[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6648047,"mediaKeyId","3548158-ae45e39eb363eea3f9ba609daa98dd8f","parentId",3548158,"title","Commission moves resilient communities content into environmental stewardship and community facilities chapters","audioSeconds",856,"startMs",4412000,"endMs",5268000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3548158-ae45e39eb363eea3f9ba609daa98dd8f&start=4412&end=5268","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3548158-ae45e39eb363eea3f9ba609daa98dd8f/thumbnail_4412000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6648047/Albemarle-County/Virginia/Commission-moves-resilient-communities-content-into-environmental-stewardship-and-community-facilities-chapters","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6648047-b49a58f2f432ab92bc10992ebc9387c9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771177812&Signature=XyOVzQ2xkvFz9dyu692aWTYC9AoCM1Ot1~oeHGF2lEL~cj0Q6F8B7TkwL3QHZyrvA5RDhLyUlRJkdgojax3elnPd~mD-QHagspmNOe7LfWBJ25K7I6iVzyAvaZxUvEEjSMGTvdAtrg9pmj79rEhjRqpvQ5XNhjzCC-C-T6n7VdPVV~Mfg8yfE4OOwoBqo6glveDg2PvCRuGxnfmddrcRO-id814rOERM9UvGFr6sY4aiqf4YKOU9Q85Ew9nnzelQBv0pV7dFWC8JQOVHr4PrQD7ldrPJuj~MtqkIzI1MfgfIIvDGieKyawsWu~YkWKo0j~7T86Vm76ga7t85RwjXJg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Albemarle County","date","2025-05-28T12:35:57Z","article","Planning staff told the commission on May 27 that the AC44 \"resilient communities\" chapter contains material that overlaps other chapters, and staff will relocate subtopics into the environmental stewardship chapter and the community facilities and services chapter.

Ben Holt explained the crosswalk that reallocates content. Material on community resilience hubs and local food systems will be moved into the community facilities chapter (objectives include services and programs that benefit community health and healthy local food systems). Content on environmental resilience, climate adaptation and natural hazard planning will transfer to the environmental stewardship chapter, which will carry objectives for preparation and recovery from natural and man‑made disasters.

Commissioners and staff discussed questions of implementation. Commissioners broadly supported urban agriculture as a program when tied to public land or community centers, but several said urban agriculture in compact development areas is often inefficient and works best as community gardens or food access programs. Commissioner discussion favored using public land and community centers for gardens, farmer's markets and incubator uses.

Commissioners also suggested adding a community education program to reduce excessive outdoor lighting and to promote dark‑sky friendly fixtures. Staff said lighting and dark‑sky topics already appear in the environmental stewardship chapter and would be cross‑referenced from cultural resources.

Staff noted the relocated content ties closely to transportation, parks and open space and land‑use chapters. Commissioners asked staff to clarify implementation timing and whether near‑term budget funding is available; staff said no specific budget was identified for these actions at the time of the presentation.

Ending

Staff will update the plan text to move resilient communities subtopics into the two identified chapters, cross‑reference lighting/dark skies, and incorporate commissioner feedback about public‑land programming and partnerships for urban agriculture.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Albemarle County Planning Commission Meeting 05/27/2025","oneSentenceSummary","Staff told commissioners the resilient communities material will be relocated into the environmental stewardship and community facilities chapters of AC44; commissioners asked about urban agriculture, community hubs and dark‑sky outreach.","taxTitle","Albemarle County, Virginia","taxId",4417,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6648052,"Planning Commission grants one‑year extension for Field School site start; neighbors cite delays and safety concerns",1667,7205000,8872000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3548158-ae45e39eb363eea3f9ba609daa98dd8f&start=7205&end=8872","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3548158-ae45e39eb363eea3f9ba609daa98dd8f/thumbnail_7205000.jpg","/articles/6648052/Albemarle-County/Virginia/Planning-Commission-grants-oneyear-extension-for-Field-School-site-start-neighbors-cite-delays-and-safety-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6648052-1f21a3561de1f4a580f6d7336d836c46/orig.mp4?Expires=1771177812&Signature=Zkh95HqeKJPxdv~EW7mHnS2XOh30T4X1zu3gLn-0KyyHtpcqzsMpCDmmaJ-AD5mzY1DAiuLC8zy2-iqOl63kPgIYU0W0q1~u0MdAfUd-tFc2Bln70DMudHzsX-wxGma4nKjgpjMlXP-CbJ0hq9jS87jLCxgmQm1WGPkvqkinhM4MMFlCxS0APmfKrTzw7kgAaxYF8P84qBzHe-XpizO209iX4QnZRZr6vPvv2lOxdG5Phr8XJ~zwgYbKYcCbqtQY~jh~5F5b7IL7pK3BItY48pV6aVRSqg~xWS-lwAZkZZvLtCShRRv7mB1X~-t6qy5qbk8-JnHioD1OFoGykFK0iQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Albemarle County's Planning Commission on May 27 approved a one‑year extension for the Field School's special use permit condition that requires construction to begin by a set date, after the applicant said final approvals are underway and the county staff supported a limited extension.

Rebecca Ragsdale presented the item, noting the Field School's special use permit authorizes a private middle school for up to 50 students on Barracks Road and that the request before the commission only sought to amend condition 9 to extend the construction‑start deadline from Aug. 28, 2025 to Aug. 28, 2026. Ragsdale said the site's initial and final site plans have been submitted to the county and that the site plan and stormwater reviews are in process.

Field School head Beau Pariello told the commission his organization had submitted final site plan and Virginia stormwater management documents and that the school has a building committee, architects and a civil engineering team working on the project. \"We are full steam ahead on the project,\" Pariello said, asking for the extension while staff and outside reviewers complete plan reviews.

A nearby resident, Robert Humphreys Jr., opposed another extension and asked the commission to deny the request. Humphreys said the project had changed leadership and consultants multiple times and missed prior deadlines. He also said the latest site plan relocated the entrance to a steeper segment of Barracks Road, prompting a VDOT requirement for right‑ and left‑turn lanes and potential traffic safety concerns.

Commissioners discussed tradeoffs between keeping pressure on applicants to start construction and recognizing realistic permitting timelines that include VDOT and state agency reviews; staff said an additional year was reasonable and that no other changes to the existing special use permit conditions were requested.

The commission recommended approval of the one‑year extension for the Field School special use permit; the vote recorded commissioners present and voting in favor (audio roll call noted Mister Bivens, Mister Murray, Mister Clayburn, Mister Missal, Mister Karazana, Miss Firehawk, Mister Moore among those voting yes). All existing SUP conditions remain in effect: enrollment caps, buffers, hours, lighting controls and other site requirements.

Ending

Staff and the applicant will proceed through final site plan and permits. If construction does not start by the extended deadline, the applicant will need to return for a further amendment; commissioners said they expect the applicant to pursue building permits promptly and noted community safety questions remain part of the site plan and VDOT reviews.","The commission approved a one‑year extension (to Aug. 28, 2026) for the Field School special use permit start deadline after the applicant said final site and stormwater plans are under review; a nearby resident urged denial citing repeated delays and traffic safety concerns.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6648057,"Planning commission recommends approval of Spring Hill Farm subdivision with conservation conditions",1593,5538000,7131000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3548158-ae45e39eb363eea3f9ba609daa98dd8f&start=5538&end=7131","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3548158-ae45e39eb363eea3f9ba609daa98dd8f/thumbnail_5538000.jpg","/articles/6648057/Albemarle-County/Virginia/Planning-commission-recommends-approval-of-Spring-Hill-Farm-subdivision-with-conservation-conditions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6648057-79f0d9987a46d6fd1e2ec99c331d8528/orig.mp4?Expires=1771177812&Signature=CMUq6xl~lQC~CPrLg6GMkgs9Rez6Xvtymgn-J32gWgP2gVfMv-HamtA3eGuDjK7GVoIrAbLrDXVdueARqdxLUBBBf4~1gBnLskSnVXTjNILCTZddW4OLh-ZlTCI6kjhGWPb5G1cwylhndj5Rp-yQVrKa8hP9t5uZkpC8teory~wlEv5NIkPOT7eqtnxSDzxvU73XJnXbvKdATlFaiD7tYVG6UVo32Mx0pTVbXnpE9wx66e7rtJyGOc5lr0~~OHHiznvmEQOLguNomOdV2ES-6Puw8bu9dhQ7HVFkUN-G6F5NiI12cTgaL52RWxKNNz0zOofZemY~255SBssD9Ubp-w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Albemarle County planning staff and the applicant described revisions to the Spring Hill Farm subdivision concept plan at the May 27 Planning Commission meeting, and the commission voted to recommend approval with staff conditions.

Rebecca Ragsdale, planning manager, told the commission the property west of Charlottesville off Dickwood Road and near the Ivy interchange totals roughly 342 acres and that the current proposal would create six residential tracts while keeping the bulk of the land in conservation or open ownership. \"We are primarily focused on how it gets developed,\" Ragsdale said, noting earlier approvals and special use permit history tied to the tract.

Applicant Ethan Miller, representing Blue Springs Land Corporation, said the current plan reduced the acreage allocated to residential lots from about 263.8 acres in the applicant's earlier concept to roughly 193 acres and shortened driveway lengths by nearly 2,500 feet through shared drives. Miller said the revised plan leaves 96.5% of the residue parcel in forested or agricultural use and averages roughly 32 acres per proposed lot (the ordinance minimum referenced by staff is 21 acres).

Staff recommended approval subject to conditions that include:
- Limiting residential clearing on each new lot (staff and applicant specified a 2-acre clearing cap for building sites and driveways as applied to new driveway construction);
- Requiring only one principal dwelling unit per lot (accessory unit rules remain tied to the county's definition of dwelling unit);
- Review and approval of grading and erosion & sediment control before building permits are issued;
- Ensuring emergency vehicle turnaround at the end of private driveways per the Fire Marshal's review.

Ragsdale said the county had worked with the applicant to reduce potential impacts from driveways and building sites; the applicant also agreed to deed conservation/open space areas to the neighborhood structure rather than retaining them under the seller's ownership. Several immediate neighbors told commissioners they supported the plan.

The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of SP‑2024‑24 with staff conditions. Roll‑call during the motion recorded commissioners in attendance and voting in favor (transcript roll call: Mister Bivens; Mister Murray; Mister Clayburn; Mister Missal; Mister Karazana; Miss Firehawk; Mister Moore). The commission's recommendation goes to the Board of Supervisors for final action.

Ending

If the Board of Supervisors follows the commission recommendation, building permits and subsequent site‑level reviews (driveway engineering, erosion and sediment control, and any required waivers) will govern construction timing and specific lot layouts.","Commissioners recommended approval of SP-2024-24, a proposal to create six large rural lots on a 342-acre tract west of Charlottesville after the applicant reduced residential acreage and driveway impacts; staff recommended conditions on clearing, grading and driveway design.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6648061,"Albemarle planning commissioners back broader protections, inclusive inventories for cultural resources",1850,70000,1920000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3548158-ae45e39eb363eea3f9ba609daa98dd8f&start=70&end=1920","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3548158-ae45e39eb363eea3f9ba609daa98dd8f/thumbnail_70000.jpg","/articles/6648061/Albemarle-County/Virginia/Albemarle-planning-commissioners-back-broader-protections-inclusive-inventories-for-cultural-resources","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6648061-ce6814bf0d459b06dbaed92d1586b161/orig.mp4?Expires=1771177812&Signature=k8oBFM8fXY7RNAW5rWIwdTUv0Ec4Tu8ulhLnHS6t7EhTHIOF~6ZeJx5JiU9qZ3Dc7jkntnhkQdq1bEuyRLRm065YuKOTMy5faAGxBY6uMcJ3nQ8lh4tC92Q43y0DjGLGpNoK5rhutcbVslVUvBU~p6yN~xM7Rx0fO41Vb5o-e~TTxfFbCYf1g3zbYWX6~MFN7aVhFF4sYcr1yLE62~3ybM7iwtZn~Aa3oKVwA0SU5gr~h~4iCRZRr2~LiMEmb-2UaWebOzPNqqFOG~y3s4Dy2K9VThwKVOou3vfE1C4WeBRvIjLDuGJtv-Fiy5v8LbNYal9HiJbDJhCDOIIZhfl9~g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Albemarle County planning staff presented the cultural resources chapter of the county's AC44 comprehensive plan at the May 27 Planning Commission meeting, and commissioners signaled broad support for more proactive protection, updated inventories and measures to make preservation more inclusive.

The presentation, led by Ben Holt of the county's Long Range Planning Division and Margaret Maliszewski of the Planning Division, framed cultural resources as central to the county's identity and quality of life. \"Cultural resources are really what make Albemarle the unique county that it is,\" Maliszewski told commissioners, summarizing the chapter's goals and objectives.

Commissioners and members of the public pressed staff on several specifics. Commissioners generally endorsed an \"overlay study\" that would map overlapping resources (historic structures, scenic corridors, conservation easements and biodiversity sites) to set protection priorities. They also expressed conditional support for stronger local regulations, such as a preservation ordinance or a targeted demolition ordinance, provided measures are narrowly tailored and do not unduly burden property owners.

Staff summarized prior feedback and the draft objectives. Holt told the commission the chapter emphasizes maintaining accurate, updated surveys, increasing protection through local regulations and incentives, supporting adaptive reuse, and telling more inclusive local histories that recognize the contributions of African American and Indigenous communities. Staff plans to add captions for images and incorporate inclusive historical narratives into the draft chapters posted on the county's Engage AC44 website.

Commissioner comments ranged from advocating adaptive reuse and stronger incentives to warnings about \"weaponizing\" preservation rules. Commissioner Moore and others asked staff to ensure rules are not so broad that they freeze entire landscapes. Commissioner Firehawk asked whether a local scenic highway designation could provide protections the county's existing entrance corridor regulations do not; staff responded it would be a local designation implemented via local ordinance, not the state scenic highway program.

Multiple commissioners and public commenters urged the county to expand its focus beyond high‑style architecture to modest homes, Freedman communities and living cultural institutions such as festivals, community gardens and rural social organizations. Commissioner Murray and others asked that inventories include living communities and sites of ongoing cultural activity, not just cemeteries or static monuments.

Public comment reinforced calls for inclusive preservation. Diane Brown Towns, a former member of the county's Historic Preservation Committee subcommittee, urged the commission to create a repository documenting free and enslaved families and proposed a museum or interpretive repository tied to conservation goals. \"I returned to Lane High School Auditorium today . . . to speak to you about the need for a repository to highlight and preserve the history of free and enslaved people,\" Brown Towns said.

Staff recommended further work to (1) conduct the overlay study, (2) evaluate legal tools including a targeted demolition ordinance, (3) create a GIS inventory layer and genealogical resources, (4) assemble a restoration/reuse \"toolbox,\" and (5) explore incentives such as tax or other programs. Commissioners asked staff to clarify implementation pathways (e.g., consultant vs. in‑house work), identify likely funding or partners (UVA and local nonprofits were discussed), and show how objectives would align with other AC44 chapters (environmental stewardship, parks, transportation and resilient communities).

The commission did not take a formal vote on regulatory changes at the May 27 session; the discussion was recorded as direction for staff as they refine the chapter for Board review. Staff said the cultural resources chapter (and image caption updates) will go to the Board of Supervisors on June 4 as part of the AC44 chapter rollout.

Ending

Staff will draft more detailed implementation steps and return to the commission with clarified language around proposed ordinances, incentives and the overlay study. Commissioners asked staff to include clearer language on who would hold easements or conservation interests, spell out whether incentives would be real estate tax breaks or other tools, and add explicit actions supporting partnerships and living cultural resources such as festivals and community gardens.","Planning staff presented the draft cultural resources chapter of the AC44 comprehensive plan; commissioners broadly supported an overlay study, stronger local protections and incentives, and more inclusive inventories that highlight African American and other under‑represented sites.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commission moves resilient communities content into environmental stewardship and community facilities chapters

Planning Commission grants one‑year extension for Field School site start; neighbors cite delays and safety concerns

Planning commission recommends approval of Spring Hill Farm subdivision with conservation conditions

Albemarle planning commissioners back broader protections, inclusive inventories for cultural resources