Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Site Readiness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
EDA members press for zoning flexibility, site-readiness as Albemarle faces limited developable land
Summary
EDA members and staff discussed county land constraints, a reported ‘about 5%’ developable land figure, and called for modernization of permitting, zoning and site-readiness efforts to support commercial growth without undermining rural character.
Members of the Albemarle County Economic Development Authority raised concerns about the county’s limited amount of developable land and urged the county to modernize land development processes and add flexibility to zoning codes to support business growth.
During the strategic plan discussion a board member cited an internet figure—“approximately 5%” of Albemarle County land designated as developable—and asked how the county can pursue commercial diversification with that constraint. Staff said the strategic plan would not itself identify specific sites but would recommend areas for future work; site identification and infrastructure planning would be part of a multi-year implementation effort. Staff also described ongoing site-readiness work (including a Virginia business-ready sites application and requests for federal site-readiness funding) intended to expand the pipeline of build-ready commercial sites.
Board members pressed for clearer metrics on what “site readiness” means in practice—square footage, utilities capacity, transportation and permitting timelines—and said the plan should include implementation sequencing (what can be done now versus in later years). Several board members argued for “flexibility” in zoning to allow modern agribusiness activities, lodging near Crozet and shared food-processing or co-packing facilities that do not fit neatly into current rural zoning. Staff agreed to include modernization items and to identify roles for county departments and external partners.
Members also discussed the interplay between growth-area boundaries and specific constraints such as riparian setbacks, institutional land holdings (including university-owned parcels), and how a limited development area affects where new commercial projects could locate. Staff cautioned that adoption of the plan would not immediately change zoning or create sites; subsequent, targeted planning and capital projects would be required.
