Charlottesville Tomorrow Blog

Board of Supervisors denies Highway Commercial rezoning near I-64

John Chavan sought a rezoning of his property, which is outlined in red

The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has voted 6-0 to deny the rezoning of land on Route 250 East near the Interstate 64 interchange, citing the project’s inconsistency with the County’s comprehensive plan. 

The applicant, John Chavan, had sought a rezoning from Rural Areas (RA) to Highway Commercial (HC) in order to construct a storage facility adjacent to the Comfort Inn and just East of the I-64 interchange. 

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20080409-BOS-HC-Denial.mp3

The Planning Commission recommended denial at its meeting on February 5, 2008. Since then, the applicant proffered a further reduction in the by- right uses allowed to light warehousing, electric, gas, oil and communication facilities, public uses and buildings. That was not enough to convince staff, who continue to recommend denial of the rezoning because the project is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, would generate traffic in a rural area, and would place HC zoning in an area surrounded by conservation easements. Staff said the proffer to limit uses would not mitigate the potential negative impacts of the rezoning.

But John Grady, who represented Chavan, said that the Comprehensive Plan is not a perfect tool and that sometimes special actions are required by the Board.  He said there are at least 26 businesses in the immediate vicinity of the property, and Chavan’s land is one of the only strips left on the northern side of Route 250 zoned as RA. Grady said if the Board chose to rezone, they would be correcting a situation that he said needs to be changed.

“You can call it Rural Area if you like, but I don’t think anybody  here would buy it, build a house, and raise their children there,” Grady said. He added a mini-storage facility would be a good use for the land, and that Chavan would be willing to work with the Architectural Review Board when choosing building materials. Grady concluded his testimony by saying that the existence of nearby easements on other properties should not hinder Chavan’s property rights.

Property owner John Chavan

When Chavan got up to speak, he pleaded with the Board to rezone his property so that he can provide a better future for his children. He and his wife are registered nurses who work for the University of Virginia Health System.

“I have chosen this particular business because it has the lowest impact on traffic, it utilizes the least of County resources, and it will be local and consumer friendly,” an emotional Chavan said, holding back tears.

Several members of Chavan’s church spoke on his behalf and asked the Supervisors  to approve his application.  Sylvia Mills said the area is already mixed-use, and she could see no reason why Chavan should be denied.

However, Jeff Werner of the Piedmont Environmental Council reminded the Board that they
had a duty to uphold the Comprehensive Plan, which designates the land as being in the rural area.  He told the Board they would soon see a similar rezoning application for the East Pantops Sports Complex across the street, and that if they sought to change the comprehensive plan, they should do so in a holistic way for the entire stretch of Route 250 between I-64 and Route 22.

But Ed Bain Jr, Chavan’s Attorney, asked when that process would happen, given that the Pantops Master Plan was just adopted in March.  The Plan does not extend to the eastern side of the I-64/Route 250 interchange, and Bain said he was concerned that the review process would not occur for another five years.

“Should we be held up because of that for this one use on this one property?” he asked. “We’re not using public services, the traffic is already there.” He reminded the Board that they recently approved a special use permit for the First Nazarene Church to build a 374-seat multipurpose center at the intersection of Routes 22 and 250. [Supervisor Dennis Rooker (Jack Jouett) later reminded the Board that the federal Religious Land Use Act makes it difficult for local governments to deny special use permits for churches.]

Supervisor David Slutzky (Rio) asked if the topic of extending the Pantops Master Plan to cover the area came up in the Planning Commission’s discussion of the plan. Wayne Cilimberg, the County’s Director of Planning and Development, said the Commission decided not to expand the boundaries. He also reminded the Supervisors that they had previously said that they did not want to expand the growth area’s boundaries.

“You said you were not interested in introducing more [land] into the development area, and there was some reference made to a concerted effort to not permit any more intensification of use that would strip Route 250,” Cilimberg said. He also explained that the HC zoning in surrounding properties dates back before the 1980 Comprehensive Plan that created the development and rural areas.

 “We have a very worthy applicant, but the issue before us is really a land use decision,” Rooker said. “I think it would be very bad precedent to start going down the road of spot rezoning rural area land to Highway Commercial without going through a decision of whether or not it ought to be in the growth area in the first place.” Rooker said he could never remember a situation when property in the rural area was rezoned for commercial use.  

Slutzky said the same issue had come up last year when the Soccer Organization of Charlottesville Albemarle County sought the rezoning of rural land for playing fields. The Board voted to deny that application.

“We made the land use decision that we’re compelled to make that it wasn’t consistent with our rules that we’ve set for ourselves,” Slutzky said. He said that he would support a discussion on whether the area should be brought into the growth area.

Chairman Ken Boyd (Rivanna) asked Cilimberg if it really would be five years before the Board can take up the issue of whether or not to expand the growth area to cover the area.

Cilimberg said unless the Board directed staff to put the topic to the top of its project list, it would be “a while before we would be looking at this from a land use stand-point.”  He said this year’s review of the County’s economic development policy could begin the conversation.
The County is looking for ways to increase the amount of land that can be made available for Light Industrial uses.

Supervisor Lindsay Dorrier (Scottsville) said Chavan’s application was worthy, but he could not violate the Comprehensive Plan. So, he made a motion to deny the application, which was seconded by Rooker.

Before the vote, Supervisor Sally Thomas (Samuel Miller) said she did not like being “mean” to the applicant, but that the County had a duty to protect its entrance corridors.

“I have consistently been mean along 250 and said no to almost every  proposal that’s anything like this,” Thomas said. “Our decisions are made on land use… When you go to communities that haven’t been mean to some individual applicant and end up with businesses going for miles out every road.”

The vote to deny the application was 6-0.

Thomas raises concern about traffic light for White Gables Condominiums

When the Board of Supervisors approved the White Gables Condominiums in 2003, one of the conditions of the special use permit was that the developer pay for a traffic signal at the development‘s entrance onto Route 250. However, The Virginia Department of Transportation says the existing conditions do not warrant a light at the intersection. Supervisor Sally Thomas raised the concern that VDOT ‘s decision could nullify Weather Hill Homes’ obligation to build the light, creating a traffic nightmare.

“If the warrants aren’t met and yet we force people to not use the entrance to White Gables, but everyone use Kenridge, there’s going to be traffic right and left against the flow of traffic there,” Thomas said.  She suggested VDOT be pressured to accept a yellow caution light at the location.

Mark Graham, the County’s Director of Community Development, said the developer had a ten-year window to install the light, but the traffic conditions do not merit a light because the project is taking longer than expected. Graham said his interpretation of the condition was that the developer could be required to build the physical structure of the light, which could be switched on at a later date.

Sean Tubbs

County Planning Commission Report – April 1, 2008

 
Commission approves downzoning for Wavertree Hill Farm

The Commission voted to recommend to the Board of Supervisors the rezoning of 145 acres off of Plank Road from Planned Residential Development to Rural Areas so that the landowner can qualify for land use taxation. The property now owned by Wavertree Hall LLC was once the site of a planned religious community which never fully developed.

The land cannot be developed under the existing zoning because the property is under a conservation easement from the Virginia Outdoors Foundation.

“We are here to try to get the taxation that this farm is entitled to under the code,” said Richard Carter, attorney for the property owner. Carter said the owner’s intent is to do what he can to preserve the historic home that is on-site and to continue operating it as a farm. 
The item has not yet been scheduled for the Board of Supervisors.

Commission approves special use permit for non-conforming camp

Camp Watermarks is a four-year old camp on the James River near Scottsville that got a special use permit last year to build a 20’ by 40’ multi-purpose building. One of the conditions for approval was that the structure could be no larger than 800 square feet.  However, shortly before construction was to begin the camp’s owners decided that was not big enough for their needs, and so they applied for a special use permit to increase the size to 2160 square feet.  According to County Planner Joan McDowell, the building’s construction is almost complete.

The applicant requested a special use permit to allow this building to be larger than originally planned

Staff found no objections with the proposal and recommended approval.  Commissioner Edgerton said he was troubled that the applicant began work on the structure before all of the approvals were granted.

“It seems this particular applicant seems to have problems with doing things in the proper order, and I take offense at that,” Edgerton said.

The owner of the camp, Travis Critzer, said he had been granted a building permit for the larger structure, with the understanding that it could only be used for agricultural storage if the Commission did not grant the special use permit. He insisted he went through the appropriate channels.

The Commission voted 7-0 to approve the special use permit, with Edgerton voting for it despite his objection. The item will now go to the Board of Supervisors on May 7, 2008.

Strucko reports on Fiscal Impact Advisory Committee

Commissioner Eric Strucko (Samuel Miller) told his colleagues that the County’s Fiscal Impact Advisory Committee has reconvened, and has begun an examination of SB768. That’s the bill to replace the existing cash proffer system in favor of a system of impact fees that developers would pay for each housing unit. The bill stalled after passing the state Senate, but will be back in some form during next year’s General Assembly session.

“The Fiscal Impact Advisory Committee put forth a pretty lengthy effort last year to come up with some of the parameters that eventually worked into our proffer policy,” Strucko said. “This bill would put caps on what localities could get as well as put localities through a series of complex calculations that determine exactly what the impact of new development would be.”

The Committee will continue watching developments with the bill in order to find out what the impact of legislation might be to the County. Wayne Cilimberg, Albemarle’s Chief Planner, said the Committee will research how impact fees are used in other states. 

Committee recommends seven properties  for ACE program

Commissioner Bill Edgerton (Jack Jouett) says the Acquisition of Conservation Easements Committee is considering seven potential properties for inclusion in the County program, which purchases development rights from willing property owners in the rural area. Edgerton said these properties came from a pool of 15 applicants, and will be appraised.
“Unfortunately depending on how these prices come in, we probably won’t be able to work with all seven properties,” Edgerton said.

Sean Tubbs

Supervisors oppose Senate bill that would eliminate proffer system

The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors reached consensus today to oppose Senate Bill 768 which, if passed by the General Assembly, would eliminate Virginia's cash proffer system in favor of impact fees with a capped rate. Supervisor Sally Thomas (Samuel Miller) raised the issue for the Board's consideration under other business matters. Thomas said the bill has bi-partisan support and is currently under review by the Senate Finance Committee.

Chairman Ken Boyd (Rivanna) indicated that he had already been making personal calls in opposition to the bill. Supervisor Dennis Rooker (Jack Jouett) told his colleagues he was already on record as opposed to the bill and that he had also written a personal letter to legislators.  He shared with the Board that, if this law had been in effect at the time the Biscuit Run rezoning was approved, the County would have received $25 million less in proffers. He said the total proffers from Biscuit Run were valued at about $41 million.

"It is a devastating bill, I think, to localities, that are higher growth localities, that are having to build infrastructure to keep up with growth issues," said Rooker.  "I think the developers see the downturn in the economy as an opportunity to get something done they have been trying to get done for a long time. That is to limit severely the amount they have to contribute to pay for growth where it occurs."

Supervisor Ann Mallek (White Hall) said she would be in Richmond tomorrow and volunteered to add this to the list of issues she would discuss with members of the General Assembly.

The public can read the bill and post comments at the Richmond Sunlight website.

Brian Wheeler

Rooker says proffer bill could have devastating impact on Albemarle

Albemarle County Supervisor Dennis Rooker was a guest on WINA's Charlottesville Live radio program as part of the station's monthly Government Day feature.  Hosts Rick Daniels and Jane Foy interviewed Rooker about legislation in the General Assembly that would eliminate Virginia's cash proffer system in favor of impact fees with a capped rate.  Rooker said Albemarle's proffer expectations for each single family home would go down from $17,500 to $5,000 and the County would no longer be able to accept cash contributions into its affordable housing fund.  The Board of Supervisors just adopted new cash proffer expectations last June which raised the amount from $3,200 per home.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20080205-WINA-Rooker.mp3
 

Rooker encouraged the public to lobby local legislators in opposition to Senate Bill 768 which he said would have "a devastating impact on the ability of communities to somewhat recover the costs of growth as it impacts infrastructure."  The bill is being pushed by home building industry. Jane Foy asked if an unintended consequence of the caps might be that local governments stop approving new developments.  Rooker referred to a Washington Post article (Bill Could Force Curb On Growth, Fairfax Says, W. Post 1/4/08) that reports some Northern Virginia localities as saying the bill will curtail or freeze rezonings.

The public can read the bill and post comments at the Richmond Sunlight website.

In the remainder of the interview, Dennis Rooker responded to questions about the proposed changes to several rural area ordinances which are scheduled for a public hearing before the Board of Supervisors tomorrow.

Brian Wheeler

 

City Planning Commission to consider new proffer guidelines

The Charlottesville Planning Commission is considering whether or not to adopt new guidelines for how to deal with “in-kind” and cash proffers from developers seeking a rezoning. At a January 22nd work session, staff sought feedback on whether a cash proffer policy should be initiated, and if a proffer review sheet would be a useful tool. 

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20080122-CPC-Proffers.mp3

Compared to Albemarle County, there are relatively few re-zonings in the City. Neighborhood Planner Missy Creasy said there were only five re-zonings in Charlottesville for all of 2007, and two of those were withdrawn by the applicant. However, one of those re-zonings prompted some on City Council to ask for tighter guidelines of what can be expected.

In August of last year, the Commission voted 4-2 to recommend denial of a rezoning for a new nine-story building to be built in the northeast corner of the intersection of Ridge-McIntire.  A month later, City Council approved the rezoning after the developer agreed to increase a proffered contribution to the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority.

“We get very limited rezonings, but the ones that do come forward require a lot of discussion,” Creasy said.
Creasy said there is a proffer policy in place, but it does not address many of the issues that have come up in recent years.

Last year, the Commission and staff developed a draft proffer review sheet to be used as a guide in accepting “in-kind” donations. This document provides an opportunity for staff to review how any proffers generated through the rezoning might address the city’s infrastructure and planning needs. Areas of interest to the city include affordable housing, environmental impacts, opportunities for green building, and potential impacts on traffic congestion. The draft sheet also clearly outlines explains to each applicant what the legal requirements of proffers are, in light of state legislation that recently expanded their potential use.

“What we’re trying to accomplish is, because we have this new-found authority  to take a lot of proffers that we couldn’t have taken before, we’re trying to give some process to it, so there is going to be a definitely reasonable relationship between the impacts and the proffers,” said Rich Harris, the City’s Deputy Attorney. 

Harris cautioned that any discussion of cash proffers may be academic, given that a bill to prohibit them in favor of impact fees is making its way through the General Assembly. 

The County arrived at a figure of $17,500 after coming up with an estimated of how much each new residential unit costs to provide services. The Commission decided that a similar calculation of the incremental impacts of new development in the City would yield a much smaller number. Commissioner Jason Pearson suggested it might be difficult to calculate the incremental impact of each rezoning, given that there aren’t as many opportunities to rezone in the City as in the County, which has more available land to develop.

Other Commissioners wanted to know more information about what an “in-kind” proffer might mean. For instance, Keller asked if a developer offered to donate funding to purchase a land trust, would that be considered a cash-proffer or an in-kind one? Harris said that would likely be considered as in-kind.

Next month, the Planning Commission will also take up new zoning districts for the Downtown Mall and the West Main and South Street corridors. New height restrictions are being considered that would limit by-right development potential, meaning developers would need to apply for a special use permit if they wanted to build extra units.Commissioner Cheri Lewis asked if the City could collect additional proffers in exchange for that permit.  That prompted a philosophical discussion in which Pearson said he felt zoning should be a way to guide development, rather than a way to simply get proffers.

The revised proffer policy will be discussed at the Planning Commission’s next meeting on February 12, 2008.

Sean Tubbs

Top-10 Growth & Development Stories of 2007

In my weekly appearance today on WINA AM 1070 on the Charlottesville Right Now program, Coy Barefoot and I counted down Charlottesville Tomorrow's top-10 growth and development stories of 2007.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: 20080103-RightNow.mp3

Charlottesville Tomorrow's Top-10 Growth and Development Stories of 2007

1. County Elections 2007—Ann Mallek elected Supervisor in White Hall District
2. 4,800 new homes approved at Biscuit Run, Hollymead Town Center, and Rivanna Village
3. Wendell Wood’s projects around National Ground Intelligence Center on Route 29N get new scrutiny by media, public, and local government
4. Albemarle Supervisors set new cash proffer expectations
5. Proposed rural area protection ordinances stalemate Board of Supervisors
6. Lack of rain leads to drought warnings
7. City Planning Commission debates ethics, communications with the public and developers, impartiality, and starts holding pre-meetings off camera
8. Water and sewer infrastructure needs get increased community attention
9. City approves another nine-story downtown building and receives recommendations to limit future building heights in some areas
10. Major capital projects continue facility improvements at the University of Virginia

Brian Wheeler

Commissioners act on community concerns for Crozet’s downtown rezoning

This draft map dated November 19, 2007 shows staff recommendations for the boundaries of the proposed Downtown Crozet zoning district. The two general areas outlined in red (by Charlottesville Tomorrow) were taken out of consideration, prompting concerns from Crozet leaders. The Commission later restored them.

When arriving in Lane Auditorium before another Albemarle County Planning Commission meeting on a preemptive rezoning for Downtown Crozet, members of the town’s business community and other citizen leaders were shocked to find a draft map that showed a smaller downtown zoning district.

During the fourth work session on the topic, Commissioners overturned staff recommendations to draw a tighter zoning district, to establish a minimum size requirement for mixed use, and also threw out a plan to encourage affordable housing by setting an average maximum square foot floor for residential units in multifamily developments.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20071127-CpC-Crozet.mp3

County Senior Planner Rebecca Ragsdale described the reasoning behind the staff recommendation for the boundaries for the rezoning, should the County proceed. Unlike the boundary maps created by the consultant, the staff map does not include transition areas, and does not recommend including the 14.74 acre J. Bruce Barnes Lumber Yard at this time.  Ragsdale said downtown under this scenario would be about 53 acres.

Commissioner Eric Strucko (Samuel Miller) asked why the lumber yard wasn’t being included as part of this rezoning. Ragsdale responded that based on current use, the lumberyard would be non-conforming with its heavy industrial zoning classification.

“The lumberyard is only allowed in the heavy industrial category, so we didn’t see where heavy industrial type uses would be appropriate,” Ragsdale said, pointing out that the Master Plan anticipates the lumberyard moving or redeveloping at some point in the future.  “This is a way to allow them the flexibility to continue their operations which does provide a number of employment opportunities.”

Commissioner Bill Edgerton (Jack Jouett) asked if the lumber yard could be included in the rezoning, and somehow allowed to continue operations. “It’s a key part of the future development of the downtown core of Crozet,” he said, adding that doing so might encourage the property owners to redevelop.

CROZET LEADERS EXPRESS FRUSTRATION

Many stakeholders from the Crozet business computer spoke to express their opposition to staff’s proposed changes.

White Hall resident Ross Stevens told the Commission he was concerned about the boundaries. He said that the point of creating a downtown Crozet was to help the community compete with other commercial areas in the County. As the owner of several properties in the area, he would like more consideration of the recommendations of the Crozet Community Advisory Committee and the Downtown Crozet Association.

“I didn’t anticipate Downtown Crozet getting smaller,” Stevens said. “We need more space in order to accomplish the flexibility of developing downtown in a larger space.”  He was specifically opposed to the western side of Carter Street being taken out of downtown. 

Sandy Wilcox of the Downtown Crozet Association said he was upset about the way the process was turning out. He said the idea of reducing the size of the downtown had never been discussed during meetings between property owners, staff and consultants. He also said he was confused by why the lumber yard was taken out.

“The idea that we had in there was for everything to be the same so there wouldn’t be a wild card out there that we don’t know what is going to happen,” Wilcox said. He added that he felt blind-sided by the staff’s report and that his trust in the process is broken. 

The complaints kept coming.

Mack Lafferty, a member of the Crozet Community Advisory Committee, said he felt blind-sided. Another member, Mary Rice, encouraged the Commissioners to walk along Carter Street before following the recommendations.

Mike Marshall, publisher of the Crozet Gazette and chair of the CCAC, said he was shocked that staff issued a new recommendation before the work session.

“It’s not really too much of a surprise because this is sort of consistent with the Crozet experience,” Marshall said. He said he did not think using a 1,000 average maximum size for residential units was the appropriate way to deal with affordable housing, and that the issue of the lumber yard not conforming had never come up before.  Marshall said he thought the County was more interested in creating more opportunities for proffers, rather than protecting the heart of downtown Crozet.

“You’re not going to get those proffers on the areas currently zoned commercial, so you take those areas that aren’t currently zoned commercial, like West Carter Street, and the lumber yard, you pull them out. That means in the future they have to be rezoned, when the rezoning comes, you ask for your proffer.  So this is really about generating future income for the County.”

Marshall finished his comments by reminding the Commission that the town wants a single district with a unified set of rules.

COMMISSION DISCUSSION

After the public comment period ended, Commissioner Cal Morris (Rivanna) said he was surprised that members of the Committee felt blindsided.  When Commissioner Edgerton asked Ragsdale why areas had been removed, she responded that those particular areas lack appropriate infrastructure.

When Chairman Marcia Joseph (At-Large) asked what improvements would be needed, Ragsdale responded Main Street and Carter Street were substandard, so staff took a conservative approach when drawing the draft boundaries. 

“Without proffers, which is a very important tool to the County, as part of the rezoning process, we didn’t  have [infrastructure improvements] in the CIP now, we felt it was important to be able to have that tool in the future,” Ragsdale said.

But Commissioner Strucko said he thought proffers would be a disincentive for businesses to locate in the areas that have been taken out of the boundaries. 

“And the intent of the Crozet Master Plan was for the Downtown to be the center of commercial activity, an employment center, cultural center, also a center of public exchange,” Strucko said. He recommended staff add Carter Street and the Lumber Yard back to the draft map for the zoning district. Commissioner Duane Zobrist (White Hall) agreed.

Strucko also called for making the mixed use requirement more flexible, and called for removing the 1,000 square foot average maximum, and Zobrist and Joseph agreed with that as well.

While agreeing with the citizen input on the size of the zoning district, Commissioner Edgerton  shared concerns about the composition of uses that would be required.

“On every rezoning, we require mixed use, so we’re going to take just the rules off of Crozet and hope that it works out later?” he asked.

Strucko said looking at the map, he saw an intense business center in the middle of an area that contains residential and commercial use.  Edgerton said he was scared that without mixed use requirements that mandated residential use, the area would lack vitality because no one would be there at night when the businesses close.

That led to a discussion of how many residential units were within a five-minute walking radius of Downtown. Zobrist said people would walk downtown as long as there was a Dairy Queen, and also added that the Commission recently approved of the Crozet Station development, which includes residential units  in downtown.

Strucko said he spends about 15 hours in Crozet each work in his capacity working with the Western Albemarle Rescue Squad, and that the downtown needs flexibility so that it has an advantage over Old Trail and business along Route 250. Commission Jon Cannon (Rio) suggested finding a way to maximize incentives for commercial development in the core.

But Edgerton stuck to his principles, and asked his fellow Commissioners if they would be happy with downtown Crozet being redeveloped without any residential units at all, something he felt would happen unless it is required. Strucko said he would be comfortable with that because many residences would still be within a quarter mile walk.

Though the work session was not a public hearing, Chairman Joseph received public comment and even called citizens back allowing them to provide additional feedback. Sandy Wilcox went back to the podium, and said he was not against mixed use, just having it forced upon Crozet property owners.

“We are not an incorrigible child that has to be regulated into having mixed use,” Wilcox said. “I think the whole world looks at the downtown areas differently than they did before. We don’t want to roll up the sidewalks at 5:00 but we do need the flexibility.”

After the discussion, Joseph said she thought the project needed revision. Edgerton said he would like to see the larger boundaries be revisited.

“We need to make the downtown area as large as possible and the idea of holding back with the hope of getting some future income off of proffers to the County is really counter to what is needed here,” Edgerton said. 

Zobrist said he supported using the boundaries approved by the Crozet Downtown Association. Joseph said all Commissioners reached consensus on this point.

They then took up the issue of whether the floor for mixed use for single structures should be raised above the 7,500 square feet figure recommended by staff. To accommodate Edgerton’s wishes to include some requirement, Zobrist suggested increasing it to 10,000 square feet. Strucko said he thought numbers were arbitrary, and Canon wondered if there were ways to apply Neighborhood Model Principles without micromanaging. For example, he suggested using density bonuses for affordable housing.

Deputy County Attorney Greg Kamptner said mixed used did not only include mixing residential with retail shops. A combination of retail and office would also satisfy the regulations.

County Planner David Benish said he was unclear what the Commission’s directive was in terms of the mixed use requirement. Joseph clarified that the Commission wanted incentives rather than hard targets. The Commission also recommended throwing out the average minimum floor size.

The Commission will take up the matter again in early January, according to Ragsdale.

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST

• 00:51 - Review of the staff report from County Planner Rebecca Ragsdale
• 12:56 - Discussion of whether mixed-use should be required in each building
• 16:29 - Discussion of the 1,000 maximum square foot average for residential units
• 21:04 - Ragsdale continues staff report discussion and begins discussing recommended boundaries for Crozet
• 26:54 - Commissioner Strucko asks for more information on the zoning proposal discussed at the last work session
• 33:08 - Discussion of the fiscal impact analysis
• 35:21 - Public comment period begins with Crozet property owner Ross Stevens   
• 38:21 - Sandy Wilcox of the Downtown Crozet Association outlines his concerns with the new boundaries
• 42:55 - Mack Lafferty, member of the Crozet Community Advisory Committee
• 45:18 - Mike Marshall, chair of the Crozet Community Advisory Committee, briefs Commissioners on his concerns, followed by the Commission questioning Marshall about his opposition to the boundary change
• 52:41 - Cliff Fox outlines his opposition to using 1,000 maximum average square foot as a tool to encourage affordable housing
• 55:03 - Mary Rice urged Commissioners and staff to reconsider eliminating west side of Carter Street from downtown   
• 57:03 - Commission begins deliberation   
• 1:13:02 - Sandy Wilcox returns to the podium to say that the Downtown Crozet Association is not opposed to mixed use      
• 1:17:39 - Chairman Joseph says she can't support the project moving forward without revision to staff's draft
• 1:20:49 - Mac Lafferty returns to the podium to
• 1:22:08 - Mike Marshall explains why DCA opposes transition zones
• 1:25:21 - Commission reaches consensus that boundaries need to be expanded
• 1:27:28 - Commission discusses whether floor for mixed use requirement should be increased or dropped 
• 1:33:15 - Deputy County Attorney Greg Kamptner says mixed use does not necessarily include residential
• 1:36:54 - County Planner Elaine Echols asks for clarification

Sean Tubbs & Brian Wheeler

Albemarle landscaper seeks rezoning for move to 250 near Crozet

Landscaper Scott Watkins makes his case to the Planning Commission

Scott Watkins is a lifelong resident of Albemarle County who has operated a landscaping business  here since 1984. However, the future of his livelihood is currently in jeopardy.

“The County has determined that I cannot have my landscape business in a rural area because it’s not agricultural,” Watkins told the Planning Commission on October 30, 2007.  Watkins and Company is located on Route 20, outside of the growth area.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20071030-Watkins.mp3

The County classifies his business as a contractor’s storage yard, which is only allowed in land designed as Highway Commercial or Light Industrial. Watkins said he could not afford to purchase any land already zoned in one of those two categories, so he and his wife purchased two parcels of land totaling three acres in the growth area along Route 250 and are requesting a rezoning to Highway Commercial.  The land is currently zoned as R-1 residential. 

“Currently my livelihood is at stake,” he said. “I’m not looking to develop this property for profit, but merely to keep my business in the County.”

The Commission held a work session to find out more information on the project, and to consider whether a landscaping business would be an acceptable use of the property.  Staff also wanted to know if Watkins would be required to connect to sewer.  The house has a functioning well and septic system, and Watkins said he would likely not want to hook up to public water.  Watkins is also not interested in contributing to the construction of an interconnecting road to the proposed Liberty Hall subdivision, something staff has suggested may need to be part of a rezoning.

Watkins two parcels of land are marked with orange and red outlines

Adjacent to the property on the west is the Cloverlawn development, which features town houses as well as two commercial buildings fronting Route 250. To the east lies the rural area boundary.

For his part, Watkins said his business would make a good neighbor for the Cloverlawn department.
“I think that we would make a wonderful transition between what is currently the rural area to a commercial area.”  He said he would be willing to improve the current landscaping on the property, and there would be no retail traffic at the location. However, a handful of trucks would be dispatched each morning. 

Because the property is within the boundaries of the Crozet Master Plan, staff has also requested Watkins to consider building pedestrian connections  with surrounding neighborhoods, both existing and proposed. Watkins said he did not want to do so because his business is not a retail establishment. 

“A quick scan of the local maps shows that there is a dearth of industrial land in the County for service businesses,” Watkins said.

Landscape architect and former Planning Commissioner Will Reilly has been working with Watkins to find a new location. He spoke up in favor of the rezoning.

“I think the really crucial issue here is to recognize that this parcel is in the growth area,” Reilly told the Commission. “If you look at the various criteria in the Crozet plan for where this kind of operation would occur, the closest category is the one that it's proposed to be in.”

But the rezoning is opposed by at least one neighbor of Cloverlawn, and by an organization that is dedicated to preserving the route 250 corridor. Scott Peyton is the president of Scenic 250.

“I'm deeply concerned that a rezoning from R1 to Highway Commercial would set an extremely disturbing precedent,” Peyton said. “I think you all could count on seeing additional requests come before you and the Supervisors. If you approve this rezoning, I don't know what the County's footing would be to deny future rezoning requests.

“I'm deeply sympathetic to Mr. Watkins personal and professional plight,” Peyton added. “I think it is imperative for the County to take steps to make provisions for appropriate locations for service industries to be in place to support both the commercial and residential development in the growth area.”

Reilly told the Commission that the road will look even more scenic if Watkins can operate his business, because he will plant trees along Route 250.

Commissioner Duane Zobrist (White Hall) asked what would happen if the land was rezoned, and Watkins goes out of business. Reilly said there would be a lot of limitations placed on the rezoning.

Anita Jacobson lives next door in the Cloverlawn townhouses, and she says she would not have bought her home if she had known the property next door would go commercial. “I'm unfortunately only one of 18 homeowners here tonight at this meeting to make that objection,” Jacobson said.

Zobrist said he had a lot of sympathy for Watkins but was skeptical the rezoning would occur.

“I just think he probably picked the wrong piece of property,” he said before listing several reasons why he is opposed. They include the presence of heavy trucks entering the property, the preservation of 250's character, and a fear that the property may end up being sold to another commercial interest in the future.

Commissioner Eric Strucko (Samuel Miller) agreed, and added that he could not support any more rezonings until the County has rural protection strategies in place.

But Commissioner Pete Craddock (Scottsville) said he was concerned that Watkins and other small businesses will end up moving to another county in order to keep going.  But, he added that he was not sure if this particular piece of property would be  a good fit.

Commissioner Calvin Morris (Rivanna) said he felt it was an appropriate use, because a landscaping business would provide a good transition from rural to commercial.  Though, he said he was not sure how to handle the potential traffic issues.

Commissioner Bill Edgerton (Jack Jouett) said he was struggling with how to proceed, and wanted more information on exactly how many trucks would enter and exit the property each day. Watkins responded that at most, two trucks would be loaded up with supplies each morning, and would return in the afternoon, and the occasional 18 wheeler would supply the business.

“I hear the concern about the expansion of commercial,” Edgerton said. “This is certainly not on the level of expansion of yet again more shopping centers.” He added that residential uses would likely generate more traffic.

Chair Marcia Joseph (At-Large) said she had a problem with rezoning the property as Highway Commercial, which she called the County's most intense zoning classification. Her proposed solution would be to try to find a way for Watkins to continue operating his business in the rural area. She added that she concerned that Watkins did not want to do many of the items requested by staff, such as connecting to public water and building transportation improvements.

Zobrist asked if it would be possible to simply rezone Watkins' existing property. County Planning Chief Wayne Cilimberg said that would not be consistent with the comprehensive plan designation, and would be spot-zoning. Commissioner Jon Cannon (Rio) said that he thought rezoning Watkins property on 250 would be consistent.

“I don't think you need to be hung up on highway commercial if we tailor [the rezoning] so that it is what it needs to be for this particular site in a way that can be enforced,” Cannon said.

Commissioner Craddock said the rezoning would have to be worded very carefully. “I certainly don't want to see this done to Highway Commercial, and then six months later Joe's Used Car Lot comes out there,” Craddock said.

Four of the seven commissioners agreed to proceed with the process, and a public hearing before the Planning Commission will be held on December 11, 2007. Zobrist and Strucko were the two votes against proceeding, and Joseph did not voice a specific position.

---

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST

• 0:54 – County Planner Rebecca Ragsdale introduces the item and gives a summary
• 17:31 – Commissioner Zobrist asks how the Cloverlawn development is currently zoned, and Commissioners discuss
• 19:51 – Applicant Scott Watkins
• 26:39 – Commissioner Zobrist asks Watkins about the location of his current property
• 27:41 – Landscape architect Will Reilly describes how he's been working with Mr. Watkins
• 37:01 – Commissioner Jon Cannon asks Reilly if he thinks the property would be appropriate for residential use
• 42:06 – Commissioner Joseph asks how a landscaping business would be acceptable under the Crozet Master Plan
• 43:42 – Cloverlawn resident Anita Jacobson expresses her opposition
• 45:09 – Scott Payton, President of Scenic 250, expresses his opposition
• 48:35 – Commissioners discuss whether a landscaping business would be an appropriate use for the location
• 1:16:46: County Staff asks for more input on the improvements Watkins would have to make through proffers to the property in order to get the rezoning

Sean Tubbs

Planning Commission Summary for October 30, 2007

The Albemarle County Planning Commission has voted 5-2 to recommend rejection of a rezoning that would further expand the Glenmore community. The applicant has requested several parcels of land southeast of the existing Glenmore development be rezoned as Planned Residential Development.  KG Associates seeks to build an additional 110 homes  on the property.

The item was first reviewed at a public hearing on August 21, 2007. While the Commission recommended approval at that meeting, a second hearing had to be held because a discrepancy was found in the legal advertisement. One of the tax parcel numbers had been omitted from the ad, and others were incorrect.   
After the first public hearing, the Planning Commission made three specific recommendations:

• the applicant should make cash proffer contributions  and or construct affordable units
• the applicant should  amend the plan to show a pedestrian connection
• the applicant should proffer an area for a greenway

County Planner Elaine Echols said the recommendation of staff was to approve the rezoning if the developer met those recommendations. But, at the October 30 public hearing, the applicant had not  made the first two changes, though Echols said she had been talking to the developer’s representative, Don Franco, about the cash  proffers. 

“There were changes to the proffers, but there were not changes to the plan,” Echols told the Commission. “But the proffers were just changed in some ways to make it clear what they were proffering and certainly to provide the greenway information.”

The applicant’s representative, Don Franco, told the Commission that the requested changes to the plan were graphical in nature,   and that he would be taking up the affordable housing proffers issue when the item goes before the Board of Supervisors on November 14. The developer wants to base the affordable housing contribution on 76 units, and feels that a credit should be granted for environmentally-sensitive design.

Planning Commissioner Eric Strucko (Samuel Miller) said he could not support the rezoning because he was concerned about the extra density in the location, which is within the County’s growth area. “Given the fact that we don’t have rural preservation policies in place, I cannot support this,” he said. He also said he was opposed to the applicant’s request for any credits.

Commission Chair Marcia Joseph (At-Large) said she was disappointed that nothing was changed on the plan.  “I feel as if it doesn’t really matter what we say or what kind of approval or what kind of recommendations we give to the Board,” she said.  “We needed all 110 units within the proffers.”

Assistant County Attorney Greg Kamptner said the applicant wants the chance to explain why they feel they need a credit to the Board, and that’s why they’ve not made the change.

Commissioners Cal Morris (Rivanna) and Duane Zobrist (White Hall) voted for approval, while Commissioners Joseph, Strucko, Bill Edgerton (Jack Jouett),  Pete Craddock (Scottsville) and Jon Cannon (Rio) voted against.

Another expansion at Glenmore, the Livengood parcel, was approved earlier this month.

---

OAKLEIGH FARM

The Commission also recommended rejection of a rezoning of 8.82 acres of land off of West Rio Road from R-6 the Neighborhood Model District. The owner of the property, George Ray, wants to build a mixed-use community called Oakleigh Farm that would feature 109 housing units arranged as well as 28,000 square feet of commercial retail space.

Two of the buildings fronting Rio Road would have the commercial space on the first level, with residences located on upper floors. Behind that, the development would open up into a series of multi-family units arranged around a grove of trees, as well as two single family cottages. The property is bordered by the Berkmar Crossing, Heritage Hall and a business called the Garden Spot. Fifty-three percent of the project would be either open space or some other amenity, according to the applicant’s attorney, Valerie Long.

County Planner Claudette Grant told the Commission the proposal meets with most of the principles of the Neighborhood Model, and that the applicant will preserve 39 existing mature trees.  However, she also listed several factors that are unfavorable to rezoning. For instance, she said the impacts on public facilities are not appropriately offset through proffers, a buffer with Heritage Hall has not been finalized, as well as several issues with the plan identified by the Architectural  Review Board. Grant said the applicant has agreed to resolve the issues and is working with staff.

There are no affordable housing provisions in the plan, but Grant said the developer may change this before it goes to the Board.  If not, Oakleigh may pay an additional cash proffer to meet the County’s affordable housing.

Long said the applicant is requesting proffer credits based on two provisions in the County’s recently adopted cash proffer policy.  First, she said the policy allows states that the Board of Supervisors “has the discretion to give credit for existing lot yields if the application provides substantial upgrade over current design development standards.”  Second, she says the policy allows for credit to be given “if there are unique circumstances about a project that mitigates the development’s impact on public facilities.”

Long said Oakleigh  qualifies for both of those credits because it would build a mixed-use community in Neighborhood Model, and because the County will receive tax revenue as a result of the commercial space.  The developer could build between 52 and 78 residences by-right, and Long estimates that the project will generate $ 65,000 per year in tax revenues. She asked the Commission to consider granting a proffer credit of $325,000 based on five years.

Commissioner Pete Craddock said he thought it was up to the Supervisors to answer the proffer question. Commissioner Cannon lauded the project for taking tree preservation seriously, but said he did not feel it’s the Commission’s role to make exceptions to the “strict terms” of the proffer policy.

“I don’t understand how they expect us to exercise their discretion,” Cannon said.

Commissioner Edgerton said he could not support the project because not enough had been done to push for a buffer between Oakleigh and Heritage Hall.  He also said he felt it was not appropriate for the Commission to weigh in on cash proffer credits.

The Commission voted unanimously to recommend rejection. The item will go before the Board of Supervisors on December 12, 2007.

---

LIBERTY HALL

The Planning Commission voted unanimously to amend a previous rezoning of the Liberty Hall project, 8.01 acres that were rezoned in June 2006 to Neighborhood Model District. The change allows for construction of a total of 51 residential units off of Radford Lane in the Crozet area. The language in the original rezoning did not include language that would have allowed the developer, Weatherhill Development, to rent out the 8 proffered affordable housing units. The amendment now includes that language.  No other changes were made to the rezoning, and the project is nearing final site plan approval.  Valerie Long, who represents the developer, says the amendment was requested to provide flexibility once the units are built. The item goes before the Board of Supervisors on December 12

---

OTHER COMMISSION ITEMS

The Commission also held a work-session on the rezoning of Downtown Crozet, as well as a work-session on a proposal to rezone a parcel of land to the south of Liberty Hall to Highway Commercial to accommodate a landscaping business. Charlottesville Tomorrow will publish stories on those topics in the near future.

Sean Tubbs

Scottsville candidates face questions at forum

On October 23, 2007, the three candidates for the Scottsville District on the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors appeared at a candidate forum co-sponsored by the Free Enterprise Forum and Charlottesville Tomorrow.

Democratic incumbent Lindsay Dorrier and independent challengers Kevin Fletcher and Denny King answered ten questions on land use, transportation, and growth in the County. The candidates also answered several questions submitted by members of the audience, ranging from ground water quality, the ethics of meeting with developers privately, and the amount of time it takes per week to serve on the Board of Supervisors.

About twenty-five people attended the forum, which was held at Monticello High School. The event was co-moderated by Neil Williamson of the Free Enterprise Forum and Sean Tubbs of Charlottesville Tomorrow.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20071023-Scottsville-Forum.mp3

Watch the video below:

OPENING STATEMENTS

Denny King (I)-Challenger: “When people ask me why in the world I was running for public office, I simply said that I had been so fortunate throughout my business career and I felt that it was time for me to give back to my community... At the urging of my many friends and neighbors and business associates, they had been terribly concerned about the changes that have happened over the past ten years in our County. And they were very concerned about representation... When I looked at the questions tonight, the first thing I thought about was “Why weren't some of these questions asked ten years ago?” That was the time in which these questions should have been asked. The horse is now two counties away and we're playing catch-up. We have been reactive rather than proactive...”

Kevin Fletcher (I)-Challenger: “There's been quite a bit written in the papers and different things about that I'm really not that interested in trying to get elected, because I have only raised $575 for my election, and I'd like to try to explain that in the sense that I ran for Board of Supervisors as a write-in four years ago, and I received quite a bit of support financially... When I lost, it hurt me deeply, because a great many people had not only invested their time, but they invested a lot of money... I felt that I had let them down, and that bothered me for quite some time... I'm not a politician. I do not like letting people down, so I made the determination that I'm not going to take a bunch of money... People have offered me money, but I've not spent any time at all soliciting money...”

Lindsay Dorrier (D)- Incumbent: “I'm running for Board of Supervisors because I guess I've got a genetic disposition to do so. Both of my grandfathers served on the Board of Supervisors in the 1940's and 50's. My great-grandfather served on the Board... I think it's probably the local governments where the action is, where people can get something done and you can do it yourself... I'm proud of the fact that I'm representing the Scottsville district because I draw my strength from you the people who give me ideas about ways we can improve our government. Albemarle County is going through changes now. We're seeing a lot of growth in Albemarle County, but I think we have some processes that we are applying in Albemarle County that are going to reap fruit in the near future. We've got a master planning process that we are using to plan communities... We are taking proffers from developers for infrastructure. Those amount to millions of dollars. For example, Biscuit Run project is 41 million dollars from the developer...”

Question 1: 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?

Lindsay Dorrier (D)-Incumbent: “I believe that the growth management strategies are beginning to work. I think that we've got a master planning process. I helped develop the strategic plan in 2001 and 2002 that's we're implementing, and that we used to redo the comprehensive plan with. The strategic plan sets the goal of development in 5% of the area of the County, which is the growth area. 95% of the County is going to remain rural. And we have implemented those strategies to deal with growth... So I think that these growth strategies will work, they are working. We've got to manage future growth by master planning... By master planning I mean we're bringing County planners into meetings and dialog with citizens of the area, so the citizens working with the County design he plan for the area of the County.... Crozet had some problems at first but we're on the right track out there and we're getting a lot of input from Crozet residents.

Denny King (I)-Challenger: “I think we've had very poor growth management strategies... And Mr. Dorrier speaks about the Master Plan. The Master Plan wasn't even in effect before the County approved 15,000 homes... I believe that the citizens have been marginalized and the developers have been catered to. The developers appear to be in charge of the County. It is my desire and my goal to give the County back to the people, once again, to hear the voices of the people. I believe the whole growth system, the whole growth plan is totally, totally out of balance. We've seen secret private meetings discussing these matters. When we go to public hearings, we see the Board of Supervisors get up and go back and have their own mini-meetings. It's simply time that we make the Supervisors, your Supervisors, accountable to their actions, to make it transparent. You deserve that, you require that, and that is your right. We speak for you, we speak for the will of the people, and I believe the will of the people simply has not been heard...”

Kevin Fletcher (I)-Challenger: “I also believe that the growth management strategies have failed in Albemarle County... Many of the development that has taken place in the County has been done without a Master Plan in place. And, the Comprehensive Plan is very clear that the Neighborhood Model of which we all work upon for our rezoning will fail, it will fail without a Master Plan in place, and that has been proven in Crozet. So much started without that, and then they finally got it going, and mistakes were made in that... We have so much going on.  We've had Biscuit Run, we've had Rivanna Village, we're going to be having the shopping centers that's going to come up soon on the other side of 64. There's not a Master Plan in place and one hasn't even begun...…As far as the rural areas, I liked what was brought before the Board I guess it was last week or two weeks ago. The Board failed to vote on it once again – deadlocked – which is sad. Even if they are deadlocked they need to vote so that your vote goes on record, where you stand as far as protecting our rural areas... Are the existing incentives adequate? Certainly they're adequate. I think there's been quite a bit of growth, and I think the incentives for people to develop in the growth areas have certainly been there. But we have failed to manage our growth because we have moved too quickly... We have failed our County.

Question 2:   How important is creating new jobs to the future of Albemarle County?  Should particular businesses be encouraged or discouraged from coming to or remaining in Albemarle County?  Who?  How?

Denny King (I)-Challenger: “I think the economic well-being and the health of any community is paramount on job creation. Unfortunately, our County has been  losing jobs at a pretty staggering rate. The creation of new jobs, I believe, should be linked to the University. We have a tremendous number of alumni from the University who have created very successful companies and corporations, and I believe that we have to work closely with the Alumni Association, with the University, to encourage some of these alumni to come back to Charlottesville and Albemarle County and bring their businesses back here.  The jobs that have been created are low paying service jobs, and once again, requiring this workforce, these employees to live a county or two counties away. Thus again, impacting the traffic problem and all of the other infrastructure, system problems that we experience every day of our lives. We must be, I believe, proactive.  I think Albemarle County has just signed on with the economic commission group
representing several neighboring counties, and the County was very reluctant to do that for a great number of years and I think that the County made a great decision in finally joining forces with the Thomas Jefferson [Partnership] for Economic [Development (TJPED)]... Because those people will go around the nation encouraging clean industry and more jobs to come to Charlottesville and Albemarle. And we're beginning to see more and more of that, with the creation of NGIC, the growth factor, we now have over 18,000 employees at the University...”

Kevin Fletcher (I)-Challenger: “I think that it is very important that we are continuing to try to create new jobs.  I think we are going to be facing a bit of a job crisis I believe coming up because of housing market is continuing to  slump…I think we will be in a bit of trouble.  I think there's going to be some people that are going to be in dire need of looking for work.  I think also one of the aspect of business is that we really need to try to push in Albemarle County is agriculture. I think that local agriculture is a very hot topic. People like local agriculture. They like the fact that something is grown local and sold local, keeps money in the economy.... And that also helps to protect our rural areas and it helps to get the people who live in our rural areas, they can live and they can work  and live, not necessarily make a fabulous living, but supplement their income... I think that we need to try to attract more technology based businesses... work with the University on that... Another part of the growing segment in our business in our County is going to be  the service industry, especially since our population is getting older... Albemarle County is very much a microcosm of America. Manufacturing is gone. Technology businesses have moved in, have done very well, they're very clean, and now the uptick in the surge in America is the service industry, and I think we need to try to pay attention to that and promote that.”

Lindsay Dorrier (D)-Incumbent:  “We need to work on creating new jobs in Albemarle County...  I have been in favor of the Board joining TJPED and the Chamber of Commerce... And the Board only reluctantly came around to that opinion last year. I think it's important that we belong to both of those  organizations because they deal with the future of the County. If we don't have a good economy in Albemarle County we're not going to be able to have a high quality of life, and we are not going to be able to do all the things that we want to do... We have a number of underemployed people in Albemarle County. We've got PhDs waiting tables and we've got a number of people who have to leave the community because they can't get jobs... I think businesses should be encouraged to come here and if they are manufacturing type businesses, we would probably discourage them from coming here.  We have lost some major industries in Albemarle County.... We need to look at the computer-type industries, the Silicon Valley type. Non-invasive, non-smoke belching industry is what we want. We want research parks. We need to work closely with the University of Virginia to bring the right businesses here and to encourage research and biomedical areas...”

Question 3: How will you deal with neighborhood opposition to rezonings in our growth areas that are in line with the goals of Albemarle’s Comprehensive plan?

Kevin Fletcher (I)-Challenger: “Once again we go back to the master plan. I think that if we utilize the master plan the way it was intended I think it would cut down on a great deal on public unhappiness with rezonings... There should even almost be a community input team. Let's say Biscuit Run... There might have been a couple people from Mill Creek, Mill Creek South, Lake Reynovia, Foxcroft. Those people all work together and they are creating, they are working within the community to come up with ideas and plans that can be presented to the Planning Commission... There is a sense that you do not get your say in this county.  The mere fact that they voted on [the Biscuit Run] rezoning at 1:00 AM, that also helps to set, the mindset, of the general public that you do not matter... That is why when you go and you walk through the neighborhoods and you try to to talk to them and they talk about growth, and they say, “You know, there's nothing you can do about it. It is hopeless. It is hopeless.” And that is something I want to try to bring to the Board...

Lindsay Dorrier (D)-Incumbent: “The way to deal with neighborhood opposition is to have the developer meet with the opponents and try to deal with their particular concerns. Also, the Supervisors should be involved in that process. I think that in the Biscuit Run situation, the developer met with citizens. He appeared before the Planning Commission and he appeared to answer every question that people had concerning that development. Now, the