Author: cvilletom

Albemarle County has made available an on-line citizen survey related to cash proffer policies.  Visit the survey and share your opinion by Friday, June 15th!  The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will be reviewing the results at their June 20th work session.  Voluntary proffers are are typically offered as part of a rezoning request from a developer to the County to mitigate the impact of the development on the community.  Proffers are a very important aspect of the Biscuit Run development currently under review by Albemarle County.

In May, the Supervisors received recommendations from the Fiscal Impact Advisory Committee for the County to change its methodology related to cash proffers. On May 2nd, the Board approved some placeholder proffer amounts for different types of homes.  For example, a single family detached home will now have a cash proffer expectation of $17,500 from the developer. In recent developments, Albemarle has accepted about $3,200 as a cash proffer for each of these homes.  The County is seeking your feedback as it reviews the committee’s recommendations on methodology and works them into a formal proffer policy.

For a number of reasons, the methodology developed by the committee does not address water/sewer needs or the costs of capital infrastructure not already in the County’s 10-year capital budget.  With new legislation recently passed by the General Assembly, Albemarle may be able to take a broader view of the community’s infrastructure needs that could be supported by cash proffers.  That issue is still under review.

Proffers have been an important issue covered in Charlottesville Tomorrow’s blogs.  You can read those stories that discuss proffers from Charlottesville Tomorrow and the local mainstream media.

Brian Wheeler

At a work session on June 5, 2007, the Albemarle County Planning Commission approved a draft version of the Pantops Master Plan. The framework will now go before the Board of Supervisors in early August.

Commissioners examined several proposed revisions made to the plan since a public hearing in April. The largest of these changes involve the Wheeler property, a 77-acre parcel of land located in the northern section of the planning area (diagram below).  Even with a 2006 resolution from the Board of Supervisors implying their support for Wheeler’s 77 acres to be removed from the growth area, the Planning Commission decided not to adjust the Pantops Master Plan’s designated growth boundary.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20070605-County-PC-Approves-Pantops.mp3

The staff report recommended: 

“The property has features that are more rural than urban in character,
with historic and natural resources, and the owner may wish to place
the property under conservation easement. It is currently zoned Rural
Areas and is designated Neighborhood Density Residential (3-6 dwelling
units per acres) in the current Land Use Plan for Pantops.

“A change in the boundaries to the Pantops Master Plan was considered
comprehensively as part of the master plan study and was not applicant
driven by the property owner. It was intended to be responsive to the
property owner’s desires to possibly seek a conservation easement,
public comment received during the initial master plan meetings, and
for land use planning purposes.”

The Wheeler parcel is linked to the May 2006 decision by the Board of
Supervisors to facilitate the expansion of the National Ground
Intelligence Center (NGIC). (.PDF of the resolution) In the Board’s discussion at the time, the
switch of the Wheeler property from growth area to rural area zoning
was envisioned as an offset to the arrangement with developer Wendell
Wood. He asked that 30 acres of land he owned in the rural area in the
Route 29 North corridor be switched into the growth area.  This
arrangement, Wood argued, would allow him to sell some other land below
market value to the federal government to help NGIC. 

At the work session, the Albemarle County Planning Commission did not
discuss the resolution approved by the Board of Supervisors.  Clara Bell Wheeler has told Charlottesville Tomorrow that she never made a commitment to the County to have her land moved from
the growth area as part of the NGIC deal nor was there ever a written request to have that considered.

Planning Commissioner Bill Edgerton said he was concerned about two
issues involving the proposed removal of the property from the growth
area.

“First of all, taking the property out of the development area could
lead to exacerbating the bigger problem that we’re fighting all the
time, which is not getting as much development in the development area
as we want.” Edgerton said to take land out of the growth area would
put pressure on rural areas. “I’m sure the neighborhood would like her
land to remain rural forever, but it was an area that for whatever
reason back in the seventies was designated as a target for
development.”

David Benish, Chief of Planning for the Albemarle County Department of
Community Development, told the Commission that staff made this revision
in response to various issues expressed by community members.
“Scenic mountain views, open space, there was the issue of impact to
Route 20, along with the understanding that there was a property owner
that did not have an interest in [developing] this property.”

In a move counter to the understanding outlined in the NGIC
arrangement, the Commissioners reached consensus to reject the
revision, and suggested that if Mrs. Wheeler wants to take her property
out of the development area in the future, she could seek an easement.  Wheeler told Charlottesville Tomorrow that the commission did what she had asked them to do.

Bill Edgerton said he didn’t want to set a precedent, especially during the master planning process.

“There will come a time when there will be a lot of political pressure
applied to the Board and the Commission to start adjusting the
development areas. We are setting ourselves up for a greater challenge
if we take it out. Let Mrs. Wheeler make her decisions about what she
wants to do one way or another. There’s good road access, there’s lots
of reasons it’s in there.”

Commissioners accepted a revision to the plan to indicate the
possibility for more future connectivity in the road network in Peter
Jefferson Place and Martha Jefferson’s new facilities. They also
approved new language to indicate more protection for the Rivanna
River, as requested by the Southern Environmental Law Center. The added
passages strengthens the plan’s inclusion of the Rivanna as “an
important resource to protect and and as an asset to serve as focal
point for Pantops.”

Commissioners also agreed to amend the Community Facilities provision
of the Pantops Master Plan as well as its implementation plan to stress
that any new schools, libraries and community meeting spaces should be
built in the priority areas.

“What we beefed up was the recommendation for the [Jefferson-Madison
Regional] Library to reconsider their space allocations for facilities,
and to look at other innovative ways to provide for smaller, direct
service to this area,” said Benish. He also said the Plan now reflects
that the county should continue to monitor the Pantops region’s
population growth for future school sites, though the county’s
long-range planning currently does not forecast a need for any such
facilities.

Commissioners asked if the Community Facilities section of the Plan
could also be readjusted to discuss the possibility of adding
sidewalks. Benish said they would take into consideration before the
Plan goes before the Board of Supervisors.

Sean Tubbs & Brian Wheeler*

* Note: Charlottesville Tomorrow’s Brian Wheeler is not related to Clara Bell Wheeler, the owner of the 77 acres of growth area land near Pantops.

City resident Dr. Barbara Haskins is an official candidate for one of three seats on the Charlottesville City Council.  Running as an independent, she will face the three Democratic candidates and independent Peter Kleeman in the general election being held in November 2007. The deadline for candidates to get on the ballot is June 12th.

Haskins, 55, is a psychiatrist at Western State Hospital and has been a city resident since 1981.  She has never previously run for an elected office.  When asked why she was running, Haskins said, "I became outraged in the last City Council budget cycle.  That is why I am doing it.  I am driven by a serious concern about how city budget decisions are made. I want to be the candidate asking about the trajectory of the city
budget.  Is it sustainable? I want the big questions on spending
decisions driven by good data to ensure an effective use of tax
dollars."

On the question of cooperation with the County of Albemarle, Haskins views it with an eye towards spending taxpayer dollars more effectively.  "We should reopen the question of the merging of services and reversion."  She thinks reversion  to town status within Albemarle has a greater potential for savings than merging various agencies as reversion will "dissolve governmental structures" in the city.  Haskins said she also favors reversion since it is something the city voters can decide on their own.

When asked about running as an independent versus seeking the nomination of a political party, Haskins responded, "I think both parties come with enormous baggage.  On a national level, both parties are owned by different groups.  I think each party has sacred cows and I want to be able to talk about those sacred cows."

Visit Charlottesville Tomorrow’s Election Watch 2007 website for detailed information on the candidates, campaign finance reports, upcoming candidate forums, and related events. Click here to view all postings related to City elections.

Brian Wheeler

At their meeting on June 6, 2007, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors voted to set aside $25,000 from its reserve fund for a study into the "ecological carrying capacity" of Albemarle County’s environmental resources. The study will be facilitated by the group Advocates for a Sustainable Albemarle Population. In his motion, Dennis Rooker (Jack Jouett) specified that the money should not be appropriated until ASAP presents a more detailed scope of work to the Board. Funding was also contingent on the hiring of a consultant approved by the County.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20070606-BoS-Asap-Study.mp3

ASAP also plans to approach the City of Charlottesville and private donors for to help fund the study, which could cost as much as $90,000. ASAP President Jack Marshall says the study will be the first of its kind in the nation.

Chairman Ken Boyd (Rivanna) was the lone vote against the motion.  In his remarks, Mr. Boyd pointed out that when the FY2008 operational budget was approved last month, the Board reached consensus to discuss this issue at their June 13, 2007 meeting as part of the FY2008 capital budget.

"I have a problem appropriating this when we can’t pay for police officers," said Boyd. He also suggested that community development staff do not have enough time to help with the report. He asked if the county’s Natural Heritage Commission could study this issue instead. But Boyd said he was mostly concerned about setting an ‘optimal population’, one of ASAP’s stated goals in conducting the study.

Supervisor David Slutzky (Rio) responded that county zoning rules technically do set a maximum population, pointing to a study released in the 1990’s by the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission which reported a total build-out of the metropolitan area of a million people. Slutzky says that number is divorced from the idea of conservation planning, a new way of establishing land-use policies based on what environmental resources can provide.

"You don’t want to just use land use to just acknowledge human activity," said Slutzky. He said the study would give county staff a new tool to help adjust population densities based on what the land, watershed, and air shed could provide. Slutzky said he also wanted to make sure the study would produce scientific results, but Boyd said he didn’t see how an ASAP report could be objective. He suggested other studies by groups such as Stream Watch have already reported that there are too many people in the rural areas, leading to polluted streams. Dennis Rooker said the ASAP study would likely draw upon existing resources while conducting its report, and that staff time spent on the study would be minimal.

Lindsay Dorrier (Scottsville) voted to set aside the funding, but said any study would also have to incorporate surrounding counties which are also part of the watershed and because potential changes to zoning in Albemarle may push people to live in neighboring localities.

"We think we can pull together a scope of work that will be acceptable to the supervisors," said Jack Marshall after the vote. He will meet with his board of directors this weekend to begin planning, and told Charlottesville Tomorrow he hopes to have a plan to present to the Board of Supervisors by the end of the summer.

Sean Tubbs

When the Meadowcreek-250 Interchange Steering Committee adjourned from its May meeting, participants left thinking they had informally selected a preference among one of five remaining options for how to design and build the interchange.

But, the consensus was somewhat challenged during the final meeting before their recommendations are presented to the Charlottesville Planning Commission and Charlottesville City Council at a joint public hearing next Tuesday.

City Councilor Kevin Lynch, who serves on the committee, said the purpose of the steering committee is to develop three alternatives to take to City Council. “I think in our last work session, we felt that while our charge was to bring three, there was one that was a clear consensus.” Option C1 was the preferred alternative.

But some members not present at the May meeting expressed concern that Option C1 does not address their concerns over access to McIntire Park, while others thought it might be better to revisit option G1 which would build a signalized diamond interchange.  This traditional interchange design would have the Route 250 bypass passing over the Meadowcreek Parkway.  There would be traffic signals along McIntire Road at the end of the entrance and exit ramps.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20070604-250-Steering-Committee.mp3

At the May meeting, the committee member asked the project team to evaluate each of the options using  eleven criteria, including park access, trail system access, environmental impacts, and how the interchange would serve as a gateway to downtown Charlottesville. Project team staff placed this information in a matrix to weigh various impacts, using green to describe a “better opportunity” and red to describe “less opportunity.” When the finer points of this matrix were debated, new questions were raised.

[Download a .PDF of the matrix here]

In Option C1, north-south traffic would travel through a large oval underneath an elevated Route 250, and would also feature a north-south pedestrian and cycle trail along Schenk’s Branch on the east side. Engineering firm RKK, which is coordinating the design, project presented two refinements for how these trails would be oriented – one with an at-grade crossing for walkers and bikers, and the other with an underpass beneath Route 250.

Several committee members raised questions. How safe would the trails be? Would the retaining walls required in the grading process be too large? Would pedestrian bridges and underpasses be too expensive? Could Option G1 be selected instead, which uses a signals to regulate traffic while providing opportunities for pedestrians to cross safely?

Robert Winstead, an alternate member of the committee who did not attend the May meeting, said neither refinement satisfied one of his important concerns.

“I feel like we’ve been really clear about pedestrian access, and we need to think about this not from the average commuter coming down there, but how does my seven-year-old son on his bike get into the park?”

Option A is considered to be a “no-build” scenario, but John Conover said that is a disingenuous term to use. “Option A if you did not have it grade-separated, but used some of the $25 million dollars to improve it, would have a number of greens on it. It may fail in terms of moving cars through the intersection itself, but in every other way could be greatly improved.” He recommended a pedestrian bridge could serve as the gateway that the city is looking for.

Project Manager Owen Peery reminded Conover and the other committee members that federal money may not be available if the selected design does not meet the definition of need as defined by the Federal Highway Administration.

Architect Russell Perry, who was also not at the May meeting, suggested G1 might be a better preference. “If G1 has minimal areas of road, and C1 has moderate areas of road, than G1 is better.” Perry also thought that G1 would presented a better  and safer experience for cyclists and pedestrians.

The large oval in Option C1 was one reason why the peer reviewers expressed a preference for it, because of its ability to create an impressive ‘gateway’ for the city. But John Conover said “The price of having that oval, that pushes it all to the east, and we have less options with the trail.”

Kevin Lynch said Option C1 ranked higher for him because it does not feature traffic signals. “The light does stop the traffic, and it’s safe, but it’s a pain.”

After a long discussion of the matrix, Cheri Lewis: “I think after two days of meetings last month, we made our decision. I think we have a very close second option in G.”

Robert Winstead said he didn’t entirely reject Option C1, but is concerned about the 12-foot retaining walls depicted in the design that uses underpasses and the potential impact on Schenk’s Branch. “C1 has a lot of potential as a roadway and a gateway to the city and I can see how it keeps traffic flowing. But I would certainly say G1 has less impact on Schenk’s Branch, has less impact on the park, it’s better for things other than the road.”

Mike Farrugio, committee member and City Planning Commissioner, said G1 was less desirable to him. “The biggest thing with G1 is you’re talking about traffic lights. And that’s one of the things we’re trying to do away with.”

Project Manager Owen Peery is not a voting member of the steering committee, but he did seek to inspire the committee to retain its preference for C1 because of its potential to create a unique feature for Charlottesville.

“You can pretty much go up and down I-81  and any other Interstate in Virginia and see G1 anywhere else, and if this place is going to be a unique park, different interchange, I think there are still things to solve with C1, but I don’t think G1 provides the type of interchange that you all envisioned when you first started this project.”

Nothing will be decided at next week’s meeting. City Planner Angela Tucker reminded the committee that while the city is administering the project, it must go through certain regulatory hurdles to make sure that the project can still qualify for state and federal funds. The project must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as well as with environmental guidelines set by the Federal Highway Administration.

An actual selection cannot happen until NEPA assessments are done. Actual design work can’t proceed until VDOT is authorized to begin purchasing the right of way.

Sean Tubbs

On May 29, 2007, the Albemarle County Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Biscuit Run rezoning.  The public hearing featured the first appearance by developer Hunter Craig (photo at right), an audience of approximately 100 people, and thirty-two speakers who offered their comments on the 3,100 home development in Albemarle’s Scottsville magisterial district.  Up until this meeting, Craig had kept a low profile granting only one interview related to the project and typically deferring to his attorney Steve Blaine to represent the project in public.

In the view of staff which recommended approval, and by the end of the five hour meeting, the Planning Commission, the developer of Biscuit Run had brought a lot to the table to entice Albemarle County to rezone 828 acres of land for the new development.  The Planning Commission looked very favorably upon the proffers for transportation, affordable housing, and public parks. 

Roughly half the speakers from the public expressed their support for Biscuit Run, with many citing improvements that had been made to address their concerns.  While several speakers asked that the project be rejected, most of the other half of the speakers came with outstanding questions and concerns that they asked be addressed before the project was given the County’s approval.

The Biscuit Run rezoning will next be reviewed by the Board of Supervisors in a work session on July 11, 2007.  A public hearing before the Board has tentatively been scheduled for August 8, 2007.

Watch a video of the Commission’s vote:

Brian Wheeler

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

On a day in which the Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) voted to approve a rate increase, members of the board also discussed who should pay for upgrades to water and sewer lines in the County. In their meeting on May 24, 2007, the board also approved a non-binding preliminary agreement with the Biscuit Run developer regarding who would pay the bill for sewer upgrades to support the largest development in the County’s history.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20070524-ACSA-Approves-Rates.mp3

The ACSA purchases water and sewer capacity from the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA), and then sells it to county residents on public utilities. If RWSA raises its rates, ACSA generally must pass these increases on to its customers.  The average single-family home consumers 4,800 gallons a month. The total bill will rise from $41.93 a month to $51.71.

At a public hearing before the vote, Glenmore resident Jim Colbaugh expressed concern that the increase was high, considering that proposed capital improvements by the RWSA are not fully reflected in the increase.

"I’m concerned with new development paying it’s fair share," Colbaugh said. "I do believe because we’re having such a big jump in cost for new capacity, some of that is for existing customers and some of it is for new customers. There ought to be a way to divvy up that expense."

The ACSA’s newest board member, Lizbeth Palmer (Samuel Miller District), asked her colleagues if there was a way to do that by using system development fees . "Can we make sure that in some way, that the capital costs of these new developments are really covered?"

The RWSA has several major projects on the books to increase capacity. They include increasing the dam at Ragged Mountain Reservoir to 112 feet, upgrades to the wastewater treatment plant at Observatory Hill, and the construction of a new pipeline between the South Fork Rivanna and Ragged Mountain reservoirs. Earlier this week, RWSA Director Tom Frederick set a "straw date" of 2021 for the construction of the pipeline.

In order to satisfy the community’s 50-year water supply plan, activists like John Martin of Free Union are concerned that’s not soon enough. At Thursday’s meeting, Martin told the board that the public needs action on these projects in order to satisfy projected growth figures.

ACSA Board Member Robert Larsen (White Hall District) expressed concern about the timing of the South Fork project. "2021 is an eye-opener for me. I hadn’t heard that late [a date]. I appreciate that Mr. Martin has brought that to my attention."

This led to some discussion on the ACSA board about its role in the decision-making process about phasing and financing of major capital improvement projects.

The RWSA’s board does not include an elected member of the Board of Supervisors, but Albemarle County Executive Bob Tucker is a member. A joint meeting between the RWSA, the ACSA, the Supervisors, and City Council is planned for June to discuss capital projects, but no date has yet been set.

Palmer would like Fern to regularly update the Board of Supervisors. "I know that Gary is talking on a regular basis with the planning staff, but I think it would be a good idea to get something out in the public so that everybody can hear and see that we’re working together keeping abreast of the water supply. There’s just so much going on."

But ACSA Chair Donald Wagner (Rio District) said having Fern address the Supervisors would usurp the authority of Bob Tucker, who is a member of the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority board. "If the Board of Supervisors wants to get a report from somebody, it seems to me that the Board of Supervisors should ask for that report rather than somebody go down and say they want to talk to them." Wagner has been on the board since 1984, and is a principal of Great Eastern Management, the developer of North Pointe.

But Palmer continued with her point. "It’s appropriate for the Board of Supervisors to see the head of RWSA and the head of ACSA directly and get updated information in detail." She says the ACSA was set up to manage water and sewer issues, but that the current set-up prevents information from getting to the county’s decision-makers. "They have a tendency to wall off water and sewer, and it’s going to affect the citizens of this community dramatically over the next twenty years."

But Wagner said the proper place for that is for a ACSA board members to keep their individual supervisor informed. Each member of the Board of Supervisors nominates an appointee to the ACSA. "I don’t feel it’s appropriate for the Albemarle County Service Authority to tell the Board of Supervisors what they ought to be doing about these issues."

Palmer says her main goal is to reach the public. "I want to make sure the public is informed because there are so many changes taking place."

One of the biggest changes being considered by the County government is the future of the Biscuit Run property, just south of Charlottesville in the county’s growth area. Wastewater generated at the new development would flow through the Biscuit Run Trunk Sewer, which discharges into the Moores Creek Interceptor before being treated at the Moores Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant.

On Thursday, the ACSA Board voted 3 to 1 in favor of approving a memorandum of understanding between the Authority and Forest Lodge LLC, Biscuit Run’s developers. Under the non-binding preliminary agreements, Forest Lodge will provide improvements to the Biscuit Run Trunk Sewer once its usage surpasses 80% of the peak flow in the pipeline today. The ACSA originally designed and built the "trunk sewer" to handle a "peak flow" of nearly two million gallons of water per day.

When Biscuit Run is fully built, it will need a projected 2,211,250 gpd.  The developers have agreed to be responsible for the financing and design of capacity upgrades. Under the terms of the agreement, the ACSA will have the power to not allow new connections if it feels the capacity is not sufficient.  In addition, the Biscuit Run Trunk Sewer feeds into what is known as the Moores Creek Interceptor.  That sewer line is also expected to require upgrades.  The costs for that upgrade are not know at this time, however a second memorandum outlines the developer’s commitment to pay for an appropriate share of those upgrade costs based on the wastewater flows from Biscuit Run.

Parker was the sole vote against approving the agreements, and was skeptical about whether the agreements were powerful enough.  “I am wondering if we should be requiring money upfront to try to help with this infrastructure costs,” she said.

Steven Blaine, attorney for Forest Lodge, tried to allay Parker’s fears.   Ã¢â‚¬Å“It’s going to be like any other type of utility or infrastructure. If it’s not there and you wish to expand or build, you have to see that it is built as a cost of doing business. The memorandum of understanding puts the developer, owners and the public on notice that the developer will have to pay its fair share, whatever that may be.”

Sean Tubbs

Candidate Jennifer McKeever (D)

The five candidates for three Democratic nominations for City Council held another in a series of candidate forums at Buford Middle School on May 22, 2007. The organizers of this forum decided to go with an informal approach, and opted to have the candidates and about thirty audience members gather around tables for an informal conversation. Topics covered a wide range of events, from affordable living choices to Council’s role of in city schools. Leah Puryear of the Charlottesville City School Board served as the moderator.

Visit our Election Watch 2007 website for detailed information on the candidates, campaign finance reports, upcoming candidate forums, and related events. View all postings related to City elections.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20070522-Democrat-Buford-Forum.mp3

Watch a video of the program:

Highlights from the forum related to growth and development issues:

Question: "How does each candidate feel about merging county and the city together?"

Linda Seaman: " think it’s time for us to sit down with the county and start talking again, because we have a revenue sharing agreement that we’ve only ever executed half of it, that is the half that involves the county sending some money to the city every year. The other half of that agreement indicates that we should have continued talking about consolidating various services and moving forward towards merger. But after a while I guess it was easier to write a check then it was to talk."

Jennifer McKeever: "I believe that we have merged some services including social services and libraries and we have an agreement between the fire departments and those are the types of things that I’d like to see. I think we are two distinct entities and I would like to see the culture be distinct and continue to be distinct. We are a city. They are a county."

Holly Edwards: "The county and the city have been dating for a number of years and I believe one had been waiting for the other to pop the question. I think clearly there are wonderful things about the city and wonderful things about the county, that merging services and consolidating services would make sense because of the resources. I think as we continue the conversation that we find common ground in terms of the health and safety of both communities, people by and large believe that’s important, so maybe its essential to begin that conversation  by thinking about what can we consolidate that would be beneficial to both. What I don’t want to happen is that while we’re dating we give birth to an idea that will cause a shot-gun wedding before we are ready to actually go the altar."

Satyendra Huja: "There are a number of area where we can cooperate in in services, in facilities. We can cooperate in the area of transit, we can cooperate in the area of affordable housing. There are a number of areas in which we should be talking about, for example, policing in urban areas, there’s no reason why we can’t cooperate there. There’s a question possibility in the schools. Our school population is going down, there’s is increasing."

David Brown: "I think we should increase cooperation, but I’m skeptical of consolidation. I think there are so many examples of things we’ve chosen to prioritize that the country has not. An example would be curbside recycling. I think we all benefit and we appreciate that we can recycle at the curbside. The county doesn’t. So if we consolidate, how does that all play out?"

Question: Two audience members asked two follow-up questions which are paraphrased: City and county residents both use each parks services in the other jurisdiction. How can we make sure the county is paying their fair share? What about children who frequently move back and forth between the school systems during their educational career?

Linda Seaman: "I think there’s an opportunity coming later this month when the Y sits down with the city. The county’s already put some money behind that. Maybe that’s a door opening for us to talk about other ways that we can collaborate between the city and the county and a private entity."

Jennifer McKeever: "The parks and rec department in Charlottesville is very distinct. It has a lot of indoor facilities, a lot of programming for youth. I want the parks and rec place to be a place for our city students, and I’d love to see more programming going into it. I am more concerned with bringing our parks up to a high standard, and not as concerned with merging our facilities."

Holly Edwards: "[Charlottesville parks] have been part of the neighborhoods for so long… and I can’t think of very many programs that we have that truly embraced every child, within every pocket of the community in that way. And I like to believe that we’ll be able to continue that same kind of culture.

Satyendra Huja: "Recreational and athletic programs I think we can cooperate with the county more. Maybe of the people using our parks and rec facilities are from the county, and not from the city. If that’s the case, I want them to share some of the cost of that with the city."

David Brown: "Another difference between the city and county does come in some of our recreational programs. An example is basketball. The city parks and rec department runs the basketball program. It’s available at nominal cost to city children. On the other hand, the county doesn’t have a program for basketball, the Y runs the basketball, and it’s much more pricey. At the same time, when you look at it in terms of green space, the county parks are an asset to the city, and the city trails and parks are an asset to county residents, so to some degree a lot of this should be kind of seamless."

Question: "Right now, housing is unstable for the same children we’re trying to help. What do you think you can do in a market-driven arena to create affordable workforce housing in significant numbers?"

Linda Seaman: "I think there’s a tremendous need for workforce housing. I think the answer may be increasing density in the city, and it will most likely not be single detached housing. That said, we don’t have a great deal of land on which to build that, so we’ll have to increase density. We need to regionalize the housing issue."

Jennifer McKeever: "U.Va and the county are not necessarily good neighbors with respect to the very lowest income housing. As much as we can get out city employees to be able to the city, I’m for."

Holly Edwards: "I’m really curious as to what the affordable housing task force has decided because I really think those decisions need to come from the outside in. We could explore how the services that we can provide families can empower them to be in a place where they can buy a house. Helping people with their credit, helping people learn how to save their money."

Satyendra Huja: "We just built about thirty homes in the 10th and Page neighborhood. 10 of those were sold on the open market, and the profit from those ten plus some funds from the city and county were put into the other 20 houses to make affordable houses. It cost about $40,000 per unit to make affordable housing. So, I don’t know if it’s the best uses of money, but it’s one way of dealing with it."

David Brown: "We’re losing the stock of affordable rental housing in the city, and that’s one thing we need to replenish. We will get moving on creating a joint U.Va-City-County task force. Hopefully the county will embrace this idea, but the reality is that the county so far does not provide any low-income housing."

---

HIGHLIGHTS  (times correspond with audio in the above podcast)

• 00:00 – Introduction
• 02:31 – Question: "How do you feel about merging county and the city together?"
• 8:51 – Two audience members asked two follow-up questions which are paraphrased: City and county residents both use each parks services in the other jurisdiction. How can we make sure the county is paying their fair share? What about children who frequently move back and forth between the school systems during their educational career?
• 23:30 – Question about why the city is holding payments to the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority.
  Only Mayor Brown directly answered the question.
• 28:00 – Question: "I’m concerned as an administrator in the criminal justice field about the level of violence in our school systems. What are the candidates’ thoughts on this subject? Would you support single-sex education or school uniforms as possible solutions?"
• 47:00 – Question: "What do you see as the role of Council in addressing alcoholism and drug abuse in the city’s school system?"
• 58:50 – Question: "What role as city councilors would you have in recruiting and retaining highly-qualified and effective teachers who can help all children learn?"
• 1:07:40 – Question: "Right now, housing is unstable for the same children we’re trying to help. What do you think you can do in a market-driven arena to create affordable workforce housing in significant numbers?"

Sean Tubbs

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.

On May 21, 2007, the Board of the Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority (RWSA) held their monthly meeting and reviewed several items related to the FY 2008 budget and the community’s 50-year water supply plan.  RWSA has two customers, the Albemarle County Service Authority and the City of Charlottesville.

FY2008 BUDGET

During the budget discussions, staff informed the Board that Dominion Virginia Power had passed along a rate increase of 12.9% for each of the next three years in its contract with RWSA.  Staff recommended against making adjustments in the proposed FY 2008 budget and that the Board keep a close eye on these expenses in the next fiscal year.  The operations impacted by the rate increase today have annual utility expenditures budgeted for $1.1 million.  The rate increase would add about $145,000 in additional costs during FY 2008.  The budget was approved unanimously.

WATER SUPPLY & IN-STREAM FLOWS

The Board heard recommendations from staff on the sequencing of infrastructure upgrades related to the 50-year water supply plan.  The plan calls for construction of a new larger dam at the Ragged Mountain Reservoir, upgraded treatment facilities at Observatory Hill, the construction of a pipeline between Ragged Mountain and the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir, and the abandonment of a 100 year old pipeline running from Sugar Hollow to Ragged Mountain (this pipeline fills Ragged Mountain, but prevents some water from reaching the Moormans River).

The Board began with a report on the ongoing discussions between the authority and The Nature Conservancy about how in-stream flows could be improved below the Sugar Hollow Dam (Moormans River) and the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20070521-RWSA-Meeting.mp3

RWSA Executive Director, Tom Frederick, said, "We’ve got an opportunity to be number one, perhaps in the world in terms of coming up with a strategy for how to utilize a stream for both human needs and for nature’s needs."  The goal is to have in-stream flows mimic their natural state (what existed before the reservoirs were built) while balancing the community’s water supply needs, particularly during times of drought. According to the staff report, RWSA intends to leverage the expertise and ideas from The Nature Conservancy to "rewrite ‘the book’ on how releases from reservoirs throughout Virginia and the nation are regulated in the future."  The Board authorized Mr. Frederick to move forward with the stream flow proposals.

Next, the Board was introduced to the specifics of the phasing proposal for the $130 million 50-year water supply plan.  The key recommendation is to start by building the new 112′ Ragged Mountain Dam all at once (below the existing dam and 45′ higher).  Building the dam in multiple phases would generate $3 million in additional costs.

The proposal given to the Board for consideration was as follows:

• By 2011, build the new dam at Ragged Mountain Reservoir all at once ($37 million)
• By 2015, upgrade water treatment facilities at Observatory
  Hill
• By 2021, build a new pipeline between Ragged Mountain and the
  South Fork reservoirs ($52 million)

The RWSA Board asked Mr. Frederick to schedule a public hearing during Summer 2007 so that they could finalize a phasing and financing plan at their August 2007 meeting.

Brian Wheeler

On May 19, 2007, the five candidates seeking Democratic nominations for three seats on Charlottesville City Council held another in a series of forums at the Jefferson Area Board for Aging. Over sixty people attended the event, which was hosted by the Charlottesville and Albemarle Democrats as part of their monthly breakfast meeting. Columnist Bob Gibson of the Charlottesville Daily Progress served as moderator for the forum.

(L to R) Bob Gibson (Daily Progress), Jennifer McKeever, Holly Edwards, Linda Seaman, David Brown, and Satyendra Huja

Visit our Election Watch 2007 website for detailed information on the candidates, campaign finance reports, upcoming candidate forums, and related events. View all postings related to City elections.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20070519-Democrat-Candidates-Forum.mp3

Watch a video of the program:

The candidates did not give opening and closing statements. Instead, Bob Gibson presided over a series of ten questions, many of which touched on growth and development issues. The following are some of the questions as well as selected responses from the candidates.

Question 1: “Is Charlottesville one community with Albemarle County? Should the county and city explore a possible merger?”

Jennifer McKeever: “I believe that we can look to merging different things, for example the social services works very well, the fire department, the library works well. I’m not opposed to studying those issues, I just don’t want to see reversion or merger necessarily because we are two distinct localities.”

Holly Edwards: “Consolidation does bring out a better use of resources, but the reality is before you get married, all those pre-marital counseling sessions are for a reason.”

Linda Seaman: “The city and the county have a revenue sharing agreement. We finished the first part. In other words, the city gets a check from the county each year. We haven’t finished the second part which was to further discuss ways of consolidating services.”

David Brown: “There are a number of areas where the city and county are showing an ability to cooperate. The idea of moving towards a regional transit authority and figuring out ways of investing and sharing resources to make transit improve in Charlottesville is a great idea. We should look for opportunities to work together.”

Satyendra Huja: “There are many areas where we can cooperate and consolidate and have economies of scale. Transit, we can’t solve the affordable housing problem only in the city. For that to happen, we need to meet together on a more regular basis, more of a team basis, instead of just meeting on a crisis basis.”

Question 2: “Should the city look specifically at the consolidation of police, fire and rescue services?”

Satyendra Huja: “Yes, I think we should do that.”

David Brown: “We just had a study look at the possibility of merging the fire departments, and it didn’t come back thinking there were reasons to do that. On the rescue squad issue, I think the city has tried to move a little too fast and we should work more closely with the county to identify what are the performance issues and what are the best strategies for improving them as a region.”

Linda Seaman: “I would like us to very seriously look at the consolidation of police and fire, and also bring the University into that conversation. As the county urbanizes around the ring of the city, I think they are finding a lot of the services the city provides, they’re going to have to provide too.

Holly Edwards: “One aspect that would perpetuate the idea of consolidation is having both the county and city agree on what common ground is, and clearly health and safety is common ground for everyone. So, to explore the police, the fire and rescue squad would be a good way to start.”

Jennifer McKeever: “I would want to research that subject more before I commented further.”

Question 6: “Given several legal and community questions about the viability of the Meadowcreek Parkway, would you support transferring money from the Meadowcreek Parkway to other transportation projects?”

Jennifer McKeever: “I would like to see that money right now put into city coffers for transportation initiatives. The Parkway is an idea whose time has past.”

Holly Edwards: “Some of the issues will come to rest by the fall. I’m hoping some of the questions we’ve been asking over the years will finally come to resolution.”

Linda Seaman: “I favor our building the parkway using the same requirements City Council put on in 1999, and that it be built to certain specifications. We also have an opportunity to develop it as a multi-modal transportation corridor, having it as an HOV road during peak transportation times.”

David Brown: “I’ve supported the Meadowcreek Parkway in line with the 1999 agreement. I don’t think it’s a yes or no question. The key ingredient for regional transportation will be an Eastern Connector. There’s no doubt that if everyone who wants to go from Pantops to 29 North has to come through the city, we’re always going to have a big problem."

Satyendra Huja: “I support the Meadowcreek Parkway because I believe it’s a road that will provide good access to downtown as long as it is designed in a quality manner so that it’s a parkway, not an expressway.”

Question 8: “What is your position on the possibility of converting the Charlottesville Transit Service to a “fare free” system?”

Jennifer McKeever: “I support that proposal, but we have to make them convenient and desirable alternatives to driving.”

Holly Edwards: “I’d be interested in learning more about the details in concert with finding out more about which places in the community have higher bus usage than others to see where a free bus service would be most useful.”

Linda Seaman: “The MPO which is looking into the idea of a regional transit district needs to move that along as quickly as possible. We need to expand the bus service not only within the city, but also out into the county.”

David Brown: “The cost of the bus didn’t seem to me to be the determining factor on whether people chose to use the bus or not. If going to a fare free bus system does significantly boost ridership, then we should look into that. More important is that it has to be dependable.”

Satyendra Huja: “We’ve talked about this idea before, I support it, but more than that, buses have to be every fifteen minutes, dependable.”

---

HIGHLIGHTS  (times correspond with audio in the above podcast)

• 02:00 – Question 1: “Is Charlottesville one community with Albemarle County? Should the county and city explore a possible merger?”
• 6:40 – Question 2: “Should the city look specifically at the consolidation of fire and rescue services?”
• 9:30 – Question 3: “How do you feel about projects such as ‘Art In Place’ during a time when people have a hard time finding an affordable place to live?”
• 14:30 – Question 4: “I have in mind that there are three school systems in the region. City, county and private schools. Do you feel we should have a ‘school czar’ to deal with these three entities, and do you feel that the size of the school systems have anything to do with the quality of education?”
• 21:30 – Question 5: “Housing in the area is often referred to a crisis. I want to know when it will be dealt with as a crisis. IMPACT has talked to a lot of people who say there is a lack of cooperation between the city, the county and the University. What are your positions on a joint task force to address the issue?”
• 32:00 – Question 6: “Given several legal and community questions about the viability of the Meadowcreek Parkway, would you support transferring money from the Meadowcreek Parkway to other transportation projects?”
• 37:44 – Question 7: “Where are all the cars going to be parked when they come to downtown Charlottesville?”
• 42:30 – Question 8: “What is your position on the possibility of converting the Charlottesville Transit Service to a ‘fare free’ system?”
• 50:45 – Question 9: “What do you see in Charlottesville that you champion that is a success story?”
• 57:20 – Question 10: “Are there any other transportation solutions besides buses, roads, and more individuals in private cars”

Sean Tubbs & Brian Wheeler