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.”

Planning commission endorses Places29 over objections of business community

By Brian Wheeler
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Wednesday, October 28, 2009

After an investment of four years and $1.6 million, the Albemarle County Planning Commission voted 4-2 on Tuesday to endorse Places29, a master plan for future development and transportation projects along the U.S. 29 corridor north of Charlottesville.

The decision came after a public hearing dominated by local business leaders who oppose many of the plan’s key transportation recommendations.  Twelve of the 14 speakers addressing the commission represented businesses and business organizations.  They spoke in opposition primarily to transportation elements of the plan, specifically grade separation on U.S. 29 at six key interchanges.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20091027-CoPC-Places29

Neil Williamson, Free Enterprise Forum

Neil Williamson, executive director of the business advocacy group the Free Enterprise Forum, told the commission his group could not support the current plan. 

“The plan is over budget, it over promises, and ignores the time frame stipulated by the planning process,”  said Williamson in an interview.  “By ignoring the [20 year time frame], the planners have relieved themselves from the restrictors of time and money.”

Commissioners Marcia Joseph (At-Large), William Edgerton (Jack Jouett), Cal Morris (Rivanna), and Tom Loach (White Hall) all voted to endorse the plan which now goes to the Board of Supervisors.  Commissioners Don Franco (Rio) and Linda Porterfield (Scottsville) said the concerns of the business community about the impact of transportation proposals and potential fiscal impacts both needed further review.  Chairman Eric Strucko (Samuel Miller) was not present at the meeting and was unavailable for comment today.

Chris Tyler is the owner of the Red Carpet Inn on U.S. 29. Tyler shared a view that resonated strongly with several members of the commission.

 “The first thing I’d like to say is kind of like what the doctors are told, ‘First, do no harm,’ said Tyler. “This plan will directly affect the businesses on the 29 corridor, and it will affect them adversely.  It will lower the revenues produced and therefore it will lower the tax base that the County has to work with.”

Morgan Butler, Southern Environmental Law Center

Morgan Butler is an attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center.  He was one of two speakers who encouraged the commission to endorse the master plan.

“Transforming this part of the County into a more appealing and functional growth area that can also generate sustainable economic growth is a big challenge, but it is also a critical one for the county to undertake,” said Butler. “The first step is getting a plan in place, that sets forth that vision and then charts the course for getting there.”

Williamson said in an interview that his organization had reached the conclusion that the County shouldn’t even attempt to do land use and transportation planning together and that attempts to do so were “perpetuating the island mentality of the Albemarle-Charlottesville community.”

“I believe Places29 would be better served if it was simply a land use plan,” said Williamson. “Land use should inform transportation decisions, but the transportation decisions should be made in a larger regional context.”

Judy Wiegand, the Albemarle planner heading the project, said the staff had been directed from the beginning to take that approach and that it was “essential that they be done at the same time.” 

“There is no place in the County where that can be shown more clearly than in the 29 North corridor,” said Wiegand. 

Wiegand also pointed out that when future development projects are reviewed, the Places29 master Plan will help establish expectations about private sector contributions to accommodate a backlog of existing transportation needs.

Local developer Wendell Wood

Wiegand said she believed the extension of parallel roads like Berkmar Drive and Hillsdale Drive, combined with six grade-separated interchanges on U.S. 29, would lead to greater economic vitality in the business sector.

“Businesses have been in our minds since the beginning,” said Wiegand. “Once we get more of the road improvements in place and the mixed use centers start to develop, there will be more economic vitality in the business community.  We are trying to make it easier for people to get to these businesses.”

Commissioner Linda Porterfield was most concerned that the plan did not do more to encourage developer Wendell Wood to make a proffer to contribute financially to the plan’s road improvements.  She said expanding the County’s growth area to include land he owns in the path of the proposed Berkmar Drive extension was important.

Wood told the commission that he paid for the improvements and widening of U.S. 29 in front of Hollymead Town Center.  He encouraged the commission to expand the growth area to include his properties near the South Fork Rivanna River and the National Ground Intelligence Center, but those adjustments were not part of the final plan endorsed by the commission.

The Board of Supervisors is not expected to review the Places29 master plan until January 2010 at the earliest.  More information about the plan can be found on the County’s website at http://www.albemarle.org/places29

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST:

 

• 1:35 – David Benish gives staff report on Places29 Master plan
• 6:29 – Henry Weinschenk, Owner of Express Car Wash in the City, speaks against the plan, specifically the grade-separated interchanges
• 9:34 – Neil Williamson, Executive Director of the Free Enterprise Forum, speaks against the plan, specifically against the absence of project timelines
• 12:40 – Carter Myers, owner of Colonial Auto Center, speaks against plan
• 16:46 – Lloyd Wood, Chairman of the North Charlottesville Business Association, speaks against plan
• 19:46 – Jim Kennan, County resident, speaks against plan
• 22:36 – Tom Fromm, small business owner, speaks against plan
• 26:39 – Chris Tyler, owner of the Red Carpet Inn, speaks against plan
• 28:01 – Tim Hulbert, President of the Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce, speaks against plan
• 31:14 – Wendell Wood, property developer, speaks against existing designated growth area classifications [background on previous consideration of Berkmar Drive extension]
• 35:01 – Morgan Butler, from the Southern Environmental Law Center, speaks in support of the plan and against expanding the growth area
• 37:36 – Jeff Werner, from the Piedmont Environmental Council, speaks in support of the plan
• 40:08 – Bob Hodous, City resident, speaks against plan
• 43:18 – Mark Green, the developer of Rivanna Plaza, speaks against plan
• 45:36 – Roy Van Doren, owner of property at Hollymead Town Center, tells Commission that with plan which encourages density, comes traffic
• 47:08 – Public hearing closed
• 47:27 – Commissioner Cal Morris says business community concerns were clear
• 48:06 – Commissioner Don Franco says public raised serious questions
• 49:14 – Julia Monteith, UVA’s representative on the Planning Commission, asks why there is a disconnect between the planning process and resident concern
• 50:08 – Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning for Albemarle County, responds that the plan minimizes impact on businesses as much as possible, but says there must be a balance
• 53:16 – Commissioner Marcia Joseph says this balance has been issue for a long time and specific components of the plan were decided long ago
• 55:23 – Monteith says that she is surprised after all this planning that so many spoke against plan
• 58:22 – Commissioner Bill Edgerton says that public comments did not come as a surprise to him and that since growth is coming to the area, improvements must be made on Route 29 now
• 1:02:19 – Commissioner Linda Porterfield says that they have adequately heard objections from the business community in the past and that in the current economic climate, harm to businesses need to avoided as much as possible
• 1:06:08 – Commissioner Tom Loach  says that the people commenting tonight do not fully represent the community as a whole and that the plan has been well-vetted
• 1:21:16 -- Edgerton explains his view of consequences of growth area expansion and nature of Wendell Wood's offer to help build Berkmar Drive
• 1:23:55 -- Cilimberg shares history of Wendell Wood's proposal to move this rural land into the growth area [background on previous consideration of Berkmar Drive extension]
• 1:25:43 – Joseph moves for approval; Edgerton seconds
• 1:26:00 – Wendell Wood interrupts Planning Commission, accuses Edgerton of “lying” 
• 1:27:04 – Cilimberg asks for clarification; does motion include the expansion for growth areas?
• 1:27:34 – Joseph says that motion does not recommend expansion of growth area
• 1:29:02 – Franco says he remains concerned about the plan’s impact on businesses along Route 29
• 1:30:03 – Joseph says that she doesn’t see how impact on businesses can be accurately measured now
• 1:30:59 – Cilimberg says that impacts must be reviewed and that any time comprehensive plans can be amended
• 1:37:49 – Porterfield says she can’t support the plan that doesn’t contain adequate parallel roads
• 1:39:03 – Final vote taken: 4 Yeas (Edgerton, Loach, Joseph, Morris), 2 Nays (Porterfield, Franco)

County candidates square off on growth issues at final forum

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Monday, October 26, 2009

Population growth, transportation improvements and protecting the watershed were the three topics discussed at the final candidate forum for the six men vying for the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. The forum, held on October 22, 2009, was sponsored by Advocates for a Sustainable Albemarle Population (ASAP), Alliance for Community Choice in Transportation (ACCT), the Piedmont Environmental Council and the Rivanna Conservation Society.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20091022-Final-County-Forum

Watch the video:

Albemarle County Candidates Forum from Charlottesville Tomorrow on Vimeo.

The forum was moderated by Bob Gibson, Executive Director of the Sorensen Institute for Political Leadership at the University of Virginia.

The sponsors asked three long questions in advance of the forum, each of which was backed up with facts and footnotes.

Download the full list of questions here

Question 1: In light of ASAP’s survey on the area’s ecosystem services capacity, what policy implications do you envision for the pending revision of the Comprehensive Plan? What additional facts would be necessary to help you form your opinion about the desirability of capping County growth at an optimal sustainable population size?

Rodney Thomas (R-Rio): “I think the research for this study was flawed because it didn’t take into consideration technological advances and the increase in growth and density proposed by the master plan… After the last drought, many residents stepped up and worked to reduce the amount of water they used.... We can continue to be good stewards of the land and not handcuff future generations… I don’t believe in population control.”

David Slutzky (D-Rio): “The comprehensive plan is a beautiful statement of intent, but intent is empty, if you will, without process to support it, and we are limited in our process elements to our comprehensive plan… We need to strengthen policy choices that would lead to rural area protection….”

Dennis Rooker (I-Jack Jouett): “Some of the additional information we need is really what I would call geographic specific information about the areas that we need to focus on to better protect areas where natural resources are housed. One of the things we do know is that forest protection is incredibly important.”

Madison Cummings (D-Samuel Miller): “The facts presented should give us all pause regarding the future size of our population. The study gives us time to address the possibility of rampant growth… If we can keep the growth in the urban ring… we’ll be able to mitigate the potentially harmful effects on our water, forests and fields.”

Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller): “The study is valuable from the standpoint of helping to illustrate the needfor us to continue to set clear-cut policies in terms of zoning… I asked the question if the study took into account conservation easements… [the Consultant] said no… Right now some of the things we can continue to do is fund the [Acquisition of Conservation Easements] program…”

John Lowry (I-Samuel Miller): “I did see some things in the study that didn’t seem quite right. I am in North Garden, only 6.5% developed, and the study said the population could go from 6,800 to 60,000, and I don’t see that happening… It’s good to have the discussion in a conceptual and abstract sense because it’s better to plan for your future than not plan for your future…”

Question 2: Do you support the approach taken in the Places29 Master Plan to address traffic congestion through parallel roads, bus rapid transit, grade-separated interchanges and better facilities for cyclists and pedestrians? If so, how will you secure funding? If not, what is your plan for addressing the transportation problems of the County?

David Slutzky (D-Rio): “If we’re going to have traffic, meaning people moving from place to place, I think we need to disperse and diffuse that energy across modalities… We’ve got to get people out of cars and into alternative modes of transportation… To the extent that people are in automobiles, we need to create a network of parallel roads… How we pay for them is a whole other matter….”

Rodney Thomas (R-Rio): “I know of no place in the United States where a community our size has significantly increased alternative transportation by throwing massive amounts of taxpayer dollars at it, so I am inclined to think that throwing money at a fleet of empty buses is not the answer.... We need some of the parallel roads that are on the drawing board put in place, but at this time there does not appear to be any money for them…”

Dennis Rooker (I-Jack Jouett): “We sought a bill at the legislature last year that would have allowed us to have a public referendum on whether or not we could add up to a penny on the sales tax for dedicated transportation funding for this area. The legislature did not allow that to get out of committee. Had we done that… we would have had adequate transportation funds to do most of the things that we know need to be done.”

John Lowry (I-Samuel Miller): “If we have the seed money that we can raise on our own, that will allow us to do debt issues of long term capital to finance our improvements in the transportation system. After all, they’re long-term investments and they’ll pay us back… We really need to have the Sunset Avenue/Fontaine Avenue connector….”

Madison Cummings (D-Samuel Miller): “We must find ways to get out of our cars…If the General Assembly were to at least allow the localities to choose what improvements their citizens would desire and how to fund them by means of local referenda, I believe we would do the responsible thing.”

Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller): “I think that we need the parallel roads… I’m not interested in seeing in seeing a through-way with U.S. 29 with grade-separated interchanges and increasing the speed limit to 60 miles an hour….”

Question 3: The County’s comprehensive plan calls for a number of policies to protect the Rivanna watershed, but a number have not been implemented. Can you comment on the County’s willingness to approve developments that are consistent with the plan, but its unwillingness to support policies such as the Mountain Overlay District? Do you agree with the County passing ordinances to make sure clean water flows towards the Chesapeake Bay?

Dennis Rooker (I-Jack Jouett): “The County amended the zoning ordinance to include driveway standards… The County amended the water protection ordinance to require stream buffers and all intermittent and perennial streams… The County amended its process for development in the rural areas to require that building permits include critical resource reviews….”

John Lowry (I-Samuel Miller): “I do feel like Albemarle County is very effectively managed… I do support ordinances to protect the watershed… I think we need to have firm policies that we will not expand our growth area….”

Madison Cummings (D-Samuel Miller): “There should be equal respect given to protecting the natural environment as there is to development… I feel like we’ve made a promise to our fellow citizens in this community and the other states that feed into the Bay… We all need to do a better job… I feel like we must protect our forests because they clean the air, they hold the soil from erosion, and they enhance the quality of the water….”

Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller): “Working on the Architectural Review Board, we started taking a really close look at how these projects were developing and making sure they got the controls in place… In large-scale development we need to make sure we have the runoff that we’ve had in the past… I’ve spent my life trying to educate people on how to take care of their land  and how to improve water quality… I look at myself as one of the original environmentalists in the area….”

Rodney Thomas (R-Rio): “I think the solutions arrived at by the Board of Supervisors over the past several years were a reasonable balancing of the rights of property owners and improved steps to preserve our ecosystems…100 foot buffers on streams, required timely vegetation on development sites, driveway requirements in rural standards… We must be careful not to make farming impossible by making rules that limit our farming heritage….”

David Slutzky (D-Rio): “The comp plan gives us guidance… but it’s the Board’s job to carry out that will… How do we get further? I tell you when we sit there at a Board hearing and the folks who are there to defend their property rights are out in numbers, and the folks that want to have ecological systems protected for the benefit of future generations are at home talking about it among themselves, the political will isn’t there for our Board to be more proactive and assertive….”

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST:

• 01:00 - Introduction from Bob Gibson, Executive Director of the Sorensen Institute for Political Leadership
• 04:50 - Gibson introduces the candidates
• 07:00 - Question 1
• 08:30 - Rodney Thomas (R-Rio) responds
• 10:30 - David Slutzky (D-Rio) responds
• 14:30 - Dennis Rooker (I-Jack Jouett) responds
• 17:30 - Madison Cummings (D-Samuel Miller) responds
• 20:00 - Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller) responds
• 22:20 - John Lowry (I-Samuel Miller) responds
• 24:15 - Gibson reads additional information to set up Samuel Miller rebuttal
• 25:30 - Cummings rebuttal to Question 1
• 27:15 - Snow rebuttal to Question 1
• 30:20 - Question 2
• 32:10 - David Slutzky (D-Rio) responds
• 34:10 - Rodney Thomas (R-Rio) responds
• 36:00 - Slutzky rebuts Thomas
• 37:00 - Thomas rebuts Slutzky
• 38:20 - Dennis Rooker (I-Jack Jouett) responds
• 41:45 - John Lowry (I-Samuel Miller) responds
• 43:45 - Madison Cummings (D-Samuel Miller) responds
• 45:45 - Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller) responds
• 47:45 - Lowry rebuts Snow and Cummings
• 49:40 - Cummings rebuts Snow on the idea of zero based budgeting
• 51:15 - Snow uses his rebuttal time to call for economic development
• 52:45 - Question 3
• 54:00 - Dennis Rooker (I-Jack Jouett) responds
• 57:30 - Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller) responds
• 59:45 - John Lowry (I-Samuel Miller) responds
• 1:01:00 - Madison Cummings (D-Samuel Miller) responds
• 1:04:00 – Samuel Miller candidates rebut on question 3
• 1:09:40 - Rodney Thomas (R-Rio) responds
• 1:10:30 - David Slutzky (D-Rio) responds
• 1:12:00 - Rio candidates rebut on question 3

Senior Statesmen of Virginia hold forum for all six Albemarle Supervisor candidates

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Friday, October 16, 2009

All six candidates for the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors participated in a forum sponsored by the non-partisan Senior Statesmen of Virginia on October 15, 2009. Samuel Miller District candidates Madison Cummings (D), John Lowry (I) and Duane Snow (R) sat alongside Rio District candidates David Slutzky (D) and Rodney Thomas (R). Jack Jouett District incumbent Dennis Rooker (I) was also on the panel even though he faces no opposition.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20091014-SSV-Forum

After each candidate gave a five-minute opening statement, they answered questions from the audience about land use taxation, the role of chain stores in Albemarle’s economic plan and cooperation with the City of Charlottesville. Each candidate was also given a chance to make a closing “wrap-up” statement.

The opening statements offered a chance for each candidate to explain why he is running. Rooker pointed to many achievements the Board of Supervisors has made during the past eight years, including maintaining a AAA bond rating.  Thomas said his time as Chairman of the Albemarle County Planning Commission prepared him to serve as a Supervisor. Slutzky said he was a hard worker who would put in the time to continue to serve Albemarle County. Snow said he was qualified for the job by his lifelong residency as well as his experience as a business owner. Lowry called for the creation of an economic development department. Cummings pointed to his service on the School Board as a reason why he should be elected.

The following are highlighted responses from the five questions asked by the audience.

Question 1:  What action would you take to enable restaurant chains such as the Olive Garden and Cracker Barrel, as well as big box stores such as the Home Depot, to open in Albemarle County?

Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller): “We make it almost impossible for them to come here because we demand so much from them…”

Dennis Rooker (I-Jack Jouett): “We do not choose which businesses want to come here. We provide adequate land uses for businesses to locate here. We have today about 3 million square feet of commercial space that is approved in the County but has not been built out.”

Rodney Thomas (R-Rio): “The [County’s] maximum footprint is 65,000 square feet… I think that probably should be doctored a little bit to let the bigger stores come in…”

David Slutzky (D-Rio): “The Department of Conservation and Recreation issues some draft regulations that were ruthless in protecting the bay, but they also were going to have a profound chilling effect on the business climate in the Commonwealth in Virginia…I came up with an alternative proposal… They’ll be finalized and signed by the Governor later this year.”

John Lowry (I-Samuel Miller): “Businesses have to want to come here. Is the County perceived as being friendly to business? We need to have an economic development office to invite businesses here.”

Madison Cummings: (D-Samuel Miller): “If we’re not welcoming to businesses… we need to be working on that… I do hear occasionally that there are County employees who are less welcoming and sometimes rude. I would hope that we would work on that.”

Question 2: How would you join with Charlottesville government to help in making both areas save taxpayer dollars?

Rodney Thomas (R-Rio):”I would plan a meeting to do something with the revenue sharing… Right now we have no say over that money that is spent inside of the City of Charlottesville. $18.8 million is what the check is going to be for in January.”

Dennis Rooker (I-Jack Jouett): “City and County cooperate on many, many things… We can always do more.”

David Slutzky (D-Rio): “The City runs the bus system… the bus system is very downtown-centric yet 80% of our commercial activity is along [U.S. 29]. I would like to see us enter into a collaboration with the City to form a Regional Transit Authority.”

Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller): “We have to be careful that in the effort to collaborate, [that] we don’t get carried away with spending…”

John Lowry (I-Samuel Miller): “We have a City operating independently inside the County and logically the two really ought to be together completely so we wouldn’t have an overlap in the school system and police, fire and rescue…”

Madison Cummings (D-Samuel Miller): “I was on the School Board in the late 90’s and I approached the superintendent and [asked] how we could cut this dog.gone transportation budget? I tried to work and see if maybe we could meld at least in the urban area the two transportation systems for the schools… One opportunity maybe we could consider again.”

Question 3: The Daily Progress recently reported that housing prices have dropped by 20%. How should the Board respond to lower real estate assessments?

Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller): “There’s nothing we can do about raising those property values back up until the economy improves. But in the meantime you can’t tell someone that is already struggling to make ends meet that we have to raise taxes… Cut the waste in the County and then from there we can make decisions. Do you realize the County has never had a zero-based budget?”

Dennis Rooker (I-Jack Jouett): “The County actually did try zero-based budgeting back in 1990 and then they went away from it… What we do today is what I would call a modified zero-based budget. We do look at every line item in the budget to determine whether or not it’s something we need to fund… Actual full-fledged zero-based budgeting is an incredibly time-demanding… At the end of the day it was abandoned because it took up a lot of time that could have been spent elsewhere… Before we raise rates, we always need to look for efficiencies and make sure we are getting the most out of the revenues we currently have.”

John Lowry (I-Samuel Miller): “Relying on property taxes alone is unsustainable.. You could have $20 million from commercial taxes over time that could be a replacement…It’s not a crisis of wasteful spending. We have a crisis of not having enough revenues to provide the services we like.”

David Slutzky (D-Rio): “You’ve got to minimize your expenses and you’ve got to increase your revenues… I voted against the turf fields that were going to be put in the schools…I find it frustrating in a campaign process where candidates sit there and say they’re going to cut the waste… if we’re interested in zero-based budgeting, that must mean that these candidates have already looked at the budget and have at least some suggestions of what waste they want to see cut, and I haven’t been hearing that so far.”

Rodney Thomas (R-Rio): “There’s a lot of ways that you can cut. You want to cut the waste out of the budget… I think it’s going to be obvious as to where we need to make the cuts when we get into the budget, and cut the wasteful spending.”

Madison Cummings (D-Samuel Miller): “We perhaps are at zero-based budgeting now whether we want to be or not. We’re at least at baseline budgeting because of the number of folks [in County government] that are frozen.”

Question 4: “What negative results would occur if land use taxation were to be eliminated?”

Dennis Rooker (I-Jack Jouett):”There probably are some properties out there that have been getting a benefit for that tax break that might not qualify, and we want to make certain that the program is only going to those who meet the definition... We decided to go with revalidation to see where that would lead us.”

David Slutzky (D-Rio): “I can’t imagine our board would eliminate the program. I certainly wouldn’t support it… It provides immense value in that it does create an incentive for rural lands to be protected for a period of time…”

Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller): “I don’t think it’s a matter of taxes. It’s a matter of personal property rights… The people that are living in the County that are getting a tax break on their property, most of them don’t use the services that those in the urban ring use.”

Rodney Thomas (R-Rio): “Farmers would not be able to afford to run their farms if the program was done away with… I don’t know of any land use participant that is a land speculator… I can’t imagine anyone in the County doing that.”

Madison Cummings (D-Samuel Miller):”It’s a sacred duty to maintain the rural areas of Albemarle County and other areas. Land use taxation relief helps to do that.”

John Lowry (I-Samuel Miller): “The agriculture industry would completely go away. The timber industry would disappear, too.”

Question 5: What are your views on the bypass around Charlottesville?

Madison Cummings (D-Samuel Miller): “In the 70’s, they were talking about the western bypass. We talked about it and I said, why wouldn’t they talk about going down U.S. 15? What doesn’t make sense about that? That was before Historic Green Springs set itself as a historical area, so that makes it more difficult now… The western bypass, the topography there is not attractive. It’s terribly expensive…I think we need to drive a stake through its heart permanently.”

John Lowry (I-Samuel Miller):”I’d like to speak on the seriousness ofn the ability to fund road improvements in our area. We have a problem of flow right now. We have a state that is not sending money to our community… It’s not a lack of planning that we’re missing. We’re missing a lack of funding… It’s not the bypass that’s so important. We need lanes connecting Hydraulic to the traditional 29 bypass. We need the rural road program to be funded.”

Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller): “They tell us that roughly 10% of the traffic we have in this area goes straight through the 29 area and out of the County. They say that in building a bypass we’re building it mainly for that 10%. What we really need is to make it easier for the 90% that are moving around inside of the city to get around more effectively.”

Rodney Thomas (R-Rio): “I really like the [Western] bypass… I thought it was a very good internal road that we needed… If the bypass had been put in, it would have eliminated a high percentage of the cars blocking or backing up at the 250 bypass interchange…”

Dennis Rooker (I-Jack Jouett): “There is no funding for transportation in the state… Somebody needs to solve the transportation funding problem… Hillsdale needs to be built… We know we need to add a lane on 29 from Hydraulic Road south to the 250 Bypass along with an extra ramp at Best Buy… we don’t have any money for it.”

David Slutzky (D-Rio): “I strongly agree with my opponent Rodney that we cannot let 29 become an expressway, and I think that was one of the original reasons why the community looked at the so-called Western Bypass… If the Board is going to be deliver anything out of Places29, it is that parallel road that is Berkmar that’s been described already.”

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST:

• 01:00 – Introduction from David Perkins of the Senior Statesmen of Virginia
• 03:30 – Opening statement from Dennis Rooker (I-Jack Jouett)
• 09:00 - Opening statement from Rodney Thomas (R-Rio)
• 10:30 - Opening statement from David Slutzky (D-Rio)
• 16:00 - Opening statement from Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller)
• 20:15 - Opening statement from John Lowry (I-Samuel Miller)
• 25:45 – Opening statement from Madison Cummings (D-Samuel Miller)
• 31:20 – Question #1
• 44:00 – Question #2
• 56:30 - Question #3
• 1:10:30 - Question #4
• 1:26:00 - Question #5
• 1:39:00 - Wrap-up comment from Madison Cummings (D-Samuel Miller):
• 1:42:00 - Wrap-up comment from John Lowry (I-Samuel Miller)
• 1:44:40 - Wrap-up comment from Duane Snow (R-Samuel Miller)
• 1:47:15 - Wrap-up comment from Rodney Thomas (R-Rio)
• 1:50:00 - Wrap-up comment from Dennis Rooker (I-Jack Jouett)
• 1:53:30 - Wrap-up comment from David Slutzky (D-Rio)

City Council Candidates Forum

On October 7, 2009, the five candidates for two seats on the Charlottesville City Council participated in a forum sponsored by Charlottesville Tomorrow and the Free Enterprise Forum. Independents Bob Fenwick, Paul Long and Andrew Williams sat next to Democrats Dave Norris and Kristin Szakos as they answered several questions on land use, transportation and infrastructure in Charlottesville. Each candidate also gave a three-minute closing statement.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20091007-City-Candidates-Forum

WATCH THE VIDEO:

City Council Candidates Forum from Charlottesville Tomorrow on Vimeo.

QUESTIONS:

Question 1:
Should we start the planning process over on the fifty-year community water supply plan?  Why or why not?

Question 2:
The Charlottesville City Council vision statement describes “Economic Sustainability” as a key element for the City’s future.  The goal says:  “We have a business-friendly environment in which employers provide well-paying, career-ladder jobs and residents have access to small business opportunities…”  How would you assess Charlottesville’s economic condition today?  As a Councilor, what specific strategies would you pursue to generate new jobs and economic vitality?  What is your vision for the City addressing economic development opportunities?

Question 3:
Do  you support the proposed grade separation at Route 29 and Hydraulic Road as a City transportation priority?  Why or why not?

Question 4:
Over the last four years, the community has had an average population increase of 1,167 persons annually, 225 people per year in the City and 942 people per year in Albemarle County.  What do you think of this rate of growth and how should we plan for it?  How would you define sustainable growth for our community?

Question 5:
The city has vowed to increase density near the downtown area, how will you balance the desire for density with citizen concerns about changing the character of neighborhoods.

Question 6:
How do we ensure the community infrastructure—roads, sidewalks, fire/rescue facilities, libraries, etc.—is in place to support our current population, new development and redevelopment in our designated growth areas?  To what degree should this infrastructure be funded by the real estate property tax, a gas tax, developer proffers, or new service districts?

Question 7:
Do you support the Meadowcreek Parkway?  Absent a court decision that stopped this project, if you get the opportunity to vote on an element of McIntire Road Extended or the Meadowcreek Parkway Interchange, and the result of your vote could have the effect of stopping the project indefinitely, how will you vote and why?

Audience question 1:
Charlottesville last purchased parkland three decades ago. Do you support the acquisition of parkland for passive recreational purposes? Will you commit now to this as a major line item in the 2011 Capital Improvement Plan budget? Assuming the Meadowcreek Parkway is built, should the master plan the eastern half of McIntire Park include a botanical garden?

Audience question 2:
Is it healthy for Charlottesville to be controlled by a single political party?

Audience question 3:
What role should industrial enterprises play in Charlottesville’s economy? Do you support attracting manufacturing industries with blue collar jobs, and if so, how would you do so? In addition, please state your position on national chain retail stores.

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST:

• 01:00 - Introduction from Brian Wheeler of Charlottesville Tomorrow
• 02:15 - Neil Williamson of the Free Enterprise Forum reads the rules
• 04:00 - Question 1
• 12:45 - Question 2
• 24:30 - Question 3
• 32:00 - Question 4
• 41:30 - Question 5
• 52:20 - Question 6
• 1:04:30 - Question 7
• 1:12:40 - Audience question 1
• 1:23:30 - Audience question 2  
• 1:31:00 - Audience question 3  
• 1:42:30 - Closing statement from Paul Long
• 1:45:30 - Closing statement from Kristin Szakos
• 1:48:00 - Closing statement from Andrew Williams
• 1:51:15 - Closing statement from Dave Norris
• 1:54:30 - Closing statement from Bob Fenwick

Rio District Candidates Forum

On October 1, 2009, the two candidates vying for the Rio District of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors met at a Candidates Forum sponsored by Charlottesville Tomorrow and the Free Enterprise Forum. Democrat David Slutzky and Republican Rodney Thomas answered ten questions on land use, transportation, and growth in the County. The candidates also answered several questions submitted by members of the audience. The event, held at Hollymead Elementary School, was co-moderated by Neil Williamson of the Free Enterprise Forum and Brian Wheeler of Charlottesville Tomorrow.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20091001-CT-FEF-Rio-Forum

WATCH THE VIDEO:

Rio District Candidates Forum from Charlottesville Tomorrow on Vimeo.

QUESTIONS:

Question 1:
According to the Albemarle County Strategic Plan, “the County desires to maintain a strong, sustainable economy, increase business activity in the urban cores of development areas, and ensure all citizens of the County are able to participate fully in a vibrant economy.” How would you assess Albemarle’s economic condition today? As a Supervisor, what specific strategies would you pursue to generate new jobs and economic vitality? What is your vision for the county addressing economic development opportunities?

Question 2:
How would you assess Albemarle County’s growth management strategies? What other steps would you advocate be taken to discourage development in the rural countryside and encourage development in the growth areas? Are the existing incentives adequate?

Question 3:
Should we start the planning process over on the fifty-year community water supply plan? Why or why not?

Question 4:
Albemarle County has expectations for the development community to build or pay for affordable living choices in new developments. Do you agree with that approach? How do you believe the County should address the need for not just affordable housing, but also workforce housing?

Question 5:
The Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission have both held work sessions on the transportation elements of the Places29 Master Plan. If there is an opportunity to receive a significant developer proffer related to Berkmar Drive Extended in exchange for an expansion of the County’s designated growth area, should that be pursued as part of the Places29 Master Plan?

Question 6:
Do you support the proposed grade separated interchanges on Route 29 as major components of the Places29 master plan? Why or why not?

Question 7:
Do you agree with continuation of the current land use tax program in the rural areas and with the revalidation process that was recently initiated by the BOS? Why or why not?

Question 8:
How do we ensure the community infrastructure—roads, sidewalks, fire/rescue facilities, libraries, etc.—is in place to support our current population, new development and redevelopment in our designated growth areas? To what degree should this infrastructure be funded by the real estate property tax, a gas tax, developer proffers, or new service districts?

Question 9:
An emotional issue that has divided the community is before the Board of Supervisors. How should an elected official balance citizen input, staff input, and the goal of making decisions that are in the best interests of the community as a whole?

Question 10:
How should we measure local government’s effectiveness on its strategic plan?

Audience question 1:
Both candidates have been in elected or appointed positions in Albemarle County. What letter grade would you give your constituent service from that period and how do you plan to improve it if you are elected?

Audience question 2:
With 60% of the County's budget going towards education, how do you propose ensuring Albemarle provides a quality education for its children that attracts high-paying jobs to the area? Do you plan on cutting education funds to balance the budget?

Audience question 3:
It seems like we've seen nothing but tax increases from the board. When do you see these taxes increases stopping?

Audience question 4:
What is your position on public transportation, in particular, cooperation with Charlottesville Transit Service and University Transit? What are your feelings on a Regional Transit Authority? How did you get here tonight?

Audience question 5:
What is your position on the County's current cash proffer system?

Audience question 6:
The Jefferson-Madison Regional Library has had a 30% increase in visitors over the past year and a more than 6% increase in circulation at the three Albemarle locations, but also was level-funded in this year's budget. Do you intend to increase funding to support increased use?

Audience question 7:
Give us your general perspective on balancing development and the environment in Albemarle County?

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST:

• 01:00 - Opening introduction from Brian Wheeler of Charlottesville Tomorrow
• 01:45 - Rules are read by Neil Williamson of the Free Enterprise Forum
• 03:20 - Question 1
• 08:30 - Question 2
• 12:40 - Question 3
• 16:30 - Question 4
• 19:15 - Question 5
• 24:30 - Question 6
• 27:40 - Question 7
• 31:00 - Question 8
• 34:30 - Question 9
• 38:40 - Question 10
• 43:00 - Audience question 1
  
• 47:45 - Audience question 2
• 52:00 - Audience question 3
• 55:40 - Audience question 4
• 1:00:30 - Audience question 5
• 1:04:20 - Audience question 6 
• 1:08:00 - Audience question 7
• 1:12:30 - Rodney Thomas's closing statement
• 1:14:40 - David Slutzky's closing statement

Samuel Miller District Candidates Forum

On September 30, 2009, the three candidates vying for the Samuel Miller District of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors met at a Candidates Forum sponsored by Charlottesville Tomorrow and the Free Enterprise Forum. Democrat Madison Cummings, Independent John Lowry and Republican Duane Snow answered nine questions on land use, transportation, and growth in the County. The candidates also answered several questions submitted by members of the audience. The event, held at Murray Elementary School in Ivy, was co-moderated by Neil Williamson of the Free Enterprise Forum and Brian Wheeler of Charlottesville Tomorrow.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20090930-CT-FEF-Samuel-Miller-Forum

WATCH THE VIDEO:

20090930-Samuel-Miller from Charlottesville Tomorrow on Vimeo.

Question 1:
According to the Albemarle County Strategic Plan, “the County desires to maintain a strong, sustainable economy, increase business activity in the urban cores of development areas, and ensure all citizens of the County are able to participate fully in a vibrant economy.” How would you assess Albemarle’s economic condition today? As a Supervisor, what specific strategies would you pursue
to generate new jobs and economic vitality? What is your vision for the county addressing economic development opportunities?

Question 2:
How would you assess Albemarle County’s growth management strategies? What other steps would you advocate be taken to discourage development in the rural countryside and encourage development in the growth areas? Are the existing incentives adequate?

Question 3:
Should we start the planning process over on the fifty-year community water supply plan? Why or why not?

Question 4:
Albemarle County has expectations for the development community to build or pay for affordable living choices in new developments. Do you agree with that approach? How do you believe the County should address the need for not just affordable housing, but also workforce housing?

Question 5:
The Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission have both held work sessions on the transportation elements of the Places29 Master Plan. If there is an opportunity to receive a significant developer proffer related to Berkmar Drive Extended in exchange for an expansion of the County’s designated growth area, should that be pursued as part of the Places29 Master Plan?

Question 6:
Do you support the proposed grade separated interchanges on Route 29 as major components of the Places29 master plan? Why or why not?

Question 7:
Do you agree with continuation of the current land use tax program in the rural areas and with the revalidation process that was recently initiated by the BOS? Why or why not?

Question 8:
How do we ensure the community infrastructure—roads, sidewalks, fire/rescue facilities, libraries, etc.—is in place to support our current population, new development and redevelopment in our designated growth areas? To what degree should this infrastructure be funded by the real estate property tax, a gas tax, developer proffers, or new service districts?

Question 9:
An emotional issue that has divided the community is before the Board of Supervisors. How should an elected official balance citizen input, staff input, and the goal of making decisions that are in the best interests of the community as a whole?

Audience question 1:

What is your position on public transportation in Albemarle County, including a Regional Transit Authority with Charlottesville? How would you fund it? Would you support rapid public transit such as light rail or bus rapid transit?

Audience question 2:
A new economic development office and a Regional Transit Authority are two new government agencies I've heard proposed tonight. Where will you cut County government to fund these agencies, or would you propose new taxes during an economic downturn?

Audience question 3:
Would you revise the current barking dog ordinance to provide more restrictions in the entire County, and or the barking of multiple dogs?

Audience question 4:
There has been a significant retail sales tax shift out of Albemarle County. Do you believe the loss of sales tax revenue is a serious issue? How do you view neighboring counties' commercial development activities?

TIMELINE FOR VIDEO AND PODCAST:

• 01:00 - Introduction from Brian Wheeler of Charlottesville Tomorrow
• 01:45 - Neil Williamson of the Free Enterprise Forum reads the rules  
• 03:00 - Question 1
• 10:20 - Question 2
• 18:45 - Question 3
• 25:00 - Question 4
• 32:30 - Question 5
• 40:00 - Question 6
• 48:00 - Question 7
• 52:30 - Question 8
• 1:00:00 - Question 9
• 1:09:00 - Audience question #1
• 1:16:30 - Audience question #2      
• 1:22:45 - Audience question #3 
• 1:28:15 - Audience question #4    
• 1:35:00 - Madison Cummings' closing statement
• 1:38:15 - John Lowry's closing statement
• 1:40:35 - Duane Snow's closing statement

Council votes to spend $2.1 million from economic development fund to jumpstart Hillsdale Drive

By Connie Chang & Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Tuesday, August 25, 2009

The Charlottesville City Council has voted to transfer $2.1 million from the City’s strategic investment reserve to the Charlottesville Economic Development Authority (CEDA) in order to begin construction of the first phase of Hillsdale Drive Extended. The management of the project’s funds will be handled by CEDA. Costs beyond that limit must be covered by the developer of the new Whole Foods, slated to be constructed at the corner of Hydraulic Road and the future Hillsdale Drive.  The developer of the new Whole Foods, Meadowbrook Creek LLC, has agreed to construct the first phase of Hillsdale Drive.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20090817-CC-Hillsdale

Council’s vote came during their meeting on August 17, 2009. According to Aubrey Watts, Charlottesville’s Director of Economic Development, there is a potential gain for the City to develop the land across from Whole Foods, which he said would expand the City’s tax base.

The funding will go to cover right-of-way, utility easements, final design and construction of the first segment. Approval of this funding will allow for construction of this first phase to begin immediately with a project completion date in 2010.

Watts said the City is expecting the investment to be paid back in six years through increased sales taxes, though he noted the payback time could be quicker if potential development is carried out surrounding the site. The Hillsdale Drive project has already received design funding from the state, and this $2.1 million will be used  specifically on other improvements needed on Hydraulic Road such as upgraded turn signals and enhanced turn lanes.

However, the construction of the rest of Hillsdale Drive Extended will depend on the community finding additional transportation funds. There will be no state funds available for the project until at least FY2015. The Virginia Department of Transportation estimates that right of way purchase will cost at least $18.6 million and construction will cost around $8.8 million.

UVA North Fork Research Park expansion gets okay from Albemarle Planning Commission

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Wednesday, August 19, 2009

The Albemarle County Planning Commission has recommended approval of a rezoning that would allow for the expansion of the University of Virginia’s North Fork Research Park along Airport Road. If approved by the Board of Supervisors, the rezoning from Rural Area to Planned Development Industrial Park (PDIP) would expand the park by 30 acres and allow for an additional 700,000 square feet of commercial, office and industrial uses.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20090818-APC-NorthForkUVA

Illustrative image showing the concept for the expansion. Click for a larger image.

The North Fork Research Park was rezoned in 1996 with a total acreage of 525 acres, allowing for over 3 million square feet of office, industrial and research space. The University was granted three special use permits allowing for the construction of parking garages, laboratories, hotels and other commercial uses to support the park. As of today, there are 19 businesses in the park, occupying around 491,000 square feet of office space.

A previous expansion for the park was approved by the Board of Supervisors in February 2006 to allow for the construction of the Hollymead Fire Station, which is technically in the park.

Staff recommended the new rezoning be approved for several reasons. First, the County’s comprehensive plan calls for industrial development at that location. The County’s economic development policy has recently been updated to encourage the creation of more office, commercial and industrial development. The Places29 Master Plan calls for this area to be part of the “Uptown” area of urban mixed-use development (a mix of retail, housing, commercial, and office uses), and the application depicts the construction of several roads to build connectivity within the research park. Additionally, UVA has agreed to several transportation improvements as part of the rezoning.

Transportation proffers being made by UVA include:

• UVA will provide for an interconnection to Northside Drive, which will provide connectivity to U.S. 29
• UVA will provide right-of-way for an eventual upgrade of Dickerson Road
• UVA agrees to restrict build-out of this new expansion to 180,000 square feet until such time as they connect the park to Lewis and Clark Drive via the existing Innovation Drive. At full build-out of the park, Lewis and Clark will connect to Airport Road

Commissioner Tom Loach (White Hall) pointed out that Airport Road already has a failing level of service (LOS) during peak hours. He said nothing in the proffers or in UVA’s plan would do anything to alleviate the pressure until at least 180,000 square feet of the expanded park are built. County Engineer Glenn Brooks said that a connected Lewis and Clark Drive will not be a complete solution, but could take cars off of U.S. 29. County Senior Planner Elaine Echols said an extended Lewis and Clark Drive would help the County build its system of parallel roads.

Commissioner Marcia Joseph (At-Large) asked Fred Missell, Director of Design and Development with the UVA Foundation, if he had talked with the research park’s neighbors to determine if they were open to the increased connectivity that will come when the park is built out. Missell said he had not, but that there was a remaining discrepancy about the exact location of a future interconnection to a parcel of land owned by developer Wendell Wood. The potential road would connect the research park to Wood’s Goldleaf Trust, and the location will be lined up when that site plan comes forward. County Planner Bill Fritz acknowledged there was a chance that an agreement between Wood, the County and UVA could not be made, meaning that connection would never be built.

Missell said there are currently no plans to begin construction in any of the new expansion. He said the Foundation is seeking the rezoning now in order to comply with the County’s goals as indicated in the Comprehensive Plan.

The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the rezoning and the special use permits. The rezoning application will now go before the Board of Supervisors at a date to be determined.

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST:

• 01:00 – Staff report from County Planner Rebecca Ragsdale
• 19:40 – Commissioner Bill Edgerton asks clarifying question about proffer to limit development until Lewis and Clark Drive is extended
• 21:50 - Edgerton asks question about differences between conceptual plan and what will actually be built
• 25:00 – County Engineer Glenn Brooks said UVA’s proffer to build connection after 180,000 square feet is not connected to traffic impacts
• 28:30 – Commissioner Tom Loach (White Hall) asks who is responsible for monitoring Levels of Service (LOS)
• 30:20 – Director of Planning Wayne Cilimberg explains how original proffers obligate UVA to make certain transportation improvements
• 32:00 – Loach said Airport Road is already failing and says nothing in UVA’s proffers would appear to address the issue
• 35:00 – Commissioner Marcia Joseph (At-Large) asks if appropriate land uses were used when developing traffic study
• 36:15 – Presentation from Fred Missell, Director of Design and Development for the UVA Foundation
• 42:30 – Joseph asks if UVA has spoken to neighbors about connectivity
• 46:14 – Joseph asks how many occupants are already in the park
• 47:20 – Loach asks how quickly these buildings will be built
• 50:30 – Commissioner Linda Porterfield asks if tenants need connection to UVA

Albemarle Supervisors debate future of energy audit program for homeowners

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Thursday, August 6, 2009   

This summer, Charlottesville and Albemarle County were awarded a $500,000 grant from the Southeast Energy Efficiency Alliance (SEEA) to launch a new service to help homeowners reduce their energy usage. The Local Energy Alliance Program (LEAP) will coordinate energy audits in both localities where homes would be inspected to find out if energy usage could be reduced. At least one member of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors is concerned the program will not live up to its expectations.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20090805-BOS-LEAP

LEAP would make loans to homeowners to help them cover the cost of energy-saving improvements. In the long-run, the program would be sustained in part by charging interest on those loans. Homeowners would pay for the loans in part by using the savings that come with lower energy bills. The grant application claims that between 915 and 1,271 jobs would be created as much as 69,685 metric tons of carbon emissions would be eliminated in the first seven years.

Download the SEEA grant application

An update on LEAP was included on the Board of Supervisors’ consent agenda for their meeting on August 5, 2009. In order to satisfy SEEA grant guidelines, the Board was asked to make a public statement acknowledging their acceptance of the grant.

One issue that has cropped up is who will actually receive the $500,000 award. Supervisor David Slutzky (Rio) said the Blue Moon Fund has given an additional $100,000, part of which is being used to pay legal fees associated with building LEAP’s governance structure. LEAP is not yet recognized as a legal entity, and Virginia law prevents the City and the County from accepting the money directly. However, the General Assembly did grant the City of Charlottesville authorization to start the program with the passage of SB1212.

This chart from the grant application projects LEAP organizers' expectations during the first seven years of operations

Supervisor Ken Boyd (Rivanna) said he wanted to know more details about LEAP’s business plan. Boyd was concerned that the County would have to hire staff to operate LEAP. Slutzky said while the County may receive grant money to pay for LEAP’s start-up costs, it is not designed to be another government program. Boyd said he needed to be convinced by looking at the numbers. Slutzky said the governance issues had to be worked yet, but that he felt the application for the SEEA set clear goals.

“The first step is to put together the analysis needed to persuade the grantors that we have a reasonable vision for how we achieve 30% to 50%  market penetration,” Slutzky said. Boyd said the plan lacked clear detail on what that actually meant. Slutzky said the plan clearly laid out that the expectation is to eventually help up to half of all households in Charlottesville and Albemarle County remodel their homes to become energy efficient. 

“The scale of the green job formation that’s associated with this initiative is to me nothing short of exciting,” Slutzky said. But Boyd remained skeptical.

“I have trouble understanding how you are going to translate a $500,000 grant into 1,500 jobs,” Boyd said. Slutzky said the 200-page application demonstrates how they will achieve that goal. Boyd wanted balance sheets projecting LEAP’s income streams before he could support moving forward.

This pie chart breaks down the sources of Greenhouse gas emissions for Charlottesville and Albemarle County for the year 2006 (Source: SEEA grant application)

Supervisor Dennis Rooker (Jack Jouett) said LEAP is not a County project, and the benefits of the program will come without the use of any taxpayer funds. When Rooker called Boyd’s concern “hyper-critical,” Boyd responded that he was “hyper-cautious.”

“I’ve seen this things expand to be where they don’t create the things they say they’re going to create,” Boyd said. “I want to be sure that the plan is predicated on something we can actually achieve.” In May, Boyd voted against a resolution of support

Slutzky said the fact that this community was selected over many others in the nation is one achievement already accomplished. He said additional funding was likely to come from the U.S. Department of Energy because LEAP could be a template for other programs across the country. Rooker urged Boyd to get involved with the project to make sure it works. Slutzky said LEAP would represent a market-driven approach to solving a community problem that the Board identified as a priority when it adopted the Cool Counties initiative in December 2007.

“We have in this country taken on the commitment of achieving 80% reduction in greenhouse gases by the year 2050,” Slutzky said. “Forty percent of those greenhouse gas emissions come from existing buildings… In order to achieve that you have to have programs like we’re starting here to make it possible to retrofit substantial portions of existing housing stock with energy-efficiency technologies and have a mechanism for paying for it.”

“I hope that you’re right, but I’m not convinced of that yet,” Boyd said.

After this discussion, the Board agreed to sign a letter to the SEEA acknowledging that the County and City have been awarded the grant.