Planning commission reviews AC44 implementation chapter; staff outlines six "big moves," metrics and outreach schedule

Albemarle County planning staff presented an implementation chapter for the county’s 20‑year comprehensive plan (AC44) at the Planning Commission’s July 8 work session, outlining six priority areas staff called “big moves,” proposed measurable tracking metrics and a schedule for public review this summer and early fall.

Tanya Swartzendu, planning manager, told commissioners the implementation chapter distills more than 250 actions into six overarching priorities. “What we mean by implementation is making progress on the recommended actions listed in AC44 that cut across several county departments,” Swartzendu said. “It’s about turning the vision of AC44 into action, providing accountability and building momentum.”

Staff’s six big moves are: (1) align regulations to support AC44 (including zoning and subdivision changes), (2) increase affordable housing access, (3) invest in compact, connected development areas and activity centers, (4) support agricultural and forestry uses in the rural area, (5) expand economic opportunity, and (6) mitigate and prepare for the impacts of climate change. Each move was paired in staff slides with related chapters and example actions.

Swartzendu said staff is drafting specific metrics to show trends rather than set final targets. Examples offered for big-move three (development-area growth and activity centers) included increasing the percentage of housing units within a 15‑minute walk of a park, decreasing severe pedestrian and cyclist crashes and increasing miles of shared‑use paths. She said target-setting would be completed as part of the county’s strategic planning process.

The presentation included a proposed schedule: staff aims to release the full draft for public review in August; hold a community check‑in roughly two weeks after the release; receive the Planning Commission’s comments on August 26 (a work session will allow commissioners to discuss the full draft); return the full document to the commission for a recommendation on September 23; and seek Board of Supervisors adoption in October.

Commissioners and commenters pressed staff on several themes it plans to address. Multiple commissioners asked for clearer, measurable objectives and interim benchmarks and urged staff to expand the environmental and “green” metrics (for example, tree canopy and protected forest blocks) and to include adaptive management language so the county can reassess progress before the five‑year reports. Several commissioners and members of the public also urged more explicit attention to equity and affordable housing design — not only percentage commitments but implementation tools and funding strategies.

Public speakers who had earlier urged expanded public outreach on the county economic development strategic plan returned to the work session’s discussion. Hugh Meagher, who spoke during the public comment period, argued the EDSP was being advanced too quickly and without adequate hearings. “The economic development strategic plan proposes significant changes to the county zoning, to its land use and growth management policy, and to its regulatory structure without the benefit of public hearings,” Meagher said. Holmes Brown, another public commenter, said the draft EDSP and related summaries relied heavily on stakeholder meetings and limited online responses and asked the commission to delay adoption until broader public education and hearings were held.

Staff also flagged a possible procedural change to the plan amendment process: county staff is evaluating reinstating a citizen‑initiated future‑land‑use map amendment pathway that had been discontinued. Commissioners discussed the tradeoffs; several said any citizen‑initiated pathway should carry a high evidentiary bar and work within a deliberate amendment calendar.

Why it matters: The implementation chapter frames how Albemarle will convert a long, detailed comp‑plan document into concrete work over the next five to 20 years. Commissioners repeatedly urged that the chapter include clearer metrics, funding pathways and mechanisms to protect rural and environmental resources while enabling growth in activity centers. Staff said metrics and a public schedule will be refined in the coming weeks and that the Planning Commission will review the full draft on August 26.

What’s next: Staff will publish the full draft for public review in August, hold a community check‑in, and ask the Planning Commission for comments at a work session on August 26. The commission will take a formal recommendation vote in late September; the Board of Supervisors is expected to consider adoption in October.