Charlottesville Tomorrow Blog

Supervisor candidates on expansion of County growth areas

As the community gets ready for election day on November 6th, Charlottesville Tomorrow is preparing to mail our non-partisan voter guides featuring the results of interviews with each of the candidates for Charlottesville City Council and the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. 

Over the next few weeks, this blog will feature some of the questions that did not make the cut for the voter guide, but which still offer important insights into the candidates' views on local growth and development issues.

 

Our Election Watch 2007 website includes the complete audio and written transcript for each candidate interview.  Subscribe to our e-mails to get immediate notification of the availability of the 2007 Voter Guides.  The content below are excerpts pulled from the verbatim transcripts.

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, FOURTH IN A SERIES

How do you feel about an expansion of the County’s designated growth areas, currently 5% of the County’s land area, to support a transfer of development rights program or to support a developer’s request to move land from the rural area to the growth area?How do you feel about an expansion of the County’s designated growth areas, currently 5% of the County’s land area, to support a transfer of development rights program or to support a developer’s request to move land from the rural area to the growth area?

---

RIVANNA

Ken Boyd (R)-Incumbent: Well, I think that the transfer of development rights program is an intriguing idea and I’m very anxious to see more about it but I really am not going to make up my mind until I’ve had more analysis that would come from the staff and from a report which we haven’t received yet.

Marcia Joseph (D)-Challenger: …I think there [is] still available land out there, not only green land that hasn’t been used, but land that could be redeveloped.  I don’t think we need to expand them at this point.  TDRs are a very interesting concept.  Before I would ever commit to anything like that, I’d like to see what other localities are doing, what have they done, what have they been successful in doing… the receiving area of these transferred development rights is extremely critical because you realize that there’s no rezoning going on, that that increased density just goes on in there so we’d have to make very very sure that all of this infrastructure that we’ve been talking about is adequate and could support that increased density.

---

SCOTTSVILLE

Lindsay Dorrier (D)-Incumbent: I am against any expansion of the growth area in Albemarle County.

Kevin Fletcher (I)-Challenger: I am not in favor of expanding our growth area… because we have squandered I think a lot of our opportunities in the growth area, but I think that the proposed plan benefits most everyone except I guess the small landowner in Albemarle County, the people who are developers or land speculators, you know, they get what they want… the proposed plan would, as I believe as Mr. Slutzky has proposed, puts a great deal of burden of this plan on the small landowners and I’m not in favor of that in any way….  I don’t think there’s been any new legislation to allow the transferring of development rights…

Denny King (I)-Challenger: You know, the more I look at the 95/5% split, the more I become convinced that such an imbalance, such an enormous imbalance of 95% and 5%, how could it ever be sustainable?... Are we rapidly becoming northern Virginia?... 

Transferring more development into the 5% or expanding the growth areas, I don’t think does much to address the basic imbalance.  That’s simply a band-aid…

---

WHITE HALL

David Wyant (R)-Incumbent: Well, I’m opposed to expanding the development areas and especially Crozet, if we do a Transfer of Development Rights, if it’s ever considered.  I think if you look at Albemarle County from up at 20,000 [feet], it’s kind of unusual to have a development area outside of the major one of in the County, but I understand why years ago the Board selected that with ConAgra and the ACME [businesses] that no longer exist there. 

…When we get into the Transfer of Development Rights, what you’re going to have to consider there, as I’ve said in engineering, I’m trying to provide services and the trunk lines and the other means for water and sewer, [TDRs] really [do] change that.  I as a designer of those infrastructures, it’s difficult for me to design for that when those boundaries are changing on it…

Ann Mallek (D)-Challenger: I oppose expanding the growth area.  We made a commitment that growth area residents would have the countryside nearby, so that the growth area does not become a huge monolith, with miles and miles of high rise and high density living.  If we betray that trust our growth areas will fail.  Providing greater encouragement to farming nearby would increase the proximity of farm products to customers.

Kendall Singleton

Developer Frank Cox calls for local government leadership and rural area protection

What tools do communities in Virginia have for managing growth, and are they effective? A diverse panel of experts addressed these questions at a discussion held at the Senior Center on May 24, 2007. The event was moderated by Morris Sahr, a former chairman of the Fairfax County Planning Commission, who now lives in Charlottesville.

"Who are we really planning for?" asked Sahr to kick off the event. "Are we planning for those of us in the room tonight, or the generations to come? How can you make a decision as to how much you can accommodate with all of the facilities that have to be provided?"

Developer Frank Cox is the man behind County projects like Albemarle Place, the Granger property, and the proposed retail development at 5th and Avon. Reflecting on past decisions by the County Board of Supervisors to downzone rural Albemarle in the great rezoning of 1980, Cox said the evidence indicates that today's rural area zoning was not doing enough to limit growth.  When asked what he would do to protect Albemarle's rural countryside today, he initially said he would not downzone further, but later clarified that what was needed was leadership to implement the community's vision, as described in the comprehensive plan, which he thought would call for minimum lot sizes of 50 to 100 acres.  Minimum lot sizes today, which were established in 1980, are 21 acres.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20070524-Sustainable-Growth.mp3

"Albemarle County has been intellectually dishonest with itself for the last fifty years," said Cox about the ability of the Board of Supervisors to implement a vision for protecting the rural area.  With respect to downzoning, Cox said, "I think we should have done it thirty years ago.  I am not sure that we have the overall political and governmental strength to do it [today]."

Cox didn't mince words when it came to describing his belief that local government was failing to implement its vision and make the necessary investments in public infrastructure.  His Albemarle Place project is currently stalled because of inadequate sewer capacity.

"I go back to the point that we need to implement a vision....My fear is that we don't have the leadership to hang on to, to describe, to carry out that vision, to inculcate it in not only us....We need to inculcate that vision into a new generation that is coming....In the rural area we are intellectually dishonest. If we want to go back to our comprehensive plan in the way it is described right now, and then translate it into a zoning ordinance that would bring about the actual precepts that are articulated for rural area growth, we would implement a zoning ordinance, a new zoning district for the rural area, that would have one unit per 50 acres, maybe one unit per 100 acres."

Morgan Butler of the Southern Environmental Law Center told the crowd that the essence of planning is to shape the future. "But I don't think there can be any denying that the decisions we make have an immediate impact as well."

Jack Marshall, President of Advocates for a Sustainable Albemarle Population, said his group is calling for the County to define an "optimal" population. He defined sustainability as "meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." He says the costs of growth can exceed the benefits, especially as the United States becomes a more populous nation.

"If we are morally committed to being stewards of our own community, then we recognize an obligation to identify an optimal sustainable size for a community," Marshall said. "Without doing that, we grow either by accident or at the whim of those who profit from growth."

Attorney Steven Blaine told the crowd that Albemarle should consider population when planning for the future, to avoid the high rate of growth that has occurred in communities such as Loudoun County. But, he says "smart growth" policies to direct development into key areas is failing in the county.

"Last year, there were 575 home starts in 2006, down from previous years," Blaine said. "But 46 percent of those house starts were in the rural area."  [Note: During the first quarter of 2007, only 17.5% of new homes are in the rural area]

The discussion continued on the effectiveness of "smart growth" tools such as Neighborhood Model, how to maintain the region's quality of life, and what lessons can be learned from counties to the north of Albemarle.

Sean Tubbs & Brian Wheeler

Developers, environmentalists, and government officials journey to Chapel Hill

By Brian Wheeler
Charlottesville Tomorrow

Download this article to print

How far will the Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC) go to ensure good ideas get on the table for new developments in Albemarle County? Today they went to Chapel Hill, NC.  PEC board member Tony Vanderwarker filled a Cessna Citation III jet with a Charlottesville-Albemarle delegation eager to learn about neighborhood model developments in Chapel Hill that successfully integrate public transit.  The objective was to bring home good ideas for Biscuit Run and other area developments.

The passengers included Mr. Vanderwarker, Biscuit Run developer Hunter Craig, Albemarle County Supervisors Lindsay Dorrier and Sally Thomas, City Planning Commissioner Michael Osteen, PEC Field Officer Jeff Werner, and Susan Payne with Payne Ross (the public relations firm representing Biscuit Run).  Charlottesville Tomorrow was invited to report on the trip (In the interests of full disclosure, Mr. Vanderwarker is also on the Board of Directors of Charlottesville Tomorrow). 

Located two miles outside of Chapel Hill, the Meadowmont neighborhood has a lot of the features on Albemarle County’s wish list for new developments.  Street trees, bus stops, sidewalks, town centers, mixed uses, and a variety of housing types.  A former dairy farm, Meadowmont has about 1,050 homes on 435 acres with 200,000 sq.ft. of commercial/office space.  It took ten years to get approved and was built between 2000 and 2007.  By comparison, Biscuit Run is proposed to have 3,100 homes on 828 acres with 150,000 sq.ft. of commercial/office space.

(L to R) Lindsay Dorrier, Sally Thomas, Hunter Craig, Tony Vanderwarker, Jeff Werner (hand visible with map), and Michael Osteen

During the 30 minute flight from Charlottesville, Michael Osteen commented on his priorities.  “Transportation is one thing that needs to be solved on a regional basis.  We need the County, UVA, and the City all on the same page.”

City Planning Commissioners like Osteen have recently received a lot of feedback about transportation, particularly since Biscuit Run took the public stage.  An architect who also serves on the City’s Board of Architectural Review, he admits transportation wasn’t originally at the top of his policy agenda.  That changed when Osteen was recently appointed to the City’s Street Car Task Force.  Now he is giving a lot more thought to how the University and downtown Charlottesville are connected.

Meeting the group at the Raleigh-Durham airport was Meadowmont resident and realtor Phil Patterson.  Patterson, a friend of Susan and L.F. Payne from when he worked with the couple developing Wintergreen, spent sixteen years in Charlottesville and was quite adept at comparing the various aspects of the community to things familiar to the group back home in Virginia.  Other experts there to offer advice included former Chapel Hill Mayor Rosemary Waldorf (1995-2001) and resident Gail Ross and her dog Madison.

On the drive from the airport to Meadowmont, Tony Vanderwarker outlined his group’s interest in working with Hunter Craig to achieve quality growth in Albemarle.  “In recent years, [the PEC has] been becoming aware that to fulfill the county’s comprehensive plans, growth areas have to be thoughtfully planned out in order to absorb population that would otherwise go to the rural areas.”  With respect to the Biscuit Run development, Vanderwarker said, “Hunter engaged us a couple months ago and asked for our point of view and perspective. We have been talking ever since.”

The first stop on the tour was a retirement community known as The Cedars integrated into Meadowmont.  Similar to Charlottesville’s Westminster Canterbury, it has a front yard more like the lawn at UVA adjoining a town center with a Harris Teeter within walking distance.  This was not Hunter Craig’s first visit to The Cedars and he says a similar facility will likely be a design element in Biscuit Run.

“This is a market we are going to target,” said Craig.  “Looking at the 55+ age group, they want efficient and attractive transit.”  The Cedars has shuttle buses which take residents to the town center and Chapel Hill.  As part of the Biscuit Run development, Craig has proffered up to $1 million in cash towards public transit operations.  Craig said he has already spoken to UVA’s Leonard Sandridge about making use of the University bus stops for shuttles coming out of Biscuit Run.  Until the University participates in an integrated transit system, Craig wants the decision makers in Albemarle to know he is serious about helping residents choose to leave their cars at home.  “This trip is about a regional discussion on transportation, and is not just about Biscuit Run,” said Craig.

The group walks past several of the 30 affordable homes designed for Meadowmont.

While public transit was a focus of the visit to Meadowmont, the residents the group met said they did not actually use the bus system themselves very often, if at all.  Interestingly, the bus routes initially looped through the interior of the development until neighbors complained about the noise.  The transit service was pushed out and the bus stops moved to the spine roads.  Residents now have a 4-5 block walk to the nearest stop.  Chapel Hill Transit has been fare free since 2002 and the University of North Carolina contributes heavily to its operation.  Working in Chapel Hill’s favor is the fact it already has a unified town-university transit system.  UNC is also famous for having very little parking and a master plan that seeks to eliminate even more parking in favor of infill development accessed by transit. 

The fact that the Charlottesville Transit System (CTS) receives federal funding has been cited as an obstacle to integration with the University of Virginia.  Federal funds come with restrictions on the use of transit equipment.  Hunter Craig said our community should be able to overcome that challenge.  “I think we need to work together and get the laws changed if necessary,” said Craig.  The University of Virginia’s Director of Parking and Transportation, Rebecca White, says, “That would be fabulous.”  White was not on this trip, but reports a delegation from UVA is also heading to UNC on June 14th to talk with their colleagues about sustainability.  “We do not receive federal funds and my understanding is equipment purchased with federal money cannot be used for charter services,” said White. 

White said there are other universities that have worked around this problem by carving out fleets not supported by federal dollars.  UVA needs to have buses for parking lot shuttles, graduation, sporting events, and field trips.  According to White, last year CTS said it would no longer be able to allow its fleet to be used for UVA’s graduation because of the City’s interpretation of federal law.

Meadowmont resident Gail Ross and her dog Madison with Albemarle County Supervisor Lindsay Dorrier.

Her curiosity piqued, resident Gail Ross observed the Charlottesville delegation walking through the Meadowmont Town Center and she introduced herself and her dog Madison to the group.  “I walk to Harris Teeter.  I walk to the wellness center,” said Ross.  “I live here because of the convenience of this lifestyle.”  Supervisor Lindsay Dorrier asked how she got her groceries from the store to her apartment.  Ross responded, “I don’t get a lot of groceries on each trip because I go by there all the time.” 

Rosemary Waldorf was mayor of Chapel Hill when the Meadowmont development was approved.  “This is a community that doesn’t take change easily,” said Waldorf.  “People went berserk when Meadowmont was submitted.”  Supervisor Sally Thomas asked how well the community worked now that it was fully built out.  “I have lived here three years, and it functions unbelievably well as a community,” said Waldorf.  “People who chose to live here like this lifestyle.  People try and support the retail here too.”

A question raised about Biscuit Run is whether there is enough commercial and retail use being included in the development.  As a largely residential development in the current plans, Biscuit Run is anticipated to have a negative fiscal impact on Albemarle County.  More non-residential activity leads to increased tax revenues, fewer students in public schools, and more internal vehicle trips “captured” within the town center development.  “I am concerned Biscuit Run will be the bedroom community to the retail on 5th street,” said Thomas.  The 5th Street-Avon Center project, also under review in Albemarle, will add a large home improvement store and grocery store just North of Interstate 64.

It appeared each member of the delegation saw something in Meadowmont that they liked and hoped could be brought to new developments back home.  Thomas said the best thing she saw all day was the full bike rack at the Rashkis Elementary School.  Students were taking advantage of the safe streets and trails to get to their neighborhood school.  Hunter Craig like the “rolled curbs” and driveways with grass median strips in the residential area.  He asked each Supervisor to consider the benefits of this curb system that allowed driveways to be placed anywhere along the roadway, which is built first, without the need for a curb cut later.  “I hate when we have to put in a driveway and a new curb with concrete that doesn’t match.”

Back in Charlottesville, the PEC’s Jeff Werner and Hunter Craig agreed that co-operation in Charlottesville-Albemarle can put our community ahead of Meadowmont and Chapel Hill.  “In many ways we are ahead of where they are.  There are some design elements we can take away for use in Biscuit Run,” said Craig.  “Our transit will be better.  We will have more bike lanes.”  Werner agreed on the potential to come out ahead of Meadowmont, but said, “We can’t answer all the questions by next Tuesday.”  Biscuit Run has its next public hearing before the Albemarle County Planning Commission on May 29th.

Senior Statesmen discuss the challenges of growth and development

(L to R) Jack Marshall (ASAP), Jeff Werner (PEC), Neil Williamson (FEF)

On April 11, 2007, the Senior Statesmen of Virginia (SSV) held their monthly meeting at the Northside Library in Charlottesville, VA.  The three invited panelists, among the community's most familiar faces when it comes to discussions of local growth and development issues, shared their views on topics including land use, transportation, population growth, government regulation, and property rights. 

The panelists were:

Jack Marshall, Advocates for a Sustainable Albemarle Population
Jeff Werner, Piedmont Environmental Council
Neil Williamson, Free Enterprise Forum

Before an audience of about forty people, each panelist made a presentation about the role of their organization and provided their assessment of the growth and development challenges facing local government and our community at-large.

President Don Wells, described the Senior Statesmen "as a vehicle for senior citizens to get together to learn about issues, to discuss them, but also to potentially take action... to influence the political process."

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20070411-SSV-Growth.MP3

Audio pointers and representative quotes:

• 00:08:30 -- Jack Marshall, ASAP
  • "A small but powerful group has been delighted with the relentlessly expanding local population.  For its members enjoy profits from land speculation and construction, or from an expanding market for whatever they sell."
  • "Although 'smart growth' is necessary, ASAP argues that it's not sufficient. Smart growth addresses where and how a community's population expands, but not whether it should expand. Over the long haul, smart growth merely accommodates growth. ASAP's approach goes beyond smart growth by contending that every community should try to identify its optimal population size, then work to reach and maintain a stationary size at that point."
  • "The only thing more radical than stopping growth is not stopping growth."
• 00:21:35 -- Jeff Werner, PEC
  • "We support growth and development at a pace and in a pattern that is fiscally responsible and not a burden on taxpayers."
  • "In total, the current residential pipeline for the [County's] growth area and for the [City of Charlottesville] is now over 18,000 units.  This does not include the rural area...which is another 30,000 to 50,000 lots. That 18,000 units in the growth area and the City is enough for approximately 42,000 additional people.  In other words, while the development community argues that the growth area needs to be expanded, their own proposals clearly indicate that such an expansion may not be necessary for at least another generation."
• 00:37:14 -- Neil Williamson, FEF
  • "As a purpose, [the Free Enterprise Forum] strive to provide balance to the public debate.  We feel that without such balance issues are often skewered by special interest groups which may not have a full understanding of the community ramifications for the solutions they propose."
  • "It is true that we would like to see more development in the development area.  That is clear. That's where the infrastructure should be placed.  It is also true that property rights are important."
  • "Right now the rural areas, for the past three or four years, probably the past seven years, have been at or above the [level] of development in the development areas.  I firmly believe that is due to government regulation making it difficult to develop in the development areas. This is something I see starting to change."
  • "Jack [Marshall] had mentioned, 'Are there limits to growth in our future.'  I think that is a very relevant question.  The other question is who should place those limits....Placing an arbitrary number [on population] is digging a moat around the County.  And who gets to man the bridge?"
  • "There are some in Albemarle County that want to place this population cap.  I find that elitist and it would be the equivalent of digging a moat."
• 00:48:20 -- Q&A

Brian Wheeler

 

Are we on the path to Austin, Aspen, or maybe Boulder?

On January 23, 2007, the Virginia Piedmont Technology Council (VPTC) held a town hall meeting entitled: “Pursuing Technology for a Robust Economy--Choosing our future: Austin or Aspen.”  The principal speakers were Gary Henry (longtime resident, technology leader and Chair of the VPTC Board) and Katie Bullard with AngelouEconomics in Austin, Texas.  Ms. Bullard was previously Budget Director for the City of Charlottesville.

[Charlottesville Podcasting has the audio.  VPTC's website has the presentations]

The Virginia Piedmont Technology Council wants to be a catalyst to spark a collaborative effort to create a larger technology-based economy in Charlottesville.  They are asking the question… Do we want to look more like Aspen, CO (i.e. completely unaffordable with no middle class) or Austin, TX (a highly rated community with a strong technology economy, more affordable cost of living, and a substantial middle class)?

VPTC sees this initiative as balancing the scale of our economy which is weighted today towards retirees and tourism.  I applaud their search for some of the ingredients in a common agenda that could help us achieve quality growth, growth that would benefit the community as a whole.  They have framed this as a desire to add balance to our economy and generate economic vitality.  Charlottesville Tomorrow shares those objectives.  We are going to grow, let’s make sure it is quality growth that enhances the community and doesn’t sacrifice our quality of life.

In their presentation, VPTC identified the need for a critical mass of new jobs and technology companies.  They want to build Charlottesville’s reputation so it becomes the #1 place to locate or incubate a small technology company.  This is ideally defined as home-grown technology businesses that employ 5-25 people.

VPTC’s three primary goals in this initiative are:

1. Bring this conversation to the community
2. Develop a center for technology incubation
3. Drive workforce development to support this effort

To measure the community’s progress down a technology path, they will define a “Technology Index” by which our technology economy’s growth can be measured.

I found the discussion helpful, but I left with many questions.  Here are a few to get people thinking.

Katie Bullard said a key indicator for Charlottesville to watch is the number of 25-44 year olds in the population (currently 29.1%).  She said we need to be at 33% or better to get young people to stay here after college and find career ladder jobs in technology companies.  Gary Henry defines “critical mass” as being opportunities (i.e. jobs) so our talented young people do not feel like they have to leave Charlottesville.  With a critical mass of opportunities, they can switch companies more easily here at home.  How many new companies and new jobs would it take to create that critical mass? 

Many of the comparisons in Ms. Bullard’s presentation were to Austin and Raleigh-Durham.
Has any other City our size figured this out?  [When I asked that question from the audience, Ms. Bullard cited Boulder, Colorado as one town already on the path of having a strong technology-based economic sector (software development).  Are there others?  Is Boulder an attractive model?]

Ms. Bullard identified our technology wages as a major problem.  “Wages here are not keeping up with the cost of living.”  The average technology wage in Charlottesville is $61,894 vs. Austin at $87,988.  When pressed on this by an audience member, Ms. Bullard said we needed to find “a couple small companies willing to pay higher wages and jump start the market.”  Is it realistic to think technology companies will come here and substantially raise wages?

Gary Henry pointed out that the technology sector is attractive because “the infrastructure impact will be minimal.”  He indicated we already have office space into which many small 5-25 person companies can go and UVA research parks are ready to expand.  What other community infrastructure (roads, schools, housing, etc.) will be needed to support the growth required to reach critical mass? Is UVA not on track to grow our technology sector with their investments at Fontaine and North Fork research parks?  If the organic growth we are seeing today is not enough, what pace of growth do we need?

In response to a question from Neil Williamson about the role of local government, Ms. Bullard said that local government should play a supporting role.  “Economic development should not be subsidized by government.”  Ms. Bullard emphasized private investment and pointed out she had never seen a regional approach work too well.  She clarified these comments for me after the lunch by indicating token financial support from local government was fine, but really economic development needed to be funded and championed by the private sector and venture capital.  Do we have the right mix of public-private investment in economic development?  How would we measure the results thus far and what needs to be done differently to more strategically serve VPTC’s goals?

As you can see, I plainly don't have all the answers, but I appreciate VPTC stimulating the conversation.

Brian Wheeler

TDRs receive in-depth discussion by local leaders

On January 18, 2007, Advocates for a Sustainable Albemarle Population (ASAP), held their monthly meeting at the Westminster Presbyterian Church in Charlottesville.  The topic was Albemarle County's consideration of a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program as a growth management tool. 

Charlottesville Tomorrow has prepared a written transcript of this very informative panel discussion on TDRs.

The panel members included Supervisor David Slutzky of the Rio District, Supervisor Dennis Rooker of the Jack Jouett District, Rich Collins, Professor Emeritus in Environmental Planning at the University of Virginia, and Jeff Werner, Field Officer with the Piedmont Environmental Council. About 35 members of the public were in attendance for the forum moderated by ASAP President, Jack Marshall.

Download Dennis Rooker's audience handout.

This program by Charlottesville Tomorrow is broken into two 1-hour recordings.  In this first part, we begin with the welcome and introductions by Jack Marshall. The panelist presentations in this portion include Rich Collins, David Slutzky, and Jeff Werner.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download podcast #1: Download 20070118-ASAP-TDR1.mp3

In this second part, we begin with the presentation by the fourth panelist Supervisor Dennis Rooker. This is followed by the panel's discussion, and audience questions.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download podcast #2: Download 20070118-ASAP-TDR2.mp3

Brian Wheeler

Development survey available on County website

As I reported here earlier this month, the Albemarle County Development Review Process Task Force is conducting a survey of the public and the development community in an effort to determine what the County could improve upon in its public engagement and in its process for rezonings and special use permits. 

If you are a citizen or someone that works in the local development community this is an important opportunity to make your voice heard!  The County is listening... now we get to do the talking.

Click here to view the survey

The survey will be available online from Monday, September 18 through Friday, September 29. In the County's announcement of the survey, they point out that individual responses are confidential and only a summary of results will be reported to the Task Force. 

Here are the questions posed to each constituency group:

Citizens' Survey

1. Below is a list of the ways of getting information about County development proposals. Please check each of the ways of which you are aware...
2. Please check, from the list below, all of your preferred methods for getting information about County development proposals...
3. What specific information do you want to know related to development proposals?
4. Does the current review process adequately allow for citizen involvement?
5. What methods would you suggest to improve citizen input regarding development proposals?

Developers' Survey

1. Please briefly describe your role in the development process...
2. Understanding that the purpose of the Task Force is not to alter current Development Area/Rural Area policy, but instead to focus on the review process itself, do you believe that the current rezoning and special use permit review process works adequately?
3. Please suggest any specific improvements you would like to see made to the review process...
4. How do you currently provide for citizen input on your development projects?
5. Are there additional citizen information/input methods that you think would be helpful in creating successful projects in the development areas?

Brian Wheeler

Kaine's plan and local government

Charlottesville Tomorrow's focus is purely on local government and issues in the City and County.  However, I do get lots of questions about Governor Kaine's ideas on land use and transportation issues and his interest in having the General Assembly grant more authority to local governments.  I thought today's article in the Washington Post provided the best explanation I have seen of what Kaine's proposal would and would not address. 

Northern Virginia officials say one likely effect of the plan would be to give localities greater leeway in directing growth into areas where their planners have intended it, such as near rail stops.

There are also things the proposal wouldn't do. The plan would give local governments clearer authority in reviewing developers' requests to rezone land but not more power to reject plans in areas where zoning allows what a developer is proposing. For that reason, the plan wouldn't affect many building projects on the horizon. [i.e. what is called by-right development]

In that regard, Kaine is not going as far as states such as Maryland, where localities can judge projects by whether there are "adequate public facilities" to support them, even in areas where projects are allowed under existing zoning. In Maryland and many other states, local authorities assess impact fees on developers to cover the cost of public services.

In Virginia, a strong tradition of property rights and constitutional limits on local governments has led most localities to make do with a less formal system in which developers offer money for school or road improvements. Such proffers are negotiated only for rezonings and not for cases in which the zoning allows for the developer's plans.

Brian Wheeler

County Development Process Under Review

On January 11, 2006, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors held an afternoon worksession to review the entire community development process, the method by which such things as site plans, proffers, rezonings and special use permits are handled in Albemarle.  In the Podcast available below (9MB audio download), you can listen to the staff report from Mark Graham and the Board’s entire discussion, including a presentation by Supervisor Ken Boyd in which he recommended the formation of a development process task force.  The Board and staff are following up on discussions from 2005 at meetings in June, August, and December.  The Board reached consensus to have staff bring back a plan in February recommending actions to create the task force recommended by Mr. Boyd.

Listen to Podcast: Download 20060111-BOS.mp3

New Supervisor David Slutzky made the following remarks which I believe capture many important elements of the discussion:

“…the perception at least is out there in the community, in some parts of the community, that to try and do neighborhood model development inside the designated growth areas, which is clearly an imperative of our comp plan, that the inherent complexities of doing that take too long, are too confusing for some people, and result in a desire to go ahead to the rural areas and do the development out there because it is just plain easier.  That dynamic I think we all recognize is really problematic given the comp plan doesn’t want development in the rural area.”

“As to whether or not there is something broken, I think there is, I can’t put my finger on what it is, but I think that it would be healthy, and I like the idea of this proposal a lot, I like the idea of it having a sunset provision, I like the idea of getting it started quickly and bringing it to a swift and focused conclusion… We should really talk about what is the output of this exercise… the goal of all this should be to see if there are ways in fact to have, I would argue, an accelerated or at least a more efficient process for evaluating and deciding thumbs up or thumbs down on development proposals in the designated growth areas.”

“I think that’s only half of the conversation. I think that outside of this track, there are several proposals that have been floated around and been analyzed and considered over the years to address the other half of that equation, i.e. to explore ways to make it less appealing for development to happen in the rural areas while at the same time we are looking at ways to make it less burdensome to do neighborhood model development inside the growth areas.  I think that we ought to at the same time, but on a parallel track, make a commitment to resolving--Are we going to do clustering? Are we going to do phasing? Are we going to do mountaintop protection?  Because if we do those things that will reduce the pressures on rural area development at the same time we lighten up, which may be the goal of this, some of the impediments to developing in the growth areas, I think we will have a balanced chance… My recommendation is we go forward with what Ken is saying, while at the same time, we  make a commitment to going ahead and sorting out what if any of those three things that we have talked about for years are we actually going to implement, while we’re at the same time considering what changes we might want to implement with regard to development in the designated growth areas.  So that when we come out of this overall process, on these two parallel tracks, we may well have some value."

Brian Wheeler

Supervisors Discuss Development Process in Albemarle

At their meeting today, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors had an important discussion about the County's development process. [Daily Progress coverage] Early in an agenda item on policies related to improving the zoning application process, Ken Boyd (Rivanna) made a proposal to create a high-level “strike force” that would work over 6-12 months to review the community development process from start to finish.  The resulting discussion touched on Crozet, the Glenmore/Rivanna growth area, the neighborhood model, master plans, comprehensive plans, and the overall goal of channeling new development to our population centers. This is probably the most significant exchange I have heard by the Board of Supervisors on these topics. 

The topics they covered are also at the heart of Charlottesville Tomorrow’s mission to share information with the public and to find a common agenda to protect and enhance our community so that growth is well-planned, benefits the community as a whole, and protects the area’s quality of life, rural character, and healthy environment.  The path to quality growth is through a deeper understanding of these issues and viewpoints in the community and I thought good points were made by all.  It was an important conversation that will continue early in 2006.

[Note: Sally Thomas (Samuel Miller) was attending another meeting and not present for the discussion]

The audio of this discussion is available via the Charlottesville Tomorrow website.  If you are not a current subscriber to Charlottesville Tomorrow's information, you just need to signup when prompted and provide your email address to get access.

To listen visit:
http://action.cvilletomorrow.org/cvilleaction/publications.html

Brian Wheeler