancy, more habitual tardiness, and more absenteeism, received more attendance services. In other words, students identified by Family Support Workers as having attendance problems were more likely to be provided with school services by the Family Support Worker than were other students. Financial Risk and Familv Support Program Interventions The relationship between family financial risk characteristics and services provided by Family Support Workers during the summer, fall, and winter was also examined. During the summer, families with greater financial need (a high score on the Financial Scale) received more employment services and more financial services. During the winter, families with greater financial need tended to also receive more financial services. Further analysis indicated that families with more financial need in the summer continued to have more financial need six months later (winter). Over the three time periods, thirteen percent (13%) of the families had fewer economic difficulties, 25% had more economic difficulties, and 62% did not change. Povertv. Free and reduced lunch status was used as a proxy for poverty. Eighty-eight percent (88%) of the students in the Family Support Program were reported by Family Support Workers as qualifying for free or reduced lunch as of March 2002. No relationship was found between free and reduced lunch status and the number of school services provided between July and March. Neither was a relationship found between free and reduced lunch and academic achievement as reported by teachers. There was a negative relationship between receiving free and reduced lunch and 3rd grade math SOL test success as gathered from school records, indicating that students who quality for ftee and reduced lunch tended to fail this standardized test. No other SOL tests were 40 significantly correlated with free and reduced lunch status. Finally, there was no correlation between receiving free and reduced lunch and school problems as reported by teachers. Familv Relationships and Familv Support Program Interventions During the summer, the families of children with greater risk of abuse and neglect, as indicated by a high score on the Child Abuse and Neglect Scale, tended to receive more of every kind of service than did those who scored lower. During the winter, families of children with greater risk of abuse and neglect tended to receive more legal services, health services, and financial services. Means for the summer Child Abuse and Neglect Scale and the winter Child Abuse and Neglect Scale did not significantly differ from the mean score for winter. The correlation between the summer and winter scale scores was statistically significant, indicating that children with a high score on the scale the first time tended to also have a high scale score six months later. Difference scores were used to examine potential changes for each child. Between the summer and winter, 40% of the children had a reduced risk of maltreatment, 40% had an increased risk and 20% had the same score. Conclusions. The Family Support Program identifies and provides case management services to children of at-risk families to address their most serious needs - school perfonnance, financial need and family relationships. Family Support Workers provide interventions to the most at-risk families with school age children in Albemarle County. Characteristics of children and families cited above clearly indicate that the program is identifying and serving children and families that, lacking these interventions, would be at serious risk for a number of unwanted outcomes. A typical child receiving Family Support Program interventions is a third grade. white. male that has school attendance problems. has failed all SOLs. He is in a Special Education program and has difficulty completing schoolwork. He receives tree/subsidized lunch. He lives in a household headed by a single mother who has employment and literacy problems. His mother was a victim of abuse or neglect as a child, she is overwhelmed by the demands of child rearing and needs financial assistance to make ends meet. One of more of these factors put him at-risk for eventual removal from his home. Case management services provided by the Family Support Program address problems identified by the families and by the schools. Through a variety of means Family Support Workers provide interventions that include sharing infonnation, linking families to services and monitoring the case plan that is developed between the family and the worker. Information 41 collected and analyzed in the study tends to indicate that Family Support Program interventions are both addressing problem areas and beginning to make a difference. Data also indicates that the Family Support Program targets its services to meet child and family needs, and provides more interventions in areas of specific need (i.e. families with greater financial need received more employment services and more financial services.) The Family Support Program shows promise in delivering outcomes that benefit the children and families it serves. In a teacher survey conducted on 136 students in the program, children who were rated as having a problem "but improved" were recipients of a variety of Family Support services. These areas include completing homework (40% of students improved), getting along with others (32% of students improved), fighting (20% of students improved), being disruptive in class (24% of students improved), acting out (26% of students improved), displaying aggressive behavior (22% of students improved) and being withdrawn (27% of students improved). The area in which teachers reported the most improvements was "completing homework" in the academic category and "getting along with others" in the social-behavioral category. Children for whom fighting, disruptive behavior and acting out "was a problem but improved" were recipients of more school-related services from Family Support Workers; children for whom truancy "was a problem but improved" were recipients of more financial and relational services, as were children for whom poor grades "was a problem but improved." Although the evaluation did not attempt to prove a causal relationship between services provided and these improvements, the correlation between services provided and improvement in client needs is promising. Further study of these children and their families and the Family Support Program is necessary to determine the long-term impact of the Program. The development of the database enables the Family Support Program to continue to follow these children and families to determine if the Program meets its long-tenn goals of providing prevention and intervention services though home, school and community collaboration to prevent child outplacement from the home, support children's growth and development, strengthen families, and promote school success. RECEIVED AT 80S MEE;T(NG Date: //~ð/ Agenda Item #: /.?' ß. / Y Clerk's Initials: 'Ý~ AGENDA o Bright Stars Annual Report o Family Support Program - Weldon Cooper Center Evaluation Report o Family Support Program Funding Shortfall ------... ---.. --------- _____... ____n..___________ _______... ___ Prevention/Early Intervention Strategies o 1995 Albemarle Human Services Plan . Focus on Prevention/Early Intervention Strateg ies · "Encourage and support a comprehensive "4-year old education program in the County" - 1995 established the Bright Stars Program. · "Provide parent education and support services to families through day-care, pre- school and regular school programs" - 1999 established Family Support Program in all the -ß1emeotary_5choDlsL__....._._______ ______ 1 Family Support Program Past, Present and Future 2000-2002 Study Results o Long Term · Program description fine tuned · Creation of instruments to assess and document characteristics · Web-based integrated information system · The capacity to assess the long-term impact · Decrease in placement outside the home. .._--~ -----.,_.__._-----~- o Short Term · An analysis of the data of description of families and service delivery · An assessment of near- term impact of the program · Decrease in placement outside the home. --_._-~--------,- 2 Data Analysis 2000-2002 o Highest referral source - teachers o Most common referral reasons - emotional, behavioral problems and limited social skills o Almost half of the children referred read below grade level o Most common problems sited by teachers: · low scores · not completing homework · being inattentive in class · not getting along with others · being disruptive · acting out. o Three-fourths of the students failed SOL reading, math, history and science tests. o Fewer than half were considered to be emotionally, cognitively or socially prepared for school. o 68% were referred for child study o 45% had IEP's (compared to 16% for all county students); 29% had assistance plans o 40% referred were at risk of abuse and neglect o 44% were known to have been referred to CPS prior to receiving FS services. ----,-,-- Data Analysis (cont) D Most common characteristics of families · Overwhelmed · Poor (over 80% qualified for free/reduced lunch; 53% received) · Almost half were single parent households. D Highest risk associated with parents · Discipline · Conflict within the household · Lack of parenting skills. D 33% of families had high trauma risk such as injury/loss/death D 26% had violence In the household. D 42% of parents had a childhood history of risk including poverty and emotional abuse. D 47% of current parents had a high risk of aggressive/abusive behavior D Adult relationships had high risk of emotional, physical and verbal abuse D While there was a low risk of substance abuse in the parental population there was high risk of some (23%) for alcohol abuse. D Since the program inception, 924 referrals have been made; 74% or 688 have voluntarily worked with the social worker. --.....--------.--...----- -----_._-.~-------..._-..._----..__....._._.._- 3 Short/Long-Term Results School Related Improvements o Study Period » Attendance - 3% improvement » Behavior - 20%-48% improvement » Academics - 40% improvement o Post study period » Attendance » FY 2004 improved 25% » FY 2005 YTD improved 57% » Behavior » FY 2004 improved 29% » FY 2005 YTD improved 70% » Academics » FY 2004 improved 36% » FY 2005 YTD improved 64% ----- -------..-----..-----..-..- Short/Long Term Results Family Related Study Period » 49% of the families had a high potential for abuse and neglect » The number of children placed outside the home during the study period was 2.5% -~._-._-~--."....._-_...._--- Post study period » The number of families with a high potential for abuse and neglect decreased by 9% in FY 04 and YTD FY 05. » The number of children placed outside the home: » FY 03 was 1% » FY 04 was 1% » FY 05 YTD .06% ------- --..--..-------..---- - --..._----_.~-_._-----_._--_.- 4 Other Family Dynamic Changes o Study Period ~ More family problems were in relational and financial categories ~ Less freq uent problems were in employment and legal categories ~ 5% of families were reported to have LEP "---.------ o Post Study Period þ> More family problems were in the housing, employment and health insurance categories þ> Most frequently cited goals attained were in securing adequate housing, securing a new job, improved supervision of children, successful counseling, illness stabilized, family became aware of community resources and children were doing well in school þ> 8.5% of families were reported to have LEP --.-..-......--- Relational Improvements 180 180 .Fost.r Car. Ca..toad .. to 12 5 What about CSA costs? "'000,000 CSA EKpendltures vs. Total Foster Care Children entering Care 200 180 110 140 120 100 80 80 40 . o Foster Care Specialized Placements .8pecIaIlzedPII~ .. ---.---~_._.._----.._------._----.._---.__...~--------,- 6 Family Support Program Revenue and Expenditures Family Support Program $900,000,00 $800,000.00 $700,000.00 $600,000.00 $500,000,00 $400,000,00 $300,000.00 $200,000.00 $100,000.00 $- Fiecal Year 1999 2000 2001 2002 ~ActlProj 2003 *PrOJ 2004 uActlPro 2005 -- --. Total FSP Fed Rev. Total FSP Local Rev 0 Total FSP Expenditures Prevention/Early Intervention Strategy is Working o Bright Stars · academic gains, increased parental involvement, ready for kindergarten o Family Support · improved learning, attendance and behavior · improved family stability o Foster Care · decline in number of children in foster care o CSA · costs are leveling off despite increasing vendor rates and specialized care ---"--'-"'~-"'~"--'-'---'----'---'--'--"- ._--_._-_.._---_.-...__.--._-----_.~_._~-~-_..._- 7 Continue Family Support Program This Year? FY05 Revenue Shortfall L$255,010) FY04 Brig ht Sta rs Ca rryover FY05 Bright Stars Carryover School Division Remaining Shortfall $55,000 $46,000 $154,010 $0 Alternative: Terminate 7 Family ~lI1Wºrt-Forkers en!l_ºf .[anuª-ry -------- ------.. __________ ..._ _____.... .m.____.., ____ Continue Family Support Program Next Year? o Maintain current program design - $800,000 program · $500,000 federal/other funds; $300,000 new funds required o Change program design · reduce staff hours - 10/11 mos. program . reduce number of families served . target fewer schools --."----_._._--"_.~------~--------"---_._--_._--_.....----... -.-------, -- ----._~.__..._----._-_..~--,- 8 Next Steps o Board approve use of Bright Stars 4l carry-over funds for FYOS. C/ o Wait for School Board decision on one-time FYOS funding -January 10th o Continue discussions with School staff on FY06 program design and funding. o Develop amended budget request for FY06 Family Support Program. ---- -......-..----.....------.. -.-.. --..- - - --- ---- 9 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Bright Stars Annual Report AGENDA DATE: January 5, 2005 ACTION: INFORMATION: X SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Bright Stars Program - Review of Annual Report CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, White, Ralston, Haines ATTACHMENTS: Yes LEGAL REVIEW: Yes REVIEWED BY: r--- BACKGROUND: The Bright Stars Program began in 1995 in Albemarle County Schools with the first classroom at Stone Robinson Elementary School. Today the program serves six schools and ninety-six four year olds and their families in the following schools: Stone Robinson, Agnor-Hurt, Greer, Scottsville, Wood brook, and Cale. Bright Stars is an early intervention program for at risk four-year old children and their families that attempts to increase learning opportunities by addressing risk factors that affect school performance. At risk factors are based on a variety of criteria that include such things as parental illiteracy, poverty, domestic violence, substance abuse, chronic illness, criminal activity, developmental disabilities and behavioral, oral language, social or personal difficulties. Funding for the program is partially offset by state dollars from the Virginia Pre-School Initiative but these funds only support 33% of program. The remaining funding for the program comes from local government, the schools and a small grant from Martha Jefferson Hospital that provides dental care support for the children. STRATEGIC PLAN: Strategic Direction 1: Provide high quality educational opportunities for Albemarle County citizens of all ages. DISCUSSION: The annual report provided to the Board for 2003-2004 is a summary of the year in review and does not include Woodbrook Elementary, since that program just began in the fall of 2004. The report provides demographic and program information as well as curriculum, results of test scores, comparative data and impact on families. Finally, there is information from recent surveys of parents, teachers and other staff regarding the program. More than half of the children that were served in Bright Stars remain at or above grade level in math and reading through the third grade, although there are still children scoring below grade level, producing a challenge for the program to determine the factors that contribute to those children still not keeping up with educational grade levels. Of the twenty-eight former Bright Stars students taking the third grade reading/writing SOL, twenty passed while eight did not pass. Families have many opportunities to be involved in the program and 97.5% of families attended at least one family event during the school year. Families also benefit from case management services provided by Family Coordinators. Case management services to families at one school resulted in three parents either obtaining their GED, post high school training or enrolling for college level courses; three parents improving their housing situation; and one parent applying for and being hired into a more responsible benefit-paying job. RECOMMENDATIONS: This report is for information only and does not require any action from the Board. . . 04.208 Attachment A BRIGHT STARS ANNUAL REPORT 2003-2004 Albemarle County's Preschool Program for 4 year-olds WHAT THE BEST AND WISEST PARENT WANTS FOR HIS OWN CHILD, THAT MUCH THE COMMUNITY WANTS FOR ALL ITS CHILDREN JOHN DEWEY A c ~ /... ..' /~ ~," Bright Stars Mission To increase the opportunities to learn for our children and their families by promoting family involvement and addressing risk factors that affect school performance MEET OUR BRIGHT STARS In a Bright Stars classroom, children are involved throughout the day in learning, exploring, questioning and problem-solving. Bright Stars students follow a similar schedule as other elementary school students: they arrive on the morning bus, eat breakfast, go to their classroom for large and small group time, work time, story, clean-up, bathroom, outdoor time, lunch, nap, snack and getting ready to board the buses home. As required by the Virginia Preschool Initiative Grant, they attend school for 6.25 hours 180 days per year. The quality of life for a child and the contributions the child makes to society as an adult can be traced back to the first few years of life. From birth until about 5 years old a child undergoes tremendous growth and change. If this period of life includes support for growth in cognition, language, motor skills, adaptive skills and social-emotional functioning, the child is more likely to succeed in school and later contribute to society. A well-managed and well -funded early childhood development program, or ECDP, provides such support. Current ECDPs include home visits, as well as center-based programs to supplement and enhance the ability of parents to provide a solid foundation for their children. Early Childhood education receives a strong endorsement in a landmark study released in November 2004 that shows low-income children who attended a high-quality preschool were better off in most ways at age 40. The children were more likely to be high school graduates, to be employed and had higher incomes than a comparison group that did not attend preschool. They also were less likely to have committed crimes. The preschool group also performed better through the years on intellectual and language tests, school achievement tests and literacy tests. Abecedarian, Chicago and High/Scope - Quoted at the Conference on Education and Economic Development, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland I. PROGRAM DEMOGRAPHICS · 5 Classrooms - Agnor-Hurt, Cale, Greer, Scottsville, Stone-Robinson · 80 Children: 16 children per classroom · 5 Licensed teachers at Bachelors' or Master's level, certified in Early Childhood · 5 Teaching assistants · 5 Family Coordinators at Bachelors' or Master's level, licensed as social workers, professional counselors or teachers · Gender: 48% Male 52% Female · Race:30% AA,3% Biracial,45% Caucasian,20% Hispanic, 2% Other · ESOL: There are no formal ESOL services provided in the preschool year, however, 15-17% of families across the program have limited English proficiency and in three of the Bright Stars classes the number is higher than 40% · Family Characteristics: 44% Single Parent, 49% Illiterate or Limited Education · Other noteworthy characteristics: Family histories of domestic violence and incarcerations; previous Child Protective Services and/or Foster Care involvement; siblings had difficulty in school; mental health issues "If you start early enough, you can alleviate some of the most costly interventions. It is a very, very, wise early intervention that pays off tenfold not only in the school system but the family support system, our juvenile delinquency system, our prisons.fl Cheryl Wright, Associate Professor and Director of the Child and Family Development Center at the U. of Utah HOW ARE THE BRIGHT STARS DOING? Trends · All classrooms have the maximum number of students (16); 3 schools have waiting lists. In late June 2004 a 6th Bright Stars classroom was approved for the Woodbrook district. · The children who are entering the program have higher risk scores meaning they have more barriers to overcome in order to be successful. · The number of Hispanic students has substantially increased in the last 3 years; the number of parents who have Limited English Proficiency is increasing. · Bright Stars has taken on a maJor socializing role for immigrant students and families. · Bright Stars families have the services of a Spanish- language interpreter/consultant and staff that have skills in Spanish. · Scores on language and literacy and math measures are going up. · More children are sustaining or regaining their progress in Bright Stars into Kindergarten and Grade 1 and beyond. · Referrals for early interventions are getting children and families the help they need earlier. · Teachers report that Bright Stars children enter kindergarten with positive attitudes towards school and already understand appropriate school behavior. · Bright Stars parents come to school for parent conferences and other school events; they talk to teachers about children's progress; they ask for help to know what to do at home. · Attendance is improving. · Bright Stars students are getting medical and dental services II. . or or exceeded the 2 met or the tested include those who have English language. . are to 1 ~ ~ f 5 1 ~ s fI fI fI by are fI to t fI fI fI s !Þ on es¡ soci i ion¡ lopment¡ Scope is County ; !Þ ties f buddies classroom 1 e !Þ s classroom learn s 1 s 18 classroom t Nights, s . it it it it (100%) of the d on s .... 2004 2004 36 0 3 3 32 5 2 38 0 IIÞ the in III IIÞ III III I never ; I of my 1 S lIs around other children her age. - 2 a use Id .. .. ars t a .. .. a .. c so .. is a ice success! c - 1% Grant 32% School Contribution 4% i. ìi. Grant Preschool I iii. iv. Costs 93% , payroll taxes, costs include contract postage, s, JANUARY 5, 2005 CLOSED SESSION MOTION I MOVE THAT THE BOARD GO INTO CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.2-3711 (A) OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA . UNDER SUBSECTION (1) TO CONSIDER APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS; AN.D · UNDER SUBSECTION (7) TO DISCUSS WITH LEGAL COUNSEL AND STAFF SPECIFIC LEGAL ISSUES REGARDING A MATTER RELATING TO TAXATION OF REAL PROPERTY. RECEIVED AT BOS MEETfNG Date: '/~f Agenda Item ,: ~ ð Clerk's Initials: f"./ ~ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Board of Supervisors FROM: Debi Moyers, Senior Deputy Clerk DATE: December 21, 2004 RE: Vacancies on Boards and Commissions Attached please find an updated listing of vacancies on boards and commissions through June 30, 2005. Attached are applications that were due to the Board by December 3rd, 2004 for: Architectural Review Board: Current Members/Fact Sheet Attached Paul J. Grady, Jr. Gardiner Hallock - J'?%.p"""""/ Steve Taylor Duane Snow ... ~-t:¿.......-.,J Sandy Lambert (Late-Received 12/13/04) Housing Committee: Current Members/Fact Sheet Attached A. Bruce Dotson ./" Steve Tayler ,/ Reginald Woods Jana Crutchfield ,/ Carmelle Hontz Natalie Reed (Original app. sent by emaiI11/17/04) Public Defenders Office: Current Members/Fact Sheet Attached Marilyn Minrath / Public Recreational Facilities: Current Members/Fact Sheet Attached Natalie Reed (Original app. sent by emaiI11/17/04) c?;I_ ~"'u/,~ ./ There are two interviews scheduled for the January 5, 2005 meeting for the Police Dept. Citizen Advisory Committee vacancy: 12:30 p.m. Clarence W. Roberts / _ -V"7 J f/~1I:'4 12:40 p.m. Stephen Smith /' /' ~ 11~)-./ (Current members, fact sheet and bylaws attached) '1-"'1 ð I.L:::;!!Ž-o-o -.....WO) 0) I- æ :E '3 '3 o WI- I- 0" 0" - 0)0) ~(I)~cr:cr: (I)(;~¡::¡:: ëc(Q.:8:8 :Ec(üü «« o 0 ZZ I I >->- LLLL W <'- m C W o I I- I-WZ ~O::Õ~~ (I) 0..0.0 - 0. .- .- ;: c(gg ww :E(I)""'''''' O::woo wo::oo I-_~~ ;:0........... w)(~~ ZWIOIO (1)1.01.0 :Ewgg o::e:NN wOo;::;:: 1-)«('1)('1) W-..-.. 1.0 1.0 0) O:::§ai wmE m>co :E >.- W .= :E= :E _ ~ ~ - ¡:: >- co Q) .o~ ::J co WI Z ~ ···1· sail :Eli . ~II ... ~'I I gt.I·· 01: 0:: . .. c( o .. m . . II '0 I:: ::J .E - ¡:: Q) E III Q) C Ü 0 co .- - - c.ca Q) U .... .- .- ã. -CI. 5c( I::IØ o >- co 1;) 'i - ::J .0 o Z co o o ~ ~ ..... - ..... ..... ~ o o ~ ~ ..... - ..... ..... ~ ~ ¡:: 'e I- -0-0-0 0) 0) 0) .... .... .... .-.- .- ::J :J :J 0" 0" 0" Q) 0) 0) cr:cr:cr: ¡:: ¡:: ¡:: 000 ui5~ ««« 000 ZZZ I I I >=>=>= LLLLLL E E o '00 Q)OI Q) II) ¡:: - CO·- :9Q)ê gg~ WOD.. ,....,....co 000 000 ~~~ ('I) C") ('I) -- - ~~~ >- roo 0 >- -0 -0 -0 -0 0) 0) 0) 0) >- LL '- '- '- '- I .- .- .- LL ci :J :J :J :J I 0- 0" 0" 0- a.. 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: III 0::: E ¡:: ¡:: ¡:: ¡:: C en 0 0 .2 0 0 E 'C t5 :,::; t5 t5 ;; E :J Ü ca 0 « « « « .~ 0 I- 0 0 0 0 0 z z z z ã. ~ co I I I I CI. Ü >- >- >- >- c( 0 ro --I LL LL LL LL CD Q) Q) :ë:ë :§!:§! ¡¡¡¡¡¡ ,.... ,.... 00 00 ~~ 00 C") C") - - co co Q) Q) ;ë;ë .Q).Q) Q) ¡¡¡¡¡¡:ë - -'5 00= zzw coco co 000 000 ~~~ 000 C") C") C") - -- co co co '0 Q) - I:: 'õ C. ÕÕ a. Z z.. co ~ bbb~ 000_ ~~~o ~~'or-C: ~~~Q) ('oI('oI('oI.c ...............1;) Q) ::J C" ~ Q) Q) :ë:ë :§!:§! ¡¡¡¡¡¡ Q) :ë :§! ¡¡¡ co o o ~ o C") - co ~ o 01 .Q) 0.... C> I:: _ co '0 ~m m I:: _ 0 ::::0 o ü = co ¡¡¡~ ¡:: o II) ~ :s OI_CO I::£~ '-::J . ~oa::: - ">- - c/)v..:, -=-E' -:. ~ u) I:: 01 o ~.~ ~ Q) E :Ö~E o co ::J a:::~o ~~~ 000 000 ~~~ -.r-,....,....Q) C")C")C")(.) ÑÑÑæ ,.... ,.... 'or- "0 I:: Q) :::: co 1.0 1.0 1.0 LO 1.0 LO 1.0 1.0 LO 000 00 0 000 000 00 0 000 NN N NNN NNN -.. -.. 0 -.. -.. -.. -.. -.. -.. 00 000 ('I) ('I) ('I) -.. -.. -.. ('I) ('I) ('I) ('I) ('I) ('I) ~~~ -.. -.. (0 -.. -.. -.. CD CD CD CD CD C> 01 UJe ¡....: .....: (¡) 0 E ã) -ã,,gi .2> æ 0 1;) ~ ' ~~ >; I:: .co Q) 0)1:: -0 ~ - co ail:: 8 ~ ~~ il i II. Iii ; ,: ~ ; II ~ÎII.!~;;' ~IË · I I II I i U h.,. 1~liltll III II It I ,11111;11 >-' Q) II) E~I:: .c 0'- C/).:.:.~ (.) co aiz 0 = -r,¡) ~~ 'E :2 'õ' 0 ~C/)~ Z I:: co <ë .... o o a. >- 0 . I:: - I.L I:: Q) Q) '0 ::J ~, 'S; '0 ,'Õco:¡ -00.0 ~~"'Q) Q)~:2:ë .c Q) E '5 :::: 0) .c .- co....ü- ~C>C/)~ I:: o II) 1::: Q) .0 '5 o -0 -0 -0 -0 0) 0) 0) 0) '- .... .... '- -- .- .- CI. :J :J :J :J 0" C" 0" ::::I 0" 0) 0) 0) I 0) - 0:::0:::0::: Q) 0::: ¡:: ¡:: ¡:: (I) C C ¡:: 000 III 0 0 0 t5t5t5 ~ :; ;; t5 ««« Q) ca « .~ .~ .~ 0 0 0 ã. ã. 0 zzz Q) Z I I I - CI. CI. I >=>=>= .5 c( c( >- LLLLLL ('If ..... .... LL -0 ~ Q) Q) 0) 0) 0) ¡:: :ë:ë:ë OJ :ë :Q¡ :Q¡ :Q¡ ,Ii III :§! 0) 0 o Q) ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ 0::: Z z> ¡¡¡ ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... 0 00 co 000 0 00 0 000 ~ ~~ 0 ~~~ ..... ~ ..... ..... ..... ('I) C") C") C") - ..... ..... ('I) N - - --- NN - C") C") C") ..... co ..... ..... 1.0 LO 1.0 ~ ~~ 1.0 000 co 0 00 0 000 0 0 00 0 NNN 0 ~ ~~ N -.. -.. -.. ~ ..... ('I) ('I) -.. ..- ..- ..- 10 ('I) ..... ..... 0 ('I) ('I) ('I) - - - - ('I) -.. -.. -.. ('I) N NN -.. ('I) ('I) ('I) ..- ..... ..... CD -) 'E 'E~co co>.c ~ 0 .2 -0 I a::: W>;>; u)~m Q).o'O I:: co I:: ~o::¡ Q) I:: I:: co )( o a::: Q) ~ .c ~ County of Albemarle Office of Board of County Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITIEE (Please type or print.) Board/ Commission/ Committee p~ ðÝ ~iilEc-rUrLAL- !Zr.-'-Ir~ ~2_3-C¡OO~ Home Phone Applicant's Name ~ ~ . df2..AtD'-1 "- ') r2.., Email Address Full Home Address 4;A'~ /20æF-i,,?t+ &;¿, IU.I2-N/?!K£mail Address L/ ru.Aé:.-¡ \/A r ZZ'- 0"3 , .p6 rzA-t:fY~ NÆ:..X/é.-í, J-.llé-T Magisterial District in which your home residence is located W{-+-tîf' f~ Employer 6~ ~ PLØ t.¡ r¿j) b f'f.k..l féfU4-t.- , 'I Phone C-D1--f.ínl4<..-íðiL ~ c.~~ _"'At"> Business Address ~e..- G~ Occupation/Title Date of Employment ¡977 Years Resident in Albemarle County 3'& í IV::> Spouse's Name Previous Residence Number of Children Education (Degrees and Graduation Dates) ~~fL. ~ ,An.a;f-fí ~-rufl...l!- \ UVA- G~<7 o{:: 72 Memberships in Fraternal. Business. Church and/ or Social Groups { z1 zJü4 Date / Return to: Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 FAX: (804) 296-5800 PLEASE RESTRICT ANY ATTACHMENTS TO ONE PAGE ... Ella Carey Page 1 of2 From: pgh@arcadiapreservation.com Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 12:03 PM To: ecarey@albemarle.org Cc: dmullins@albemarle.org Subject: Board/Commission/Committee Application Date of this Application: Board/Commission/ Committee Applied for: Magisterial District: Applicant Name: Address: Home Telephone: Email Address: Employer: Business Address: Work Telephone: Occu pation/Title: Date of Employment: Years Resident in Albemarle County: Previous Residence: Spouse: Number of Children: Education: Memberships: Interests: Reason to Serve: 11/2812004 Application Information 11/24/2004 Architectural Review Board Rivanna Gardiner Hallock P.O. Box 138 Keswick, V A 22947 (434) 293-7772 pgh@arcadiapreservation.com Arcadia Preservation, LLC P.O. Box 138 Keswick, VA 22947 (434) 293-7772 Principal 11/2003 26 Alexandria, V A Jennifer Hallock o BA in Historic Preservation - Mary Washington College Masters of Science in Historic Preservation - University of Vermont Preservation Piedmont, Vernacular Architecture Forum, National Trust for Historic Preservation, Association for Preservation Technology President elect of Preservation Piedmont I was born in Albemarle and have lived a majority of my life in the county. I have also personally been involved with the current and future National Register .,. " . Peter Gardiner Hallock) fr. Prior to the founding of Arcadia Preservation, LLC, Mr. Hallock held the position of Manager of Restoration at George Washington's Mount Vernon Estate and Gardens. At Mount Vernon, Mr. Hallock was responsible for research, documentation, and conservation of the Estate's historic structures. In addition, he managed multiple projects including the restoration of the Small Dining Room, the reconstruction of the Kitchen Well Pump, and the conservation of the ornamental plaster ceiling in the West Parlor. Mr. Hallock also wrote a historic structure report for the Spinning House, researched and prepared a National Register Nomination for George Washington's Grist Mill, and has been published in Architecture Week ("Conserving Mount Vernon"), the Association for Preservation Technology's Bulletin ("Assessing Past Conservation Treatments at Mount Vernon") and the Vernacular Architecture Forum's Journal Perspectives ("Pise Construction in Early 19th Century Virginia"). Papers and presentations given by Mr. Hallock have included Technology and Tradition: Conserving the Small Dining Room at Mount Vernon at the National Building Museum, Pise Construction in Early 19th Century Virginia for the Vernacular Architecture Forum's 2002 Annual Meeting, and Current Restoration Projects at Mount Vernon for a conference hosted by the Department of Historic Preservation at Mary Washington College. Currently Mr. Hallock is also an adjunct professor at Mary Washington College and he will be teaching a Survey and Documentation class in the Fall of 2004. Education Masters of Science in Historic Preservation. U niversiry rif Vermont. Burlington, VT 1998-2000 Bachelor of Arts in Historic Preservation. Mary Washington College. Fredericksburg, VA 1993-1997 Exoerience Founder and Principal, Arcadia Preservation, LLC. Keswick, VA Fall2003-Present. Adjunct Professor, Mary Washington College. Fredericksburg, VA Spring 2004 - Present Taught Landscape Preservation (HISP 312), Historic Preservation Department, Spring 2004 Teaching Survry and Documentation (HISP 405), Historic Preservation Department, Fall 2004 Manager of Restoration, Mount Vernon Estate and Gardens. Mount V ernon, VA May 2000 - November 2003 Responsibilities include preparing conservation plans, developing restoration and reconstruction plans (including preliminary designs), documenting all restoration/ conservation activities, maintaining the exhibition area, managing the work of estate personal and outside contractors, specifying materials for restoration projects and researching building histories (through both documentary and physical evidence). Significant projects include the restoration of the Small Dining Room, the reconstruction of the Kitchen Well Pump, and the conservation of the ornamental plaster ceiling in the West Parlor. Mr. Hallock also wrote a historic structure report for the Spinning House and researched and prepared a National Register Nomination for George Washington's Grist Mill. Ella Carey Page 1 of2 From: SteveTaylor@ReaIEstateiii.com Sent: Sunday, November 21,20049:27 AM To: ecarey@albemarle.org Cc: dmullins@albemarle.org Subject: Board/Commission/Committee Application Date of this Application: Board/Commission/ Committee Applied for: Magisterial District: Applicant Name: Address: Home Telephone: Email Address: Employer: Business Address: Work Telephone: Occupation/Title: Date of Employment: Years Resident in Albemarle County: Previous Residence: Spouse: Number of Children: Education: Memberships: 11/21/2004 Application Information 11/21/2004 Architectural Review Board Rio Steve Taylor 1323 Breckenridge Court Charlottesville, VA 22901 (434) 978-1890 Steve T ªylor@RealEstateiii.c_Qm Real Estate III 1045 Carrington Place Charlottesville, VA 22901 (434) 817-6055 REALTOR 01/2004 3 Washington, DC April 2 RRA.-Information Processing, The George Washington University, May, 1990 Company of Friends, VPTC volunteer, Neon Guild, National Intercollegiate Soccer Officials Association United States Soccer Federation Also currently serve on the Dunlora Architectural Review Board Page 2 of2 Interests: Currently serve on the Dunlora Architectural Review Board currently a soccer referee with Major League Soccer Reason to Serve: I am always looking for ways to become more involved with the community while improving my local real estate expertise. SIGNATURE REQUIRED: Steve Taylor DATE SIGNED: 11/21/2004 County of Albemarle . t~'c, // ~/ / ~¿JCI Ý .'/ (f?"-j Y~-I .. o/~ . ~ 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22t)02-4596 (434) 296-5B41 Fox: (434) :¿g6-s800 ---.....--..-- Board/Commission/Committee: Architectural Review Board Applicant's Name: Duane E. Snow E-mail Address:duane@snowknows.com Full Home Address: 905 Leigh Way Charlottesville, VA 22901 Magisterial District which your home residence is located: Home Phone: 434-295-3682 Employer: Snow's Garden Center Samuel Miller 'I Phone: 434-2115-2159 /' ('61// ,ð',g/, ~ .5 ,M'; Business Address: 1875 Avon Street Charlottesville, VA 22902 Occupationffitle: Landscape Designer Date of Employment: June 1970 Years Resident in Albemarle County: 23 Years Spouse's Name: Rena Millet Snow Previous Residence: 513 Moseley Drive Charlottesville, VA 22903 Number of children: 5 Memberships in Fraternal, Business, Church and/or Social Groups: EducationlDegrees and Graduation Dates: High School Rock Hill 1963 Brigham Young University BS 1970 Charlottesville Rotary Club-Secretary/Treasurer; Charlottesville/Albemarle Chamber of Commerce; American Nursery & Landscape Assoc.; Virginia Nursery & Landscape Assoc.; Bishop-Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Public, Civic and Charitable Office and/or Other Activities or Interests: Previously served on American Heart Assoc. Board Served 10 years on Virginia State Agriculture Council; Boy Scouts of American Comm. Member Interests: Cycling, Swimming, Reading, Scuba Diving, Traveling, Spending time with wife & family J l' . Reason (s) for Wishing to Serve on this Board/Commission/Committee: Our family has been in this community for five generations. As a grandfather of nine grandchildren, I realize the importance of planning for our future generations. I am recently retired as CEO and President of Snow's Garden Center. I have had thirty-four years of experience as a businessman in the Charlottesville area. For the next few years of my life, I would like to spend more time serving our community. It is my desire to serve on the Architectural Review Board to help preserve the quality of life which we now enjoy and to protect the historical nature of our area. The infonnation provided on this application will be released to the public upon request. ~-~~ !'/7'()'f Date Diane Mullins Page 1 of2 From: slambert715@adelphia.net Sent: Monday, December 13,20043:55 PM To: ecarey@albemarle.org Cc: dmullins@albemarle.org Subject: Board/Commission/Committee Application Application Information Date of this 12/13/2004 Application: Board/Commission/ Committee Applied for: Architectural Review Board Magisterial District: Samuel Miller Applicant Name: Address: Home Telephone: Email Address: Sandy Lambert 1174 Courtyard Drive (Redfields) Charlottesville, VA 22903 (434) 295-9353 ~lambert715(0adelphia.neJ Employer: Business Address: Work Telephone: Occupationrritle: Date of Employment: University of Virginia Facilities Mgmt. 575 Alderman Road (use P.O.) P. O. Box 400726 Charlottesville, VA 22904 (434) 982-2804 Architect 10/1982 Years Resident in Albemarle County: Previous Residence: Spouse: Number of Children: '"'~"" 4 Fluvanna Co 1996-2000 Cville 1964-1996 Lorna Jean 2 Education: B.S. in Architecture, UV A, 1964 Memberships: 12/1312004 AlA Central Virginia Virginia Society of AlA American Institute of Architects (AlA) Virginia Jaycees Lifetime Member Former Charlottesville Rotarian, past president First Baptist Church, ordained Deacon (1985- Meadows Presbyterian Church, Elder, Deacon (1966-1984) Page 2 of2 _'____~_.,._~~~""_~~."__~__~......,_''^'_~~~'^'~__,,c~~__v...·.~ Interests: Chairman, Courtyard Committee, Redfields Homeowners Association ,_~·,.__,___^___.___m~~·~_~~~~N.><~,,~~_,~~_·.·,.·A·___~U~~"~~"'^,^,~^'__~,,~~·.w__·, Reason to Serve: Civic interest. Willingness and desire to serve community in which I live. SIGNATURE REQUIRED: Sandy Lambert DA TE SIGNED: 12/13/2004 BYLAWS POLICE DEPARTMENT CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (PDCAC) PURPOSE - To provide for independent review by a citizen committee of policies, procedures, budget decisions and staffing allocations of the Albemarle County Police Department in order to improve efficiency and effectiveness of local law enforcement services and to promote the community policing philosophy of the County in a way which advances shared responsibility and interdependence between the community and the Police Department. I. Duties of the PDCAC Upon request by the Board of Supervisors, the County Executive, or the Chief of Police, or in response to a citizen complaint, the PDCAC shall undertake the following reviews and provide recommendations to the Chief of Police: · Review of Albemarle County Police Department (ACPD) policies, programs, procedures and practices. (i.e., community policing, crime fighting initiatives, traffic enforcement, monitoring of police vehicle videos, interrogation and interview procedures, etc. ..) · Review of ACPD Rules and Regulations and General Orders. · Review of ACPD budget and funding priorities. · Review of the level of staffing of the ACPD and how staffing is allocated. II. Responsibilities of the Chief of Police · The Chief of Police will ensure ACPD cooperation with the PDCAC in all appropriate inquires and studies. · The Chief of Police will review the recommendations of the PDCAC and will respond to the PDCAC, verbally or in writing, to address the ACPD's recommendations. ID. Composition of the PDCAC · The Board of Supervisors shall appoint five (5) citizen members to the PDCAC. They shall be selected on the basis of their professional experience, educational background, and history of community service. · A Board of Supervisors member will serve as an ex-officio, non-voting member of the PDCAC and serve as liaison between the PDCAC and the Board of Supervisors. 1 · Each citizen member will serve a tenn of two (2) years commencing rrom their date of appointment, and may serve for a maximum of three (3) consecutive tenns. IV. PDCAC Chairperson · A Chairperson will be selected by a vote of the members of the PDCAC to serve a tenn of one (1) year. A Chairperson may not serve in that capacity for more than two (2) consecutive years. · If a Chairperson cannot be elected by a vote of the PDCAC members, the County Executive will select the Chairperson rrom the sitting members. · The Chairperson will be responsible for: 1. Scheduling committee meetings. 2. Appropriate record keeping of committee activities. 3. Assigning and coordinating PDCAC duties as defined in this document. v. Removal of a PDCAC Member During Term · A PDCAC member may be removed rrom the committee for cause by the Board of Supervisors upon a detennination that the member has committed nonfeasance, misfeasance, or malfeasance in perfonning the duties of the PDCAC or is otherwise unqualified to continue to exercise the assigned duties and responsibilities. Approved 12-5-01; Amended 1-5-05 C:\Documents and Settings\ecarey\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\PDCAC Bylaws 2.doc 2 '!. " David P. Bowennan Rio Kenneth C. Boyd Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller Undsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Scottsville David C. Wyant White Hall December 7,2004 Clarence W. Roberts 3010 Colonial Drive Charlottesville, VA 22911 Dear Mr. Roberts: This letter will confirm your interview with the Board of Supervisors at 12:30 p.m., Wednesday, January 5, 2005, for a vacancy on the Police Department Citizens Advisory Committee. The interview will last approximately ten minutes, and will be held in the Conference Roorn on the fourth floor of the Albemarle County Office Building. I am also enclosing a copy of the bylaws. Please feel free to contact me at (434) 296-5843 should you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, ¥£. ~?¿J Debi Moyers Senior Deputy Clerk Enclosure * Printed on recycled paper Clarence W. Roberts 3010 Colonial Drive Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 ( It,· vA nlltt (434) 973-2442 E-mail: cwroberts222@wmconnect.com ò,:s -I-. ) OBJECTIVE I voluntarily and without compensation seek to serve the citizens of Albemarle County on the Albemarle Police Citizens Advisory Committee. SUMMARY I served more than eight years as Chairman of the Board and Commissioner on the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, a public safety agency of the Commonwealth of Virginia. I am a retired law enforcement officer having served more than thirty-seven years as an investigator, inspector, special agent and law enforcement commissioner. My management duties included organization, budget, professional standards, police officer's code of conduct and all other areas of the agency. I managed their $12 million law enforcement division coupled with a $500 million enterprise agency with about 2,200 employees. My service included the management of fourteen special agents that were first responders to the pentagon on 9/11. I know what it means to manage a police officer involved in a shoot-out and the suspect being killed. I believe my law enforcement experience coupled with my business back ground make for an unusual set of qualifications to serve on the Albemarle Police Department Citizen's Advisory Committee. EMPLOYMENT July 1,2002 - Present - Retired June 6, 1998 - July 1,2002 - Chairman of the Board, Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board - Appointed by Governor James S. Gilmore, III - Richmond February, 1994 - June 6, 1998 - Commissioner, Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board - Appointed by Governor George Allen - Richmond February, 1997 - June 6, 1998 - Chairman Pro Tempore and Acting Agency Head - Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board 1984 - 1994 - Special Agent - Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board - Charlottesville 1969 - 1984 - Inspector - Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board - Charlottesville 1967 - 1969 - Investigator - Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board - Charlottesville MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE · As Chairman of the Board, I was responsible to the Governor, the Virginia General Assembly and the citizens of Virginia for the overall operations of this $500 million enterprise agency · Responsible to the citizens of Virginia for maintaining the highest degree of integrity in Virginia's system of alcoholic beverage control and provide excellence in public service to our internal and external customers · Provide executive level management for the agency's 200 member law enforcement division with special agents empowered with full police powers · Managed processes to fully automate the agency, its 280 stores and nine regional offices · Managed and implemented recommendations of a "best practices" study of the agency · Responsible for the safety of the citizens of Virginia's as related to a retail network of265 ABC stores with annual sales over $500 million. . · Preside over public hearings during the regulatory process · Preside over licensee disciplinary and application hearings at the appellate level before the Board · Applied knowledge of state government and Virginia's legislative process to determine the impact oflegislation on the agency, its licensees and the citizens of the Commonwealth · Provide positive interaction with diverse constituency groups including the offices of the Governor, Secretary of Public Safety, Attorney General, General Assembly members government officials and the general public · Accountable for administrative policy development, interpretation and implementation. David P. Bowerman Rio Kenneth C. Boyd Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller Undsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Seottsville David C. Wyant White Hall December 8, 2004 Stephen Smith 1226 Broad Axe Road Charlottesville, VA 22903 Dear Mr. Smith: This letter will confirm your interview with the Board of Supervisors at 12:40 p.m., Wednesday, January 5, 2005, for a vacancy on the Police Department Citizens Advisory Committee. The interview will last approximately ten minutes, and will be held in the Conference Room on the fourth floor of the Albemarle County Office Building. I am also enclosing a copy of the bylaws. Please feel free to contact me at (434) 296-5843 should you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, {&. ~7-'P4 Debi Moyers Senior Deputy Clerk Enclosure * Printed on recycled paper Ella Carey Page 1 of2 From: sfs3h@virginia.edu Sent: Thursday, October 14, 200412:14 PM To: ecarey@albemarle.org Cc: dmullins@albemarle.org Subject: Board/Commission/Committee Application Date of this Application: Board/Commission/ Committee Applied for: Magisterial District: Application Information 10/14/2004 Police Department Citizen Advisory Committee Samuel Miller Applicant Name: Address: Home Telephone: Email Address: Stephen Smith 1226 Broad Axe Road Charlottesville, VA 22903 (434) 923-8844 sfs3h@virginia.edu Employer: Business Address: Work Telephone: Occupation/Title: Date of Employment: University of Virginia School of Law 580 Massie Road Charlottesville, VA 22903 (434) 924-3911 Associate Professor of Law 0712000 Years Resident in Albemarle County: Previous Residence: Spouse: N umber of Children: 08 Fairfax County, VA Lora N. Gallagher-Smith 05 Education: JD 1992, University of Virginia School of Law Memberships: 10/14/2004 BA 1988, History and Philosophy, Dartmouth College member in good standing, Virginia State Bar (1995-present) former law clerk, U.S. Supreme Court (1993-94) Albemarle County Rotary Club Education Honors Clerkships Legal Employment STEPHEN F. SMITH 1226 Broad Axe Road Charlottesville, VA 22903 (434) 924-3911 (w) sfs3 h@virginia.edu University of Virginia School of Law Charlottesville, VA J.D. 1992. Member, Order of the Coif. Virginia Law Review--selected on basis of grades and anonymous writing competition. Articles Editor, Virginia Law Review. Member, The Raven Society (the University of Virginia honors society). Dartmouth College Hanover, N.H. B.A. History and Philosophy (1988). Freshman Football Team Elected Vice President and Social Chairman, Sigma Nu Fraternity Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem-ecclesiastical honor conferred by the Vatican. 2002 "Best Professor" Award-selected through student survey. Edward Coke Appellate Inn of Court. Margaret G. Hyde Award-for most outstanding member oflaw school class. Rosenbloom A ward-for outstanding academic contributions to Law School. "Proficient Writer" Award, Dartmouth Writing and Composition Center. Four-Year Air Force ROTC Scholarship. Headmaster's Award-for outstanding personal traits and values. Roper Scholarship--for outstanding academic performance. Supreme Court of the United States October Term 1993 Law Clerk Served as law clerk to the Honorable Clarence Thomas. U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Law Clerk Served as law clerk to the Honorable David B. Sentelle. 1992 Term University of Virginia School of Law June 2000-present Associate Professor Teaching Criminal Law, Federal Criminal Law, Criminal Adjudication, and Appellate Advocacy. Areas of research include criminal law and procedure. U.S. House of Representatives July 2000-Feb. 2001 Judicial Review Commission on Foreign Asset Control Special Counsel Advised Commission and Staff on constitutional issues implicated by the designation and blocking processes of the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Act and other federal foreign asset control programs. BYLA WS POLICE DEPARTMENT CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (PDCAC) PURPOSE - To provide for independent review by a citizen committee of policies, procedures, budget decisions and staffing allocations of the Albemarle County Police Department in order to improve efficiency and effectiveness of local law enforcement services and to promote the community policing philosophy of the County in a way which advances shared responsibility and interdependence between the community and the Police Department. I. Duties of the PDCAC Upon request by the Board of Supervisors, the County Executive, or the Chief of Police, or in response to a citizen complaint, the PDCAC shall undertake the following reviews and provide recommendations to the Chief of Police: · Review of Albemarle County Police Department (ACPD) policies, programs, procedures and practices. (i.e., community policing, crime fighting initiatives, traffic enforcement, monitoring of police vehicle videos, interrogation and interview procedures, etc...) · Review of ACPD Rules and Regulations and General Orders. · Review of ACPD budget and funding priorities. · Review of the level of staffing of the ACPD and how staffing is allocated. II. Responsibilities of the Chief of Police · The Chief of Police will ensure ACPD cooperation with the PDCAC in all appropriate inquires and studies. · The Chief of Police will review the recommendations of the PDCAC and will respond to the PDCAC, verbally or in writing, to address the ACPD's recommendations. III. COP1position of the PDCAC ~ · The Board of Supervisors shall appoint four (4) citizen members to the PDCAC. They shall be selected on the basis of their professional experience, educational background, and history of community service. · A Board of Supervisors member will serve as an ex-officio, non-voting member of the PDCAC and serve as liaison between the PDCAC and the Board of Supervisors. 1 County of Albemarle Office of Board of County Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE (Please type or print.) (~ ""'- v..,-~H -e.. ~ Home Phone it )~.- '1 ì.3 - L l7t,.. Email Address Employer uvA µ,'p (Ì"\ l \. ~ u L Y \) "J . 6l,(~J Phone 4 Y-( - 9:;¿Lf - (,4 ç c, Magisterial District in which your home residence is located Business Address Co.J·\".~bdl H ~ t I ,.5c~..()t ö-t A-rcL'.t r.-:Juv "'- po tbt:.i<- '¥or:,/d-;).) cl.~I--I"\\<5J~lI~,VA ';<';<71;:,'7 Occupation/Title ~;G\\ 'f",J6S~) 45ScL>~~ Y~~N Date of Employment l J ICJ.?9s l Years Resident in Albemarle County ~ " Spouse's Name})I'a.rÞ-s:L ~¡..,,;Jl R' tù: U-t c2ç{c ù/ Number of Children '5 a&\Jlt ~~ l l "', ~ ~ ~ ìðNC\. Q.IJjv: g, C~'-N~ r . r C h.0V'LL, c{ 0d/ S(l...0~",v t ~ ~>c~!rl . IrU . .J c . 'M; l~ ~ ì ol.J \,J «. (~L\ Public, Civic and Charitable Office and/or Other Activities or Interests 'V~hl'\)~':- L~0..Ji-~J,.) ~I'V\-e l...(Lv...}J \>\ (LtAJA-" JVCj 14 SSL\c.., (l\,~ 1'-' ReasonCs.) for Wishing to Serve on this Board/Commission/Committee ì Mi\:)d otN<.....~. A ü ~""'b(.1L...;¡ ll:) uS ~ -\Ie Ú ç _ C~V1-.. JbJl, ~N't- oi- 6\J~·"-\.l C '-'c tJi- J+~¿¡{~1 y.. The info ti oed on this /iéaú will be released to the public upon request. Previous Residence ~V'6 L...\k.. (5<\M.u~l IMI r ¡,.. Education ÇDegrees and Graduation Dates) Q)0, 11/30/b'f Date / I ',,-- Return to: Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 FAX: (804) 296-5800 PLEASE RESTRICT ANY ATTACHMENTS TO ONE PAGE A. Bruce Dotson Application for Housing Committee Supplemental Information · One of my most abiding concerns is growth management. A well known writer on this topic described affordable housing as the "conscience of growth management". I would like to match and balance my concern for managing growth with my concern for addressing the housing needs of the many groups who face housing difficulties. I seek to do this by serving on the Housing Committee. · I served four years on the County Planning Commission. While on the Commission, we approved the Esmont/Porters site near Yancey School. I must admit that this décision troubled me because it did not meet a literal interpretation of the County's rural area protection goals yet it was a worthy project and important ITom an affordable housing standpoint. This experience, along with my roadside observations over the years that a significant amount of rural housing is in fact affordable, convinces me of the need to consider a wide range of approaches to housing affordability, in the designated growth and even the rural areas. A study I conducted last fall showed that owner occupied housing priced at or below $100,000 is found in almost equal amounts in the city, the urban ring/designated growth area around the city, and the rural area. What amount and type of affordable housing is appropriate in each of these areas, as well as elsewhere in the region, is a topic and program area I would like to address if on the Housing Committee. In addition to housing affordable to the neediest families, I am also concerned with workforce housing and its availability. Many families who are not in poverty, nonetheless, find their housing choices limited. On the Housing Committee I would pursue this full spectrum of housing needs and seek ways to do so in the context of county development policies. · Many years ago I chaired a county committee, the LURC or Land Use Regulation Committee, that proposed a variety of means to streamline and better organize the county's development review departments. The committee consisted of developers, design professionals and staff. I would welcome the opportunity to again address, as a member of the Housing Committee, the topic of regulatory streamlining. · I served on the DISC Committee and recall Supervisor Charles Martin frequently saying that he could not support any policy that made it difficult for families to find affordable housing. That attitude continues to impress me as a challenge. I would like to serve on the Housing Committee and to have the opportunity to address Martin's challenge in this #1 rated community. Having served two terms on the Fiscal Impact Committee I also see the fiscal dimension of housing, another key layer of complexity in addressing the problem. · At my church, I co-chair our Outreach Commission that undertakes a variety of activities to aid needy families. At our Food Closet the day before Thanksgiving, I passed out two day's food, plus holiday turkeys and hams, to twenty-nine needy drop-in households. I briefly got to see how things like health setbacks, unexpected loss of work, age and other factors can put people in situations where choices have to be made between using resources for housing, food, utilities, medicine etc. Another twenty families have been "adopted" by our Commission for food at major holidays and gifts for the children at Christmas. I have delivered this food and these gifts to their homes and have seen what these household's material life is like. I have also seen households that live in clearly substandard housing, yet they are proud to be property owners and have their own standards of adequacy and self-respect. My Commission provides funding to Habitat for Humanity for office operations and, along with other Episcopal churches in the region, is about to sponsor the construction of a house. As a planner though, I am interested in policy and program level interventions and believe that by serving on the Housing Committee I might be able to address housing needs more broadly. · ß Ella Carey Page 1 of2 From: SteveTaylor@ReaIEstateiii.com Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 9:24 AM To: ecarey@albemarle.org Cc: dmullins@albemarle.org Subject: Board/Commission/Committee Application Date of this Application: Board/Commission/ Committee Applied for: Magisterial District: Applicant Name: Address: Home Telephone: Email Address: Employer: Business Address: Work Telephone: Occupation/Title: Date of Employment: Years Resident in Albemarle County: Previous Residence: Spouse: Number of Children: Education: Memberships: 11/21/2004 Application Information 11/21/2004 Housing Committee Rio Steve Taylor 1323 Breckenridge Court Charlottesville, VA 22901 (434) 978-1890 Steve T ay lor@RealEstateiii.-ºom Real Estate III 1045 Carrington Place Charlottesville, VA 22901 (434) 817-6055 REALTOR 01/2004 3 Washington, DC April 2 RB.A.-Information Processing, The George Washington University, May, 1990 Company of Friends, VPTC volunteer, Neon Guild, National Intercollegiate Soccer Officials Association United States Soccer Federation Also currently serve on the Dunlora Architectural Review Board - ---~- -..-. _._-~-_.~_.,-_._..._~,...._--~-- Page 2 of2 J Interests: Currently serve on the Dunlora Architectural Review Board Soccer Referee with Major League Soccer Reason to Serve: I am always looking for ways to become more involved with the community and improve my knowledge of the local real estate scene. SIGNATURE REQUIRED: Steve Taylor DATE SIGNED: 11/21/2004 Ella Carey Page 1 of2 From: rfw7@cornell.edu Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 11 :04 AM To: ecarey@albemarle.org Cc: dmullins@albemarle.org Subject: Board/Commission/Committee Application Date of this Application: Board/Commission/ Committee Applied for: Magisterial District: Applicant Name: Address: Home Telephone: Email Address: Employer: Business Address: Work Telephone: Occupation/Title: Date of Employment: Years Resident in Albemarle County: Previous Residence: Spouse: Number of Children: Education: Memberships: 11/17/2004 Application Information 11/17/2004 Housing Committee Rivanna Reginald Woods 4822 Barn Field Drive PO Box 490 Keswick, VA 22947 (434) 295-2888 rfw7@corneltedu 08 Saddle River, NJ Katharine 03 Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering, Cornell University, 1961 Master of Engineering, Cornell University, 1962 Master of Busines Administration, Cornell University, 1963 Director and Shareholder, Benedetto Gartland Group, New York, investment banking Page 2 of2 Director and Shareholder, Chairman of the Audit Committee, The Greenleaf Company, New Jersey, commercial construction for large corporations Director, DeHayes Consulting Group, California, management consulting to the financial services industry Vestry, Senior Warden, Trustee of Grace Episcopal Church, Cismont Advisory Board, Glenmore Country Club Member, Keswick Hunt Club Member, Keswick Club Interests: Director, Executive Committee, Development Committee, Nominating Committee, Habitat for Humanity of Greater Charlottesville Co-Founder, Director, Keswick Community Foundation (sponsor of the Keswick Horse Show) Reason to Serve: I have a strong interest in supporting County efforts to provide affordable housing opportunities for low and middle income citizens. I believe that maximizing such opportunities is essential to preserving and enhancing a healthy, stable, and balanced community for the benefit of all residents. SIGNATURE REQUIRED: Reginald Woods DATE SIGNED: 11/17/2004 Ella Carey Page 1 of2 -..--.-..--..---~--...---------.--.-----.-.---.--..-.-~--"------'-----'----'- -----_.,~.~- -_._----,......_.~---_._----_.~-~-------_._-~---- From: janacrutch@aol.com Sent: Friday, December 03,20043:25 PM To: ecarey@albemarle.org Cc: dmullins@albemarle.org Subject: Board/Commission/Committee Application Date of this Application: Board/Commission/ Committee Applied for: Magisterial District: Application Information 12/03/2004 Housing Committee Rio -.-.---..-..--...- _.__._._-----_.._._--_._._----_._.~ --_._._--_._--~--.__._,_._-_._-----_.__.._._._- .-- .---..----.-.---.-----.....-.-----.-------------------------------_._--~----------_.~----_.- Applicant Name: Address: Home Telephone: Email Address: Jana Crutchfield 2406 Northfield Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 (434) 981-3350 j anacrutch@aol.com -------_...__._--_._--_..__..._---_._-_._--_._~+-~-_..------..-----...--------------------.-------------------------- Employer: Business Address: Work Telephone: Occupation/Title: Date of Employment: Not Working Outside the Home ----"--,-,----, --.- --_.._...~---~-~._._---_.__._.~_._~._--_..__._-_._~--~-~._."._._..__._-~.._..._-_.- -------,,--_.._----_.~-- _._----_._---------~---._--~--~--_._-~--_...._.__._-~._-----...-...-------------"'., _....__..._._------~_._--,.._----_._-- Years Resident in Albemarle County: Previous Residence: Spouse: Number of Children: ----..-.-. Education: Memberships: Interests: Reason to Serve: SIGNATURE REQUIRED: 12/3/2004 40 -_._-_.__..._-~-'----------------_._---_._-------~~- MBA, Darden School BA, Economics, UV A -----..--..------------.------ -..-.---.----.--.--...------------. -_._--_._----~_._--_._.__.__.__._---_._-------------_._---_._._-_._.__._----~._,,_._,--------_..._.----- Word of Faith Habitat Store of Habitat for Humanity, Steering Committee Thanksgiving Day Festival, Advisor Board Festival -_._-'--~---_.~-_..-.._---------------_._---.,------_. to serve in an area in which I have an interest -- ----..-.-----------.------..---------" Page 2 of2 lana Crutchfield DATE SIGNED: 12/3/2004 Ella Carey Page 1 of2 From: itscarmelle@hotmail.com Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 11 :26 AM To: ecarey@albemarle.org Cc: dmullins@albemarle.org Subject: Board/Commission/Committee Application Date of this Application: Board/Commission/ Committee Applied for: Magisterial District: Applicant Name: Address: Home Telephone: Email Address: Employer: Business Address: Work Telephone: Occupation/Title: Date of Employment: Years Resident in Albemarle County: Previous Residence: Spouse: Number of Children: Education: Memberships: Interests: Reason to Serve: 12/20/2004 Application Information 12/0112004 Housing Committee Rio Cannelle Hontz 2649 D Barracks Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22091 (434) 465-1526 itscann~l1e@hotP1ail.cQm First Stone Counseling Center 1149 Rose Hill Dr Charlottesville, VA 22903 (434) 923-3637 Office manager 10/2003 1 1112 B River Ct. Charlottesville VA 22901 Robert Hontz o High School 1996 Completed a teaching program in Nottingham, England 2001 Member and Sunday School Teacher at Spring Hill Baptist Church Member of Central Virginia Family Forum To offer any assistance I can give to help ensure affordable housing for community members. I am aware of the need for this, especially for single mothers in our area to get involved locally -to be an infonned and contributing member of the Page 2 of2 community SIGNATURE REQUIRED: Cannelle Hontz DATE SIGNED: 12/2012004 Ella Carey From: natalie@firm-design.com Sent: Tuesday, December 21,20049:51 AM To: ecarey@albemarle.org Cc: dmullins@albemarle.org Subject: Board/Commission/Committee Application Date of this Application: Board/Commission/ Committee Applied for: Magisterial District: Applicant Name: Address: Home Telephone: Email Address: Employer: Business Address: Work Telephone: Occupation/Title: Date of Employment: Years Resident in Albemarle County: Previous Residence: Spouse: Number of Children: Education: Memberships: Interests: 12/21/2004 Application Information 12/21/2004 Housing Committee I Pc, I) II C Rivanna ,'\ ~. (' í ) 1-. t) (/ I 1 ¿.. ¡ Natalie Reed 1745 Verona Drive Charlottesville, VA 22911 (434) 295-2561 nataJie@firm:-design.çQill Troutman Sanders 1111 East Main Street Richmond, VA 23219 (804) 697-1200 Attorney 01/2005 01 Silver Spring, Maryland David 02 University of Kentucky, BA in Communications, 1991 Georgetown University Law Center, JD, 1997 Member of Broadus Memorial Baptist Church Commercial Real Estate Women American Bar Association Page 1 of2 !~ (' ( I. I~" J /fL''III'J Page 2 of2 Virginia Bar Association Reason to Serve: As a commercial real estate attorney in the Metropolitan DC area for 7 years, I have been exposed to and have worked with housing programs in DC and several couinties in Maryland and Virginia. I think providing affordable housing, while not discouraging housing developers is a very important and a very hard task. I would like to be involved in striking this balance in Albemarle County. I am also interested in the Public Recreational Facilities committee. I deal with plats and easements in my job on a day to day basis. SIGNATURE REQUIRED: Natalie Reed DATE SIGNED: 12/21/2004 Ella Carey From: mfm4k@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 6:52 PM To: ecarey@albemarle.org Cc: dmullins@albemarle.org Subject: Board/Commission/Committee Application Date of this Application: Board/Commission/ Committee Applied for: Magisterial District: Applicant Name: Address: Home Telephone: Email Address: Employer: Business Address: Work Telephone: Occupation/Title: Date of Employment: Years Resident in Albemarle County: Previous Residence: Spouse: Number of Children: Education: Memberships: Interests: Reason to Serve: 12/1/2004 PI¿'(nf ¿19/~v e "c '" ý 9$1- ¿vv</ 1'10) 951. ¿30 Application Information 11/30/2004 Public Defenders Office Citizens Advisory Committee Samuel Miller Marilyn Minrath 565 Loblolly Lane Charlottesville, V A 22903 (434) 295-8839 mfm4k®-ao1.com Marilyn F. Minrath, Ph.D., M.S.N 505 Faulconer Drive Suite 2D Charlottesville, VA 22903 (434) 296-6462 Clinical Psychologist 08/1990 18 614 Big Oak Road Charlottesville, Va Rafael Triana 2 .....,-'"-,-~.._._--_..~_........ Page I of2 Doctor of Philosophy, University of North Carolina at Chapel HIll 1989 Masters pf Science in Nursing, University of Virginia 1976 St Thomas Aquinas Church Ronald MacDonald House Board of Directors 1996 to 2002 Providing community service in an area in which I have professional expertise as a · ~ Forensic Psychologist. SIGNATURE REQUIRED: Marilyn Minrath DATE SIGNED: 12/1/2004 Page 2 of2 Ella Carey Page 1 of2 From: natalie@firm-design.com Sent: Tuesday, December 21,20049:51 AM To: ecarey@albemarle.org Cc: dmullins@albemarle.org Subject: Board/Commission/Committee Application Date of this Application: Board/Commission/ Committee Applied for: Magisterial District: Application Information 12/21/2004 Housing Committee I PlÆ íJ J I L Rivanna 1- A I h ¿J- r~" . ,1 ffv#'~j 7 , o oft r i k i> dn ~ / Applicant Name: Address: Home Telephone: Email Address: Natalie Reed 1745 Verona Drive Charlottesville, VA 22911 (434) 295-2561 natalie@finn-design.com Employer: Business Address: Work Telephone: Occupation/Title: Date of Employment: Troutman Sanders 1111 East Main Street Richmond, VA 23219 (804) 697-1200 Attorney 01/2005 Years Resident in Albemarle County: Previous Residence: Spouse: Number of Children: 01 Silver Spring, Maryland David 02 Education: University of Kentucky, BA in Communications, 1991 Memberships: Interests: 12/21/2004 Georgetown University Law Center, JD, 1997 Member of Broadus Memorial Baptist Church Commercial Real Estate Women American Bar Association Page 2 of2 Virginia Bar Association Reason to Serve: As a commercial real estate attorney in the Metropolitan DC area for 7 years, I have been exposed to and have worked with housing programs in DC and several couinties in Maryland and Virginia. I think providing affordable housing, while not discouraging housing developers is a very important and a very hard task. I would like to be involved in striking this balance in Albemarle County. I am also interested in the Public Recreational Facilities committee. I deal with plats and easements in my job on a day to day basis. SIGNATURE REQUIRED: Natalie Reed DATE SIGNED: 12/21/2004 · (" I.. David P. Bowerman Rio Kenneth C. Boyd Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Seottsville David C. Wyant White Hall December 7, 2004 Clarence W. Roberts 3010 Colonial Drive Charlottesville, VA 22911 Dear Mr. Roberts: This letter will confirm your interview with the Board of Supervisors at 12:30 p.m., Wednesday, January 5, 2005, for a vacancy on the Police Department Citizens Advisory Cornmittee. The interview will last approximately ten minutes, and will be held in the Conference Room on the fourth floor of the Albemarle County Office Building. I am also enclosing a copy of the bylaws. Please feel free to contact me at (434) 296-5843 should you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, #. ~?¿J Debi Moyers Senior Deputy Clerk Enclosure * Printed on recycled paper · " Clarence W. Roberts 3010 Colonial Drive Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 ( /1....,' vii flll~ (434) 973-2442 E-mail: cwroberts222@wmconnect.com Ò,'.s!-. ) OBJECTIVE I voluntarily and without compensation seek to serve the citizens of Albemarle County on the Albemarle Police Citizens Advisory Committee. SUMMARY I served more than eight years as Chairman of the Board and Commissioner on the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, a public safety agency of the Commonwealth of Virginia. I am a retired law enforcement officer having served more than thirty-seven years as an investigator, inspector, special agent and law enforcement commissioner. My management duties included organization, budget, professional standards, police officer's code of conduct and all other areas of the agency. I managed their $12 million law enforcement division coupled with a $500 million enterprise agency with about 2,200 employees. My service included the management of fourteen special agents that were first responders to the pentagon on 9/11. I know what it means to manage a police officer involved in a shoot-out and the suspect being killed. I believe my law enforcement experience coupled with my business back ground make for an unusual set of qualifications to serve on the Albemarle Police Department Citizen's Advisory Committee. EMPLOYMENT July 1, 2002 - Present - Retired June 6, 1998 - July 1,2002 - Chairman of the Board, Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board - Appointed by Governor James S. Gilmore, III - Richmond February, 1994 - June 6, 1998 - Commissioner, Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board - Appointed by Governor George Allen - Richmond February, 1997 - June 6, 1998 - Chairman Pro Tempore and Acting Agency Head - Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board 1984 - 1994 - Special Agent - Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board - Charlottesville 1969 - 1984 - Inspector - Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board - Charlottesville 1967 - 1969 - Investigator - Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board - Charlottesville MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE · As Chairman of the Board, I was responsible to the Governor, the Virginia General Assembly and the citizens of Virginia for the overall operations of this $500 million enterprise agency · Responsible to the citizens of Virginia for maintaining the highest degree of integrity in Virginia's system of alcoholic beverage control and provide excellence in public service to our internal and external customers · Provide executive level management for the agency's 200 member law enforcement division with special agents empowered with full police powers · Managed processes to fully automate the agency, its 280 stores and nine regional offices · Managed and implemented recommendations of a "best practices" study of the agency · Responsible for the safety of the citizens of Virginia's as related to a retail network of265 ABC stores with annual sales over $500 million. . · Preside over public hearings during the regulatory process · Preside over licensee disciplinary and application hearings at the appellate level before the Board · Applied knowledge of state government and Virginia's legislative process to determine the impact oflegislation on the agency, its licensees and the citizens of the Commonwealth · Provide positive interaction with diverse constituency groups including the offices of the Governor, Secretary of Public Safety, Attorney General, General Assembly members government officials and the general public · Accountable for administrative policy development, interpretation and implementation. ... ~" David P Bowerman Rio Kenneth C. Boyd Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Scottsville David C. Wyant White Hall December 8, 2004 Stephen Smith 1226 Broad Axe Road Charlottesville, VA 22903 Dear Mr. Smith: This letter will confirm your interview with the Board of Supervisors at 12:40 p.m., Wednesday, January 5, 2005, for a vacancy on the Police Department Citizens Advisory Committee. The interview will last approximately ten minutes, and will be held in the Conference Room on the fourth floor of the Albemarle County Office Building. I am also enclosing a copy of the bylaws. Please feel free to contact me at (434) 296-5843 should you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, {&. ~7~4 Debi Moyers Senior Deputy Clerk Enclosure * Printed on recycled paper · - Ella Carey From: sfs3h@virginia.edu Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 12:14 PM To: ecarey@albemarle.org Cc: dmullins@albemarle.org Subject: Board/Commission/Committee Application Date of this Application: Board/Commission/ Committee Applied for: Magisterial District: Applicant Name: Address: Home Telephone: Email Address: Employer: Business Address: Work Telephone: Occupation/Title: Date of Employment: Years Resident in Albemarle County: Previous Residence: Spouse: Number of Children: Education: Memberships: 10/14/2004 Application Information 10/14/2004 Police Department Citizen Advisory Committee Samuel Miller Stephen Smith 1226 Broad Axe Road Charlottesville, VA 22903 (434) 923-8844 sfs3h@virginia.edJ.! University of Virginia School of Law 580 Massie Road Charlottesville, VA 22903 (434) 924-3911 Associate Professor of Law 07/2000 08 Fairfax County, V A Lora N. Gallagher-Smith 05 JD 1992, University of Virginia School of Law BA 1988, History and Philosophy, Dartmouth College member in good standing, Virginia State Bar (1995-present) fonner law clerk, U.S. Supreme Court (1993-94) Albemarle County Rotary Club Page 1 of2 _.'--. ..-~.- ------ .. - Education Honors Clerkships Legal Employment STEPHEN F. SMITH 1226 Broad Axe Road Charlottesville, VA 22903 (434) 924-3911 (w) sfs3h@virginia.edu University of Virginia School of Law Charlottesville, VA J.D. 1992. Member, Order of the Coif. Virginia Law Review--selected on basis of grades and anonymous writing competition. Articles Editor, Virginia Law Review. Member, The Raven Society (the University of Virginia honors society). Dartmouth College Hanover, N.H. B.A. History and Philosophy (1988). Freshman Football Team Elected Vice President and Social Chairman, Sigma Nu Fraternity Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem-ecclesiastical honor conferred by the Vatican. 2002 "Best Professor" Award-selected through student survey. Edward Coke Appellate Inn of Court. Margaret G. Hyde Award-for most outstanding member oflaw school class. Rosenbloom Award-for outstanding academic contributions to Law School. "Proficient Writer" Award, Dartmouth Writing and Composition Center. Four-Year Air Force ROTC Scholarship. Headmaster's Award-for outstanding personal traits and values. Roper Scholarship--for outstanding academic performance. Supreme Court of the United States October Term 1993 Law Clerk Served as law clerk to the Honorable Clarence Thomas. U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Law Clerk Served as law clerk to the Honorable David B. Sentelle. 1992 Term University of Virginia School of Law June 2000-present Associate Professor Teaching Criminal Law, Federal Criminal Law, Criminal Adjudication, and Appellate Advocacy. Areas of research include criminal law and procedure. U.S. House of Representatives July 2000-Feb. 2001 Judicial Review Commission on Foreign Asset Control Special Counsel Advised Commission and Staff on constitutional issues implicated by the designation and blocking processes of the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Act and other federal foreign asset controlprogr~. County of Albemacle Office of Board of County Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE (Please type or print.) Board/Commission/Committee r'vl /'-c "et't:'~f"ßr't?"'¡¡Q / ¡::-~(! i/,I, I' d ..9 v ¿In',T Ý Applicant's Name ~D,^V\ Je\(o,~rl?---' ~w(!3 L\~~\(\Home Phone '-13'-1 . 2q (.,- Ql\- S~ Email Address ~ : Full Home Add~ '3 "2- \ A" \-\ ,I \, Email Address <3;-Aa.lc es.U\ lie 1ft., 2. LC{ 0 I Magisterial District in which your home residence is located Employer ~e+\Q€à - Q.\l.\ 7(j\.ce C.\..~1 197/- /(i94 ~'M \r\e \ ~ì ; \ \eJ' Phone Business Address Occupation/Title '* 'í{; lrCQ C~L~t ~ '~,~ Date of Employment \C:('l ~ - )<i ~ 4 Years Resident in Albemarle County L. \Q.. -\,'A.e.. \qZs - 7.."e\.~}r Spouse's Name ~'t\S.\AY¡c...",- ~ '~'v4~' E)Cc<')' \""" '\e~Q':. ,v. HQ\M,~,Co\\~,~, V'S ~~~ Q...~..~VIA~,^\> . Previous Residence Q,<,~v..\"~c\ I\)' Lf?C., c...\.c. .) l Number of Children "3> \ I Education (Deg¡:ees and Graduation Dates) Öa~< \qloo \ \T)IC\"'~~ S\'Q~ ""'\I"'" G.I\>~ L:AV\"-',^,- . \)),c.k. '-~ I L~ \n.Q."'-lV>~~ '"tt\c7 J ~~~'^~ ~~~Y\ "'S~. ~~ h c.\...w"\,Ç.,"'-. t. '. (it! , ~<:ô.~, C~¡ c;Vo^ f' ~(_. \-WW\Q...., Cc,·.'V\W'I.'s,>\~'V\Q..i' , "h~~,c.:... \).- ?:.a - Olt Date Return to: Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 FAX: (804) 296-5800 PLEASE RESTRICT ANY ATTACHMENTS TO ONE PAGE · · · COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 - , Phone (434) 296-5823 Fax (434) 972-4126 December 10, 2004 Collier, Ken Hughes, Good, O'Leary & Ryan, Inc. 6 Executive Park Drive, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30329 RE: SP 2004-00040 Mount Fair Farm (Sign #73 & 95; Tax Map 26, Parcel 33 Dear Mr. Collier: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on December 7,2004, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. With the exception of all changes that would be required in order to comply with the conditions listed herein, the site shall be developed in general accord with the plans entitled, "Mount Fair; Albemarle County, Virginia; MacFarlane Residence; Whitehall Virginia," dated revised 11/19/04. 2. Approval and bonding of an erosion and sediment control plan. 3. Approval and bonding of a mitigation plan for buffer disturbance. 4. Federal and state agency approval for stream and wetland disturbances. 5. FEMA approval of a rnap revision (LOMR or LOMA). Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on January 5, 2005. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date. If you have any questions or comments regarding the above-noted action, please do not hesitate to contac m Senior Planner Zoning and Current Development Division Cc: Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey Steve Allshouse Ella Carey Macfarlane, Dudley Wood STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Yadira Amarante December 7, 2004 January 5, 2004 SP-2004-040 Mount Fair Farm THIS IS AN UPDATE TO THE STAFF REPORT PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON OCTOBER 26, 2004. Previously staff had not been able to recommend approval of the request for the following reasons: 1. The applicant has not provided the County with enough information to analyze the impacts to public health, safety and general welfare in terms of post-construction floodplain levels. Since the October meeting the applicant has subrnitted information to engineering staff detailing the hydrology, and revising the plan to better delineate buffer areas, and provide sketch plans for the bridge crossings. The applicant has indicated that further information is forthcoming with regard to the hydraulic computations evaluating flood level impacts at the driveway crossings and the dam. Considering the applicant's wish to stay on the current schedule, and the fact that this is an area of FEMA approximated floodplain, for which the applicant is providing more information than was available to FEMA, staff is recommending that the applicant send this information to FEMA and obtain a rnap revision. With a FEMA map revision, the official flood levels become the new flood levels, and the County Ordinance requirement for no increase in the flood levels is unquestionably met. 2. The location of the driveway and extent of buffer disturbance do not appear necessary for reasonable use of the parcel as a horse farm. 3. The applicant has not provided an alternate design to eliminate unnecessary stream buffer disturbance. 4. The Water Protection Ordinance disallows unnecessary stream buffer disturbance. At the October rneeting the applicant had appealed the Water Protection Ordinance Program Authority's decision not to allow stream buffer disturbance to the Board of Supervisors. Upon further review, staff determined that the Water Protection Ordinance is not applicable to agricultural uses and so the appeal was not necessary. Therefore the disturbances of the stream buffers shown on the applicant's plans can be approved as is, but staff recommends that conditions of approval include the review and approval of an erosion and sediment control plan and a stream buffer mitigation plan. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of SP-2004-040 with the following conditions: 1. With the exception of all changes that would be required in order to comply with the conditions listed herein, the site shall be developed in general accord with the plans entitled, "Mount Fair; Albemarle County, Virginia; MacFarlane Residence; Whitehall Virginia," dated revised 11/19/04. 2. Approval and bonding of an erosion and sediment control plan. 3. Approval and bonding of a mitigation plan for buffer disturbance. 4. Federal and state agency approval for stream and wetland disturbances. 5. FEMA approval of a map revision (LOMR or LOMA). 1 1... · · · COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5823 November 3, 2004 Ken Collier Hughes, Good, O'Leary & Ryan, Inc. 6 Executive Park Drive, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30329 RE: SP-2004-00040 Mount Fair Farm (Sign #73 & 95); Tax Map 26, Parcel 33 Dear Mr. Collier: Fax (434) 972-4126 The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on October 26, 2004, unanimously deferred the above-noted petition. Therefore, this item has been rescheduled for public hearing as follows: ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - Tuesday, December 7, 2004 ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS - Wednesday, January 5, 2005 The Albemarle County Planning Commission will meet at 6:00 p.m., Meeting Room #241, Second Floor, County Office Building, 401 Mcintire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors meeting begins at 9:00 a.m. You will receive a copy of the staff report and tentative agenda one week prior to the Planning Commission meeting. YOU OR YOUR REPRESENTATIVE MUST BE PRESENT AT BOTH OF THESE MEETINGS. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Cc: Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey :3 STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Yadira Amarante October 26, 2004 December 8, 2004 SP-2004-040 Mount Fair Farm Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is requesting approval to construct a dam, for a 1.2 acre pond, and driveway, to provide access to pastures, for the operation of a horse breeding establishment. The driveway will loop from a new entrance on Slam Gate Road [SR #673] to a new entrance on Browns Gap Turnpike. This driveway is proposed to cross the floodplain of a tributary of Doyle's River in two locations. The dam, with a footbridge, and the pond are also proposed in the tributary floodplains. One new entrance on Browns Gap Turnpike [SR #810) is proposed in the floodplain of Doyle's River. Total elements proposed to be constructed in the Flood Hazard Overlay District are: · Culvert for the driveway · Two bridges for the driveway · Dam with a footbridge · Excavation for the pond · Entrance location on SR 810 The applicant contends that the driveway, two entrance locations and pond are necessary in order to run the fann and to transport animals and fann equipment throughout the property, (Attachments A, B & C). Although not shown on the submitted plans, information gathered on a field visit suggests that an existing gravel driveway, located wholly in the floodplain, will be removed in order to accommodate the proposed changes. Petition: Request for a special use permit to: (1) allow the construction of a dam and pond in accordance with Section 30.3.05.2.1.1 of the Zoning Ordinance which allows for the construction of a dam for water supply; (2) Section 30.3.05.2.1.2 of the Zoning Ordinance which allows for the construction of bridges and culverts; and (3) Section 30.3.05.2.2.3 of the Zoning Ordinance which allows for fill in the floodplain. The property, described as Tax Map 26 Parcel 33, contains 75.3 acres and is zoned RA (Rural Areas) and FH (Flood Hazard Overlay District). It is located at the northwest comer of the intersection of Browns Gap Turnpike [SR #810] and Slam Gate Road [SR #673]. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property for Rural Area uses in Rural Area 1, (Attachment A). Plannin!! and Zonin!! Historv: 1. SUB 95-076 Mount Fair Estates Preliminary Subdivision Plat: On 9/19/95 the Planning Commission re-approved an expired preliminary plat for a Rural Preservation Development involving several parcels in which subject parcel would have been the preservation tract. The development never transpired. 2. SP 01-052 John Decarlo: On 2/20/02 the Board of Supervisors granted a special use permit for a driveway and culvert off of Slam Gate Road in the floodplain of a tributary of Doyle's River in 1 4 order to abate a zoning violation. The plan submitted by the applicant for review ofthe current · application does not show this driveway or culvert. Character of the Area: The property under review is a mixture of pastures and woodlands. Trees are mostly deciduous. There are currently no dwellings and one fann structure on the site. There is an existing driveway off of Slam Gate Road which provides access to subject parcel and the Mount Fair estate on Tax Map 26, Parcel 33F. The property is bisected by two perennial streams and their associated flood plains. The streams are tributaries of Doyle's River. There are areas of steep slopes but they are limited to wooded areas adjacent to the streams. The entire development is located within the South Fork Rivanna Watershed, a water supply protection area for the South Fork Rivanna River Reservoir. Surrounding properties exhibit similar natural characteristics with similar uses as what is proposed. Staff noticed several bridge and culvert crossings across the Doyles River in this area. RECOMMENDATION: Staffhas reviewed the proposal for conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and with Zoning Ordinance Sections 31.2.4.1, 30.3.5.2.1.1, 30.3.05.2.1.2, and 30.3.05.2.2.3 and recommends denial of the special use pennit. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STAFF COMMENT: · The applicant proposes to construct a new gravel driveway which extends from Slam Gate Road to Browns Gap Turnpike and crosses the floodplain twice. The proposed new entrance at Browns Gap Turnpike is located in the floodplain of the Doyles River. The plan submitted by the applicant does not show floodplain at this location. The applicant is also proposing to construct a dam with footbridge and pond in the flood plain, (see Attachment C). The applicant has stated that the pond will be used for potential fire suppression, irrigation, and horse watering. The applicant does not show the location of a dry hydrant on the pond. It is staff s opinion that impacts to the flood plain and stream buffers can be minimized by allowing just one stream crossing to access most of the property. The rest of the property could probably be accessed with a second entrance off of Slam Gate Road without having to impact the stream buffers or flood plain which exists along the entire frontage of this property along Browns Gap Turnpike. The applicant has not offered an alternate driveway location/design which might minimize or eliminate most of the stream buffer or floodplain disturbance. Both the Open Space Plan and Chapter 2 of the Comprehensive Plan, entitled Natural Resources and Cultural Assets, provide staff with guidance for managing the County's natural, scenic and historic resources, and for the preservation and conservation of those resources in order to protect the environment for future use. · 2 '5 Natural Resources: The Open Space Plan Concept Map identifies Doyle's River and its tributaries at this location as a "major stream valley," a significant natural resource which should be left in an undisturbed natural condition and unoccupied by building lots, structures, streets, or parking lots. This recommendation in the Open Space Plan serves various Comprehensive Plan objectives such as protection of natural, scenic, and historic resources, including agricultural and forestal lands, and groundwater and surface water resources. While reviewing this proposal against the Water Protection Ordinance (WPO), (the WPO offers protection of these natural resource areas, especially in a water supply watershed, through the mandatory implementation and protection of stream buffers), the program authority of the WPO (in this case engineering staff) concluded that he would not authorize the proposed stream buffer disturbances for the new entrance on Browns Gap Turnpike or the driveway. Certain types of development may be allowed, and with approval of a buffer mitigation plan are allowed in the stream buffer by the program authority. However, in this case, the program authority has not authorized the stream buffer disturbances proposed as shown, citing Section 17.321.5 of the WPO. This section states that if the stream buffer disturbance is for the construction of a driveway or roadway, the authority must determine if the regulations "would prohibit reasonable access to a portion of the lot which is necessary for the owner to have a reasonable use of the lot. . ." The program authority has determined that the owner would have reasonable use of the lot without disturbing the stream buffers as proposed. Without this authorization, the project cannot be approved as proposed. If this special permit is recommended for approval by the Planning Commission, the applicant will still have to appeal the program authority's decision to the Board of Supervisors when this application goes before them in December. In terms of impacts to the floodplain and flood levels, Section 30.3.06.1.2 of the Zoning Ordinance states that the county engineer (in this case engineering staff) can only approve a landfill permit if the fill is "designed and constructed to minimize obstruction to and effect upon the flow of water. . ." It is the opinion of engineering staff that the dam located in the stream channel would affect the flood carrying capacity of the watercourse and, therefore, a landfill permit is not recommended for the dam. The subject parcel is also designated as Fannland on the Open Space Concept Map. The proposed use as a horse breeding establishment includes pastures for grazing and for the production of hay which are legitimate, viable and necessary Rural Area uses. The Comprehensive Plan specifically promotes the continuation of viable agricultural and forestal industries in the Rural Areas but not at the expense of unwise design. Historic Resources: Tax Map 26, Parcel33F is the location of Mount Fair, on the Virginia Landmark Register and the National Register of Historic Places. As a fann, Mount Fair has not been operational for several years. From the 1940's to 2001 it was used to raise cows, horses, goats, sheep and chickens. The current owner intends to restore the 3.00 acre home site and raise horses on the adjacent 75.3 acre fann. On July 27,2004 the Virginia Department of Historic Resources conducted very limited archaeological tests of the property to determine if archaeological resources were present. Based on the results ofthese 3 (p tests, the Department detennined that the proposed development would have no adverse impact. · SPECIAL USE PERMIT STAFF COMMENT: Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use pennits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adiacent property. Staff has not received adequate information to assess whether the proposed fill in the floodplain or the dam would raise the flood levels which may affect adjacent properties. It is likely that this can be accomplished depending on the placement of the bridge and dam away from adjacent property lines. However, without information to verify the impacts, staff cannot make a positive finding that this proposal will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property. That the character of the district will not be changed thereby. The preservation of the agricultural and forestal lands and activities, and conservation of the natural, scenic and historic resources are listed as key purposes of the Rural Areas zoning district. Uses allowed by right in the district are either residential, or related to agricultural and forestal activities. The proposed use of the property as a horse breeding operation would fit into the district. The Flood Hazard Overlay District allows certain uses by right. Those allowed by special use permit require stringent review by County . engineering in order to ensure that the intent of the district, to restrict unwise use and development of · lands subject to inundation, is protected. Staff has not received adequate information from the applicant to assess whether flood levels either on the property or on adjacent properties will be affected by the proposed development in the floodplain. and that such use will be in harmony with the pUlpose and intent of this ordinance. Staffhas reviewed this request with consideration for the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4.6, 1.4.8, and 1.4.10. Section 1.4.6 states that one of the intents of the Ordinance is to, "protect against loss of life or property from flood." Staff cannot assert that the proposed use will carry out this intent because adequate information about how the flood levels at this location are affected by the proposed use has not been received from the applicant. with the uses permitted by right in the district. When adequately designed, stream crossings, dams and ponds, especially on farms, act to support those agricultural activities promoted by the Comprehensive Plan. In this case it is staff's opinion that the design and placement of those elements on the subject land is not consistent with other Comprehensive Plan goals, namely, water protection through stream buffer preservation and flood control or with the stated relationship of the Zoning Ordinance to the Environment as stated in Section 1.5. · with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance. and with the public health. safety 4 -¡ and general welfare. There are no additional regulations for the proposed use in Section 5.0. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this request: 1. The proposed fann operation is consistent with the Rural Area goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Staffhas identified the following factors, which are unfavorable to this request: 1. The applicant has not provided the County with enough infonnation to analyze the impacts to public health, safety and general welfare in tenns of post-construction floodplain levels. 2. The location of the driveway and extent of buffer disturbance do not appear necessary for reasonable use ofthe parcel as a horse fann. 3. The applicant has not provided an alternate design to eliminate unnecessary stream buffer disturbance. 4. The Water Protection Ordinance disallows unnecessary stream buffer disturbance. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends denial of SP-2004-040. Should the Board vote to approve the special use permit, staff recommends that the applicant be required to comply with the following conditions of approval: 1. With the exception of all changes that would be required in order to comply with the conditions listed herein, the site shall be developed in general accord with the plans entitled, "Mount Fair; Albemarle County, Virginia; MacFarlane Residence; Whitehall Virginia," dated 6/17/04 and provided herein, with Attachment C. 2. Provide a plan which shows all existing conditions - parcel boundaries, structures, driveways, entrances, culverts, floodplain (both on and adjacent to the property and along SR 810 and SR 673), and topography on and adjacent to the entire property. 3. Provide a plan which shows proposed topography, extent offill and limits of the proposed changes to the floodplain and stream buffers. 4. Provide plans for the bridges, dam and culverts. 5. Provide sufficient engineering data to demonstrate that there will be no increase in flood levels during the occurrence of the one hundred year flood in accordance with Section 30.3.03.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. 6. Provide sufficient data to demonstrate that stream buffer disturbances are kept to a minimum, especially for driveways or roadways where reasonable access may be provided elsewhere, according to Section 17.312.5 of the Water Protection Ordinance. 7. Obtain necessary federal and state pennits the US Anny Corps of Engineers and Virginia Department of Environmental Quality for work in the stream(s). 5 <3 · ATTACHMENTS: A. Vicinity Map B. Map of Parcels (includes aerial) C. Plan of development · · 6 t) 10 ATTACHMENT A \ l ~t '" /"'\ 7' I t", "-..., \'''''"' '.i. '¡:.: ,-~ . ~ " ~ \ ATTACHMENT B ~~ O~ o £:) o o (9 V) ~ 'DICUIM. . PAll.DL· m JDO ?2 A11AN1'''.œo.nA.JOII9 V . ...h..¡'... ::> '4CK WI1Ot2 ..,... 1MAl1......_ ¡...I...¡ -.....- REVISIONS l W Ü z W <0 ~CI) OW a::~~ <C~W~ U.ZZ~ ::I « 0 t- 8 ...J ~ Zw~ - -oJ «-oJ ~ c:: ëi! .....J < U. :I: O~üw W«I- I11III:::: CD ~ ..::::: ëi! ~ ~ mu SITE PIAN !)An 06/17/04 - ~ )C)'NO. Q32j() - ª DWOFlLI 0325OPW1 DaAWN IV BI. ~ CHJCI(E ) 1i U ICo\U r-tlJ.()' 2 SHUT ~ P-l ~( - Of 3 2 ¡ I ~ . z 5 o ~ ~ :0 i . ::! g t: :c ~ < .. 5 is z ~ \\ \' \\ \, \\ ,\,'\ \, \' \ ,\ \\. '\\ ' "----\ \ '\\- '\'\, . \ ' , \\: t '.' \ ':\ /i\~ ".'\... " , W E \\ I . I . ,/';1 766, B</ /'/ / ./1 ¡'/ )' / .1 I . (( ,- \\~\. . \ ' i "\\ \\~' ATTACHMENT C 8 2/ 1 x7 TSTURE x724 x740 \ 6 X704 i\JI 0' !IO' 60' 120' 6 II X70S x7'08 , Corrugated Metd Pipe ;rtished 1'1001' ~tiofl "01'1 Rod Found Iron Pipe r ClUnd OYerneod Power R.....forced Concrete Pipe SanItMy Qeort-out 'VOI_ Underground £lectrit; Und-.pound Telephone " Ä88REVtATIONS' =p ffe irl ;pf OHP ... ... UGE UG ¡ \ ~ //---';:Y' ':::'~TOR ."'./ Pft!1.D J...œA"" I. '---------------- \ 1 ..... x7 Owwtt«KI POlL'*' Pote wI Property Un. w/ Comer a.Gn-out Valve ...- TeIepftotte Mar1ter Tllphone Pedeslol ,...on' ';Boring locatiOn Úlstlng ContQW" ~d ContCM OecIduOllS Tree Ditch Of Streom Guy WIr. lon~ Bed Ught Pate E_vrØtl Tree fence lÎM SanitO')' "NO Tempottr)' w." ........ ,'"'" ", LEGEND _O~ . ~. . -~- o 6} * CD o @) --- - 9 EÐ_ \ / ¿~ \ , ,/; <f'?.....~ \ \ / : \I \ i_,"""""M~ \ I 1 _____.." I .,PASTURE -\\: ~ \~\ _I .. ~A""'~va. \ IØO.....~A /~ - .... .......,..- I .... J - - ---- ~ ....---- --~~~~~=:------- -",) 7 N6 I ~ >- C<: t.ð ..... <: ¡.¡.¡ ,...¡ . 0 0 0 0 0 en ¡.¡.¡ tlJŒOn'M'AU.DI. _mJOO :r: A1tAHtAeOlOlGÞ.JOJ2t 0 , 4041~11MO :J f 4041H111OÐ :r: iMA11 lpelp.colll -- IlfVISIONS DA W () Z W <0 -- ~CI) c!)w a::~o:: - ·W< «~Z~ L1.. :) ~ C!) o D:: 1-(,)0::> Z~«::f ::)~ u.. ~ O:E()W W«t- ~a:I ~ ëi!:E3: rnu POND GRADING PlAN DATE 06/17/04 , 10' NO. = """flU 0J:2.S0I"A D~WH IV BL , CKECUD J-I I , SCAU r-3O'·Q' ¡ SHUT ¡ P-2 , ¡ 2 Of 3 ¡ ~ I . z ¡¡¡ Õ ~ '" ~ i . ::! g t: '" ~ § is ~ ATTACHMENT C Corrugoted Metal Pipe F1r\....ed~£I_tlan fIIod Found Iron p~ Found O--"tIOd Pow... Reinforced CCIftCn'te Pip Sonitory aeon-out Val.... U~£lectric U~T.epftoß. ABBREVIATIONS ~ L .o.e.o.TeHl!NT I'OItØl$TURem:> rETLANØTHAT IS IN ~OI" Al..LOHANC;I!II eHAI..L BE MADe 0ÞHWTe, 1!II!'f00000THe I"AItAMI!TI!ItS 01" Tte DRA>'IN&. ::I. ~ I"ONI:> el%l!1S A,"",,-.o.TeI. "I' .,. LOO~ 5. LeN5TH 01" _T\IIUIeI)5~ DOI!& MOT 1!J<CeI!Ø500~. ... _TO_1!5T1W(;TUlUAN!)c.LI!AAA~0I" ~_IJA5I!t>""~"'" ~5. 5. _TO~OUT1"LOI'I5T101,1('.TUIœ. 6. __~ATION5AItl!TON~ AP'I"RO-.o.TION5. 51!1!~ I!VALUATIONANt> __A('.I!~TIOMIU!P'OIItTII"I'C>AA O ! II.A_ A55O('.._~A1L5- 1. I"ONC> C>I!I"TH IS MOT TO I!X('.I!EC> Øl$T ANC'.I! _ 50IL _~A('.I!TO _TINS 1tOC'.tc:. __ ~T I'OIt e>eI"THS. e. ALL C>lSI"LAC'.I!C> sou. 15 TO ItI!MAIN OIHIITI! AN!) I!VØ"I' ATTI!HI"T HILL BE MAC>l!TO t<æI" 50IL IN IMMI!C>tATI! AIŒA. <m, .. irl ", OHP ,<, uGE UOT LIn. Londe<apod .... Ught Pd. OvIrtIead Po... Pol. . / PrcIIWty u-.e wI Comer Oean-out VafWi Temporary Benc",¡",ortt T....OI'IIII UoI1i;er TotpI'Ione Peda1.o! .., 'l'ctlands YorcIl1)'drOnt !oring l.ocQtiorl Ellisting Contour PrQ9ot.ed CorItou' 0ecIctu0u8 Tr_ Ditch Of StreGl'Ol E-v-n Tr.. Fence Un. Guy WIre sanltory "'N' LEGEND o -- . . -..,.- o @ * CD o @ -..- - 9 $- LITTORAL SHELF V'IA TER. LEVEL ELEV. 1:20 TYP. PASTURE 00' STREAM BUFFER PR.OPOSED OUTFLO~ STRUC.TURE ~ITH PEDESTRIAN FOOT 6RID6E X73 PROPOSED 6AAYEL.: F~RM ROAD ' I , ,~ \\\ \ \ \\ \ .' '-, \ \\ '\' , \\ \,\ i. \ /----" \ I ..--/'; ,\ ",/ ',\ '" .. J \-".- , t' '., , , 1 ' ': II 'j i{." .'.\~ I,' \ . \ \ ,\ \ ~ \ \ \ q \ , \ \ , I '\ I '\ -d00 YR. FL-OODPLAlij .. \ 1 " . I' { ! ~\ \ , , I \ I \ 100' STREAM 6UFF~R~ \ ¡ / \ \ ' PASTU,RE \~\ PROfOSED J \ BRI¡;)6E / I I PROPOSED 6AAVE FARM ROAp / V 10 EB NORTH n.JI 0' II' 50' 60' c,oNC.EPTUAL SKETC.H ,PRQEOSED POND ~I"-!IO' -~ A .-::z ORDINANCE NO. 05-18(1) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 18, ZONING, ARTICLE III, DISTRICT REGULATIONS, 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 18, Zoning, Article III, District Regulations, is hereby amended and reordained as follows: By Amending: Sec. 30.3.01 Sec. 30.3.02.1 Sec. 30.3.02.2 Sec. 30.3.05.1.2 Sec. 30.3.07 Intent Definitions Determination of Floodway and Floodway Fringe in the Approximated Flood Plain By Right Within the Floodway Fringe Amendment of the Flood Hazard Overlay District By Repealing: Sec. 30.3.06.2 Finding of the County Engineer Chapter 18. Zoning Article III. District Regulations 30.3 FLOOD HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT - FH 30.3.01 INTENT It is intended that the flood hazard overlay district hereby and hereafter created shall be for the purpose of providing safety and protection from flooding. More specifically, these provisions are intended to restrict the unwise use, development and occupancy of lands subject to inundation which may result in: danger to life and property; public costs for flood control measures and/or rescue and relief efforts; soil erosion, sedimentation and siltation; pollution of water resources; and general degradation of the natural and man-made environment. It is further intended that these provisions shall be adequate for qualification and continuation of Albemarle County on the regular program of the National Flood Insurance Program as administered by the Federal Insurance Administration and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). To these ends, provisions have been developed in accordance with regulations governing the regular program. (§ 30.3.01, 12-10-80; Ord. 05-18(1), 1-5-05, effective 2-5-05) 30.3.02 APPLICATION 30.3.02.1 DEFINITIONS-GENERALLY The flood hazard overlay district shall include all areas subject to inundation by the waters of the one hundred year flood. The source of this delineation shall be the Flood Insurance Study for Albemarle County and Incorporated Areas and the Independent City of Charlottesville prepared by FEMA, effective on and after February 04, 2005 (the "flood study"). The following definitions shall apply in the administration and interpretation of this section 30.3: 1. One-hundred year flood: The term "one-hundred year flood" is a design storm of a specific intensity and duration with a return frequency of one-hundred years or a one- COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing for ZTA 2004-008 and ZMA 2004- 00019 Flood Hazard Overlay District AGENDA DATE: January 5, 2005 ACTION: X INFORMATION: SUBJECT/PROPOSALlREQU EST: Board of Supervisors approval of the Flood Hazard Overlay District Zoning Ordinance text and Zoning map amendments CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACnS): Tucker, Foley, Davis, Kamptner, Kelsey ATTACHMENTS: Yes LEGAL REVIEW: Yes REVIEWED BY: ~ ( BACKGROUND: A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on December 7, 2004 on the proposed zoning map and text amendments. The Commission supported the zoning map and text changes necessary to assure continued eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program and to provide the clarity needed for implementation of these regulations. The Commission, however, did not support the proposed addition to Section 30.3.05.1.2 that would allow pedestrian and multi- use paths within County owned or operated parks and Greenways as a by right use. In addition, the Commission requested additional clarification of the terms "floodway fringe" and "flood plain" in the FHOD regulations. STRATEGIC PLAN: Goal 2.2 - Protect and/or preserve the County's natural resources. Goal 3 Enhance the Quality of Life for all Citizens DISCUSSION: The Commission discussed in detail the proposed amendment to allow pedestrian and multi-use paths within County owned or operated parks and Greenways as a by right use. The Commission noted fairness and the concern that public projects should be held to the same review procedures and requirements as private projects as the primary reason for its decision not to recommend the amendment. However, staff feels the proposed amendment will assure the same level of technical review and facilitate the implementation of the County trail system. As proposed the ordinance will require that any filling of land be approved by the county engineer in accordance with section 30.3.06.1 (1) through (5). Staff recommends that the ordinance allow County created pedestrian and multi-use paths to be a by right use. As requested by the Commission, staff incorporated additional terms and revised definitions in Section 30.3.02.1 of the proposed ordinance (Attachment A) to clarify the terms "floodway fringe" and "flood plain." RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the attached ordinance amendment and the associated zoning map amendment. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Draft Ordinance 05-18( 1 ) Attachment B: Planning Staff Report 04.211 Attachment A DRAFT: 12/21/04 ORDINANCE NO. 05-18( ) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 18, ZONING, ARTICLE III, DISTRICT REGULATIONS, 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 18, Zoning, Article III, District Regulations, is hereby amended and reordained as follows: By Amending: Sec. 30.3.01 Sec. 30.3.02.1 Sec. 30.3.02.2 Sec. 30.3.05.1.2 Sec. 30.3.07 Intent Definitions Determination of Floodway and Floodway Fringe in the Approximated Flood Plain By Right Within the Floodway Fringe Amendment of the Flood Hazard Overlay District By Repealing: Sec. 30.3.06.2 Finding of the County Engineer Chapter 18. Zoning Article III. District Regulations 30.3 FLOOD HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT - FH 30.3.01 INTENT It is intended that the flood hazard overlay district hereby and hereafter created shall be for the purpose of providing safety and protection rrom flooding. More specifically, these provisions are intended to restrict the unwise use, development and occupancy oflands subject to inundation which may result in: danger to life and property; public costs for flood control measures and/or rescue and relief efforts; soil erosion, sedimentation and siltation; pollution of water resources; and general degradation of the natural and man-made environment. It is further intended that these provisions shall be adequate for qualification and continuation of Albemarle County on the regular program of the National Flood Insurance Program as administered by the Federal Insurance Administration and the Federal Emenæncv ManalIement AlIencv (FEMA)' To these ends, provisions have been developed in accordance with regulations governing the regular program. 30.3.02 APPLICATION 30.3.02.1 DEFINITIONS-GENERALL Y The flood hazard overlay district shall include all areas subject to inundation by the waters of the one hundred year flood. The source of this delineation shall be the Flood Insurance Studv for Albemarle County and Incomorated Areas and the Indenendent City of Charlottesville nrenared bv FEMA. effective on and after Februarv 04.2005 (the "flood studv") flood insurance study for the County of .^Jbemarle, Virginia, as prepared by the Federal Insurance Administration Federal Emergency Management .^.gency, dated June 16, 1980 . The flood haza:rd overlay district shall be comprised of three subdistricts as follows: The followinlI definitions shall annlv in the administration and intemretation of this section 30.3: Attachment A DRAFT: 12/21/04 1. One-hundred vear flood: The term "one-hundred year flood" is a desi!!n storm of a soecific intensity and duration with a return freauencv of one-hundred years or a one-oercent orobability of be in!! eaualed or exceeded in a !!iven Year. The term "one-hundred year flood" is also referred to as the one (1 )-oercent annual chance flood. 2. Base flood elevation rBF£): The term "base flood elevation" is the one-hundred year flood elevation that has been determined at a cross section of a stream reach. as desÍlmated in the flood study. 3. Flood vlain: The term "flood olain" means any land susceotible to bein!! inundated bv the flood waters !!enerated bv a one-hundred year flood. as desÍlmated in the flood study. 4.ft; Floodway fFlj: The term "floodwav" means That portion of the flood hazard overlay district required to carry and diseha:rge the ',vaters of the one hundi"Cd year flood '.vithout increasing the water surface elevation at any point more than one (1) foot a:bove existing conditions, as demonstrated in the flood insurance study referenced abo·¡e. the stream channel and that oortion of the adiacent flood olain that must be reserved to carrY and dischar!!e the waters of the one- hundred year flood. as desi!!I1ated in the flood study. without increasin!! the flood water surface elevation at any ooint more than one (1 ) foot above the base flood elevation and orovided that hazardous velocities are not oroduced 5.Jr. Floodway Pfringe ~: The term "floodwav frin!!e" means Those portions of land '.."ithin the flood hazard overlay distriet subject to inundation by the one hundred yea:r flood, lying beyond the flood..."ay in areas where detailed study data and profiles are available. that oortion of the flood olain that lies between the floodwav and the outer limits of the flood olain. as desi!!I1ated in the flood study. For the sole ournose of determinin!! oermissible uses under sections 30.3.05.1.2 and 30.3.05.2.2. the floodwav frinæ also shall include the aooroximated flood olain. fie; Approximated Pflood Pplain fF-Jf: The term "aooroximated flood olain" means Those portions of land within the flood hazard oyerlay district subject to immdation by the one hundred year flood, v.here a detailed study has not been performed but where a one hundred year flood plain boundary has been approximated. those flood olain re!!ions where base flood elevations have not been determined. as desi!!I1ated in the flood study. l·th Development: The term "development" means. for the purposes of this section only, 5hall me£ffi any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations. .8..e,. Substantial improvement: The term "substantial improvement" means, for the purposes of this section only, shall mean any repair, reconstruction or improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds fifty (50) percent of the market value of the structure either (1) before the improvement or repair is started, or (2) if the structure has been damaged, the rrunketvaluebefore the damage occurred. For the purpose of this definition "substantial improvement" is considered to occur when the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor or other structural part of the building commences, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the structure. The term does not, however, include either (1) any project for improvement of a structure to comply with existing state or local health, sanitary or safety code specifications which are solely necessary to assure safe living conditions, or (2) any alteration of a structure listed on the National Register of Historic Places or the Virginia Historic Landmarks Commission. 2 Attachment A DRAFT: 12/21/04 9.£--Start of construction: The term "start of construction" means. for the purpose~ of this section only includes substantial improvement, and means the date the building permit was issued, provided the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, placement or other improvement was within one hundred eighty (180) days of the permit date. The actual start means either the first placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of slab or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns or any work beyond the stage of excavation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation, such as clearing, grading and filling; nor does it include the installation of streets and/or walkways; nor does it include excavation for a basement, footings, piers or foundations or the erection of temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling units or not part of the main structure. (Added 6-10-87) 30.3.02.2 DETERMINATION OF FLOODW.A1Y AND FLOODWAY FRINGE IN THE APPROXIMATED FLOOD PLAIN Except for such uses permitted in the floodway in accordance with section 30.3.5, no use, structure or building shall be established and no rezoning petition, site development plan, subdivision plat, building permit or other county approval shall be given for lands located within any approximated flood plain, prior to verification by the county engineer as to the limits of the floodway and floodway rringe within such lands. In his determination of the limits of the floodvlay and floodway rringe, and one hundred year flood elevation, the county engineer may request assistance rrom the Federal Insurance Administration, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and such other qualified agencies and persons as he deems appropriate. The county engineer shall require the applicant to provide such information as he deems reasonably necessary to make his determination. The cost of such determination shall be borne entirely by the applicant. (§ 30.3.02.2, 12-10-80; Ord. 01-18(6), 10-3-01) 30.3.05.1.2 BY RIGHT WITIDN THE FLOODW A Y FRINGE 1. Uses permitted by right in the floodway. 2. Accessory structures to uses permitted by right in the floodway, excluding structures for human habitation; provided that any such structure permitted shall be firmly anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement due to flooding. 3. Pedestrian and multi-use Daths that are within county owned or oDerated Darks and IITeenwavs: Drovided that anv fillinQ: of land has been aDDroved bv the county enQ:ineer in accordance with section 30.3.06.1(1) throuQ:h (5): and anv footbridQ:es necessarY to cross tributarY streams. watercourses and swales have been aooroved bv the county enQ:ineer. 30.3.06.2 FINDINC OF COUNTY ENCINEER Upon completion of a fill operation in accordance with section 30.3.6.1, and at such time as the county engineer is reasonably satisfied that such fill is stabilized at a finished grade abovc the one hundred year flood elevation, he shall notifY the board of supervisors of such finding. The board of supervisors shall review such finding for amendment of the flood hazard overlay district as generally provided in section 33.0 and particularly provided in section 30.3.7. In the event of amendment, lands deleted rrom the flood hazard overlay district shall enjoy all uses of the underlying zone, as such uses arc permitted therein. 3 Attachment A DRAFT: 12/21/04 30.3.07 AMENDMENT OF THE FLOOD HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT The delineation of the flood hazard overlay district may be revised, amended and modified by the board of supervisors in compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program when any of the followimr conditions are met: 1. UDon comDletion of a fill oDeration in accordance with section 30.3.06.1: and. county emrineer receiDt of notification from FEMA that a maD amendment based on the Dlacement of fill has been issued: and. at such time as the county en!!ineer is reasonably satisfied that such fill is stabilized. at a finished ¡rrade above the one hundred year flood elevation. and in comDliance with any related conditions imDosed bv the board of sUDervisors in aDDroval of a sDecial use Dennit: the county en!!ineer shall notify the board of sUDervisors of such findin!!. The board of SUDervisors shall review such findin!! for amendment of the flood hazard overlay district as !!enerallv Drovided in section 33.0 and Darticularlv Drovided in section 30.3.07. In the event of amendment. lands deleted from the flood hazard overlay district shall eniov all uses of the underlvin!! zone. as such uses are Dennitted therein. 2. There are chan!!es throu!!h natural or other causes. 3. There are chan!!es indicated bv FEMA issuance ofletters of maD amendment (LOMA) or letters of maD revision (LOMR) 4. There are chan!!es indicated bv future detailed hvdrolo!!ic and hydraulic studies. a. There are ehanges thmugh natural or other causes; b. Changcs are indicated by future detailed hydrologic and hydraulic studies. All such changes are subject to the review and approval of the Federal Insurance .^..dministrationFEMA. This ordinance shall be effective on and after February 5,2005. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an Ordinance duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of _ to _, as recorded below, at a regular meeting held on Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Aye Nay Mr. Bowennan Mr. Boyd Mr. Domer Mr. Rooker Ms. Thomas Mr. Wyant 4 RECEIVED DEC 2 1 2004 County of Albemarla County Executive's Office Phone (434) 296-5832 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Developrnent 401 Mcintire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Fax (434) 972-4126 MEMORANDUM TO: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County FROM: Jack Kelsey, County Engineer DATE: December 13, 2004 RE: ZTA-04-08 Flood Hazard Overlay District (FH) and ZMA-04-19 Flood Hazard Overlay District (FH) The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on December 7,2004, by a vote of 7-0, recommended approval of the above-noted petitions to the Board of Supervisors, subject to the following conditions: ZTA-2004-008 Flood Hazard Overlav: · The deletion of Section 30.3.05.1.2(3). · Clarification should be made between the definition of approximated floodplain and floodplain prior to going before the Board. ZMA-2004-019 Flood Hazard Overlav: · Adoption of the FEMA flood maps as described in the staff report to be effective on February 4, 2005. Attached you will find a staff report and supporting documents which outlines the requests. The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing on January 5, 2005. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. JKlaer ATTACHMENTS ST AFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: JACK KELSEY, PE DECEMBER 7, 2004 JANUARY 5, 2005 ZT A 2004-008 AND ZMA 2004-00019 FLOOD HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT ORIGIN AND DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The Albemarle County flood insurance study was adopted 16 December 1980. It was later updated in 1990 to include the changes resulting from the Scottsville levee. Due to their age, our maps had become severely outdated, especially within the "urban ring" where significant land changes and development activity had occurred. There has also been a need for more detailed flood elevation information along the major streams in our development areas. Since September 2002, staff have been working with FEMA, Dewberry & Davis (FEMA mapping consultant), and the US Army Corp of Engineers to update the Flood Insurance Rate Maps for the County and expand the "detailed study" areas, where the 100-year flood or base flood elevations (BFE's) are determined. On 27 January 2004, FEMA and US Anny Corps representatives met with staff to present the preliminary study and flood maps. A number of improvements had been made to the study and the maps. The most noticeable improvement was that the study and maps for Albemarle County, City of Charlottesville, and Town of Scottsville had been consolidated into one set. Other significant improvements are described below. · Report expanded and updated the community description and flood history. · Maps reflected the "Letters of Map Revision" FEMA had issued since 1980. · Maps were based on the topographic mapping provided by the County, City and ACSA and reflected the changes in topography and land development activity since 1980. · Map scales were improved. The earlier map scale was 1 inch to 2000 feet. The new map scales are 1" = 500' within the urban ring, Crozet Development Area, and Scottsville. The map scales are 1" = 1 000' for the remaining maps, except for the few maps along the edges of the outer perimeter of the County where the scales are 1 in. to 2000 feet. · The "detailed study" areas were expanded along the Rivanna River and North Fork Rivanna River. New "detailed study" areas were added in the Crozet Development Area (Lickinghole Creek, Powells Creek, Slab town Branch), in Urban Neighborhood 4 (Cows Branch), and in the Hollymead/Piney Mountain Community (Herring Branch, Flat Branch and Tributary to Flat branch). FEMA published public notifications of the proposed BFE's in the DailY Progress on 26 February 2004 and 4 March 2004. This notice initiated their 90-day appeal process. The County received notification from FEMA on 4 August 2004 that the 90-day appeal period had been completed, no appeals were received by FEMA, that the BFE's were considered fmal, and that the flood study and maps would become effective on 4 February 2005. The Flood Hazard Overlay District (FHOD) is defined in Code Section 18-30.3 as all areas inundated by the one hundred year flood, as delineated by the flood insurance study for the County of Albemarle, dated 16 June 1980. Therefore the adoption of a ZTA to reference the new flood insurance study and a ZMA to adopt the FHOD map changes is necessary. Staff's request is for the Planning Commission to adopt a Resolution of Intent (Attachment A) to hold a public hearing and make its recommendations to the Board of Supervisors. JUSTIFICATION OF THE REQUEST As mentioned above the new flood study and maps become effective on 4 February 2005. FEMA has notified the County that prior to 4 February 2005 the County is required, as a condition of continued eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program, to show evidence of adoption of the FEMA floodplain regulations. This includes the adoption of the effective flood maps and study report to which the regulations apply and the modifications made by this map revision. TEXT MODIFICATIONS At the November 16, 2004 work session, staff described the text amendments that would be necessary to assure continued eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program and to provide the clarity needed for implementation of these regulations. The Commission concurred with staff and the text amendments have been included in the attached ordinance. Staff also presented additional text modifications for consideration. The Commission expressed their opinion that the suggested modifications should be developed through a process of "public involvement", such as roundtable discussions, input from the development community, or other means used in the past amendments. However, it was noted by Mr. Wayne Cilimberg that during the special use permit hearing for the Old Mills Trail (Rivanna River Greenway) the Board of Supervisors had instructed staff to pursue the by-right construction of trails within the Floodway Fringe. The Commission agreed to include the recommended amendment 30.3.05.1.2.(3) as provided in Appendix C of the November 16, 2004 Staff Report. To supplement this text amendment, the Commission requested that the County Engineer include information on the design standards for pedestrian and multi-use trails. These documents are included as Attachments B, C and D. Attachment B summarizes the result of staff's research of existing sidewalk, pedestrian path, bike trail and multi-use path standards. Attachment C is a worksheet used for developing County standards. Attachment D is the Design Manual section providing the County pedestrian and multi-use facility criteria RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the approval of the ordinance amendment provided as Attachment A and the associated zoning map amendments. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Ordinance No. 05- Amendment to Section 30.3 Flood Hazard Overlay District Attachment B: Research Summary Table of Existing Standards for Sidewalks, Pedestrian Paths, Bike Trails and Multi-use Paths 2- Attachment C: Worksheet for County Sidewalk, Pedestrian Path, Bike Trail and Multi-use Path Criteria Attachment D: Design Manual Section 610 - Pedestrian & Multi-use Facilities '3 ATTACHMENT A Public Hearing Version: 11-18-04 ORDINANCE NO. 05- AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 18, ZONING, ARTICLE III, DISTRICT REGULATIONS, SECTION 30.3 FLOOD HAZARD OVERLAY - FH, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors ofthe County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 18, Zoning, Article III, District Regulations, Section 30.3 Flood Hazard Overlay - FH, is hereby amended and reordained as follows: By Amending: Sec. 30.3.01 Sec. 30.3.02.1 Sec. 30.3.02.2 Sec. 30.3.05.1.2 Sec. 30.3.07 Intent Definitions Determination of Floodway and Floodway Fringe in the Approximated Flood Plain By Right Within the Floodway Fringe Amendment of the Flood Hazard Overlay District By Repealing: Sec. 30.3.06.2 Finding of the County Engineer Chapter 18. Zoning Article III. District Regulations 30.3 FLOOD HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT - FH 30.3.01 INTENT It is intended that the flood hazard overlay district hereby and hereafter created shall be for the purpose of providing safety and protection from flooding. More specifically, these provisions are intended to restrict the unwise use, development and occupancy of lands subject to inundation which may result in: danger to life and property; public costs for flood control measures and/or rescue and relief efforts; soil erosion, sedimentation and siltation; pollution of water resources; and general degradation of the natural and man- made environment. It is further intended that these provisions shall be adequate for qualification and continuation of Albemarle County on the regular program of the National Flood Insurance Program as administered by the Federal Insurance Administration and the Federal Emer2:encv Mana2:ement Aæncv (FEMA)' To these ends, provisions have been developed in accordance with regulations governing the regular program. 30.3.02 APPLICATION 30.3.02.1 DEFINITIONS-GENERALLY The flood hazard overlay district shall include all areas subject to inundation by the waters of the one hundred year flood. The source of this delineation shall be the Flood Insurance Studv for Albemarle Countv and Incomorated Areas and the IndeDendent Citv of Charlottesville. a nreDared bv the Federal Emer2:encv Mana2:ement A2:encv. effective date Februarv 04.2005 flood ins1:1raflce smdy for the County of .^Jbemarle, Vkginia, as prepared by the Federal Insurance .^.dministration Federal Emergency Management .^.¡;ency, dated June I €i, 1980 . The flood hazard overlay district shall be comprised of three subdistriots as follows: Page...J-..ef+ 4 ATTACHMENT A Public Hearing Version: 11-18-04 L &.- Floodwav frn: That portion of the flood hazard overlay district that must be reserved required to carry and discharge the waters of the one hundred year flood without increasing the water surface elevation at any point more than one (I) foot above existing conditions, provided that hazardous velocities are not produced, as demonstrated in the flood insurance study referenced above. ~ &. Floodwav Fringe ~: Those portions of land within the flood hazard overlay district subject to inundation by the one hundred year flood, lying beyond the floodway in areas where detailed study data and profiles are available. l (T. Approximated Flood Plain fR4: Those portions of land within the flood hazard overlay district subject to inundation by the one hundred year flood, where a detailed study has not been perfonned but where a one hundred year flood plain boundary has been approximated. ;1. th Development for the purposes of this section only, shall mean any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations. ~ 8-:- Substantial improvement, for the purposes of this section on]y, shall mean any repair, reconstruction or improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds fifty (50) percent of the market value ofthe structure either (1) before the improvement or repair is started, or (2) if the structure has been damaged, the market value before the damage occurred. For the purpose of this definition "substantial improvement" is considered to occur when the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor or other structural part of the building commences, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the structure. The term does not, however, include either (1) any project for improvement of a structure to comply with existing state or local health, sanitary or safety code specifications which are solely necessary to assure safe living conditions, or (2) any alteration of a structure listed on the National Register of Historic Places or the Virginia Historic Landmarks Commission. ~ f:. Start of construction for the purpose of this section only includes substantial improvement, and means the date the building permit was issued, provided the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, placement or other improvement was within one hundred eighty (180) days of the pennit date. The actual start means either the first placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of slab or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns or any work beyond the stage of excavation. Pennanent construction does not include land preparation, such as clearing, grading and filling; nor does it include the installation of streets and/or walkways; nor does it include excavation for a basement, footings, piers or foundations or the erection of temporary fonns; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling units or not part ofthe main structure. (Added 6-10-87) 30.3.02.2 DETERMINATION OF FLOODW;\.Y ;\.~ND FLOODWAY FRINGE IN THE APPROXIMATED FLOOD PLAIN Except for such uses permitted in the floodway in accordance with section 30.3.5, no use, structure or building shall be established and no rezoning petition, site development plan, subdivision plat, building penn it or other county approval shall be given for lands located within any approximated flood plain, prior to verification by the county engineer as to the limits of the flood'Nay and floodway rringe within such lands. In his determination of the Jimits of the floodv.'ay and floodway rringe, and one hundred year flood elevation, the county engineer may request assistance rrom the Federal Insurance Administration, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and such other qualified agencies and persons as he deems appropriate. The county engineer shall require the applicant to provide such information as he deems reasonably necessary to make his determination. The cost of such determination shall be borne entirely by the applicant. (§ 30.3.02.2,12-10-80; Ord. 01-18(6),10-3-01) p.~ge :2 Qf1 S ATTACHMENT A Public Hearing Version: 11-18-04 30.3.05.1.2 BY RIGHT WITHIN THE FLOODW A Y FRINGE 1. Uses permitted by right in the floodway. 2. Accessory structures to uses permitted by right in the floodway, excluding structures for human habitation; proyided that any such structure permitted shall be firmly anchored to preyent flotation, collapse or lateral movement due to flooding. 3. Pedestrian and multi-use Daths that are within County Darks and Greenwavs that haye been dedicated to the County of Albemarle and acceDted by the Board of SUDervisors: Droyided that any filline: of land has been aDDroyed by the county en2:ineer in accordance with 30.3.06. HI) throue:h (5): and any footbride:es necessary to cross tributary streams. watercourses and swales have been aDDfoyed by the county ene:ineer. 30.3.0().2 FINDINC OF COUNTY ENCINEER Upon completion of a fill operation in accordance with section 30.3.6.1, aFld at such time as the county engineer is reasOI:¡ably satisfied that such fill is stabilized at a fi-nished grade above the one h\:Illdred year flood elevation, he shall notify the board of supervisors of such finding. The board of supervisors shall review sllch finding for amendment of the flood hazard overlay district as geÐerally provided in section 33.0 and particll1arly provided in sectiofl 30.3.7. Ifl the event of amendment, laflds deleted from the flood hazard overlay district shall enjoy alll:\ses of the I:\nderlying zone, as such uses are permitted therein. 30.3.07 AMENDMENT OF THE FLOOD HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT The delineation of the flood hazard overlay district may be revised, amended and modified by the board of supervisors in compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program when anv of the followine: conditions are met: 1. UDon comDletion of a fill oDeration in accordance with section 30.3.6.1' and countv ene:ineer receiDt of notification from FEMA that a maD amendment based on the Dlacement of fill has been issued: and. at such time as the county en2:ineer is reasonablv satisfied that such fill is stabilized. at a finished !!Tade above the one hundred vear flood elevation. and in comDliance with anv related conditions imDosed bv the board of sUDervisors in aDDfoval of a sDecial use Dermit· the county en2:ineer shall notify the board of sUDervisors of such findine:. The board of sUDervisors shall review such findine: for amendment of the flood hazard overlav district as e:enerallv Dfovided in section 33.0 and Darticularlv Drovided in section 30.3.7. In the event of amendment. lands deleted from the flood hazard overlav district shall eniov all uses of the underlvine: zone. as such uses are Dermitted therein. 2. There are chan2:es throu2:h natural or other causes. 3. There are chane:es indicated bv FEMA issuance of letters of maD amendment (LOMA) or letters of maD revision (LOMR). 4. There are chan2:es indicated bv future detailed hvdrolo2:ic and hvdraulic studies. a. There are Cflaflges throl:\gh natural or other cal:\ses; b. Changes are ifldicated by future detailed hydrologic and hydraulic studies. All such changes are subject to the review and approval of the Federal Emer2:encv Manae:ement Ae:encv Federal Insurance .^.dministration. Page 3 of 3- V B B Design c .- .... ~ ~ ãj " ~ .o ~ .o ~ 0 1: .... Q,j ~ .... ~ '¡:: ~ U 0 I ~:= ... Ql) ~æ Ci"CI þ= :.= ~ ... .... (,J Q,j ~ Q,j ~.t:: Q,jrJ) '" Q,j 9.= ... .... ;::.... = 0 :;= -- Q,j ;"CI ... = .o Q,j ~ Q., Q,j Q,j "CI"CI Q,j = =--ö I() I \C Q,j :ë ~ ~ C'1:l 0.0<1> .- <I> ~ ~ QIJ) «! - -;-;~ -=.~ E ~ '5 ~ ï: ;;;. := o < :I: <I> (j ~ ¡" ::s IJ) .c - '1:1 ~ <I> ~ .... E-< 05 ¿ ~ 00 -d 0) I:: ~ 0) ... ~ '" ~ ¡'J "'- E a ~ o - .c - ¡" c<S r.:¡ E:;::O)~ CIj 0 ~.~ .~:: (3) .b e t8 8 -OJ 2: ..Q.2 .ã <§:;j:g .c (j :; :; ... o (-..¡ 0) 0) 0) '" ~ ~o'ð~ 8'1:1 8'1:1 . u8.u8.~ ~} .9< ~ ,9< gg Õ õ< <I> C o - IJ) - "0 '" 0) ... ::I .coCl 2 ~ ~ U 0 0 èijèñ (-..¡ M - '" oj ::s ... Clco coO) < ~ (-..¡~ ~o'ð ... 0) o § êi5 - -¡ .c ~ '" < 05 ¿ <I> - <I> ¡" (j c o U 05 ¿ ¿ <n .8 "'" 0) 'È; 'c;j "ã ~ '¡: f- p... ,-, ...... ~ l/") .~ ~ f2 '" 0) a:: ~ 0 00 ~ 0) õ :z: 0) 0) ~ ~;;,¡. ~-:S~ (n~~ ;;,¡."2~ og;gg :.a < MU o'ð 0) ~ t) ~ ;.... .. ;; ~ ~"OO' ..8Q)(1)~ .g c co M;:jOCO uêi5< (-..¡<:t - oj ëtI t1.) L-o .c <.,) co ~~~ ~ ~ 3 = ~ UJ"," (-..¡ o'ð 05 ¿ -d 0) I:: ~ 0) ... 0. 05 ¿ o'ð ~ O)~ d) . tJ ~ c co o co U< <:t~ ,-, ¿ 'ã '-' ¿ <n c '" "5£ '" '" ~p... 0) p... ,-, .c .5 o.¡::: ,... - C'-' oP::: N¡¡., 0\ ~ 0) Õ Z(ò 0) 0) IJ) '-' ,-, M ~ 0) õ :z: 0) 0) ~ ~13,- ,.<n :;::<n >ico~ ~.5~~ ¡:: :z: ~2] ~ CIj >. ~ 0) '" tZJ 5b8~ ... co <8 ,:: 0) ~ :>, ~~c '¡: c 0 ~".§ J!a 5. § 'c;j o..o.l:: < 6 ,-, N ~ 0) õ :z: 0) 0) ~ 05 ¿ N ~ 0) õ :z: 0) 0) ~ o'ð ~ - ro ;g~ o oj 0) ... c co o co êi5< (-..¡<:t ;¢ ~ 0) õ :z: 0) 0) ~ - '"¡;j 0) .c <.,) ~~ < ;:j IJ) N oj ... toO toO 0) < ~ \o~ o(:! 05 ¿ ,-, ¿ §o'ð ¿ o - "0 '" 0) ... "0 0) e:9 toO;; ·0 G::.c N '" 1A "2 .c ~a(¡¡ '';:: .c P-. -UJO) ;:j... ~ ;:Eo...... lJ .... :§ '" '" o(:! c co 'r;; 0) "0 '"¡;j 'ü 0) 0. '" 0) ... '5 t:r' 0) ... >-. '" 6 "0 C '" "'" cú,£ ~~ O)f- ...:.:: :D~ c '5 'c;j 0 c c g.~ 6 ¡'J ì::O ,S:: f- (¡¡O ~;;;. 0) 0) ....c :;:: - ..8 ,:: "0"0 c 0) ro"O u) (I)"> 0) 0)0 oj§ §5. goo ~ .5 > > r/)C c:::-g¿ ~ "E ~ '.Ë ~ 5 ~ g ð3 CIj ~"'2.;313£ L-o ~ tI) ~ ",., <8:;:::.a:;::E 0) ot: o¡:¡ ""C:j - 0- 1-0 ~ "'....c"'toO ;:j 5£¡<8 ~c.8 0) § :ü:ü~:ü~ ~ g..Š ~.Š 5£¡ @¡ * ~::: ~ CIj °00 :;:: 0) :;:: 0):;:: 8 o .è 0 .è~ :;;§:;;§'" ] ~8~8~ P::: ¡:::....¡:::>-.6 f- -,D-,D 0 [)"'C1[)"'C1[) 0 .Š ~.Š ~ ~ > toO 0 co 0 .@¡ 0) ",5:;;5:;;5 .::¡ 0).è0)>-.0) >-.¡1.8 õc,.cê:"'Oë......L.. :Z:;:j >-';:j >-';:j2~ o '" 0 '" 0 ro 0) ~u;:Eu;:Eu~~ '" f- 0irri."f<ri ATTACHMENT D <n .< c .g <.,) 0) tZJ 0) ,... § õ > \Ó ATTACHMENT D D. Pedestrian and Multi-use Facility Design Criteria The tables that follow provide the specific design criteria for various pedestrian and multi-use facilities. Table 6-3 provides the criteria for "sidewalks". Table 6-4 provides the criteria for "pedestrian paths" and "multi-use paths" that are separated from the street and follow the street vertical and horizontal alignments. Table 6-5 provides the criteria for "primitive trails", "pedestrian paths" and "multi-use paths" that are independent ofthe street and right-of- way, or the travelways associated with parking areas. Table 6-3: Sidewalk Design Criteria Type Width Surface Horizontal & V ertical AIi~nment Behind Curb (See Notes # 1 & 2) Curbed (Urban) 3 ft. Buffer or 5 ft. (min.) 4" Concrete & Streets, Utility Strip 4" Aggre. Base Follow Alignment of Travelways & Streets, Travelways 6 ft. Street Tree and Parking Areas. Parking Areas or Planting Strip (See Notes # 4 & 5) Commercial/Office 8 to 12 ft. "Centers" (See Note # 3) Ditch & 2" Asphalt Surface Shoulder (Rural) Behind Ditch 5 ft. (min.) & 4" Aggre. Base Follow Alignment of Streets Streets (See Note # 4) Table Notes: 1. Applicable to parking areas only. A minimum 3 ft. buffer or utility strip will be provided along primary travelways where county engineer anticipates vehicle speeds may be 20mph or greater. 2. Sidewalk placed against the back of the curb along public and private streets is discouraged, unless the sidewalk is at least 8 feet wide to satisfy VDT sidewalk and utility strip minimum requirements [VDT Subdivision Street Design Guide]. 3. Width of sidewalk adjacent to any tree well or grate must be 3 ft. or greater. 4. Provide VDT standard underdrains (UD-3) for all sidewalks to be maintained by VDT. 5. Where sidewalk is used in conjunction with roll-top curb, the sidewalk thickness will be at least 7 inches [VDOT Subdivision Street Design Guide]. Table 6-4: Pedestrian and Multi-use Facility Design Criteria (Separated & Aligned with the Street) Type Width Surfaces Horizontal & Design Speed Vertical Alignment Pedestrian Path 5 ft. (min.) 2" Asphalt Surface Follow Street & 4" Aggre. Base Alignment n. a. Multi-Use or Shared 10 ft. (min.) & 2" Asphalt Surface Follow Street 20 mph Use Path 2 ft. graded & 6" Aggre. Base Alignment (See Note # 2) shoulders (See Note # 1) Table Notes: 1. A maximum grade of 5% is recommended. Grade greater than 5% may be allowed per VDT Design Guide Table 4. County engineer may require special design & safety features. 2. Refer to the VDOT Road Design Manual - Volume 1, Section A-5 l2.. ATTACHMENT D 5. Bicycle Path A bicycle path is a paved facility that is intended for commuter and/or recreational bicycle use only, and with minimal cross flow by motor vehicles. It may be separated from and aligned with the street, and located within the street right of way. It may also be independent ofthe street and located within a separate right of way. 6. Multi-use Path or Shared Use Trail A multi-use path or shared use trail is a paved facility with minimal cross flow by motor vehicles that is intended to be used by pedestrians, skaters (inline or roller), and bicyclists. It is generally designed for two-way travel, may be separated from and aligned with the street, and located within the street right of way. It may also be independent of the street and located within a separate right of way or easement. C. General Design Criteria The design criteria provided in the paragraphs that follow are applicable to all pedestrian and multi-use facilities. 1. Clear Zone A Clear Zone will be provided and maintained along the entire length of all pedestrian facilities and multi-use paths. A vertical clear zone of at least 8 feet (measured from the surface) will be provided along all pedestrian and multi-use facilities. The edge clear zone (measured from the surface edge) will be at least 2 feet for pedestrian facilities and 3 feet for multi-use trails. 2. Cross Slope The cross slope on any pedestrian or multi-use facility will not exceed 2 percent or 1j,¡" per foot. 3 . Materials All pedestrian and multi-use facility surface materials will comply with VDOT specifications, unless otherwise specified in this Manual. 4. ADA Regulations Compliance with ADA regulations may require additional improvements and/or design criteria more stringent than provided in this Manual. 5. VDOT Maintenance Sidewalks proposed for VDOT maintenance will be completely contained within the public right-of-way. 11 ATTACHMENT D SECTION 610 PEDESTRIAN AND MULTI-USE FACILITIES Pedestrian and multi-use facilities are an important component of the infrastructure that serves the public. These facilities provide both a transportation and recreation function and promote create a neighborhood feel in residential areas that is conducive for family life. The purpose of this section is to help define the various types of pedestrian and multi-use facilities and provide the related guidelines and design criteria. A. Review Responsibility All new pedestrian and multi-use facilities will be subject to review and approval by VDOT and/or the county engineer. These facilities will be designed and constructed in accordance with VDOT standards unless otherwise provided in this Section. [Code 18-32.7.2.8; 14-525] B. Facility Descriptions Definitions and descriptions of the various types of pedestrian, bicycle, and multi-use facilities are provided in the sections that follow. These descriptions have been compiled from a variety of sources including FHW A, AASHTO, Code of Virginia, VDOT, Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan, and other sources. 1. Pedestrian A pedestrian is person who travels on foot (e.g. walker, runner, person with a baby stroller, and person walking a dog) or who uses an assistive device for mobility such as a wheelchair (motorized or non-motorized). 2. Sidewalk A sidewalk is a surfaced walkway that is intended for use by pedestrians. Along streets, it is a component of the street cross-section and is located between the curb and the right of way limits. Within a parking area, sidewalk is a component of the travelway cross-section and is located behind the curb and/or is adjacent to the parking bays. 3. Primitive Path A primitive path is a walkway that is intended to provide only pedestrian access within a "natural", or similarly designated area, with the least amount of disturbance. It is both separate and independent of the street. 4. Pedestrian Path A pedestrian path is a surfaced walkway that is intended for use by pedestrians, but may attract other users such as bicyclists and skaters (inline or roller). It may be separated from and aligned with the street, and located within the street right of way. It may also be independent of the street and located within a separate right of way or easement. When associated with a parking area, it may be separated from and aligned with the travelway, or may be independent of the travel way. () ATTACHMENT D E. Design Plans Generally the design plans for pedestrian and multi-use facilities are a component of a site plan, road plan, or subdivision plat and must comply with the applicable plan content infonnation. In addition the design plans will provide the infonnation describe below. 1. Typical Cross Sections Provide the typical cross section for all proposed pedestrian and multi-use facilities, including all dimensions (e.g. width, depth, clear zone, etc.), cross slopes, super-elevation (if applicable) and surface specifications. 2. Centerline Profile Provide a centerline profile of all proposed pedestrian and multi-use facilities, including existing & proposed grade lines, proposed grades, and vertical design infonnation (when applicable). 3. Drainage Provide drainage ditches, culverts, and other appropriate provisions necessary to provide adequate drainage of the facilities. All ditches and culverts will comply with the guidelines and criteria provided in Chapter 5 of this Manual. 4. Bridges Designs and computations will be provided to demonstrate the structural members and the abutments or bearings have adequate capacity to carry the expected dead and live loadings. Plans will include all necessary dimensions and all material and fastener specifications. For some situations standard County bridge designs may be available. Bridges proposed to be located within areas of FEMA designated floodplain will comply with the requirements of the Flood Hazard Overlay (Code 18-30.3). 14 . . . ZTA-2004-008 Flood Hazard Overlav ZTAlZMA Modification of the Overlav Maps and District Regulations and adoption of a Resolution of Intent - Work session to discuss the ZTAlZMA necessary to revise the flood hazard overlay definition by referencing the new flood study and to provide for "housekeeping" text amendments. The Albemarle County flood insurance study was adopted December 16, 1980 and was later updated in 1990 to include the changes resulting from the Scottsville levee. The new flood study has expanded the "detailed study" areas, where the 100-year flood or base flood elevations (BFE's) are determined, and will become effective February 4, 2005. FEMA has notified the County that as a condition of continued eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program, the County is required to show evidence of adoption of the FEMA floodplain regulations prior to the effective date. This includes the adoption of the effective flood maps and study report to which the regulations apply. Mr. Kelsey summarized the staff report. (See Staff Report) He asked the Commission to review the proposed text amendments and bring comments and suggestions to the work session. The text amendments necessary to assure continued eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program must be adopted before February 4, 2005. Staff also included a list of some additional modifications for consideration and they could be pursued with this amendment, separately or just looked at in the future. The detailed wording is provided as attachments to the report. There are three attachments. He pointed out that the resolution of intent that was included as Attachment A in the staff report was not the most current one and he did have copies for everyone. Attachment B is the ordinance amendment itself. Attachment C is some additional suggestions. Staff requests input from the Commission on that. Therefore, staff requests the Planning Commission to adopt a Resolution of Intent (Attachment A) to hold a public hearing on December 7,2004 and make its recommendations to the Board of Supervisors. In summary, the Planning Commission held a work session to discuss the ZTAlZMA necessary to revise the flood hazard overlay definition by referencing the new flood study and to provide for "housekeeping" text amendments. Ms. Higgins suggested that staff conduct a Round Table Discussion on these issues with the public. Mr. Rieley moved to adopt the revised resolution of intent for ZTA-2004-008, Flood Hazard Overlay ZT AlZMA. RESOLUTION OF INTENT WHEREAS, Section 30.3, Flood Hazard Overlay District, establishes regulations pertaining to uses, structures and activities within delineated floodways, floodway fringes and approximated flood plains; and WHEREAS, Section 30.3 is based on, and is intended to meet or exceed, the federal National Flood Insurance Program regulations; and WHEREAS, the delineation of the boundaries of the flood hazard overlay district are based on a study dated June 16, 1980, prepared for the County by the Federal Insurance Administration - Federal Emergency Management Agency ("FEMA"); a new study is currently being prepared by the Army Corps of Engineers, and it is expected to be adopted by FEMA in January, 2005; and WHEREAS, it is desired to amend Section 30.3 to adopt the new study identified above as the source for delineating the boundaries of the flood hazard overlay district; and WHEREAS, it is desired to evaluate Section 30.3 to assure that it meets or exceeds federal National Flood Insurance Program regulations, and to amend Section 30.3 where required by federal regulations; and ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 16, 2004 ZT A-2004-008 Flood Hazard Overlay ZT AlZMA - Modification of the Overlay Maps and District Regulations and adoption of a Resolution of Intent MINUTES - DRAFT 1 WHEREAS, it is desired to amend Section 30.3 because it has been found that certain activities in the Flood Hazard Overlay District can be managed through administrative regulations rather than through special use permit; and WHEREAS, it is desired to amend Section 30.3 to make all other appropriate amendments to improve the clarity and the implementation of the Flood Hazard Overlay District regulations; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT for purposes of public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practices, the Albemarle County Planning Commission hereby adopts a resolution of intent to amend Section 30.3 of the Zoning Ordinance to achieve the purposes described herein, and to amend the Zoning Map accordingly; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the zoning text amendment proposed pursuant to this resolution of intent, and make its recommendations to the Board of Supervisors at the earliest possible date. ***** Mr. Craddock seconded the motion. Mr. Kamptner asked that the Commission clarify that the approval is for the revised resolution of intent. The other key provision is that in the first resolution paragraph it is to amend the zoning map accordingly. Therefore, they are doing both the zoning text amendment and the zoning map amendment. The motion carried by a vote of (7:0). Mr. Thomas stated that the resolution of intent passes and the matter will be coming back to the Planning Commission on December 7. Mr. Cilimberg pointed out that he had a quick question about the text modifications outlined on page 2 and 3 of the staff report. Staff assumes that those Sections 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.6.2 and 3.7 will be part of what the Commission sees on December 7. He asked if there were any of those provisions that they would also like to move forward now or would they prefer that they all wait. Ms. Higgins asked if Section 5.1.2 should be included, which has to do with the County Parks and Greenways. Mr. Cilimberg pointed out that he was asking a question since staff needs the Commission's direction. Mr. Thomas stated that he did not have any problem with including those in that. Mr. Rieley stated that he would like to see that included. Ms. Joseph stated that she would rather not see them in there and would prefer to see the design standards that staff came up with. Then, that could be part of the discussion. Ms. Higgins stated that she would assume that they would see that if they got them at that point. Mr. Cilimberg stated that they wanted to see those design standards for greenways along with considering that amendment. Ms. Joseph stated that they would have to reference something. Mr. Rieley stated that suggestion would really make sense. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 16, 2004 ZT A-2004-008 Flood Hazard Overlay ZT AIZMA - Modification of the Overlay Maps and District Regulations and adoption of a Resolution of Intent MINUTES - DRAFT 2 r . . . Ms. Higgins stated that they would add Section 5.1.2 in regards to greenways to the list. Mr. Cilimberg stated that the actual reference would be 5.1.2.3. He stated that on page 9, appendix C under 30.3.05.1.2 By Right within the Floodway Fringe that number 3 was the only one that the Commission wants to move forward. 30.3.05.1.2 By RIGHT WITHIN THE FLOODWAY FRINGE 3. e~destrian~!1dJJlulti-usJ~~ath§.JhaLaiE:!..cWjtbin.Ç9u~Jy~pªrJ<s_and. Gre~J'lY'Lays.Jhat . h=ª,,~~be~~Q dedic::at~djo~tll~ÇO\'!I)JY~QLAlbemacIJt~ndªçcepJ~Qj)-~tle~eoard_QL§!,!p'e!y~ors~ - QrQ.¥i~{Ub§t ªDy_fiILiD~ºiJa!lº _ .ha§~be~1] ~éll>pr9yed ~bYJ.b.~S~oj.JDtyengiQe~r io_accQrdpn~~_nlJl{ltb_30.3=0.6Ji1) th rQl.!gh~~(5)~an(La n.Y.10ºtbrLº9ce~ne~E!§§ary JO_oc_[Q~s.Jrjbutªry .streªmj¡~watercou r§e..s. and swales ha\Le.'þJ~e I] _approveAÞYJbI:LÇQU n!Yc,,ªQgLoeJ~r, Ms. Joseph stated that there is a different organization chart and there is a reference to the County Engineer. Within the organizational chart is it clear who the County Engineer is? Mr. Kamptner stated that it was very clear that Jack Kelsey is the County Engineer. Mr. Thomas asked Mr. Kamptner if they need to amend the motion. Mr. Kamptner stated that the motion did not need to be amended. (Recorded and transcribed by Sharon Claytor Taylor, Recording Secretary.) ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 16, 2004 ZT A-2004-008 Flood Hazard Overlay ZT NZMA - Modification of the Overlay Maps and District Regulations and adoption of a Resolution of Intent MINUTES - DRAFT 3 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: CPA 03-06 Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan Work Session AGENDA DATE: January 5, 2005 ACTION: X INFORMATION: SU BJECT/PROPOSALlREQU EST: Review the changes to the Rural Area Comprehensive Plan, as requested by the Board of Supervisors on December 1, 2004 CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, Foley, Davis, Kamptner, Graham, Cilimberg, Benish, McDowell ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: LEGAL REVIEW: Yes BACKGROUND: In a work session on December 1, 2004, the Board of Supervisors accepted an updated draft of the Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan that reflected changes made by the Board at two prior work sessions on October 6 and November 3. Furthermore, the Board requested that additional changes presented at the work session by Mrs. Thomas be incorporated into the draft for the Board's review at its January 5,2005 meeting. Staff has since met with Mrs. Thomas to review her proposed changes and have incorporated those into a new draft presented in Attachment A. The Board has also scheduled a public hearing on February 9 for the Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan. STRATEGIC PLAN: Goal 2.1: Protect and/or preserve the County's rural character. DISCUSSION: The additional revisions to the Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan are as follows: 1. Goals have been added at the beginning of each major section. The Goals summarize the intent of the policies contained in each section of the Plan. 2. Page 9: added stronger emphasis on tourism economy. 3. Page 11: a) added "watershed protection" to Guiding Principle 1.2 Forestry Resources. Addition brings attention to the role forestry resources play in our watershed protection; b) added "[p] ermanently" to Guiding Prniciple 1.3 Land Preservation; c) added "open spaces" to Guiding Principle 1.4 Land Conservation. 4. Page 12: a) Guiding Principle 10, changed "[c]onsider" to "[i]nclude the goals of the T JPDC Sustainability Council." These goals have been previously adopted into the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan chapter of the Comprehensive Plan; b) changed "[p]rovide to "[F]oster" tools that would allow alternatives for smaller lots. 5. Page 15: added the protection of "working farms" to the strategy to protect prime agricultural soils from non- agricultural development. 6. Page 16: added Strategies 11 and 12 to recognize and protect wine production and to provide support to farmers markets. 7. Page 18: renamed "Conservation Uses" to "Land Conservation". 8. Page 19: a) changed "can" to "may" regarding the level of protection afforded by conservation; b) added information regarding raising public awareness of funding for conservation and the value of funding and implementing conservation measures as in order to achieve conservation on private lands; c) added statement regarding importance of monitoring easement properties. 9. Page 20: a) relocated and changed name of Voluntary Land Conservation Programs to Land Preservation or Voluntary Land Conservation (begins on Page 22); b) relocated strategies (Page 22). 10. Page 21: replaced Strategy 1; added "and protect" to Strategy 3. 11. Page 22, 23, 24: a) relocated renamed section; b) added paragraph that ties the need for conservation easements to other chapters of the Comprehensive Plan. 12. Page 31: added sentences advising of the impact of scattering residential development in the rural areas. 13. Page 35: added emphasis regarding traffic increases on dangerous rural roads. AGENDA TITLE: CPA 03-06 Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan Work Session January 5, 2005 Page 2 14. Page 37: added statement that RPD's should not become a justification for extending public services to the RA. 15. Page 42: added Strategy 19 stating that the County should adopt the Chesapeake Bay Act's provision regarding maintenance of septic-tank systems. 16. Page 44: a) added connections between additional traffic, increased residential development and accidents; b) added caution that fiscal resources are not sufficient to make rural roads safe with increased traffic; and, c) deleted reference to relationship of transportation needs and directing growth into designated areas and the goal that the two main considerations in rural transportation are safety and maintenance. 17. Page 47: added Objective that addresses maintenance of septic systems while avoiding contamination of wells and waterways. Staff believes the changes as proposed are generally consistent with the intent of the Planning Commission recommendations and subsequent decisions reached by the Board in its work sessions. However, Item 15, above, is a strategy that was not discussed by the Commission. The CBPA requirements include pumping of septic systems every five years (see number 7 in Attachment B). All changes to the Plan (Attachment A) have been shown as strikethroughs, that have been used to show deletions, and double underscores, that have been used to show revisions. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors accept the revisions as contained in Attachment A and take this revised draft Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan Amendment to public hearing on February 9, 2005. ATTACHMENTS A - Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan B - Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (Number 7 pertains to septic systems) C - Fatal Traffic Accidents In Albemarle County 1997-2004 (copy will be available at the work session) 04.206 CHAPTER FOUR THE RURAL AREAS INTRODUCTION The Rural Landscape Albemarle County occupies 726 square miles in the Virginia Piedmont and Blue Ridge Mountains. The designated Rural Areas, about 690 square miles, make up the majority (approximately 95 percent) of the County and surround the designated Development Areas and the City of Charlottesville. They border on Greene and Orange counties to the north, Louisa and Fluvanna counties to the east, Buckingham County to the south, and Nelson, Augusta, and Rockingham counties to the west. The County's topography varies from Piedmont hills in the east and south to the Blue Ridge and its foothills in the west. Altitudes range from 235 feet, where the Rivanna River crosses the County's eastern border, to 3,389 feet on Big Flat Mountain in Shenandoah National Park. There are large areas of steep slopes primarily in the central and western part of the County. The majority of the Rural Areas is in the watershed of the James River, mostly draining through the Rivanna and Hardware rivers. The two largest Rivanna River tributaries in the County are the North Fork and South Fork Rivanna rivers. The South Fork is dammed to form the area's largest drinking water reservoir. The land cover of the Rural Areas is a complex mosaic. It has been estimated that, as of the early 1990s (when data was last collected), nearly 47 percent of the Rural Areas was in deciduous forest, 18 percent was in mixed forest, and 8 percent was in conifer forest. Open areas (including pasture, row crops, barren areas, mowed areas and yards, etc.) occupied about 24 percent of the Rural Areas. However, these numbers may not be exact, because the data is collected at coarse resolution by satellite making it difficult to distinguish between pasture and residential yards, or between unfragmented forest and wooded subdivisions. In 2002, the Rural Areas population was estimated at 42,731 people (compared to approximately 44,017 in the designated Development Areas), occupying 16,994 dwelling units. However, density is not distributed evenly throughout the four Rural Areas. Some areas remain quite rural, with large parcels of farm and forestland, while others (including areas such as Earlysville and Ivy, which were formerly designated as Villages) are largely characterized by suburban residential development. Commercial zoning districts within the Rural Areas included 274 acres in existing commercial or industrial uses and another 729 acres as yet undeveloped. The last Federal Census of Agriculture (1997) found 747 farms (counting only those with at least $1,000 in gross income) in the County, totaling 172,251 acres, or 37 percent of the County. In 1997, the most common farm products were hay, beef cattle, and horses. The largest crops were hay, horticultural products, and fruits. The majority oflivestock raised were cattle. The average 1 RA Comp Plan 80S revised 120104 work session fin"l farm size was 231 acres, although the majority (493) was less than 176 acres. The number and area of farms has been declining since the 1920 Census of Agriculture, which counted 3,765 farms over 388,941 acres, or 83.6 percent of the County. In the period since W orId War II, smaller farms have experienced the most extensive declines, but farms of every size have declined in number: Farm Size Farms 1954 Farms Farms Change Change 1992 1997 1992-1997 1954-1997 1 to 9 acres 346 33 41 +8 -305 10 to 49 acres 547 186 186 0 -361 50 to 179 acres 568 269 266 -3 -302 180 to 499 acres 328 177 176 -1 -152 500 to 999 acres 102 62 50 -12 -52 1,000 acres or 35 34 28 -6 -7 more Total Acreage 320,619 188,567 172,251 -16,316 -148,368 The total acreage in farms has also declined: 450,000 400.,000 350,000 300,000 (I) f 250,000 ~ 200,000 150.000 100,000 50,000 o Acreage in Farms, 1950..1997 ("') N s ~ 'C'"" k ("') N N 1950 1954 1959 1964 1969 1974 1978 1982 1987 1992 1997 In addition to the County's most well known historic property, Monticello, many of the County's known historic resources and areas are located in the Rural Areas. The villages of Advance Mills, Batesville, and Proffit are listed as historic districts on the National Register of Historic Places. White Hall and Yancey's Mill are also potentially eligible for listing as historic districts. Approximately 31,000 acres of the County are included in the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District, the environs of Greenwood, and portions of the southeastern section of the R" Comp Plan BuS revised ! 2 0 I 04 work session final 2 County have potential to be listed as another such district. The County also has a rich archaeological heritage, having been occupied by Native Americans for approximately 12,000 years before the arrival of European settlers, who themselves left significant artifacts and sites. For more information on historic resources and related policies, see Chapter Two (Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan) and the Historic Preservation Plan. The majority of the County's parks and natural areas, which provide recreational opportunities to the entire community, are located in the Rural Areas. Over 14,000 acres of the northwestern edge of the County (approximately 3% ofthe Rural Areas) are included in the Shenandoah National Park. Rural Policy History The County's approach to rural area planning has changed over the years. The first Zoning Ordinance, adopted without a Comprehensive Plan in 1969, was largely intended to address concerns over land development and potential annexations by the City of Charlottesville; rural planning was not a major focus. The first Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1971, laid out large areas of development to accommodate a projected 185,000 people by 1995. The 1977 Plan reflected more concern with growth management, and designated less of the Rural Areas for conversion to urban or suburban development. It also projected a lower rate of growth, with the County population expected to reach 100,000 by the year 2000. (In reality, the County population reached approximately 84,000 by the year 2000.) The 1969 Zoning Ordinance permitted unlimited residential development on lots as small as 2 acres in the Agricultural zoning district, as well as planned developments of at least 100 acres. The 1977 Ordinance maintained the 2-acre minimum, and introduced a "Conservation" district, which was short-lived and included very little land outside Shenandoah National Park. By 1980, water quality degradation in the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir (the main drinking water supply for the County's urban areas and the City of Charlottesville) created concern about the level and location of development. As a result, Development Areas within the watershed were restored to rural designation in the Comprehensive Plan. The exception was the Crozet development area, which was only reduced in size. Its boundaries were contained within a single watershed, where water quality management measures were to be put in place to address drinking water protection. In December 1980, the County was comprehensively rezoned. In the Rural Areas, a single zoning district was created that focused on preferred uses (agriculture, forestry) but also accommodated development by assigning each rural parcel up to five "development right" lots (lots with a minimum of2 acres). Outside those "development right" lots, a minimum parcel size of 21 acres was established in hopes of preserving larger parcels for agriculture, open space, and rural character. Several more intensive land uses and land development options that had been permitted under the 1977 Zoning Ordinance were removed from the list of permitted uses. Plan revisions in 1982, 1989, and 1996 focused on an evolving commitment to growth management. (In the 1980s, more than 50 percent of the County's residential growth was in the 3 RA Comp Plan BoS revised 120104 work session final Rural Areas - peaking at 65 percent in 1987.) The 1989 Comprehensive Plan focused rural area policy on resource protection, with an emphasis on promoting and protecting agricultural and forestal uses and limiting the scale and character of rural residential development. The policies of this plan also led to the inclusion of cluster development provisions (the "Rural Preservation Development" option) in the Zoning Ordinance. In 1992, the County adopted the Open Space and Critical Resources Plan, which identifies important resources, discourages the piecemeal loss of important open space, and encourages the evaluation of a resource as part of a larger system of open space that serves several functions. In 1996, the County adopted the Land Use Plan, which focuses largely on the development areas, but it also contains a commitment to protect the key elements of rural character and establishes policies intended to direct growth into the Development Areas. As part of this growth management plan, the County has adopted a policy of not extending public water or sewer service into the Rural Areas, where it might drive more rapid residential and commercial development. The Neighborhood Model for the County's Development Areas, adopted in May 2001, calls for protecting the Rural Areas by increasing development capacity in the Development Areas and forming clear edges with the Rural Areas. The Historic Preservation Plan, adopted in September 2000, recommends measures to protect the County's historic and prehistoric resources, many of which are located in the Rural Areas. Several tools for protecting the Rural Areas are in place. Albemarle County offers a use-value taxation program that reduces tax rates for lands in agricultural, forestal, horticultural and open space uses. As of spring 2003, the County's voluntary agricultural and forestal districts program helped prevent intensification of use on nearly 65,000 acres ofland. Another tool is the County's voluntary Acquisition of Conservation Easements (ACE) program, under which the County purchases conservation easements (which limit uses and development) on qualifying properties. One of the goals of the ACE program is to ensure that owners can afford to keep their land, while benefiting the community through long-term protection of agricultural, forestal, and open space lands. While policies have advanced, rural residential development and changes in the character of the Rural Areas continue from 1985 to 2002, the number of development right lots (lots under 21 acres) created per year ranged from 171 to 340. In sum total, over 3,000 development right lots were created, converting over 15,000 acres of the Rural Areas to potential residential use. Another 704 parcels between 21 and 50 acres in size were created, continuing over 19,000 acres of rural land. In the decade from 1987 to 1997, 14,235 acres went out of farming according to the Census of Agriculture, continuing a long standing trend toward fewer and smaller farms. These are the central trends-the division and fragmentation of the rural landscape, and the increasing suburbanization of the Rural Areas-that Albemarle County's rural area policies must address. 4 R¿\ Comp Plan BoS revised 120] 04 work session tJl1al Trends in Rural Areas Land Use and Development The following data summarize trends in land use and development in the County's Rural Areas: · From 1985 to 2000, 3,662 new parcels were created through subdivisions in the Rural Areas. Of these, nearly 42% were at least 2 but less than 5 acres in size, and another 30% were 5 to just under 21 acres. (At present, 21 acres is the minimum size for lots other than development right lots in the County.) In other words, 76% of new parcels in this period were below the 21-acre minimum. · During this period, the division of new parcels in the Rural Areas has continued at a relatively steady rate, ranging from 171 to 340 parcels per year. · In 1996, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission estimated that the Rural Areas could accommodate 54,867 more housing units, bringing a population increase of 143,751. They estimated that, at buildout: Lots in the "Open Space" categories (1 housing unit per 50 acres or more) would decrease from 57.6% of the Rural Areas to 1.4% of the Rural Areas. "Large Lot" parcels (1 housing unit per 5 to 20.9 acres) would in increase from 16.8% of the Rural Areas to 72.3% of the Rural Areas. "Suburban" parcels (1 housing unit per 1 to 4.9 acres) would increase from 2.1 % to 24.1 % ofthe Rural Areas. From 1991 to 2002, over 2,500 new subdivision lots were approved in the Rural Areas (data for 1995 are not available). This would leave approximately 52,000 more dwelling units in the Rural Areas. For comparison, the entire County had 36,469 dwelling units in 2002 (19,475 in the Development Areas and 16,994 in the Rural Areas). TJPDC estimated that total Rural Areas population could increase to 189,636, as compared to an estimated 42,731 in 2002--nearly four and a half times the current rural population. · Development right lots have been created at higher densities within the designated Water Supply Protection areas than outside those areas. · Rural Preservation Developments (RPDs), which are clustered subdivisions that are intended to reduce the impact of rural residential development, have only rarely occurred in the County. Since 1989, when RPDs were first allowed under the Zoning Ordinance, only 13 RPDs have been approved, with preservation tracts under conservation easement ranging from 40 to 385.6 acres. Between 1990 and 1998, there were six years with no clustered subdivisions approved. In 69 percent of the developments, 50 percent or more of the land was protected; 53 percent preserved 60 percent or more). · In 2002, the rural area population was estimated at 42,731 people (compared to approximately 44,017 in the Development Areas), occupying 16,994 dwelling units. However, density and population growth are not distributed evenly through the Rural Areas. 5 R:\ Plan BnS revísed 12 () 1 04 work session IÏnal Comprehensive Plan Area Annual Growth Rate, 1993-2000 1.65% 0.78% 1.27% 2.19% 1.94% Rural Areas 1 Rural Areas 2 Rural Areas 3 Rural Areas 4 All Development Areas · From 1993 to 2000, Rural Areas population growth (1.49% annually) was only slightly slower than the rate for the Development Areas (1.94% annually). . In the 1989 Comprehensive Plan, it was reported that, on average, over 50 percent of the County's residential development was occurring in the Rural Areas. From 1998 to 2002, this percentage ranged from 18 to 44 percent of total development. However, it is important to note that this is not due to a significant decrease in the number of dwellings created in the Rural Areas, but to a large increase in the number created in the Development Areas. Rural residential development has continued at a relatively steady rate. This building permit activity reflects development on both existing and newly created parcels. Building Permits for Dwelling Units, 1998 - 2002 CaMP PLAN 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 AREA Urban Areas 367 42% 218 28% 189 29% 414 47% 1,131 66% Communities 158 18% 167 22% 130 20% 186 21% 246 14% Villages 63 7% 49 6% 50 8% 22 3% 27 2% Rural Areas 286 33% 336 44% 281 43% 253 29% 316 18% TOTAL 874 100% 770 100% 650 100% 875 100% 1,720 100% These trends are inconsistent with the County's growth management policy. Public Input In the winter 2002-03 public input meetings, 70.1 % of respondents agreed with the County's policy of directing residential growth into the Development Areas, and another 24.3% agreed "somewhat." Many of those who qualified their answers agreed with the policy, but felt that it was not being effectively implemented. These answers correspond with those in the 2002 Citizen Survey, in which the protection of water, natural resources, and farm and forest land were all high priorities--all of these resources are impacted by residential development. 6 R i\ Comp Plan BoS revised 12 0 j 04 \vork session final Asked to characterize their vision for the Rural Areas, 73.1 % favored a rural character with "little residential development" (1 on scale of 1 to 4, with 4 representing "extensive suburban development"). Another 24.1 % selected "2" on this scale. On another scale from 1 ("large-lot subdivisions") to 4 ("clustered subdivisions with protected areas"), 75.4% chose 3 or 4. A majority felt that farms (62.7%) natural areas (64.9%), and stream buffer and habitat corridors (76.7%) should be common features of the Rural Areas. Ranking visual character on a continuum of values from 1 ("suburbs") to 4 ("farms, forests, and natural areas"), most chose a rank of 4 (76.2%) or 3 (21.1 %). CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN This chapter of the Comprehensive Plan is intended to work in concert with the other elements of the Plan. Strategies for implementing the growth management policy and the public facilities policy established in the Land Use Plan and the policies set in the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan are found throughout this chapter. This chapter also takes advantage of new information regarding resource protection and provides for further policy adoption based on the expected products of the Critical Resource Inventory. In order to ensure consistency throughout the Plan, the other elements of the Plan will require amendment upon adoption of this Chapter. Land Use Plan The Guiding Principles echo and build on the Growth Management Goal of the Land Use Plan. They also reflect the Facilities Planning goals, which state that the County should use infrastructure spending to direct dC'/elopment into the Development .\.reas. As that olan states. "rtlhe Countv's orimarv !:!:rowth mana!:!:ement !:!:oal directs develooment into desi!:!:nated areas and conserves the balance of the Countv for rural areas and resource orotection. .. .Plannin!:!: efforts aim to channel !ITowth into desÜmated areas to facilitate economical service deliverv in those areas. and to conserve the Rural Areas... .Plannin!:!: efforts also focus on means to discoura!:!:e develooment in the Rural Areas and suooort activities consistent with the character ofthe Rural Areas....Loss oUrurall resources is irreversible...." (Land Use Plan. 0.3.: amended Julv 2002.), Natural Resources & Cultural Assets Plan Rural Areas regulations and programs should be reviewed for their natural and cultural resource impacts, and the County should ensure that regulatory and program changes protect or restore the resources they affect. This will require an orientation to resource protection that pervades the County's planning process, rather than a separate resource protection program. This approach would implement the Guiding Principles by furthering land preservation and conservation; protecting water supply, natural, scenic, and cultural resources; protecting and enhancing retainin!:!: rural quality of life for current and future residents; implementing the objectives of the Natural Resources & Cultural Assets Plan; and encouraging and implementing protection of genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity for native plants and wildlife. However, committee work and research regarding resource protection policies and the Critical 7 RA Comp Plan BoS revised 12 01 04 work scssionlìnal Resource Inventory are ongoing. The following general strategies are intended to ensure that Rural Areas policies adopt the recommendations that result from that work: GUIDING OBJECTIVES FOR FURTHER POLICY DEVELOPMENT: · Ensure that Rural Areas policies are developed in accord with the Guiding Principles (see below) and the Facilities Planning goal of the Land Use Plan ("r s ltronelv suooort and effectivelv imolement the Countv's erowth manaeement oriorities in the olannine and orovision oftransoortation infrastructure. oublic facilities. and oublic utilities"-o.5. Land Use Plant and that policy changes are designed to avoid any increased demand for public infrastructure in the Rural Areas. · Ensure that Rural Areas policies are developed in accord with the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan, and protect resources identified as important in the Critical Resources Inventory. STRATEGIES: The County should: 1. Continue and increase current efforts at aericultural. forestal. ooen-soace and natural- resource orotection in existine and new codes and oroerams. 2. Amend codes and programs affecting the Rural Areas and the County as a whole to protect biodiversity, reflect the recommendations of the Biodiversity Work Group and the standing Biodiversity Committee once adopted, and incorporate policy responses to issues raised by the ongoing biological resources inventory. 3. Amend codes and programs affecting the Rural Areas to protect historic resources and reflect the recommendations of the Historic Preservation Plan. 4. Protect potential trail areas as recommended in the Greenways Plan. 5. Locate trails to provide public access to natural and cultural resources without negatively impacting those resources. 6. Protect scenic resources for residents and visitors. Approach protection of scenic resources by fostering viable rural economies, healthy ecosystems, and protected cultural resources± , rather than only through implementation ofyisual design standards. }..pproach protection of scenic resources from the viewpoint of all rural area residents and '¡isitors, rather than only focusing on vie\ys from designated scenic roads and streams. 8 RA Comp Plan 130S revised 12 0 ¡ 04 \vork session final A VISION FOR RURAL ALBEMARLE COUNTY County land use decisions regarding the Rural Areas should be based on a set of consistent policies adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Decision making should always include a consideration of a proposal's cumulative effects on the Rural Areas and the County as a whole. It is, therefore, very important for the County to have a coherent idea of the desired future of its rural lands. The following vision statement is intended to clarify the overall goals of this section of the Comprehensive Plan. Albemarle County envisions its Rural Areas as multifaceted places that will, over centuries, provide and protect the key elements that give the area its character. This vision is not a list of actions to be avoided, but a positive design to be achieved, maintained, and improved over the very long tenn, with the intention that the Rural Areas remain rural. The elements of this vision include: · A pattern of land uses defined by fanns, forests and other natural elements, and traditional crossroads communities, rather than by suburban or ex-urban - outside the suburbs - development that typically uses land faster than population Increases. · A strong agricultural and forestal economy, with large unfragmented parcels of land on which to produce their goods, opportunities to gain value from processing their own produce, and access to local markets · Diverse, interconnected areas of viable habitat for native wildlife, extensive enough and sufficiently protected and restored to allow ecological processes to endure for the long tenn · Healthy streams and sustainable supplies of unpolluted groundwater · Protected historic structures, archaeological sites, and other cultural resources · Rural citizens supported by community meeting places, a basic level of services, and rural organizations and other cultural institutions at traditional rural scales, with opportunities to take part in community life and decisions · A clearly visible rural character achieved by supporting lively rural industries and activities and discouraging suburbanization of the Rural Areas~, rather than by treating the Rural Areas only as an amenity for "isitors (vlhile ackno'vvledging the value of tourism based on this rural character) · A sÏl:mificant tourist economv in which rural and historic landscaves aUlm1ent the visitors' exverience and ¡Úve historic sites as authentic a setting: as vossible. · Well infonned citizens, both rural area and development area residents, who understand the cultural, economic, and ecological aspects of the Rural Areas and appreciate their importance to the community, region, and state · Plans, policies, and decision making that consider and protect rural economies and ecological processes · Boundaries that show a clear distinction between rural and urban areas, without 9 RA Comp Plan DoS revised 12 0 ¡ 04 work session final low-density transition areas Several aspects of this vision were reflected in the input received from citizens during four public meetings held in the winter of 2002-2003. The strong majority of attendees (over 70 percent in each case) felt that: · The visual character of the Rural Areas should be made up of farms, forests, and natural areas. · Stream buffers and habitat corridors should be common throughout the Rural Areas. · Growth should be limited and well managed to maintain the rural character of the County. · Residential development should be directed into the designated Development Areas. · Agricultural and forestal lands are critical County resources, and that agriculture and forestry are the desired primary land uses in the Rural Areas. The County's 2002 Citizen Survey reflected similar views. Items rated "very important" for the County by a majority of respondents included "protecting water quality in reservoirs, streams, and wells" (85.2%), "preserving natural resources and open space" (65.1 %), and "preserving farmland and forested land" (63.8%). Planning approaches favored by a majority included permitting localized services (stores, post offices, etc.) in traditionally rural communities (96%), the Acquisition of Conservation Easements (ACE) program (74%), use-value taxation of agricultural and forestal land (79%), and restricting the number oflots into which a rural parcel can be subdivided (76.1 %). 10 R ,'I Comp Plan BoSrcviscd I~()] 04 \vork session final GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR THE RURAL AREAS The following principles are intended to guide comprehensive planning of the Rural Areas and to set general guidelines for future policy decisions. They reflect the County's growth management policy and its vision for the Rural Areas. Albemarle County will: 1. Recognize in policy development that all of the following defining principles are equal and important components of the Rural Areas: 1. Agriculture - - Protect Albemarle County's agricultural lands as a resource base for its agricultural industries and for related benefits they contribute towards the County's rural character, scenic quality, natural environment, and fiscal health. 2. Forestry resources - Protect Albemarle County's forests as a resource base for its forestry industries and watershed Dfotection. 3. Land Preservation - Permanentlv RPreserve and protect Albemarle County's rural land as an essential and finite resource. 4. Land Conservation - Protect Albemarle County's rural land through planned management of ODen SDaces to prevent exploitation, destruction, or neglect. 5. Water supply resources - Protect the quality and supply of surface water and groundwater resources. 6. Natural resources - Preserve and manage the Rural Areas' natural resources in order to protect the environment and conserve resources for future use. 7. Scenic resources - Preserve the County's rural scenic resources as being essential to the County's character, economic vitality, and quality of life. 8. Historical. archeological and cultural resources - Protect the Rural Areas' historic, archeological and cultural resources. 2. Protect and enhance rural quality of life for present and future Rural Areas residents. 3. Provide support to local agricultural and forestal economies and connect local producers and consumers of rural products. 4. Address the needs of existing rural residents without fostering growth and further suburbanization of the Rural Areas. 5. Develop tools to direct residential development into designated Development Areas, where services and utilities are available, and where such development will have minimum impact on rural resources and agricultural/forestal activities. 6. Establish development standards that are consistent with rural area characteristics and expectations. 7. Provide levels of service delivery in accord with the Facilities Planning goals of the Land 11 f{¡\ Plan BoS revised 12 OJ 04 worl; session tìnal Use Plan. 8. Provide support for long standing rural crossroads communities and villages without creating de facto growth areas. 9. Consider financial and fiscal tools to support implementation of Rural Areas policies. 10. Consider Include the goals of the Thomas Jefferson Sustainability Council in rural area policy and code development. (These guidelines have been adopted as part of the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan, where they are reproduced.) 11. Strive for better understanding and coordination of rural area land use planning with neighboring counties. 12. Pro'lÌdc Foster tools that offer alternatives to fragmentation of parcels into pieces too small for economic viability. 13. Implement the applicable objectives of the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan. 14. Encourage creative and diverse forms of rural production and support rural land uses that provide rural landowners with economic viability. 15. Encourage and implement the protection and enhancement of genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity for wildlife in the County. 12 R!\ Comp Plan BoS revised 12 01 04 work scssioni1nal RURAL AREAS LAND USES INTRODUCTION Albemarle County has a long tradition of protecting its rural land through its land use policies, resource protection policies, and growth management policies in the Comprehensive Plan. Also, the County has demonstrated its support of and in its efforts to maintain the character of the Rural Areas through the Acquisition of Conservation Easement (ACE) program, Agricultural and Forestal Districts, the Use Value Assessment (land use tax) program, conservation easements, and Rural Preservation Developments. The Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Component of the Plan states, "In the Rural Areas, agricultural and forestry uses are the preferred land use, over residential uses." In accord with the Guiding Principles, this section builds on that policy by recognizing that agriculture and forestry are the preferred income-generating activities, but also that land and water conservation activities are equally important aspects of the Rural Areas. According to the United States Department of Agriculture, between 1992 and 1997 the County's agricultural land decreased nine percent. Response to the continued decrease in agricultural lands cannot be to turn aside from our detennination to preserve and protect fannland. The conversion of land in the Rural Areas for residential development is the County's biggest threat. The decline of agricultural lands calls for proactive support of agricultural uses, illustrating the need to seek creative solutions that would prevent or reduce land divisions without compromising the land, the character, or the resources of the Rural Areas. All Rural Areas land uses should be measured against their support of and their impact on the Guiding Principles, so that the preservation of the Rural Areas is assured. Scale and the intensity of land uses should be carefully considered. Where necessary, perfonnance standards should be used to ensure that scale and intensity are appropriate to the rural landscape. Uses that cannot be sufficiently mitigated or that conflict with the Guiding Principles should not be pennitted. AGRICULTURAL USES GOAL: Protect Albemarle Countv's ag:riculturallands as a resource base for its arncultural industries and for related benefits thev contribute towards the Countv's rural character. scenic aualitv. natural environment. and fiscal health. The Guiding Principles for the Rural Areas recognizes the importance of our agricultural lands as a resource base for agricultural industries and for the contributions they make toward the County's rural character, scenic quality, natural environment, and fiscal health. The Growth Management Plan corroborates the significance for the preservation of agricultural resources as they provide "an opportunity to conserve and efficiently use other resources such as: (1) water resources (with use of property conservation techniques); (2) natural, scenic, and historic resources with the maintenance of pasture land, fannland, and forested areas; and 13 !{A Comp Plan 80S revised 12 0 ¡ 04 work session Cinal (3) fiscal resources by limiting development and lessening the need to provide public services to wide areas of the County. In the interest of this growth management strategy, residential development is considered a secondary use in the Rural Areas. The importance of agricultural uses to the economy, environment and heritage of the County is also articulated in other sections of the Comprehensive Plan, including the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan and the Growth Management Plan. Citizens attending the Rural Areas public meetings held during the winter of 2002-2003 confirmed the validity of the County's policies to protect agriculture. In response to a survey given at the meetings, over 62% desired fanns to be common and widespread. A visioning question revealed that citizens wanted to see support for working fanns, but with the realization of the need for economic alternatives to traditional fanning. They also wished to see support for more sustainable management techniques on fanns. Over 69% of the public meeting participants ranked agriculture as number 1 when asked how they would rank the land uses they would like to have within the County. Over 76% of the participants agreed that agricultural and forestal resources should be the primary land uses in the Rural Areas. Protecting agricultural land has become more urgent despite all past efforts and resolve; Albemarle's agricultural lands continue to disappear. Much of the land that has been fanned for generations has been subdivided for residential use. In 1994, the Agricultural and Forestal Industries Support Committee presented a report to the Board of Supervisors. Representatives from a variety of fann types participating on the Committee provided recommendations based on their valuable, first-hand experiences. Among those recommendations, the Committee asked that measures be taken that discourage fannland fragmentation, they favored clustered development and the protection of prime soils (Map F, Important Fannland Soils) believing that the 21-acre lots size wastes land and that growth should be concentrated. They asked that the number of development rights be maintained, in order to maintain stability. Further, they recommended that marketing strategies for agricultural products, niche agriculture, and direct marketing operations be encouraged and promoted. They also requested that County policies support fanners regarding nuisance conflicts in Rural Areas. One of the County's challenges will be to maintain and increase agricultural uses on smaller parcels, as acreages devoted to fanning decrease. Viticulture, the cultivation or culture of grapes especially for wine making, is an emerging leader in agriculture. Virginia ranks ninth in commercial grape production and Albemarle County ranks first among the ten leading Virginia counties (2001 acreage figures) with over 367 acres planted in vines. In Virginia, a 20-acre vineyard is considered large and a 5-acre vineyard is more common. The Virginia Cooperative Extension Service recently published a report titled, Virginia Farmers Have Opportunity to Fill Organic Crops Market Niche. Organic fanning provides opportunities for small and mid-size fanning, according to the Extension Service. These are only two examples of alternative fanning opportunities that should be explored in order to reverse the decline in fanning. 14 RA Comp Plan 80S revísed 12 0 j 04 work session final The 1994 report of the Agricultural and Forestal Industries Support Committee, as well as subsequent discussions with many fanners in the County, has provided a clearer understanding of the needs of the agricultural community. It is unmistakable that the agricultural community values Albemarle's rural character and its natural resources and that they are resolute in their detennination to retain the integrity of the Rural Areas. Many of their recommendations are included as strategies in this section. The County recognizes that there can be conflicts between residential uses and agricultural uses. Both smaller parcels and increased development exacerbate these inherent, inevitable conflicts. Using multi-media communication methods, including a requirement of a note on a subdivision plat, the County should advise residents of the predictable conflicts of traveling and living in the proximity of our agricultural industries, such as noise, odors, slow moving fann equipment on roadways, and chemical spraying. Conflicts can arise from different agricultural uses as well. As agricultural uses are encouraged in our Rural Areas, conflict resolution can be more difficult in these cases. Education, communication, and sensitivity toward neighbors will be key components in seeking resolution. Additional setbacks, minimum area requirements and any other necessary requirements should be considered for agricultural uses that may have greater impact on their neighbors, such as the potential to create demands on services, produce off-site negative environmental impacts, and significant traffic impacts. For the purposes of this document, the tenn agriculture encompasses all fonns of food, ornamental plant, beverage, equine and other animal operations. OBJECTIVE: To support agricultural land uses and to create additional markets for agricultural products through creative economic and land use strategies. STRATEGIES: The County should: 1. Initiate a multi-media communication program that educates citizens of the benefits and the conflicts ofliving in the proximity of agricultural industries, promotes the appreciation ofthe Rural Areas and the importance of agricultural resources. 2. Encourage the protection of prime agricultural soils and workin!! fanns from non- agricultural development through Rural Preservation Developments, conservation easements, Agricultural and Forestal Districts, the Land Use Taxation program, and the Acquisition of Conservation Easement program. 3. Allow appropriately scaled low-impact uses on working fanns that provide supplemental economic benefit to fanners. 4. Increase and establish consistent funding for the Acquisition of Conservation Easement program and actively seek supplementary public and private funding sources. 5. Establish proactive support of agricultural land uses through the creation of an Agricultural/Forestal Support Program position that provides agricultural assistance that includes community education, marketing strategies, the exploration of agricultural support businesses and alternative agricultural uses. 15 RA Camp Plan [3oSrcvìscd 1201 04 work session final 6. Revise the Zoning Ordinance to include perfonnance standards for agricultural operations, such as confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) that may cause serious negative impacts the environment. 7. Continue to support the Fann Tour as an educational tool. 8. Support agricultural education in the classroom. Implement a fann day for children. 9. Encourage and promote agricultural related vocational education programs from middle school onward. 10. Encourage the integration of conservation land uses with agricultural and forestal uses, especially if the conservation use would provide connectivity to other conservation land and/or would provide a buffer between potential conflicting uses, such as residential and other types of agricultural or forestal uses. 11. RecoQIlize increasin!! interest in wine Dfoduction and consider how reQulations and the use of a2:ricultural education and SUDDOrt staff can foster aDDfoDfiatelv located vinevards. 12. SUDDOrt creation and oDeration of farmers' markets. FORESTAL USES GOAL: Protect Albemarle Countv's forests as a resource base for its forestrv industries and watershed Dfotection. The Guiding Principles for the Rural Areas recognize the importance of forestal resources to the County. Forestal resources in the County serve as a base for its forestry industry, adds to the economic vitality of the region, contributes to the biodiversity of the region, and benefits the scenic, natural and historic resources. Although this section addresses forestal uses, the importance of forested land as an essential component for the continued protection of the County's water resources cannot be overstated. "The most important and obvious source of resilience in the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir Watershed ecosystem is the natural forest. Forests produce the cleanest and most reliable flow of water possible," according to The South Fork Rivanna Reservoir and Watershed report prepared in 2002 for the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority. The report explains resilience as, "Ecosystems, including watersheds, have natural characteristics that confer a degree of protection to the ecosystem and those who rely on it. These protective characteristics sometimes are referred to as 'resilience.'" According to the Virginia Department of Forestry, an ecosystem approach is based on whole ecosystem function, rather than on single elements or species in isolation. Management objectives blend long-tenn needs of people and environmental values so the land will support diverse, productive ecosystems and sustainable ecosystem processes. While the popularity of wood products has increased, the Agricultural and Forestal Industries Support Committee 1994 report identified continued forest fragmentation as the biggest threat to the future vitality ofthe forestry industry in Albemarle County. The Report stated that tract sizes below 40 acres are difficult to manage economically and the proximity to houses and other structures further escalates the problem. Continued decreases in forested land, and further fragmentation of the remaining land reduces the sustainability of both the ecological services and the forest products provided by the forests of Albemarle County. The erosion of larger blocks of forest decreases the habitat for forest-interior bird species, favors edges species (such as white- 16 ¡{A Comp Plan BoS revised 120] ()4 work session tlnal tailed deer) and increases the risk of forest fires and the loss to fire of woodland homes. The latest estimate (2002) of forestland area for Albemarle is 272,000 acres. The previous estimate (1992) was 293,400 acres. Therefore, the estimated total net loss over the last 10 years has been approximately 21,400 acres. County-level estimates of conversions ofland between agriculture and forestland uses are not available. However, statewide data indicates that for approximately every 3 acres of forestland converted to urban and agricultural uses, 2 acres of agricultural land reverts to forestland use. Map G, Important Forestal Soils, documents that most of the County contains soils conducive to the potential for growing of both hardwoods and softwoods. The Virginia Department of Forestry recognizes that urbanization is the main source of fragmentation and predicts that an annual net loss of about 18,000 acres of Virginia forestland per year is likely to continue due in part to the trend toward large lots and woodland homes. Urbanization is cited as the biggest threat to forestal land. OBJECTIVES: . Strive to maintain and/or restore sufficient forestlands in the County, with the spatial arrangement - connected parcels or a sufficient size that permits harvesting, ownership, and management needed to provide sustainable ecological services and forest products; adhere to the principles of ecosystem management, while working to achieve the primary goals of conserving and promoting biodiversity and reducing the risk of wildfire to forest and human communities. · Continue to support the forestry industry, in recognition of its contribution to the economy, environment, and heritage of the County of Albemarle. STRATEGIES: The County should: 1. Encourage protection of prime forestal soils from non- forestal agricultural development through Rural Preservation Developments, conservation easements, Agricultural and Forestal Districts, the Land Use Taxation program, and the Acquisition of Conservation Easement program-:-. and imulementation of the Mountains section of the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Comuonent of the Plan. as discussed below (ua2:e 34), as mountains in Albemarle are heavilv forested. 2. Encourage educational programs that teach conservation of the forest land base. 3. Continue to actively promote conservation easements. 4. Consider the impact on forest fragmentation in the evaluation of land use decisions. 5. Encourage cooperative management of small parcels of forestland to provide economies of scale and better management. 6. Actively promote Agricultural and Forestal Districts. 7. Establish proactive support through the creation of an Agricultural/Forestal Support Program that provides forestal assistance that includes community education, marketing strategies and the exploration of forestal support businesses. 8. Encourage the integration of conservation land uses with forestal uses, especially if the 17 Ri\ Comp Plan ßoS revised !2 0104 work session !lna! conservation use would provide connectivity to other conserved land and/or would provide a buffer between potential conflicting uses, such as residential uses. CONSERV},.TION USES LAND CONSERVATION GOAL: Protect Albemarle Countv's rural land throullh Dlanned manallement to mevent eXDloitation. destruction. or nelllect. and Dennanentlv meserve rural land as an essential and finite resource. The Guiding Principles for the Rural Areas recognize the importance of conservation use of land to the County. For the purposes of this section, conservation may be defined simply as "the protection, preservation, management, or restoration of wildlife and of natural resources such as forests, soil, and water." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Recognition of "conservation" as a use of land is crucial to protection of essential natural resources, such as water and biodiversity, in Albemarle County. In 1992. the Countv adoDted a ODen SDace and Critical Resources Plan. In the 1999 the current Natural Resources and Cultural Assets chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, the importance of such resources is recognized. In the Natural Resources chapter, the County also makes a commitment to development of a long- tenn biodiversity protection plan. This biodiversity commitment supplements the County's long engagement in protecting local water resources. Citizens have indicated a strong wish to see such protections accomplished. ODen SDace land used for Gconservation ranks with agricultural and forestal use~ of land as one of the most prevalent and important use of land in the Rural Areas, and as noted in the Guiding Principles, ranks equally in importance with them. It is reco!!llized in the State Land Evaluation Advisorv Council (SLEAC) movisions for land use that mav be covered bv the use-value taxation mO!ITam (commonlv called "land use tax" .Albemarle County has demonstrated the importance of land conservation by its adoption of the L\cquisition of Conservation Easements (J\CE) program '.vhich acquires conservation casements to preserve the land's rural character, whether in agriculture, forest production, or dedicated to conservation. Further, this Comprehensive Plan's description of the benefits of Rural Preservation Developments includes "the pennanent preservation of large areas of land that can be used for agricultural and forestal production, recreational uses, water supply protection, and the conservation of natural, scenic and historic resources. " Conservation, agriculture and forestry have a dynamic and mutually supportive relationship in our Rural Areas. Albemarle's Rural Areas are a mosaic of land used for agriculture, for forestry, as well as for land whose greatest value is its contribution to the protection of natural resources. This mosaic has great value to the residents of Albemarle's rural communities, for whom it provides a traditional rural environment; but its value extends to the community at large, including the City of Charlottesville and the County's Development Areas, which benefits from the proximity to rural land and its salutary contributions to clean and abundant water supply, clean air, and preservation of wildlife habitat that are fundamental to a healthy and diverse biological community. Tho community profits as well from the preservation of scenic and 18 Ri\ Comp Plan BoS revised 12 OJ ()4 worK session Iloa! cultural resources, ':/hich not only enriches lives, but which are important components of a thriving tourism industry, and as a setting for traditional rural activities such as hunting, fishing, hiking and horseback riding. The relationship among forestry, agriculture and conservation is also mutually supportive in that some land whose primary use is conservation may have secondary uses for agriculture or forestry (e.g., limited hay cutting and/or small selective harvesting of trees). The relationship is dynamic because these uses may change among the three over time (e.g., agricultural land may become forest). This is in stark contrast to residential or commercial uses which almost never revert to agriculture, conservation or forestry. Like agriculture and commercial forestal land use, effective protection of natural resources generally requires substantial blocks of land dedicated to conservation. Fragmentation of land by suburban type development is no more compatible with conservation use of land than it is for land dedicated to agriculture or to forestry. Land in long-tenn conservation use can buffer agricultural & commercial forestry operations from less intensive use of land or particularly sensitive ones; can provide recreational opportunities; and eaH: mav provide a greater level of protection for natural resources than land dedicated to either agriculture or forestry alone. The economic benefits of conservation use of land are also important. For the community at large and for the individual property owner to a lesser extent, retail sales for activities associated with conservation use of land such as hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, and horse-back riding equipment (also uses found on a£ricultural and forestrv lands) are substantial and growing. As with arncultural and forested lands. Hhere are also other potential property owner benefits such as tax benefits, including use value taxation, protection from more intensive development through easement donation or participation in agricultural and forestal districts, and the possibility of increased property value as conserved land. Land in conservation use of land can also enhance the value of near-by property. And tourism, one of the most important components of this area's local economy, is inextricably linked to conserved land that preserves natural resources. In the larger sense, perhaps the primary long tenn economic value of conservation use ofland can be the ecological services they provide, such as moderation of temperature extremes, facilitation of rainfall absorption, purification of water and air, erosion control, pollination of crops and supply of many active ingredients in drugs used to treat human diseases. As an example, all human enterprise in the community depends on the abundance and quality of water, which can be enhanced and protected by large tracts of properly conserved land. Conservation can be assisted by providing funding for conservation projects, such as the planting and maintaining of forested stream buffers. Raising public awareness of funding sources and providing assistance with acquiring funding and implementing conservation measures is an effective way for the County to achieve resource conservation on private lands. However, for voluntary programs (especially pennanent easements) to be truly effective, use of the protected land must be monitored to ensure that the established conservation standards are being met. The County currently has little or no capacity for monitoring even the relatively 19 f{,\ Comp Plan BoS revised 12 0 J 04 work scssionlinal small number of easements that it currently holds. An increasing dependence on easements for conservation will require that such a capacity be created. V oluntary Land Consen'ation Programs Vlith the prospect of over 50,000 more dwelling units being added to the Rural .\reas, it becomes clear that the County must take advantage of e'lery opportunity to reduce the number of available development rights. Although it may not be practical to change the current development pattern of the Rural .\reas solely through the purchase of development rights, the existing .\cquisition of Conservation Easements (¡\CE) program docs make conservation casements an option for landowners who cannot afford to donate them. .^~pplicants' incomes are considered in determining the purchase price of ACE casements, and properties that have high development potential or that are under pressure to subdivide arc ranked higher for purchase. Increasing the funding for this program will make protection of more of this threatened land possible. Goal setting (for the number of development rights to be extinguished, and/or the area of land to be protected) would help to determine the level of funding and program promotion necessary to make this approach more effective. Some landowners arc '.villing to donate casements that protect important resources by eliminating development potential. The Virginia Outdoors Foundations and other organizations already hold such casements. The County's Public Recreational Facilities Authority is also able to hold casements, if the property includes resources identified as important in the Comprehensive Plan. Promotion of this program could lead to a significant increase in the number of casements donated, and provide nCVl opportunities for resource protection through the elimination of development potential. The Thomas Jefferson Soil and VI ater Conservation District no"v has a program for accepting riparian conservation casements; the County streams and riparian woodlands could benefit from increased participation in this program. In order to have an accurate picture of the extent of conservation casements in the County and to plan accordingly, it would be useful to have a database and maps that include the casements accepted by all holders. Unfortunately, records on casements are scattered, with some records kept by the County and others by other holders. fJso, there is no mechanism in place to notify the County or other holders when new conservation casements arc recorded. V/orking in cooperation v¡ith the other casement holders in the community, the County could facilitate the creation of an accurate and freely available casement tracking and mapping system that would assist in land protection efforts. See Map E, Conservation Easements, for conservation casements, including ACE casements. The County's voluntary f~gricultural/Forestal Districts program helps limit the development potential of a member's land for renewable periods of up to 10 years. f~lthough nearly 70,000 acres arc currently emolled in the program, emollment has been slO'.\'ly decreasing. The reasons for this decline arc not clearly understood; surveying past and current members would provide useful information. Increased public awareness of the Districts and an acti'le promotion program 'Nould be useful in increasing participation. Another approach to voluntary conservation is to pro'lÌde or facilitate funding for conservation 20 R/\ Com ) Plan BoS revised 12 01 04 work session final projects, such as planting and maintaining forested stream buffers. Raising public awareness of funding sources and providing assistance '.vith acquiring funding and implementing conservation measures is an effective way for the County to achieve resource conservation on private lands. Howe'..'er, for voluntary programs (especially permanent easements) to be truly effective, use of the protected land must be monitored to ensure that the established conservation standards are being met. The County currently has little or no capacity for monitoring even the relatively small number of easements that it currently holds. ,^..n increasing dependence on easements for conservation will require that such a capacity be created. OBJECTIVES: · Strive to maintain and/or restore sufficient land in conservation use in the County, with the primary goals of conserving and promoting undisturbed land for its benefit to clean and abundant ground and surface water, clean air, and terrestrial and aquatic habitats that are fundamental to a healthy and diverse biological community. · Support rural land owners whose main objective is the conservation of rural land not necessarily in agricultural or commercial forestal production. STRATEGIES: The County should: 1. Protect the Countv's natural. scenic. and historic resources in the Rural Area. continuim! the efforts bel!un with the "Ouen Suace and Critical Resources Plan" adouted in 1992. 1. Encourage protection of environmentally sensitive land from residential or commercial development through Rural Preservation Developments, conservation casements, ,\gricultural and Forestal Districts, the Land Use Taxation program, and the Acquisition of Conservation Easement program. 2. Encourage educational programs that teach conservation of natural resources, especially those programs tailored to individual user groups such as land owners, business owners, contractors, developers, and teachers. 3. Identify and Dfotect land areas that should be maintained as natural conservation areas to assure persistence of our water and biological resources. This should consider, among other things, maintenance of large blocks of forest to provide groundwater recharge and forest interior habitat, protection of wetlands, riparian areas and other biologically rich and ecologically important areas, maintenance or creation of wildlife movement corridors, possibly in riparian areas and mountain ridge tops. Utilize the County's biodiversity initiatives to identify areas or species that need conservation protection. 4. Review potential conflicts between conservation areas and other, adjoining rural land uses. Seek to develop planning and management methods that promote coexistence of these different uses. 5. Continue to actively promote conservation easements. 6. Consider the impact on rural land fragmentation in the evaluation of land use decisions. 21 [{A Comp Plan BoSrevised 1:::0] 04 work session final 7. Actively promote Agricultural and Forestal Districts. 8. Establish proactive support through the creation of an Agriculture/Conservation/Forestry Support Program that provides assistance including community education, marketing strategies, and the exploration of rural land use support businesses. 9. Promote the benefits of conservation and preservation of land through education programs, infonnation provided through mixed media resources, and the County web page. Infonnation pertaining to the Land Use Taxation program for Open Space should be included in this outreach initiative. 10. Establish stability in the ACE program through a pennanent funding source. 11. Increase the visibility of the ACE Program. 12. Increase funding of the }..CE Program to enable it to keep pace '.vith escalating real estate '¡alues. 13. Assign the highest priority possible in the County's budget to the acquisition of pennanent casements. 14. l\ctiyely pursue voluntary donations of conservation casements that prc'¡ent development and protect valued resources, whether those casements arc held by the County's Public Recreational Facilities }~uthority or by other approved bodies. 15. Coordinate ':lÌth other casement holders to create a complete and accurate conservation casement tracking system for the County. 16. Increase its capacity to monitor the use ofland under casement and ensure adherence to the tenns of casements. 17. Preserve large areas of forest, protect or create forested stream buffers, and support good soil management in order to protect watershed services. 18. Fund and/or provide grant assistance for voluntary conservation projects that protect agricultural and forestal resources, animal and plant habitats, and ecosystem services. 19. Upon adoption of recommendations from the Groundwater Committee, adopt measures to protect the quality and quantity of groundwater, both as a critical portion of the County's overall water system and as a water supply for rural residents. 20. Recognize land conservation programs as the highest priority for achieving Rural Area goals, and management of development patterns as a tool that can reduce but not prevent development impacts. Land Preservation Or V oluntarv Land Conservation Albemarle County has demonstrated the importance of voluntary land conservation by its adoption of the Acquisition of Conservation Easements (ACE) program which acquires conservation easements to preserve the land's rural character, whether in agriculture, forest production, or dedicated to conservation. Further, this Comprehensive Plan's description of the benefits of Rural Preservation Developments includes "the pennanent preservation of large areas of land that can be used for agricultural and forestal production, recreational uses, water supply protection, and the conservation of natural, scenic and historic resources." The community profits from the preservation of scenic and cultural resources, which not only enrich lives, but which are important components of a thriving tourism industry, and as a setting for traditional rural activities such as hunting, fishing, hiking and horseback riding. The 22 RA Comp Plan BoS revised I:: 01 (¡4 work scssionlïnal economic benefits of preservation or voluntary land conservation of rural lands are also important. With conservation easements come potential property owner benefits such as federal and state gift and estate tax benefits. When neighborhoods participate in agricultural and forestal districts, each property's value and residents' quality f life increases with the protection from intensive residential development. Eased land over time acquires a value as a protected estate, independent of what residential development it holds. Land under easement also enhances the value of near-by property. And tourism, one of the most important components ofthis areas's local economy, is inextricably linked to the preserved rural countryside. Conservation easements are needed to meet Comorehensive Plan goals as listed in other sections. These include: 1. Protect natural. scenic. and ooen-soace resources (Natural Resources and Cultural Assets o. 7) 2. Manage growth to orotect the defining elements of the Rural Areas-agricultural and forestrv resources: water suoolv resources: natural resources: scenic resources: historic and cultural resources: and limited service deliverv. (Land Use Plan. o. 3) With the prospect of over 50,000 or more dwelling units being added to the Rural Areas, it becomes clear that the County must take advantage of every opportunity to reduce the number of available development rights. Although it may not be practical to change the current development pattern of the Rural Areas solely through the purchase of development rights, the existing Acquisition of Conservation Easements (ACE) program does make conservation easements an option for landowners who cannot afford to donate them. Applicants' incomes are considered in determining the purchase price of ACE easements, and properties that have high development potential or that are under pressure to subdivide are ranked higher for purchase. Assuring or increasing the funding for this program will make protection of more of this threatened land possible. Goal setting (for the number of development rights to be extinguished, and/or the area of land to be protected) would help to determine the level of funding and program promotion necessary to make this approach more effective. Some landowners are willing to donate easements that protect important resources by eliminating development potential. The Virginia Outdoors Foundations and other organizations hold such easements. The County's Public Recreational Facilities Authority is also able to hold easements if the property includes resources identified as important in the Comprehensive Plan. Promotion of easements could lead to a significant increase in the number of easements donated, and provide new opportunities for resource protection through the elimination of development potential. The Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District now has a program for accepting riparian conservation easements; the County streams and riparian woodlands could benefit from increased participation in this program. In order to have an accurate picture of the extent of conservation easements in the County and to plan accordingly, it would be useful to have a database and maps that include the easements accepted by all holders. Unfortunately, records on easements are scattered, with some records kept by the County and others by other holders. Also, there is no mechanism in place to notify the County or other holders when new conservation easements are recorded. Working in cooperation with the other easement holders in the community, the County could facilitate the 23 [{A Comp Plan 80S revised 1:2 0 j 04 work session final creation of an accurate and freely available easement tracking and mapping system that would assist in land protection efforts. See Map E, Conservation Easements, for presently known conservation easements, including ACE easements. The County's voluntary Agricultural/Forestal Districts program helps limit the development potential of a member's land for renewable periods of up to 10 years. Although nearly 70,000 acres are currently enrolled in the program, enrollment has been slowly decreasing. The reasons for this decline are not clearly understood; surveying past and current members would provide useful information. Increased public awareness of the Districts and an active promotion program would be useful in increasing participation. For voluntary programs easements to be truly effective, use of the protected land must be monitored to ensure that the established conservation stipulations are being met. The County currently has little or no capacity for monitoring even the relatively small number of easements that it currently holds. An increasing dependence on easements for conservation will require that such a capacity be created. OBJECTIVES: 1. Assist, promote, and fund land easement programs that further the policies and goals of the Comprehensive Plan 2. Create the technical, legal, and public relations tools and personnel necessary to hold, maintain and increase the amount of land held in easements STRATEGIES: 1. Encourage protection of environmentally sensitive land from residential or commercial development through Rural Preservation Developments, conservation easements, Agricultural and Forestal Districts, the Land Use Taxation program, and the Acquisition of Conservation Easement program. 2. Promote voluntary donations of conservation easements that prevent development and protect valued resources, whether those easements are held by the County's Public Recreational Facilities Authority or by other approved bodies. 3. Acquire a stable funding source for the ACE program 4. Acquire independent legal assistance for ACE and the Public Recreational Facilities Authority to avoid any conflict in interest between the County and easement holders 5. Promote and support Agricultural-Forestal Districts, including assisting the Agricultural/Forestal District advisory board in its legal and policy-related duties 6. Increase the County's capacity to monitor the use ofland under easement and ensure adherence to the terms of easements. 7. Coordinate with other easement holders to create a complete and accurate conservation easement tracking system for the County. RURAL COMMERCIAL 24 R!\ Plan BoS revised ¡:2 01 04 work session Únal Crossroads Communities GOAL: Provide SUDDort for Ion!:! standin!:! rural crossroads communities and villa!:!es to movide an aDDromiate level of services for rural residents and to Drotect historic resources. without creatin!:! de facto !:!rowth areas. Albemarle County has numerous rural crossroads communities that were once thriving. For many years, communities such as Batesville, Covesville, Free Union, Greenwood, and Proffit provided the necessary services to the surrounding areas of each community. In fact, crossroads communities were the heart and soul for the outlying areas as they were the commercial and social centers of their surrounding areas. Many of these areas still function as centers of activity and there is a desire from most residents for them to maintain some level of viability. These areas could also contribute to some level of traffic reduction by providing some essential rural- scale services that would otherwise have to be obtained by driving a further distance. The rural crossroads communities are an important part of the County's heritage. There are many buildings located in the crossroads communities that are vacant and could have local historical significance. These buildings could be renovated to maintain the rural character of the crossroads community and provide a valuable service to the immediate local area. There appears to be substantial support for maintaining strong, viable crossroads communities, as the Albemarle County 2002 Citizen Survey reveals 96% of respondents favored allowing localized services in traditionally rural communities. Furthennore, during the Rural Areas public input meetings held during the winter of 2002-2003, citizen comments indicated a high preference for country stores as a pennitted land use in the Rural Areas. Country stores were the third preferred land use option out of nine land use categories, ranking only behind agricultural and forestal land uses. Country stores could be a primary use in crossroads communities. This component ofthe Comprehensive Plan should be closely connected to the Historical Resources section in the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, which is considered to be a component of rural conservation, as the older surviving historic buildings typically relate directly or indirectly to agricultural pursuits. Furthennore, the Albemarle County Historic Preservation Plan, adopted by the Board of Supervisors in September 2000, identifies the protection of the County's natural, scenic, and historic resources in the Rural Areas as a primary goal. The Historic Preservation Plan also recommends that the County should be more proactive in allowing the reuse of country stores. In crossroads communities, adaptive reuses of historic structures should be pennitted where appropriate to encourage their maintenance and preservation. The boundaries of crossroads communities should be well defined to ensure the rural character of the area is maintained. The boundaries should correspond to parcels that have been identified as historical sites, or potential historical sites that could be converted to uses, such as country stores or small doctor/dentist offices that would serve the immediate surrounding area. However, depending on the scope of the crossroads community, not all historic structures would necessarily be included within its boundaries. The goal would be to limit the area of the 25 RA Comp Plan BoS revised I ~ 01 04 work session JÌnal crossroads community to the "crossroads" rather than create "strip" development that would not be in character with the Rural Areas. While crossroads communities would not encourage development of the Rural Areas, development that would be expected in the Rural Areas would be encouraged to provide services to the immediate surrounding area of the crossroads community. Crossroads communities are not intended to be Development Areas. The Survey of Historic Crossroads Communities in Albemarle County has been compiled to assist in detennining the boundaries of crossroads communities. This inventory provides valuable infonnation, such as aerial photos, tax maps, photographs of structures and photograph reference maps, and National Register of Historic Places and Virginia Landmark Register listings for each crossroads community that has potential to retain its historic and rural character while providing services to the immediate local area. Crossroads communities should provide only essential goods and services. Therefore, they will be limited in area and their pennissible uses should be carefully delineated. It is imperative that crossroads communities are established in a manner that does not encourage further development in the Rural Areas. It is desirable to maintain the historic nature of the crossroads communities in the sense that traditionally these communities have a simpler ambiance than urban style development. While structures in crossroads communities are located on smaller lots and closer to the road, as is typical with urban style development, crossroads communities traditionally have not incorporated other typical urban style characteristics such as strict parking requirements and landscaping. Issues such as number of required parking spaces, parking surfaces, entrance standards, and landscape requirements should be examined to ensure the character of the Rural Areas is maintained. Urban type development should not be introduced into the Rural Areas. Improvements should be limited to those that ensure public safety. OBJECTIVE: Establish crossroad communities that would be viable in meeting the goal of providing limited services to the immediate surrounding area of the crossroads community without creating strip development while providing a connection to the preservation and reuse of historic buildings. STRATEGIES: The County should: 1. Encourae:e the renovation and use of BQuildings in crossroads communities should be used/renovated to provide appropriately scaled services that would only benefit the immediate surrounding area while preserving the rural character", such as ExamDles of such services include country stores, small scale offices, day care, and small scale doctor/dentist offices, and public institutional uses, such as post offices, with particular emphasis given to historic buildings as spaces to support the maintenance of these resources. 2. Assure that ~rossroads communities should remain viable rural community/social centers that retain their individual rural historic characteristics while also supporting the broader Growth Management Goals found in the Land Uses Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Ensure that the scale and scope of any new use is consistent with the existing infrastructure 26 RA Comp Pian 80S revised 12 01 04 work session fimd and character of the crossroads community and Rural Areas, without any requirement for upgrade or expansion of infrastructure. 4. Establish boundaries, such as boundaries corresponding with parcels that have been identified as historical sites or potential historical sites, to guide decisions on the location of uses in crossroads communities. 5. Establish design standards, such as architectural, renovation, and sign guidelines, to ensure that the scale and scope of businesses maintain the character of the crossroads communities and support the County's growth management policies. 6. Encourage the adaptive reuses of historic structures that should promote their maintenance and preservation. 7. Implement policies in the Zoning Ordinance that promote the character of the Rural Areas and not urban style development such as relaxing the required parking standards and requirements for parking lot surfaces, entrance requirements, and landscape requirements. Alternative Uses GOAL: Encoura2:e creative and diverse forms of rural Dfoduction and SUDDort rural land uses that Dfovide rural landowners with economic viabilitv. Increasingly, rural landowners come under financial pressure to subdivide their land. Some of those landowners could offset the pressure to subdivide if the County permitted a range of land use opportunities that provided secondary sources of income on rural parcels. These secondary activities would be intended to provide support for primary uses (agriculture, forestry, etc.), forestall subdivision, or improve the viability of crossroads communities. The County would benefit from the reduced fragmentation of land and the resulting protection of potential agricultural and forestal production, as well as natural and historic resources. This would implement the Guiding Principles by providing alternatives to land fragmentation; supporting local rural economies; encouraging creative and diverse forms of production that increase economic viability for owners of rural parcels; meeting the needs of rural residents; and protecting agricultural and forestal resources, natural and cultural resources, and rural quality of life from the impacts of suburban development. Respondents at the winter 2002-2003 public input meetings moderately favored such alternative uses as home occupations, commercial recreation, and special events, ranking them below agriculture, forestry, and country stores, but above restaurants and offices. The County should review how it permits such uses as farm product sales, home occupations (businesses located in homes or accessory structures), some low impact forms of commercial recreation, temporary special events, and arts and crafts sales and other uses suitable for the Rural Areas. The costs and time required for approval of such uses should be minimized. Uses without significant negative impacts on the Rural Areas could be permitted by right, subject to established performance standards; uses with potentially significant impacts should be permitted only by special use permit, if at all. The increasing frequency of applications for home occupations (class B are permitted by special use permit) has made it clear that the current definitions need clarification to ensure that only 27 RA Comp Plan BoS revised 12 01 04 work session tJnu! appropriate uses are permitted. Restructuring the standards that define which uses are permitted by-right and which require special use permits, based on impacts of individual uses rather than simply location (in a house vs. in a detached structure) and number of employees, could streamline approvals for low impact uses and more effectively manage or prevent high impact uses. These standards could also more clearly define which uses (such as those which approximate contractors' storage yards) would not be permitted as home occupations. The Guiding Principles and the Land Use Plan suggest that these home occupation uses be limited to a scale and intensity that will not diminish the character or quality of life in the Rural Areas, encourage suburban development patterns or density, or significantly impact natural or cultural resources. The list of permitted uses and their associated performance standards could be used to ensure that these uses are: · reversible (so that the land can easily return to farming, forestry, conservation, or other preferred rural uses); · scaled and sited to cause minimal impacts on their rural surroundings; · minimal in the their public health and environmental impacts; and · viable with no increase in public infrastructure or services, either at time of approval or later. To minimize the impacts of these uses, the County could avoid requiring parking lot paving, curb and gutter, commercial entrances, and other site improvement features more typically found in the Development Areas. Hospice facilities that provide services for patients and their families could benefit from a rural setting without creating a need for extended utility services or for frequent response from rescue services, unlike retirement and/or convalescent facilities. Historic sites can also be protected through increased flexibility in rural uses. The Historic Preservation Plan recommends that owners of properties listed on the state or national historic registers, or that are contributing structures in historic districts, be enabled to apply for special use permits to allow public tours. As most of these properties are located in the Rural Areas, amending rural policies to allow these tours would be of the most benefit. The scale of these tours and their impacts on their surroundings would be considered and limited during the special use permit review process. Any impacts unique to these uses could be addressed with performance standards. In addition, for uses that are not directly related to the agricultural, forestal, or conservation uses of the land, the County could institute a program through which landowners can reduce or eliminate their ability to subdivide their land for the duration of the permitted use. On smaller parcels in crossroads communities, alternative uses would provide opportunities for landowners and the County to support historic preservation. OBJECTIVE: To permit rural landowners to have income producing land uses that will offset financial pressure to subdivide their land but that are consistent with the Guiding Principles regarding rural character and resource protection. 28 RA Comp Plan 1305 revised 1:2 01 04 work scssíonlin,t! STRATEGIES: The County should: 1. Review the Zoning Ordinance to re-evaluate by-right uses and uses by special pennit, such as home occupations and fann sales, to encourage uses that promote the preservation of rural lands and activities (including but not limited to fann sales and agricultural service businesses, low-impact fonns of recreation, temporary special events, and arts and crafts sales), garden centers, and discourage uses that are contrary to the County's growth management policies (including but not limited to swim or tennis clubs, new schools, and off-site parking for industrial districts). 2. Change fann sales to a by-right use without site plan requirements. 3. Revise the definitions and standards relating to home occupations to streamline approvals for low-impact uses (preferably by right), require special use pennits for uses with higher impacts, and clarify which uses will not be pennitted as home occupations. 4. Establish perfonnance standards that minimize impacts on natural and cultural resources, and avoid conflicts with agricultural and forestal uses. 5. Revise the Zoning Ordinance to pennit tours of National or State registered historic sites or buildings and of contributing structures in historic districts by special use pennit, as recommended in the Historic Preservation Plan, and consider perfonnance standards for these uses to mitigate any impacts on the building, historic district, or Rural Areas. 6. Limit the size and intensity of rural alternative uses so that they do not conflict with the character of the Rural Areas. 7. Maintain the existing policy of not expanding public water and sewer service to the Rural Areas, including rural alternative uses. 8. Ensure that subdivision is not possible for the duration of alternative uses that are not related to agriculture, forestry, or conservation. 9. Require alternative uses located in the Rural Areas to use lighting (if any) that confonns to the design specifications found in the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan. 10. Consider allowing hospice facilities within the Rural Areas. 29 RI\ Com ) Plan BoS revised 12 0 ¡ 04 work session final LAND USE PATTERNS, DENSITY AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INTRODUCTION The Growth Management Policy of the Comprehensive Plan is a fundamental commitment to retaining the Rural Areas as an asset to the County. The rural character of Albemarle provides significant environmental, economic, and quality-of-life benefits to the County and its residents. The character and qualities of the Rural Areas are affected most significantly by patterns of development. As noted in the Introduction, the Rural Areas are being impacted by consistent residential development and land subdivision, and a declining agricultural economy, which drives further land conversion. A major impact of this land conversion is the fragmentation of large units of land. Those units might be individual parcels, or areas of forest or other vegetation that do not correspond to a single parcel. Agriculture, forestry, and resource conservation share an interest in avoiding this fragmentation. Forestry and many forms of agriculture depend on large parcels of land to provide sufficient area for a viable scale of production. Division of rural parcels both takes significant areas out of production and leaves remnant pieces that are no longer large enough to be economically viable for farming or forestry. Beyond the size of individual parcels, a general pattern of larger parcels both ensures contiguous areas of production that make viable support industries possible and minimizes nuisance and other conflicts with nearby suburbanized residential areas. There are, of course, exceptions to this rule. Specialty or niche vegetable growers, for example, can sometimes succeed on smaller lots, as long as incompatible nearby uses does not lead to conflicts. While these uses are not common in the County, they do provide an opportunity for appropriate rural uses where small to moderately sized parcels have already been created. Avoidance of fragmentation is also essential in the conservation of plant and wildlife habitats. The County's rural land is a variable mosaic of uses and land covers. In anyone place, the dominant land characteristic, or "matrix," might be pasture, deciduous forest, lawns and residences, or any of the other common rural land use patterns. Within the matrix are patches of different character residential lots in a matrix of forest, remnant woods within a matrix of pastures. Linear features such as streams and roads act as both corridors and barriers (roads, for example, provide movement for vehicles and the seeds of invasive plants, but can be barriers to mammals and amphibians). See the "Biological Resources and Biodiversity" section of the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Component ofthe Plan for more on habitat fragmentation. Many animal species require large areas of habitat for basic life functions (feeding, breeding, etc.), while many plants and animals require specific habitats connected by safe corridors. In 30 RA Comp Plan BoS rcvised I::; () j 04 work session final some cases, the species need large areas that may not correspond to any single recognized parcel of land, or that connect via corridors that cross many parcels. A general pattern of large parcels and unbroken corridors is as important as the size of any individual parcel. Landscape ecologist Richard Forman (author of Land Mosaics, a work built on a survey of landscape research studies) notes four essential aspects to be protected in a landscape plan; he states that "no substitute for their benefits is known." These four aspects are (1) "a few large patches of natural vegetation;" (2) "wide vegetation corridors along major water courses;" (3) "connectivity for movement of key species among the large patches;" and (4) "heterogeneous bits of nature throughout human developed areas." The subdivision of land for the construction of residences is the central factor in the ongoing fragmentation of rural land. It has serious implications for the viability of rural industries and successful resource conservation and protection, and therefore has a significant impact on the character of the Rural Areas that we experience. The scatterine: of residential develoDment creates unsustainable fiscal imDacts on the Countv. It also leads to "accidental house arrest" for elderlv residents caue:ht bevond the reach of Dublic transDortation. The Rural Areas are currently zoned to create a pattern of small "development right" lots (as small as 2 acres, but generally ranging from 2 to 10 acres in practice) and moderately sized "estate lots" (21 acres). Neither size is considered sufficient for viable agriculture (except perhaps some specialty or niche farming uses), forestry, or conservation. The continuing spread of this pattern is steadily converting the Rural Areas from a relatively un-fragmented landscape to one that is becoming highly fragmented and characterized largely by small parcel sizes and a suburban character. There currently exist (June 2003) nearly 7,500 undeveloped tax map parcels (parcels without dwelling units) in the Rural Areas zoning district (some of which may consist of multiple legal parcels, each with development rights), and more than 12,500 developed parcels. The 1989 Comprehensive Plan reported "more than 7,500" undeveloped parcels and "more than 9,600" developed parcels. The changes in those numbers seen by 2003 reflect both the ongoing rate of subdivision and the construction of dwelling units on previously unoccupied parcels. In 1996, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission estimated that the Rural Areas could accommodate 54,867 more housing units. The large number of existing and potential lots must be considered in determining an acceptable level of new Rural Areas subdivision activity. Furthermore, the tendency to use 21-acre parcels for home sites rather than for agricultural/forestal uses must be recognized in developing strategies to preserve rural land. In addition to fragmentation, rural subdivision creates conflicts between residential uses and rural economic activities, increases service delivery needs, and permanently alters the natural, scenic, and historic landscape. Fragmentation also reduces the economic viability of the agricultural and forestry industry. To be consistent with the Guiding Principles, the County's land development policies must be changed to stop the ongoing trend toward fragmentation and loss of rural character. New policies should focus on protecting existing large parcels from fragmentation, 31 RA Comp Plan 80S revised 12 0 {)4 work session final preserving a general pattern characterized by farms, forests, and habitat corridors. and reducin1! the potential overall level of residential development and loss of rural character. Implementation of these policies to address residential density and pattern of development should be the County's hi1!hest priority. The County should aggressively pursue implementation mechanisms that include phasing of development, changing the formula for calculating the number and size of lots within Rural Preservation Developments, decreasing the size of residential lots, increasing the size of the preservation parcels in RPDs, and, with few exceptions, requiring that RPDs to be the standard for residential subdivisions. WATER CONSERVATION AND WATER PROTECTION MEASURES GOAL: Protect the aualitv and sunnlv of surface water and 2:roundwater resources. The County's Rural Areas depend on an adequate supply of safe water for human consumption and other uses, and are the source of the majority of the water used by in the Development Areas and the City of Charlottesville. The quality and quantity of our water supply, and the health of aquatic ecosystems, largely depend on the character of rural land uses and land covers. Healthy watersheds provide four essential ecosystem services to the community: (1) recharge of aquifers that supply both wells and reservoirs; (2) moderation of flood flows, which reduces stream bank erosion and prevents loss of reservoir capacity from sedimentation; (3) clean water, which reduces water treatment needs and provides for healthy aquatic life and safe recreation; and (4) protection of plant and animal habitat in and around streams. The features that generally make healthy watersheds possible are large areas of forest, low amounts of impervious surface, and well protected soils. Forests provide good groundwater recharge and moderated flood flows. Forested stream buffers are particularly important, as they provide flood moderation, water quality protection, habitat and landscape connectivity for plants and animals, and recreational opportunities. Rivers and streams through the County, from intermittent and ephemeral streams to the Rivanna River, should have forested buffers wherever possible. Pervious surfaces slow runoff and reduce erosion. Soils that are protected from compaction and erosion are less likely to erode, and will more efficiently recharge groundwater, which flows to wells, streams, and reservoirs. These features can be more effectively managed in a land use pattern defined by large rural parcels, where land cover characteristics can be more easily protected and improved than in developed areas. Protecting and restoring healthy watersheds should be a goal for Rural Areas policies and programs. For more details on this topic, see The Albemarle County Rural Areas as a Source of Watershed Ecosystem Services, prepared by the Water Resources division of the Department of Engineering and Public Works. Where development is permitted, the County faces patterns of water consumption and contamination influenced by the layout of residential subdivisions. Currently, some impacts are managed through the Water Protection Ordinance, but this approach does not typically address overall subdivision layout. The information currently being obtained regarding recharge areas and other critical aspects of the groundwater system, as well as research into stream health, will allow the County to develop standards for subdivision layouts that protect both groundwater and surface water from contamination. Stream buffers and groundwater infiltration areas can also be 32 RA Comp Plan BoS revised 120104 work session final incorporated into designs as protected areas, and would be especially effective where forest vegetation is either protected or reestablished. The Groundwater Committee is working to develop appropriate standards for groundwater testing for proposed subdivisions. Once adopted, the recommendations of the committee can be used as appropriate to better manage the groundwater resource. CRITICAL RESOURCES AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS GOAL: Protect critical natural resources identified in the Comorehensive Plan from the imDacts of residential develooment. The ongoing Critical Resources Inventory is identifying areas and resources of high importance to the County, in addition to those already identified in the Open Space and Critical Resources Plan. These areas should not be converted to rural residential uses, and the County will need tools to prevent that conversion. One approach is to establish overlay districts that set standards to protect sites and resources of value. For example, the direction set by the current Flood Hazard Overlay District and the Water Protection Ordinance's standards for stream corridors could be combined with goals set by the Biodiversity Committee to establish a riparian buffer overlay district that addresses both water quality concerns and the need for connectivity between wildlife habitats (see Map D, Hazards and Limiting Factors). The Zoning Ordinance currently requires that building sites not include critical slopes or floodplains, but does not consider other resources. The building site definition should also be revised to avoid important resources and hazard areas identified by the Critical Resources Inventory, the County's ongoing groundwater studies, debris flow hazard studies, and other sources of applicable information. In order to protect existing areas of forest and other natural areas that provide habitat, resource protection, and other values in the face of permitted development, it will be necessary to include these resources in the design standards set by the zoning and subdivision Ordinances. Residential development should be directed away from large areas of forest, wildlife corridors, and highly valued habitats. Where development is approved, impacts can be mitigated through creative measures including but not limited to conservation easement donations, riparian buffer plantings and corridor establishments, and habitat restorations. This should be true for both clustered and non-clustered subdivisions. On a smaller scale, individual homes, roads, stormwater management facilities, and other constructed features of residential subdivisions should be directed away from important or sensitive habitat areas. The results of the biodiversity assessment and the recommendations of the Biodiversity Committee should be considered in the development of tools to address these impacts. In 1996, the Mountain Protection Committee recommended standards for driveways that would avoid the erosion impacts of the creation of steep slopes, and ensure safe access to residences for private vehicles and emergency services. However, erosion on steep slopes and safe access are of concern throughout the Rural Areas. The County can address these concerns through driveway standards for the Rural Areas as a whole, and should adopt those that will reduce the erosion 33 [{A Comp Plan fioS revised j:; 01 04 work session final impacts of residential development and ensure safe access. MOUNT AINS GOAL: Incoroorate new and anticiDated information to uDdate the existing Mountain Protection Plan. The Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan was amended to include a section on Mountains in 1998. That section's objective is to "[p]ursue additional protection measures to protect mountain resources and to promote public safety in these areas of exceptional critical slopes and higher elevations." Several aspects of the County's mountains are identified as areas of concern, including critical slopes; soils; water quality and quantity; forest and agricultural resources; debris flows; plant and animal habitat; scenic resources and their economic impact; dark skies; and tourism. Because the majority of the County's mountains are located in the Rural Areas, rural residential development and land use policies will have a significant impact on these aspects of the mountains. Policies established elsewhere in this chapter will also assist in the effort to protect mountain resources. In 1996, The Mountain Protection Committee recommended changing the 21-acre minimum lot size to 42 acres, largely based on the expected size required for viability of commercial forestry. Recommendations also were offered for improved clustering in RPDs, more detailed requirements for building sites, and reduced or eliminated minimum lot sizes. By addressing these critical issues for the whole area, the County can also achieve many of its mountain protection goals. The ongoing Critical Resources Inventory is expected to provide detailed information that will need to be included in the consideration of mountain protection policies. Plant and animal habitats were included as one aspect of the mountains in need of protection. The outcome of the ongoing biodiversity assessment is expected to provide more information on the mountains' role in providing habitat and landscape connectivity, and to identify unusual habitats and landscape features found in the mountains that are in need of protection. Other elements of the Critical Resources Inventory should also be considered as appropriate. Since the adoption of the Mountains section of the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Component ofthe Plan in 1998, the County has received more detailed information and mapping regarding debris flow hazard areas. Residential construction and other development activities in these areas can pose a significant safety risk. These areas are also highly susceptible to groundwater contamination. Codes implementing the County's mountain protection policies should include measures to prevent construction in these areas and to avoid creating hazards. The 1998 Mountain policy should be maintained. However, policies affecting the mountains should be revised or designed to include the new and expected information discussed above. 34 RA Comp Plan 80S revised I ~ 01 04 work session tinal DENSITY AND DEVELOPMENT GOAL: Reduce the level and rate of residential develoDment in the Rural Areas. and minimize the imDacts of Dermitted develoDment. The ongoing conversion of rural land from farms, forests, open spaces, and natural habitats to residential uses is a central issue for the County. Despite the community's established goals for rural area protection, existing regulations are not achieving these goals because they are permitting this conversion to continue with few hindrances (see Map A, 2000 Population Density). Rural residential development has two key impacts: fragmentation impacts on the land, and density related impacts (including but not limited to inefficient public facilities demands, change in rural character, increased traffic on dan2:erous rural roads. and pollution and erosion impacts). The most effective methods for protecting rural land from these impacts will continue to be those that ensure long term or permanent prevention of development of parcels in the Rural Areas (including but not limited to conservation easements). Regulations that control the form of residential development may reduce fragmentation to a small degree, but will not significantly reduce its impacts, nor affect density-related impacts at all, if overall density is not reduced. Where development cannot be avoided with the use of conservation easements and other land- protection tools, the impacts of rural residential development can be reduced by altering the pattern of permitted development. The current pattern can be improved upon significantly to reduce impacts on an individual site and its surroundings. However, this approach does not alter the overall impact of residential growth in the Rural Areas and should be considered secondary to true conservation efforts. However, as a certain level of residential development will be permitted in the Rural Areas, the County must address the location, character, and extent of this development in order to minimize its impacts. Rural Preservation Developments (see below), have the most potential to reduce the impacts of the currently permitted level of residential land use. Therefore, Rural Preservation Developments (cluster development) is the preferred method for all residential subdivision and should be required for all Rural Areas subdivisions, with exceptions made only in cases where properties are too small for clustering to make a significant difference (where preservation tracts would be too small for effective conservation). Addressing rural residential development (both by limiting its extent and by implementing designs that reduce the impacts of permitted development) would implement the Guiding Principles by protecting agriculture and forestry resources; conserving and preserving land; protecting water quality and quantity; protecting natural and cultural resources; directing development into the Development Areas; creating development standards appropriate to the Rural Areas and implement the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan. 35 RA Comp Plan BoSrevised 1201 04 work session final Rural Preservation Developments Rural Preservation Development (RPD) was added to the Zoning Ordinance in 1989 as an alternative to the conventional development subdivision in the Rural Areas zoning district. The RPD subdivision option was intended to encourage more effective land usage, while retaining all development potential available under conventional subdivision. As a tool to address development patterns, RPDs place the same number of residential development as permitted under conventional subdivision regulations on smaller parcels in a more compact neighborhood. However, the RPD subdivision contains standards that provide protection for natural resources, farmland, forestland, historic resources and scenic views. The benefits for the landowner include a reduction in development costs; the creation of smaller, more marketable development lots; obtaining the full economic benefit of development while retaining a substantial portion of the land for agricultural, forestal or rural recreational uses; preservation of important aesthetic aspects of the land which can enhance both the desirability and the marketability oflots; and protection of sensitive environmental aspects of the land. The benefits to citizens include the permanent preservation of large areas of land that can be used for agricultural and forestal production, recreational uses, water supply protection, and the conservation of natural, scenic and historic resources. Rural preservation developments are a tool by which the County can impact the way development occurs in the Rural Areas. As stated above, it is the preferred method of subdivision in the Rural Areas and, with few exceptions, should be made the only way land in the Rural Areas could be subdivided. However, it should be clearly noted that Rural Preservation Developments are not a way to encourage residential development in the Rural Areas. Between 1990 and 2003, 13 Rural Preservation Developments containing 2,886 acres were approved. These RPDs contain 275 development lots, 17 preservation parcels, and have permanently preserved 1,843 acres. The preservation parcels range from 16% of the total RPD acres to 84% of the total acres. The average development lot size is 3.72 acres. In some cases, the landowners did not request that the RPD contain the full number of development right lots that would have been permitted under conventional development. Although land has been preserved that may not have been otherwise, Rural Preservation Developments cannot be considered a success when compared with the rate rural land has been subdivided using conventional subdivision methods. For example, in 1993 (the year with the most acreage in RPDs and three RPDs recorded): 1993 RPD ACTIVITY 1993 CONVENTIONAL ACTIVITY 36 RA Comp Plan 80S revised 12 01 04 work session final Total Acres Development Lots Average Lot Size Total in RPD Total in Lots Percent in RPT 663.61 acres 53 acres 3.6 acres 470.1 acres 190.8 acres 70.84 % Total Acres Total Lots Average Lot Size 3,205 acres 273 lots 11.74 acres The reasons that RPDs have not reached their full potential are varied, but the most dominant reason given by applicants is the special use permit application process. However, effective July 1,2004, state law will require that localities allow the by-right clustering of single family dwellings (RPDs), if the locality has clustering provisions in place. State law Dfovides that. in establishing standards, conditions, and criteria for clustering, the Board of Supervisors may include any provisions it determines appropriate to ensure quality development, preservation of open space, and compliance with its comprehensive plan and land use ordinances. When considering standards for Rural Preservation Developments, it will be important to ensure that the standards achieve the objectives contained in the Guiding Principles. The development standards should ensure, and have as the highest priority, the protection of the natural environment, scenic and historic resources, water supply resources, agricultural and forestal land, and open space. A maximum lot size, a minimum percentage of the RPD placed in a preservation parcel, and the phasing of development should be considered. A survey of existing Rural Preservation Developments in the County has revealed that although RPDs preserve large areas ofland, most of the RPDs have been subdivided into large lot residential developments. Accomplishment of the purpose for RPDs - to provide a more effective land usage, while retaining all development potential available under conventional subdivision - will require the same philosophy as that of all residential development in the Rural Areas: minimize the amount of land used for residential development in order to maximize the amount of land that is available for agriculture, forestry, open space, natural, scenic and historic resources. In order to accomplish this goal, consideration of fewer residential lots may be necessary. RPDs, like any other development in the Rural Areas, should not become a justification for extending public services to the Rural Areas. Other Rural Areas Issues Development Right Lot Sizes The Zoning Ordinance currently permits development right lots as small as two acres, but allows the five development rights on any parcel (including access roads) to occupy up to 31 acres--an average of approximately 6 acres per lot (although anyone lot could theoretically be much larger than 6 acres). Instituting a maximum acreage for individual development right lots could significantly reduce the total area used for residential development. A flat maximum lot size would also prevent the creation of subdivisions that meet the 31-acre total by creating some quite large lots and some smaller ones, with the average being six acres. However a maximum 37 1<1\ Comp Plan 80S revised 12 01 04 work session tlual development right parcel size will result in residues of less than the maximum non-development right parcel size on some parent parcels. In those cases, the residue should be assigned to one of the development right parcels, and that parcel should not be further subdivided. The current minimum lot size of2 acres is significantly larger than the 30,000-square-foot (0.68 acre) building site currently required by the Zoning Ordinance. This building site is considered sufficient to provide space for a dwelling and two septic field locations (primary and backup). Although additional space is needed to ensure a safe well location and some flexibility to work with terrain, the minimum parcel size could be reduced. This would potentially reduce the amount of land developed and reduce the price of rural lots. The Village Residential zoning district--largely represented by developed land in rural villages--currently permits lots of approximately 1.5 acres, or 0.92 acres under bonus density provisions. The County could develop standards that would permit similar minimum parcel sizes in the Rural Areas zoning district, ensuring first that well water safety can be sufficiently protected and that each lot has enough space for backup wells to ensure a viable water supply. Phasing of Subdivisions (Time-release) The 1980 Zoning Ordinance granted up to five development rights to all rural parcels of record, and made possible by-right creation of 2l-acre lots. Since that time, it has been possible to use all the potential lots from a parent parcel at once to create a rural residential development. Rather than simply providing needed income to rural landowners who intend to keep the majority of their land intact, this approach has led to the Rural Areas being used as a low density development area. Under current regulations, rural subdivisions can be created at least as easily as within the designated Development Areas. A phasing or time-release requirement, permitting only a limited number of lots to be created from a given parcel over a fixed period of years is one approach to this problem. Such a program would permit landowners to use their development potential to meet occasional financial needs, but would not readily permit the creation of entire subdivisions or encourage land speculation for that purpose. Since the total development potential is not reduced by such a program, it will not be effective unless the required time period is long enough to discourage piecemeal approvals that effectively create the same development pattern that is now occurring. The table below shows the numbers of lots approved per Rural Areas subdivision application from 1999 to 2002. Divisions creating one new lot accounted for 33.6% of all new lots. The numbers of applications for more lots are significantly lower. Setting the appropriate time limits would necessitate balancing the needs of landowners for occasional lot sales with the County's goals of avoiding residential development of suburban character and scale in the Rural Areas. 38 R¡\ Comp Plan BoS revised ]2 OJ (¡4 work session t1na! I Rural Areas Subdivisions, 1999-2002 I Lots Created Applications Lots Percentage of per Application Approved Approved Total Lots 1 234 234 33.6% 2 34 68 9.8% 3 12 36 5.2% 4 8 32 4.6% 5 8 40 5.7% 6 7 42 6.0% 7 3 21 3.0% 8 1 8 1.1% 10 1 10 1.4% 11 1 11 1.6% 12 1 12 1.7% 13 2 26 3.7% 16 1 16 2.3% 19 1 19 2.7% 20 3 60 8.6% 25 1 25 3.6% 37 1 37 5.3% Grand Total 319 697 100.0 Family Divisions In order to support the ability of rural families to transfer land to immediate relatives, the County pennits "family divisions." These divisions are subject to a lesser review standard. However, in order to discourage the resale of these lots for non-family related development, the County requires that the owner of the new parcel hold it for a minimum of two years. Increasing this period could dissuade the resale of family division lots without inconveniencing family members who intend to remain on the land. Requiring the family to hold the land for a certain period before family divisions are pennitted would help to ensure that relatively easy family divisions do not provide an incentive to purchase and divide large parcels. Rural Divisions The Subdivision Ordinance currently includes reduced review standards for "rural divisions," which are subdivisions that create lots of 5 acres or more with at least 250 feet of public road frontage. On some parent parcels, it is possible to create entire residential developments through this simpler process. (Five development right lots of five acres or more can be created under the 31-acre rule.) In other cases, it is possible to create a residential development without full review by using a combination of rural division and two-lot subdivision applications, neither of which 39 f( ¡\ Camp Plan ßoS revised l:: 01 04 work session final requires the full review applied to standard subdivisions. The subdivision process should be revised to ensure better designs and consistent reviews. There are some minor exceptions, such as some boundary adjustments, where a reduced level of review is appropriate. Transfer of Development Rights The Transfer of Development Rights provides communities with a potentially powerful tool for redirecting growth from one area of a community to another. Under a TDR program, the County could allow higher density development in the development areas in exchange for lower densities in the Rural Areas. Once a program was established, developers in the development areas would be allowed to build more dwelling units than pennitted by the zoning regulations, provided that they purchased development rights from landowners in the Rural Areas. Through these purchases, the development potential in the rural areas would be gradually transferred to the development areas. TDR programs are not expressly enabled by the state legislature and, under the Dillon Rule, the power to establish them cannot be necessarily implied. Therefore, the state must pass enabling legislation for the County to be able to use this valuable planning tool. The legislature, so far, is unwilling to support TDR programs. The County should use every means available to advocate TDRs as a significant growth management tool that would support the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. OBJECTIVES: . Achieve the Vision for Rural Albemarle County by limiting the extent of residential development in the Rural Areas and establishing a land use pattern based on protecting large parcels and valuable resources for fanning, forestry, natural resource conservation, and other rural activities. · Preserve open space, natural resources, fannland, forest land, and natural, historic and scenic resources, while preserving the economic value of the land for rural uses. · Minimize the amount of land used for residential development in order to maximize the amount of land that is available for agriculture, forestry, open space, natural, scenic and historic resources. STRATEGIES: The County should: 1. Require Rural Preservation Development (clustering) for all Rural Areas subdivisions, with exceptions to be detennined with this Chapter's implementation. 2. Maximize to the extent possible the rural preservation parcel in RPDs, in tenns of size and benefit to the natural environment, scenic resources, historic resources, agricultural and forestal soils and uses by requiring that the preservation parcel be contiguous and with a minimum percentage of the total acres of the RPD Reduce the impact of the development parcels by minimizing to the greatest amount feasible the acreage used for residential parcels within a Rural Preservation Development by establishing a maximum residential lot size. The preservation parcel should not be less than 80% of the total 40 R¡\ Comp Plan ßoS revised 1201 04 work scssioniina! acreage in the RPD. The residential parcel sizes shall be determined with this Chapter's implementation. 3. Require that residential lots should be clustered together, to the extent possible, in order to reduce the impacts of fragmentation and to avoid conflicts with agricultural and/or forestal uses. 4. Require that the primary consideration for the location of residential lots and the preservation tract in RPDs must be the protection and conservation of rural open space and/or natural, historic, or scenic resources, as well as the conservation and protection of critical slopes, stream valleys, floodplains, perennial streams, prime, important or unique agricultural or forestal, non-tidal wetlands, water supply watersheds, groundwater recharge areas,_and mountain protection areas, as described in Chapter Two of the Comprehensive Plan. 5. Adopt standards and restrictions for subdivisions that are consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and of the Rural Areas Guiding Principles. 6. Restrict access for all development lots in RPDs to an internal street in accordance with Chapter 14 of the Code of Albemarle. 7. Restrict the number ofRPD lots to no more than the number that could be achieved with a conventional subdivision. 8. Encourage the connectivity of conservation land wherever feasible by locating the RPD conservation easement adjacent to other conservation easement properties. 9. Set a maximum acreage for development right lots in subdivisions that will effect a significant reduction in land consumption through development compared to the current 31-acre total for five development rights, while ensuring reasonable flexibility to make wells and septic fields possible in difficult terrain. 10. Adopt a phasing (time-release) program that would permit a limited number oflot(s) to be created in a fixed period of time. 11. Establish overlay districts (for example, a combined stream buffer and habitat corridor district) and building site definitions that better protect important resources identified in the Comprehensive Plan and Critical Resources Inventory from the impacts of residential development. 12. Address the impacts of residential development on biodiversity by altering zoning and subdivision regulations to include design criteria that direct residential development away from large areas of forest, wildlife corridors, and highly valued habitats, and by implementing the recommendations of the Biodiversity Committee. 13. Adopt programs and regulations to implement the mountain protection goals identified in the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets section of the Comprehensive Plan, in accord with new information on debris flow hazard areas and with the future input of the Critical Resources Inventory. 14. Set standards that limit the slopes and curvature of driveways in the Rural Areas to prevent erosion and provide safe access. 15. Limit or prevent residential development in debris flow hazard areas as needed to protect public safety. 16. Require use oflighting that conforms to the design specifications found in the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Component of the Plan in all residential development approvals. 17. Revise time requirements for family ownership both before and after a family division. 41 f{!\ P[an BoS revised 1201 (!4 work session nna[ 18. Actively support enabling legislation for the Transfer of Development Rights. When TDR programs are enabled, the County should adopt measures for implementation. 19. Adont the Chesaneake Bav Act's nrovision regarding maintenance of sentic-tank svstems. LAND USE PATTERNS AND COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING GOAL: Develon tools that heln the Countv envision the interactions and nossible outcomes of Rural Area nolicies and measure the success ofnolicies and nrograms. The Guiding Principles reflect the complexity of the elements that make up the Rural Areas. Planning for these elements should not occur in isolation but should ensure that the County's policies and programs are integrated and consistent in order to maximize their effectiveness in achieving the Vision for the Rural Areas. Changes to Rural Areas programs and regulations, as well as future revisions of the Comprehensive Plan, should make certain that all of the land elements in the Guiding Principles-including agriculture and forestry, land preservation and biodiversity, open space conservation, water resources, and natural, scenic, and cultural resources-can be accommodated in a finite land area over a long period of time. To implement this approach, it will be necessary for the County to have an understanding of how these land elements relate and interact. However, tracking all of these aspects over the expanse of the Rural Areas is a difficult task, and summary measures are needed to make such an effort practical. An accepted set of indicators can summarize the status of important resources and features. These indicators are referred to as "rural area status indicators." In developing them, the County should consider what data about rural land (for example, degrees ofland fragmentation, density of residential uses, water quality indicators, favorability of conditions for agriculture, etc.) can be reasonably collected, and what values for each measure are needed to achieve a positive status. To give this data a link to the on-the-ground reality of land use and land cover in the County, the County could add a mapping element to the indicators that would show the current status of natural and cultural resources. This plan can help citizens and policy makers visualize the status of the Rural Areas, which can be difficult to do with data and abstract analysis. To be useful, such indicators and maps need to be developed with the input of experts in various fields. Frequent and regular reviews of changes shown by the indicators and the maps can be used to inform future policy, program, and regulatory changes. Ecological Footprint Analysis is an accounting method for estimating the land area that a community needs to supply its resource needs. It is similar to fiscal impact studies already used by the County, but rather than expressing costs in dollars, it measures impacts in acres. Such a method could be used to estimate the outcomes of both County policies and proposed land uses. Adapting this method for the County's purposes could provide a tool for considering impacts on 42 RA Comp Plan BoSrcviscd 1201 04 \Vork session final ecosystem services (air and water quality, septic absorption, climate mitigation, soil productivity, etc.) and natural systems caused by permitted or proposed land uses, as well as other activities. Another tool that would be useful for future Comprehensive Plan revisions is a landscape futures scenario process. Rather than accommodating predicted trends, this process sets a desired set of physical landscape conditions (the "scenario") that is then used as a guide for policy development. Participants in the process are presented with maps and/or pictures of an area under various future combinations of land uses and land covers. Informed by their own knowledge and preferences and the community's goals, participants choose a best case scenario, and policies are used to attempt to meet this goal. OBJECTIVES: . Effectively implement policies that acknowledge the complex interactions of the elements of the Guiding Principles and strive to achieve each Principle without hindering the overall VISIOn. . Review future changes to County policies, regulations, and programs to ensure that all aspects of the Rural Areas are considered as a whole. Policies, programs, and regulations that address only one Principle to the detriment of others should be avoided or, where already in place, revised. STRATEGIES: The County should: 1. Adopt a set of Rural Areas status indicators and develop a set of frequently updated maps (or map layers) that show the status and trends of Rural Areas resources and features. These measures should be reviewed annually to inform policy, program, and regulation changes. 2. Develop a method of ecological footprint analysis to be used in estimating the impacts of proposed policies and land uses, and use that method in policy analysis and project review. 3. Before the next revision of this chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, engage in a participatory process that establishes a vision for achieving agricultural and forestal land conservation, biodiversity protection, watershed protection, historic preservation and other land use goals on a shared landscape. Use the outcomes of this process to guide an overall landscape plan for achieving the Vision for Rural Albemarle County. 43 RA Comp Plan BoS revised 12 0 J 04 work session ¡'¡nal INFRASTRUCTURE/COMMUNITY SERVICES TRANSPORTATION GOAL: Provide safe. effective transoortation ootions while ureserving the character of the Rural Areas. The primary objective of the Rural Areas Chapter is to preserve the rural character of the county. Depending on ones perspective, there can be many interpretations of what rural character means. In regard to transportation issues in the Rural Areas, it should not be the commuter that defines rural character; rather the local residents should define the context of rural character. It should be recognized that rural roads are the sites of most of the countv's fatal automobile accidents (see mao). Increasing the numbers of oersons driving the rural roads is an unavoidable conseauence of increased residential develooment in the rural area. A goal of the Rural Areas should be to keeo residential increase to a minimum in order not to increase the numbers of drivers on rural roads. There are not enough fiscal resources to make all rural roads safe. esoeciallv when imoacted with greatlv increased traffic. Rural character could be described as a scenic landscape of open spaces, and is also composed of the human activities upon that landscape that define rural life. Consideration should be given to the multi-modal function of rural roads, giving non-motorized users equal consideration in rural neighborhoods and where otherwise appropriate. When oossible, rural roads should be designed in such a manner that drivers passing through Rural Areas are alert to and moving at appropriate speed to react safely to slower moving farm equipment, bicyclists, horseback riders, or children walking from a school bus stop. Transportation needs should be carefully analyzed so as not to conflict with the primary goal of the County's growth management policy to direct gro'Nth into the designated grov/th areas and conserve the remainder of the County for Rural Areas and resource protection. The two main considerations in rural transportation issues arc providing safe roads and maintaining rural character. County roads should maintain their rural character, even when changes are made to them. Road improvements should not only provide for safe and reasonable mobility, but also contribute to the rural character of the County. Roads should be identified that provide for connections/destination routes to serve the rural population and to provide farm-to-market functions. It should be clearly noted that these secondary roads should not be designated or designed to become the impetus for growth corridors. Transportation improvements should be designed in context with their setting. During the Rural Areas Public Meetings held during the winter of 2002-2003, citizen comments indicated that their primary concern was for the safety and maintenance of the County's rural roads. Road improvements, such as installing shoulders and guardrails, were preferred over building new roads. Many rural residents responded that they did not want to see transportation funding that could contribute to the safety of rural roads be channeled into the Development Areas. 44 R/\ Comp Plan BoS revised 1:2 0 J 04 work session IJna! There was also public sentiment for alternative transportation possibilities such as JAUNT, public transport stations, and traffic calming. The County should coordinate alternative transportation possibilities with the appropriate agents, such as VDOT, at the time development or road construction occurs. Unpaved Roads There are currently 227 miles of unpaved secondary roads in the County. At the end of 2002, the Virginia Department of Transportation introduced a program to pave rural roads in the County that is an alternative to the Pave-In-Place Program. The Rural Rustic Roads Program is designed to pave rural roads in a more environmentally friendly and less costly manner than the rarely used and more restrictive Pave-In-Place Program. The goal of the program is to pave more miles of roads with the limited funds available, doing so with no or minimal encroachment beyond existing ditches and without compromising the safety of the road. For a road to be considered a candidate for the program, the road must be a priority in the County Six-Year Plan; it must be part of the State's secondary system of highways and have an average daily trip count of no less than 50 and no more than 500; and it must also be familiar to most drivers and serve low-density land uses. In addition to the above criteria, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors must pledge to designate a candidate road as a Rural Rustic Road and pass a resolution for each candidate road. Furthermore, the Board would have to pledge to limit growth along the candidate road through comprehensive planning and zoning. The Rural Rustic Roads Program would better meet the Guiding Principles for the Rural Areas than the Pave-In-Place Program. By using existing road widths for road improvements, rather than increasing road widths, the goal of preserving the County's rural scenic resources would be more obtainable. General Design Standards for Rural Roads The following are general design standards for roads in the Rural Areas and should be coordinated with the Department of Engineering: 1. Rural roads should be designed to retain their rural character and not be designed to the characteristics of suburban subdivision street standards. 2. Rural roads should consist of minimum travelway widths that are necessary for safety. 3. Typical rural section design (shoulders and ditch) should consist of greater horizontal and vertical curvature. 4. As is not always the case, Virginia Department of Transportation Mountainous Road Standards should be applicable to the Rural Areas roads. Exceptions to these may be 45 RA Camp Plan BüS revised 120104 work session final appropriate in the rural crossroads communities where the character of those areas may dictate pedestrian facilities and road designs. 5. Rural roads should be designed to encourage multi-modal travel opportunities. 6. Design the construction of road improvements to be protective of environmentally sensitive areas. Any anticipated road improvements or construction in fragile areas should receive careful scrutiny and provide protection measures to eliminate ecological, environmental, and aesthetic concerns. 7. Minimize clearing activities associated with construction to the greatest extent feasible. 8. Minimize the number of access points on rural roads to those necessary to provide safe and convenient access. OBJECTIVE: Provide a balance between the safety of rural roads and maintaining the rural character. Evaluate the need to establish rural road design standards to help articulate expectations for road design that meet this balance. STRATEGIES: The County should: 1. Focus road improvements on safety improvements such as providing shoulders, guardrails, and spot improvements such as straightening curves rather than the paving and widening of rural roads. 2. Pursue the Rural Rustic Roads Program as an alternative to the Pave-In-Place program for qualified roads that have been designated to be paved by the County. The Rural Rustic Roads Program is a more environmentally friendly and less costly way than the Pave-In- Place Program. 3. Consider expanding transportation alternatives, such as JAUNT, to provide and enhance rural transit opportunities. 4. Explore new transportation alternatives such as park and ride lots and traffic calming in crossroad communities. 5. Except for agricultural and forestal purposes, limit construction of new roads in the Rural Areas, especially where road building would impact or fragment natural habitats. 6. Require that new-road projects and road improvement projects include measures that avoid degrading habitats or actively improve them (for example, wildlife tunnels where roads cross migration corridors, stream crossing designs that consider habitat connectivity as well as flood level impacts, etc.). 7. Identify roads that would provide for connections/destination routes to serve the rural population and to provide fann-to-market routes. It should be clearly noted that these secondary roads should not be designated or designed to become the impetus for growth corridors. 46 RA Comp Plan DoS revised ! 2 01 04 work session finul WATER AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL GOAL: Protect Dublic health and water aualitv from the imDacts of moliferating seDtic svstems in the Rural Areas. Current County policy is to restrict development in water supply watersheds and to discourage the location of public facilities such as public sewer and water lines in the Rural Areas. Current County policy also does not support central water and sewer systems. The underlying goal of the County is to protect public health and the environment. As of 2002, there were 16,994 dwelling units in the Rural Areas. Based on the 1996 Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission build-out report, there is the potential for another approximately 54,867 dwelling units in the Rural Areas. Conservatively, there is the possibility of 66,000 dwelling units in the Rural Areas that would have a need for water supply and septic servIces. Considering this build-out scenario, according to the report entitled Technology Choices for Water & Wastewater, written by the County's Water Resources Manager, there would be an overall water demand of 16.5 million gallons of water per day provided by individual wells and 13.2 million gallons of wastewater per day disposed into conventional septic tanks and drainfields (based on current demand figures from the Albemarle County Service Authority). If the disposed wastewater were disbursed evenly over the County's 726 square miles, there would be approximately 18,000 gallons per square mile per day of wastewater. In reality, some areas of the County would receive a higher percentage of the disposed wastewater than other areas. The report goes on to explain that in addition to the build-out scenario, the type of soils found in Albemarle County is critical to the ability to provide on-site wastewater and conventional septic systems. Of the 222 soil units listed in the Albemarle County Soil Survey, only one is considered to have "slight" limitations for septic tank absorption fields (soil properties and site features are generally favorable for absorption fields). Eighty are considered moderately unsuitable (soil properties and site conditions are not favorable) and 128 have "severe" limitations based on poor penneability or filtering, high water table, shallow depth to bedrock, or excessive slope and/or flooding. Thirteen soils are unrated. Given the characteristics of conventional wastewater technologies, the build-out scenario, and soil types, there can be no accurate prediction as to the impact on wells, streams, and reservoirs from conventional wastewater systems. The ChesaDeake Bav Act sets reauirements for seDtic tank maintenance. Those reauirements were not adoDted when Albemarle adoDted other sections of that act. The Countv should consider adoDting those reauirements. for the sake of the Bav and to reduce the Dossibilitv offailed svstems and resulting contamination of wells. OBJECTIVE: Maintain seDtic svstems as a safe and viable waste-disDosal svstem for the Rural Areas while avoiding contamination of wells or Dollution ofwaterwavs. 47 I l RA Comp Plan BoS rcvíscd 12 01 04 work scssíon tined STRATEGIES: The County should: 1. Maintain the current policy of not encouraging the extension of the Albemarle County Service Authority Jurisdictional Area that serves the Development Areas. 2. Adopt the Groundwater Program being developed by the Groundwater Committee to enable a policy that would provide technical guidance on how to conduct site level groundwater assessments. 3. Adoot ti!:!htened standards for maintenance of individual seotic svstems. 48 RA Comp Plan BoS revised 12 () 1 04 work session final FISCAL AND TAX TOOLS GOAL: Analyze and improve County budgeting and taxation to support Rural Area goals and avoid unintentional subsidy of uses with negative impacts. The County's revenue and funding programs have a significant impact on rural land uses. Favorable tax mtes-assessments on rural land, such as those established under the County's use- value taxation program, can provide support for agriculture and land conservation and accuratelv reflect onen snaces' low reauirements for Countv services.. However, if qualification standards for those rates are not sufficient or are not effectively enforced, those same tax rates can subsidize residential development and other activities that are counter to the County's rural area goals. Funding strategies have similar effects; they can provide for protection of the Rural Areas (e.g., purchase of development rights), or they can provide counterproductive subsidies (e.g., funding for increased road capacity in relatively undeveloped areas). Ensuring that these programs conform with Rural Areas policies will support the Guiding Principles by providing alternatives to land fragmentation, protecting the agricultural and forestal resource base, supporting local rural economies, supporting conservation and preservation of rural land, protecting natural and cultural resources, meeting the needs of current rural residents, and providing tools that offer alternatives to the fragmentation of parcels into pieces too small for economic viability. Taxation Tools The use-value taxation program, one of the County's main tax tools for supporting rural area goals, needs to be reviewed for its effectiveness in reaching those goals. The current standards may need to be altered, and new options may be required to encourage activities (such as some forms of natural or cultural resource protection) that are not strongly supported by the program. As the program covers a wide range of rural activities, its revision will require input from a variety of interests and perspectives. includin2: non-rural residents. The issue of rollback taxes and whether they are an effective disincentive to development should be addressed. A study committee including citizens involved in farming, forestry, horticulture, biodiversity conservation, open space protection, and historic and cultural resource protection could provide the expertise needed to improve the program and/or reauest chan2:es in Vif2:inia enablin2: le2:islation. The history of participation in the use-value program raises questions about its effectiveness. From 1982 to 2002, the percentage of the Rural Areas enrolled in the program declined from 75.6% to 62.6%. Map H, Albemarle County Land Use Taxation, shows that few rural parcels large enough to qualify are not enrolled in the program. This suggests that the decline in area enrolled is largely due to the disqualification of land subdivided into parcels too small to qualify for the program. This raises the question of whether or not the tax relief provided by the program is effectively countering the financial pressure to subdivide and develop. Fiscal Tools 49 R!\ Comp Plan BoS revised 120104 work session final The County's budget policies and funding programs should be comprehensively reviewed to ensure that they also are effectively supporting the County's goals for the Rural Areas. Existing programs, such as the Acquisition of Conservation Easements program, should be examined in light of continuing residential development of the Rural Areas and be allocated sufficient funding to respond effectively to that threat. The County should also compare its existing funding strategies to its list of rural area protection goals, and consider new programs to address unmet needs. The County will also need to find and take advantage of outside funding sources that are available for rural conservation purposes. Landowners should be helped to connect with state and federal funding sources for purchasing land (or at least associated development potential), land rental for conservation uses (such as the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program), and installation and maintenance of Best Management Practices for natural resource protection. OBJECTIVES: . Ensure that the County's fiscal and tax policies actively support Rural Areas goals and do not provide subsidies for activities that are counter to those goals. . Find additional sources of funding for private and public proj ects that support the Guiding Principles. STRATEGIES: The County should: 1. Establish a committee to review the County's use-value taxation program and revise the program within the framework of state enabling legislation. The Committee should ensure that this program supports rural area policy goals and does not subsidize residential development or other activities that are counter to rural area goals. 2. Revise the standards for the Open Space category of the use-value taxation program to allow landowners to qualify through the protection of environmental resources (such as biodiversity) and ecosystem services (such as watershed protection), and create a straightforward application process for this purpose. 3. Review the County budget for opportunities to effectively provide incentives that support rural area policies and to remove inadvertent subsidies of uses and activities that are counter to rural area goals. 4. Conduct an analysis of the fiscal impacts of rural residential development, including transportation, and revise policies and regulations to address those impacts. 5. Find outside funding sources for the purchase of development rights and other forms of resource protection and effectively use that funding for County land protection programs. County staff should help landowners find funding for conservation purposes. 50 RA Comp Plan BoS revised 120104 work session final ATTACHMENT B Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (see number 7, as it pertains to septic maintenance) Database updated through 20:24 Va.R. August 9, 2004 9V ACI0-20-120. General perfonnance criteria. Through their applicable land use ordinances, regulations and enforcement mechanisms, local governments shall require that any use, development or redevelopment of land in Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas meets the following perfonnance criteria: 1. No more land shall be disturbed than is necessary to provide for the proposed use or development. 2. Indigenous vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent practicable, consistent with the use or development proposed. 3. Where the best management practices utilized require regular or periodic maintenance in order to continue their functions, such maintenance shall be ensured by the local government through a maintenance agreement with the owner or developer or some other mechanism that achieves an equivalent objective. 4. All development exceeding 2,500 square feet of land disturbance shall be accomplished through a plan of development review process consistent with § 15.2-2286 A 8 of the Code of Virginia and subdivision 1 e of 9V ACI0-20-231. 5. Land development shall minimize impervious cover consistent with the proposed use or development. 6. Any land disturbing activity that exceeds an area of 2,500 square feet (including construction of all single family houses, septic tanks and drainfields, but otherwise as defined in § 10.1-560 of the Code of Virginia) shall comply with the requirements of the local erosion and sediment control ordinance. **7. On-site sewage treatment systems not requiring a Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (VPDES) pennit shall: a. Have pump-out accomplished for all such systems at least once every five years. (1) If deemed appropriate by the local health department and subject to conditions the local health department may set, local governments may offer to the owners of such systems, as an alternative to the mandatory pump-out, the option of having a plastic filter installed and maintained in the outflow pipe from the septic tank to filter solid material from the effluent while sustaining adequate flow to the drainfield to pennit nonnal use of the septic system. Such a filter should satisfy standards established in the Sewage Handling and Disposal Regulations (12V AC5-610) administered by the Virginia Department of Health. (2) Furthennore, in lieu of requiring proof of septic tank pump-out every five years, local governments may allow owners of on-site sewage treatment systems to submit documentation every five years, certified by a sewage handler pennitted by the Virginia Department of Health, that the septic system has been inspected, is functioning properly, and the tank does not need to have the effluent pumped out of it. b. For new construction, provide a reserve sewage disposal site with a capacity at least equal to that ofthe primary sewage disposal site. This reserve sewage disposal site requirement shall not apply to any lot or parcel recorded prior to October 1,1989, if the lot or parcel is not sufficient in capacity to accommodate a reserve sewage disposal site, as determined by the local health department. Building shall be prohibited on the area of all sewage disposal sites until the structure is served by public sewer or an on-site sewage treatment system which operates under a permit issued by the State Water Control Board. All sewage disposal site records shall be administered to provide adequate notice and enforcement. As an alternative to the 100% reserve sewage disposal site, local governments may offer the owners of such systems the option of installing an alternating drainfield system meeting the following conditions: (1) Each of the two alternating drainfields in the system shall have, at a minimum, an area not less than 50% of the area that would otherwise be required if a single primary drainfield were constructed. (2) An area equaling 50% of the area that would otherwise be required for the primary drainfield site must be reserved for subsurface absorption systems that utilize a flow diversion device, in order to provide for future replacement or repair to meet the requirements for a sewage disposal system. Expansion of the primary system will require an expansion of this reserve area. (3) The two alternating drainfields shall be connected by a diversion valve, approved by the local health department, located in the pipe between the septic (aerobic) tank and the distribution boxes. The diversion valve shall be used to alternate the direction of effluent flow to one drainfield or the other at a time. However, diversion valves shall not be used for the following types of treatment systems: (a) Sand mounds; (b) Low-pressure distribution systems; (c) Repair situations when installation of a valve is not feasible; and (d) Any other approved system for which the use of a valve would adversely affect the design of the system, as determined by the local health department. (4) The diversion valve shall be a three-port, two-way valve of approved materials (i.e., resistant to sewage and leakproof and designed so that the effluent from the tank can be directed to flow into either one of the two distribution boxes). (5) There shall be a conduit from the top of the valve to the ground surface with an appropriate cover to be level with or above the ground surface. (6) The valve shall not be located in driveways, recreational courts, parking lots, or beneath sheds or other structures. (7) In lieu of the aforementioned diversion valve, any device that can be designed and constructed to conveniently direct the flow of effluent from the tank into either one of the two distribution boxes may be approved if plans are submitted to the local health department and found to be satisfactory. (8) The local government shall require that the owner(s) alternate the drainfields every 12 months to permit the yearly resting of half of the absorption system. (9) The local government shall ensure that the owner(s) are notified annually of the requirement to switch the valve to the opposite drainfield. j Fatal Traffic Accidents In Albemarle County 1997-2004 Prepared by Albemarle County Office of6eographic Data Seroices (60S). Mop created by Derek Bedarf. October 200~. Legend Q Deoelopment Areas ~ Roads o County Boundary fatal Traffic Accidents + In the Oeoelopment Areas (22) + In the Rural Areas (51) Transitional: On a road between the o Rural and Oeoelopment Areas (8) Note: The map elements depicted are graphic representations and are not to be construed or used as a legal description. This map is for display purposes only. o 3 6 9 Miles e Agenda Item No. 26. Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-2003-006), Work Session. Mr. Cilimberg said that at its work session on December 1, 2004, the Board accepted an updated draft of the Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan amendment that reflected the changes made by the Board at its two previous work sessions. At that work session Ms. Thomas submitted some additional changes, and the Board members requested that those changes be incorporated into the draft. There were 17 suggested revisions and those have been made and a new draft of the plan provided to the Board members for today's meeting. Staff believes the changes proposed are generally consistent with the intent of the Planning Commission's recommendations and the decisions reached by the Board in its work sessions. However, No. 15, on Page 42, adds Strategy 19 stating that the County should adopt the Chesapeake Bay Act's provision regarding maintenance of septic tank systems. That was not a strategy discussed by the Commission. The Bay Act requires pumping of septic systems every five years. That would be a new feature in the plan. Staff does feel that the 17 points, in combination with the changes suggested by the Board in its work sessions meets the Board's intent for the rural areas. He asked that the Board make a decision today since the amendment is to be advertised for a public hearing on February 9,2005. He then offered to answer questions. Mr. Rooker asked if any Board member had a question about No.1 which states: "Goals have been added at the beginning of each major section. The Goals summarize the intent of the policies contained in each section of the plan." There were no comments. As to No.2: "Page 9 - added stronger emphasis on tourism economy." There were no comments. As to No.3: "Page 11 - a) added "watershed protection" to Guiding Principle 1.2 Forestry Resources. Addition brings attention to the role forestry resources play in watershed protection; b) added "permanently" to Guiding Principle 1.3 Land Preservation; c) added "open space" to Guiding Principle 1.4 Land Conservation." Mr. Wyant asked if the word "permanently" should also be added to Guiding Principle 1.1 for agriculture and Guiding Principle 1.2 for forestry. Ms. Thomas said she has been confused as to what land preservation is and how it differs from land conservation. The Commission came up with these two terms and discussed them at length. The concept in 1.4 is more qualitative (Land Conservation - Protect Albemarle County's rural land through planned management of open spaces to prevent exploitation, destruction, or neglect.). What will be done with the land in order to conserve natural resources? The concept in 1.3 is a long-term, permanent preservation of rural land (Land Preservation _ Permanently preserve and protect Albemarle County's rural land as an essential and finite resource.). For instance: a conservation easement or a riparian easement have a private trust such as The Nature Conservancy holding the land. "Permanent" was added to 1.3 because that is what the Commission was thinking of when they talked about land preservation as distinct from land conservation. Mr. Wyant again asked about permanent protection of agricultural and forestry resources. He thinks all of this plus protection of water resources is something that should be done permanently. Ms. McDowell said all of these are of equal importance, but the language further defines a legal easement on a piece of property as opposed to something voluntary. Mr. Wyant said if the word "permanent" is used he thinks it should be applied to both agriculture and forestry resources. Mr. Cilimberg said 1.3 is inclusive of agriculture and forestry resources where it is an element of conservation easements. Mr. Rooker said he does not think the County can enforce agricultural use on a property in a permanent way, whereas it may have the power through acquisition of conservation easements, etc., to permanently preserve the land. Mr. Bowerman suggested saying "through" at the end of the sentence and adding "open space easements." Mr. Rooker said he does not think the wording should be limiting. Ms. Thomas asked if there is some ·umbrella" term over easements. Mr. Davis suggesting saying "by public ownership or by easement." Mr. Wyant felt that would be clearer to anyone reading this principle. He asked if these are all publicly held easements. Mr. Davis said the Open Space Land Act requires that all open space easements be held by public entities. Conservation easements in the statutory sense are for the most part held by private entities. The language "by public ownership or by easement" was agreed to by consensus. As to No.4: "Page 12 - a) Building Principle 10, changed 'considered'to 'include the goals of the T JPDC Sustainability Council.' These goals have been previously adopted into the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan chapter of the Comprehensive Plan; b) changed 'provide' to 'foster' tools that would allow alternatives for smaller lots." There were no comments from Board members. As to No.5: "Page 15 - added the protection of "working farms" to the strategy to protect prime agricultural soils from non-agricultural development. There were no comments from Board members. As to No.6: "Page 16 - added Strategies 11 and 12 to recognize and protect wine production and to support creation and operation of farmers' markets." Mr. Wyant asked if this implies just to farmers' markets. He thinks the Board should encourage the little roadside stands one sees in the rural areas. He said those are what makes the rural area and are a way for these people to make a living. Mr. Rooker suggested changing the sentence to read: "Support the marketing of farm products in the creation and operation of farmers' markets." Ms. Thomas said that language would also support the County spending staff time on helping the farmers market their goods. She said a staff member had asked her if No. 11 should single out wine production or whether it should talk about a variety of agricultural production including wine production. The Board agreed by consensus to change No. 12 to read: "Support the marketing of farm products in the creation and operation of farmers' markets." As to No.7: "Page 18 - renamed 'Conservation Uses' to 'Land Conservation'." Ms. Thomas said there has been a good deal of comment made about this particular Principle. There is a problem with defining "conservation" and "preservation". Can they be measured? Farm production can be measured and timbering can be measured. When land is in the Land Use program, the County looks to be sure there is farming taking place, or that there is a forest management plan. How will the County know when there is conservation taking place? She has no problem with returning the title of this section to "Conservation Uses." Some people who spoke to her were jarred by the term "Land Conservation." If the term "conservation uses" embodies more of what the public is interested in, she does not think it changes much. Through all of the community meetings held on this Comprehensive Plan amendment, it came up again and again that people think there is something called conservation. There is farming, there is forestry, and then there is the third category of something being protective of natural resources. The Comprehensive Plan already contains a chapter on Natural Resources. Soon there will be a chapter on bio-diversity. Ms. Thomas said how to embody "conservation" into the Comprehensive Plan has been a puzzle. She received a couple of e-mails which suggested that it had not been sufficiently embodied in the words of the amendment. She made a suggestion, but is open to others making alternative suggestions. She thinks a good definition of conservation is needed because this plan suggests that a lot of land in the County be put into clusters. Then a good deal of land ends up in preservation tracts. If those preservation tracts are supposed to meet a public purpose, then that conservation purpose needs to be defined first in order to have them held by an easement. The words put here will be important; it is not just an academic exercise. Mr. Rooker said he does not have a problem with the language proposed in this draft. He thinks Mr. Tom Oliva sent everyone an e-mail about the goal for this section titled "Land Conservation." Mr. Rooker said he had no problem with that recommendation either. Should the Board leave this draft as proposed and wait until after the public hearing to discuss it further? Ms. Thomas said she will suggest that the title be changed back to "Conservation Uses." Mr. Boyd said he does not know what the sentence in the third paragraph under that goal means ("It is recognized in the State Land Evaluation Advisory Council [SLEAC] provisions for land use that may be covered by the use-value taxation program [commonly called 'land use tax.']"). Ms. Thomas said a member of the public at an earlier hearing suggested that the County's land use taxation program include provision for conservation lands, not just for agricultural and forestal lands. SLEAC recognizes those provisions. Mr. Boyd asked if this language is intended to be a definition of open space land use for conservation. Mr. Cilimberg said he believes the sentence is incomplete. Mr. Rooker suggested saying "conservation uses are recognized ..." Ms. Thomas said "It" stands for conservation uses, but if you don't read it that way it sounds like an incomplete sentence. Mr. Rooker suggested the sentence read: "Conservation use is recognized ... as qualified for use-value taxation." Mr. Wyant felt the sentence should be "Conservation uses are ..." Mr. Rooker then restated the sentence to read: "Conservation uses are recognized in the State Land Evaluation Advisory Council (SLEAC) provisions as uses that qualify for the use-value taxation program (commonly called "land use tax".). Ms. Thomas agreed to that language. Mr. Wyant asked if there is a chance there is nothing in the agricultural or forestal land use, and this would give some conservation easements an opportunity to get into land use? Mr. Rooker said it is just a statement of fact. Mr. Cilimberg said those lands already qualify for land use taxation. Ms. Thomas said they have that option now, but it is under utilized. Mr. Dorrier asked why the last sentence on Page 18 was deleted (The community profits as well from the preservation of scenic and cultural resources, which not only enriches lives. but which are important components of a thriving tourism industry, and as a setting for traditional rural activities such as hunting, fishing, hiking and horseback riding.). Ms. McDowell said in order to make the draft more legible, whole sections were deleted, and the words moved to other places. Mr. Boyd said he also wondered about that. But, it seems that throughout this draft all references to the ACE program have been eliminated. He did not see that it had been added anywhere. Ms. Thomas said she had the same question about Page 20. Everything is removed, and she did not see where it was put back in. Ms. McDowell said all of that language was moved to Page 22. Mr. Cilimberg said ACE is discussed under the section titled "Land Preservation or Voluntary Land Conservation". As to No.8: "Page 19 - a) changed 'can' to 'may' regarding the level of protection afforded by conservation; b) added information regarding raising public awareness of funding for conservation and the value of funding and implementing conservation measures as in order to achieve conservation on private lands; c) added statement regarding importance of monitoring easement properties." There were no changes recommended. As to No.9: Page 20 - a) relocated and changed name of Voluntary Land Conservation Programs to Land Preservation or Voluntary Land Conservation (begins on Page 22); b) relocated strategies (Page 24)." There were no changed recommended. As to No. 10: Page 21 - replaced Strategy 1; added "and protect" to Strategy 3. There were no changed recornmended. As to No. 11: Pages 22,23,24 - a) relocated renamed section; b) added paragraph that ties the need for conservation easements to other chapters of the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. McDowell said Mr. Dorrier asked about one paragraph that was deleted on Page 18. She said that paragraph was moved to the bottom of Page 22 as the second paragraph under "Land Preservation or Voluntary Land Conservation." Mr. Wyant said before going to the next recommended change, he would like to talk about "Crossroads Communities" on Page 25. He said the report states that boundaries are defined by historic structures. He thinks it will be very difficult to define those communities in that way. He said every community named was at the crossing of two roads, and that is where stores were located. He does not see the significance of a boundary for these communities unless the County has something planned for them in the future. Mr. Rooker said Mr. Wyant is referring to the last paragraph on Page 25 where it says "The boundaries of crossroads communities should be well defined to ensure the rural character of the area is maintained. The boundaries should correspond to parcels that have been identified as historical sites, or potential historical sites that could be converted to uses, such as country stores or small doctor/dentist offices that would serve the immediate surrounding area." He thinks the question concerns the second sentence. What is meant by the word "historical"? Does that imply some kind of designation or simply that they have existed as crossroads communities in the past? He does not think these are areas that carry any potential for designation. He read this to mean that these communities exist today, have existed for some period of time. The idea is that the boundaries not be expanded for commercial use in the rural areas beyond those areas that have been historically used for that purpose. Mr. Wyant said he does not want growth occurring around these centers creating another new growth area. He is not sure that they even need a boundary. Mr. Rooker said he thinks the boundary concept needs to be in there, otherwise it would imply that there are no boundaries. He asked if the second sentence quoted above could be changed to say: "The boundaries should correspond to the limits of existing and traditional commercial uses within those crossroads communities". Ms. McDowell drew the Board's attention to Page 27, Strategy 4, which says: "Establish boundaries, such as boundaries corresponding with parcels that have been identified as historical sites or potential historical sites, to guide decisions on the location of uses in crossroads communities." Mr. Rooker said he is glad Mr. Wyant questioned this paragraph. He is troubled by the use of the word "historical". Does that mean it has to be a building with historical significance? To him, it means that the area has traditionally existed as a crossroads community with some commercial activity. Ms. McDowell said that was the entire idea behind the language. There were crossroads communities identified in the original Comprehensive Plan. Staff talked to the Historic Preservation Committee to be sure it was in concert with their thinking. Some of the buildings within these areas are of local historic significance. However, historic sites will not necessarily be identified to have expanded uses. The crossroads communities sites have certain historic significance because they either are, or where, crossroads communities as identified in the Survey of Historic Communities in Albemarle County. Mr. Wyant mentioned Strategy 5 on Page 27 which reads: "Establish design standards, such as architectural, renovation, and sign guidelines, to ensure that the scale and scope of businesses maintain the character or the crossroads communities and support the County's growth management policies." He previously mentioned that in order for the County to keep up these structures, there must be some flexibility given so people can set up small businesses. Then the owners will have an incentive to maintain that structure. Ms. McDowell agreed. Mr. Wyant said he does not think that regulations are the way to go. Ms. Thomas said Strategy 1 on Page 26 says: "Encourage the renovation and use of buildings in crossroads communities to provide appropriately scaled services that would only benefit the immediate surrounding area while preserving the rural character. Examples of such services include country stores, small scale offices, day care, and small scale doctor/dentist offices, and public institutional uses, such as post offices, with particular emphasis given to historic buildings as spaces to support the maintenance of these resources." She believes this is the most important strategy. Mr. Wyant said from comments he received recently, he would add the word "crafts" to that list. He wants to see the historic structures maintained, but believes the County must allow the people to do something with these structures. Mr. Tucker said these communities were all identified in the 1970 Comprehensive Plan. If they were identified again and had a special zoning district which allowed these uses by right, that would be an incentive. Some of the uses mentioned are by special use permit only in the rural areas. Mr. Wyant said if there were boundaries, and then certain things were allowed by right, he would be agreeable. Mr. Rooker suggested that the second sentence of the last paragraph on Page 25 read: "The boundaries should correspond to parcels that have traditionally served as crossroads communities and that would serve the immediate surrounding area." As currently worded, he is not sure what the sentence means. Mr. Tucker said examples of those uses are spelled out in Strategy 1 on Page 26. Mr. Rooker suggested changing Strategy 4 on Page 27 to track that language. Ms. Thomas said Strategy 4 could be turned into two different strategies. She thinks it would be useful to identify historic sites to guide decisions of the location of uses in crossroads communities. That is something the Historic Preservation Committee is working on. She does not want to take out the "identified parcels" because that is an important step. Mr. Wyant thinks it is important that they be identified. Ms. Thomas said Strategy 4 could be changed to read: "Identify historical sites or potential historical sites to guide decisions on the location of uses in crossroads communities" . Mr. Rooker agreed. Mr. Cilimberg said this section was only to apply to the seven crossroads communities surveyed and on which a report was presented to the Board. This does not apply generally to any crossroads situation in the County. It only now applies to the seven that were surveyed. If the Board wants this to apply more broadly to where other crossroad communities that have not been surveyed might exist, then the language would need to be changed. Mr. Rooker said he does not see that Strategy on Page 27 makes it clear that it applies only to the crossroads communities that have been surveyed. Mr. Davis said it is referred to in the paragraph on the top of Page 26 which states: "The Survey of Historic Communities in Albemarle County has been complied to assist in determining the boundaries of crossroads communities. This inventory provides valuable information, such as aerial photos, tax maps, photographs of structures and photograph reference maps, and National Register of Historic Places and Virginia Landmark Register listings for each crossroads community that has potential to retain its historic and rural character while providing services to the immediate local area." Mr. Rooker said he would be more comfortable with the Strategy as Ms. Thomas suggested by starting it with the word "Identify." He thinks the County wants to identify historic sites whether or not they have been surveyed. Mr. Wyant said he does not believe the language is referring to just seven communities. Ms. Thomas said only five are identified by name in the language, so she is not sure what the others are. Mr. Cilimberg said the report previously given to the Board names seven. It is important that staff understand if the Board wants this section more generally structured for the public hearing. Mr. Rooker said the language as worded is generally applicable. Mr. Wyant said he likes the language of Strategy 6 on Page 27: "Encourage the adaptive reuses of historic structures that should promote their maintenance and preservation." He thinks that is the key to keep these structures. He is bothered by "design standards." Each community has its own appearance. As to No. 12: Page 31 - added sentences advising of the impact of scattering residential development in the rural areas. Mr. Wyant said he was concerned about the sentence reading: "It also leads to 'accidental house arrest' for elderly residents caught beyond the reach of public transportation." Ms. Thomas said it is an increasing issue with people who are concerned about aging. roads. As to No. 13: Page 35 - added emphasis regarding traffic increases on dangerous rural There were no comments. As to No. 14: Page 37 - added statement that RPD's should not become a justification for extending public services to the rural areas. Ms. Thomas said she does not see this language on Page 37. Ms. McDowell said that is right, and she is not sure at this moment why she wrote this explanation for No. 14. Mr. Rooker said he thinks the explanation for No. 14 should be in the language. There was some discussion of that concept at a previous meeting. As to No. 15: Page 42 - added Strategy 19 stating that the County should adopt the Chesapeake Bay Act's provision regarding maintenance of septic tank systems. Mr. Wyant said he has a problem with this because pumping of septic tanks every five years does not solve a problem. Within five days there is 1000 gallons back in the 1000-gallon tank so the problem is still there. There is data that shows that septic tanks are the cause of the problem with the Chesapeake Bay as much as tanks at point sources. That is why there is a conference coming up to talk about ways to tax and take care of point sources. He does not endorse this strategy with "maintenance of septic tanks" included. The way to maintain a septic tank is to put Fleshman's yeast in it every three months and the tank should not have to be pumped. Mr. Dorrier said he also has a problem with that stipulation. Ms. Thomas said the Board is proposing to not change the Comprehensive Plan that allows 50,000 more houses in the rural area. Those will be septic tank systems, and if they are not maintained, they would last no more than 20 years. People have been encouraged for many years to have their septic tanks pumped. It is widely accepted as the way to maintain the efficiency of the tank, but more than the efficiency of the tank it maintains the soil into which the effluent goes because it is the soil that gets clogged with particles and that soil can never be used again. Every area east of 1-95 which has adopted the Chesapeake Bay standards has the system because that is part of the Chesapeake Bay provisions. When the County's Engineer worked for Arlington County, he was in charge of making sure that septic tanks were pumped. She said yeast does not need to be added, but the septic systems must be maintained. There will be an increasing number of septic systems throughout the County. Virginia's regulations on septic systems are considered some of the weakest in the nation and tend to be more concerned about effluent getting to the surface and are not so concerned about polluting groundwater. If the County is not going to reduce the potential for residential development in the rural areas, she thinks there will be problems with septic systems. Mr. Rooker said he does not think the Board can decide today whether or not to affirmatively adopt the Bay Act provisions, so he suggesting changing Strategy 19 on Page 42 to read: "Consider adopting the Chesapeake Bay Act's provision regarding maintenance of septic tank systems." He said this item will come to the Board as a separate item at some point in the future for action. Ms. Thomas agreed. Mr. Wyant also agreed, but said that the soils on the east side of 1-95 are all sandy soils so the flow is much faster through those soils than through the clay soils in Albemarle. He said he has done a lot of work in this field of study, and done a lot of testing also. As to No. 16: Page 44 - a) added connections between additional traffic, increased residential development and accidents; b) added caution that fiscal resources are not sufficient to make rural roads safe with increased traffic; and, c) deleted reference to relationship of transportation needs and directing growth into designated areas and the goal that the two main considerations in rural transportation are safety and maintenance. Mr. Rooker said Ms. Thomas had e-mailed her recommendations to the Board members before the last meeting. Mr. Boyd said he had one problem with the concept of saying that roads in the rural areas will not be improved just because there is growth in those areas. His constituents often say that they did not promote growth in those areas. When they moved to those areas there was no growth and then suddenly by-right developments were built, and it is not their fault there is an . unsafe road situation. He does not know the solution, but he does not agree with just saying road improvements will not be made in rural roads where by-right development occurs. Mr. Rooker said he does not believe that is what is being said on Page 44. He said the goal says: "Provide safe, effective transportation options while preserving the character of the Rural Areas." He does not see anything in this section which says there will be no improvements made to rural roads. Mr. Boyd said in several sections it says that improvements to rural roads should not be expected just because there happens to be growth in those areas. Mr. Rooker said it does not say that on Page 44, although it does point out that "There are not enough fiscal resources to make all rural roads safe, especially when impacted with greatly increased traffic." He thinks that is just a statement of fact. Ms. McDowell said Mr. Boyd may be referring to what was deleted in the third paragraph "Transportation needs should be carefully analyzed so as not to conflict with the primary goal of the County's growth management policy to direct growth into the designated growth areas and conserve the remainder of the County for Rural Areas and resource protection. The two main considerations in rural transportation issues are providing safe roads and maintaining rural character." Mr. Wyant said he also questions this language. Ms. Thomas said she thinks it is a fact that there will not be enough money to make all rural roads safe with the increasing residential development that will take place. She thought suggesting that safe roads could be provided was misleading the public. It does say that spot improvements will not be made. Mr. Boyd asked how this relates to the new Rural Rustic Road Program. Would this mean that a road would not be paved using the RRR program? Ms. Thomas said when she thinks about rural roads and accidents, she thinks of Garth Road. There is no way that road could ever be made safe enough for all the traffic using it now. Ms. McDowell drew the Board's attention to Page 46, Strategies 1 and 2. NO.1 says to "Focus road improvements on safety improvements such as providing shoulders, guardrails, etc." NO.2 says to "Pursue the Rural Rustic Roads Program as an alternative ...." Mr. Rooker said that on Page 45 under "Unpaved Roads", the last paragraph says "The Rural Rustic Roads Program would better meet the Building Principles ...." He thinks that is a positive statement that the Board is interested in using that program. Mr. Boyd said that was acceptable. As to No. 17: added Objective that addresses maintenance of septic systems while avoiding contamination of wells and waterways. Mr. Rooker read the third sentence of the added paragraph dealing with septic tank maintenance: "The County should consider adopting those requirements, for the sake of the Bay and to reduce the possibility of failed systems and resulting contamination of wells." Ms. Thomas said this sentence already uses the word "consider." Mr. Davis said Strategy 3 on Page 48 should be changed to read: "Consider adopting tightened standards for maintenance of individual septic systems" so it would be consistent with the other sections. Mr. Rooker said he thinks all want to be sure that septic systems do not fail and create pollution problems for groundwater throughout the County. The question is how to do that. Ms. Thomas said there may be a time when the County is required by the State to put denitrification (phonetic) units on septic tanks. It requires a second tank in order to do this. Mr. Rooker said that completes discussion of the items which were changed by staff. This draft now reflects all of the changes recommended by the Board. Mr. Wyant asked if "Attachment B - Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act" is included. Mr. Cilimberg said that is just part of the Executive Summary, not part of the amendment. Ms. Thomas said she thinks the map "Fatal Traffic Accidents in Albemarle County 1997- 2004" should appear somewhere in the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. McDowell said it will be a part of the overall maps in the Plan. Mr. Rooker said if there were no other comments about this amendment, this has already been set for a public hearing in February. Mr. Wyant asked if the Board members will receive a revised copy of the amendment before the public hearing. Mr. Cilimberg said a copy will be ready for public distribution soon, and a copy will also be mailed to the Board members. Mr. Rooker thanked staff for their work on this amendment to date.