Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-11-10 adjNovember 10, 1999 (Adjourned Meeting) (Page 1) A joint meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, and Albemarle County Planning Commission, was held on November 10, 1999 at 5:30 p.m., in Meeting Room 235, County Office Building, Mclntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. This meeting was adjourned from November 3, 1999. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Ms. Charlotte Y. Humphris, Mr. Forrest R. Marshall, Jr., Mr. Charles S. Martin, Mr. Walter F. Perk ns and Ms. Sally H. Thomas. ABSENT: None. PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. William W. Finley. Mr. C. Jared Loewenstein, Mr. William D. Rieley, Mr. Dennis S. Rooker and Mr. Rodney S. Thomas. ABSENT: Mr. William J. Nitchmann and Ms. Hilda R. Lee-Washington. OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive; Mr. Larry W. Davis, County Attorney; Mr. V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Community Development; Mr. David Benish, Assistant Director of Planning and Community Development; and Ms. Mary Joy Scala, Senior Planner. Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. Mr. Martin called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Agenda Item No. 2. Presentation: Background Report on Rural Areas DiStrict Section of Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Cilimberg reported that approximately three years ago when the Board approved the Land Use Plan there was a joint work session with the Planning Commission as far as the direction to follow relating to the Comprehensive Plan. At the time there was an Economic Development Section, and a discussion was held referring to the possibilities of further considering infill and development area initiatives, expansion of development areas and further consideration of the Rural Area. There was also the Natural Environment section which needed to be completed, The decision at that point was to move forward with the Development Area Initiatives Study which will be coming to a close with a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors early next year. The Supervisors decided they were not going to pursue any type of land area expansion, but they wanted to look further at the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan particularly in light of what would deVelop in the Natural Environment section and what might come out of the DISC. He said with the Natural Environment section having been approved by the Board this past summer, it is time for a discussion on the Rural Area sectiOn. Members of the DISC have expressed a lot of interest in how this will also proceed because they see it as a balance to their work in development areas. The staff wanted the opportunity to discuss with the Board of Supervisors exactly what kind of direction it collectively wants to take in this review before a rather involved process begins of examining the Rural Area. He announced that Mary Joy Scala will go over the elements of the report and, after a discussion, it is hoped a conclusion can be reached as far as how to proceed from this point. Ms. Scala explained that this is the third and last major chapter of the Comprehensive Plan to be reviewed. The staff is currently completing Chapter One, County Profile, Chapter Five Implementation, as well as the Introduction. These chapters are more factual and Will require less discussion than the other three chapters, and they will be brought to the Commissioners and Supervisors soon. She also stated that the Action Agenda, which was omitted from Chapter Two laSt spring, has been finished, and it is being advertised now for adoption. The purpose of this work session is to begin the discussion of the Rural Area Chapter, and to have the Board and Planning Commission reach consensus on the staff's outline for review of this chapter. She remarked that the first step in this process is to develop a vision for the Rural Area or confirm what the Supervisors and Commissioners believe to be the existing vision. She commented that this could be something similar to the previously adopted Land Use Plan, and she called attention to the Statement of General Principles for Land Use in Designated Development Areas. This statement can also be considered as a purpose and intent for the Rural Area. However, it is something that needs to be thought about, verbalized and written down. In ithe 1989 Comprehensive Plan there is no statement to that effect, and there is nothing in writing to indicate the vision for the Rural Area. There is a Growth Management goal in Chapter Three, which discusses the resources that should be protected in the Rural Area, but it doesn't go beyond that. This Comprehensive Plan discusses the Rural Area in terms of agricultural/forestal resources and natural scenic historic resources, as well as a short section on rural development which basically indicates that residential development in the Rural Area is not to be encouraged. However, there is no positive statement as far as what is hoped to be achieved. The staff thinks this needs to be done as a first step before the Board and Commission proceed. She added that perhaps the way to begin is to look at the existing characteristicS of the Rural Area. She mentioned that a staff committee worked on these existing characteristics during the last few months. The committee tried to list the characteristics currently present in the Rural Area, and this is shown in Attachment C. The list is subjective and the Board and Commission may not agree with it, but it is the beginning of a way to consider the current Rural Area. She added that after the Commission and Board work on this vision and agree upon a statement relating to the Rural Area, then the next'step will be data collection and discussion of whether or not the current direction, regulations and programs will lead to the vision. She called attention to Page Four of the staff report where there is a Summary of Major Issues for Future Study. She would like for this work session to review these issues and make comments on their appropriateness. November 10, 1999 (Adjourned Meeting) (Page 2) Some of them have been discussed before, and some of them are new. She commented that these are the issues the staff has identified as far as what needs to be discussed in order to complete the Rural Area section. It is also hoped the Commission and Board will confirm what the staff believes to be the best public participation process. The staff feels it is essential to get members of the public involved in this chapter so they will be in agreement with the County's vision for the Rural Area. She added that the staff is proposing to do this through a work session process, and the sessions will be advertised especially on the County website. She will not go through the staff report page by page, but the staff has listed a background to put the discussion in context with the other sections of the Plan. She also noted that an organization of the main portions of Chapter Four is listed which should be addressed. There should be a discussion of agricultural/forestal land uses and other Rural Area land uses, as well as the section on Rural Area Implementation techniques. She pointed out that she has listed in the staff report a summary of the major issues already identified as well as how the staff thinks public participation should be handled in the review process. She will be happy to answer questions, and she hopes this work session will generate some discussion about these issues and the proposed process. Mr. Lindsay Dorrier, newly elected official to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to begin in January, 2000, inquired as to how many acres there are in the Rural Area. Mr. Rooker answered that approximately 95 percent of the County is designated as Rural Area. Ms. Scala concurred. Ms. Humphris referred to Page Four of the staff report relating to the heading, "Implementation techniques in other localities." She asked if it can be assumed that this is referring to counties dealing with similar situations such as Augusta, Fauquier and Rappahannock and not the neighboring counties. Ms. Scala replied affirmatively. The staff is searching for counties with problems most like Albemarle County. Ms. Humphris said this will be helpful to Albemarle County officials as far as what has already been implemented, as well as possible things to consider. Ms. Thomas referred to the same section. She would like to emphasize staff work and professional guidance as far as other localities are concerned, because there are lots of things going on around the country that are relevant to Albemarle County's situation. Some of these things are working, and some of them have failed, but a lot can be learned. There is no way a summit of citizens is going to bring forth this sort of evaluation as well as the professional staff can do. She enjoys getting together with counterparts from other localities, and she has learned a lot from a Fauquier County breakfast held a few days ago. However, she would like to emphasize the importance of the staff informing the Supervisors and Commissioners what has worked, what can work and what hasn't worked around the country. Ms. Humphris agreed. She sees no purpose for this Board to sit down with other BOards from around the country, and she hopes this is not the idea. It should be a professional gathering of information to be presented to the members of the Board and Commission. Ms. Thomas mentioned that Farm Land Trust makes a big thing of going through this very process of helping communities evaluate the value of their rural areas. Ms. Humphris concurred that Farm Land Trust puts out wonderful publications, which she assumes are all kept in one of the County offices. Next, Ms. Humphris called attention to Number Eight on Page Five which refers to issues of providing utilities and setting firm boundaries for villages. She thought these issues had already been taken care of, and she was sorry to see them resurfacing. She thought it was the unanimous opinion that this was going to lead to the kind of growth and sprawl in the Rural Area that was not desired, and there would be no defending against it happening if crossroads/historical villages and possible new villages were allowed to be legitimized. She asked why this section is included again for discussion. Ms. Scala answered that the staff group working on this section kept finding reasons to revisit the section on villages. One of the reasons is that the County has historic villages, and there is the idea that historical buildings need to be used for some specific purpose so they can be utilized. This group had opinions that ran the gambit from not wanting to do anything with villages, because they promote growth where it is not desired, to the opposite extreme. Mr. Bowerman wondered if there was any discussion of identifying the sites in historical significance but not as development areas. Ms. Scala replied affirmatively. Mr. Benish stated that he does not think the intent of this section being included for discussion related to development areas. He went on to say there are more and more questions and issues raised from residents within certain communities, such as Batesville, where there have been initiatives for public commitment to providing public facilities and services. They do not rank any higher than any other spot in the County's Rural Area, so the intent is not to think of these as future growth areas. Instead, the issue is how to recognize and support the social fabric already there. Mr. Finley asked what is wrong with a village in a rural area. Even with a small subdivision a type of village setting is desired under the new approach. He pointed out that rural people like communities, neighbors and friends, etc., and he wondered why this idea should be forbidden in the Rural Area. He asked if people living in these types of settings will have to go to the growth areas to get together. Mr. Cilimberg stated that the topic has been included for discussion because the direction in which the County wants to go needs to be made clearer. November 10, 1999 (Adjourned Meeting) (Page 3) Ms. Humphris noted that she questioned the establishment of new villages, and not anything already existing. She recalled that after the Supervisors had discussed the whole situation, they saw the potential for villages not being confined to a small village area, as well as the almost certainty that there would be pressures for it to spread. This is what caused the Board to vote against it. Ms. Humphris then mentioned the last sentence on Page Five involving the staff's recommendation that there be a vision for the Rural Area established through public participation. She stated that of course there has to be public participation, but she recalled visions forums held in 1991, 1992 and 1993, as well as others. There have been approximately nine public meetings on visioning in 1994 and 1995 and a lot of money was paid to have a very professional survey done. It seems to her there should be a huge amount of material available. If the public is involved now, she believes there could be a confirmation of what this material has already given to the County. So many of the new people who have moved into the County are informing County officials that now they are here, and they want the Rural Area preserved for them. She thinks the public will confirm much more so now the things brought out in all of the past visioning meetings. Mr. Rooker inquired if reports were done with this information. Ms. Humphris responded that such information was kept in depth. Mr. Rooker stated that it would be good if the Supervisors and Commissioners could have the benefit of all of this past information. Ms. Humphris mentioned that most particularly important was an extensive survey that was done. She has everything in her files, although she does not know how it can be put together for everybody to see. Mr. Benish said there is also the community visioning process which is actually a part of the whole review aspect of the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Humphris commented that she does not think it is necessary to start all over in this process. Mr. Rooker concurred, and he said the Commissioners do not disagree. He went on to say the emphasis was that as the Land Use Plan is considered, the general principles and vision should be set in the beginning, so everything developed is based on a common understanding of the Board's and Commission's expectations and vision. If the Board and Commission feel comfortable with relying on past public input during the normal work session and public hearing process, that will be fine. Probably the best thing to do is to copy the results of the past public information meetings, workshops, etc., so cOmments at that time can still be considered. Mr. Dorrier stated that approximately 20 years ago the County passed Land Use Taxation to preserve rural land. He inquired if there is a particular section in the report today dealing with results of that issue and whether or not it has done what it was intended to do. Ms. Scala replied that she can present figures on how much land is in the various parts of this program and how it has fluctuated over the years. It has actually stayed relatively equal over the years, although it has fluctuated slightly. The program has certainly served a great purpose, but it is one part of the whole program of protection measures for the Rural Area. There has been a lot of discussion about this program in the past, and there have been groups of people who have met and talked about Land Use Taxation, as far as how it relates to other protection measures, such as agricultural/forestal districts. Mr. Rooker asked again if this information is somewhere in the staff report. Ms. Scala answered that she can provide a summary of previous staff reports, but it was decided that the issue would not be mentioned in this particular report. The staff felt that the program is firmly in place, and it really did not need to be revisited at this time. She stated that it was felt there were other more important issues to be discussed. Mr. Dorrier said he has heard that speculators may put their land into land use, where they get the benefits, but they also reap the profits. Mr. Rooker indicated that it is often difficult to determine whether someone has sold the land for speculation. Mr. Bowerman commented that there was some land in the urban area, which was considered to be speculative land, and it was involved with land use. He explained that the Legislature allowed the adoption of a 25 acre agricultural/forestal district where there was land in the urban areas slated for development in the Comprehensive Plan. He explained that landowners could elect to form an agricultural/forestal district as small as 25 acres if they were actually using the land for agricultural purposes. This is one of the tools developed as a protection against speculative land, because this was a criticism three or four years ago. Ms. Thomas said Land Use Taxation is still a tool to be used, and it probably could be used in a better way. For example, some counties go to great lengths to make sure all the people in Land Use Taxation are fighting Johnson Grass. She added that one county even has a committee to make sure everyone is fighting Johnson Grass, and this type of thing is not even shared with the people in Albemarle County who have Land Use Taxation. She commented that she would not like to see Land Use Taxation removed from the list of tools to be considered as incentives, but she is convinced it could be used in a better way in Albemarle County. Mr. Dorrier agreed with Ms. Thomas. He believes Land Use Taxation is working, but it could possibly be changed to make it work better. Mr. Marshall referred to Issue Number One which mentions reducing the number of development rights. He does not want to take the rights away from people, particularly the people who have been living November 10, 1999 (Adjourned Meeting) (Page 4) here all of their lives. They might have a child or other family member who may need to build a home on their property. He is also worried that the poor people are going to be run out of Albemarle County, and he wondered what type of people are going to be able to afford to live here, if they can only subdivide their land at 42 acres. He emphasized that he is not talking about people moving here. He is talking about people who have lived here'for many years. He stated that a grandfather clause should be built into the regulations for people who have owned land for long periods of time. He does not want to help a developer. However, he knows of a specific couple, George and Thelma Howard, who have a farm that has been in the family for 150 years. If the Mountaintop Ordinance had passed, their son could not have built his home there. It would have been another thing if they had wanted to put a subdivision there. He emphasized that he wants to protect such people, and he hopes the other Supervisors will continue to do so after he leaves this Board. Ms. Thomas also referred to Issue Number One. She would like to make sure that clustering is considered. Although the County has rural preservation development, clustering might be a way of dealing with development rights currently. Something needs to be developed that is better at considering the characteristics of the property and making sure certain things are protected, but there should also be the option of clustering development. She does not think this is quite discussed in Issue Number Four which deals with the relationship of Rural Area uses to provision of water and sewer service and water resource protection. She believes there should be a better understanding of water resources in certain portions of the Rural Area. The Geological Survey needs to indicate where there is a lot of water, as well as where people can develop at their own risk. This may be an important factor in how a map is drawn to describe rural areas and where different things can be done. She would like to see Issue Number Four have better information on water resources. Although she is unsure of the timing, and she does not want to delay development of this portion of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Bowerman noted that this is part of the Groundwater Study. Ms. Thomas replied that the Groun~:lwater Study indicates what is being done now in gathering data, which is an important first step. She said there are other things to be considered. Mr. Dorrier called attention to Issue Number One relating to rural residential development potential. He thinks the 21 acre size may be better than the minimum 42 acre parcel size. He mentioned that he talked to AHIP representatives, and one of the big problems with Iow income housing, is finding property. There was a discussion about incentives to get people to donate property for AHIP houses, and that incentive would be to increase the number of development rights from five parcels per 21 acres to six parcels per 21 acres, if one of those parcels was dedicated to an AHIP structure. A possible tax break could also be considered, and although this type of thing may not be feasible, he thinks it is creative thinking which may have some merit. He wondered if the possibility could be considered of encouraging ways for AHIP and the Piedmont Housing Alliance to be able to get land for their houses. Mr. Martin commented that as County officials move through this vision, he hopes they continue to understand that affordable housing is also one of the main goals for this County. He said sometimes in protecting the rural areas and maintaining affordable housing, there is a conflict. As things proceed, he will continue to harp on this particular issue, and anytime he sees something proposed that makes him feel as though the middle class and poor people will be leaving the County, he will make a stand. Mr. Perkins said there could be some enticement to encourage people to cluster, and perhaps another development right could be given which could be tied to affordable housing. Rather than houses being spread in every direction and tying up more land, more of them could be clustered, so open space could be maintained. Mr. Dorrier stated that he understands the idea about AHIP came from Frank Quayle, a realtor, who has offered to donate some land. He said perhaps the real estate community might favor something of this nature. He asked how an incentive can be provided, yet controlled. Mr. Rooker mentioned expanding development rights. One of the incentives could perhaps best be given to development areas rather than rural areas. Mr. Martin commented that everyone indicates they want to have affordable housing in the growth area, but when it comes down to actually having it, people back off and will not emphasize it. Until it is known there will be affordable housing in the growth area, he will not stand by and see it taken out of the Rural Area. He mentioned Issue Number Five which refers to Attachment D, although he said it is really Attachment E and relates to the DISC plan. He called attention to the third blocked off portion of Page Two of this plan where it mentions having the same regulatory requirements for development in the Rural Area as in development areas. This is a great goal, if it is considered in terms of protecting the Rural Area. However, in terms of maintaining affordable housing, it is a terrible goal. This regulation is actually making it just as expensive to build a home in a rural area as it is to build it in a growth area. Mr. Bowerman stated that he is not disagreeing with Mr. Martin. He mentioned a discussion in the DISC meeting which puts more certainty into the process of development in the urban areas. He explained that the Board can support different types of uses in the Comprehensive Plan whereby if something is rezoned there could be an assortment of development features from which an individual property owner can choose and almost by right be able to apply to a particular situation with mixed use. There is certainly a process, and the public still has input. This idea recognizes that the urban area can November 10, 1999 (Adjourned Meeting) (Page 5) absorb a lot of growth but some of the costs can be eliminated. If communities are considered, there is no reason why affordable housing cannot be kept by individual choice in the Rural Area if it can be provided in urban areas, too. The individual can choose as long as it is available. Mr. Martin remarked that for the purpose of visioning and moving forward, he wants to make it clear that he will not allow the loss of affordable housing in one area before he is shown it can be somewhere else. Mr. Bowerman said there are thousands of lots that could be used for affordable housing. Ms. Thomas concurred that these lots are all available today but for some reason they are not getting on the market. She explained that some of the reasons they are not getting on the market is because everybody thinks a millionaire is going to come and buy their place. Everybody is holding out for something bigger that will happen, than the small middle class family who would love to buy a two acre lot. Going through this process will give County officials a better understanding of what is happening to the cost of land because when things are uncertain, people will most likely hold on to their land thinking something bigger and better is coming. If things are more certain, it may lead to more people being willing to sell their land. She noted that there are a number of factors going into the cost of property in the County today. The latest quarterly report shows that there are more houses being built in the Rural Area than in the designated growth areas. Housing prices are decreasing because of this, so it is going to take some very real planning to make sure there are affordable places for people to live. She stated that when it is just being allowed to happen, as it is today, it is not happening. Mr. Marshall mentioned that even trailers have to have a special use permit. Ms. Thomas responded that Albemarle County has the easiest process for trailers than all the neighboring counties. People are not being kept out of the County by regulations. She emphasized that it is the cost of property. Mr. Martin stated that issues are being brought up, but there is no debate. He said everybody was just expressing how they feel. He brought up affordable housing because he did not want staff to forget that it is an issue needing constant consideration. It is the only reason he brought up the issue. As the process moves forward, this will have to be kept in mind, so a decision can be reached to which everybody can compromise and agree. Ms. Humphris recommended that everybody refer to the Charlottesville/Albemarle Board of Realtors publication for this month which includes a good feature story on affordable housing. One of the realtors has done a complete survey of the amount and numbers of affordable homes on the market both in the growth area and in the rural area. She recalled that there are over 300 properties now that are less than $100,000 in the development area today. She said when this discussion is held in the future all of these facts need to be gathered. County officials have their own definitions of affordable housing which are different from the realtor's definition, because he was looking at only one group of housing. The numbers are available for future discussions. Mr. Bowerman commented that by having County officials who are going to consider rezoning land outside of the growth areas, the County is participating in a speculative revaluation of land which pushes values up throughout the entire area. He said by not having a policy that is strictly adhered to, County officials are participants in this situation. Land that is outside of the growth area, for speculative reasons, might have much more value today than it could have in two or three years. Mr. Martin remarked that Mr. Bowerman is talking about something entirely different from affordable housing. He said Mr. Bowerman is talking about decisions to upgrade land which probably keeps the land all across the County at a certain high cost. Mr. Bowerman said he is talking about property outside of the growth area. Mr. Martin agreed that this is a good issue for discussion. He is not closing his mind to anything, and he is not implying that he would not allow a 42 acre minimum parcel size. He is simply asking everyone to keep in mind, as they move forward, that he is always going to be looking at the affordable housing issue. He is not saying he cannot be convinced that a certain thing is not correct or proper and in the best interest to Albemarle County. He has never had a closed mind, but he will be placing a lot of emphasis on this issue, and he does not believe he is the only person on this Board who will be considering affordable housing in this same manner. Mr. Loewenstein remarked that the comments heard before at the Planning Commission's work session can be appropriate to consider at this meeting. In considering development of rural areas, County officials have heard over and over again that it is easier to develop in rural areas than in designated growth areas. This is where a lot of the figures come from in such things as the third quarter report referred to earlier in the meeting. This is one of the reasons why so much construction is going on in the Rural Area. He added that consideration is going to have to be given, as a community, as far as whether to make it harder to build in the Rural Area or whether to make it easier to develop in existing growth areas, or a combination of the two, in order to accomplish some of the desired goals. He does not see a lot of things in the document this evening that addresses this problem directly although there are some that do. He noted that developers will also acknowledge that it is easier to build in the Rural Area. He suggested that there are a number of ways to consider spreading a better balance, and if this is in fact what County officials want to do, it should be one of the overarching goals in this discussion. A lot of the easy land to build on in the development areas is gone, and a lot of the land left is on 25 percent slopes. November 10, 1999 (Adjourned Meeting) (Page 6) Other considerations need to be taken into account that make the land presently unavailable for development, and County officials are going to have to be a little more creative about how they look at this problem. There is a lot of land available for infill in the growth areas, but some of it is hard to build on, and a lot of developers will agree to this statement. Mr. Bowerman stated that this is true because of the County's ordinances. Mr. Loewenstein concurred. Mr. Cilimberg stated that infrastructure is a big issue, but there is also the problem of how easy or difficult it is to get to the land. Mr. Loewenstein commented that he has been saying for years that building should come first, and the infrastructure should come later. Mr. Bowerman remarked that the Commission and Board could make it known in the beginning where things will occur and what the regulations will be. Things need to be known such as interconnections, although there may not be any houses on the lots. Mr. Cilimberg noted that someone will have to pay for these things, and the developer is not going to do it. Mr. Lowenstein stated that sooner or later the developers are going to find out it is cheaper to do these types of things in the beginning. Mr. Bowerman agreed that this is true, providing the developers don't have to go through certain processes, and if they can select certain design features that they can apply. There are a lot of ways 25 percent slopes can be handled, and if developers meet certain requirements, the staff can approve these things administratively. Mr. Finley said if 95 percent of the land is rural and only five percent is in development areas, there should be some way of determining that the problem relates to too much development in the Rural Area. He stated that perhaps one way is to determine how much rural land has been lost because of development. Mr. Martin said this is a very good point. He added that if 95 percent of the County is rural and 50 percent of the people are moving into five percent of the land, then this should be examined. Mr. Loewenstein stated that according to building statistics, the Rural Area is being defined differently from how it was originally intended. A lot of the Rural Area is not very rural anymore. Mr. Bowerman commented that the route from Harrisonburg via Interstate 81 and Route 250 to Owensville Road and Route 601 is all rural up to the traffic light at Route 743. Mr. Loewenstein stated that it is not as rural as it was 35 years ago. If another 35 years or less are considered, at the rate building is continuing in the Rural Areas, it will be a lot less rural. He mentioned the number of two acre lots that can be built on by right. Mr. Dorrier commented that he thinks it is important to consider the desires of County citizens. It is a difficult process for individuals as well as developers. It seems to him the process should be made user friendly, but the requirements that County officials want to enforce should be visible and easily understandable for everybody. The public should have some input into what they want. This process is fine, but he thinks the public doesn't really understand or share the available information. Mr. Marshall noted that public hearings are held, but a lot of people do not come to them. Mr. Dorrier said that is why he thinks the public should be kept informed with some thought given to release of information. Mr. Marshall stated that he has said over and over that more people are being made every day, but no more land is being made. There are a lot of poor people who live in this County who have no other place to live. He emphasized that they can't afford to go into the infill areas, because the cost of the houses and lots is prohibitive. He stated that some of the subdivisions have covenants where a person can't build less than a 2,000 square foot house, and a 2,000 square foot house today costs more than $100,000. This is not affordable housing. There are a lot of places such as this, where lots are available, but people can't build on them. He referred to the comment made earlier about AHIP being offered a lot from a landowner to build a house. This method would allow a cheaper house to be built in a growth area. He remarked that everyone would know this, and if the developer wanted to build a $500,000 home next to it, it is his business. He said someone would be allowed to live there, who couldn't have afforded to do so otherwise. Ms. Thomas suggested the addition of Numbers Ten and Eleven as major issues. She said Issue Number Ten should relate'to transportation which partially fits into the question of cost of living and partially fits into the standards used for the Six Year Plan. There has not been much discussion about rural roads and their relation to anything. It is the County's policy that a minimum amount be put each year into the paving of unsurfaced roads, so the availability of paved roads does not increase, because it encourages development. Mr. Martin stated that he had seen a recommendation somewhere about paving rural roads. Ms. Thomas' next suggestion for Issue Number Eleven related to the level of services to be offered in the Rural Area. Albemarle County officials are going to have to do the same thing as one of its neighboring counties which informs its rural citizens that they are not going to get a quick response from emergency medical vehicles or the county would have to be sprinkled with rescue squads at every crossroads. She reiterated that the level of services offered in the Rural Area should be included in the vision plan with some discussion of fire and school buses included. November 10, 1999 (Adjourned Meeting) (Page 7) Ms. Thomas then referred to Page Four relating to the promotion of agricultural/forestal activities. She would like for County officials to examine taking a position that would actually help farmers to make more money on their farms. She remarked that Loudoun County is closer to places where there are farmers' markets where money can be made, and Albemarle County officials might decide that this County should have such things. However, if everyone is really serious about wanting to have more land in farming then consideration should be given as far as ideas to help people make a living on this land. She said Farm Land Trust is convinced that it is when people can't make a living on their farm that they turn more quickly to the idea of subdivisions. Ms. Humphris suggested that this item could be combined with the implementation techniques in other localities. Mr. Martin concurred. He went on to say one of the things he liked about the historic preservation recommendations is the focus on making it useful, and he thinks it can transfer over to this discussion very easily. Mr. Marshall stated that he has a working farm, but he probably will never be able to make a living on it because there are too many rocks there. However, he can raise cattle, but there is only so much money that can be made raising cattle. If he tried to plow the land to put in a crop, he would tear up his equipment and get nothing for it. He cannot do anything else with the land, and keep it as a farm, other than raise cattle and hay. Mr. Loewenstein commented that traditional land use is as important a historic resource as any structure or landscaping. In this County agriculture is important and should be factored into the visioning. Mr. Finley called attention to Page Three of Attachment B where it states "Encourage the purchase of local products by local businesses .... "The status for this item states no action has been taken. Mr. Rooker referred to Ms. Thomas' statement about whether or not to provide services to the Rural Area. He suggested that regulations and standards required for the Rural Area be provided on the plat to let people know in the beginning the type of services that will or will not be available. He then mentioned the problem with water resources. It is extremely important for people to understand in the beginning when they buy a lot in the Rural Area the kind of services they can expect. Ms. Humphris agreed that this is something that has to be done. She said people who come to the County from other places seem to think all they have to do is ask, and they will get sewer and water service. County officials know there are some areas in the County where people will never have a water or sewer line going to their house, and she thinks they have an obligation to let the citizens know. Mr. Marshall mentioned the Groundwater Report. A lot of people buy a piece of property, and they want to build on it, but there is no water. Ms. Humphris asked if the Board of Supervisors has the right to require a test well before a building permit is issued. Mr. Davis said there is the enabling authority to do that, but it has never been done in Albemarle County. Mr. Marshall and Ms. Humphris indicated that the Board needs to deal with this issue. Mr. Rooker suggested that staff develop something in this regard. It is a good time to focus on this matter. Ms. Thomas stated that she thinks the Groundwater Committee should be reinstated. This Committee did a lot of work in the past, but it doesn't exist now. It would be good to have the Committee make recommendations specifically on the groundwater areas. She mentioned that the Peacock Hill situation has brought up a lot of questions, and the stormwater issues are bringing up similar questions about how deeply the County will have to get involved in some areas where it has never been involved before. The Groundwater Committee has already suggested the way to proceed. Mr. Martin noted that the category involving other rural area land uses on Page Three of the staff report refers to farmers' markets and recreational activities which are some of things Ms. Thomas mentioned. County officials also need to consider allowing schools in the Rural Area, so premium prices won't have to be paid for land. He is unsure if this is the correct forum for such a discussion, but it is something that needs to be discussed soon. Mr. Cilimberg stated that public schools actually fall under the Community Facilities Policy. Ms. Humphris remarked that, besides the land use issue, public water and sewer would have to be provided for the size schools that are in Albemarle County. This is one of the things that dictates the location of schools. Mr. Bowerman said this is true with middle and high schools. Mr. Rooker mentioned that it would also be helpful to have a cross-reference for other documents already in existence that refer to the Rural Area. A document that is inconsistent with existing documents should be avoided. He suggested that if there are specific sections the staff thinks are very important to be considered while this new section is being developed, it would be helpful if these pages could be pulled and copied. Mr. Rieley mentioned research done by Bruce Dotson on growth patterns in rural and development areas over the last few years. This is an extensive and interesting base of information, and he wondered if there is a way County officials can tap into this study. i I November 10, 1999 (Adjourned Meeting) (Page 8) Ms. Scala said she has a copy of this report, and she has asked Mr. Dotson if he would make a presentation to the Planning Commission. She stated that Mr. Dotson has wonderful maps. Mr. Dorrier said it is important to look at the neighboring counties around Albemarle County to see what they do for rural development because people tend to move to some of these places because of the Iow cost of land or the zoning regulations. He stated that a summary of this would be helpful. Ms. Scala concurred. Ms. Humphris said such things have been dealt with a lot through the Planning District Commission, so Albemarle County has a good understanding of what the other counties do as well as what they don't do. She added that there are things the other jurisdictions might do to change their zoning that would help their situation, but they don't do it, so she does not think anything can be learned from them. She emphasized that Albemarle County officials know what other counties are doing, and some of them do not believe they are doing as much as they can to prevent the flight from Albemarle County to their counties. Mr. Dorrier commented that perhaps a joint meeting could be held between the counties to discuss the issue. Maybe the other county representatives could be encouraged to do something. Ms. Humphris stated that this is the way it is done in the planning district. Mr. Rooker remarked that the Planning Commission had a joint meeting a few weeks ago with the Greene County Planning Commission. It was productive, and it was agreed to share information on a regular basis. Mr. Martin noted that he had met with people from Nelson County, and they are interested in sharing information, too. Mr. Marshall informed the group that he talks a lot with his cousin, who is Chairman of the Board of Supervisors in Greene County. Mr. Finley pointed out that some of the County documents indicate that farmers do not have time to come to public meetings: Talking to some of the genuine farmers can bring forward some ideas as far as what would help them. Mr. Cilimberg stated that there was a good resource for farmers found in a report that was available a few years ago by the Agricultural/Forestal Industries Support Committee. It is worth keeping available because it relates to what the farmers thought was important as far aS land use in the Rural Area. He noted that it is Attachment D in the information given to the group for this meeting. There was no further discussion. Agenda Item No. 3. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda. There were no other matters. p,mo Agenda Item No. 4. Adjourn. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:43 /'Chairman Approved by the of County Date ~, Initials