County Planning Commission work session hears objections from wine growers

By Tarpley Ashworth
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Thursday, November 12, 2009

The Albemarle County Planning Commission held an informal work session on Tuesday, November 10th to discuss how best to bring local zoning regulations in line with an updated state law concerning farm wineries. The Virginia General Assembly added language in 2009 to an existing farm winery law which mandated that localities take into account the potential economic effects on the wineries when considering regulation. The state also required that farm wineries be permitted to engage in activities that are “usual” and “customary” for wineries, such as tastings and hosting wedding receptions. Ever since this provision was revised, County staff has been working on changing relevant regulations to reflect these requirements.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: 20091111-APA-Farm-Wineries

Planning Commissioners, farmers and winery owners listen as the proposed ordinance is discussed

Wayne Cilimberg, the County’s Director of Planning, proposed an amendment to Albemarle’s zoning rules which he said would clear up confusion while also following state law. His proposal defines that “customary” winery activities include fruit harvesting, the sale and shipment of wine, hosting private gatherings and festivals, and tastings and tours among other activities. But the draft regulation requires that all of these activities take place during normal business hours, which is defined by the County as being between 9:00 am and 6:00 pm, and be limited to no more than 50 people.

The draft regulation would allow a farm winery to obtain a one-time zoning ordinance which allows them to operate outside normal business hours and at a maximum capacity of 200 persons. If wineries wish to host events having more than 200 people, the draft ordinance would require them to obtain a special use permit. The proposed rule change also expressly prohibits wineries from opening restaurants on their property.

Amelia McCulley, the County’s Zoning Administrator, told winery representatives that the application for a “zoning clearance” was fairly simple and would need to be completed only once by the winery. The application includes questions about the proposed use, frequency and duration of use, parking, sanitation, and temporary structures. The application fee is currently $35.

Cilimberg said that the application was necessary since it concerned events which “may make substantial impact” to the surrounding community, including neighbors and drivers. He also noted that these regulations were thorough because they applied to rural areas within the county, which are more protected than development areas.

Commissioner Calvin Morris (Rivanna), who chaired the work session, questioned the exclusion of restaurants on farm winery property.

“It seems that we’re almost providing restaurant facilities, but not permitting them,” said Morris, referring to the fact that catering, picnics, and appetizers are permitted in the draft.

Cilimberg responded that the restaurant prohibition was based on a distinction between activities which are accessories to wineries, and those which aren’t. He said more casual food like appetizers were considered an accessory, but that a separate commercial operation, such as a restaurant, was not.

Matt Conrad of the Virginia Wine Council, who spoke during the work session, called the draft legislation a “paradox” since the state had just issued, in his words, a “burden-shifting paradigm” which placed the burden on the County to prove that such regulation was necessary. Conrad took issue specifically with restricting farm wineries’ hours of operations, particularly since there was no mention of such restriction in state legislation.

“We know that the folks in Albemarle County are very reasonable. But there may come a time where we can’t always be certain who will be at the helm in the county,” said Conrad. “So we want assurances in this ordinance that the things that the General Assembly has allowed us to do will be permitted without obstruction.”

David King of King Family Vineyards told the group about his personal experiences of trying to get a special use permit from the County for his vineyard in 2007. He said the conditions of the permit would have “put us out of business” and so he helped pursue the new legislation.

Charlotte Shelton of Albemarle CiderWorks echoed previous concerns about the restricted operating hours. She said it was extremely hard to accurately predict the number of visitors for a certain event and that normal business hours should, at the very least, be defined by season since this influences turnout.

Neil Williamson of the Free Enterprise Forum called for the regulations to be tabled indefinitely because they would disrupt farm wineries’ customer traffic and profit.

“I think this should be a dead document,” said Williamson. “I would hate to see the County spend what limited funds it has to pursue a chapter that is only going to be mired in litigation in the future.”

Morgan Butler, an attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, was the only public speaker to defend the proposed regulations.

“The tricky balance is making sure the uses allowed are supplemental to the winery,” said Butler. “[Some] could have a substantial impact of public welfare.”

Greg Kamptner, the Deputy County Attorney, said that the county has struggled with determining what uses qualify as “usual” and “customary” since the state did not define these terms in the farm winery legislation. He also said that the County determined the normal hours of operation by surveying all the farm wineries in the county for their specific hours. He reported that the 9 am to 6 pm timeframe was actually more broad than any winery’s actual hours of operation.

Cilimberg clarified that the 50 person limit only applied to wineries’ supplemental activities and not to their regular business. He also said that the County was open to rethinking the limit on visitors and hours of operation and stated that the final decision about the details would be made by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors.

Morris ended the meeting by acknowledging that the input was “very informative” in helping the Commission formulate the regulations. Cilimberg said that planners would take the discussion into consideration as they finalize the proposal for future review by the Planning Commission.

Are big changes ahead in budgeting, taxes, and economic development?

This article is an extended version of what appears in today's Daily Progress.

By Brian Wheeler
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Sunday, November 8, 2009

The day after his fellow Republicans swept the competitive races for the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, Ken Boyd (Rivanna) was not gloating.  In a board meeting that lasted all day on Wednesday, Boyd patiently listened to reports of dire economic conditions and jabs by his colleagues at the promises made by victorious Republican candidates Duane Snow (Samuel Miller) and Rodney Thomas (Rio).

Thomas defeated one-term incumbent Democrat David Slutzky (Rio) and Snow won the open seat race in the Samuel Miller district over Democrat Madison Cummings and Independent John Lowry.  Both winners are local businessmen born and raised in Charlottesville-Albemarle. 

The election results will bring a new mix of experience, politics and philosophy to the board starting in January. That could mean big changes in the board's approach to budgeting, tax rates, economic development and other key issues.

“I don’t know how much it will change,” said Boyd in an interview after a grim work session on the County’s five-year financial plan.  “When you run one way, then get elected, you are faced with certain realities once you are on the board. Running for election is different from actually legislating.”

“Even people with experience in the community get faced with having to make fiscal decisions, and it can be different on the inside than from the outside looking in,” said Boyd.

Jack Marshall, president of Advocates for a Sustainable Albemarle Population (ASAP), said in an interview that he thought the election would bring significant changes.

“In the last 20 years, there has been a natural tension on the board, between those that subscribe to a traditional strategy—constant growth is good; we always need to attract new businesses—and a newer strategy, that a community should seek a sustainable level of economic development that over the long haul doesn’t disrupt our environment and quality of life,” said Marshall.  “Last week’s election pretty clearly shifted the balance toward the more pro-growth approach.”

A DIFFERENT APPROACH TO BUDGETING

Thomas and Snow both indicated in their campaigns that zero-based budgeting process would be part of their approach to cutting government expenses and avoiding tax increases.

In an interview after the election, both Thomas and Snow said the budget and economic development remained at the top of their priority lists.

“My priority is the budget.  We now have a $5.7 million deficit [in this fiscal year],” said Thomas.  “We have to start cutting expenses because we don’t have any money and it is not getting any better.”

Boyd, Snow and Thomas all say they believe zero-based budgeting could improve the County’s financial position.

“Instead of staff coming back with budget recommendations [to the board], department heads would build their budgets from the bottom up,” explained Boyd.  “One advantage of zero-based budgeting is that instead of staff making decisions about what is essential, the board is forced to do that.”

“When requests for money are made, we need to have [staff] justify that expense,” said Snow in an interview.  “You have to be prepared to say why you need it and what will happen if you don’t get it.”

Jeff Werner, a land use field officer for the Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC), said in an interview that zero-based budgeting was going to force some tough choices at the board level.

“In the past it has been easy for some of the supervisors to say they support various initiatives, but that they also want to cut taxes,” said Werner. “It is going to require them to take very specific positions on the things they want to cut and I think that will be very interesting.”

CUTTING EXPENSES VS. RAISING TAXES

The board of supervisors that meets in January will start with four votes opposed to any increase of Albemarle’s current 74.2-cent real estate property tax rate.  The three Republicans and Democrat Lindsay Dorrier all say they are currently opposed to a staff proposal to increase the rate by 3 cents and maintain that rate for the next five years. 

“I don’t want to increase the tax rate at all,” said Thomas. “I would rather look at where we can save some money and programs that we can cut out of the budget.  Maybe in the police department, but I don’t have all the facts yet.”

“I would like to keep the tax rate the same as it is now,” said Boyd.  “Everybody I know, in business and personally, is having to cut back.  Until we reach the point where we are having to sacrifice critical services, I wouldn’t be willing to raise that rate.”

The majority of today’s board, however, has given County Executive Bob Tucker direction to pencil in the higher tax rate to prepare a draft five year financial plan.  At the meeting Wednesday, staff reiterated that a 77.2-cent rate would mean the average homeowner would pay the same real-estate taxes as this year because of declining property values. The Board is expected to approve a five year financial plan in December.  In April, the new board of Supervisors will set a final tax rate for calendar year 2010.

In the work session Wednesday, the board received new financial projections and learned that the current fiscal year revenues were now $5.7 million below what was budgeted.  Second, they were warned that a 74.2-cent tax rate would not even cover the costs to service existing debt in the next capital budget.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

With this election, the next board of supervisors can be expected to bring economic development center stage as one tool they will propose to use to improve the county’s fiscal health.  In their campaigns, both Thomas and Snow emphasized the need to attract new businesses to the community with more specific economic development plans.

“The entire culture needs to be changed to be more business friendly.  We are open for business,” said Thomas.  “We need to attract more businesses to Albemarle County.. and I am not speaking of commercial or retail businesses, I am primarily talking about businesses that can hire significant numbers of people.”

Thomas said he was interested in creating new locations for light industrial businesses and that he was open to discussing the Yancey Mills Business Park proposal in Crozet’s rural area.

The PEC's Jeff Werner said he expected the next board would be “pre-disposed to grant developers what they want.”

“How much more would they have to approve to be business friendly?” asked Werner. “Look at the pipeline of residential and commercial development that has been approved but not built.  To say we need a growth area expansion for new business is absurd.”

Snow said he wanted to focus on the county’s economic development plans, with a focus on development within the designated growth areas. 

“We should come up with a system where we facilitate and help [business] rather than drag our feet.  There is a problem,” said Snow.  “It will be a team effort, I am not coming in with both guns blazing.  It will take a mentality of all of us working together.”

ASAP’s Jack Marshall said he hoped the new board would plan carefully for future of the entire community.  He also indicated his preference was for the County to support existing local businesses rather than attract new ones.

“I know that the new supervisors are concerned about the long term good of the whole community and trust they will carefully weigh the impact of their decisions on future generations,” said Marshall.  “I would urge that we do everything we can to support and strengthen local businesses.  Over the long haul, it is not healthy to make great efforts to bring in new businesses.  Any economic development efforts should go into sustaining and strengthening what we already have here.”

Crozet streetscape grant prompts questions about County’s capital projects budget

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Friday, November 6, 2009

The streetscape improvements are called for in the Crozet Master Plan

In the face of significant revenue shortfalls, Albemarle County Supervisor Ken Boyd (Rivanna) said Wednesday that at least some projects in the County’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) should be scrutinized to see if public investment is still warranted. Earlier this year, the County removed $100 million  from the program through FY2014 in order to balance the five-year financial plan. This week, supervisors were told to expect another $100 million in project cuts and to prepare for a heavily revised capital budget focusing only on maintenance and debt service.

The topic came up during a public hearing on an application for a $250,000 grant from the federal government to help pay for streetscape improvements in downtown Crozet. The County has previously received $300,000 in transportation enhancement money (TEA-21) for previous phases of the project. The money will pay for sidewalks, drainage improvements, decorative lights and benches.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20091104-BOS-Crozet

The total cost of the project is around $2.5 million, according to Albemarle County’s Chief Planner, David Benish. If awarded the grant, the County will pay for around 80 percent of the project with taxpayer dollars. Benish said the Crozet streetscape is one of the higher priority recommendations called for in the Crozet Master Plan.

Boyd expressed concern at the amount of money that the County has invested in the project. He said he was not sure if this was appropriate spending given the County’s ongoing budget issues.

“We have two master plans, and we seem to forget about the other one at Pantops that has absolutely no funding for it,” said Boyd. “At the same time, we’re throwing millions of dollars into Crozet.”  Meanwhile, he pointed out that improvements called for in the Pantops Master Plan have not yet been funded.

Benish said many of the Pantops improvements are anticipated to be paid for with proffers from developers such as intersection improvements and at least $1 million in sidewalk improvements. Supervisor David Slutzky (Rio) pointed out that the Crozet Master Plan was adopted five years ago, whereas the Pantops Master Plan was only adopted in March 2008.

“Wait until we get to Places29 and the tab for infrastructure we’re going to have there,” Slutzky said.
Boyd said he wondered how many previous decisions on capital spending will need to be reconsidered as the County’s budget climate continues to worsen .

Supervisor Dennis Rooker (Jack Jouett) said once the County begins to apply for grants for projects, it cannot break that kind of commitment.

County Attorney Larry Davis said if the project is not finished, the County would have to return the other $300,000 received through the federal program.

The Board voted 6-0 to support the grant application. Boyd said he could support this application, but that he wanted to apply more scrutiny during the development of the FY2011 CIP.

“I’m going to ask as part of the CIP oversight committee review that we look at these multi-millions worth of monies that are sitting around for previously approved projects and whether or not we can continue to do those,” Boyd said. However, he acknowledged that projects that are tied to grant funds will likely have to go forward.

Hatton Ferry’s future requires a non-profit owner

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Friday, November 6, 2009

The future of the nation’s only remaining pole-driven ferry depends on whether the Albemarle County Historical Society or another non-profit is willing to take on its ownership. The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has established a December 31 deadline for the ferry to be transferred to another entity. Otherwise it will be closed.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20091104-BOS-Hatton-Ferry

The ferry is under the jurisdiction of VDOT in part because it carries vehicles across the James River (Source: Steven Meeks)

The Hatton Ferry first began crossing the James River upstream from Scottsville in the late 1870’s. Every year from April to October, ferrymen use poles to push the boat guided by a cable that spans the river. The state highway department  took over operations of the ferry in 1940.

VDOT announced this summer it could no longer fund the ferry due to budget cuts. In July, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors agreed to contribute $9,300 to keep the ferry operating throughout this year. However, the historical society was charged with coming up with funds not only to repay the County, but also to ensure funding for next season.

The man in charge of the current fundraising efforts  for the ferry’s continued operations told the Board of Supervisors on Wednesday that if the Hatton Ferry is closed, a piece of American history will be lost forever. E. Marshall Pryor III appealed for the County’s financial support.

“If we don’t get some participation from the community, from the Board of Supervisors and other municipalities, [the ferry] can’t go on forever,” Pryor said.

Supervisor Lindsay Dorrier (Scottsville) suggested the creation of a public-private partnership where donations would be matched by County dollars. He said the ferry should charge riders, which would bring in revenue either for the County or a non-profit organization that would run the ferry.

“I think Albemarle County along with Buckingham County and Scottsville can come up with $10,000 or $20,000,” Dorrier said.

Supervisor Dennis Rooker (Jack Jouett) said he was skeptical that money could be found when the County faces a significant budget shortfall in the current year.

However, Supervisor Ken Boyd (Rivanna) agreed with Dorrier.

“In a $307 million budget, I think we can find $10,000,” Boyd said. He said one possibility might be to use  money from the Acquisition of Conservation Easements (ACE) program because the ferry promotes the rural nature of the community. Staff was directed to come back with suggestions of what budget items could be cut to pay for the ferry.

Pryor said his group has not yet submitted any grant proposals to fund the ferry, but has raised around $20,000 through private contributions. That’s enough to pay for the ferry for next season, which he said will be the 140th anniversary of the ferry. Pryor estimated that at least $700,000 will need to be raised in order to ensure it can operate “in perpetuity.”

Download an October 28 letter from VDOT Commissioner David Ekern to Bob Tucker

However, VDOT’s end-of-year deadline for a decision is looming, forcing the Society to scramble to establish a long-term plan.

Under state law, VDOT cannot transfer ownership directly to a non-profit organization. Instead, either Albemarle, Buckingham or the Town of Scottsville would need to receive the ferry from the state before it could be transferred to a non-profit.

(Source: Steven Meeks)

County Attorney Larry Davis said Albemarle cannot run the ferry itself because localities do not have the authority to operate a ferry without specific enabling legislation. He said the best way to operate the ferry would be to transfer it to a non-profit organization. However, Davis was concerned that complications could arise if the County serves as the intermediary.

“If the County is the middle person for this, there may be the expectation that the County will be there with deep pockets to keep it operating,” Davis said.

Steven Meeks, President of the Albemarle County Historical Society, said his Board of Directors has discussed taking over management of the ferry, but has not formally adopted a position.

“We’re very interested in possibly managing it,” Meeks said. In a follow-up interview, Meeks said he needed to research the costs of liability insurance as well as the legalities of the transfer.  He added that he is optimistic he can put together a proposal in time for the next Board of Supervisors meeting on December 2, 2009. 

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST

• 0:57 – Public comment from E. Marshall Pryor
• 04:10 – Public comment from Steven Meeks, President of the Albemarle County Historical Society
• 7:49 – Supervisor Lindsay Dorrier suggests instituting a public-private partnership where the County could contribute matching funds
• 8:00 – Supervisor David Slutzky asks where this money will come from
• 9:31 – Dorrier says Hatton Ferry could make money back by charging fee for use
• 10:37 – Supervisor Dennis Rooker expresses budget concerns
• 11:22 – Slutzky says that he doesn’t want fees and taxes to be raised
• 12:35 – Supervisor Ken Boyd agrees with Dorrier that the money can be found somewhere in budget
• 13:13 – Boyd suggests taking money out of the ACE (Acquisition of Conservation Easements) Program to fund the ferry
• 13:30 – County Administrator Bob Tucker says that staff could attempt to identity places in the budget where funds could be cut
• 14:55 – Rooker says VA Film Festival pays off the investment from County and is interested in studying the rate of return for the ferry
• 15:45 – Dorrier wants Buckingham County and Scottsville to contribute to the ferry too
• 20:48 – Slutzky says he appreciates the efforts to keep the ferry operating, but doesn’t want to mislead the public by building hopes for something that might not happen
• 21:28 – Tucker talks about letter from VDOT which warns that the ferry would be discontinued by the end of the year
• 24:55 – Tucker says that VDOT can’t legally transfer their assets to non-profit, so County would have to act as middleman in this transfer
• 26:13 – County Attorney Larry Davis says County does not have the proper enabling authority to operate a ferry
• 31:45 – Davis says that there are no non-profits that have come forward who want to operate the ferry without financial assistance, and if the County acts as a middleman, it could create the impression that the County financially backs the ferry
• 32:21 – Supervisor Sally Thomas says that any non-profit who receives the ferry would assume full responsibility
• 33:34  - Meeks says that the Historical Society Board hasn’t formally adopted a position on whether they want the ferry
• 34:44 – Slutzky asks Meeks to get Historical Society Board to adopt a position quickly so the Board can act at their December 2^nd meeting if necessary

Supervisors accept open space for Arden Place development; Widen trail and require pedestrian connection to Woodbrook

This article is an extended version of what appears in today's Daily Progress.

By Connie Chang & Brian Wheeler
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Thursday, November 5, 2009

The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has overruled the recommendations of its planning commission, and the wishes of many in the Woodbrook neighborhood, by requiring the developer of a luxury apartment complex to widen a proposed trail and connect it to public property.

 The 212-unit Arden Place development was approved by the planning commission in September and is located on land off of Rio Road behind the Albemarle Square Shopping Center.  Coleway Development agreed to provide open space and a trail in order to qualify for a density bonus of 25 additional residential units. 

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast:

Download 20091104-Arden-Place

On Wednesday, the board accepted Coleway’s proposal, but not before making modifications.  Supervisors added requirements that a pedestrian trail be widened from 5 feet to 8 feet and be connected to a planned stormwater management project called the Woodbrook Lagoon Project. 

At the public hearing in September, many Woodbrook residents voiced opposition to a wider trail and any connection in the vicinity of their neighborhood.  No residents were present at the Wednesday morning meeting.

Some Supervisors thought the 5-foot wide pathway would be too narrow to be effective.
Supervisor Sally Thomas (Samuel Miller) noted that a pathway would need to be at least 8 feet to accommodate bicycle traffic.

“Someone’s going to be sorry if we don’t make this wide enough to make it usable,” said Thomas.

“If you want to create an access that allows people to get from this area into the commercial areas to the north and west, [then] you don’t want it to be what would be considered a narrow sidewalk,” said Dennis Rooker (Jack Jouett). “It needs to be a width people can push a carriage on easily, bicycles could go on.”

Woodbrook residents have previously lobbied against any connection from Arden Place to the nearby Woodbrook Lagoon Project.  Even a trail, they said, would diminish the safety and security of their neighborhood.

However, several Supervisors felt that blocking access to public property by the broader community was a more significant concern.

“I do have some reluctance to endorsing that a particular piece of county-owned property is really only available to one neighborhood,” said Ann Mallek. “It is public property and we are making a significant improvement to it for many good reasons.”

In an interview, former Woodbrook Association President, John Gallagher, expressed disappointment over the Board’s decision, especially in regards to the re-establishment of a connection to Woodbrook.  He said residents had made headway in a long battle to remove what was once proposed to be a vehicular connection.

“Our neighborhood has one way in and one way out and it has been that way for 40 years or so,” said Gallagher. “What this pathway does is breach our security. That pathway is going to dump people into a place without sidewalks or streetlights. [The Board] is creating a safety issue.”

Supervisor David Slutzky (Rio) reiterated the concerns he had heard from Woodbrook residents in his district.

“One of the reasons why the Woodbrook community seemed to react so strongly to that connection is that there are no public facilities other than the street for people to walk on,” said Slutzky. “They were worried about a lot of kids now walking down the streets of Woodbrook where they don’t have sidewalks.”

Andrew McGinty, developer for the Arden Place project, noted that the Board’s decision will certainly come as a surprise to the majority of Woodbrook residents.

“[The Board’s decision] was a departure from what was negotiated in the planning commission meeting,” said McGinty. “You have to sympathize somewhat with Woodbrook.”

“We worked very closely with the Woodbrook residents throughout this process trying to implement and incorporate their suggestions,” said Valerie Long, Coleway’s attorney.

Pending easement agreements and other signed documentation with Gardens Shopping Center, the proposed Arden Place development will also have vehicular access to the Carmike Theater. Although this connection will be gated and limited only to Arden Place residents, Woodbrook residents still worry over the potential for strangers to access their neighborhood.

“[The pedestrian connection] blows a hole into the commercial area, the outside world,” said Gallagher.

In an initial motion, Slutzky moved to grant the dedication of open space with the only added condition that the path be widened from 5 feet to 8 feet. After that motion failed on a 2-4 vote (Slutzky and Ken Boyd in favor), the motion was revised to include the condition that the path also connect to the Woodbrook Lagoon Project. That motion passed by a 5-1 vote with Ken Boyd (Rivanna) voting against.

In an interview after the meeting, Boyd said he supported the development, but wanted the neighborhood’s input on the changes from the board.

“I am in favor of the project as presented and agreed to by the Woodbrook neighbors,” said Boyd.  “I couldn’t vote in favor without first giving them a chance to weigh in again.”

Local election results

In the races covered by Charlottesville Tomorrow during 2009, the following candidates were elected tonight:

Albemarle County Board of Supervisors

• Independent Dennis Rooker (Jack Jouett)
• Republican Rodney Thomas (Rio)
• Republican Duane Snow (Samuel Miller)

Charlottesville City Council

• Democrat Dave Norris
• Democrat Kristin Szakos

Thank you to all of the candidates who participated in our interviews and candidate forums during this important local election.

City planners evaluating how developers might contribute to off-site mitigation efforts; City role in a transfer of development rights program also discussed

By Connie Chang & Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Commissioners Bill Emory, Genevieve Keller, Jason Pearson and Dan Rosensweig discuss their priorities before choosing study areas

In their third retreat in the past two months, the Charlottesville Planning Commission has directed staff to study how the City might create something called the Charlottesville Mitigation Exchange (CMX) and to assess how the City might participate in a transfer of development rights (TDR) program with Albemarle County. Staff will also study the potential of protecting the Rivanna River corridor through the City.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20091027-CPC-Retreat

The idea of the Charlottesville Mitigation Exchange was born after the Commission debated whether the City should be required to daylight culverted streams in exchange for a critical slopes waiver for a new fire station on Fontaine Avenue. There is currently no provision in the City’s code that would allow for a developer to be required to make off-site mitigations in exchange for a rezoning, site plan approval, special use permit or critical slopes waiver. Commissioner Kurt Keesecker suggested the CMX could operate as a mechanism for the City to prioritize specific environmental clean-up projects.

Keesecker drafted the following proposal:

“Charlottesville is a city that has seen virtually all of its vacant, non-impacted, privately held land fully developed in the years past. The remaining undeveloped parcels may have a variety of characteristics that would impact the City if they were fully developed to their potential. Mitigation of these impacts within the bounds of the single parcel is becoming increasingly difficult and/or expensive as available parcels become smaller and smaller. At the same time, the City has a variety of properties (both publicly and privately held) that have characteristics that should be preserved but there are no formal agreements or easements that would protect these areas against development in the future… The solution might be the creation of a mitigation exchange that would allow private parties to reach agreements to protect some areas of the City in exchange for the development of other portions of the City, on a site by site, proffer by proffer basis…”

Deputy City Attorney Richard Harris said the proposed CMX would not be legal unless enabling legislation were passed allowing Charlottesville to accept proffers for site plan and special use permits, an authority the City does not have. Additionally, he said proffers are intended to be used to make a rezoning of a particular property more palatable.

Chairman Jason Pearson said that he liked the idea because it was radical, but he doubted the City would be able to get the General Assembly to grant the necessary enabling authority.

Jim Tolbert, the City’s Director of Neighborhood Development Services, said the creation of a “mitigation checklist” would help educate developers about what improvements are expected for approvals. However, that idea would only apply to individual properties, and not off-site locations.

Commissioner Genevieve Keller said she thought the CMX might be a good tool for controlling land use across the City, and could help protect historical and physical assets that she said make Charlottesville a desirable place to live.
   
Transfer of Development Rights

The Commission also discussed whether the City should participate in a potential TDR system with Albemarle County, where Charlottesville would be one of the receiving areas for County development rights.

The General Assembly has passed legislation allowing Albemarle County to establish a TDR system, but the Board of Supervisors has so far declined to move forward with implementation.

Keesecker pointed out that a TDR system would also require a clearinghouse, or TDR
bank. He suggested that neighborhoods that want less density could potentially sell their development rights to downtown developers who want to add extra floors to buildings.

Tolbert was skeptical that a TDR system would work in Charlottesville, where some zoning districts already allow up to 200 units an acre.  He also said he wasn’t sure Charlottesville residents would automatically support more density.

Commissioner Keller said the time to implement a TDR system would have been before West Main Street was up-zoned to allow more development in 2003. She also said if the City were interested, it could test a TDR system by starting first in neighborhoods with historic protections in place. Keller said a TDR system might make more sense if Charlottesville and Albemarle County were one jurisdiction.

Commissioner Dan Rosensweig, who suggested the idea for study, said he intended the idea to be something for the City to have in place for use in several decades as redevelopment occurs.  Rosensweig participated in a 2008 discussion on TDRs facilitated by the Weldon-Cooper Center for Public Service.

Chairman Jason Pearson. Above his head is the list of potential study areas. Commissioners got two votes and indicated their preferences with the use of red dots

Pearson said in a conversation he had with Albemarle County Planning Commission Chairman Eric Strucko, he learned that development in the County’s growth areas has not been as dense as planned.

“Where the development is occurring, they’re not getting build-out to the maximum densities so nobody is squeezed,” Pearson said. He added he was concerned that adding a TDR system might create an extra barrier for developers.

Keesecker said the TDR system would allow developers looking to add units to have the incentive of purchasing additional rights in order to build taller buildings.

The Commission was less interested in the TDRs, but agreed to keep that possibility open for discussion when they meet with the Albemarle County Planning Commission in December.

“I think this gives [staff] a road map for the types of things we’d like to be working on,” Pearson said. “I don’t think any of us want to just sit around and talk and not get something done… Maybe it does result in much more productive conversations with the development community about the way development happens in Charlottesville.”

Commission passes on “form-based zoning”

Commissioner Genevieve Keller made a request to study whether the City should switch to different system of zoning based on “form-based codes.” Under this system, codes depend more on what the physical structure of a block should look like, as opposed to separating out different types of uses. Currently the City can only regulate design in entrance corridors and historic districts. 

“I think there would be a greater comfort level in the city if people knew what things would look like,” said Genevieve Keller.

Tolbert said when the City’s zoning code was rewritten in 2003, that idea was considered but was taken off the table because it was felt that design reviews would become too lengthy.  He said that certain streets, such as Monticello Avenue through Belmont, could be added to the list of entrance corridors in order to require more design scrutiny.

However, the idea did not receive enough votes to be studied in the coming year.

Other items that staff will work on for the Commission’s consideration include:

• Rewriting of the City’s critical slopes ordinance
• Improving the planning process in the Belmont neighborhood
• Rewriting the “dance hall” section of the City zoning code
• Study of the Cherry Avenue corridor
• Review of the process for prioritizing sidewalk additions
• Review of entrance corridor guidelines
• A request from the Fry’s Spring neighborhood to downzone some residential properties

Tolbert said the dance hall review is to establish clear guidelines on what establishments are allowed to offer music and which ones are not.

“We made a list the other day and came up with 35 places that have music in them,” Tolbert said. “Maybe five of them have been allowed legally. The others have morphed and happened and one definition doesn’t fit all of them.”

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST

• 01:00 – Chair Jason Pearson opens with discussion of location of fire station on Fontaine Avenue
• 08:00 – Planning staff Ebony Walden provides status report on tree canopy initiative
• 15:05 – Planning staff Melissa Celii provides status report on density discussion
• 17:23 – Planning staff Nick Rodgers provides status report on Rivanna River discussion
• 23:15 – Planning manager Missy Creasy discusses revised proposed work plan items
• 27:24 – Pearson discusses slope waiver review language
• 39:45 – Creasy opens discussion of potential work plan items
• 43:50 – Commissioner Kurt Keesecker asks whether Charlottesville Mitigation Exchange (CMX) is legal
• 53:27 – Jim Tolbert discusses transfer of development rights
• 1:07:04 – Pearson discusses form-based codes
• 1:17:10 – Pearson discusses density in relation to transportation of all types
• 1:20:56 – Pearson discusses alignment of the comprehensive plan
• 1:30:15 – Commissioner Dan Rosensweig discusses affordable housing item
• 1:36:00 – Keesecker discusses environment-sensitive development
• 1:47:14 – Commissioners vote on priorities for work plan
• 1:51:00 – Discussion of CMX

Snow calls on County to halt zoning fee increases

By Brian Wheeler
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Saturday, October 31, 2009

Republican Duane Snow, a candidate for the Samuel Miller seat on the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, is calling for the Planning Commission to end its discussion of raising a variety of zoning fees, including those on home businesses. 

Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller) holds a press conference on zoning fees at the home of Kirbie & Nelson Moore

“Here we are in the worst economy that I have ever been a part of, and to take someone with an idea to start a new business, and then raise the fee [from $440 to $4,500], I find that truly amazing,” said Snow on Friday.

Snow was referring to one of a number of fee increases which will be considered by the planning commission at a November 10th public hearing.  The Home Occupation – Class B one-time fee is currently $440 which covers a home business with no more than 2 employees, other than family living in the residence. 

The Class B fee has been proposed for an increase to a maximum of $4,500.  The Class A Home Occupation permit, is proposed to increase from $13 to $25.

The County’s Chief of Current Development, Bill Fritz, confirmed in an interview these particular fee increases and said the planning commission directed that fees be advertised that recovered 75% of the costs incurred by the county.

“Staff’s recommendation was $2,000 for Class B,” said Fritz. “Class A has an administrative process and they can sometimes be done while the person is standing there in the office, no more than a day or two at the most.”

“Class B is a special use permit just like any other special use permit,” said Fritz.  “The process does add to the cost, and the County’s fee study tried to capture all those costs.”

Planning Commission Chairman Eric Strucko (Samuel Miller) said it was appropriate for the county to review its fee structure and associated costs for reviewing zoning applications and special use permits.

“The amount advertised for public hearing becomes the absolute ceiling and we purposely make it high so there is some leeway in the deliberative process,” said Strucko in an interview.  “We will most likely bring them down, as some of these increases are very significant.”

County staff assessed the fees charged in other localities and made recommendations based on recovering a portion of the actual costs for the work involved.

Commissioner Linda Porterfield (Scottsville) said she believes in “100% cost recovery” if reasonable costs have been calculated up front.  “We shouldn’t inflate a fee just to pay for something else,” said Porterfield in an interview.

“I think that the fees should be set reasonably, but the person getting the opportunity should be paying the price,” said Porterfield.  “I don’t think my neighbor should pay for me to do something, thus subsidizing it.”

Other proposed fee increases caught the attention of Valerie Long, an attorney who represents a number of local developers and other business owners.

“Rezonings applications are a good example,” said Long.  “Right now a planned development of 50 acres or less costs $1,020.  Under this proposal it would increase to $13,500, a 1,220% increase.” 

Asked about the County’s effort to recover its costs of doing business, Long recommended the county strike a fair balance with developers and streamline the way it does business.

“The costs are driven in large part by the complexity of the regulations and the scope of review that the county chooses to undertake,” said Long.  “The level of review is premised on protection of the public interest.  If we want quality development in the growth areas, the community should help cover the costs.”

Snow announced today that, if elected, he would not support any increases in the zoning fees. 

“I think right now what we need more than anything is an economic development plan with measurable goals, and by doing something such as that we will be able to increase the vitality of our economic condition,” said Snow.

Independent John Lowry is also running for the Samuel Miller seat on the board.  Lowry chairs the economic development authority and in July he called for the county to create an economic development office that would generate more tax revenues.

Lowry said he would want to review the planning commission’s final recommendations, and that he thought the cost recovery approach made sense. 

“These are not fee increases to raise revenues for the county, they are simply more reflective of what these costs are for what the county provides,” said Lowry.  “It is impractical to think you can close the door on fee increases.  You have to have an open mind on what reality dictates.”

Democrat Madison Cummings is the third candidate in the three-way race which will be decided in Tuesday’s election.  Cummings could not be reached for comment.

Business PAC makes large campaign contributions in Albemarle races

By Brian Wheeler
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Friday, October 30, 2009

With four days to go before the Nov. 3 general election, a local political action committee is making its presence known with large contributions to some of the candidates running for the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors and to the County Republican Party.

The latest campaign finance data was published Wednesday by the Virginia Public Access Project and includes fundraising through October 21.  According to VPAP, the Monticello Business Alliance, a political action committee that receives its funding primarily from local real estate and development interests, has invested $40,000 in Albemarle County’s political contests. 

Albemarle Supervisor Candidate	Amount raised through Oct 21st*
Jack Jouett District
Dennis Rooker (I) – Incumbent	$70,405
Rio District
David Slutzky (D) – Incumbent	$82,595*
Rodney Thomas (R) – Challenger	$72,345*
Samuel Miller District
Madison Cummings (D)	$20,980
John Lowry (I)	$20,578
Duane Snow (R)	$42,208*
* Total for this candidate includes contributions of $500 or more received between October 22-28, 2009 Source: Virginia Public Access Project

The Monticello Business Alliance was formed in 2003 and has a steering committee made up of more than 100 area business people and individuals.  It describes itself as a non-partisan organization working, “to preserve, protect, sustain and enhance an economically sound and vibrant community.”

In September, the Alliance made a contribution of $1,500 to each of the five candidates running in contested races for the Board of Supervisors.  It also contributed $10,000 to the County Republicans which the party says it is using to hire campaign consultants.  Since 2003, 82% of the PAC’s funding has gone to Republicans according to VPAP.

In October, however, the Alliance made additional large contributions only to three candidates--both Rio district candidates, incumbent Democrat David L. Slutzky and challenger Republican Rodney S. Thomas, and Republican Duane Snow who is running in the Samuel Miller District. 

With the help of an additional $7,500 contribution from the Monticello Business Alliance, Slutzky has maintained his lead in local campaign donations with an overall total of $82,595.

“Considering they traditionally fund Republican candidates, it reveals a lot about my broad base of support,” said Slutzky.  “A significant amount of Thomas’ money comes from himself and the Realtors, but at the end of the day, it is really about how the voters feel, not the donors.”

Thomas received two additional contributions from the Monticello Business Alliance in October totaling $5,000.  He has made $11,592 in in-kind donations to his campaign from his printing company.

“I probably have 500 donors” said Thomas.  “When I get higher numbers of small donations, that means I am going to get more votes.  I’d rather have one-thousand $100 donors than ten $10,000 donors.”

According to Christian Schoenewald, chair of the Albemarle County Republican Party, the $10,000 donation it received from the Alliance is being used to hire campaign consultants for Thomas and Snow.

“We hire people that work with the party and we farm them out to work with the candidates,” said Schoenewald.  “The party pays them as campaign consultants, and they help the Supervisor candidates with their campaign needs.”

Snow is in the three-way race for the open Samuel Miller District seat being vacated by the retiring Sally Thomas.  Snow has raised a total of $42,208, twice as much as each of his opponents, Democrat Madison Cummings and Independent John Lowry.

Snow garnered his biggest financial boost from the Monticello Business Alliance, now his largest contributor, when they made an additional donation of $10,000 after the end of the early October filing period.  Large contributions of $500 or more must be reported in the two weeks before the election. 

“I never had any idea what it took to run a campaign and get your message out.  It was a complete eye opener for me,” said Snow.  “I thought you could do something like this for $8,000 to $10,000.  It all adds up.  You have flyers, radio, and television.”

Asked why he had received the largest candidate contribution from the Alliance, Snow said in an interview he thought it was because of his concern for “waste and inefficiencies in government.” 

“That message is resonating with people everywhere,” said Snow.

While Snow is running television ads in the last week before the election with some of the additional funding, his opponents, Cummings and Lowry, said that was not in their game plan.  Cummings has raised a total of $20,980 and had the smallest contribution total for early October with $1,800 in new donations.

“I think we have run our campaign in a very fiscally responsible fashion and our expenditures have been what we targeted to spend,” said Cummings.  “I think is has been a very successful campaign and we have done it on a lean budget.”

Lowry has raised a total of $20,578 and he brought in additional contributions of $3,194 in early October.

“I have knocked on most of the doors of all the homes that will be voting in the Samuel Miller District,” said Lowry.  “I am not convinced additional media advertising will do much more. I am happy with what I have done so far because I am running as an independent.”

In the last pre-election campaign finance reports, VPAP reports a total of $309,111 raised for Albemarle’s supervisor races through late October.  This exceeds the 2007 fundraising total of $261,138, a year which also had two hotly contested supervisor races.

RWSA approves dredging study, modified Meadowcreek Interceptor work

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Thursday, October 29, 2009

At their meeting on October 27, 2009, the Board of Directors of the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA) approved a contract for a dredging feasibility study of the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir, agreed to a modified work order for the Meadowcreek Interceptor, and directed staff to work with Schnabel Engineering on a proposal to develop a cost estimate for raising the existing dam at Ragged Mountain Reservoir by 13 feet.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20091027-RWSA

RWSA approves dredging feasibility study

After months of discussion between the “four boards”, the RWSA has approved a $343,778 contract with HDR Engineering to perform a series of dredging feasibility studies at the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir. The studies will provide a range of cost estimates for restoring the reservoir to its original capacity and disposing the spoils.

The full study was requested by City Council in order to determine if dredging would be a cost-effective way of providing some additional water capacity, and Council agreed to pay for studies that dealt directly with dredging for that reason. Members of the Albemarle County Service Authority did not feel the information was necessary to move the adopted water supply plan forward, and thus were unwilling to pay for the full suite of studies. Full restorative dredging, and maintenance of that condition over the 50-year period of the community water supply plan, does not by itself provide enough new water storage capacity to meet needs identified in the 2006 plan. 

HDR was selected as a finalist for the project in August, but the price for their services was initially much higher than City Council had expected. Earlier this month, they agreed to a “standard” study that will provide less detail. Council also removed a study that would have examined the sediment to determine if it had any “beneficial re-use.”

RWSA Executive Director Tom Frederick

RWSA Executive Director Tom Frederick has warned both Council and the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors that without the more detailed study, HDR may not be able to come up with a full cost estimate. Another item that was removed by Council was a public meeting that would be held while the study is being conducted so citizens can ask questions of HDR consultants. Gary Fern, who sits on the RWSA Board because of his position as Executive Director of the Albemarle County Service Authority, offered to contribute an additional $8,880 to ensure the second public meeting will be held. 

 “We’d hate to have all that data and then not be able to express it to the public,” Fern said. 

Frederick said a decision on whether to conduct the beneficial reuse study anyway could be made after that meeting. HDR would hold a second public meeting when their study is complete.

One item in the study is a new bathymetric analysis of the reservoir, which will be paid for by the RWSA from its watershed fund. The RWSA will write the check to HDR and will be reimbursed by the City of Charlottesville for the portions of the study that it has requested. The ACSA will pay the $8,880 for the additional public meeting.

According to City Public Works Director Judy Mueller, The City’s share of the study is nearly $256,000 and includes a pre-dredge survey, a characterization of the sediment, an analysis of dredging alternatives, an analysis of potential dewatering sites, and the final public meeting.

The RWSA’s share of the study is nearly $79,000 and includes a bathymetric study, an assessment of whether there are any federally protected wetlands in the reservoir, as well as the final report.

State regulators want answers on dam replacement

RWSA officials have been requested to appear at a November 19 meeting of the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board to answer questions about efforts to replace or repair the existing dam at Ragged Mountain Reservoir.  A final decision about how to proceed with the dam is not expected to be made until the spring of 2010. That is when Schnabel Engineering, the firm hired to replace Gannett Fleming in designing the new dam at the reservoir, is expected to complete its work on a preliminary design and cost estimate. 

The Lower Dam at the reservoir is currently operating under a conditional permit from the Department of Conservation and Recreation’s Dam Safety division. The permit expires at end of this month. Frederick said the permit might possibly be extended as long as the RWSA continues to show progress towards complying with state regulations.

Frederick said that the RWSA continues to assume that the Lower Dam will be replaced by a larger one just downstream as called for in the 2006 community water supply plan. However, City Council has also directed Frederick to ask the dam’s new designers to model a scenario in which Lower Dam would be raised by 13 feet.  In order to do so, Schnabel will need to perform underwater tests to investigate the strength of the bedrock on which the existing structure rests. Frederick told the RWSA Board that Schnabel’s initial guess was that it would not be cheaper to build on the existing dam because of the complications that could arise when building on 100-year-old technology.

Albemarle Supervisor Sally Thomas (Samuel Miller) asked if Schnabel would study how the Ragged Mountain Reservoir would be treated during construction. Would the pool have to be lowered, reducing the amount of water available to the community? Would the City and County have to enact mandatory usage restrictions in order to reduce demand? Frederick said he did not have those answers handy, but Schnabel’s proposal for the study will come back before the RWSA Board for a vote at the next meeting in November.

RWSA Chief Engineer Jennifer Whitaker said there are questions about the strength of the dam’s cement core. She also said to build anything on top of the existing dam, construction crews would need to remove an earthen buttress that was built around the dam in the 1930’s to address earlier safety concerns.

“There are legitimate concerns that you could not [remove the buttress] while the water was up against the dam,” Whitaker said. “You’d run the risk of tipping it over.”

Whitaker said before building on top of the dam, Schnabel will need to determine how the existing dam would be incorporated into the new structure, and how the two different types of materials would bond together. She also said a higher pool of water would exert a higher pressure on the base of the dam.

During the public comment period, Richard Lloyd of the group Citizens for a Sustainable Water Plan said he thought concerns about the safety of the dam were being exaggerated.

“I don’t get it. That dam is a hundred years old. It has withstood hurricanes, it withstood Camille,” Lloyd said.

Board votes to approve modified work order for Meadowcreek sewer replacement

Click for a larger map of the interceptor's alignment

The RWSA board voted 5-0 with one abstention to place a section of the Meadowcreek sewer interceptor replacement project under the jurisdiction of the Virginia Department of Transportation. Built in the 1950’s by the City and sold to the RWSA in the 1970’s, the Authority is in the final stages of planning a replacement sewer line. Frederick said the existing pipe is deteriorating, a situation made worse after storms when it is infiltrated by runoff.

Part of the pathway for the interceptor lies on the same right of way being used to construct the Meadowcreek Parkway. Frederick said in the initial planning for the project, it was assumed the sewer line would be laid before the roadway is built. However, due to a delay over negotiations with property owners in the City for easements to build the interceptor, the road project has moved ahead of the interceptor.  

At issue is 410 linear feet on City-owned land in Albemarle County where the RWSA needs an easement in order to proceed, as well as 2,130 linear feet on VDOT property.  Faulconer Construction, the company building the Meadowcreek Parkway in the County, has so far delayed their work on this section of land.

Frederick suggested that the Board approve a motion to remove this portion from the rest of the interceptor project so the project as a whole can go to bid. The work on the 2,540 linear feet would be performed by Faulconer as part of their contract with VDOT. However, City Council must approve the easement on its land before the contractor can work on that section of the project.  The earliest Council can take up the easements is on November 16, 2009, but they need to have two readings of the matter before it can be passed.

City Councilor Holly Edwards

City Councilor Holly Edwards abstained from the vote because she said had concerns about the design. While on Council, Edwards has consistently voted against the Meadowcreek Parkway.

Thomas asked if Edwards abstention meant that she would not recommend Council approve the easements. Edwards said she would not make that decision until it came time for City Council to vote.

The modified bid will be released on November 5. VDOT will be paid nearly $2 million for the work.

Other news from the meeting:

Frederick asks Board and Council to call on Richmond to appropriate an additional $175 million to the state’s Water Quality Improvement Fund. He said unless the next General Assembly comes up with the funding, the RWSA may receive only two-thirds of the state money it was expecting to upgrade the Moores Creek Wastewater Treatment plant. That means the agency may have to find an additional $3.1 million to pay for the project.

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST:

• 01:00 - RWSA Chair Mike Gaffney opens meeting
• 01:30 - Executive Director's report from Tom Frederick
• 05:00 - Frederick comments on the request from DCR to update them on the dam progress
• 11:30 - Frederick says any additional requests for studies need to be made now
• 12:30 - County Executive Bob Tucker directs Frederick to submit WQIF request to TJPDC Legislative Liaison David Blount
• 13:15 - City Councilor Holly Edwards asks what information Schnabel needs
• 15:15 - Thomas asks if Schnabel's conceptual design for building on existing dam would look at different heights other than 13 feet
• 20:30 - RWSA Chief Engineer Jennifer Whitaker describes the challenges Schnabel will face
• 25:45 - Public comment from Richard Lloyd of Citizens for a Sustainable Water Plan
• 29:00 - Public comment from City Council Candidate Bob Fenwick (I)
• 31:45 - Public comment from Dede Smith of Citizens for a Sustainable Water Plan
• 35:30 - Public comment from Albemarle County resident Susan Bacik
• 37:00 - Public comment from Betty Mooney of Citizens for a Sustainable Water Plan
• 43:15 - Public comment from Liz Palmer of the Albemarle County Service Authority
• 46:45 - Dede Smith makes a correction to her comment
• 47:00 - Responses to public comment
• 50:00 - Thomas makes a comment about her role in efforts to create a sustainable water plan
• 52:00 - Edwards asks for clarification on whether bathymetric study is required and if RWSA will pay for it
• 55:20 - Edwards asks why Sugar Hollow Reservoir is down
• 59:30 - RWSA takes up engineering services contract with HDR for dredging feasibility study
• 1:11:00 - Edwards explains why Council made its decision to cut costsF 
• 1:14:00 - Gary Fern of the ACSA offers to pay for second meeting
• 1:16:00 - Frederick answers question from Edwards about how studies will be paid for
• 1:19:00 - Fern makes the motion
• 1:22:00 - Frederick begins his update of the Meadowcreek Interceptor study
• 1:37:00 - Thomas reports on DEQ's new Total Maximum Daily Load requirements
• 1:39:30 - Frederick expresses his opposition to the new requirements