2015-06-10June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 1)
An afternoon adjourned and regular night meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, was held on June 10, 2015, Lane Auditorium, County Office Building, McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, Virginia. The afternoon meeting was held at 3:30 p.m., and was adjourned from June 3,
2015. The night meeting was held at 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Mr. Kenneth C. Boyd, Ms. Jane D. Dittmar, Ms. Ann Mallek, Ms. Diantha H. McKeel,
Ms. Liz A. Palmer and Mr. Brad L. Sheffield.
ABSENT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Thomas C. Foley, County Attorney, Larry W. Davis,
Clerk, Ella W. Jordan, and Senior Deputy Clerk, Travis O. Morris.
Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 3:36 p.m. by the Chair, Ms. Dittmar
_______________
Agenda Item No. 2. Closed Meeting.
At 3:36 p.m. Mr. Sheffield moved that the Board into a closed meeting pursuant to Section 2.2 -
3711(A) of the Code of Virginia under Subsection (1) to consider appointments to boards, committees,
and commissions in which there are pending vacancies or requests for reappointments; and under
Subsection (1) to conduct the annual performance review of the County Executive and to discuss the
performance standards and evaluation process for specific County employees appointed by the Board.
Ms. Palmer seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Sheffield, Mr. Boyd, Ms. Dittmar, Ms. Mallek, Ms. McKeel and Ms. Palmer.
NAYS: None.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 3. Call back to Order.
At 6:07 p.m., the Chair called the meeting back to order.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 4. Certify Closed Meeting.
At 6:07 p.m., Mr. Sheffield moved that the Board certify by a recorded vote that to the best of
each Board member’s knowledge, only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting
requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the motion authorizing the
closed meeting were heard, discussed, or considered in the closed meeting. Ms. McKeel seconded the
motion. Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Sheffield, Mr. Boyd, Ms. Dittmar, Ms. Mallek, Ms. McKeel and Ms. Palmer.
NAYS: None.
_____
Ms. Dittmar moved that the Board approve the proposed Employment Agreement for the County
Executive with a base salary of $184,853 effective October 1, 2015, and authorized the Board Chair to
execute the agreement subject to it being approved in final form and content by the County Attorney
consistent with the Board’s approval. Mr. Sheffield seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion
passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Sheffield, Mr. Boyd, Ms. Dittmar, Ms. Mallek, Ms. McKeel and Ms. Palmer.
NAYS: None.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 5. Pledge of Allegiance.
Agenda Item No. 6. Moment of Silence.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 7. Adoption of Final Agenda.
Ms. Mallek added for discussion a potential grant to the Department of Housing and Community
Development that is being requested by the community of Crozet, under Matters from the Board.
Ms. McKeel moved to adopt the agenda as amended. Ms. Mallek seconded the motion. Roll
was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Sheffield, Mr. Boyd, Ms. Dittmar, Ms. Mallek, Ms. McKeel and Ms. Palmer.
NAYS: None.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 8. Brief Announcements by Board Members.
Ms. Mallek announced that on Saturday, June 13, 10:00 a.m., at Mint Springs Park, there will be
a ribbon cutting ceremony and guided walk to kick-off the County’s Kids in the Park Program. She said
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 2)
this is something the Parks Department has been working on along with the Blue Ridge Parkway
Foundation, National Park Service, and Shenandoah Park, and is sponsored by the Blue Cross and Blue
Shield of North Carolina. Ms. Mallek stated that this will be a great way to have young people of all ages
get more enjoyment out of nature. She noted she had been on the radio discussing the program earlier
that morning and there has been much information in A-mail and all over the press.
_____
Ms. Liz Palmer announced the open house on the County’s Long Range Solid Waste solutions
had a good turnout from all areas of the County. Ms. Palmer stated there were about 50 people from the
public from all over the area, who provided great ideas and input. Ms. Palmer also thanked Emily Kilroy,
Community Engagement Specialist, stating that she did an excellent job of coordinating the event.
_____
Ms. Dittmar announced that she and Ms. Mallek had attended the announcement by the USA
Cycling Team that they had selected the Charlottesville/Albemarle area for training prior to the World
Cycling Championships in Richmond. Ms. Dittmar stated this will bring the USA Cycling Team here and
the accompanying national press, prior to them going to Richmond, and for the first time in 29 years the
U.S. will host the World Championships. Ms. Dittmar stated that over 1,000 of the world’s top cyclists will
compete for 12 world championships, and it is anticipated that over 400 million television viewers will tune
into Central Virginia during the event. She explained that nearly a half-million people will go to Richmond
and will spill over into many surrounding areas, so it is anticipated that there will be a large number of
tourists here in September.
Ms. Mallek added that during the next few months, citizens will know that the cyclists will be
training here and it is important to be a welcoming community for them.
Ms. Dittmar recognized Ms. Lee Catlin who spearheaded the efforts for Albemarle County along
with joining with the City of Charlottesville and the CACVB.
Ms. Dittmar also announced that each state sent a holiday tree to Washington D.C., to be near
the White House, and this year Governor McAuliffe has asked each locality to design and send a holiday
ornament to be on the tree. She stated the Board has received the request, and she will be passing out
copies of it.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 9. Proclamations and Recognitions. Proclamation recognizing Albemarle
Amateur Radio Club Field Day Exercises - June 2015.
Ms. Dittmar read the following resolution recognizing the Albemarle Amateur Radio Club Field
Day Exercises:
Proclamation
Albemarle Amateur Radio Club Field Day Exercises
June 2015
Whereas, Amateur Radio Operators have provided countless hours of community services to our
many Emergency Response organizations and to other local organizations; and
Whereas, these Amateur Radio services are provided wholly uncompensated; and
Whereas, these same individuals have further demonstrated their value in public assistance by
providing free radio communications for local parades, bike‐a‐thons, walk‐a‐thons, fairs,
and other charitable public events; and
Whereas, the Commonwealth of Virginia recognizes and appreciates the diligence of these “hams”
who also serve as weather spotters in the Skywarn program of the US Government
Weather Bureau; and
Whereas, the ARRL Amateur Radio Field Day exercise will take place on June 27‐28, 2015 and is
a 24 hour emergency preparedness exercise and demonstration of the Radio Amateurs’
skills and readiness to provide self‐supporting communications without further
infrastructure being required;
Now, Therefore, Be it Resolved, that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors does hereby officially
recognize the Albemarle Amateur Radio Club for its Field Da y activities and its service to
the community.
Signed and sealed this 10th day of June, 2015.
Ms. Dittmar moved to adopt the proclamation honoring Albemarle Amateur Radio Club Field Day
Exercises in June 2015. Ms. Mallek seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion passed by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Sheffield, Mr. Boyd, Ms. Dittmar, Ms. Mallek, Ms. McKeel and Ms. Palmer.
NAYS: None.
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 3)
Ms. Dittmar then asked Mr. Michael Rein to come forward to accept the proclamation.
Mr. Michael Rein thanked the Board and stated his appreciation, noting that a proclamation like
this allows the Albemarle Amateur Radio Operators Club to be taken seriously. He stated that “amateur
radio” is defined as a service by the Federal Communications Commission because of the services they
provide, and said that a major purpose of the Albemarle Amateur Radio Operators Club is to improve
skills, and to provide fellowship and education of members. Mr. Rein explained that Amateur Radio
Operators in the past have contributed to research and development in electronics field, and also stated
that one major purpose is to provide emergency communication and service communication because the
equipment communicates more efficiently and across greater terrain and distances than cell phones.
Ms. Mallek encouraged others to attend the Field Day and has met with them before, and said it
is spectacular speaking to people on the other side of the world in real time.
Mr. Rein stated there is a GOTA Station – “Get on the Air” – 24-hour event the following Saturday
to Sunday for people who are not licensed operators, and said that certificates are given for anyone who
makes a contact. He also stated they will be operating in concert with the Charlottesville-Albemarle-UVA
Emergency Communications Center.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 10. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda.
Ms. Nancy Carpenter, resident of the Scottsville District, addressed the Board and asked why
Albemarle County has not eliminated employment discrimination by instituting the “Ban the Box” policy on
County job applications. She stated having that question about criminal convictions on job applications is
discriminatory, with that effect called “disparate impact,” occurring when an employer has a practice or
policy that has a discriminatory effect on protected classes. She stated national statistics indicate that
one in four people or about 70 million people have had contact with the criminal justice system, or about
one in four. She stated that annually there are about 700,000 individuals coming back to their home
communities and look for reentry assistance or services, and if they are unable to get their feet in the door
for regular employment, they work under the table or go back to jail. These are not good options based on
fiscal policy, public policy or social policy, Ms. Carpenter stated. She stated that in society there are real
consequences when many Americans are deprived the opportunity for economic stability based on past
convictions. Ms. Carpenter said that as a first step, there is a group of individuals that have been trying to
reach out to Albemarle County’s Human Resource Director, Lorna Gerome, but ha ve not been able to
schedule a meeting to discuss this issue. Ms. Carpenter said she is hopeful that the Board can direct the
County Executive to check into this matter and begin that process. She stated that Board members are
involved with task forces, commissions and other groups with the City related to the reentry programs,
and since the City has adopted the “Ban the Box” policy on their job applications, she is hoping that
Albemarle County will do so also.
__________
Ms. Helen Cauthen, President of Central Virginia Partnership for Economic Development,
addressed the Board to speak in support of Item 16, the Resolution of Intent, which started three years
ago with the Target Market Report, which provides a focus for existing businesses to remain and grow
here. She said the Board has worked very hard on this and is interested in taking another step toward
helping homegrown companies have a place to locate here. She also stated they are low on inventory,
and this is a great step forward to study what some possibilities might be. Ms. Cauthen said this will also
help in recruitment of additional companies in the target markets, and the Partnership strongly support s
adoption of the resolution.
There were no further public comments, and the Chair closed the matters from the public portion
of the meeting.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 11. Consent Agenda.
(Discussion: Ms. Mallek and Ms. Palmer stated that they would need to pull their minutes.)
Ms. McKeel moved to approve Item 11.2 (as amended) through Item 11.5 on the consent
agenda. Ms. Mallek seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion passed by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Sheffield, Mr. Boyd, Ms. Dittmar, Ms. Mallek, Ms. McKeel and Ms. Palmer.
NAYS: None.
__________
Item No. 11.1. Approval of Minutes: October 1, October 8 and November 12, 2014.
Ms. Mallek had not read her portion of the minutes of October 1, 2014 and asked that they be
carried forward to the next meeting.
Mr. Boyd had read the minutes of October 8, 2014, pages 1-52(end at Item #14), and found them
to be in order.
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 4)
Ms. Palmer had not read her portion of the minutes of November 12, 2014 and asked that they be
carried forward to the next meeting.
By the above-recorded vote, the Board approved the minutes of October 8, 2014, as read.
__________
Item No. 11.2. SDP-2015-00018. Carson Raymond Field- Lighting Special Exception.
The executive summary states that Carson Raymond Field (the “Field”) is located on the
Hollymead Elementary School property and is used by Hollymead Elementary School, Sutherland Middle
School, and the Northside Cal Ripken League (NCRL). The NCRL proposes to install four (4) sixty-foot
light poles to illuminate the Field in order to provide an additional 450 hours of practice and game time
from March through October. County Code § 18-4.17.4(a) requires that full cutoff luminaires be used,
meaning they shall be shielded so that all light emitted by them is projected below the horizontal plane.
Both the Albemarle County School Board and the NCRL are seeking a special exception to waive the
requirement of County Code § 18-4.17.4(a) to allow the new light fixtures to not be full cutoff luminaires
(See Attachment B). The Albemarle County School Board unanimously approved the plan at its January
22, 2015 meeting, and the County Department of Parks and Recreation supports this request. There are
other athletic fields located on the property, however, only the Carson Raymond Field, which is the field
closest to the school(s), is being proposed for the lighting.
On January 20, 2015, the NCRL hosted a community meeting at Sutherland Middle School and
invited members of both the Hollymead and Forest Lakes communities, along with County staff, to share
their plan. The NCRL proposes to install Musco brand lighting, which is the same typ e of lighting fixtures
that have been installed on various types of playfields in the County. The applicant has provided a
photometric plan that demonstrates what the values would be with the proposed fixtures installed (See
page 5 (SL 1.0) of Attachment C). The spillover from the fixtures would not extend beyond the property
line of the school(s). During the community meeting, there was concern expressed by the community
regarding lighting being used during late night hours. However, the Field has small dimensions and its
use is limited to only youth baseball, and the NCRL has indicated that it will not operate late night
activities for children. Due to this concern, staff is recommending a condition that would limit the use of
the lights to no later than 10:00 p.m. Another concern was related to traffic generation. While the lights
will allow the field to be used for a longer period of time, it is not anticipated that the extended hours of
field use would generate a significant increase in traffic because it is a single field. County Code § 18-
4.17.5(a)(1) and (2) set forth the factors to be considered in reviewing this request. Staff opinion is that
the alternatives proposed would satisfy the purposes of the outdoor lighting regulations at least to an
equivalent degree and that the proposed Musco luminaires are a reasonable alternative. A detailed
analysis is provided in the Staff Report (Attachment A).
There is no budget impact to the County. The cost of electricity for lighting will be paid by the
NCRL.
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment D) to approve this
special exception to waive the full cutoff luminaire requirement of County Code § 18-4.17.4(a) subject to
the following conditions:
1. The lighting fixtures installed shall be Musco (Light Structure Green System).
2. The height of the proposed pole shall not exceed 70 feet above ground level.
3. The Field shall not be illuminated after 10:00 p.m. each day.
_____
By the above-recorded vote, the Board adopted the following resolution to approve this
special exception to waive the full cutoff luminaire requirement of County Code § 18 -4.17.4(a)
subject to the following conditions:
1. The lighting fixtures installed shall be Musco (Light Structure Green System).
2. The height of the proposed pole shall not exceed seventy (70) feet above ground
level.
3. The Field shall not be illuminated after 10:00 p.m. each day.
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE SPECIAL EXCEPTION
FOR SDP 15-18 CARSON RAYMOND FIELD - MINOR
WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle School Board (the “School Board”) is the owner of those
lands currently identified in the County’s tax records as Tax Map and Parcel Number 046B1 -01-00-00100
(the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, the Carson Raymond Field (the “Field”) is located on the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Northside Cal Ripken League (NCRL) currently has an operating agreement with
the School Board for its use of the Field; and
WHEREAS, the NCRL and the School Board filed a request for a special exception in conj unction
with SDP 2015-00018, Carson Raymond Field – Minor, to waive the full cutoff luminaire outdoor lighting
requirement under County Code § 18-4.17.4(a) to allow the use of Musco brand lighting fixtures on four (4)
sixty-foot light poles to be installed on the field.
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 5)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, upon consideration of the foregoing, the executive
summary prepared in conjunction with the application, and its supporting analysis included as Attachment
A thereto, the plans entitled “Carson Raymond F ield Northside Cal Ripken League & County of Albemarle
School Board Minor Site Plan Amendment” prepared by Woolley Engineering dated March 23, 2015, and
all of the factors relevant to the special exception in Albemarle County Code §§ 18-4.17.5 and 18-33.9, the
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby approves the special exception to waive the full cutoff
luminaire outdoor lighting requirement under County Code § 18-4.17.4(a) to allow the use of Musco brand
lighting fixtures on four (4) sixty-foot light poles to be installed on the Field subject to the conditions attached
hereto.
__________
Item No. 11.3. FY 2015 Budget Amendment and Appropriations.
The executive summary states that Virginia Code § 15.2-2507 provides that any locality may
amend its budget to adjust the aggregate amount to be appropriated during the fiscal year as shown in
the currently adopted budget; provided, however, any such amendment which exceeds one percent of
the total expenditures shown in the currently adopted budget must be accomplished by first publishing
a notice of a meeting and holding a public hearing before amending the budget. The Code section
applies to all County funds, i.e., General Fund, Capital Funds, E911, School Self- Sustaining, etc.
The total increase to the FY 15 budget due to the appropriation itemized below is
$164,821.83. A budget amendment public hearing is not required because the amount of the
cumulative appropriations does not exceed one percent of the currently adopted budget.
This request involves the approval of two (2) appropriations as follows:
One (1) appropriation (#2015106) to appropriate $43,000 from Emergency
Communication Center (ECC) fund balance to the ECC; and
One (1) appropriation (#2015107) to appropriate $121,821.83 for various school division
projects and programs.
Staff recommends approval of appropriations #2015106 and #2015107 for ECC and school
division projects and programs as described in Attachment A.
*****
Appropriation #2015106 $43,000
Source: ECC fund balance $ 43,000.00
The Emergency Communications Center (ECC) requests that the County, acting as fiscal agent for the
ECC, appropriate $43,000.00 from the ECC fund balance for the demolition and repair of the sewage and
water lines in the two shower/restrooms on the first floor of the Emergency Communications Center. The
ECC Management Board approved this emergency request at its May 19, 2015 meeting.
Appropriation #2015107 $121,821.83
Source: Local Non-Tax Revenue $ 93,588.00 Project Graduation Fund fund bal.
$ 28,233.83
This request is to appropriate the School Division’s appropriation request approved by the School Board
on February 26, 2015:
Project Graduation Grant – This request is to re-appropriate $28,233.83 in available fund balance from
the Project Graduation Grant. This grant provides assistance during summer school for juniors and
seniors needing to obtain verified credits in reading, writing, and algebra. There was a fund balance of
$28,233.83 remaining at the end of FY 14 that is requested to be re-appropriated to FY 15.
Community Public Charter School – This request is to appropriate $65,879.00 in donations for the
Community Public Charter School. The mission of the Community Public Charter School is to provide an
alternative and innovative learning environment, using the arts, to help children in grades six through
eight learn in ways that match their learning styles. Seeking to serve students who have not succeeded in
school, the program is designed to close their achievement gap by offering a balance of literacy tutorials
and an arts-infused curriculum.
Club Yancey Program – This request is to appropriate $14,619.00 in donations and tuition to the Club
Yancey Program. These funds are to cover operating expenses of the program.
Economically Dislocated Worker’s Fund – This request is to appropriate $13,090.00 in donations for the
Economically Dislocated Worker’s Fund. The mission of this fund is to collaborate with institutions,
agencies, and businesses to provide tutoring and classes tailored to the individualized needs of particular
students.
By the above-recorded vote, the Board approved appropriations #2015106 and #2015107
for ECC and school division projects and programs as set out below:
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
APP# ACCOUNT AMOUNT DESCRIPTION
201506 3-4100-51000-351000-510100-9999 43000.00 SA2015106 App ECC fund balance
201506 4-4100-31040-435600-331800-1003 43000.00 SA2015106 water and sewer repairs
201507 3-3217-63217-351000-512001-9999 28233.83 SA2015107 Use of Fund Balance
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 6)
201507 4-3217-63217-461101-132100-6530 26227.44 SA2015107 Salaries-PT Teacher
201507 4-3217-63217-461101-210000-6530 2006.39 SA2015107 FICA
201507 3-3380-63380-318100-181080-6599 65879.00 SA2015107 Donations
201507 4-3380-63380-461101-112100-6280 61197.39 SA2015107 Salaries-Teacher
201507 4-3380-63380-461101-210000-6280 4681.61 SA2015107 FICA
201507 3-3157-63157-318000-181254-6599 10224.00 SA2015107 Club Yancey Donations
201507 3-3157-63157-318000-181284-6599 4295.00 SA2015107 Club Yancey Tuition
201507 3-3157-63157-319000-190215-6599 100.00 SA2015107 Field Trips
201507 4-3157-63157-460000-111400-6113 11072.00 SA2015107 Salaries-Other Management
201507 4-3157-63157-460213-210000-6113 847.00 SA2015107 FICA
201507 4-3157-63157-460000-221000-6113 2000.00 SA2015107 VRS
201507 4-3157-63157-460213-231000-6113 500.00 SA2015107 Health Insurance
201507 4-3157-63157-460213-232000-6113 50.00 SA2015107 Dental Insurance
201507 4-3157-63157-460000-241000-6113 50.00 SA2015107 VRS Group Life
201507 4-3157-63157-460000-420100-6113 100.00 SA2015107 Field Trips
201507 3-3116-63116-318000-189900-6599 13090.00 SA2015107 Economically Dislocated Workers Donation
201507 4-3116-63116-463348-132100-6530 12159.77 SA2015107 PT Wages Teacher
201507 4-3116-63116-463348-210000-6530 930.23 SA2015107 FICA
TOTAL 329,643.66
__________
Item No. 11.4. Resolution authorizing the County Executive to appoint substitute Trustee(s) and
sign certain documents on loans securing Community Development Block Grant Funds and the Crozet
Crossings Housing Trust Fund.
The executive summary states that in the mid-to-late 1990’s, the County was required to be a
noteholder for loans generated using Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, including
loans made through the Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund. The loan documents named Roxanne
White and Melvin Breeden as “Trustees” for the County.
On December 12, 2002, the Board authorized the County Executive to “execute documents
necessary to protect the County’s interest (in the loans) and/or CDBG program requirements.” This
authorization specifically addressed loan modifications and subordination requests, but did not explicitly
authorize action on other potential requests, such as for releasing liens.
An estimated two dozen loans still remain outstanding, with about half of those being under the
Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund and the others associated with the Porters Road/Yancey School
Neighborhood Community Improvement Project.
Recently, the County has received requests to release liens on properties associated with these
CDBG loans. In each case, either the loan has been satisfied by payment in full or the loan deferral
period has ended. The process used prior to the execu tion of any document includes a review by the
Chief of Housing and the County Attorney. Once approved, such requests require the signature of either
the “noteholder” or “trustee(s)”. However, with both of the named Trustees now retired from the County’s
employment, the County lacks a timely, efficient way to act on approved requests. The proposed
Resolution (attached) would authorize the County Executive to: (1) execute these loan documents as the
“Noteholder” on behalf of the County; and (2) appoint the De puty County Executive and Director of
Finance (either of whom may act) as Trustee(s) or Substitute Trustee(s) for these loans. Both
authorizations are intended to improve the County’s ability to respond to requests involving these loan
documents.
There is no budget impact associated with this request.
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment A) authorizing the
County Executive to execute any documents associated with loans created with Community Development
Block Grant Funds, including those through the Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund, and to appoint the
Deputy County Executive and Director of Finance (either of whom may act) as Trustee(s) or Substitute
Trustee(s) for these loans.
By the above-recorded vote, the Board adopted the following Resolution authorizing the
County Executive to execute any documents associated with loans created with Community
Development Block Grant Funds, including those through the Crozet Crossings Housing Trust
Fund, and to appoint the Deputy County Executive and Director of Finance (either of whom may
act) as Trustee(s) or Substitute Trustee(s) for these loans.
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is the noteholder on loans supported by Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds, including loans made through the Crozet Crossings Housing
Trust Fund; and
WHEREAS, periodically the County of Albemarle is requested to execute various documents
related to these loans, including, but not limited to, loan modifications, subordinations, and releases of the
recorded liens; and
WHEREAS, as the noteholder, the County of Albemarle has designated trustees for certain loan
documents; and
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 7)
WHEREAS, the two trustees named on the original recorded documents are no longer County
employees; and
WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle’s interest in each loan requires the ability to act in a timely
manner.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby
authorizes the County Executive to execute, on behalf of the Count y of Albemarle, all loan documents
required in the management of loans associated with CDBG Funds and the Crozet Crossings Housing
Trust Fund, including, but not limited to, loan modifications, subordinations, and releases of the recorded
liens.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors further authorizes
the County Executive to appoint the Deputy County Executive and the Director of Finance (either of
whom may act) as Trustee(s) or Substitute Trustee(s) on any CDBG and Crozet C rossings Housing Trust
Fund loan document.
__________
Item No. 11.5. Resolution to accept road(s) in Dunlora Forest Subdivision into the State
Secondary System of Highways. (Rio Magisterial District).
At the request of the County Engineer, and b y the above-recorded vote, the Board adopted
the resolution to accept roads in Dunlora Forest Subdivision into the State Secondary System of
Highways.
R E S O L U T I O N
WHEREAS, the street(s) in Dunlora Forest Subdivision, as described on the attached Additions
Form AM-4.3 dated June 10, 2015, 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 street(s) in Dunlora Forest, as described on
the attached Additions Form AM-4.3 dated June 10, 2015, to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to §33.2-705, Code of Virginia, and the Departm ent's Subdivision Street Requirements; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of- way,
as described, exclusive of any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the
recorded plats; and
FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident
Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation.
*****
The road(s) described on Additions Form AM-4.3 is:
1) Sawgrass Court (State Route 1793) from Route 1792 (Dunlora Forest Drive) to 0.08 miles
north, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County
in Deed Book 4320, page 171, for a length of 0.08 miles.
2) Barefoot Court (State Route 1794) from Route 1793 (Sawgrass Court) to .075 miles
south, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County
in Deed Book 4320, page 171, for a length of 0.08 miles.
3) Dunlora Forest Drive (State Route 1792) from Route 631 (Rio Road) to .023 miles east,
as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County in
Deed Book 4320, page 171, for a length of 0.02 miles.
4) Sawgrass Court (State Route 1793) from Route 1794 (Barefoot Court) to 0.036 miles
north, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County
in Deed Book 4320, page 171, for a length of 0.04 miles.
Total Mileage – 0.22
_______________
Agenda Item No. 12. VDOT Culpeper District, Albemarle County Quarterly Report, June 2015.
Mr. Joel DeNunzio of VDOT addressed the Board and introduced new staff member Caroline Azwal
Menza, stating that she has just graduated from the Core Development Program and is assigned to the
Charlottesville residency. Mr. DeNunzio stated that she is working on various projects related to safety, and
is currently working on the 240 shoulder project and will be working on 810 as well as some areas on Rt. 53
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 8)
in Fluvanna. He also introduced Kovina Nitwa, who is new to the Core Development Program and will be
spending his first nine months in the program in the residency office. Mr. DeNunzio said that he will be
working closely with Gerald on the HB-2 Legislation and the projects that will be submitted with that program.
Mr. DeNunzio introduced Derry Harris, stating that he is a fourth year University of Virginia student who will
spend the summer with the office; and Kyle Mc Gammon, stating that he is in his 4th Year at Virginia Tech
and is interning this summer at the Rt. 29 Solutions office and has been checking culvert reports for the past
few days.
Mr. DeNunzio reported that the Rt. 250 bridge replacement over Ivy Creek is expected to have a
public hearing in the fall, although no date has yet been determined, and said there is an add date of January
2016. He stated he is skipping Route 643 because it will be discussed later in the meeting. Mr. DeNunzio
stated the draft plan is expected to remove Rt. 606, and the bridge construction and the re-decking are going
well, with the project expected to be open as planned. He reported that Route 703 Pocket Lane is their top
rural rustic road priority, and construction had been started earlier that week with clearing of vegetation, and
pipe installation to start the following day, with stone to be put down the following week. Mr. DeNunzio stated
the road is in the Keene area and is one of two projects VDOT will be doing this summer. He reported that
Route 784, Doctor’s Crossing Road, is the other rural rustic road, and is expected to receive environmental
clearances in the next two weeks. There will be clearing of vegetation and ditch work, replacement of the
culverts, additional stone and hard surfacing. Mr. DeNunzio said he expects a start date of July with
completion by October 2015, and currently there are no scheduled dates listed.
Mr. DeNunzio reported that the Route 29 Solutions report had been given by Mark Graham the
previous week. He stated the design-build contractor has a tentative date of July 15 for local outreach for
DBE and SWAM vendors, with the contract having a requirement for DBE of 13% in the amount of $15.2
million and in addition, it is expected that $25 million to go to local small businesses. He stated that there will
also be a second job fair at the end of July for more employment, single employment or local contractors.
Mr. DeNunzio reported that an area headquarters is being built at Hunter’s Stand Court off of Quails
Run Road, with two salt domes there currently, and this will help the winter operations on Route 29 and the
northern areas. He stated this will be a huge benefit for the snow operations for Free Union and other areas,
and ultimately they will have a full area headquarters there and combine with the Free Union site. He also
stated that about a year ago, they had lost the trustee supplemental crews from Augusta, and Ms. McKeel
suggested having discussions with the Albemarle Charlottesville Regional Jail to have crews to help with
services, which they expect to have in place soon. Mr. DeNunzio said they can also help with mowing and
operating small equipment as well as picking up trash.
Ms. McKeel stated this is wonderful because the Adopt the Highway committees need help.
Ms. Dittmar asked what sort of vendors VDOT is looking to contract for the $25 million of available
contracts. Mr. DeNunzio responded that it can be construction contractors, suppliers of materials or anything
that is project related. He said there is a local concrete DBE contractor in the area and at the July 15, 2015
meeting they will have Civil Rights staff there who will be able to sign up vendors.
Ms. McKeel thanked Mr. DeNunzio and VDOT for the street sweeper for the Jack Jouett District, and
said it is nice to have it out helping in the area.
Mr. DeNunzio said they rent the equipment for a few months at a time and crews clean up at night in
the high-volume corridor areas.
Mr. Boyd said that as a member of the Jail Board, he is glad to see the relationship establishing with
VDOT.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 13. PUBLIC HEARING: County’s Secondary Road Improvement
Priorities/VDOT Secondary Six-Year Plan (SSYP). In accordance with Section 33.1-70.01 of the Code
of Virginia, to receive public comment on the proposed Secondary Six-Year Plan for Fiscal Years 2015/16
through 2020/21 in Albemarle County, and on the Secondary System Construction Budget for Fiscal Year
2015/16. All projects in the Secondary Six-Year Plan that are eligible for federal funds will be included in
the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), which documents how Virginia will obligate
federal transportation funds. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on May 25 and June 1, 2015.)
The executive summary forwarded to the Board states that the purpose of this public hearing is to
receive input on the proposed Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Secondary Six Year
Program (SSYP), FY 16-21 (Attachment A). The SSYP is the funding program for the construction of
secondary road projects based on the County’s Transportation Priority List and reflects available State
road funding allocated to the County. The Board held a work session on the SSYP and the County’s
Transportation Priority List of Secondary Road Improvem ents on May 6, 2015 (Attachment B-Executive
Summary). At the May 6 meeting, the Board: (1) approved the list of unpaved road priorities set forth in
the staff report; (2) approved the “Recommended Projects and Updates for the FY16 SSYP” set forth in
the staff report for inclusion in the County’s draft FY16 SSYP; and (3) scheduled a public hearing on the
SSYP for June 10, 2015.
VDOT staff has provided a draft of the FY 16-21 SSYP (Attachment A) that is based on the
priority list agreed to by the Board at its May 6 work session. Projected funding allocations for this SSYP
were provided to the Board in the May 6 Executive Summary (Attachment B). As indicated last month, all
available funding for the FY 16-21 SSYP will be used to complete the projects listed below:
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 9)
1. Black Cat Road (Rte. 708) bridge replacement;
2. Broomley Road (Rte. 677) bridge replacement;
3. Dick Woods Road (Rte. 637) bridge replacement;
4. Pocket Lane (Rt. 703), from Rt. 715 to end state maintenance - paving project;
5. Doctors Crossing (Rt. 784), from Rt. 600 to Rt. 640 - paving project;
6. Keswick Drive (Rt. 731), from Rt. 744 to Rt. 22 - paving project;
7. Rio Mills Road (Rt. 643), from paved section to US 29 - paving project;
8. Bunker Hill Road (Rte. 616 to dead end) - paving project; and
9. Preddy Creek Road (Rte. 600 to Rte. 640) - paving project.
The SSYP is for the expenditure of State/VDOT secondary road construction funds allocated to
the County and does not require the expenditure of County funds except to the extent that any project
may also utilize revenue sharing funds or otherwise necessitate County resources in support of the
project.
After the public hearing, staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution
(Attachment E) approving the FY16-21 SSYP and authorizing the County Executive to sign the SSYP.
_____
Mr. Gerald Gatobu, Transportation Planner, stated that secondary roads are those numbered 600
and above, and explained that the County receives funds from VDOT, with the County prioritizing what
projects are to be funded. He noted there is a County priority list which is followed as a tool for what is
important and what has been funded. Mr. Gatobu said the Secondary Road Program is annually
reviewed by the County, and this year there is a transportation priority list for secondary road
improvements. He reported that the Board accepted a comprehensive transportation list in April, and this
will be used for a basis for projects included in VDOTs Secondary System Six-Year Program. Mr. Gatobu
stated there are both paved and unpaved roads in the County, and currently the only sources of funds for
paved roads are CTB and TeleFee funds, with those funds programmed by VDOT. He said there is $2.4
million for FY 2016 in CTB funding, and the TeleFee Funds are approximately $1.8 million for FY 2016,
so the available funding should be used for projects already listed. Mr. Gatobu stated there are two
additional projects, Bunker Hill Road and Preddy Creek Roads, added to the Secondary System Six-Year
Program. Mr. Gatobu stated that bridge projects are also included in the Secondary System Six-Year
Program but also receives federal funding. He noted there are two projects completed: Midway Road
and Dry Bridge Road, and stated that staff is recommending adoption of Attachment E to approve the
SSYP for FY16-21.
Ms. Palmer said the amount of money is for all six years, and asked if there are any restrictions
for the TeleFunds. Mr. Gatobu responded it can be used for repaving or improvements for any paved
roads.
Ms. Palmer asked what they should do with a rural rustic road that is deteriorating. Mr. DeNunzio
responded that those use maintenance funds for rural rustic roads and tr y to put another surface on the
following year so they will hold up better. He stated they did Gillum’s Ridge Road last year and w ill
probably do Midway Road this year.
Mr. Gatobu said the TeleFee funds can be used for any projects on the County’s list.
Mr. DeNunzio stated those funds can be used or any road-related improvement in the secondary
system. He said they can also be applied to a revenue-sharing project.
The Chair opened the public hearing.
Mr. Peter Carpenter of the Rivanna District addressed the Board and stated that he and his wife
have lived on Doctor’s Crossing Road for 19 years. He explained that it is a gravel road and has been
approved under the Rustic Road Program to be improved. Mr. Carpenter stated that he is supporting this
project and hopes it will not be delayed for any reason, as this will greatly improve travel on a dangerous
road.
Mr. Scott Singel of the Rivanna District addressed the Board and stated that he has lived at 3420
Doctor’s Crossing Road since 1980 and very much appreciates VDOT’s efforts in maintaining and
improving the road for many years – but at this time the washboard areas, dust and mud have gotten out
of control and hopes they will consider paving the road.
Mr. Billy Clem of the Rivanna District addressed the Board and stated that he has lived on
Doctor’s Crossing Road since 1974, and is glad to see there is a possibility it will be resurfaced with some
kind of permanent paving, which will make it better for everyone.
Ms. Maxine Holland from the Rivanna District addressed the Board and said she wants to thank
Mr. Kenneth Boyd, for all the support and consideration for the Keswick, Cismont and Cobham areas.
She stated she wants to make sure Bunker Hill is on the list as number three for full consideration to have
the road paved.
Mr. Edward Johnson from the Rivanna District addressed the Board and stated that Bunker Hill
Road was number two on the list to be paved ten years ago. Mr. Johnson stated he told his Aunt it would
be paved, which was a broken promise to her. He said that she was 98 when he made the promise the
road would be paved, and was buried last year at the age 99, with the road remaining unpaved.
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 10)
Mr. Andrew King from the Rivanna District addressed the Board and stated that he live s on
Bunker Hill Lane, adjacent to Bunker Hill Road, and said that having the road paved will improve the
quality of life dramatically in the area. Mr. King stated that it will make him happy to see the kids who
board the bus at that corner of the two roads, not sitting in a bus getting s tuck in the mud every morning.
He stated he is thrilled it is back on the list after many years of bouncing around, and he hopes it will
remain on the list and obtain the funding needed to be completed within the next year, two or three.
Ms. Linda Battle of the Rivanna District addressed the Board and stated that she live s on Rt. 616
right up from the Bunker Hill Road, noting that it floods when it rains and snows, and she supports the
road paving. She said she has lived there many years and the road continues to decline.
Ms. Katherine Smith of the Rivanna District stated she has lived on Bunker Hill Road since 2008,
and it is a wonderful community of people but it is very scary for her living there and walking the dog with
a cane. She stated she is concerned about the children who live on the road as there is very little room to
get off the road when a car is coming fast, and thanked the Board for the consideration of paving this
road, as it is direly needed.
Mr. Boyd asked Mr. DeNunzio for clarification of the order of Bunker Hill Road, as some of these
roads have already been done. Mr. DeNunzio clarified the Rural Rustic Road list includes: Pocket Lane,
Doctor’s Crossing, Keswick Drive, and Bunker Hill – which will likely be done in summer 2016.
Ms. Paula Brown Steedly of the Rivanna District stated that she is a lifelong resident of Albemarle
County and has been living on Doctor’s Crossing Road for 34 years, with the road on the list for 33 years.
She stated that when she moved there, there were 31 residences and there are now 90, and the lifelong
history and problems from other roads have been the problems on Doctor’s Crossing Road too. Ms.
Steedly thanked the County and especially Mr. Boyd for making this happen, stating they do not want to
see it bumped for money and other issues.
Mr. John Steedly of the Rivanna District addressed the Board and stated that he is there in
support of Doctor’s Crossing Road to be paved.
Mr. James Jackson Jr. of the Rivanna District addressed the Board and stated that he lives on
Doctor’s Crossing and is there in support of the Rural Rustic Road program and the Doctor’s Crossing
project. He stated he has been a resident of Doctor’s Crossing 27 years and the property he lives on, his
great-grand father owned in the late 1800s – and he is the last member of his family to be there. Mr.
Jackson stated that several years ago he addressed the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors and told
them of the impeding dangers of the children standing on the dust and dirt. He said that based upon the
MSD findings from Luck Stone it has improved some, but not dramatically. He also thanked Mr. Boyd for
his years of service to the residents of Albemarle County and said as they would say in the Navy,
“Godspeed as you set your sails toward the sun, we hope you have fair winds and following seas.”
Ms. Sally Thomas of the Samuel Miller District, addressed the Board regarding Dry Bridge Road.
Ms. Thomas said she is on the Board for Scenic Virginia and they are increasingly concerned about how
ugly the bridges are that are being built in Virginia. She stated she has told those at Scenic Virginia that
Dry Bridge Road is an exception, as it goes over a railroad, but is open and allows those who cross it to
view the area. She stated she wants to thank VDOT and others for making Dry Bridge Road look nice
and hopes that other bridges to be built will follow the example.
Ms. Emma Brown of the Rivanna District, Bunker Hill Road, asked the Board how much land is
taken when improvements are made for paving. Mr. DeNunzio responded there is no right of way taken
with Rural Rustic Roads, and said there are 30-foot prescriptive easements where the property owners
technically own to the center of the road, with 15-foot easements on both sides, and they pave within that
area.
The Chair closed the public hearing.
Ms. Mallek stated that with the Board’s task of prioritization within this bulleted list, Keswick Drive
was just added recently, and in reviewing the number of vehicle trips per day, Bunker Hill has 230, twice
that of Preddy Creek. She asked if the Board should make changes to the order of the projects today.
Ms. Palmer noted that the Board had discussed previously the possibility of having staf f come up
with a more objective way of prioritization of the projects and this is in the works for later in the year, and
asked if the Board should wait for the staff recommendations.
Mr. David Benish, Chief of Planning, addressed the Board and stated that both of the road
projects are scheduled for no sooner than next summer, they can remain on the list as-is, and can be
reviewed for scheduling by VDOT later.
Mr. DeNunzio asked if they are discussing Keswick Drive and Bunker Hill Road. Mr. Benish
confirmed that they are, and stated the Board is asking if Bunker Hill can swap with Keswick Drive.
Mr. Boyd asked where Keswick Drive had come from on the list. Mr. Benish responded that
Keswick Drive has been on the priority list for a number of years and is working up the list, so now it is in
the funding program and was added to the Secondary System Six-Year Program last year.
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 11)
Mr. Boyd stated he agrees with Ms. Mallek that he would hate to see Bunker Hill Road get
bumped because there is not enough funding left after Keswick Drive.
Mr. DeNunzio stated he is fairly certain both will be done next year, but if in the spring of next
year there is a different situation, the switch can be done next year, and he can have both cleared to
move forward. He also explained that each year after projects are completed, there are balances which
transfer to the following year for projects on the list to be done.
Ms. Mallek said after hearing from the same residents for eight years in a row, she proposes that
the Board switch the order today. She stated when extra funding comes in, it goes to the lesser
expensive project, which will mean Bunker Hill first and then Keswick Road.
Mr. Boyd noted that both are in his district, and he supports the switch.
Ms. Palmer stated she had been on Keswick Road recently and did not notice any issues, and
asked what the problems are.
Mr. Benish stated there are drainage issues and when Keswick Road is active during horse
shows and other events, it becomes crowded and damaged. He stated a lot of the requests are similar
for these roadways, related to degradation and dust, and Keswick Road has community support and has
been on the list for some time.
Mr. Boyd noted that Little Keswick School is on the road. Mr. Benish confirmed that Little
Keswick School is on the road, and said Keswick Hall is on the other end.
Ms. Dittmar said the Board is looking forward to the full report on road priorities later in the year.
Ms. Mallek stated that with the dollars they have, they need to focus on the areas with four times
as many cars.
Mr. Boyd moved to adopt the proposed resolution to approve the transportation improvement
priority list as presented, with the switching of the order of Bunker Hill Drive and Keswick Drive. Ms.
Mallek seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Sheffield, Mr. Boyd, Ms. Dittmar, Ms. Mallek, Ms. McKeel and Ms. Palmer.
NAYS: None.
(Note: The resolution as adopted is set out in full below.)
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Virginia Code § 33.2-364 provides the opportunity for each county to work with the
Virginia Department of Transportation in developing a Secondary System Six -Year Program; and
WHEREAS, the Board has previously agreed to assist in the preparation of this Program, in
accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation policies and procedures, and participated in a
public hearing on the proposed Program (FY 16-21) as well as the 2015 Construction Priority List for
Albemarle County on June 10, 2015, after being duly advertised so that all citizens of the County had the
opportunity to participate in said hearing and to make comments and recommendations concerning the
proposed Program and Priority List; and
WHEREAS, Joel Denunzio, the Resident Administrator of the Virginia Department of
Transportation, appeared before the Board and recommended approval of the Secondary System Six -Year
Program (FY16-21) and the 2015 Construction Priority List for the County of Albemarle; and
WHEREAS, the Secondary System Six Year Program (FY16-21) and the 2015 Construction
Priority List, as presented at the June 10, 2015 public hearing, are in the best interest of the County and of
the citizens of the County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board hereby approves the Secondary System
Six-Year Program (FY16-21) and the 2015 Construction Priority List as presented at the June 10, 2015
public hearing, and authorizes the County Executive to sign the Secondary System Six-Year Program (FY
16-21).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk of the Board shall forward a certified copy of this
resolution to the District Administrator of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 12)
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 13)
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 14)
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 15)
_______________
Agenda Item No.14. SP-2014-00015 Heartrock – Day Camp (Sign #40).
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall.
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 00600-00-00-028B0.
LOCATION: 6600 Blackwells Hollow Road.
PROPOSAL: Day camp.
PETITION: Day camp with outdoor play areas and environmental education as permitted under
Section 10.2.2.20 of zoning ordinance. No dwelling units proposed.
ZONING: RA Rural Areas - agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5
unit/acre in development lots). Day camp, boarding camp (reference 5.1.05) – (10.2.2.20).
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Rural Areas – preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space,
and natural, historic and scenic resources/ density (0.5 unit/acre in development lots).
(Advertised in the Daily Progress on May 25 and June 1, 2015.)
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 16)
The executive summary forwarded to the Board states that at their meeting on April 21, 2015, the
Planning Commission voted 6:0 to recommend approval of SP201400015 with the conditions
recommended by staff.
The request is for a special use permit as permitted by Section 10.2.2.20 of the Zoning
Ordinance, which allows day camps and boarding camps in the RA Rural Areas zoning district. The site is
28.01 acres in size and is located adjacent to the Patricia Ann Byrom Forest Preserve.
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the resolution to approve SP201400015 with the attached
conditions.
_____
Mr. David Benish stated that this is a proposal for a special use permit for a day camp with
outdoor play areas including environmental education. He stated the site is located on Blackwell’s Hollow
Road and adjacent to Byrom Park to the north. Mr. Benish presented photos of Blackwell’s H ollow Road
with the existing entrance and barn which will house some of the events and support facilities. Mr. Benish
said the day camp will include outdoor play areas using natural landscapes, as well as trails, and there
will be a primitive camping area with six sites. He stated there are 28 parking spaces shown on the
conceptual plan, which is available in the staff report, with a minor change to the entrance location,
moved slightly to the north. Mr. Benish said that regarding the impacts for the use, there is limited
infrastructure being provided to the site – a parking area, a relocated access road to provide for better site
distance, and only some improvements to the inside of the existing barn. He noted the major issue to
address is the safety of the play area, which is located near Blackwell’s Hollow Road, with a condition of
adding a standard type of fencing that is standard for recreational areas – and the applicant is agreeable
to this. He said there will also need to be VDOT approval of the entrance relocation, there will be no
amplified sound, and any lighting will be subject to the dark sky ordinance. He summarized that staff has
identified favorable factors as the application is consistent with the comprehensive plan goals for
alternative uses and is reversible to agriculture and silviculture uses, the scale of activity is consistent with
the rural areas, and the conditions provided address any of the negative impacts of development that
might be generated by safety issues with the children near the roads and the entrance.
Mr. Benish stated that staff is recommending approval of the permit, with the conditions as
presented.
Ms. Mallek said she hopes there will not be paving of the parking area.
Mr. Benish responded the parking areas will need to be defined, but the surface will most likely be
gravel.
The Chair opened the public hearing.
Mr. Kevin Schuyler, owner of Heartrock Family Farm LLC, a 28-acre property located at 6600
Blackwell’s Hollow Road, addressed the Board. He stated the property, which he owns with his wife,
Carolyn, is on the back side of Fox Mountain, right next to Patricia Ann Byrom Park and in the extended
shadow of Shenandoah National Park. Mr. Schuyler stated the area has spectacular views in the area,
and on the property there are three pristine and free-flowing streams and an abundance of wildlife. Their
vision is to connect children and families to this natural area. He stated Carolyn ha d presented their
vision for the camp at the Tom Tom Festival’s crowd-funded pitch night, and they were awarded the
grand prize by the community, as well as being featured recently in the Crozet Gazette. Mr. Schuyler
explained that attachment B shows the property as it looks today, and said the prior owner had built the
barn – with the fenced-in pasture to become a play-yard for children. He stated they intend to mak e use
of the existing improvements, and the plan does not call for any additional buildings that will permanently
impact the landscape. He also stated the horse-riding ring will lead into a natural field, and in the center
there is a road to the west in a steep incline that they will try to return to its natural state.
Mr. Schuyler stated that attachment C is designed by a landscape architect, Sophie Johnson,
who will be able to address questions on parking and the permeability of the surface. He said people
understand that children are not getting outdoors as much, and children who spend more time outdoors
are healthier, more resilient, and better long-term stewards of the natural resources. Mr. Schuyler stated
there are three existing meadows, and they will add trees and native plants to the meadows and slightly
realign the entrance which was suggested by VDOT. He said VDOT came out and looked at the
entrance and agreed that moving it made sense with the sight lines associated with Blackwell’s Hollow
Road. Mr. Schuyler said they will be adding appropriate parking and an overflow parking area, with six
sites for campsites, and there will be improvements to the barn by adding bathrooms and flooring. In
addition to the required public meetings, he said, they have reached out to their neighbors, especially
their immediate neighbor to the south, Lieutenant Colonel Christopher Byrom, who has two homes on his
property. Mr. Schuyler said that Mr. Byrom is an amateur land surveyor who lives in Rhode Island, and
together with Mr. Schuyler’s son they surveyed their property line. He stated Mr. Byrom shares the
similar interest of preserving the area. Mr. Schuyler said they have met their neighbors, many of whom
have volunteered to help build trails, and they have encountered no opposition. He stated that Carolyn is
a certified playground inspector and will work to ensure the safety of the children.
Ms. Sophie Johnston, a landscape architect, stated the surface materials will ideally be gravel in
order to maintain the rural farm-like character of the property. She said there are a few handicap parking
spaces at the barn, and they would like to consider using permeable paver or hard surface there. She
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 17)
said they would like to consider the overflow parking as a turn-around site for a fire truck, for it to be
potentially more stabilized turf, but this will have to be worked through with the Engineering Department.
There being no other public comments, the public hearing was closed.
Ms. Mallek moved, seconded by Ms. Palmer, to adopt the proposed resolution approving SP-
2014-00015, with the conditions as presented. Roll was called and the motion passed by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Sheffield, Mr. Boyd, Ms. Dittmar, Ms. Mallek, Ms. McKeel and Ms. Palmer.
NAYS: None.
(Note: The resolution as adopted is set out in full below.)
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE
SP 2014-15 HEARTROCK – DAY CAMP
WHEREAS, Heartrock Family Farm LLC is the owner of Tax Map and Parcel Number 00600-00-
00-028B0 (the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, Heartrock Family Farm LLC filed an application for a special use permit to allow a
day camp with outdoor play areas and environmental education, and the application is identified as
Special Use Permit 2014-00015 Heartrock – Day Camp (“SP 2014-15”); and
WHEREAS, the proposed use is allowed on the Property by special use permit under Albemarle
County Code § 18-10.2.2(20); and
WHEREAS, on April 21, 2015, after a duly noticed public hearing, the Albemarle County Planning
Commission recommended approval of SP 2014-15 with the conditions recommended by staff; and
WHEREAS, on June 10, 2015, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors held a duly noticed
public hearing on SP 2014-15.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, upon consideration of the foregoing, the staff
report prepared for SP 2014-15 and all of its attachments, the information presented at the public hearing,
and the factors relevant to a special use permit in Albemarle County Code § 18-33.8, the Albemarle
County Board of Supervisors hereby approves SP 2014-15, subject to the performance standards for this
use in Albemarle County Code § 18-5.1.05 and the conditions attached hereto.
*****
SP-2014-00015 Heartrock - Day Camp
1. Development of the use shall be in general accord with the conceptual plan titled “Heartrock
Farm,” prepared by Sophie Johnston, Landscape Architect, and dated February 17 th, 2015
(hereafter, the “Conceptual Plan”) as determined by the Director of Planning and the Zoning
Administrator. To be in general accord with the Conceptual Plan, the development shall reflect
the following major elements within the development essential to the design of the development:
• Number of parking spaces (maximum of 28)
• Number and location of tent-camping sites
• Size and location of barn
Minor modifications to the Plan which do not conflict with the elements above may be made to
ensure compliance with the Zoning Ordinance.
2. Customer parking shall only be permitted in the parking spaces shown on the conceptual plan.
3. The permittee shall obtain written approval of the entrance design from the Virginia Department of
Transportation prior to the County’s approval of the final site plan for the use.
4. The permittee shall obtain written approval of the water supply and the onsite sewage system
from the Virginia Department of Health prior to the County issuing a zoning clearance and the
permittee commencing the use.
5. All outdoor lighting at the site that is exclusively for camp use shall either emit 3,000 lumens or
less or be a full cutoff luminaire.
6. No amplified sound systems shall be used on the site.
7. The area shown on the conceptual plan as “Mowed Play Yards” shall be within fencing
conforming to ASTM standard F2049, except where it abuts a structure. All gates into this area
shall be located at least 300 feet from Blackwells Hollow Road.
8. Overnight camping shall be limited to tent camping. Overnight use of recreational vehicles is not
permitted.
9. At all times when the facility is open, except when the only active use is overnight camping, at
least one staff member shall be on site.
_______________
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 18)
Agenda Item No.15. PUBLIC HEARING: CPA-2013-00001 – Comprehensive Plan. Amend the
Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan in its entirety by restating the County’s values and vision
which guide the Plan, and its policies, goals, objectives, and strategies for growth management,
natural resources, historic, cultural, and scenic resources, economic development, the Rural
Area, the Development Areas, housing, transportation, parks and recreation, greenways,
blueways, and green systems, community facilities and services, and other related matters; adopt
a corrected Village of Rivanna land use map; amend the Pantops Master Plan by removing two
planned streets shown on the master plan; amend the Development Areas’ and Rural Area’s
boundaries by adding to the Development Areas approximately 83 acres, more or less, located
generally west of and near the Interstate 64/Route 29 South interchange, composed of Tax Map
and Parcel Number 07500-00-00-04800, a portion of which is currently within the Development
Areas, and two small fragments on the western side of Tax Map and Parcel Number 07500 -00-
00-05300, the remainder of which is currently within the Development Areas, to be designated as
Industrial and Parks and Green Systems, and by adding the Mosby Mountain and Whittington
areas to the Development Areas within one of the Plan’s Southern neighborhoods (Neighborhood
5), to be designated as Neighborhood Density Residential and Parks and Green Systems, to
create a master plan for the Southern and Western Neighborhoods, and to change the variety of
plan designations in that area.
Advertised in the Daily Progress on May 25 and June 1, 2015.)
The executive summary forwarded to the Board states that over the last eighteen months, the
Board of Supervisors has reviewed the Comprehensive Plan that was recommended by the Planning
Commission in late summer 2013. Changes directed by the Board have bee n incorporated into the Draft
Plan which may be found here: http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/Forms_Center/Departments/
Community_Development/For ms/Comp_Plan_Round_4/Table_of_Contents_final_%206-10-15_
LINKED.pdf
Redlines of the Draft Plan may be found here: http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/Forms_
Center/Departments/Community_Development/Forms/Comp_Plan_Round_4/REDLINE_Changes_To%2
0_June_10_BOS_CP.pdf
The redlines reflect the substantive changes to the Commission’s recommended Plan made by
the Board of Supervisors in its work sessions as well as editing changes for sentence structure, gramma r,
explanation of terms, clarification of existing ordinance requirements, and formatting. Included are: 1)
items the Board previously requested that were not in the latest version of the Plan, such as language
related to Monticello and providing training for public safety and emergency management staff for
hazardous incidents, such as crude oil shipments; 2) wording changes to the Economic Development
Chapter to reflect the role of the new Economic Development Director, 3) clarification or correction of
terms or existing regulations, such as ordinance requirements for special events and explanation of “low
sufficiency ratings;” 4) updated data, where readily available and where it would not change the
substance of an associated strategy, such as 2014 timber sales and flights leaving the Charlottesville-
Albemarle Regional Airport; and 5) updates to the Transportation Chapter to reflect additional background
information which was required by VDOT. Staff notes that further non-substantive corrections for format,
spelling, and punctuation will be necessary prior to a final printing and posting of the adopted document. If
needed in preparation for the final printing, staff will return with these “errata” changes for the Board’s
approval.
The Development Area expansion area south of the Route 29 South/I-64 Interchange discussed
by the Board at its May 13, 2015 meeting has been provided as an Alternate Designation for the Southern
Urban Neighborhood. Environmentally sensitive areas and areas in the Entrance Corridor intended for
visual buffers are shown with the Parks and Green Systems designation. The remaining area is shown as
Industrial. All of this information is found in Attachment A.
Since the Board last discussed the Comp Plan, the only additional citizen i nput has come from
Phil Ianna requesting that language be added to the Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources Chapter
related to the Dark Sky. The email and requested changes may be found in Attachment B. The changes
reflect his belief that more work should be done to protect the Dark Sky. Mr. Ianna’s recommended
changes do not add or change the Dark Sky strategy; instead they suggest that the County research and
consider further regulatory measures.
Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Draft linked above with the
understanding that format, punctuation, and spelling errors will be corrected prior to a final printing and
posting on-line.
Should the Board desire at this time to also include the expansion area south of the Route 29
South/I-64 Interchange in its adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, staff has provided what it feels is an
appropriate designation in Attachment A that can be added to the Board’s action.
Should the Board desire at this time to also include Mr. Ianna’s recommended changes regarding
the Dark Sky in its adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, staff finds Attachment B appropriate for addition
to the Board’s action.
_____
Ms. Dittmar stated the Board will be considering the Comprehensive Plan, and the action tonight
is to amend the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan in its entirety by restating the County’s values
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 19)
and vision, which guide the plan in its policies, goals, objectives and strategies. She introduced Elaine
Echols and Wayne Cilimberg.
Ms. Elaine Echols, Principal Planner, stated the Board has been working on the plan for the last
year and a half, and the Planning Commission began their review about four years ago. She stated the
Planning Commission had held at least fifty meetings for public comment and had a public hearing in
March 2013 and had to re-hear it in May – and the recommended plan was presented to the Board in July
and August, which they had also recommended in May. Ms. Echols said the Board has held 16 work
sessions to date and is probably ready to move from work sessions to some action.
Ms. Echols stated the plan itself has some different items than the existing plan; there is a
background, vision and values statement up front as well as the growth management policy. She said in
terms of content there are nine chapters, ranging from Natural Resources to Community Facilities, as well
as a chapter dealing with implementation, and one of the new items is a section on tools – measuring
progress on achieving the goals – in the implementation chapter, with priorities for the Board to work on
with their strategic plan. She stated the big changes are the addition of a vision that has been added,
consistency with formatting, strengthen the commitment for water quality, and clarification of expectations
for the rural areas. Ms. Echols said the Economic Development and housing chapters have been added
and there have been simplification and clarification of the Land Use Map and designations that have gone
into the southern and western urban neighborhoods master plan along with some updates, and there ha s
been new direction set for solid waste management which comes in with the Community Facilities
chapter. She said it is known from VDOT comments that there is a need to make corrections to the list of
the principal arterials in the reference documents, and staff has learned that they need to put a correct
version of the traffic calming document in the reference documents online. Ms. Echols said that staff sent
copies to members of the Board and members of the public most concerned, and the Piedmont
Environmental Council, who have helped put this all together.
Ms. Echols explained that what is needed, if the Board wishes to adopt this version tonight, is
final formatting, updating of the table of contents list with page numbers, punctuation and a few cler ical
errors. She noted the change in the reference document to the principal arterials pertain to describing the
east interchange at Shadwell to the Route 29/250/Ivy Road as being a principal arterial. She said the
Board has received some information in the staff report about the dark sky ordinance from Phil Ianna.
She stated there is the issue of the boundary adjustment, which will be considered separately and is the
next item on the agenda, so it will not be included with the Comprehensive Plan update. Ms. Echols
asked the Board to give direction once public input ha s been made about the dark sky or any other
changes, and asked the Board to adopt the resolution to approve the plan with the final changes.
Ms. Dittmar clarified the Board had publicly advertised a second potential boundary adjustment,
there was one discussed extensively, Mosby Mountain in the Samuel Miller District – but had discussed
adding for review – and publicly advertised that they would – a second potential boundary adjustment.
Ms. Dittmar stated the Board has reached consensus and have decided to move the second adjustment
to Agenda Item 16 and discuss.
Mr. Sheffield asked if the Board will allow comments for Agenda Item 16. Ms. Dittmar responded
that she supposed they can but had not planned on it, because they are just going to discuss options for
process.
Mr. Sheffield said that he is comfortable taking comments on that item.
Ms. Palmer said some of the people who had signed up for Comp Plan comments are probably
wanting to address Item 16.
Ms. Dittmar clarified for the public that comments related to the boundary adjustment will be
considered under Item 16, although they are welcome to make any statements during the Comp Plan
public hearing.
Ms. Palmer asked if she should make suggested edits now. Ms. Echols responded that if they
are substantial changes, she may want to do that after public comments are heard.
Mr. Boyd asked about including the committee report from the Transfer of Development Rights,
and if it is referenced. Ms. Echols said all of the TDR discussions that had taken place are documented
in the referenced documents.
Mr. Boyd also asked about the removal of the illustrations for the roundabouts on Rt. 231/22.
Ms. Echols confirmed that all references to the Rt. 231/22 location have been removed from the
rural traffic calming document.
Ms. Mallek asked if anyone wants to discuss the dark sky issue.
Board members agreed to discuss it after public comments.
The Chair then opened the public hearing.
Ms. Pat Napoleon of the Rivanna District spoke in regard to the rural calming plan and thanked
the staff for their accountability, listening, and removal of site-specific drawings that are depicting private
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 20)
properties. She said it is known that PEC has had a continuing interest in positioning the traffic calming
on Route 22 and 231, and changing the basic configuration and concept of a gorgeous roadway/pathway
dating back prior to the time of Thomas Jefferson, in the view of many, would perm anently alter history.
She said the reality is that technology is quickly evolving wherein vehicles will be safely steered, tracked
and driven by a microchip, and speed will be controlled by technology within the lifetime of many in the
room. Ms. Napoleon asked that drastic and permanent modifications be avoided for now, and knowing
there are many PEC members owning property along Route 22 and 231, it may be a nice gesture or a
fine example for those folks owning the land in encouraging pull-offs for vehicles and donating some of
their properties. Ms. Napoleon said that having lived in the area most of her life, she ha s concern about
traffic calming and has found reports online pointing to roundabouts failing a community in some cases.
She stated they are not all bad but the positioning and the right locations are crucial, and asked if staff
has referenced reports offering a different perspective. Ms. Napoleon suggested they make repairs to
crumbling pavement, and stated that roundabouts will take private property, as there is not enough land in
the VDOT right of way, and will slow down police, fire trucks, school buses and emergency transport
vehicles. She also asked the Board to focus on calming the traffic in Batesville and on Hilton Road, as
well as the road to Monticello, where the speeding is out of control. She also suggests removing the
picture of the accident and mentioning the name of the woman who died, unless her family ha s been
contacted, as it is inappropriate. Ms. Napoleon stated the PEC has accomplished many good objectives,
yet referencing any private non-profit in a government agency report may be problematic.
Mr. Tom Olivier of the Samuel Miller District addressed the Board and stated that Albemarle
County has a well-earned reputation for putting much effort into Comprehensive Plan updates and taking
the plans very seriously once adopted. He said that many once wonderful places ha ve succumbed to
destructive development in recent decades, such as the Research Triangle area of North Carolina, and
good Comprehensive Plans have thus saved Albemarle from that same fate. Related to this, he requests
that the Board not include the only very recently proposed expansion of development areas near the
29/64 intersection, and asked to subject this expansion to a separate full review, as so many ha ve
requested. Mr. Olivier stated he has only had time to scan some red line sections of the most recent
drafts – and the important biodiversity section still appears to be sound. He commented there is one
great omission from the new plan: there is a growth management strategy but no growth containment
strategy. He added that undoubtedly some citizens will be making that point in the future to the Board.
Mr. John Lowry of the Samuel Miller District addressed the Board stating that he is speaking in
support of expanding the designated growth area at the 64/29 intersection. Mr. Lowry stated that staff
had 13 areas that could have been added to the Comp Plan growth area, and all but one was pulled by
the Planning Commission in August 2013. He said that Commissioners had pulled the additions,
reasoning that unless there was “an immediate need,” they could not go along with staff requests. Mr.
Lowry stated that he knows staff has visited the Sieg property area and they characterized it as rugged
and challenging, but that is what business is all about: facing adversity, dealing with risk, avoiding failure.
He said that the chemistry at the intersection must have changed, and there have been a few deaths in
the Sieg family, because now there appears to be an immediate need for growth. He stated some would
state that traffic at that intersection is a reason not to allow business growth, but he lives south of the area
and to him it is “a marvel” how well traffic volume flows through the interchange. Mr. Lowry said there is
especially heavy traffic coming down from the 250/29 Bypass, and especially heavy traffic goes north
from 64 towards the Fontaine Research Park – all without a hitch. He stated that traffic traveling west
from 29 onto 64 is troubling but VDOT knows this, and Ms. Echols has done many traffic volume studies
in the Comp Plan chapters, so there may eventually be flashing yellow lights and slower highway speeds,
but no highway traffic lights. Mr. Lowry said that logically there are few better places to locate than at
intersections of major highways, with the first benefit to the County being collection of real estate taxes;
and secondly, even the Advocates for a Sustainable Albemarle Population concluded in their economic
study released in late 2012 that businesses generate $2 of income for every $1 of g overnment cost, even
in the first year of being in business. He thanked the Board for considering the added acres to the Comp
Plan growth area, and whether the addition comes as a well-deserved part of the plan or as a Comp Plan
amendment, either way work s. Mr. Lowry thanked Ms. Echols for her work on the Comp Plan over the
last five years.
Ms. Martha Levering of the League of Women Voters stated that the League would like to
comment on the brand new proposal to expand the development area along Route 29 South. She said
they are initially alarmed by the precedent set by the sudden appearance of the bulge in the development
area, but is glad the Board plans to follow accepted procedure and give this proposal a full vetting by the
Planning Commission, VDOT, the MPO, County staff, the Board and crucially, the public. She asked that
the proposal be removed completely from the Comp Plan at this time, and asked that when considering
expansion of the development area for the sake of adding to the stock of industrial land, the League
encourages the Board to follow the steps laid out in the Comprehensive Plan, particularly strategy 4A in
the Economic Development chapter that recommends undertaking a strategic assessment of industrial
properties; and as it recommends in strategy 4B, they should first proactively rezone land in the existing
development area to industrial. She said it appears the designation dates back to the 1970s, and if so the
designation predates a great deal of more sophisticated planning that has taken place since then and can
hardly be taken as a guideline for whether industry makes sense for this area. Ms. Levering stated the
League also encourages the Planning Commission, staff and Board to do a thorough analysis of the
transportation impacts, any relevant water and waste water issues, relationship to adjacent park land,
implications for more intense development to adjacent properties already in the development area,
implications for outward sprawl, and in general do the thorough vetting the public expects. Ms. Levering
thanked the Board for acting to regain the public trust, that as a group the Board has worked hard to
obtain.
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 21)
Mr. Bill Emory of the Woolen Mills District of Charlottesville stated that 58% of that neighborhood
boundary is defined by the intersection of the City and the County, and residents there are very pleased
to see the language of the Comp Plan calling for unified City/County vision regarding land uses adjacent
to the Rivanna River. He stated the language supports the river corridor as a destination while ensuring
protection and improvement of the river’s water quality. He said they are also heartened by the Comp
Plan’s call for land uses that transition well between the County and the City, as it makes sense to
coordinate. He stated that on June 23, 2015, the Planning Commissions for the City and the County are
having a joint work session. He hopes they will translate the excellent aspirational language of the Comp
Plan into concrete suggestions for action at the shared boundary that will enhance quality of life for
adjacent City and County residents. He stated that sometimes the City and County have differing
interests; for example, at Buckingham Branch – without a whole lot of advanced notice to residents – the
pedestrian connection between the City and the County was closed and a gate put up. He said this
connection figures into the City’s bike/ped master plan, a connection which has existed for hundreds of
years in between Henry Clay Merchant’s home and the Woolen Mills Chapel at the bottom of the hill, built
in 1835 and 1886, and this is the sort of thing he hopes the two municipalities can work on with the
Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Morgan Butler of the Southern Environmental Law Center addressed the Board and stated
that a great deal of time and effort has certainly been invested into this project for the last four years, but
the Comprehensive Plan deserves it. He said the desirability of the County and the high quality of life
residents enjoy is largely a reflection of respect this community has for the Plan. Mr. Butler said that great
places do not just happen, and he thanked everyone for being willing to dive deeply into the plan over the
last 18 months, and for making sure the process remained open to the public throughout. He thanked
staff and Ms. Echols especially for their tireless work and remarkable patience. Mr. Butler also said the
plan has definitely improved since the beginning, and among the positive changes the SELC is glad to
see the revised Rural Area chapter focuses more on promoting truly rural uses, and in the Development
Areas chapter, new strategies highlight the importance of improving the livability of existing
neighborhoods not just new development. He also said the Natural Resources chapter now includes an
objective focus both on what the community can do to counter climate change and to anticipate for its
local impacts. Mr. Butler stated he has basic concerns; for example the Development Area chapter in
some places still reads like an apology for smart growth, neighborhood model development and infill. He
said that while it is helpful for the plan to acknowledge challenges and to lay out strategies for overcoming
them, it needs to consistently remind the public of the significant fiscal and environmental benefits these
policies offer County residents. Mr. Butler stated the second chief concern and one raised before is that
the plan does not adequately prioritize the options of working within the existing growth areas to create
better industrial land opportunities. He said these include proactively rezoning significant land already
designated for industrial use, combining smaller adjacent industrial parcels into larger ones, and
facilitating more light industrial uses on commercially zoned lands – an option the County enabled only
two years ago. Mr. Butler stated those strategies need to be prioritized and pursued. He added there are
three non-substantive corrections he had sent to Ms. Echols and to Ms. Mallek and he while he does not
have time to get to them tonight, he asked if Ms. Echols and the Board can discuss these. He also
thanked the Board and everyone for the chance to comment on this very important effort.
Mr. Jeff Werner of the Piedmont Environmental Council stated he has stopped trying to respond
to Ms. Napoleon’s unfounded claims about what PEC has done about the Route 22/231 rural traffic
calming. He stated there are a whole lot of suggestions that are good ideas, but people keep focusing on
the roundabouts – which are the most extensive and evasive things, and the last measures that w ill be
done. Mr. Werner stated there are some good ideas in there, do not throw them out. Mr. Werner thanked
staff and the Board for all the years of hard work on the Comp Plan. He said that good planning
preserves and protects resources, and good planning creates places people want to live in and visit.
There is a reason Albemarle is annually recognized on so many “best of” lists. Mr. Werner stated the
County’s plan has long identified rural and conservation as a goal, and as such, this public policy has
allowed over 92,000 acres of the rural areas to be permanently protected by private la nd owners. Mr.
Werner stated he is pleased the Board keeps the ideas of rural traffic calming in the plan, and it will be
great to do small area studies that includes those ideas. He stated PEC’s support of tourism and
agribusiness in the rural area, but asked in implementing this plan that the County be careful about how
quickly the door is opened, if at all, to non-ag/commercial activities in the rural area. Mr. Werner
expressed PEC’s concern about the capacity of Route 29 in relation to expansion of t he growth area on
29 South’s intersection with I-64. He said that in 2011, he told the Planning Commission that simply
building bypasses will not preserve the capacity of Route 29, and along the rural segments between
bypasses new by-right access points and new intersections will continue to degrade the corridor’s
capacity. He stated the community has been through entirely too much fighting and debating and arguing
over Rt. 29, including the strained relationship with down-state neighbors. Mr. Werner said this cannot be
set aside, and clearly someone is dangling a huge carrot before the Board – although he does not know
what that is. He urged the Board to please think twice before taking any action on signalizing an
intersection on Route 29 South at I-64, and stated it will be an enormous mistake for the community to put
a light on Route 29 – and the repercussions will be huge.
Ms. Pam Riley addressed the Board and thanked Ms. Echols and all the County staff for the
excellent work they have done on the Comprehensive Plan update and on the southern and western area
master plan. She also stated that on behalf on many residents in the Avon Street Extended area she
offered up her deep gratitude to the Board of Supervisors and the Planning Commission, but especially to
Supervisor Jane Dittmar and to Planning Commissioner Rick Randolph. She said that without their
leadership, she believes many priorities and critical additions would be missing from the southern area
plan. She said during the Comp Plan update process, the southern area community had requested
additional planning sessions to allow for further study and citizen input. She said the County elected
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 22)
officials and employees collectively responded in a very supportive and professional manner, which has
led to a much improved plan. She said she looks forward to establishment of the Community Advisory
Committee for the southern area plan and the continued coordination between the community and the
County on promoting good urban design, high quality development, a strong economy and appropriate
infrastructure in the southern development area.
Dr. Ed Murphy of the Samuel Miller District addressed the Board and stated that he is an
Associate Professor in the Astronomy Department at University of Virginia, and also runs the education
and outreach programs for Fan Mountain Observatory and McCormick Observatory. Dr. Murphy stated
that he supports the Dark Skies initiative of Strategy 11 as part of the plan, and he wants to point out the
number of people that take advantage of the dark skies policy in Albemarle County. He stated the
outreach programs see about 4,000 visitors each year with most from the local community, including
about 2,000 local school children who come through both Fan Mountain and McCormick observatories.
Dr. Murphy stated that in addition they have a “Dark Skies, Bright Kids” after-school science program that
operates in the southern part of the County at Yancey Elementary, Greer Elementary and Red Hill
Elementary. He said that every semester the faculty, graduate students and undergraduate students help
the students take advantage of their dark skies and to see the universe and understand and learn about
science, technology, engineering and math. Dr. Murphy said that Fan Mountain Observatory is the only
major research observatory in Virginia, and for that reason the dark skies shou ld be protected. He stated
that for people who want to take advantage of our night skies, the Charlottesville Astronomical Society
hosts hundreds of people every year at the Ivy Creek Natural area. Dr. Murphy stated there is clearly a
demand in the community for preserving these dark skies – and these numbers do not include the
hundreds of people who probably go out every night, look up and appreciate them.
Ms. Ruth Douglas of the Rivanna District addressed the Board and wished Mr. Boyd well in
retirement, and thanked him for his years of service. She also told the Board of Supervisors how much
she appreciates all the work that has been done in recent years to add to the local park systems, and
stated there are some wonderful properties that have been acquired and hopefully there will be more
added in the future. She said it has been a pleasure to see the additions happen, and hopes the
proposed expansion of the growth area will be pulled out of the plan and put through the usual review and
vetting process. Ms. Douglas also commented that it is interesting to see traffic circles coming back, as
they had been disregarded from previous traffic planning.
Ms. Karin Yates, President of the League of Women Voters for the Charlottesville area, stated on
behalf of the League that she is there to thank the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission and
Albemarle County government staff for all the hours of work devoted to the updated Comprehensive Plan.
She said that having addressed the Water Resources section of the plan at many public comment
sessions, the League has followed the efforts to organize and shorten this section without losing any of
the intent contained in the current plan. She said they feel the final draft, which the Board is considering
at this meeting, meets the goal. Ms. Yates said that by creating a Water Resources Master Plan that will
ensure adequate, reliable and safe water for the citizens, Albemarle County w ill provide the guidance for
monitoring and protecting ground and surface water quality and quantity, maintaining and using a water
resources database, working collaboratively with other groups and agencies, eliminating redundancy of
efforts, and educating and informing citizens about water-related issues. She said these are the concerns
the League hopes will be addressed by the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Yates stated the Water Resources
Master Plan is intended to include the water quality issues related to alternative septic systems and the
potential effect on development. She said they strongly support this addition and request s that it be
thoroughly addressed in the master plan. She thanked the Board again for all the effort put into the Comp
Plan and asked the Board to quickly implement the creation of the Water Resources Master Plan.
Mr. Neil Williamson of the Free Enterprise Forum stated that his New Year’s Resolution was to be
more positive, but the current draft of the Comp Plan has made that mission difficult. He said there are
many good things in this four year long gestating plan, including the recognition of rural area conflict s with
residential development and the right to farm, an enhanced chapter on Economic Development, as well
as a condensation of the plan and a reorganization that makes this formerly unwieldy plan slightly more
user friendly. Mr. Williamson said the Free Enterprise Forum must stand opposed to the current draft,
believing the Plan should be vetoed. He said ultimately they fear that the restrictive growth tenor and the
regulatory direction of this Comp Plan will be harmful to Albemarle’s advancement and will significantly
jeopardize the ability of future generations to afford to live and find work in this great community. He said
he believes that a vast majority of citizens may not be in favor of this plan, but believe that a majority of
the Board of Supervisors is prepared to move forward. Mr. Williamson said their opposition is based on,
in part, providing Monticello veto power over development in its so-called “viewshed,” apologizing rather
than fully embracing economic development, increasing the cost and complexity of providing housing,
mandating residential densities that neither the citizens nor the market desires, seeking to move people
out of cars rather than moving cars, and falsely declaring natural resource protection is the County’s
“number one priority,” making false promises about infrastructure investments while threatening to restrict
land owner property rights based on the County’s failure to invest, and removing special specific rural
area recreation uses without considering the impacts of other such uses. Mr. Williamson said while they
cannot support the plan, the Free Enterprise Forum is disappointed, but not disheartened, and if the plan
passes, they look forward to working with everyone to continue their fight for increased flexibility,
economic advancement, reduced regulation and increased respect for property rights. He said as the
Board and the staff moves forward towards the implementation chapter he wishe s he could be more
positive, but said that staff has worked diligently on this , and he appreciates all their efforts.
There being no further comments, the Chair closed the public hearing.
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 23)
Ms. Mallek stated that with Attachment B and the additions to the Dark Skies as suggested by
members of the Astronomical Society, she will support the adoption of the change as it was sent to Ms.
Echols.
Ms. Echols stated that she thinks it is a better description but does not change the content, and
said that it does a bit more talking about future activities to be considered.
Ms. Dittmar stated that years ago when it was enacted she had worked on the Dark Skies
Ordinance with Dr. Ianna, Emily Couric and a few other people, a really good combination of people that
considered the needs of safety and security, and how they canopied lights an d that sort of thing. She
also said there was something written in a negative way like it was already studied, and asked Ms. Echols
what her suggested wording is.
Ms. Echols presented the language as: “Development of guidelines or regulations are needed for
street lighting that protects the night skies as well as pedestrians; in addition, consideration should be
given in reviewing the current ordinance to determine if it is effective and if other measures would
increase its effectiveness.” Ms. Echols said instead of just saying it is important to change the ordinance,
this suggested that it needs to be reviewed.
Ms. Palmer and Ms. McKeel stated they are in favor of the changes.
Ms. Mallek said there is no question that there is a huge amount of escaped light, and she thinks
the new language is not as strong.
Ms. Dittmar said it presupposed that stronger measures are needed and should be studied, and it
is not saying not to do it.
Ms. Echols explained this is a clarification of the strategy by stating what is there and what else
needs to be done. She confirmed this will not slow anything down; it is just providing more guidance on
what to do in the future.
Ms. McKeel commented that she is in favor of the original language, and she does not want to do
anything that will weaken the language or extend the period of study.
Ms. Mallek moved that the Board support the language as modified. Ms. McKeel seconded the
motion.
Ms. Echols said she will go through the other suggested changes first: the SELC’s suggested
changes pertaining to out ozone depletion to greenhouse gas emissions as being a major determinant of
climate change; a request that the word “near” be changed to “at” with regards to increasing the
development activities by Fort Belvoir for Rivanna Station, being clear that this particular strategy and this
recommendation underneath about ongoing dialogue will ensure the national security interests are
protected. She explained this strategy will establish that it will be easier for Rivanna Station to expand on
its property rather than on another property nearby or around. Ms. Echols stated the last suggestion is
just changing the order of the words in Strategy 5B in the Development Areas, starting the sentence with
“On greenfield sites” instead of putting it in the middle. She commented that she does not see any
problems with these particular changes.
Mr. Cilimberg stated he would not want the Rivanna Station language to imply their activities c an
only be on their property, as there might be potential adjacent areas that can be considered in the future.
Ms. Echols suggested using the word “for” so that it is not site-specific.
Ms. Echols said those are the corrections of which she is aware, and said Ms. Palmer had sent
her a couple of things earlier that day – one being a clarification that the flood of the Sugar Hollow Dam
which caused a reflow was in 1995 and not in 1996, and one echoing the greenhouse gas emissions
language.
Ms. Palmer said her suggestion is to change the language to reflect that the impacts will be
“slowed” rather than “reversed.”
Ms. Mallek stated that she is more optimistic.
Ms. Palmer stated another change she had suggestion was related to the use of alternative septic
systems, which were enabled by recent changes to the Virginia State Code that make the option
available, which can increase the number of rural area properties developed residentially. She asked if
this means if there is a strong relationship between growth and the alternative septic systems, they
should go to the General Assembly on this issue.
Ms. Echols said she thought the Board was thinking more in the terms of growth, as it came from
their discussions on what the alternative septic systems might be doing to their growth management
policy, and whether they are having an impact that increases the amount of residential growth.
Ms. Palmer asked for confirmation that this is something they will track, rather than a scientific
study on whether these septic systems affect ground water or contamination. Ms. Echols confirmed that it
is.
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 24)
Ms. Mallek said she would be glad to go back before the General Assembly, but she ha s been
rebuffed for the previous four years on this issue.
Mr. Boyd stated he has a number of comments he wants to make on the Comp Plan and is
having trouble keeping up with all this wordsmithing, and would like to ask them to consider this at their
July meeting for final approval with all the modifications and changes made to it. Mr. Boyd stated he
really cannot support this particular version for a number of different reasons, including that it d oes not do
enough to promote economic development and job creation in this community. He stated the growth area
has not been expanded, and has actually contracted since the 1970s, with times being different then. He
stated the Board has taken land out of the growth areas, yet has not put anything back into it, and said he
does not think this goes far enough for the new Economic Development Office as there is not enough
available and appropriately placed light industrial property.
Mr. Sheffield asked if Mr. Boyd recalled the discussion about economic development to be
included more laterally across the Comp Plan, as it is such a silo and needs to be more lateral.
Mr. Boyd said that modern day interchanges are exactly where people want to locate businesses,
and their report from Faith McClintock had said there were 1,100 opportunities lost, most of which is
expanding businesses, and it is unknown as to whether some of these moved to other areas. He said
that affordable housing will be hurt because the 1970-designed boundaries have been reduced over the
years – lost due to Biscuit Run, ground water and storm water regulations, etc., which has reduced the
density of what can be located. Mr. Boyd said if they keep increasing the population in the community,
the development area will also need to grow somewhere along the line. He agrees with Mr. Williamson
on questioning the “top priority” in the Comp Plan being the pr eservation of our natural resources, and
asked if it takes priority over education, the safety of residents, fire services, police services, etc. He
stated that he objects to doing away with recreational activities in the rural area, and the provision tha t a
golf course or racket club c annot be built without going through a Comp Plan Amendment, which takes
time and is costly. Mr. Boyd stated that staff considers the plan to be a Bible, and it is way too micro over
macro – as it should be a smaller document that serves only as a guide of what can be done. Mr. Boyd
said he knows staff and the Board wants to put this project completed, but he believes some minor
changes need to be voted on, with the document coming back in July for finalization.
Ms. Mallek stated that during the various months while they were discussing the plan, there were
votes on the various changes, and they voted on each of them individually. Mr. Boyd responded that he
did not remember voting on them and he would not have voted for them.
Ms. Mallek said Mr. Boyd did vote against a lot of them, but that does not mean a majority did not
support them, and when the Monticello view shed was discussed, there was a vote on that and it was not
unanimous. She said on the housing question, there have been things to increase the opportunities for
increased density, such as accessory apartments, and added that she is happy to go forward to vote
individually on the changes Ms. Echols has presented.
Mr. Boyd noted there is a rule of economics on supply and demand and if they limit the supply
because of smaller areas and less density, and has to meet all the EPA, Army Corps of Engineers and
other requirements, then it will raise the price of the cost of housing.
Ms. Mallek noted the density certainly can be achieved, and the remediation has to be done
regardless of how many units per acre. She stated that from 2004-2008 there were 4,000 units to built in
Crozet, and only 1,800 have been built.
Mr. Sheffield said there are definitely times when there is some consensus on items, but they are
never voted on, and he agrees with Mr. Boyd there are some things that are more of a nod for consensus.
Ms. Dittmar stated that during the review process, if Elaine felt it was a substantive change she
asked the Board to make sure there was a majority in agreement; if it was less substantive, more
language-related, she looked for consensus with nods. Ms. Dittmar added that it is only a vote to
continue to keep it in the plan for the Board to finally have a public hearing.
Ms. Palmer stated that regarding the comments about expansion of the growth area, they really
need to look at traffic impacts and study those, and she does not know how they will include them in the
Comp Plan without studying each individual area.
Mr. Boyd said he thinks there should be examination of every interchange – not just 29/64, but
the Shadwell interchange, Crozet at 250, as those areas have been identified by every study and work
session with the public as places people would like to have their businesses. He said Ms. McClintic’s
report apparently found that there are 105 acres of industrial land, and it is unknown how many have the
proper infrastructure necessary for expanding businesses or new businesses. He added th at if they want
affordable housing, they need to create good jobs.
Ms. Dittmar stated the Planning Commission had done an extensive look at interchanges, as had
the Board, and they decided they wanted to wait for VDOT to complete their studies, and she agrees that
each interchange needs individual study. She stated that a tremendous amount of time has gone into
this, and there will never be a perfect Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Dittmar emphasized that some people
call it a “Bible,” and Mr. Boyd is afraid it will be a Bible, but it is a plan to serve as a guideline. She stated
this can always be looked at legislatively by the Board, and it w ill form a framework for staff for the next
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 25)
five years. She emphasized the Comp Plan, as proposed, is generally is pretty darn good, and she would
like to approve it.
Mr. Sheffield stated that regarding the economic development discussion, he recalls their
conversations about making that more lateral across different sections of the plan, and the idea was for
the new Economic Development Director to make economic development more of a theme throughout
the sections rather than its own section.
Mr. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning, responded that there was an interest in making sure
there was cross-referencing between the sections, and an emphasis on the importance of the interaction
of sections. He stated there was some feeling that economic development was not getting the same kind
or recognition in other sections of the plan, such as the importance between the rural areas and
importance of the development areas, and meeting growth management needs. Mr. Cilimberg stated
there is a strategy for specifically addressing business and industrial needs, and that is something for the
Economic Development Office to undertake as an analysis.
Mr. Sheffield said this is a task he will take up at a later date to articulate, and said there are
aspects of the community that cross all of these sections.
Ms. Mallek said that every chapter is related to every other chapter, as none of this can live
independently, whether it is the environmental needs for survival or the jobs people need to survive.
Mr. Boyd had one comment to follow up with something Ms. Dittmar stated, and that is if this is
just a guide and only a guide, why is it such an elaborate process to get it changed. He stated if
someone wants to do something that is not in this Comp Plan, they have to go through a rather extensive,
lengthy and expensive process. He said this is what bothers him about the Comp Plan, because that
process indicates it is not just a guide, it is a rule, an ordinance, or a “Bible.”
Ms. Mallek said that people have the option to proceed with Comp Plan changes simultaneously
with their applications.
Ms. Dittmar asked what the next steps would be. Mr. Davis stated if they are adopting the
resolution for the Comp Plan, and if there are changes, then they need to be clear what those will be. He
suggested the Board have a vote on adding that language to the draft plan, and then adopting the
resolution for the plan as amended.
Mr. Boyd asked why they cannot just make the final changes and bring it back in July.
Ms. McKeel said there are not very many changes, and they are very clear.
Ms. Palmer moved to approve the additions and changes to the language to the draft plan. Ms.
McKeel seconded the motion.
Mr. Davis asked for Ms. Echols to review the changes.
Ms. Echols stated the amendments included: wording changes in the reference document
related to principal arterials, which is just a descriptive change; change to the wording in the Dark Skies
section to talk about development of guidelines or regulations , looking at research from other places to try
to help improve the Dark Skies ordinance; two items in Objective 8 related to changing the language
related to ozone depletion to greenhouse gases; and the language pertaining to slowing or stabilizing
rather than ultimately reversing global warming; a change in Chapter 6 for Economic Development related
to strategy 3F regarding ongoing dialogue with officials at Rivanna Station and with Fort Belvoir Army
Base, to ensure that national security interests are pro tected and help increase the ease with which new
development occurs for Rivanna Station; a change in the order of wording on strategy 5B to start that one
out with “On greenfield sites” rather than the phrase “greenfield sites” in the middle of it; and a c hange on
page 428 about the correct date of the flood of Sugar Hollow Dam as being 1995 not 1996.
Mr. Boyd stated he had gone through this process with the Places 29 Master Plan and has paid
for that vote all along, finally giving up after six years. He said he will not make that mistake again, and
thus will not vote in favor of this.
Mr. Davis clarified that this particular vote is just to approve the language changes.
Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Sheffield, Ms. Dittmar, Ms. Mallek, Ms. McKeel and Ms. Palmer.
NAYS: Mr. Boyd.
Mr. Davis stated the next motion is to adopt the resolution approving the June 10, 2015 draft of
the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan as expressly amended by the Board on this date, and noted
there is a clause in the resolution that allows staff to correct any non-substantive – grammatical, spelling,
punctuation, formatting and organizational mistakes – that will need to be completed prior to the printing
of the plan.
Ms. Mallek moved, seconded by Ms. Palmer, to adopt the resolution as stated approving the
Comp Plan. Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 26)
AYES: Ms. Dittmar, Ms. Mallek, Ms. McKeel and Ms. Palmer.
NAYS: Mr. Sheffield and Mr. Boyd.
(Note: The resolution as adopted is set out in full below.)
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE CPA 2013-00001
AND TO ADOPT AN AMENDED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, Virginia Code § 15.2-2230 requires that the Albemarle County Planning Commission
periodically review the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan (the “Comprehensive Plan”) to determine
whether it is advisable to amend the plan; and
WHEREAS, Virginia Code § 15.2-2229 authorizes the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to
amend the Comprehensive Plan after having received the recommendation of the Albemarle County
Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan amendment identified as CPA 2013-00001 proposes to
amend the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety by: (1) restating the County’s values and vision which guide
the Comprehensive Plan, and its policies, goals, objectives, and strategies for growth management,
natural resources, historic, cultural, and scenic resources, economic development, the Rural Area, the
Development Areas, housing, transportation, parks and recreation, greenways, blueways, and green
systems, and community facilities and services; (2) correcting the Village of Rivanna land use map; (3)
removing two streets shown on the Pantops Master Plan; (4) adding the Mosby Mountain and Whittington
areas to the Development Areas within Neighborhood 5, which are to be designated as Neighborhood
Density Residential and Parks and Green Systems; and (5) creating a master plan for the Southern and
Western Neighborhoods and changing a variety of plan designations in that area; and
WHEREAS, the foregoing amendments proposed by CPA 2013-00001 are contained in the June
10, 2015 draft of the “Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan 2015”; and
WHEREAS, on May 19, 2015, after a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission
recommended approval of CPA 2013-00001; and
WHEREAS, on June 10, 2015, the Board of Supervisors held a duly noticed public hearing on
CPA 2013-00001; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has carefully considered the discussion and
recommendations of the Planning Commission, the studies, analysis, and other information provided by
County staff, and the information and comments provided by the public, during approximately 16
community meetings, 2 public roundtables, 43 work sessions held by the Planning Commission (including
9 held jointly with the City of Charlottesville Planning Commission), 17 work sessions held by the Board,
and the public hearings held by the Planning Commission and the Board; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors concludes that adoption of CPA 2013-00001 will guide and
accomplish a coordinated, adjusted, and harmonious development of Albemarle County which will, in
accordance with present and probable future needs and resources, best prom ote the health, safety,
morals, order, convenience, prosperity and general welfare of the inhabitants of the County, including the
elderly and persons with disabilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, upon consideration of the foregoing, and for the
purposes articulated in Virginia Code § 15.2-2223(A), the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby
approves CPA 2013-00001 and adopts the June 10, 2015 draft of the “Albemarle County Comprehensive
Plan 2015” as the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Board of Supervisors authorizes County staff to correct
any grammatical, spelling, punctuation, formatting, and organizational mistakes in the June 10, 2015 draft
of the “Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan 2015” that do not change the substance of the text
approved by the Board when the final version of the adopted Comprehensive Plan is being prepared for
posting on the County’s website and printing.
_______________
Recess. At 8:43 p.m., the Board recessed and then reconvened at 8:54 p.m.
________________
Agenda Item No. 16. Resolution of Intent, re: Comprehensive Plan Boundary Adjustment.
The executive summary forwarded to the Board states that at the June 3 Board of Supervisors
meeting, the Board discussed its prior decision to consider the possibility of expanding the County’s
designated growth area to include an 82-acre property near the interchange of Interstate 64 and U. S. 29
as was included in the legal advertisement for the June 10 public hearing on the comprehensive plan.
This consideration has been based on the Board’s recognition of the important strategic advantages of
this particular location in the County and their concern regarding the availability of sufficient designated
and zoned land to accommodate target industry enterp rises.
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 27)
Because consideration of an expansion to include this property was included in the legal
advertisement, the Board will take comment on that option during its June 10 public hearing. However,
Board members expressed interest in the possibility of separating the assessment of a potential
expansion area south of the interchange area from the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan to allow for a
more thorough review process. The Board directed staff to come back with a Resolution of Intent for
consideration that would establish the intent and parameters of a review process. A draft Resolution of
Intent is attached for the Board’s consideration and further direction.
No budget impact from this Resolution of Intent is anticipated.
Staff recommends that the Board provide modifications to the draft resolution as desired and
approve the Resolution of Intent for immediate action.
_____
Mr. Foley said that at their June 3 meeting, the Board had asked staff to develop a resolution of
intent to consider development area boundary adjustment, to make additional land available for industrial
uses and land preservation. He said this request was made as an alternative to making any adjustment
to the boundary as part of the five-year update to the Comprehensive Plan, which was just approved. In
response to that request, he said, there is a resolution of intent provided before them. Mr. Foley said he
is providing a brief overview of the proposal and the reasons it is being considered, and Mr. Cilimberg will
talk specifically about the issues and a proposed process for proceeding. Mr. Foley stated the issue is
presented because of the County’s stated goals of expanding job opportunities and capital investment,
and the primary outcomes hoped to be achieved with this goal are: creating job opportunities for local
residents and generating additional revenues to pay for critically needed services, as discussed
extensively over the last couple of years. He stated that in pursuing these objectives, there is also a clear
goal to balance economic development and the protection of the environment, and that desire for balance
requires a targeted strategy for the right kinds of companies in the right locations.
Mr. Foley said that unfortunately staff does not believe there is adequate land available to meet
the need of target industries – both existing companies that are expanding their operations and new
companies that will also provide additional jobs and capital investment. He stated it is well documented
that there is a shortage of land to meet these needs, and the County currently has only 339 acres or 1.4%
of the development area designated and zoned light industrial. He said that of the 339 acres, 234 are in
the University of Virginia Research Park, which has specific conditions that limit its suitability for many
target industries. He said this leaves only 105 acres, or less than 1/2% of the development area,
considered flexible enough to meet the needs of the majority of our target industries – and of those 105
acres, the vast majority are sites of three acres or less and offer very little flexibility for target industries.
He said there are also an additional 80 acres designated and zoned highway commercial, which has the
potential to address some of these needs of target industries, this land has significant restrictions to meet
the needs of the majority of potential industries. As evidence of this shortage, he said, over the last five
years and primarily over the last two years, the County has been unable to meet the needs of 19 existing
businesses looking to expand in the County for a total of 785 new and existing jobs, and four new target
industries looking to locate in the County for a potential of 375 additional jobs beyond those 785. Mr.
Foley stated the specific area in the County described in the resolution of intent is very well suited for
consideration light industrial designation based on a number of important strategic characteristics that are
very critical to identified target industries: access to major transportation networks, access to multi-
directional transportation corridors, proximity or immediate access to utilities, proximity to Downtown
Charlottesville and University of Virginia, which is attractive to potential industry, and connectivity with the
new County Park and other natural systems in the area. He said that staff believes the reality of the
shortage of available land, combined with the clear strategic characteristics of this particular area of the
interchange, justifies the consideration of whether a boundary adjustment at this location will be in the
best interest for the County. While it is believed this consideration is the right approach, he said, it is
brought forward with some urgency due to the Board’s interest in being responsiv e to a potential business
interest. Mr. Foley emphasized that because this business is only the most recent in a number of
inquiries, as mentioned earlier, that have been a struggle to accommodate, this is a critical conversation
for the Board regardless of whether or not there is a prospect or not at this time. He said that Mr.
Cilimberg will now discuss the usual practice followed with a Comp Plan Amendment, but said that staff is
proposing a somewhat compressed timeline to respond to the needs discussed.
Mr. Cilimberg stated that obviously there is an interest in looking at this potential boundary
adjustment based upon the needs Mr. Foley has described, but stated there is also the opportunity to
determine how land use in that area can complement a very large land holding the County has for a
future park known as the Hedgerow Property, of which the County has ownership, which is adjacent to
the larger Ragged Mountain property. He said this provides a great opportunity for past recreation and
utilizing resources that exist in the area, and some of what will be looked at in this Comprehensive Plan
change also provides resource protection opportunities and the opportunities for complementing and
potentially providing more park land adjacent to the Hedgerow property. Mr. Cilimberg stated the actual
area, included what was in the Comprehensive Plan shown in the plan for regional mixed use but
currently zoned highway commercial and residential. He said the additional property is identified by the
Hedgerow Property which can be used as part of the analysis that will include not only looking at those
areas that may be buildable in that expansion, but also those areas that will serve resource protection
purposes and could be potentially connected with the park. He stated that any look made has to take into
consideration suitability for building and resource protection opportunities, but also how these areas can
be served by the transportation system. He noted under state law, any changes made by the
Comprehensive Plan must be reviewed and signed off on by VDOT, so the y are going to be a primary
viewing entity in any consideration. Mr. Cilimberg said they will also want to consider other infrastructure
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 28)
considerations such as public utilities and the availability of those and what it will mean to the area to
have the utilities provided. He said there is no boundary proposed, as that came out of the process, and
what staff proposes is to have a community meeting late in June or early July, a Planning Commission
work session July 21, and a Planning Commission Public Hearing August 18. Mr. Cilimberg stated this is
accelerated over what is normally done in the process, but is tailored so the Board can consider it in
September. He said this timeline is reflected in the resolution of intent before them, and it provides all the
particulars on how they will go forward in taking this boundary adjustment through the process.
Ms. Mallek asked if the designation in the Comp Plan as shown represents “ownership colors.”
Mr. Cilimberg stated the Comp Plan designation is “regional mixed use.”
Ms. Mallek said this is a real concern for her. Mr. Cilimberg said that regional mixed use is the
Comp Plan designation, and what is zoned includes highway commercial and residential area, and the
parcel outside of the development area that the Board had advertised for consideration as a possible
addition, which is the one area outside of the development area that has jurisdictional area designation.
Ms. McKeel asked Mr. Cilimberg to explain for the public what jurisdictional area designation
means. Mr. Cilimberg stated that jurisdictional area designation, in this case, is for the opportunity to be
provided with public water and sewer, and that is a process the County has long had for approving, if you
will, the provision of those services by the authority.
Ms. Palmer asked if those services are not there now.
Mr. Cilimberg confirmed there is no water or sewer services to those properties currently, and that
will be part of what they gather the information on in terms of what will be provided, and what it will take to
warrant those services.
Ms. Lee Catlin, Assistant County Executive, stated that electric and telecommunication utilities
are immediately adjacent to the site, but some of the other utilities will have to be brought to the site. She
said part of the review process will flesh out exactly what that will look like.
Ms. Palmer noted the site not in the development area on the map is R-1 zoning and is in the
jurisdictional area, and asked if the property noted in the different color is owned by the same entity –
Sweet Spot, LLC.
Mr. Cilimberg confirmed that it is owned by the same entity, and confirmed the location stated in
the resolution as the area down to the third crossover on 29 South, which helped them analyze how
transportation can be served. He emphasized this does not mean that the boundary will be there, but it
provided them an area for study.
Ms. Palmer stated that a huge concern is the traffic for that area, and they will have to go through
HB2 – so any intersection improvements will be subject a fairly large process.
Mr. Cilimberg noted the intersection is in the long-range transportation plan.
Ms. Mallek stated that it is number one in the plan.
Ms. Palmer commented that things have been “number one” for a long time in the past.
Mr. Cilimberg said the County will rely on VDOT for the necessary information, for their analysis,
and ultimately their sign-off because under Virginia law they will have to review the amendment – and it
will certainly necessitate their review.
Ms. Palmer stated she wants to make sure that people understand the level of traffic review that
will be required.
Mr. Cilimberg stated this is different than the traffic studies required under rezonings, and the
County will need to get with VDOT early on to render their opinion on the amendment.
Ms. Palmer said her assumption is that this will be a lesser traffic study for a Comp Plan
amendment than there will be for a rezoning.
Ms. Mallek responded there will likely not be a transportation study initially, because there are no
details on which a study can be based, and once they get the details, a study can ensue.
Mr. Cilimberg emphasized this will be driven by what VDOT feels it needs to have in terms of data
and information to do, under Virginia code, what they will have to do to accept any kind of amendment.
Ms. Palmer asked if they did this in September, when would a rezoning be considered by the
Board. Mr. Cilimberg responded that essentially it will be up the Board as to how quickly that moves.
Ms. Mallek said that can be 8 months to six years, with developments like Old Trail moving
quickly because the developer did what needed to be done.
Mr. Cilimberg stated the first decision the Board will have, once it makes any change, is whether
the change warrants a rezoning made by the Board or if they expect the applicant to make that rezoning
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 29)
request. He said it makes a big difference in terms of the time it will take following that decision. A few
years earlier, the Board of Supervisors, in the context of economic vitality issues, did identify Board-
initiated rezoning as one potential way that properties are prepared for potential development.
Ms. Dittmar stated the Board is not there yet, and they want to follow a good and careful process
that is transparent, to see if they really want an amendment to the Comp Plan.
Ms. Palmer stated that many people do not know the difference between a rezoning and a Comp
Plan change, and what the process is for these things.
Ms. Catlin said this is the reason for the public meeting.
Ms. Dittmar said that people have asked her as to whether they are “going away from their 5%,”
and this is not about that – it is a boundary adjustment.
Ms. Mallek stated this does not even get close to the 800 acres that were lost with Biscuit Run.
The Chair invited public comment.
Mr. Morgan Butler said he wants to ask for additional information, as Mr. Foley’s presentation was
given rather quickly, especially information about “existing businesses,” and he want s to know whether
they have left the County entirely, whether they went to a different spot in the development area, or
whether they found a way to expand on the property which they were located. He asked about the four
target industries that staff said the County “did not land,” and said it would be helpful to get a better
understanding of those examples.
Mr. Foley stated they will do what they can, but there is proprietary information they will not be
able to share.
Mr. Boyd asked why Mr. Butler needs to know this and what purpose he plays in this process.
Mr. Butler answered these examples are being used to demonstrate there is a shortage of land in the
development areas, and it is helpful to know that, of the businesses that faced location challenges due to
terrain or other factors, whether they were able to resolve their problems or not at all.
Mr. Boyd stated this is a satisfactory answer.
Mr. Foley stated that it is important to say they are just starting an economic development
program, and when they only had 105 acres or 1/2% – with relatively little flexibility on those sites – it was
not a stretch to say that this did not meet the needs of the County’s targeted industries.
Ms. Mallek noted the consideration in the Comp Plan currently is that this property is designated
as mixed use, which can be Hollymead Town Center, 5th Street Station, and residential packs in there –
so this is a real difference from farmland.
Mr. Cilimberg stated that actually what is currently in the plan is mixed use, but what will be
looked at with the boundary adjustment is geared to industrial and employment-generating kinds of use.
Ms. Palmer responded that her information indicates the property owner does not want to change
that designation
Mr. Jeff Werner stated if this was any other intersection, he would be enthused by what is being
talked about. He stated he has heard this is going to be a brewery, with reasons why they have been
locating in Asheville and not here, and the state practically guiding breweries here. He said the comment
about losing 800 acres at Biscuit Run does not mean there is light industrial land. Mr. Werner expressed
concern about some of the numbers the Board is using, and said he has taken current tax map data,
stripped out everything out owned by the County, University of Virginia, and the City, and came up with
245 acres of currently zoned Light Industrial or Heavy Industrial land. He said the County stated they
have only 105 acres, but if his calculations are correct and there are 245 acres zoned LI, there are other
reasons why these industries are not located here.
Ms. Dittmar emphasized their task is to decide if they like a process, not to get all the way to the
public hearing presuming, we get to the public hearing.
Mr. Foley stated they want to clarify the misunderstanding because Mr. Werner’s numbers do not
match the numbers he stated so they will work to do that. There is only 105 and that was part of 339.
Ms. Dittmar said the number was achieved by subtracting out UVA’s land.
Mr. Neil Williamson stated that people have asked him why Albemarle has lost business
opportunities when it is such a wonderful place and has such a great quality of life. He stated one of the
reasons is that the Comp Plan process is lengthy, and at different times people are being told different
things about pursing the process. He stated that whether Mr. Werner’s numbers are right or Mr. Foley’s
numbers are right, there are opportunities that are leaving for a variety of reasons – and the most
important reasons, in his mind, are location and access. Mr. Williamson said he is not prepared to
support or deny it, but they at least need to support a resolution with the intent to be able to consider it.
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 30)
Ms. Dittmar asked for Mr. Foley and staff to work with Mr. Werner together, and said the beautiful
thing about the difference of opinion is that there is a discrepancy in facts involved that they can resolve.
Mr. Sheffield moved to adopt the resolution of intent as presented. Mr. Boyd seconded the
motion.
Ms. Palmer stated that she will vote for this, but is very concerned about the traffic issues, and
this will at least move it forward to the Planning Commission.
Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Sheffield, Mr. Boyd, Ms. Dittmar, Ms. Mallek, Ms. McKeel and Ms. Palmer.
NAYS: None.
(Note: The resolution as adopted is set out in full below.)
RESOLUTION OF INTENT
WHEREAS, the Target Industry Study, endorsed by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
on May 2, 2012, identifies Bioscience and Medical Devices, Business and Financial Services, Information
Technology and Defense Security, and Agribusiness, Food Processing and Related Technology as the
four industry groups that have the strongest potential in Albemarle County to succeed and offer the best
prospects for jobs that offer a higher quality of life by providing security, higher wages, training, and
flexibility (the “Target Industries”); and
WHEREAS, a preliminary survey by County staff has found that there presently may be
inadequate land in Albemarle County with access to major transportation facilities, access to multi -
directional transportation corridors, proximit y or immediate access to public utilities, and proximity to
downtown Charlottesville and the University of Virginia that is both planned and zoned to accommodate
the Target Industries; and
WHEREAS, the lands generally southwest of the existing Development Area boundary south and
east of the future County park between Interstate 64 and US Route 29 South, extending to the
approximate location of the third crossover on Route 29 South that is south of the Interstate 64
interchange, may possess the foregoing qualities of access and proximity (the “Lands”); and
WHEREAS, it is desired to study the Lands for the purpose of considering whether to amend the
Comprehensive Plan by expanding the Development Areas and designating the Lands to appropriate
land use designations that would accommodate Target Industries and to identify preserved land that may
complement the future County park in the vicinity (the “Study”).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT for purposes of public necessity, convenience,
general welfare, and good land use planning practices, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
hereby adopts a resolution to consider amending the land use designation of the Lands as described
herein; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Study shall be conducted by County staff and shall
include, but not be limited to: (1) determining the minimum requirements for suitable land to
accommodate one or more Target Industries; (2) assessing the physical characteristics of the Lands and
identifying developable land and land that should be preserved; (3) determining the adequacy of the
existing transportation system, including points of access, and utility infrastructure to accommodate
developing the developable land for Target Industries; and (4) identifying necessary transpor tation and
utility infrastructure improvements; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Study shall include a recommendation as to whether the
Development Areas should be expanded to include the Lands and, if it should be expanded,
recommendations for: (1) the boundaries of the expansion area; (2) the appropriate land use designations
to allow Target Industries; (3) the location and size of resource preservation areas, including areas
adjacent to the future County park; and (4) necessary transportation and uti lity infrastructure
improvements; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT County staff shall conduct at least one community meeting
as part of the Study and the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan being considered therein before the
Planning Commission conducts its public hearing on the matter; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission shall forward its recommendation
on the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan being considered herein to the Board of Supervisors no
later than September 1, 2015.
_______________
Agenda Item. No. 17. From the Board: Committee Reports and Matters Not Listed on the
Agenda.
Ms. Mallek said there is a potential planning grant from the Department of Housing and
Community Development being requested by the community of Crozet to move forward with
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 31)
implementation of the Crozet Master Plan. She said that several years ago in the strategic plan, the
Board had really encouraged citizen ownership of solutions and participation in processes, and this is a
great example of how this can work.
Mr. Foley said staff does not have any additional points, but one of the issues they will have is the
staffing and resourcing issues that will have to be worked out, and he is not sure what the community will
provide.
Ms. Mallek stated this is an opportunity, and if there is an offer there will be more detail needed,
and the Board will have the opportunity to accept the grant or not.
Mr. Boyd asked if this sets a precedent, and if communities are going to expect participation from
staff for things like this in the future, such as master plans for other areas, and said that he is not opposed
to community involvement but it is to be more self-reliance.
Ms. Mallek stated everything they have proposed from this planning grant was from the Crozet
Master Plan from both 2004 and 2010, and citizens are basically trying to further an adopted County
project. Ms. Mallek said she cannot predict how this may turn out, but it is worth filling out an application
and if it is awarded, the Board can have a full discussion about the implications. She said there are many
kinds of Community Development Block Grants available now that were not in existence a few years ago,
as it used to be a very narrow category. Ms. Mallek added the County’s Grant Coordinator, as well as Mr.
Davis, have reviewed this.
Mr. Foley said this was kind of a “rush job,” and if these types of things eme rge from other
communities, they will need to establish a process, and if the grant is awarded the County will have to
review the processes and plans in the context of the overall work plan.
Ms. Palmer asked about the order of things here. Mr. Foley stated if the grant is awarded, the
Board will have to accept it formally, and staff will need to do a full assessment of the benefits and
impacts.
Mr. Boyd pointed out that legal staff and grant staff have already been involved with this, yet the
Board has never seen an executive summary, and personnel is an expense, so it scares him to think they
will get a lot of individual grants.
Mr. Foley acknowledged there are issues around this, and the barrier here is more the timing as
opposed to hours involved.
Ms. Dittmar said the other reason for having a process is so that other groups know what to
expect.
Mr. Foley said if the Board is comfortable with proceeding, the big discussion will be what to do
when this is awarded.
Ms. Mallek asked if it is acceptable to mail the application.
Ms. McKeel said she looks forward to a broader discussion of how grants like this might help
support aging infrastructure.
_____
Ms. Dittmar handed out two assessment tools and asked Supervisors for suggestions on pote ntial
questions, and said they should share their input with Ms. Louise Wyatt.
Ms. McKeel said she had asked the TJPDC Board if they had ever done a self-evaluation, and
they were somewhat dumbfounded, but said that she feels it is something the Board of Supervisors
should do.
Mr. Foley stated he has been working with Matt Haas, who is developing a good tool for the
School Board, similar to a Survey Monkey tool.
Ms. Dittmar asked staff to look into the “Ban the Box” issue that was mention ed in earlier
comments made by Nancy Carpenter.
_______________
Agenda Item. No. 18. From the County Executive: Report on Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Mr. Foley provided an update on the comprehensive community wide effort involving the County,
City and UVA concerning pre-K, with an estimated 250 needed slots in the City and County. He said the
process is underway and they have drafted an approach which will come to the Board in August as a draft
for their review.
Ms. Mallek thanked staff for their work to help get the Crozet grant to where it is.
_______________
June 10, 2015 (Afternoon-Adjourned and Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 32)
Agenda Item. No. 19. Adjourn.
With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:42 p.m.
________________________________________
Chairman
Approved by Board
Date: 11/04/2015
Initials: EWJ