Crozet “Downtown Mall” gets OK from advisory group

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Sunday, August 22, 2010

A group that oversees planning in Crozet has endorsed a new concept to redevelop a lumber yard on the Square into a walkable and livable community similar to Charlottesville’s Downtown Mall.

“We need a pedestrian mall in Crozet,” said Mike Marshall, chairman of the Crozet Community Advisory Council. “This comes into Crozet’s life at a very fortunate time for us.”

The CCAC voted Thursday to recommend rezoning the 14.74-acre J. Bruce Barnes Lumber Yard and CSX railroad property to allow for future development as part of the Crozet Master Plan.

[full story]

This story also appeared in the Daily Progress.

Albemarle planners update zoning for industry and home businesses

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Wednesday, August 18, 2010

As Albemarle County seeks to expand its commercial tax base, it is also taking steps to update zoning related to industrial activity and home-based businesses. Increasing economic development opportunities was a key objective of the “economic vitality plan” approved by the Albemarle Board of Supervisors earlier this month.

On Tuesday, the Albemarle County Planning Commission endorsed a proposal to amend the performance standards of industrial zoning districts. County staff said the update was important to help prepare for expanded industrial business opportunities countywide.

“Performance standards … are utilized to control and limit the impacts generated by the use of land,” said county zoning administrator Amelia McCulley. “This is the first comprehensive amendment of this section of the ordinance since 1980, and that’s a long time.”

[full story]

Water plan opponents hold forum on dredging alternative

By Bridgett Lynn and Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
August 10, 2010

Opponents of the adopted community water supply plan held a forum on July 29 to explain why they feel dredging the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir is the best solution to meeting the community’s future water needs.

Dede Smith, of the group Citizens for a Sustainable Water Plan, provided a presentation to explain why the group is against the plan adopted by City Council and the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors in 2006. That plan, which has received state and federal permits, calls for an enlarged Ragged Mountain reservoir as well as a new pipeline to connect it to the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir.

“In a nutshell, it’s over priced, oversized, and based on faulty data,” said Smith.

The plan is based on a 2004 demand analysis conducted by Gannett Fleming that established the water supply would need to be able to provide a “safe yield” of 18.7 million gallons a day. The analysis factored in population estimates, water consumption trends and historical data on rainfall.  It did not incorporate changes to the city and county comprehensive plans made after 1997.  Albemarle County completed its first master plan for a designated growth area in 2004.

Former City Councilor Kevin Lynch argued the community is using less water today and that the demand analysis does not account for these changes in behavior.

“It was relevant once,” Lynch said. “It’s not that it’s false stated, it’s just no longer relevant data.”

Lynch voted for the plan when he was on City Council, but has said since that he did so because the estimates for dredging provided by Gannett Fleming were too high.  In March 2008, the firm estimated that dredging continuously for the 50-year period of the water supply plan could cost as much as $223 million.

City Council asked for several studies to examine various components of the 2006 plan. The firm HDR Engineering was hired to evaluate the feasibility and costs of dredging the South Fork to restore it as close as possible to its original storage volume. The firm is recommending a multi-phase, one-time dredging project that would cost $34 million to $40 million and take about seven years.  HDR said resale of the dredged materials could reduce the dredging costs by as much as $12.7 million.

Another reason the community water supply plan’s implementation has been delayed is due to the rising cost estimate for the new dam at Ragged Mountain Reservoir. In September 2008, Gannett Fleming announced that the cost estimate for a concrete dam had increased to over $70 million. The RWSA hired another firm, Schnabel Engineering, who concluded that switching to an earthen dam would save money, and could be accomplished for a cost between  $28.5 million and $36.6 million.

Members of the group also took issue with a recent draft study from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality which assessed an alternative water plan at the request of Charlottesville Mayor Dave Norris.

“What it says is that if we dredge the South Fork Reservoir and build a 13 foot dam … that we can increase the safe yield of our system by about 4 million gallons a day over and above what we have now and still meet the existing flow requirements into the streams that are spelled out in the 45 foot dam permit,” Lynch said.

However, according to Scott Kudlas, a DEQ director responsible for surface and groundwater planning, the Norris plan would not meet stream-flow requirements in the community’s previously approved permits.

“Our conclusion is that the safe yield of the alternative will not meet the demand,” Kudlas said in a July interview. “In order to meet the in-stream flow requirements in the permit, the locality would have to be in voluntary [water] conservation [mode] all the time, and they still wouldn’t meet the in-stream flows from the original permit during the full range of conditions.”

The draft study by DEQ also indicates that the dredging of South Fork Rivanna Reservoir, combined with a renovation and expansion of the existing 1908 dam at Ragged Mountain, would deliver a safe yield of approximately 16.8 million gallons a day, 1.9 million gallons short of the original goal of the community’s 50-year water supply plan.

Richard Lloyd, a representative of Citizens for a Sustainable Water Plan and a board member of Advocates for a Sustainable Albemarle Population, also discussed an alternative dredging plan he is recommending for consideration.  Lloyd wrote in a recent advertisement featured in The Hook that a study of his ‘Small Bites’ alternative would “probably find that this method costs less, is more environmentally friendly and produces a much better long-term result.”

In an interview with Charlottesville Tomorrow, Lloyd could not provide the exact actual costs of his dredging plan nor the amount of water storage in “safe yield” that would be provided.  His ‘Small Bites’ advertisement claims that dredging would “cost about $1 million a year” and provide enough water supply for 30-50 years.

“It’s time for us to go out and find out what that cost would be. It’s time to issue an inquiry and have a competitive situation where different companies would bid,” Lloyd said.

In August, the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA) Board of Directors will get the results of a new review of the 2004 demand analysis to determine if changes in consumption and community growth might raise or lower the safe yield target. Swartz Engineering Economics was paid $24,000 to conduct the review.

A brand new demand analysis could cost as much as $100,000, according to Tom Frederick, executive director of the RWSA.

Regional effort under way for Chesapeake Bay cleanup

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Tuesday, August 10, 2010

A federal pollution crackdown meant to protect the Chesapeake Bay likely will spell major changes for local governments and area growth, officials said Monday.

“We’re concerned … local governments are going to be required to increase [their] attention to existing regulatory efforts, that there will also be increased regulatory requirements, [and] … that the new pollutant loadings resulting from growth will need to be offset,” said Steve Williams, executive director of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission.

The Environmental Protection Agency is announcing, for all levels of government, mandates to limit the Total Maximum Daily Load, which refers to the total amount of pollutants and sediment allowed to enter into a body of water before water quality becomes impaired.

The forthcoming changes were discussed at Monday’s meeting of the Rivanna River Basin Commission. Albemarle County Supervisor Ann Mallek, a commission member, said that the new pollutant loadings have important implications for local growth patterns.

“For the last 20 years, any of the gains that we’ve made procedurally [in watershed protection] … have been demolished by the growth,” Mallek said.

“If [the mandate] doesn’t end up being enforced by EPA, the state, or the local governments, [then] it’s going to end up being enforced by the courts,” Williams said. “There will be some sort of lawsuits brought that will ultimately force this down our throats in one way or another.”

The basin commission recommends programs to enhance the water and natural resources in the Rivanna River watershed, a tributary of the James River, which forms Albemarle County’s southern border. The James River watershed accounts for one-fourth of Virginia’s Chesapeake Bay drainage area.

“The major reason that communities should consider being prepared is that, regardless of this federal and state mandate, we have water quality issues in our watershed as well throughout the entire planning district commission,” said Leslie Middleton, the commission’s executive director. “It’s not just in the Rivanna.”

In September, the commission and the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission will begin facilitating focus group meetings with pairs of elected officials from each of the six member governments. Meetings for other stakeholder groups will be held during next three months.

Additional information can be found on the commission’s Web site at www.rivannariverbasin.org.

This story also appeared in the Daily Progress.

Albemarle collects almost $1 million in land-use revalidation program

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Friday, August 6, 2010

Albemarle County has collected $955,000 worth of roll-back taxes from a land-use taxation revalidation program adopted by the Board of Supervisors in 2008.

The report was shared with the board Wednesday.

“It was important that we put in place a revalidation program so that the public has confidence that the parcels receiving the land-use tax benefits were using their land for agricultural purposes,” said Supervisor Dennis S. Rooker in an interview.

Since 1975, the county has used a land-use program to give reduced assessments to landowners who use their property for agriculture, horticulture, open space or forestry. The program was started to help protect rural land from development.

With the revalidation program, property owners who receive a tax break have to submit proof every two years that they continue to qualify.

“I was disappointed that the county had never done a revalidation,” said Glenmore resident Paul Accad in an interview. “Now they are in the process of completing the first one and look how much money has been, and will continue to be, collected due to the revalidation.”

“My thoughts on the program are that it needs to be run as cheaply as possible given the program’s goals,” Accad said. “I’d like to see those goals posted on the Web site since I’m not sure what they are.”

In 2009, owners of each of the 4,927 properties in the land-use program were mailed revalidation applications and approximately 98 percent of the forms were returned by the December deadline. The applications that were not submitted or that no longer qualified for the tax break were removed from the land-use program and had to pay the roll-back taxes.

The result was a loss of 177 parcels of land and the collection of $955,000 worth of roll-back taxes. The county also received an increase in taxable land value of $46,254,500 and new real estate revenues of $343,208.

Although Supervisor Rodney S. Thomas said he supports the land-use program, he said that he does not necessarily agree with the policy on roll-back taxes paid by people losing eligibility.

“What if I want to get out of this land-use program?” asked Thomas in an interview. “Does that mean I don’t have to pay for the roll-back taxes even if I gave a five-year notice? No, I would have to pay for it. [That’s] one thing I didn’t like about the program.”

The General Assembly has capped the roll-back tax period at five years. Property owners leaving the program have to pay the difference between what they paid under land use and the taxes they would have paid at fair market value. Albemarle County has been unsuccessful in past attempts to get the General Assembly to extend the roll-back penalty to 10 years.

According to Bob Willingham, the county’s assessor, the Real Estate Division is now two months into a field review process to ensure that the parcels in the program meet qualifying standards. The goal is to review the remaining 4,800 parcels over the next two years.

Because the review process just started recently, information on the number of parcels verified has not been collected yet, according to Willingham. Preliminary findings indicate about 33 percent of the applications need additional follow up to verify a qualifying use.

Each property owner will be given an opportunity to provide documentation of a qualifying use before the property is removed from the land-use program and the owner is billed for roll-back taxes.

This story also appeared in the Daily Progress.

Improving conditions for bicyclists a focus of transportation work session

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Friday, August 6, 2010

At a transportation work session Thursday that attracted a couple of dozen people, Charlottesville city councilors heard from community and staff members about ways to increase bicycle safety.

“The emphasis that I took away from this is more on-street or off-street facilities for bicyclists and public education,” said Jeanie Alexander, the city’s traffic engineer.

Improving bicycling safety has come to the forefront after a 23-year-old University of Virginia graduate student was hit and killed in a collision with a truck on West Main Street in April.

Leo Connally, a teacher at St. Anne’s-Belfield School, said at the meeting that he was hit by a car in April and has also had a bottle thrown at him by an angry motorist when riding his bike in town.

“There’s this animosity between drivers and cyclists when the cyclists don’t follow the rules,” Alexander said.

Lanes that can be striped within the existing roadways to separate bikes and vehicles, as well as other efforts such as “share the road” signing, have been made to improve safety.

City staff also put together a number of sign options to alert motorists and cyclists to the rules of the road.
“One is this ‘Bicycles may use full lane’ sign,” Alexander said. “It’s just another way to alert a motorist to the fact that it is legal for the bicycle to take over the lane and, in many cases, the cyclist should take over the lane for their own safety.”

Additional projects are also under way in the city to create more safe routes for bicyclists.

“We do have funding from [the Virginia Department of Transportation] to design a bridge over the railroad tracks that would connect the two sides [of McIntire Park] for bike [and pedestrian] use, and that would tie into the 250 Bypass trail,” said Chris Jensic, the city’s trails planner.

New ideas to increase bike travel lanes included lane narrowing and “road diets.”

“There are some opportunities where we can narrow the travel lane,” Alexander said. “This is something that we haven’t really done in the past, but it’s an option in some of these places where we can’t fit the bicycle lanes with the standard 12-foot lane [and the] 5-foot bike lane.”

To illustrate lane narrowing, Alexander used Meade Avenue as an example of where an existing road could accommodate a 10-foot-wide, shared-use path.

“Road diets” is another new idea that staff presented as a way to create safer bicycle travel lanes. Preston Avenue was used as an example to show how its four lanes could be reconfigured to serve vehicular, transit and bicycle traffic.

“[One option is] we’re only going to leave one of those lanes for vehicular traffic,” Alexander said. “We’re going to use the other lane in one case for a shared bus and bike lane.”

Jim Tolbert, director of Neighborhood Development Services, also said he expects a draft sidewalk prioritization plan to be brought to the City Council sometime this fall after receiving feedback from the Planning Commission.

Mayor Dave Norris recommended that staff evaluate results from a recent survey by Bike Charlottesville and the Alliance for Community Choice in Transportation.

“There are some suggestions about legislative change that can’t be done at the local level,” Norris said.

The story also appeared in the Daily Progress.

Roundtable discusses streamlined site plan and subdivision review process in Albemarle

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Albemarle County staff held a roundtable discussion last week to receive public input on potential changes to the site plan and subdivision review process. The project is part of the implementation of the economic development priorities outlined in the “Albemarle County Action Plan” approved by the Board of Supervisors in January.

“We’re trying to make the regulations match the necessity,” county planner Bill Fritz said to the group of about 20 participants.

In June, the Board of Supervisors held a work session to initiate an evaluation of the site plan and subdivision process for the purpose of “reducing the time and cost processing applications.”

“One thing we can do is [make] more decisions administratively,” Fritz said. “The other is to simplify the process and give … applicants more guidance at the very start of the application process [by] clearly stating what your requirements are.”

Fritz said that the changes would also clarify submittal requirements, give good concise timeframes for reviews, eliminate multiple public hearings, and include a presumption of approval.

“I like the sound of it,” said Jo Higgins, former member of the Planning Commission. “It changes the site review committee [to] something of much more power … [Fritz is] talking about evolving site review as to a much more complex and decision making committee, and I think that’s a key thing that needs a definition.”

Some roundtable attendees were concerned about the elimination of public input opportunities.

“The more things you take right now that aren’t purely [administrative] and put into that category of [administrative], you’re shutting out public opportunity where it currently exists,” said Morgan Butler of the Southern Environmental Law Center.

“We were told [by supervisors] very clearly to … not remove public involvement,” Fritz responded. “We’re trying to figure out how to still include public involvement to the extent that you can in a purely administrative process. What we came up with was the site review meeting where you can work with staff and you can sit down and do those things.”

For projects not receiving planning commission review, staff plan to conduct a site review committee (SRC) meeting with a greater level of public input when a project would require conditions for approval or when staff expect to recommend denial.

Currently, when a project is reviewed before the planning commission, comments up to three minutes are allowed and there is no opportunity to ask follow up questions or provide clarifications. The SRC meeting would give the public an opportunity for an informal dialogue between all parties.

The input gathered from the roundtable and the Board of Supervisors will be presented to the Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board possibly in September, but no dates have been set yet according to staff. Another roundtable discussion may be created after staff reviews all the feedback and make recommendations before returning to the board.

The article also appeared in the Daily Progress.

County planners give okay to expanded Fontaine

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Thursday, July 29, 2010

A proposal to increase the size of the University of Virginia’s Fontaine Research Park by 310,000 square feet has moved one step closer to reality.

The Albemarle County Planning Commission on Tuesday recommended approval for a rezoning, despite concerns from city residents that an expanded research park would mean more traffic through their neighborhoods.

“The Comprehensive Plan proposes the Sunset-Fontaine connector to be accommodated on the site,” county planner Claudette Grant said. “Outside of showing this area on the application plan, the applicant has made no commitment elsewhere to address this [project].”

City, county and university planners agreed on the concept for the road as part of a 2004 planning study. The road would reduce traffic congestion on Old Lynchburg Road and would link to the county’s designated growth areas south of Interstate 64.

The University of Virginia Foundation originally proposed in 2007 to expand Fontaine Research Park by 725,000 square feet but has scaled that back to 310,000 square feet.

“The major issue was the need for a traffic study,” Grant said. “The traffic study revealed that the research park could propose an additional 310,000 square feet instead of 725,000 square feet in order to mitigate traffic impacts.”

Fred Missel, director of design and development of the UVa Foundation, said at the Fry’s Spring Neighborhood Association’s meeting held earlier this month that the county has not yet decided what the exact route of the connector should be. However, the county is suggesting at least one alternative.

“Staff believes an alternative location would be to utilize parts of Natural Resources Drive which accesses the Department of Forestry building,” Grant said. “This would necessitate relocation of a part of this road which the applicant has indicated they are not supportive of because this would generate too much traffic going through the park.”

Staff also recommended the applicant participate in a Sunset-Fontaine connector study that the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission will be undertaking.

The Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing for the UVa Foundation’s plans at their meeting September 8.

This story also appeared in the Daily Progress.

Supervisors delay decision on economic development action plan

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Friday, July 16, 2010

No action has been taken yet by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to approve an economic development action plan that has been under review for the past two months.

“Probably one of the most overriding concerns that we heard [from the public] was that the plan did not provide adequate references to resource protection and possible impacts [to] quality of life,” said Lee Catlin, the county's Community Relations manager.

The plan calls for objectives to be met in five areas ranging from improving the county’s business climate to promoting agriculture and tourism.

According to staff, the plan has been revised to address issues of resource protection, the importance of jobs for current county residents, a measure of rural economy, and refocuses on nurturing existing enterprises as opposed to a primary focus on attracting new businesses into the community.

“All this is, is a plan for us to promote economic vitality in our community,” Supervisor Ken Boyd said. “It’s an important issue that needs to take front and center, and I think we’re through studying this. Let’s start moving forward with some of this action plan.”

Rich Collins, a member of Advocates for a Sustainable Albemarle Population (ASAP), criticized the plan and said it was “nothing but a growth plan.”

“It’s [not intended as] an idea to increase population in town. It’s really to provide jobs for our people,” Boyd responded.

Boyd also insisted that it would not negatively impact the county’s Comprehensive Plan.

“This is not some perfect document that we’re going to set that’s going to identify every single angle in the community,” Boyd said. “We’re still bound by the Comprehensive Plan no matter what we put in this document.”

The Board of Supervisors now anticipates a final vote on the action plan to occur at their August 4, 2010 meeting. That meeting will not include further public input opportunities on the plan.

County planners reject inclusion of industrial park in Crozet Master Plan

By Bridgett Lynn & Brian Wheeler
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Wednesday, July 14, 2010

While Albemarle County is seeking to increase its industrial and commercial land activity, proposals reviewed as part of the Crozet Master Plan to build a new business park and convert some residential homes to mixed use have been rejected by the Planning Commission.

Will Yancey appeared at the public hearing Tuesday to lobby for his family’s 2008 application to create a light-industrial business park just outside the Crozet development area near the intersection of Interstate 64 and U.S. 250.

“We don’t have enough industrial land,” Yancey said. “In the last three years there have been two studies, one in 2007 and one that was just completed recently, that indicated Albemarle had a shortage of industrial land.”

According to county staff, the majority of Crozet residents and the Crozet Community Advisory Council (CCAC) do not support the proposed business park which would be on 184 acres around the site of the Yancey Lumber Co. sawmill.

“The public very adamantly said they were opposed to having a 1.1 [million] to 1.8 million square foot industrial park right outside of the master plan boundaries,” said Mary Rice, a former advisory council member.

“The proposal has serious flaws beyond generating sprawl in the rural area,” said Morgan Butler of the Southern Environmental Law Center. “The property is located in the water supply watershed. It drains to the South Fork Rivanna River and ultimately to the South Fork Reservoir. Major development activity on this land would almost certainly increase the amount of sediment and other pollutants entering that drinking water reservoir.”

Other concerns about the proposed business park were that it would undermine efforts to invigorate businesses in Downtown Crozet and would negatively impact traffic near the interstate.

“Our recommendation is that it’s bad for the master plan,” said Mike Marshall, chairman of the advisory council. “We don’t think it ought to be allowed.”

The planning commission indicated last month that the Yancey Mills project should be independently reviewed by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. At Tuesday’s meeting, the commission formally voted to exclude the project from the master plan update and went a step further and also voted 4-3 to recommend the Board of Supervisors deny the business park request. Commissioners Don Franco, Linda Porterfield, and Edward Smith voted against that motion.

Porterfield was the only commissioner who supported further study of the Yancey Mills project when the commission originally rejected it in November 2008 by a 6-1 vote. Franco and Smith joined the commission subsequent to that decision.

“We have not studied the Yancey proposal,” Porterfield said Tuesday. “We can’t vote it down if we don’t know anything about it.”

“There is no place else that I’m aware of in this county right now that there is one entity that controls that much land with good transportation,” Porterfield said. "If we don’t start thinking about that, we’re going to be supporting this entire county on residential taxes.”

The other topic getting considerable attention at the public hearing related to a proposal to mix commercial and residential uses in a small area north of downtown.  The commission voted unanimously to maintain the existing residential character of the neighborhood around Wayland Drive and St. George Avenue.

“We’ve had some interest for quite some time from property owners…wanting to have greater use of their property than just the single family residential use that they have right now,” said Elaine Echols, Albemarle County’s principal planner for the development areas.

“What we came up…with the community was a recommendation for mixed use in this particular area with a modification to the stream buffer to allow for redevelopment if there’s mitigation which helps to protect the water supply,” said Echols.

Jenny Martin spoke on behalf of the property owners that supported the staff’s recommendation. She said the proposal would create a transition between commercial and residential use.

“This designation of mixed use will create a buffer to the north of Crozet between commercial and residential which today does not currently exist and will preserve the look and feel of the village of Crozet,” Martin said.

However, other members of the community and representatives of the CCAC spoke against the proposal.

“The resolution that the advisory council passed was on where to maintain the boundary between commercial use…and residential,” said Marshall. “The motion…to maintain that natural [creek] boundary, which is the boundary today, as the future boundary…passed 10 to 2.”

“I cannot understand why just two houses in Wayland Park should be included in a transition zone for mixed use,” said Joyce Shifflett, a resident of St. George Avenue. “To consider just two houses in the subdivision for mixed use would be totally unfair to us and the other property owners in Wayland Park.”

In 2006, county staff prepared a report estimating that Crozet, which has a population of about 5,500 today, could reach a maximum population of about 24,000.  The revised plan now anticipates a long-term population capacity of approximately 18,000.

“I’m all for the community deciding that it wants a much lower total build out,” said Peter Loach of the Piedmont Housing Alliance. “I just want [the community] to be aware…as they lower density and make each house sit on a bigger piece of land, each house is going to cost more and become much less affordable.

Staff will incorporate changes recommended by the Planning Commission and bring the plan back for final approval at their meeting July 27.

This story also appeared in the Daily Progress.

Home energy efficiency program anticipates reduced energy costs and "green jobs"

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Thursday, July 8, 2010

An organization created to encourage residential energy efficiency has launched a contest to get residents retrofitting their homes and installing renewable technologies. Local leaders say the benefits will include reduced energy costs and the creation of new jobs.

“The Home Energy Makeover Contest is an initiative that will help…to educate local homeowners about the importance of energy efficiency,” said Cynthia Adams, executive director of the Local Energy Alliance Program (LEAP).

“Through energy efficiency, LEAP will stimulate our local economy and generate clean energy jobs which fosters energy independence and makes maintaining our homes more affordable,” said Charlottesville Mayor Dave Norris. “We are a lucky community indeed, nowhere else in Virginia does an energy alliance like LEAP exist.”

Over a year ago, the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County jointly won a $500,000 grant from the Southeast Energy Efficiency Alliance (SEEA) to create LEAP. The grant challenges the community to gain 20 to 40 percent in energy efficiency in 30 to 50 percent of area buildings over the next seven years.

Adams announced on Wednesday that the organization will award up to $10,000 in energy efficiency improvements to two residents living in either Charlottesville or Albemarle as part of a Home Energy Makeover Contest.

Eight runners up will receive free professional home performance assessments worth up to $600 conducted by certified local contractors.

Homeowners Wendy Roberman and Ted Millich had their house audited with LEAP and received suggestions to add insulation, switch out appliances, add a new furnace and windows, and some additional ventilation.

“We were able to quickly narrow down who we wanted to do the work, and we were very satisfied with that work,” said Roberman. “I would recommend people get an audit even if you think you know what you need to do.”

Prices for a home energy audit are running anywhere from $300 to $600 depending on size of home and number of gas fired appliances located in the home according to Adams.

“The end result of this should be a twenty percent or better efficiency gain for your home and …Energy Star certification,” said Adams.

In coming months, LEAP will launch its Home Performance with Energy Star program. Homeowners will get professional guidance on their energy retrofits and certification that the home has implemented energy conservation measures projected to increase its efficiency by 20 percent or more.

“We prequalify contractors to participate…and we also go behind them on a percentage of their jobs [to] test out [and] check the work [to] make sure that it was done correctly and that all of the diagnostic readings are being reported as they should be,” said Adams.

“By going through a prescribed process to identify energy efficiency issues and remedy them using a whole house approach, owners of existing homes can benefit from the latest in building science too,” said Laura Fiori, president of Key Green Energy Solutions, a LEAP partner.

“Our primary hope in participating in a LEAP program is to create job growth,” said James Sullenberger of Weather Seal Insulation. “Like many local companies, we have been forced to make major changes in an effort to survive and remain competitive in this ever changing market.”

The University of Virginia Credit Union is also partnering with LEAP to provide low-interest financing for energy efficiency improvements.

“They put together an energy sense lending program [called Green $ense Lending] that is available exclusively through LEAP that has better rates and longer terms than one can get on a personal loan,” said Adams.

Green $ense Lending products can be paired with LEAP cash incentives, federal energy tax credits and the Commonwealth of Virginia energy rebates to make home energy improvements more economical for area residents.

Winners of the contest are selected through an application review process based on homes that use the most electricity and natural gas, which translates to homes that have the potential to save the most energy.

The contest will be open from July 1 to August 20, and the winners will be announced by September 12. Applications can be found at the website www.cvillesaves.org.

This story also appeared in the Daily Progress.

Roundtable generates feedback for changes in Albemarle’s sign regulations

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Friday, July 2, 2010

On Tuesday, a second roundtable discussion was held to receive input from the community on a proposed Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) to update sign regulations for Albemarle County’s entrance corridors and the overall sign approval process.

“It is clear that the county does not want to do anything that would jeopardize good community design,” said Ron Higgins, Albemarle County’s Chief of Zoning. “Therefore, the signage ZTA is important as it can impact community design standards if not done carefully.”.

A store along U.S. Route 29 North near Lowe’s was discussed as one example of a signage challenge facing a local business.

Under the current sign ordinance, which regulates the location, size, height, number, and design of signs along the entrance corridors, Stereo Types asked for relief because trees required and planted at the neighboring business Salem M Eways are now blocking the visibility of the store’s building sign.

“[The owner] put his sign where he was recommended to put it, and then the…landscape and the landscaping obscured his sign,” said Higgins. “Personally I think his remedy could be a new sign permit and [to] move the sign.”

According to the meeting summary of feedback provided at the first roundtable, Stereo Types was allowed a new sign closer to U.S. 29, but only if it was smaller. The owner said that a new sign meeting the county’s requirements would cost over $20,000.

To ensure that the sign ordinance does not overly restrict economic vitality of businesses in the area, the Board of Supervisors initiated the Zoning Text Amendment process in May to evaluate the regulations.

Some suggestions made in the first and second roundtables included reducing restrictions on overall sign sizes and the distance a sign is allowed to be placed from its storefront.

“I think about the Penske truck sign that’s near my office…I can never see that sign,” said Neil Williamson, executive director of the Free Enterprise Forum. “The reason businesses spend money on signs, as you well know, is to be found. They don’t really want to have a huge sign if they can [already] be found.”

“[However,] if you start to get to a point where people are competing to have the biggest sign and you’re having all sorts of signs, [then] you get to the point where it’s clutter,” responded Morgan Butler of the Southern Environmental Law Center. “It actually gets harder to find [the stores].”

“The other extreme would be trying to get around the County’s prohibition of billboards and basically turning your sign into an advertisement, and that’s what we’re trying to avoid,” said Butler.

Williamson was concerned that the current sign ordinance is not designed for safety purposes as much as it is for aesthetic purposes. His ‘Eye of the Beholder’ report, which was released in May, used a review of public documents and case studies to highlight the expansion of the Architectural Review Board (ARB) power beyond the scope envisioned when it was founded in 1990.

“What’s the goal of the ordinance?” asked Williamson. “Is it truly safety? Is it aesthetics? Is there something to be done to identify that balance?”

A comprehensive signage package with a modified verbiage about “keeping consistent with history of previous signs” for certain scale and scopes of development was brought up in the first roundtable to be used at the start of construction and reviewed by staff, the ARB, and the Planning Commission.

“It comes down to signs that are meant to help provide the location of an entity,” said Butler. “If there are changes we can make to the ordinance that improves that function of a sign, I think those are well worth exploring.”

The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on August 17 on the proposed ZTA in accordance to this resolution of intent, and will make its recommendations to the Board of Supervisors at the earliest date possible.

All comments and suggestions from the two roundtables will be considered as the Department of Community Development drafts amendments in July to the current sign ordinance over the next several months. Their hopes is that the results from these roundtables will provide a better balance between business community needs and the desire of the overall community and businesses for a quality built environment.

The draft ZTA with revisions from the ARB and PC is scheduled to be completed on October 6 and sent out for a tentative third roundtable discussion scheduled for October 21.

Federal legislation mandating Chesapeake Bay clean-up still under development

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Tuesday, June 15, 2010

A senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center has briefed the Rivanna River Basin Commission on the status of new federal legislation that would provide nearly $1.5 billion for programs to help reduce pollution in the Chesapeake Bay.

Rick Parrish discussed the details of Senator Benjamin Cardin’s (D-MD) proposed Chesapeake Clean Water and Ecosystem Restoration of 2009.

If passed by Congress, the Cardin bill would increase funding for monitoring grants and implementation grants for Chesapeake Bay states and localities. The goal is to help all levels of government attain the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) limits mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

“The good news for local governments working to restore local waters that contribute to the Bay’s problems is that the Cardin bill would authorize $1.5 billion to be spent over the next five years to help local governments deal with stormwater problems, develop stormwater regulatory programs, provide technical assistance to those in need, and there may even be a little bit left over for financial assistance,” said Parrish.

The Cardin bill would require states to develop Watershed Implementation Plans as soon as May 12, 2011 and provide progress reports every two years beginning May 12, 2014. These plans must describe in detail how nitrogen, phosphorous and sediment will be reduced or removed from agricultural runoff, stormwater, and sewage treatment facilities. Parrish said the task is not without challenges, especially as deadline to develop Bay-wide plans to meet pollution loads by December 31, 2010.

“[The] EPA has set out criteria for development of the Bay TMDLs that are really impressive, really aggressive, and are going to be burdensome. There’s no question about it. This is going to be a challenge,” said Parrish.

The national economic crisis, however, has created other priorities that have delayed this bill.

“There’s support, but there’s a lot of concern about the money, there’s also concern among the agricultural community and the developers that this is the first step toward a national regulatory program that reins in their activities, so it’s a pretty contentious issue,” said Parrish.

The draft TMDL plan for the entire Chesapeake Bay will be completed by August 1, 2010, after which the public review process will begin. The EPA is expected to release its final Chesapeake Bay cleanup plan in December 2010.

Parrish concluded, “At this point, the environmental community intends to support [the] EPA and what they’re producing.”

The next meeting for the Rivanna River Basin Commission is scheduled for August 9 at the Albemarle County Office Building.

New homeless facility receives tax credits; SRO construction slated to begin this fall

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Tuesday, June 15, 2010

A project to provide housing for the homeless in downtown Charlottesville has moved one step closer to reality.

On Friday, officials with Virginia Supportive Housing (VSH) announced that a proposed 60 unit single room occupancy facility (SRO) has been awarded low-income housing tax credits by the Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA).

“It’s $529,000 [in tax credits] over ten years, so it’s really [over] $5 million in credits,” said Kathy Talley, deputy Executive Director of Virginia Supportive Housing. Talley's organization will be building and managing the facility which will be known as The Crossings at Fourth and Preston.

“[The tax credits] are a vehicle, probably the primary vehicle, by which affordable housing projects are funded not only here in the commonwealth of Virginia but throughout the country,” said Charlottesville Mayor Dave Norris.

The project has received significant support from the City of Charlottesville. VSH received $125,000 in start-up funds from City Council in 2009 to find a location to build the SRO facility somewhere within the City limits. Since then, Council has also given $1.6 million towards purchasing property from Region 10.

The approval from the Charlottesville Planning Commission last year to change the City’s zoning ordinance to allow for SRO facilities to be built within city limits has allowed the project to be located on 401 Fourth St. N.W. VSH is required to provide on-site security and support services.

“It will be a kind of permanent supportive housing that has a proven track record of reducing homelessness in communities that have built these kinds of facilities,” said Norris.

VSH said the tax credits will go a long way toward helping the organization raise the $6.3 million required to build the facility.

“The Virginia Community Development Corporation has agreed to be our syndicator,” said Talley. “They will syndicate the credits to translate the $500,000 plus of low income tax credits. That translates into over $4 million of hard cold cash,” said Talley. She added VSH is hoping to raise additional money through foundations, and is already having some success.

“We are thrilled to be able to announce today also a $250,000 grant from the Perry Foundation,” Talley said. “That’s a matching grant, so we have already applied to several sources in order to match those funds.”

Norris announced that the project is expected to open within the next eighteen months.

“There’s still a couple of other little regulatory issues that have to be addressed, but we very likely will be able to break ground this fall and start construction on this project,” said Norris.

RWSA updates county officials on infrastructure projects and water supply plan

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Friday, June 11, 2010

In early June, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors heard a quarterly update from Tom Frederick, Executive Director of the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA). The RWSA is the wholesaler of water and sewer service for residents of Albemarle County and Charlottesville.

Frederick said the RWSA had reached an agreement in April with the City of Charlottesville and the Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) to reduce stormwater inflow and infiltration from local sewer systems. Stormwater flows entering the sewer system increase the volume of water that must be treated.

“We’ve actually prioritized the areas that we should go to first… one of them is what we call lower Rivanna which is south of Free Bridge…[the second area is] the Crozet area,” said Frederick.

Under the agreement, the three agencies will work collectively to reduce by 25 percent the amount of wet weather inflow that infiltrates the wastewater system by 2020.

“If we’re going to achieve our goal, sewer rates in the future are going to have to go up some. We’ve neglected our sewer infrastructure as a community for too long,” said Frederick.

The agreement allows for the RWSA to proceed with their master plan to resize interceptors and treatment plants in order to carry peak wet weather flow. This includes the plan to upgrade the pumping capacity for the Moores Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant, which gets overwhelmed with stormwater during heavy flooding.

“We’re working on the design to upgrade the wet weather capacity for that pump station which will pump into the treatment plant,” said Frederick.

The upgrades for the treatment plant will remove high levels of nitrogen and phosphorous that would otherwise be released into the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

“We’re going to be, in the coming months, doing a lot of public relations work and public input work,” said Frederick.

The RWSA has also been able to advance their Meadow Creek Interceptor project. The project will upgrade a 24 inch sewer pipe to 36 inches that follows Meadow Creek west to east through the City of Charlottesville.

Metra Construction issued a notice to proceed on April 1, and construction is already underway by Faulconer Construction in the area of the Meadow Creek Parkway. The upgrade is expected to be completed by summer of 2011.

Following the update on Meadow Creek, Frederick proceeded to the discuss the studies associated with the community’s 50-year water supply plan.

The latest proposal from Schnabel Engineering is an earthen dam to be built just downstream from the current Lower Ragged Mountain dam. The new dam would raise the reservoir’s water level by 45 feet and is a design change from the concrete dam proposed by Gannett Fleming, the previous consultants.

In a presentation in May, Frederick said that the new dam will have a total cost of between $28.5 million and $36.6 million, which includes final design and engineering work, an environmental mitigation plan and protection of the Interstate 64 embankment, which the larger reservoir will reach.

“About sixty plus percent of the project is already financed through existing rates that we have today….I think financially we’re in very good shape. Especially now that we have a plan that is inside and stays inside the budget that was adopted in 2006,” said Frederick. “I don’t see much impact on wholesale rates to implement the water plan. That’s the good news.”

“If you take advantage of the favorable construction and the bid prices are down, then that means even higher than the sixty percent is already financed and funded,” said Frederick.

Frederick said other water supply studies include dredging the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir and Charlottesville’s study to raise the existing Ragged Mountain Dam by 13 feet are also underway.

The results of the second phase of the dredging feasibility study will be reviewed at a public meeting on June 30 at 6pm in CitySpace at the Market Street parking garage.

Planning Commission opposes water permit for Crozet gas station proposal

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Thursday, June 10, 2010

At their meeting on Tuesday, the Albemarle County Planning Commission recommended denial of a special use permit for a proposed gas station called the Re-Store’n Station, which is to be located on U.S. 250 West near the Crozet Moose Lodge.

The preliminary site plan proposes a 5,750 square foot two story commercial building on about 4 acres. The 4,750 sq. ft. first floor is proposed as a gas station and convenience store accompanied by a second floor office of 1,000 sq. ft. The plan also reserves space for expansion of the building showing a future footprint more than double the initial building size.

A special use permit is required for the site because the station intends to use slightly more than 400 gallons per acre per day. At 4.06 acres, the property is allowed to use 1,624 gallons of well water daily. Jo Higgins, the property owners’ representative, said that the station would not exceed 1,625 gallons of water use. The property lost access to public water when the site’s previous structure was torn down by Higgins’ clients.

“[The] most important concern is about groundwater as a resource,” said Higgins. “If that is the case and you want to protect wells…the [Board of Supervisors] has the power to allow a public water connection and meter it by the Albemarle County Service Authority, which would relieve staff totally of the burden to monitor this and the staff time that that entails.”

Because the gas station would use slightly more well water than what is allowed by right, Albemarle County staff recommended approval of the special permit if the owners would agree to install a meter on the well to monitor water consumption and to not exceed 1,625 gallons of water per day.

“It’s certainly debatable whether granting this special use permit would be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance,” said Morgan Butler, an attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center. “It’s even harder to assert that granting this permit to allow extra groundwater withdrawal for a gas station of this scale is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The Crozet Master Plan…specifically calls for limiting the amount of development along this stretch of 250.”

Higgins, who served on the Albemarle County Planning Commission during 2004-2006, said the station’s on-site wastewater septic system was designed according to Virginia Department of Health standards and Albemarle County ordinances. It was also approved by the health department.

“This information that was submitted was approved according to Albemarle County standards, and if you’re asking for a different level of standard, then the rules need to be changed, but not applied indifferently to this application,” said Higgins

Members of the public were concerned that the station’s water usage would not be adequately monitored and that the staff recommendation did not take into account the number of vehicular stops per day.

“Consumption can be determined estimated by vehicular traffic, but no traffic study has been completed,” said Jeff Werner of the Piedmont Environmental Council. “Until a traffic study establishes estimated traffic, water use cannot be determined. Therefore the application does not provide sufficient information to make this determination.”

Property owners close to the proposed station worried that their adjacent properties to the proposed station would be at risk for well failure.

“[A Freetown Lane resident] brought up the fact that supposedly a well was dug on a property which substantially deteriorated the well on an adjacent property. That is data that bothers me,” said Commissioner Calvin Morris.

“We want to be assured that our wells are not hurt,” said Freetown resident Richard Brown. “When you start drilling and digging in the mud, you are going to blow our wells, we’re going to have a problem.”

“There’s no indication of the effect groundwater withdrawal may have on the adjacent properties,” responded Higgins. “All we’ve said is that we don’t think anything will happen to the adjacent properties, but we don’t know that for sure.”

Commissioners Tom Loach and Russell Lafferty did not support the special use permit because the station’s water usage could possibly be a detriment to adjacent residents and the station poses public health and safety concerns.

“I have insufficient information to believe that they will not exceed the allowable usage of water and that the neighbors will be adversely affected,” said Lafferty.

Commissioner Linda Porterfield also voted against recommendation for the special use permit. In her comments she noted that there are already gas stations located near the Re-Store’n Station’s proposed site.

“There probably are other things that the people who live in that area need. At this point I don’t think they necessarily need another gas station,” said Porterfield.

By a 5-2 vote, the Planning Commission recommended denying the special use permit. Commissioners Don Franco and Edward Smith voted against that motion.

“I understand everyone’s concern about exceeding the [water usage] number, but I think that what we’ve done is established a number that is just outside the by-right use in order to enable us to do the enforcement and the monitoring,” said Franco.

Following the denial of recommendation for the special use permit, a proposal for approval of the project’s preliminary site plan and a request to allow clearing of vegetation was heard by the commission.

Members of the public spoke against the size and scope of the project and the idea of having a another gas station close to their neighborhoods.

“After taking input from the [Architectural Review Board], neighbors, the chief of zoning, and other entrance corridor folks, we actually did a totally new concept and reduced the size of the store which was originally around 6,000 down to 4,750 [square feet],” said Higgins.

For Mike Marshall, the chairman of the Crozet Community Advisory Council, the reduction in square footage was not sufficient.

“I think you should deny [the site plan]. One, it doesn’t have the special use permit, second, they’re not showing you the whole plan, third, they don’t deal with [the public] in good faith,” charged Marshall,.

Higgins said she believes that the station would have a positive impact on the community. “Competition in the market is good for the community,” said Higgins.

However, after further discussion by the commission, Higgins agreed to defer the site plan request.

“We would like to defer your action on the site plan and ask respectfully for your input,” said Higgins. In an interview after the meeting, Higgins said she and her client had not yet determined their next steps. The special use permit for water has not yet been scheduled for review by the Board of Supervisors.

O’Connell updates county officials on ACSA budget and fee increases

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Tuesday, June 8, 2010

At their meeting last Wednesday, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors heard a quarterly update from Gary O’Connell, Executive Director of the Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA).That agency is responsible for providing public water and sewer service for County homes and businesses.

O’Connell used the opportunity to explain the rationale behind higher fees charged to developers for connecting to the ACSA system. For the second year in a row, the ACSA is proposing an increase in two separate fees charged to reimburse the costs of the existing system and to pay for new service capacity.

The first is the development fee collected by ACSA for water and sewer connection which is to be raised by 8 percent. The water connection will increase from $1,640 to $1,772, and the sewer connection from $1,995 to $2,155.

The second is a charge for the developer to “buy-in” to the assets owned by the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA). These fees are to rise by about 2.7 percent; the water capacity charge will be increased from $3,725 to $3,822, and the sewer capacity charge from $2,680 to $2,756.

“[ACSA’s system value is] almost $48 million worth of investment, those connection fees projected this year are a very small portion of that pie,” said finance director Lisa Breeden. The total amount collected in the connection fees was $836,852 last year.

O’Connell also briefed supervisors on the ACSA’s capital improvements program (CIP), which identifies priorities for repairs, rehabilitation, and replacement within our water and sewer systems.

“Over the course of two years, we’ll have about $25 million in capital projects,” said O’Connell. “This is a multiyear project, takes lots of money, lots of studies, lots of effort.”

The ACSA has 25 projects identified in the agency’s over $15.7 million capital budget for FY 2011. Of the total amount, $2.5 million is for water improvements, and $13.2 million is for wastewater. These projects include the North Fork Regional Pump Station, a water and sewer replacement for the Buckingham Circle neighborhood as well as internal improvements.

“We’ll be using bonds to finance [the North Fork Regional Pump Station] as long term financing,” said O’Connell. The project is currently in its design phase, and the ACSA is almost done obtaining easements for the project. The plan for the pump station will go to bid before the end of the summer.

The ACSA proposed a $35 million overall budget for next fiscal year, a 14.8% increase over the current year. The operating budget totals almost $19 million, with additional expenditures related to capital improvement projects for the County’s public sewer facilities.

However, rates paid by county residents for urban water and sewer service will not increase under the budget proposal.

“Nearly two-thirds of our operating budget is the purchase of water and waste water treatment from the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority,” said O’Connell. “We’ve reduced expenses by $335,000 dollars to help balance our budget and to respect the economic times that our customers and we all are in,” said O’Connell.

The proposed budget uses the four-tiered system for water and sewage the ACSA developed over six years ago and updated again last year.

“[The] inclining block rate structure that we use is meant to help promote water conservation by allowing those who conserve more to reduce their monthly water and sewer bills, also makes it more affordable for lower income customers,” said O’Connell.

“I think we have been giving away our water, relatively, for many, many years. We haven’t really appreciated what it does cost as far as how we use it. I’m glad the new tiered system will help people to appreciate the true cost of their behavior especially changing the rates on irrigation,” said Supervisor Ann Mallek.

An ACSA public hearing is scheduled for this Thursday on the proposed budget and rates. The budget and rates will be considered for adoption on June 17, 2010.

Albemarle’s program to acquire conservation easements celebrated in the face of major budget cuts

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Tuesday, June 8, 2010

Albemarle County spent $1 million or more per year between 2000 and 2008 on a program designed to permanently protect rural land from development through conservation easements.

“After 10 years running the [Acquisition of Conservation Easements] program, we’ve protected 37 properties and 7,200 acres from future development,” program coordinator Ches Goodall told county supervisors at a recent meeting. “Seventy percent have been working family farms. For many of these landowners, I feel like ACE has been a real godsend for these people.”

The economic downturn, however, has reduced the overall level of funding for ACE.

According to county officials, the budget for next fiscal year only includes $366,000 for ACE, which is coming from the county’s capital improvements funds.

The easements are voluntary agreements that allow landowners to permanently limit the type and amount of development on their property while retaining private ownership and gaining access to state tax credits.

“At the state level, the General Assembly made this Virginia land preservation tax credit program, a program that was explicitly designed to be able to benefit landowners across the economic spectrum by making these tax credits transferable,” said Rex Linville of the Piedmont Environmental Council.

“If you don’t have a high income, you are actually able to sell your tax credits to somebody else who might have a high income and might be able to use them,” added Linville. “So even landowners of lower income levels are able to get a lot of benefit out of putting a conservation easement on their properties and selling those tax credits to other landowners.”

In the year 2000, there were only 17,000 acres of permanently protected private land in the county. Ten years later there are more than 81,000 acres of protected land.

“That’s largely as a result of great financial incentives either through sale of easement, through the ACE program, or for donated easements,” said Linville.

“We can’t use that success to think that we can now sit back … and say we’ve done a great thing,” said Linville. “Virginia is losing farm and forestland at the rate of 50,000 acres per year… . Permanent conservation easements are one of the few tools that we have available to preserve those resources.”

At last week’s board meeting, Goodall said the county had received an additional grant of $61,000 from Farmland Preservation to supplement efforts to obtain easements.

Properties that qualify for easements are chosen by a ranking evaluation system created to award points for a number of different values such as open space resources and threat of conversion to development. There are a number of options available for a person to do a conservation easement.

“The ACE program is a means-tested program. You get more money if you’re in a lower income bracket than if you’re in a higher income bracket,” said Supervisor Dennis S. Rooker.

However, there are generally more applicants for the ACE program than money. County staff recently wrote in a report that the program will suffer if additional funds cannot be found to accommodate demand.

The county’s goal is to qualify 90,000 acres of public parkland and conservation easements by June 30, 2010. There are currently 81,000 acres in conservation easements alone.

“I think we feel confident that we will be very close to the goal when we take everything into account,” said county spokeswoman Lee Catlin.

This story also appeared in the Daily Progress.

ASAP research challenges community to shrink its ecological footprint

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Friday, May 28, 2010

Advocates for a Sustainable Albemarle Population (ASAP) met Thursday night with local residents to discuss recent findings in a study called the Ecological Footprint Analysis of Albemarle County and Charlottesville. The analysis evaluates the environmental sustainability of the community and its optimal population size.

The study found that the footprint (demand) of Albemarle and Charlottesville exceeds the biocapacity (supply) of the area causing an ecological deficit, which is an unsustainable situation that occurs when an ecosystem is exploited more rapidly than it can renew itself.

“We are running a severe ecological deficit. We are not living sustainably,” said Jack Marshall, president of ASAP. “We’re really doing a lousy job.”

ASAP researchers calculated this deficit by measuring the ecological footprint of Albemarle and Charlottesville, which is the amount of land and water required to satisfy the demands and waste of people in the area, and the biocapacity for the same area, which measures how much land is available for consumption and waste.

The city and county have an ecological deficit of 3.7 land areas, meaning that there is not enough biocapacity from Albemarle and Charlottesville’s 736 square miles of land alone to accommodate for the demands of 135,000 residents.

In August 2009, ASAP published research indicating that the community could be home to a population of up to 300,000 people if it was willing to sacrifice some environmental conditions in the development areas. With this additional research, however, ASAP has calculated that Albemarle and Charlottesville can sustainably only support a population of about 37,000 people.

“If our community were to source all its current consumption and waste disposal right here on our available land, we would need 3.7 Charlottesville/Albemarle land areas to support our consumption,” said Marshall. “We need a lot more land than we’ve got.”

ASAP argues in the study that if we continue to ignore the ecological deficit, then we will see destruction of natural habitats, reduction of water quantity and quality, and erosion of ecosystem services in environments of other places. It may not happen in this community in the near term, but it will maintain pressure on global ecosystems according to the study.

“The way we live with our ecological deficit erodes the health of living systems at a global level," said Marshall. “It causes deforestation, water shortages, declining biodiversity, and we screw up the air, the water, and the soil. Locally, we do the same thing.”

ASAP was formed in 2002 to study the effects of population growth on natural resources, and their goal is to provide data for local city and county decision-makers to help identify an “optimal sustainable population size”. The Ecological Footprint Analysis is one of five scientific studies being conducted by ASAP.

“The information from the ASAP studies should be used by local government for planning,” said John Cruickshank, chairman of the Piedmont Group of the Sierra Club. “For land use planning, for transportation planning, and for the planning for the protection of natural resources.”

Cruickshank believes the community should focus on protecting the environment by creating more nature preserves and parks, pursuing green building practices, and encouraging density.

“When development does occur , we should cluster the residences so there’s not as big of an impact on the environment,” said Cruickshank. “We need to think smaller. We need to drive smaller cars, we need to have smaller houses, we need to use less and less and less.”

In the audience, Supervisor Dennis Rooker said he agreed with the goal of preserving more rural land. “The more land we can get in conservation easements for parkland, the better,” said Rooker.

The Board of Supervisors agreed to spend $25,000 for the scientific aspects of the study, and the City of Charlottesville paid $11,000. Additional funding came from ASAP members as well as a $50,000 grant from the Colcom Foundation of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

According to Marshall, no other community in the nation has conducted a similar study, and the national planning community is watching ASAP's work to see if the study might be used as a harbinger of things to come.

Although Marshall agrees that less resident consumption is important, he argues that that alone will not dramatically improve the ecological deficit.

“One of the results of this research I hope will be to bring greater attention to the fact that there are two components in achieving sustainability,” said Marshall.

“Reducing consumption is not enough,” said Marshall. “Simultaneously we have to deal with the number of consumers, the population.”

“I believe that government should not be in the business of recruiting new residents.” said Cruickshank. “There has been a lot of recruiting to get new people from other parts of the United States to move to the Charlottesville Area.”

“We don’t need to go out and spend taxpayer money bringing growth to this community which is already growing about 1,000 people per year,” agreed Rooker.

The Board of Supervisors will be holding a work session at 2pm on Wednesday, June 2, at the County Office Building, Lane Auditorium, to discuss Albemarle County’s new economic development action plan.

Rivanna Conservation Society discusses protection efforts for the Chesapeake Bay

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Wednesday, May 26, 2010

On May 20, 2010, the Rivanna Conservation Society held their Third Thursday Brown Bag lunch meeting and discussed protection efforts for the Chesapeake Bay. The featured speaker was Rick Parrish, a senior attorney from the Southern Environmental Law Center.

Over the course of the hour, Parrish talked about the watershed and the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), which refers to the total amount of pollutants allowed to enter into a body of water before water quality becomes impaired. He discussed the TMDL’s history, significance, and goals in the Chesapeake Bay area.

Parrish finished up the presentation describing some of the successes that the Bay has seen to date, and next steps on the schedule for the TMDL and local Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs).

The draft TMDL plan for the entire Chesapeake Bay will be completed by August 1, 2010, after which the public review process will begin. The EPA is expected to release its final Chesapeake Bay cleanup plan in December 2010.

City Council contributes $5.8 million to Jefferson School project

By Bridgett Lynn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Friday, May 21, 2010

The chairman of a non-profit group responsible for the redevelopment of the Jefferson School building in downtown Charlottesville said construction may start as soon as this August.

Martin Burks, with Jefferson School Community Partnership, briefed Charlottesville City Council Monday night on the next steps in the evolution of the Jefferson School property. The city transferred the property to the partnership and has agreed to contribute $5.8 million to the project, which will be known as the Jefferson School City Center.

The school’s primary focus will be to recognize and celebrate its history as an African American school in a racially segregated America.

“[We are] dedicated to preserving and sustaining the Jefferson School as a vibrant and meaningful community resource, providing cultural, educational, and recreational opportunities,” said Burks. “That’s powerful. That’s what Jefferson School did in the past, and that’s what Jefferson School will do in the future.”

The Jefferson School African American Heritage Center and the City’s Carver Recreation Center will be the center’s two anchor tenants. The Heritage Center will measure 9,368 square feet and will be redesigned as a museum that will document the history of the school and alumni.

The Carver Recreational Center will be renovated to offer a variety of recreational, health and fitness related activities for citizens in surrounding neighborhoods and throughout the city. It will be expanded to 20,979 square feet. The center is also expected to be home to various tenants that will compliment the school.

“We have identified approximately six non-profit organizations to occupy and lease within Jefferson School,” said Burks.

The potential uses for the tenants found on the center’s website include education, arts, health/human services, business/employment services, and possibly affordable housing groups or foundations.

The Jefferson School Community Partnership was seeking to rezone the school back in March to allow restaurants to open on the site. The application to rezone the school was submitted on Wednesday, May 19th, according to Neighborhood Planner Nick Rogers.

The City Council formed a task force back in 2002 to explore the feasibility of adapting the Jefferson School. Five years later, the partnership was formed to determine the financial feasibility of refurbishing the property.

“We had a project manager and design team to execute the planning phase,” said Burks. “We’ve established an organization structure which is the foundation to do the long term sustainability of Jefferson School.”

The partnership is responsible for the development and construction of the center as well as overseeing its operations during its first five years. Then the Jefferson School Heritage Foundation will own and operate the school and take responsibility for fundraising.

The total budget of the redevelopment of the school is estimated to be $17.3 million. The costs will be covered by a combination of loans, tax credits, private donations, and the city. Loans will pay for $6.7 million, and federal and state tax credits will pay for $4.8 million. Private supporters have pledged to support the operations of nonprofit organizations for five years and have placed $3 million toward the project. The City is expected to provide $5.8 million.

At this site in 1926, the school was built in Charlottesville to serve as an African American high school. The school’s origins can be traced to 1865. Community efforts led to the school becoming listed on both the national and state historic landmark status back in 2005 which made it eligible for grant funding. The City followed suit, allocating $5 million for its restoration.

According to Burks, the final site plan will be submitted in June. If approved by the city, construction of the City Center could start as early as August. The Carver Recreational Center will close during construction, which is expected to be complete by September 2011.

Entrance corridor review process streamlined

By Bridgett Lynn and Brian Wheeler
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Tuesday, May 18, 2010

At their meeting last Wednesday, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors reviewed proposals to streamline the review process for new development in the County’s entrance corridors and to initiate a review of sign regulations. While the board authorized some changes which seemed to have broad support, they also received public input on a recent report by the Free Enterprise Forum which was critical of the power of the Architectural Review Board (ARB).

A Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) related to the Entrance Corridor Overlay District (ECOD) will add and amend various definitions and allow, according to county staff, more efficient review of development proposals. It should also mean that the ARB will review a smaller number of applications.

“These changes are simply meant to streamline the process and speed it up, it wouldn’t have any negative impact on design [of the community],” said county staff member Margaret Maliszewski who works with the ARB. “We wouldn’t have to write a staff report which can be a time consuming task, and these items wouldn’t have to go through an ARB meeting.”

Morgan Butler of the Southern Environmental Law Center said the ordinance language is clearer. “There’s now a preliminary review process that’s mapped out very clearly in the ordinance and that preliminary review could actually lead to approval,” said Butler. “I think the process is much clearer overall”

Neil Williamson, executive director of the Free Enterprise Forum, asked the board to consider even more restrictions on the ARB’s authority than what had been recommended by staff.

Williamson said his ‘Eye of the Beholder’ report, released in advance of the meeting, uses a review of public documents and case studies to highlight the expansion of the ARB power beyond the scope envisioned when it was founded in 1990.

“Unintended consequences of the ARB process include stale signage and possible economic retardation,” said Williamson. “As recent sales tax statistics have shown increasingly retail activity is moving to the outlying jurisdictions. Albemarle County’s ARB, and the large number of entrance corridors they regulate, may have a negative impact on economic development.”

The goal of the ARB is to ensure that new developments within the County’s entrance corridors reflect the traditional architecture of the area and that the developments are orderly and attractive.

Marcia Joseph, a former member of both the ARB and the Planning Commission, appeared during public comment to defend the board’s role. When Joseph served on the ARB, she said that they “did not consider Albemarle County as ‘Anywhere USA’.”

“Please don’t paint them as an evil anti-development group of individuals,” said Joseph. “For 20 years, the ARB has been helping shape the character of our corridors and maintain the regional character of the area….They work hard, and deserve more respect than what was given them in the Free Enterprise Forum report.”

Joseph referred the board to Edward McMahon’s book, Better Models for Commercial Development, which outlines the reasons why sign regulations are important in communities. Handing each member a copy of the book, Joseph said it showed examples of communities where national franchises and chain stores have changed their designs to match the local character of the surrounding community.

Candace Smith, another former ARB member, challenged the Free Enterprise Forum’s claim of providing a “clear positive balance to the discussions of important issues of the day,” and said that the comments made in the report were “inflammatory and irresponsible.”

The ‘Eye of the Beholder’ report claims that applicants often perceive that the ARB is “gunning” to make it as difficult as possible for an applicant to get a Certificate of Appropriateness.

“One of the reasons that there have been so few appeals [for a CA] is that there have been so few denials,” Candace Smith retorted.

The Zoning Text Amendment related to the entrance corridor regulations, which was approved during the meeting, does clarify the types of development for which a certificate of appropriateness is required.

The ‘Eye of the Beholder’ report includes a case study from 2008 when the ARB asked for color changes in a sign for the bank Stellar One because they said it detracted from the building. The decision cost Stellar One $10,000 to have the signs refaced to match the color of other signage already on the building.

Paul Wright, a current member of the ARB, challenged the accuracy of the Free Enterprise Forum report and said the blame sometimes fell on applicants not following county regulations.

“If you don’t do what it is you’re allowed to do, you have to fix it, and it’s not our fault that that happened,” said Wright.

“Changing colors of the sign is not unusual, it happens all over the entire country and communities that are concerned about maintaining a regional design standard,” said Joseph. “Changing colors on the sign does not violate free speech. The message remains the same just a different color.”

Others spoke in support of the Free Enterprise Forum report and called for less subjectivity in aesthetic requirements. Jo Higgins is a former member of the planning commission who now represents various development projects being reviewed by the county.

“Since the ARB was instigated, it has kind of lost its way,” said Higgins. “The trouble is with the guidelines, that they are so loosely written, and it’s such a subjective call.”

Williamson suggested some additions to the proposed ZTA. He recommended that the Supervisors have the ARB report up through the Planning Commission, refine the charge of the ARB to limit consideration to the aesthetics of the entrance corridor, restrict the ARB’s abilities to change the orientation of buildings on a site, and to release the ARB agenda and minutes to the public via the county’s website.

The Free Enterprise Forum also called on the Board of Supervisors to issue a resolution of intent, to form round tables that include citizens and other stakeholders to review the ARB process beyond the ZTA reforms.

Williamson responded, “these measures are streamlining. They are most effective… I don’t believe these measures go far enough… but that’s not a reason to not go forward with this very important step.”

Supervisor, Ann Mallek, agreed and added, “the baby step approach is much more successful than sweeping changes [to the ARB].”

In a separate action, the Board of Supervisors also agreed to initiate a Zoning Text Amendment process to have the Planning Commission review sign regulations in the entrance corridors.

Supervisor, Dennis Rooker, asked that the language in the resolution be changed to read that it ‘may be desired’ to amend the county's sign regulations. He said he did not want to communicate a presumption that they need to be amended.

In preparation for changes to the sign ordinance, county staff have already held one round table with local business officials. A second round table is expected to be held in August, 2010, and Rooker recommended broadening the group of participants to include representatives from both the Southern Environmental Law Center and Piedmont Environmental Council. Public hearings will be held this fall by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors on any proposed changes.