AGENDA POWHATAN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS …

of 4

AGENDA POWHATAN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 14, 2020

6:30 PM CALL TO ORDER

This meeting is being held in the Village Building Auditorium and is open to the public to attend in person, but several remote options remain available to participate or watch the

meeting.

If you would like to participate in the meeting, go to https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83998792911 by computer or smartphone with the Zoom app.

or by phone, dial 1-301-715-8592 or 1-312-626-6799 or 1-929-205-6099 or 1-253-215-8782 or 1-346-248-7799 or 1-669-900-6833

Type Webinar ID: 839 9879 2911

Or iPhone one-tap : US: +13017158592, 83998792911# or +13126266799, 83998792911#

**During the public comment period, you may raise your hand using the zoom controls on your screen or press *9 on your phone. Visit the Zoom Help Center for more information.

If you would like to watch in real-time, use this link: http://powhatanva.gov/432/Live-Stream-of-Powhatan-County-Meetings

If you would like to watch the meeting at your convenience later use this link: http://powhatanva.gov/433/County-Meetings-and-Workshop-Videos-On-D

Public comments may also be submitted to [email protected] or by leaving a voicemail at (804) 598-5612. Any comments received up until 5:00 PM of the day of the meeting shall be entered into the meeting minutes.

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83998792911

https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/200941109-Attendee-Controls-in-a-Meeting

http://powhatanva.gov/432/Live-Stream-of-Powhatan-County-Meetings

http://powhatanva.gov/432/Live-Stream-of-Powhatan-County-Meetings

http://powhatanva.gov/433/County-Meetings-and-Workshop-Videos-On-D

mailto:[email protected]

POWHATAN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 14, 2020

of 4

1. Call to Order

2. Pledge of Allegiance

3. Invocation

4. Requests to Postpone Agenda Items and Additions, Deletions orChanges in the Order of Presentation

5. Formal Approval of Agenda

6. County Administrator Updates- Certificates of Appreciation, SpecialResolutions, Proclamations and Presentations

A. Proclamation P-2020-13 Recognizing Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.,Youth Day and National Mentoring Day

7. Public Comment (time limit 3 minutes per individual/5 minutes pergroup, 30 minutes total time limit that can be extended by the Board)

8. Consent Agenda

A. Minutes September 22, 2020 Special Joint Meeting

B. 2021 January Board of Supervisors Meeting Schedule

i. January 19- Organizational Meeting

ii. January 25- Workshop

C. Report on Treasurer’s Accountability Fund

D. Report from VDOT on December 2020 Activity

E. Ordinance O-2020-21 Correction of a Clerical Error Contained in aPlat Attached to Ordinance O-2020-12

Page 6

Page 8

Page 14

Page 20

Page A22


of 4

F. Resolution R-2020-65 Amending the FY21 Operating Budget byBudgeting and Appropriating $94,925 for Sheriff Vehicles

G. Resolution R-2020-66 Amending the FY21 Operating Budget byBudgeting and Appropriating $59,978 for DMV and Litter ControlGrants

H. Resolution R-2020-68 Requesting State Road Acceptance by VDOTfor the Streets within Oakbridge Industrial Park (Oak Bridge Drive,Standing Ridge Drive, and portions of Oak Bridge Terrace)

I. Resolution R-2020-69 Requesting State Road Acceptance by VDOTfor the Street within Oakbridge Industrial Park (Oak Bridge Terrace)

J. Resolution R-2020-70 Authoring the Chairman to Name a Designeeto Serve on the Central Virginia Transportation Authority (CVTA)

K. Resolution R-2020-71 Approval of Amendments to the RichmondRegional Planning District Commission (PlanRVA) CharterAgreement

9. Appointments to Boards, Commissions, Committees, etc.

Upcoming Appointments:• Agricultural and Forestal Districts Advisory Committee (AFDAC)• Anti-Litter Council (ALC)• Audit Committee• Board of Equalization (BOE)• Capital Region Workforce Partnership Chief Local Elected Officials

Consortium (CRWPCLEOC)• PlanRVA Commission, Alternate• PlanRVA Community Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC),

Primary and Alternate

10. New Business

A. Presentation of FY20 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report(CAFR)

Page 27

Page 31

Page 34

Page 40

Page 45

Page 47

Page 57


of 4

B. Resolution R-2020-67 Amending the FY21 Operating Budget byBudgeting and Appropriating $297,442 in Coronavirus Relief Funds(CRF) for Second Broadband Award

C. Resolution R-2020-72 Support for Powhatan County’s Membership tothe Tobacco Region Revitalization Commission

11. Public Hearings

A. Ordinance O-2020-19 (Case #20-03-AZ) Family Division ZoningAmendments

B. Ordinance O-2020-20 Review of Agricultural and Forestal Districts(AFDs)

12. Public Comment (time limit 3 minutes per individual/5 minutes pergroup, 30 minutes total time limit that can be extended by the Board)

13. County Attorney Comments

14. County Administrator Comments

15. Board Comments

16. Adjournment

Page 59

Page 62

Page 64

Page 81

POWHATAN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 6AProclamation P-2020-13

Recognizing Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Youth Day and National Mentoring Day

5

P-2020-13

Board of Supervisors David T. Williams, Chairman

Karin M. Carmack, Vice Chairman Larry J. Nordvig

Michael W. Byerly Bill L. Cox

County Administrator Ned Smither

3834 Old Buckingham Road

Powhatan VA 23139

The County of

Powhatan PROCLAMATION

RECOGNIZING DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.,

YOUTH DAY AND NATIONAL MENTORING DAY

JANUARY 18, 2021

WHEREAS, Monday, January 18, 2021, will be celebrated throughout the land as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, a day set

aside to honor a man who stood for peace and equality and who was the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize; and

WHEREAS, January is also National Mentoring Month, and the County of Powhatan recognizes the need to increase public

awareness of the importance of youth mentoring and the benefits it offers to youth in our community; and

WHEREAS, the members of Little Zion Baptist Church have joined together with other community members serving from

all walks of life to organize a community event that will honor both; and

WHEREAS, the youth of the Powhatan community, under the guidance of mentors, have joined together to present a

program honoring Dr. Martin Luther King to the Powhatan community on January 18, 2021; and

WHEREAS, the organizing of this program has had a positive impact on the members of the Powhatan community and

has been meaningful for both adults and youth; and

WHEREAS, mentors giving guidance and leadership to youth in the Powhatan community have been compassionate

volunteers with broad areas of knowledge and expertise that serve as role models and build positive relationships with the

young people of our county; and

WHEREAS, organizing this program has provided an opportunity for the youth in the Powhatan community to create

unity and awareness, build their leadership skills, and to encourage their peers to do the same.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that the Powhatan County Board of Supervisors does hereby recognize

January 18, 2021, as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Youth Day and National Mentoring Day and encourages residents to

support our youth and to participate in this meaningful program.

ADOPTED BY THE POWHATAN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON DECEMBER 14, 2020.

ATTEST:

Ned Smither, Clerk David T. Williams, Chairman

Powhatan County Board of Supervisors Powhatan County Board of Supervisors

Recorded Vote:

David T. Williams Larry J. Nordvig Michael W. Byerly

Bill L. Cox Karin M. Carmack

6


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 8A

Minutes September 22, 2020 Special Joint Meeting

7

POWHATAN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVIROS

SPECIAL JOINT MEETING

SEPTEMBER 22, 2020 Page 1 of 5

VIRGINIA: AT A SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

AND POWHATAN COUNT PLANNING COMMISSION HELD IN THE POCAHONTAS

LANDMARK CENTER, 4290 ANDERSON HIGHWAY IN POWHATAN COUNTY,

VIRGINIA, AND REMOTELY BY ELECTRONIC MEANS ON SEPTEMBER 22, 2020,

AT 6:30 P.M.

Board of Supervisors Present: David T. Williams, District 1, Chairman

Larry J. Nordvig, District 2

Michael W. Byerly, District 3

Bill L. Cox, District 4

Karin M. Carmack, District 5, Vice Chairman

Board of Supervisors Absent: None

Planning Commissioners Present: Ms. Vicki Hurt, District 1

Ms. Amy Kingery, District 2

Mr. Bobby Hall, District 3

Ms. Jane Pendergast, District 4

Dr. Barbara Brown, District 5

County Staff Present: Ned Smither, County Administrator

Bret Schardein, Assistant County Administrator for

Community Development

Tom Lacheney, County Attorney

Andrew Pompei, Planning Director

Phil Warner, Fire and Rescue Chief

Tom Nolan, Director of Public Safety Communications

John Wood, Director of Information Technology

Constitutional Officers Present:

Guests Present:

1. Call to Order

Chairman Williams called the meeting to order at 6:30pm and identified all the Board members

and Planning Commission members in the room.

2. Pledge of Allegiance

Mr. Byerly led the Pledge of Allegiance

3. Invocation

Mr. Nordvig provided the Invocation

8




4. Requests to Postpone Agenda Items and Additions, Deletions or Changes in the Order of

Presentation

There were no requests

5. Formal Approval of Agenda

Mr. Nordvig motioned to approve the agenda. Mr. Cox seconded the motion.

David T. Williams, Larry J. Nordvig, Michael W. Byerly, Bill L. Cox, Karin M. Carmack

voted AYE

VOTE 5-0

Motion Passed

6. Public Comment (time limit 3 minutes per individual/5 minutes per group, 30 minutes total

time limit that can be extended by the Board)

Chairman Williams opened the public comment period. Speakers were as follows:

I. Christine Ellis, 1318 Page Rd, spoke as a landowner and would like landowners to be

considered when new projects are brought before the Board for approval. She also

appreciates the traffic issues being considered.

II. Andrew Thacker, SL Nusbaum Realty that represents Classic Granite on RT 60, spoke

about the RT 60 corridor and the different transient businesses popping up and what growth

should be looked at attracting.

III. Kitty Osborne, 1071 Dorset Rd, concerned about the thinking process used in redoing the

Comp Plan. She referenced Calvin Coolidge and the Constitution and asked for the Board

to really consider landowners and their rights to their land and not taking those away.

IV. Harold Ellis, 1318 Page Rd, thanked the Board and Planning Commission for working

together on the Comp Plan on the desired Economic Development for the county but

preserving the rural character.

Seeing as there were no other speakers, Chairman Williams closed the public comment

period.

7. New Business

a. Discussion of Comprehensive Plan Updates with Planning Commission

Bret Schardein and Andrew Pompei gave a PowerPoint presentation about the current Comp Plan

and the current state of the County to start the discussion.

Chairman Williams went over several of his high level goals for the County and how to avoid

mistakes made by neighboring counties.

Mr. Cox gave a PowerPoint presentation with his concerns for the current Comp Plan concepts and

his vision or direction for a total rehaul of the entire Comp Plan.

9




Mrs. Carmack shared her thoughts on the issues being with the limited rezoning options in the

Zoning Ordinance verses the entire Comp Plan. She believes a tweak of the Zoning Ordinance is

better suited than a complete overhaul of the Comp Plan.

Mr. Cox agreed that the scale on the zoned areas must match what is fitting for Powhatan County.

Mr. Nordvig agreed that he and Mr. Cox have very similar end result ideas. He is looking for

Powhatan friendly commercial development and the concept of commercial development being

shielded from view by greenery or if it will be in view make the building very attractive. He does

think a mixed-use development would be welcomed east of 288. He asked if a complete redo was

done, given the small staff available what would the timeframe be. Mr. Smither responded with

current staffing, 6 months to 2 years depending on the amount and complexity of the overhaul.

Mr. Cox clarified that he was referring on to the Future Land-Use Plan portion of the Comp Plan

not the entire Comp Plan itself.

Chairman Williams stated that he felt they were all in agreement that the Future Land-Use Plan

with the zoning districts that don’t fit, especially in the RT 60 Corridor, this is the area they need to

be focused on.

Mrs. Hurt feels a functional transportation network is the issue at its core. Any commercial or

residential development will add to traffic issues and become a safety hazard if other options are

not looked at like service or interior roads.

Mr. Nordvig suggested contacting VDOT for a traffic engineer to consult on the traffic issue and

how traffic in certain areas can be compared to the Future Land-Use map and the higher density

zoned areas. Mrs. Carmack agreed traffic is an issue.

Dr. Brown identified workforce housing as a major issue if they are to attract businesses to the

County. Without putting too much added pressure on the school system, but also creating a

workforce that is able to provide a high level of service to incoming businesses.

Mr. Byerly agrees that businesses need to be brought in, but also agrees that creates more traffic

issues and that is just a reality. Every solution creates an issue. Having it all very perfectly is

impossible. His goals would be to start finding a way to say yes to some of the opportunities and

that sometimes has to start small in order to get the 92 to 80.

Mr. Nordvig suggested one way to compromise on bringing commercial without adding to traffic

issues could be the open commercial issues at Oakbridge or Carter Gallier Blvd. Could we peruse

businesses that the county would want with Economic Development staff? Those would be smaller

options that could be jumped on right away to get the ball rolling in the right direction.

Chairman Williams addressed Mr. Schardein and Mr. Pompei that the various Board members had

given them a direction of how to proceed with the updating of the Comp Plan. He requested a

process and timeline to go forward.

10




Mr. Schardein reviewed the ideas given from the Boards to verify all were in agreement. Mrs.

Carmack wanted to clarify whether any residential should be included in the 60 thoroughfare.

Scale being the most important, not density.

Chairman Williams asked Mr. Schardein what the next steps are in the process. Mr. Schardein

responded that he would put together a plan of the workshop schedule and the public engagement

meetings and get that to the Board.

Mr. Cox asked for clarification on whether a consultant would be hired to redoing the

Thoroughfare Plan. Chairman Williams responded that staff would work with VDOT on updating

the Thoroughfare Plan, but he was not recommending and entire rewrite.

Mr. Nordvig asked if there would be a simplification of the different zoning districts. Mr. Pompei

clarified that it would be simplification as far as the names themselves of the zoning districts, so

they reflect more of what the use is and is not so confusing to the public.

b. Expanded budgetary process and review, including ten-year financial projections of

operating and capital improvement budgets. Discussion on the scheduling impact of new

procedures.

Mr. Smither gave a background and overview to the Planning Commission particularly, of the 10-

year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Chairman Williams asked the Board members with input

from the Planning Commission what their role will be and would they be changing the Ordinance

this year. Mr. Smither clarified that his only goal at this point was to let the Planning Commission

know that the process is being accelerated this year and also to clarify the roles both Boards will

play. Mr. Cox asked when the draft CIP would be released. Mr. Smither responded that Mrs.

Schubert, Finance Director, would be presenting it at the upcoming Board of Supervisors meeting.

Mr. Nordvig asked Mr. Lacheney for clarification on the VA Code stating the CIP could only go

out as far as 5 years. Mr. Lacheney clarified that the Planning Commission review of the CIP is

only related to items in the Comp Plan which does have a 4-year window, which is then

incorporated into the 10-year CIP.

8. Public Comment (time limit 3 minutes per individual/5 minutes per group, 30 minutes total

time limit that can be extended by the Board)

Chairman Williams opened the Public Comment period. Seeing as there were no speakers,

Chairman Williams closed the Public Comment period.

9. County Attorney Comments

Mr. Lacheney had no comments.

10. County Administrator Comments

Mr. Smither had no comments.

11. Board Comments

11




Neither the Board of Supervisors or the Planning Commission had any comments.

12. Adjournment

Chairman Williams adjoined the meeting at 8:32pm.

These minutes were approved on (date) by the Powhatan County Board of Supervisors.

David T. Williams, Chairman

Powhatan County Board of Supervisors

Recorded Vote:

ATTEST:

David T. Williams

Larry J. Nordvig

Michael W. Byerly

Ned Smither, Clerk Bill L. Cox

Powhatan County Board of Supervisors Karin M. Carmack

12


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 8C

Report on Treasurer’s Accountability Fund

13


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 8DReport from VDOT on

December 2020 Activity

19

Powhatan CountyDecember 2020 – Monthly Report

MAINTENANCE Powhatan Area Headquarters ● Primary and secondary mowing throughout the county

○ Primary mowing - 100% complete with 3rd cycle○ Secondary mowing - 25% complete with 3rd cycle

● Pothole patching - multiple routes, including Route 711 Huguenot Trail and Route 615 ThreeBridge Rd

● Old River Trail (on West side of Rt 522) - Paving completed● Huguenot Springs Rd. - Bridge approach paving corrected● Continued preventative maintenance/clean up - clearing tree debris; clearing drop inlets along

Route 60 in preparation for rain events● Incidental items as received: dead animal removal, sign repair/replacement● Scheduled for Dec - replacing pipe on Rt 711 (½ mile East of Rt 522) completed.● French Drains to be installed on route 60 four lane section near Rocky Oak to drain ground water.

LAND USE Ryan McGrath

● Nothing at this time

TRAFFIC STUDIES/SPECIAL REQUESTS Lee McKnight/Rebecca Worley

● Final Route 60 study has been received. VDOT is reviewing to ensure that previous commentshave been addressed.

● Route 711 safety study is underway; anticipated completion at end of calendar year.

CONSTRUCTION Jeremy Cobb

● Route 684 Cartersville Road bridge replacement underway. Road is closed and detour inplace.Anticipated completion Summer 2021.

● Route 681 Clement Town Road bridge repairs underway. Road is closed and detour in place--similar detour route to Route 13 bridge replacement.. Anticipated completion late Spring 2021

20


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 8EOrdinance O-2020-21

Correction of a Clerical Error Contained in a Plat Attached to Ordinance O-2020-12

21

If Board members have questions, please call the staff / contact prior to the meeting.

Meeting Date: December 14, 2020

Agenda Item Title: Ordinance O-2020-21: An Ordinance to Correct A Clerical Error Contained in a Plat Attached to Ordinance O-2020-12, Adopted July 27, 2020. A request to authorize the re-recording of a vacation of right-of-way, and thereby correct a clerical error.

Motion: Move to approve the authorization to re-record Ordinance No. O-2020-12 with a corrected plat.

Dates Previously Considered by Board: N/A

Summary of Item: Ordinance No. O-2020-12 (the vacation of the unimproved right-of-way portion of Haleford Drive within Walnut Creek) was recorded in the Circuit Court Clerk’s Office, after the required 30-day waiting period. It has been discovered that a mathematical calculation appearing onthe plat attached to O-2020-12 was in error. Said error does not change the substance or intentof the ordinance; furthermore, the base data appearing on the plat and used for the calculation is correct. Only the total of that data was misstated. The re-recording of the ordinance with acorrected plat is a good-practice recordkeeping effort that will prevent confusion in futureyears.

Staff: __X__ Approve ____ Disapprove _____ See Comments

Commission/Board: _N/A_ Approve ____ Disapprove _____ See Comments

Comments: This item is clerical in nature and does not affect the originating ordinance that the Board of Supervisors approved in July. All data contained in that ordinance is correct.

Budget/Fiscal Impact: None

Attachments: 1. A copy of the plat that is in error, with editing notations2. A copy of the corrected plat, stamped by the plats officer, that will be

attached to the re-recording of O-2020-12

Staff/Contact: Thomas E. Lacheney, County Attorney, [email protected]


Agenda Item

22

http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientID=14056&stateID=46&statename=Virginia

O-2020-21

Page 1 of 1

ORDINANCE O-2020-21

AN ORDINANCE TO CORRECT A CLERRICAL ERROR CONTAINED IN A PLAT ATTACHED TO ORDINANCE NUMBER O-2020-12, ADOPTED ON JULY 27, 2020.

WHEREAS, on July 27, 2020 the Board of Supervisors did approve Ordinance No. O-2020-12, vacating a portion of Haleford Drive, vacating various easements, and dedicating two parcels to Powhatan County, Virginia within Section 1 of the Walnut Creek Subdivision, Macon District; and

WHEREAS, the ordinance referenced a plat attached thereto and entitled “Compiled Plat Showing A Portion Of Right Of Way And Various Easements To Be Vacated And Two Parcels To Be Dedicated To Powhatan County Across The Lands Of Raymond E. & Francine R. McCreight And Joseph A. & Cassandra L. Dunn, Macon District, Powhatan County, Virginia”, prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc., dated June26, 2020 (the “Vacation Plat”), detaining the vacations and dedications; and

WHEREAS, the Vacation Plat correctly stated the individual areas of Parcel A (0.041 acre/ 1,800 sq. ft.), Parcel B (0.031 acre/ 1,367 sq. ft.), Parcel C (0.106 acres/ 4,626 sq. ft.), and Parcel D (0.111 acres/ 4,820 sq. ft.); and

WHEREAS, the Vacation Plat also exhibited a legend identifying those parcels to be dedicated to Powhatan County (Parcels A and B), along with the total area of the dedication in acres and square footage (0.070 acres/ 3,082 sq. ft.); and

WHEREAS, said total area is mathematically incorrect, and should be 0.072 acre (3,167 sq. ft.); and

WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors wishes to correct the clerical error; and

WHEREAS, such a correction will not change the substance and intent of the ordinance;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED on this 14th day of December, 2020, that the Powhatan County Board of Supervisors hereby corrects the plat error by authorizing the re-recording of Ordinance No. O-2020-12 with a corrected plat attached.


David T. Williams, Chairman Powhatan County Board of Supervisors

Recorded Vote: ATTEST:


Ned Smither, Clerk Bill L. Cox Powhatan County Board of Supervisors Karin M. Carmack

25


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 8FResolution R-2020-65

Amending the FY21 Operating Budget by Budgeting and Appropriating $94,925 for

Sheriff Vehicles

26


Agenda Item Title: Resolution R-2020-65 Amending the Fiscal Year 2021 Powhatan County Operating Budget by Budgeting and Appropriating $94,925.03 in Capital Maintenance Reserve and Insurance Recoveries for Sheriff Vehicles

Motion: Move to approve Resolution R-2020-65 as presented


Summary of Item: The Board of Supervisors has approved 5 Sheriff vehicles in year’s past from capital maintenance reserve. The BOS appropriated 3 vehicles at their September 10, 2020 meeting before the FY20 financials were finalized. This resolution budgets and appropriates the additional two vehicles.



Comments: None

Budget/Fiscal Impact: Budget and Appropriate $174,925.03

Attachments: Resolution

Staff/Contact: Charla W. Schubert, Director of Finance, 804-598-5780, [email protected]


Agenda Item

27


R-2020-65

Page 1 of 2

RESOLUTION R-2020-65

AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2021 POWHATAN COUNTY OPERATING BUDGET

BY BUDGETING AND APPROPRIATING $174,925.03 IN CAPITAL MAINTENANCE

RESERVE AND INSURANCE RECOVERIES FOR SHERIFF VEHICLES

WHEREAS, on May 14, 2020 and June 29, 2020, the Powhatan County Board of Supervisors

adopted Resolution R-2020-29 and R-2020-38, respectively, which adopted the Fiscal Year 2021

Powhatan Operating Budget in the amount of $112,844,944; and

WHEREAS, the Code of Virginia Section 15.2-2507 states that any locality may amend its budget

and must first hold a public hearing which is advertised once in the newspaper if any such

amendment exceeds one percent of the total expenditures of the currently adopted budget; and

WHEREAS, the amendment of the budget in this resolution in the amount of $174,925.03

(0.155%) does not exceed one percent of the adopted budget and therefore a public hearing was

not held.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the FY 2021 Powhatan County Operating

Budget is hereby amended and the funds appropriated as shown:

CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND

REVENUES

Transfer from General Fund 3-301-095101-0100 80,000.00$

Insurance Recoveries 3-301-041010-0001 14,925.03

CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND

EXPENDITURES

Sheriff Vehicles 4-301-012500-8301 94,925.03$

GENERAL FUND

REVENUES

Use of Fund Balance - CMR 3-100-039999-0001 80,000.00$

GENERAL FUND

EXPENDITURES

Transfer to Capital Projects Fund 4-100-093100-0301 80,000.00$

28

R-2020-65

Page 2 of 2

ADOPTED BY THE POWHATAN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON

DECEMBER 14, 2020.



Recorded Vote:

ATTEST:

David T. Williams

Larry J. Nordvig

Michael W. Byerly



29


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 8GResolution R-2020-66

Amending the FY21 Operating Budget by Budgeting and Appropriating $59,978 for

DMV and Litter Control Grants

30


Agenda Item Title: Resolution R-2020-66 Amending the Fiscal Year 2021 Powhatan County Operating Budget by Budgeting and Appropriating $59,978 in the Grants Fund for DMV and Litter Control Grants



Summary of Item: The County received litter control and DMV grants each year. This resolution budgets and appropriates these funds.



Comments: None

Budget/Fiscal Impact: Budget and Appropriate $59,978




Agenda Item

31


R-2020-66

Page 1 of 1



BY BUDGETING AND APPROPRIATING $59,978 IN THE GRANTS FUND FOR DMV

AND LITTER CONTROL GRANTS







WHEREAS, the amendment of the budget in this resolution in the amount of $59,978 (0.053%)

does not exceed one percent of the adopted budget and therefore a public hearing was not held.



GRANTS FUND

REVENUES

Litter Control Grant 3-116-024040-0010 7,178.00$

DMV Speed 3-116-033011-0006 24,750.00

DMV Alcohol 3-116-033012-0006 28,050.00

GRANTS FUND

EXPENDITURES

Litter Control 4-116-083500-8215 7,178.00$

DMV Speed 4-116-031206-1201 24,750.00

DMV Alcohol 4-116-031207-1201 28,050.00


DECEMBER 14, 2020.



Recorded Vote:

ATTEST:

David T. Williams

Larry J. Nordvig

Michael W. Byerly



32


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 8H

Resolution R-2020-68 Requesting State Road Acceptance by VDOT for the Streets within Oakbridge Industrial

Park (Oak Bridge Drive, Standing Ridge Drive, and portions of Oak Bridge Terrace)

33



Agenda Item Title: Resolution R-2020-68: A Resolution Requesting State Road Acceptance by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) for the Streets within Oakbridge Industrial Park

Motion: In accordance with public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good planning practices, the Powhatan County Board of Supervisors (approves / denies / defers) Resolution #R-2020-68.

Dates Previously Considered by Board:

None

Summary of Item: At the request of the developer, Powhatan County and VDOT have inspected and recommended approval of the streets within Oakbridge Industrial Park for state road acceptance. This includes Oak Bridge Drive, Standing Ridge Drive, and portions of Oak Bridge Terrace. Attached is a draft resolution requesting VDOT to add the aforementioned streets to the secondary system of state highways.


Commission/Board: _____ Approve ____ Disapprove _____ See Comments

Comments:

Budget/Fiscal Impact:

Attachments: VDOT Form AM-4.3

Staff/Contact: Andrew Pompei: Planning Director (804) 598-5621 [email protected]


Agenda Item

34


R-2020-68


A RESOLUTION REQUESTING STATE ROAD ACCEPTANCE BY THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (VDOT) FOR THE STREETS

WITHIN OAKBRIDGE INDUSTRIAL PARK

WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached form(s), fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Powhatan County; and

WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised the Board of Supervisors that the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached form, which are located within Oakbridge Industrial Park, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Residency Administrator for the Virginia Department of Transportation.






35

VDOT Form AM-4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division

Date of Resolution: Page 1 of 2

In the County of Powhatan County ICR # 36989212

By resolution of the governing body adopted December 14, 2020

The following VDOT Form AM-4.3 is hereby attached and incorporated as part of the governing body's resolution for

changes in the secondary system of state highways.

A Copy Testee Signed (County Official): ____________________________________________

Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways

Project/Subdivision 072 Oakbridge Industrial Park

Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Addition

The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisionscited, are hereby requested; the right of way for which, including additional easements for cuts, fills and drainage, asrequired, is hereby guaranteed:

Reason for Change: New subdivision street

Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 33.2-1509, 33.2-705

Street Name and/or Route Number

⧫ Oak Bridge Drive, State Route Number 1417

Old Route Number: 0

⚫ From: Anderson Highway, (Rt. 60)

To: Oak Bridge Terrace, (Rt. 1418), a distance of: 0.22 miles.

Recordation Reference: PC F, Slide 144-146

Right of Way width (feet) = 50


⧫ Oak Bridge Terrace, State Route Number 1418

Old Route Number: 0

⚫ From: Oak Bridge Drive, (Rt. 1417)

To: EOM, a distance of: 0.01 miles.




⧫ Oak Bridge Terrace, State Route Number 1418

Old Route Number: 0

⚫ From: Oak Bridge Drive, (Rt. 1417)

To: Standing Ridge Drive, (Rt. 1419), a distance of: 0.12 miles.



36

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________Street Name and/or Route Number⧫ Oak Bridge Terrace, State Route Number 1418

Old Route Number: 0--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• From: Standing Ridge Drive, (Rt. 1419)

To: Cul-de-Sac, a distance of 0.04 miles.



Street Name and/or Route Number⧫ Standing Ridge Drive, State Route Number 1418

Old Route Number: 0--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• From: Oak Bridge Terrace, (Rt. 1418)

To: Anderson Highway, (Rt. 60), a distance of 0.27 miles.





37

Powhatan County,Virginia

LegendCounty BoundaryParcels

Street Acceptance (Dec. 2020): Oakbridge Industrial Park (Main Section + Section 3)DISCLAIMER:This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as such. Theinformation displayed is a compilation of records,information, and data obtained from various sources, and PowhatanCounty is not responsible for its accuracy or how current it may be.

Sec. 3 (Yellow Line)

R-2020-69

Main Section (Blue Line)R-2020-68

38


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 8I Resolution R-2020-69

Requesting State Road Acceptance by VDOT for the Street within Oakbridge Industrial Park (Oak Bridge Terrace)

39



Agenda Item Title: Resolution R-2020-69: A Resolution Requesting State Road Acceptance by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) for the Street within Oakbridge Industrial Park (Section 3)

Motion: In accordance with public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good planning practices, the Powhatan County Board of Supervisors (approves / denies / defers) Resolution #R-2020-69.


None

Summary of Item: At the request of the developer, Powhatan County and VDOT have inspected and recommended approval of the street within Oakbridge Industrial Park (Section 3) for state road acceptance. This includes a portion of Oak Bridge Terrace. Attached is a draft resolution requesting VDOT to add the aforementioned street to the secondary system of state highways.


Commission/Board: _____ Approve ____ Disapprove _____ See Comments

Comments:


Attachments: VDOT Form AM-4.3



Agenda Item

40


R-2020-69


A RESOLUTION REQUESTING STATE ROAD ACCEPTANCE BY THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (VDOT) FOR THE STREET

WITHIN OAKBRIDGE INDUSTRIAL PARK (SECTION 3)

WHEREAS, the street described on the attached form(s), fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Powhatan County; and

WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised the Board of Supervisors that the street meets the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the street described on the attached form, which is located within Oakbridge Industrial Park (Section 3), to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Residency Administrator for the Virginia Department of Transportation.





Ned Smither, Clerk Bill L. Cox Powhatan County Board of Supervisors

Karin M. Carmack

41

In the County of Powhatan County ICR # 36986218 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By resolution of the governing body adopted December 16, 2020

The following VDOT Form AM-4.3 is hereby attached and incorporated as part of the governing body’s resolution for changes in the secondary system of state highways.

A Copy Testee Signed (County Official): ________________________________________

Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Project/Subdivision 072 Oakbridge Industrial Park Sec 3

Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Addition

The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisionsCited, are hereby requested; the right of way for which, including additional easements for cuts, fills and drainage, asRequired, is herby guaranteed:

Reason for Change: New subdivision street

Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-1509, §33.2-705_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Street Name and/or Route Number Oak Bridge Terrace, State Route Number 1418

Old Route Number: 0--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• From: 0.01m W of Oak Bridge Drive, (Rt. 1417)

To: Cul-de-Sac, a distance of 0.23 miles.

Recordation Reference: PC H, Slide 55




42

Powhatan County,Virginia

LegendCounty BoundaryParcels

Street Acceptance (Dec. 2020): Oakbridge Industrial Park (Main Section + Section 3)DISCLAIMER:This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as such. Theinformation displayed is a compilation of records,information, and data obtained from various sources, and PowhatanCounty is not responsible for its accuracy or how current it may be.

Sec. 3 (Yellow Line)

R-2020-69

Main Section (Blue Line)R-2020-68

43


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 8J Resolution R-2020-70

Authoring the Chairman to Name a Designee to Serve on the Central Virginia

Transportation Authority (CVTA)

44

R-2020-70

Page 1 of 1


AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO NAME A DESIGNEE TO SERVE ON THE CENTRAL VIRGINIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

WHEREAS, pursuant to the bylaws of the Central Virginia Transportation Authority (CVTA) the chief elected officer of the county Board of Supervisors shall serve as a member of CVTA;

WHEREAS, the Chairman of the Powhatan County Board of Supervisors is the chief elected officer of the Board; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the CVTA bylaws the “designee” of the chief elected officer of the Board of Supervisors may serve on the CVTA in place of the Chairman.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chairman of the Powhatan County Board of Supervisors is hereby authorized to name a temporary or permanent designee to serve in his place on the CVTA, which designation shall run concurrently with the term of office of the Chairman.






45


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 8K

Resolution R-2020-71 Approval of Amendments to the Richmond

Regional Planning District Commission (PlanRVA) Charter Agreement

46

R-2020-71

Page 1 of 1


APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO THE RICHMOND REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION CHARTER AGREEMENT

WHEREAS, Powhatan County is a member jurisdiction of the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission (PlanRVA); and

WHEREAS, PlanRVA initiated discussion of proposed Charter Revisions more than a year ago and were directed by staff to identify necessary revisions; and

WHEREAS, some of the necessary revisions include increased flexibility and cost savings in determining a future location of office space, and developing an alternative appointment structure to provide maximum flexibility to member jurisdictions; and

WHEREAS, the proposed revisions are in compliance with Virginia Code.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Powhatan County approve and ratify the amendments to the Charter Agreement of the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission endorsed by the Commission on December 10, 2020, and submitted to the member jurisdictions for consideration.






47

CHARTER AGREEMENT

OF THE

RICHMOND REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION

This Charter Agreement to organize a Planning District Commission made this 14th day of

August, 1969, by and between the undersigned member jurisdictions as authorized by the Virginia

Area Development Act (Title 15.1, Chapter 34, Sections 15.1-1400, et seq., Code of Virginia (1950),

as amended), and subsequently amended this day of , 2020, as

authorized by the Regional Cooperation Act, Chapter 42 of Title 15.2 of the Code of Virginia (as

amended) (Va. Code § 15.2-4200, et seq.):

NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed that:

ARTICLE I

Name, Location, Authority, Purpose

Section 1

The name of this organization shall be the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission,

hereinafter called the "COMMISSION."

Section 2

The office of the COMMISSION shall be centrally located within Planning District 15.

Section 3

The COMMISSION shall be a public body corporate and politic with all the powers and

duties granted to it by the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia including the Regional

Cooperation Act.

Section 4

The purpose of the COMMISSION shall be to promote the orderly and efficient

development of the physical, social, and economic elements of Planning District 15 by

planning and encouraging and assisting member jurisdictions to plan for the future.

ARTICLE II

Membership

Section 1

COMMISSION members shall be appointed by the respective governing bodies of those

member jurisdictions which are parties to this Charter Agreement provided, however, that at

least a majority, but not substantially more than a majority, of the COMMISSION's members

shall be elected officials of the governing bodies of the member jurisdictions within the

Planning District with each participating county, city, and town of more than 3,500 population

48

RRPDC Charter

Page 2

having at least one representative, and the other members being qualified voters and residents

of the District who hold no office elected by the people.

Section 2

Member jurisdictions which are parties to this Charter Agreement shall appoint members to

the COMMISSION to represent the number of voting seats on the following basis:

Number and Type of Voting Seats

Governing Planning

Population Body Commission Citizen

3,501 - 7,500 1 - -

7,501 - 25,000 1 1 -

25,001 - 50,000 2 1 -

50,001 - 100,000 2 1 1

100,001 - 175,000 3 1 1

175,001 - 250,000 4 1 1

250,001 - and up 5 1 1

Appointed Governing Body members may represent more than one Governing Body voting

seat if authorized by the member jurisdiction. Governing Body members are the only

members eligible to represent more than one voting seat for the member jurisdiction.

For purposes of defining population of a jurisdiction under the terms of this Section, the

numbers to be used will be the latest of the official U.S. Census count or the most recent

preliminary population estimate prepared by the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service at

the University of Virginia.

Section 3

Vacancies on the COMMISSION shall be filled for the unexpired term in the same manner as

the original appointment was made.

Section 4

Any member of the COMMISSION shall be eligible for reappointment but may be removed

for cause by the governing body which appointed him.

Section 5

Each governing body belonging to the COMMISSION may appoint an alternate member who

is also an elected official of the governing body to the COMMISSION who may serve in lieu

of one of the elected officials of that governing body. An alternate member shall only serve in

49

RRPDC Charter

Page 3

the absence of the designated governing body official and when serving in this capacity, shall

hold the same voting authority as the designated governing body official.

ARTICLE III

Terms of Office and Voting Rights

Section 1

The terms of office of COMMISSION members shall be determined by the respective

governing body. The terms of alternate members shall be coincident with the terms of office

of their designated member of the governing body.

Section 2

Each member of the COMMISSION shall have one equal vote in all matters before the

COMMISSION unless designated to represent more than one voting seat by the appointing

member jurisdiction.

Section 3

Each alternate member appointed to the COMMISSION shall have one equal vote in all

matters before the COMMISSION, but only in the absence of the elected official on the

governing body for which they have been designated as an alternate member.

ARTICLE IV

Officers

Section 1

Officers of the COMMISSION shall consist of a Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Treasurer, and

Secretary who shall be elected by a majority of the voting seats of the COMMISSION.

Section 2

The Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Treasurer, and Secretary shall be elected for terms of one

year.

Section 3

The Chairman shall not be eligible to serve consecutive terms. No member jurisdiction shall

have more than one representative serving as a COMMISSION officer except that the

Treasurer, when reelected for a consecutive term, may serve even though another

COMMISSION officer is from the same member jurisdiction.

50

RRPDC Charter

Page 4

Section 4

The COMMISSION shall appoint an Executive Director who shall be an employee of the

COMMISSION and shall serve at the pleasure of a majority of the voting seats.

ARTICLE V

Addition, Withdrawal, or Removal of Member Jurisdictions

Section 1

Any member jurisdiction within Planning District Number 15 which is not a party to this

Charter Agreement at the effective date thereof may, thereafter, join the COMMISSION

provided that such member jurisdiction is eligible for membership and that it adopts and

executes this Agreement.

Section 2

Any member jurisdiction may withdraw from the COMMISSION by submitting to the

COMMISSION in writing a notice of intent to withdraw. Such withdrawal shall not become

effective until the end of the COMMISSION's then current fiscal year.

Section 3

Any member jurisdiction which is a party to this Agreement, shall automatically cease to be a

member of the COMMISSION if it fails to comply with ARTICLE VI of this Agreement.

ARTICLE VI

Financial Obligations of Member Jurisdictions

Section 1

All member jurisdictions within Planning District Number 15 which are a party to this Charter

Agreement shall contribute funds to the COMMISSION in accordance with an Annual

Budget approved prior to the beginning of the COMMISSION'S fiscal year, provided that said

Annual Budget is adopted by the affirmative vote of three-fourths (3/4) of the voting seats

present and voting.

Section 2

In the event that the dues of a member jurisdiction are based on an estimate of population for

that jurisdiction, the population estimate to be utilized will be the latest of the official U.S.

Census count or the most recent preliminary population estimate prepared by the Weldon

Cooper Center for Public Service at the University of Virginia.

Section 3

The local contribution of each member jurisdiction is due on July 1 of the current fiscal year

51

RRPDC Charter

Page 5

and shall be paid in a single lump sum payment by each member jurisdiction prior to July 31

of that year.

Section 4

An additional assessment may be made upon a member jurisdiction for particular services of a

local nature, which are requested by said member jurisdiction and which may or may not be

included in the Work Program adopted by the COMMISSION. This assessment shall be

agreed upon with the appropriate member jurisdiction.

ARTICLE VII

Appointment of an Executive Committee and Adoption of Bylaws

Section 1

The COMMISSION may designate an Executive Committee and delegate to it such powers as

the COMMISSION may determine, provided that these powers are not inconsistent with

provisions of the Regional Cooperation Act, Chapter 42 of Title 15.2 of the Code of Virginia

(as amended) (Va. Code § 15.2-4200, et seq.). Said powers will be specifically stated in the

Bylaws of the Commission.

Section 2

The COMMISSION may adopt Bylaws and such other rules as it deems necessary to govern

its operations.

ARTICLE VIII

Meetings

Section 1

The COMMISSION shall hold regular meetings on a schedule which will be determined by

the membership.

Section 2

Meetings of the COMMISSION and its committees shall be open to the public as provided by

the Virginia Freedom of Information Act.

ARTICLE IX

Amendments

Section 1

This Charter Agreement may be amended, supplemented, or superseded only by concurring

resolutions of all member jurisdictions of the COMMISSION. All proposed amendments

shall be submitted to the COMMISSION for its review and comment and to the member

52

RRPDC Charter

Page 6

jurisdictions for consideration.

ARTICLE X

Date of Organization

Section 1

The organization of the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission shall be effective

on the 31st day of August, 1969, or at such time after this date when the Charter Agreement

has been adopted and signed by that member jurisdictions whose population when added to

the aggregate population of those who have already adopted and signed the Charter

Agreement embraces the majority of the population within Planning District Number 15.

* * * * *

Amendments Adopted By

Richmond Regional Planning District Commission

September 14, 1989

and

Final Ratification by All Nine Local Governments

January 10, 1990

Amendments Adopted By

Richmond Regional Planning District Commission

Month Day, 2020

and

Final Ratification by All Nine Local Governments

Month Day, 2020

53

RRPDC Charter

Page 7

RATIFIED BY THE RICHMOND REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION’S

MEMBER JURISDICTIONS ON THE DATES INDICATED

MEMBER JURISDICTION DATE OF RATIFICATION

CHARLES CITY COUNTY:

By:

CHESTERFIELD COUNTY:

By:

CITY OF RICHMOND

By:

GOOCHLAND COUNTY

By:

HANOVER COUNTY

By:

54

RRPDC Charter

Page 8

RATIFIED BY THE RICHMOND REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION’S

MEMBER JURISDICTIONS ON THE DATES INDICATED

MEMBER JURISDICTION DATE OF RATIFICATION

HENRICO COUNTY

By:

NEW KENT COUNTY

By:

POWHATAN COUNTY

By:

TOWN OF ASHLAND

By:

55


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 10A

Presentation of FY20 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR)

56



Agenda Item Title: Presentation of the June 30, 2020 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) by Brown, Edwards & Company, LLP.

Motion: N/A – Presentation

Dates Previously Considered by Board: This report is received annually as required by law.

Summary of Item: The County contracts for audit services with Brown, Edwards & Company, LLP to perform the June 30, 2020 audit of the CAFR. Chris Banta, Partner for the firm is here to present to the Board on the June 30, 2020 audit.

Staff: __N/A__ Approve ____ Disapprove _____ See Comments

Commission/Board: __N/A__ Approve ____ Disapprove _____ See Comments

Comments: None

Budget/Fiscal Impact: None

Attachments: The CAFR and additional audit-related materials have been provided to the Board in their mailbox.



Agenda Item

57



REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 10B

Resolution R-2020-67 Amending the FY21 Operating Budget by Budgeting and Appropriating $297,442 in

Coronavirus Relief Funds (CRF) for Second Broadband Award

58


Agenda Item Title: Resolution R-2020-67 Amending the Fiscal Year 2021 Powhatan County Operating Budget by Budgeting and Appropriating $297,442 in Coronavirus Relief Funds for Broadband 2nd Award



Summary of Item: The County received a 2nd grant award from the Coronavirus Relief Fund to expand Broadband in the County. This grant will help extend broadband to some of the school age population that need the access for education. This resolution budgets and appropriates these funds.



Comments: None

Budget/Fiscal Impact: Budget and Appropriate $297,442




Agenda Item

59


R-2020-67

Page 1 of 1



BY BUDGETING AND APPROPRIATING $297,442 IN CORONAVIRUS RELIEF

FUNDS FOR BROADBAND 2ND AWARD







WHEREAS, the amendment of the budget in this resolution in the amount of $197,442 (0.264%)

does not exceed one percent of the adopted budget and therefore a public hearing was not held.



GRANTS FUND

REVENUES

Cares Act - Broadband 2nd Award 3-116-033010-0016 297,442.00$

GRANTS FUND (Continued)

EXPENDITURES

Cares Act - Broadband 2nd Award 4-116-012200-0005 297,442.00$


DECEMBER 14, 2020.



Recorded Vote:

ATTEST:

David T. Williams

Larry J. Nordvig

Michael W. Byerly



60


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 10C

Resolution R-2020-72 Support for Powhatan County’s

Membership to the Tobacco Region Revitalization Commission

61

R-2020-72

Page 1 of 1


SUPPORT FOR POWHATAN COUNTY’S MEMBERSHIP TO THE TOBACCO REGION REVITALIZATION COMMISSION

WHEREAS, the Tobacco Region Revitalization Commission is a 28-member body created by the 1999 General Assembly; and

WHEREAS, its mission is the promotion of economic growth and development in formerly tobacco-dependent communities, using proceeds of the national tobacco settlement; and

WHEREAS, to date, the Commission has awarded 2,285 grants totaling more than $1.17 billion across the member localities and has provided $309 million in indemnification payments to tobacco growers and quota holders; and

WHEREAS, two of Powhatan County’s neighboring counties, Cumberland and Amelia, are members; and

WHEREAS, despite its long, rich history in the tobacco trade, Powhatan County is not a member.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Powhatan County Board of Supervisors expresses its support for Powhatan County being granted membership to the Tobacco Region Revitalization Commission.






62


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 11A

Ordinance O-2020-19 (Case #20-03-AZ) Family Division

Zoning Amendments

63



Agenda Item Title: Ordinance O-2020-19 (Case #20-03-AZ): The County of Powhatan requests the amendment of provisions set forth in several sections of Chapter 68 (Subdivision Ordinance) and Chapter 83 (Zoning Ordinance) to reduce the required holding period before creating a family division lot from ten years to five years; clarify that only adults may receive a family division lot; remove provisions that currently allow a family division lot to be granted to a spouse; clarify standards regarding access; and increase the minimum size of the residual parcel remaining after a family division.

Motion: In accordance with public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good planning practices, the Powhatan County Board of Supervisors (approves / denies / defers) Ordinance #O-2020-19.


None

Summary of Item: The proposed amendments, if approved, would: • Reduce the required holding period before creating a family division lot from ten

years to five years;• Clarify that only adults may receive a family division lot;• Clarify standards regarding access for family divisions;• Prevent a family division lot from being gifted to a spouse; and• Increase the minimum size of the residual parcel remaining after a family division.The Planning Commission discussed this request at several workshops. A public hearingwas held on November 4, 2020, with the Planning Commission recommendingapproval (Vote: 5 – 0).


Commission/Board: __X__ Approve ____ Disapprove _____ See Comments

Comments:


Attachments: Staff Report Ordinance Amendment



Agenda Item

64


Case #20-03-AZ County of Powhatan

Amend the Powhatan County Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance to Revise Standards Regarding Family Divisions

Staff Report Prepared for the Board of Supervisors December 14, 2020

I. PUBLIC MEETINGS Planning Commission February 4, 2020 Workshop March 3, 2020 Workshop September 1, 2020 Workshop October 6, 2020 Workshop November 4, 2020 Public Hearing

(Recommended Approval: 5 – 0) Board of Supervisors December 14, 2020 Public Hearing

II. SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT Throughout 2020, the Planning Commission has been discussing different development options (including family divisions and single cut subdivisions) available to those that own parcels zoned Agricultural-10 (A-10).1 At several meetings, the Planning Commission discussed amendments to the standards for family divisions. The proposed amendments, if approved, would: • Reduce the required holding period before creating a family division lot from ten years

to five years; • Clarify that only adults may receive a family division lot; • Clarify standards regarding access for family divisions; • Prevent a family division lot from being gifted to a spouse; and • Increase the minimum size of the residual parcel remaining after a family division.

1 In 2019, the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors reviewed standards for conservation subdivisions

(another development option within areas zoned A-10) and approved changes on June 24, 2019 (Case #19-06-AZ: Ordinance #O-2019-19). Provisions allowing single cut divisions were eliminated on September 28, 2020 (Ordinance #O-2020-13).

65

20-03-AZ (Family Divisions) Page 2

III. ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONPurpose of Family DivisionsThroughout Virginia, the primary purpose of family divisions is (1) “to promote the valuessociety places upon the disposition of family estates during the lifetime of the owner witha minimum of government regulation” and (2) “to promote the cohesiveness of the family”(1989 Va. Op. Atty. Gen. 100; Albemarle County Land Use Law Handbook).Current Situation: State CodeThe Code of Virginia establishes guidelines regarding family divisions. Per Code ofVirginia § 15.2-2244, some localities are required to adopt provisions allowing familydivisions, while such provisions are optional in other localities:• Localities with a growth rate of less than 10% between the latest and next-to-latest

decennial census are required to adopt provisions allowing family divisions.• “High-growth” localities (those with a population increase of 10% of more between the

latest and next-to-latest decennial census), or counties/cities adjacent to “high-growth”localities, may adopt provisions allowing family divisions (but are not required to).

Between 2000 and 2010 (the latest and next-to-latest decennial census), the population of Powhatan County increased 25% (22,377 to 28,046). However, the Weldon Cooper Center has estimated a much lower growth rate in recent years, estimating that the population has only increased 6.5% between 2010 and 2019 (28,046 to 29,867). Based on estimates from the Weldon Cooper Center, some adjoining localities (including Chesterfield County) are expected to be classified as “high-growth” localities. Code of Virginia § 15.2-2244 establishes certain requirements regarding the design of family subdivisions.

Component of Family Divisions State Code Requirements Immediate Family Member A member of the immediate family is defined as

any person who is a natural or legally-defined offspring, stepchild, spouse, sibling, grandchild, grandparent, or parent of the owner. Any locality may (at its discretion) include aunts, uncles, nieces, and nephews in its definition of immediate family (§ 15.2-2244).

Number of Divisions One (1) per eligible family member (§ 15.2-2244). Right-of-Way Lots less than five (5) acres must have a

reasonable right-of-way of not less than 10 feet or more than 20 feet providing ingress/egress to a dedicated/recorded public street (§ 15.2-2244).

Parcel Size There is no minimum/maximum lot size established in the Code of Virginia, but localities are permitted to establish a maximum lot size of one (1) acre (§ 15.2-2244.2).

66


Holding Period A locality may require that a property must have been owned for up to 15 consecutive years by the current landowner or member of the immediate family prior to creation of a family division. A locality may require that a landowner agree to place a restrictive covenant on the subdivision property that would prohibit transfer of the property to a nonmember of the immediate family for a period of up to 15 years (§ 15.2-2244.1).

Current Situation: Local Requirements Sec. 68-125 (Family Divisions) establishes provisions that allow property owners to create one or more parcels to sell/gift to immediate family members (including a natural or legally-defined offspring, stepchild, spouse, sibling, grandchild, grandparent, or parent). Compared to conventional subdivisions, the review procedure for family divisions is simplified, and the required improvements are minimal. Most family divisions occur in areas zoned Agricultural-10 (A-10). Throughout 2020, the Planning Commission has been discussing different development options (including family divisions and single cut subdivisions) available to those that own parcels zoned A-10.

Minimum Lot Area for Family Division Lots by Zoning District (Current Requirements)

[Sec. 83-107(b)]

Zoning District Minimum Area: Family Division Lot

Minimum Area: Residual Parcel

Agricultural-10 (A-10) (Main Parcel on Public Road)

2 acres 2 acres

Agricultural-10 (A-10) (Main Parcel on Private Road)

2 acres 10 acres

Rural Residential (RR) 2 acres 10 acres Single-Family Residential-2 (R-2)

2 acres 2 acres

Residential-Utility (R-U) 2 acres 2 acres

Current Requirements for Family Divisions Feature Current Requirement

Required Holding Period Before Creating a Family Division Lot

10 years

Required Holding Period After Creating a Family Division Lot

5 years

Minimum Lot Area 2 acres

67


Access 1 – 2 lots: Min. 20’ Easement

3 – 10 lots: Private Road Standards

≥ 11 Lots: Public Road

Age of Recipient Not specified

Number of Family Division Applications (2016 – 2019)2 Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 No. of Family Division App. 8 10 6 10

Proposed Amendments Required Holding Period Currently, a property owner must own a parcel for at least ten years to be eligible to create a lot through a family division. Once the lot is created, the immediate family member receiving that lot must own it for at least five years before selling it. There has been discussion about reducing the holding period prior to creating a family division lot, as Powhatan County currently has more stringent requirements than comparable localities. The proposed ordinance amendment would reduce the holding period required prior to creating a family division lot from ten years to five years. After receiving a family division lot, the property owner may not sell the lot for five years, unless the Board of Supervisors (at its sole discretion) executes and records a document agreeing to a shorter time period where required by changed circumstances.3

2 Most applications for family divisions submitted during the aforementioned time period (2016 – 2019) involved the

creation of a single lot. 3 Sec. 68-125(b)(3) allows a property owner to request that the holding period required after receiving a family division

lot be reduced due to changed circumstances. Such a request must be approved by the Board of Supervisors at its sole discretion. Some localities specifically list the particular circumstances in which the holding period may be reduced. For example, Fluvanna County allows the subdivision agent to reduce the holding period due to foreclosure, bankruptcy, death, or a physical or mental disability [Sec. 19-3-3(C)]. At previous workshops, the Planning Commission considered language allowing the holding period to be reduced if the owner of the parcel is transferred by his employer to a county more than 50 miles from Powhatan County; (ii) a request to sell the property is made by a bona fide creditor pursuant to a deed of trust, action by a trustee in bankruptcy, or by order of a court of competent jurisdiction; or (iii) the death or legal incompetence of the owner.

68


Required Holding Period Before and After Creating a Family Division Lot: Survey of Virginia Localities

January 2020

County Required Holding Period Before

Creating Family Division Lot (Years)

Required Holding Period After Creating Family Division Lot

(Years) Powhatan (Current) 10 5

Powhatan (Proposed) 5 5

Amelia 0 5 Chesterfield 2 5

Culpeper 5 5 Cumberland 2 10 Dinwiddie 2 5 Fluvanna 0 3

Goochland 0 0 Hanover 0 3 Henrico 0 5

King George 0 5 Louisa 0 15

New Kent 3 2 Orange 5 5 Prince George 2 5

Lot Size At several workshops, the Planning Commission discussed the possibility of changing the minimum lot size for family divisions. Page 3 of the staff report lists the minimum area for a lot created through a family division by zoning district. The table below lists the minimum area for lots created through a family division in other localities (within agricultural zoning districts). If the proposed ordinance amendment is approved, the minimum size of family division lots would remain two acres, but the size of the residual parcel would increase as the number of lots created through a family division increases. The residual parcel would be (at least) four to 15 acres, depending upon the number of family division lots created.

69


Minimum Lot Size for a Family Division Lot: Survey of Virginia Localities

August 2020

County Minimum Lot Size for a Family

Division Lot within Agricultural Zoning Districts

Minimum Lot Size for a Conventional Resid. Lot within Agricultural Zoning Districts

Powhatan (Current)

2 acres 10 acres

Amelia 2 acres 5 acres

Chesterfield 1 acre 5 acres

Culpeper 1 acre A: 5 acres RA: 3 acres

Cumberland 2 acres A-2: 2 acres A-20: 20 acres

Dinwiddie 3 acres 3 acres

Fluvanna 2 acres 2 acres

Goochland 2 – 3 acres (depending upon location)

2 – 3 acres (depending upon location)

Hanover 2 acres

(with parent tract of at least 10 acres remaining after family

division)

10 acres

Henrico 1 acre 1 acre

King George A-1: 10 acres A-2: 2 acres A-3: 1 acre

A-1: 10 acres A-2: 2 acres A-3: 1 acre

Louisa 1.5 acres 1.5 acres

New Kent 1.5 acres 1.5 acres

Orange 2 acres 2 acres

Prince George 1 acre 5 acres

Eligible Family Members Currently, an eligible property owner may gift one family division lot to each immediate family member, which (per Sec. 68-301) includes a “natural or legally-defined offspring, stepchild, spouse, sibling, grandchild, grandparent, or parent.” The proposed ordinance amendment would prevent an eligible property owner from gifting a parcel to a spouse.

70


The proposed ordinance amendment also specifies that a family division lot can only be gifted to an immediate family member that is an adult.

IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS The 2019 Long-Range Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address family divisions. Many parcels zoned A-10 (where most family divisions occur) are located within areas designated Rural Preservation and Rural Residential. These land use designations are intended to accommodate very low-density residential development (p. 58): • Rural Preservation: 1 unit per 8 acres – 1 unit per 10 acres • Rural Residential: 1 unit per 5 acres – 1 unit per 10 acres Objective LU.2 states that “when development occurs in rural areas, the preferred form of development is conservation subdivisions, with smaller lots and preserved open space at an overall low-density consistent with a rural character” (p. 59). Allowing additional lots as small as two (2) acres to be created in these areas would not be consistent with the aforementioned recommendations, unless they are clustered to protect open space. This proposed ordinance amendment would increase the minimum size of a residual parcel associated with family divisions, helping bring this subdivision option more in compliance with recommendations made in the 2019 Long-Range Comprehensive Plan.

V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Department of Community Development recommends approval of the proposed ordinance amendment. • Increasing the minimum lot size of a residual parcel associated with family divisions

helps bring this subdivision option more in compliance with recommendations made in the 2019 Long-Range Comprehensive Plan.

• Reducing the holding period prior to creating a family division provides property owners with greater flexibility, while helping ensure that this subdivision option is used for its intended purpose (and not for speculative development).

• Changes specifying that a family division lot can only be gifted to an immediate family member that is an adult (and prohibiting spouses from receiving a family division lot) help ensure that this subdivision option is used for its intended purpose (and not for speculative development).

VI. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW The Planning Commission discussed this issue at workshops held on February 4, 2020; March 3, 2020; September 1, 2020; and October 6, 2020. At the workshop on October 6, 2020, the Planning Commission voted to initiate the ordinance amendment and advertise a public hearing for November 4, 2020. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 4, 2020. Two members of the public spoke: • One member of the public expressed concerns about removing spouse as someone

eligible to receive a family division lot. They also expressed concerns regarding

71


requirements that the family division lot be held by the receiving family member for a certain amount of time.

• One member of the public expressed concerns about increasing the size of the residualparcel.

After discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request (Vote: 5 – 0).

VII. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESOLUTIONIn accordance with public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good planningpractices, the Board of Supervisors (approves / denies / defers) the request submitted bythe County of Powhatan to amend the provisions set forth in several sections of Chapter 68(Subdivision Ordinance) and Chapter 83 (Zoning Ordinance) to reduce the holding periodbefore creating a family division lot from ten years to five years; clarify that only adultsmay receive a family division lot; remove provisions allowing a spouse to receive a familydivision lot; clarify standards regarding access; and increase the size of the residual parcelremaining after a family division.

Attachments 1. Map of Family Divisions (2016 – 2019)2. Proposed Ordinance Amendment

72

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!( !(

!(

Legend!( Family Division

Family DivisionsJanuary 2016 - December 2017

Family DivisionsJanuary 2018 - December 2019

Family Divisions (2016-2019)

73

O-2020-19

Page 1 of 6

ORDINANCE O-2020-19

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE POWHATAN COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES TO

AMEND THE PROVISIONS SET FORTH IN SEVERAL SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 68

(SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE) AND CHAPTER 83 (ZONING ORDINANCE) TO REDUCE THE

REQUIRED HOLDING PERIOD BEFORE CREATING A FAMILY DIVISION LOT FROM TEN

YEARS TO FIVE YEARS; CLARIFY THAT ONLY ADULTS MAY RECEIVE A FAMILY

DIVISION LOT; REMOVE PROVISIONS ALLOWING A FAMILY DIVISION LOT TO BE

GIFTED TO A SPOUSE; CLARIFY STANDARDS REGARDING ACCESS; AND INCREASE

THE SIZE OF THE RESIDUAL PARCEL REMAINING AFTER A FAMILY DIVISON.

WHEREAS, Sections 15.2-1427 and 15.2-1433 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, enable

a local governing body to adopt, amend and codify ordinances or portions thereof; and

WHEREAS, Section 15.2-2240 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, mandates that each

local governing body adopt a subdivision ordinance, pursuant to Sections 15.2-2240 through 15.2-2279

(Land Subdivision and Development) to assure the orderly subdivision of land and its development; and

WHEREAS, Section 15.2-2244 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, mandates that local

subdivision ordinances include reasonable provisions permitting a single division of a lot or parcel for the

purpose of sale or gift to a member of the immediate family of the property owner; and

WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is intended to ensure that subdivisions and other

development promote the health, safety, convenience, order, prosperity, and welfare of the present and

future residents of the County; and

WHEREAS, the proper advertisement and public hearing was conducted as required by law; and

WHEREAS, the full text of this amendment was available for public inspection in the Department

of Community Development, Powhatan County Administration Building, 3834 Old Buckingham Road,

Powhatan, Virginia 23139.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY

OF POWHATAN that portions of Chapter 68 (Subdivision Ordinance) and Chapter 83 (Zoning Ordinance)

be amended and reenacted as follows:

CODE OF THE COUNTY OF POWHATAN, VIRGINIA

CHAPTER 68. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE

. . .

ARTICLE I. – GENERAL PROVISIONS

. . .

Sec. 68-125. - Family division.

(a) Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish the procedure and standards for review of family

divisions. Family division review is intended to ensure that proposed lots are appropriately and

accurately delineated on a plat that serves as a permanent record of the subdivision.

(b) Family division review standards. An application for family division approval shall be approved on a

finding the applicant has demonstrated that:

(1) Only one such division shall be allowed during the lifetime of each adult family member of the

donor or grantor without regard for ownership by the donor or grantor of differing tracts or parcels

of land, andland and shall not be for the purpose of circumventing this ordinance. Any further

74

O-2020-19

Page 2 of 6

division beyond one cut for each family member shall be considered a subdivision subject to the

provisions of this ordinance;

(2) The land being divided has been owned by the current owner or member of the owner's immediate

family for at least ten five (5) consecutive years;

(3) The owner agrees to place a restrictive covenant on the subdivided lots that would prohibit their

transfer to a nonmember of the owner's immediate family for a period of five (5) years, unless the

countyBoard of Supervisors, at its sole executesdiscretion, executes and records a document

agreeing to a shorter time period where required by changed circumstances;

(4) Each lot created has an area of at least two acres and adheres to the minimum dimensional

standards (except for minimum lot area) set forth in Chapter 83 (Zoning Ordinance) for the

applicable zoning district, and the residual parcel adheres to the minimum area requirements set

forth in Table 68-125(b)(5); The division results in no lot with an area less than two acres;

Table 68-125(b)(5): Minimum Area Requirements for Residual Parcel after Family

Division

Number of Lots Created by Family

Division

Minimum Acreage of Residual Parcel1

1 4 acres

(10 acres if main parcel is located on a

private road)

2 6 acres


private road)

3 8 acres


private road)

4 10 acres

5 12 acres

6 or more 15 acres

1 If the main parcel is located on a private road, the residual parcel must be at least 10 acres in

all instances.

(6) No lot hereby created shall qualify as a family division unless it has a reasonable access right-of-

way or easement providing ingress and egress to a publicly maintained street or road as follows

(these standards will be calculated in the aggregate regardless of the timing of the divisions).

a. Minimum of 20 feet for one to two lots served by a driveway constructed to the residential

driveway standard outlined in § section 68-175(e)(8)b.1.

b. Minimum of 40 feet for threeFor a three (3) to ten (10) lots division, the lots must, at a

minimum, be served by a private road constructed to standards outlined in § section 68-

175(e)(8)b.2.

c. Divisions resulting in a total of 11 or more lots, served by a public road constructed to

standards outlined in § section 68-175(e)(8)a.

(7) The division is not for the purpose of circumventing the county's subdivision regulations.

Commented [APCA1]: The proposed revisions would reduce the amount of time a property owner must own the property prior to creating a family division (reduced from 10 years to 5 years).

Commented [APCA2]: This language clarifies who has the authority to approve a reduction in the required holding period.

Commented [APCA3]: The proposed revisions would require a larger residual parcel than currently required, as discussed at previous Planning Commission workshops. The greater the number of family divisions, the larger the residual parcel has to be.

Commented [APCA4]: Since the last Planning Commission meeting, standards listed in the footnote of the table have been added in the body of the table for clarity.

Commented [APCA5]: This language is consistent with current requirements set forth in in Sec. 83-107(b) of the zoning ordinance.

75

O-2020-19

Page 3 of 6

(78) Family divisions utilizing the private road standards of § section 68-175(e)(8)b. shall be reviewed

and acted on by the director, subject to certification and recordation of a road maintenance

agreement as required by section 68-175(e)(8)b.2.vii.

(89) Procedure for family subdivision of property held in trusts. Property held by a trust may be

divided as a family subdivision provided it meets the following requirements:

a. All trust beneficiaries must be immediate adult family members of one another, as defined

in this section.

b. All trust beneficiaries must agree in writing that the property should be subdivided.

c. All purchasers or giftees of subdivided parcels must be adult immediate family members of

beneficiaries of the trust, although they need not themselves be beneficiaries.

d. The division shall comply with all other requirements of this section for family divisions.

(c) Non-immediate family members.

(1) No building permit shall be issued on the lot being divided off to any person other than an

immediate family member.

(2) No structure on the lot being divided off shall be rented to any person other than an immediate

family member.

(d) Expiration. Family division approval shall expire if the family division plat is not recorded with the

office of the clerk of the circuit court:

(1) Within six months after the date of the family division approval; or

(2) Where construction or installation of public infrastructure improvements required to serve the

area covered by the family division plat has commenced in accordance with the family division

approval and their completion is ensured by a performance guarantee in accordance with section

68-215, performance guarantees, within one year after the date of the family division approval or

such further time period specified in the performance guarantee; or

(3) Within an extension of the applicable time period.

. . .

ARTICLE V. – DEFINITIONS

. . .

Sec. 68-301. – Definitions.

Subdivision, family division means a family division is a division of a lot or parcel of land solely for the

purpose of a one-time sale or gift of land from the lot or parcel owner to a member of the owner's immediate

family— which is defined for purposes of regulating family divisions as any person adult who is a natural

or legally defined offspring, stepchild, spouse, sibling, grandchild, grandparent, or parent of the lot or parcel

owner. Development of a family division requires family division approval in accordance with section 68-

125, Family division. No parcel may be created less than two acres in size.

. . .

CHAPTER 83. ZONING ORDINANCE

. . .

Commented [APCA6]: The proposed revision would prevent a property owner from creating a new parcel and giving it to a spouse as part of a family division.

Commented [APCA7]: Sec. 68-125 establishes requirements regarding minimum lot size. Definitions generally should not include standards/regulations, as those should be defined in the body of the ordinance.

76

https://library.municode.com/va/powhatan_county/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=CO_CH68SUOR_ARTIISPREPR_S68-125FADI

https://library.municode.com/va/powhatan_county/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=CO_CH68SUOR_ARTIISPREPR_S68-125FADI

O-2020-19

Page 4 of 6

ARTICLE I. – GENERAL PROVISIONS.

. . .

Sec. 83-107. – Use districts.

. . .

(b) Minimum lot size.

Minimum Lot Size Reference Chart

Scenario Result

Minimum Lot Size (A-10

District) 10 acres

Lot Line Adjustment (A-10

District)

2 acres for parent tract on a public road; 10 acres for all other

parcels; the result of the lot line adjustment may not create any

additional non-conforming parcels

Lot Line Adjustment (RR

District)

10 acres; parcels less than 10 acres may be increased but not

decreased in size by the lot line adjustment

Family member division; main

parcel on public road, or access

provided to public road via main

parcel (A-10 District)

2 acres for the family division parcel plus 2 acres for the residual

parcel (4 acres total) meets area requirements set forth in Table 68-

125(b)(5)

Family member division; main

parcel on private road in Large

Lot development (A-10 District)

2 acres for the family member division plus 10 acres for the residual

parcel (12 acres total); must have consent from property owners that

access the private road; minimum lot size to be computed outside the

50′ right-of-way; private road must be upgraded to state

specifications if private road serves more than ten (10) lots

Family member division (RR

District)


parcel meets area requirements set forth in Table 68-125(b)(5)(12

acres total)

Family member division (R-2

District)



acres total)

77

O-2020-19

Page 5 of 6

Family member division (R-U

District)



acres total)

Large lot subdivision exception

(A-10 District)

10 acre minimum lot size; if on a private road, minimum lot size is to

be computed outside the 50′ right-of-way

Charitable exception (A-10

District)

2 acres for the charitable exception parcel plus 10 acres for the

residual parcel

Second dwelling for family

member (per conditional use

permit in A-10 District); main

parcel on public road

20 acres total (1 dwelling per 10 acres); minimum lot size

requirements waived if dwelling is for an elderly or infirmed family

member

Second dwelling for guest house

or non-family member (per

conditional use permit in A-10

District)



member

Second dwelling on 2 lot private

road (regardless of occupant, per


District)



member

Second dwelling on 3-10 lot

private road (regardless of

occupant, per conditional use

permit in A-10 District)



member

Second dwelling on lot in any

private road subdivision that is

eligible for a single cut (per


District)



member

In all other respects the Code of the County of Powhatan shall remain unchanged and be in full force and

effect.

This amendment shall take effect immediately upon passage.

78

O-2020-19

Page 6 of 6


DECEMBER 14, 2020.



Recorded Vote:

ATTEST:

David T. Williams

Larry J. Nordvig

Michael W. Byerly



79


REGULAR MEETING

DECEMBER 14, 2020

AGENDA ITEM 11B

Ordinance O-2020-20 Review of Agricultural and Forestal

Districts (AFDs)

80



Agenda Item Title: Ordinance O-2020-20 [Review of Agricultural and Forestal Districts (AFDs)]: All Agricultural and Forestal Districts (AFDs) were originally scheduled to expire on April 12, 2020, with the Board of Supervisors temporarily extending these districts through December 31, 2020 (Resolution #R-2020-05). Based on recommendations provided by the Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory Committee (AFDAC) and Planning Commission, the Board of Supervisors will decide to whether the AFD Program should continue as-is (for another ten years), should be discontinued/terminated, or if an in-depth review should be conducted. Land may be withdrawn from a district at the owner's discretion by filing a written notice with the local governing body at any time before it acts to continue, modify or terminate the district.

Motion: At its meeting on December 14, 2020, the Board of Supervisors may take the following actions: • Initiate an in-depth review of each AFD, with each parcel involved being analyzed

by staff, the AFDAC, the Planning Commission, and the Board of Supervisors.• Continue the AFD Program as-is.• Discontinue/terminate the AFD Program.Two draft ordinances are prepared and included with the agenda packet. One ordinance (if adopted) would continue the AFD Program as-is, while the other ordinance (if adopted) would discontinue the AFD Program.


December 19, 2019 January 27, 2020 July 27, 2020

Summary of Item: The Agricultural and Forestal District (AFD) program in Powhatan County is organized under Code of Virginia § 15.2-4300, which allows localities to create local AFD programs. Powhatan County does not have its own separate ordinance regarding AFDs.

The first AFDs were created in 1991 and have been renewed/continued several times since then.

As of January 1, 2020, approximately 6,000 acres of land in Powhatan County were enrolled within ten separate AFDs.

All Agricultural and Forestal Districts (AFDs) were originally scheduled to expire on April 12, 2020, with the Board of Supervisors temporarily extending these districts through December 31, 2020 (Resolution #R-2020-05). The Board of Supervisors will determine whether the AFD Program should continue as-is (for another ten years), should be discontinued/terminated, or if an in-depth review should be conducted.

At its meeting on October 5, 2020, the Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory Committee (AFDAC) recommended that the AFD Program continue.

At its meeting on November 4, 2020, the Planning Commission recommended that the AFD Program continue as-is, in accordance with the Code of Virginia.


Agenda Item

81



Staff: Staff recommends concurrence with recommendations made by the AFDAC and Planning Commission. If the AFD Program continues as-is, the Board of Supervisors should dedicate resources to make programmatic changes to increase awareness of the AFD program (and thus its impact).

Commission/Board: The AFDAC recommended that the AFD Program continue as-is.

The Planning Commission recommended that the AFD Program continue as-is, in accordance with the Code of Virginia.


Attachments: Staff Report and Supporting Materials Ordinance (Two Drafts: Continuation of AFDs As-Is + Discontinuance of AFDs)

Staff/Contact: Andrew Pompei: Planning Director 804 598-5621 x2006 [email protected]

82

Agricultural and Forestal Districts (AFDS) in Powhatan County

Overview Prepared for the Board of Supervisors Public Hearing

December 14, 2020

Agricultural and Forestal Districts (AFDs) in Virginia

In 1977, the Virginia General Assembly passed the Agricultural and Forestal Districts Act, allowing localities to create local Agricultural and Forestal District (AFD) programs. The intent of these districts is “to conserve and protect agricultural and forestal lands.” Code of Virginia §§ 15.2-4300 through 15.2-4314 (Agricultural and Forestal Districts Act) and §§ 15.2-4400 through 15.2-4407 (Local Agricultural and Forestal Act) describe how localities can create these programs.

As of 2017, 28 counties in Virginia (plus the City of Staunton) had implemented local AFD programs, with Fauquier County having the greatest acreage enrolled in its program (78,673 acres). No localities bordering Powhatan County have implemented AFD programs.1

Mechanics of AFDs

AFDs are created and modified by ordinances passed by the Board of Supervisors. No ordinance creating or modifying an AFD may be passed until such request has been reviewed by the AFD Advisory Committee and the Planning Commission (and appropriate public hearings have been held).

Each AFD must have a core of at least 200 acres, which may consist of a single parcel or multiple contiguous parcels. A parcel that is not part of the core may be included within the district, if the nearest boundary of the parcel is within one mile of the edge of the core.

AFDs may be reviewed by the Board of Supervisors every four to ten years. If the Board of Supervisors decides to conduct a full review at that time, public hearings are held by the AFD Advisory Committee, Planning Commission, and Board of Supervisors. Unless an AFD is modified or terminated by the Board of Supervisors, the AFD shall continue with the same conditions and period prior to review as when the district was initially established.

Landowners may withdraw from an AFD by submitting a written request to the Board of Supervisors. Except for those occurring during a review period, withdrawal requests (except for those submitted during the AFD review period) must be reviewed by the AFD Advisory Committee and Planning Commission, and the Board of Supervisors must hold a public hearing. If a withdrawal is granted prior to review/expiration of an AFD, the landowner(s) must pay all rollback taxes in accordance with Code of Virginia § 58.1-3237.

Effect of AFDs

• Properties enrolled within an AFD automatically qualify for an agricultural or forestal use-value tax assessment.

• Properties enrolled within an AFD may not be developed to a more intensive use without prior approval by the governing body.

1 Source: Virginia Local Tax Rates, 2017: Information for All Cities and Counties and Selected Incorporated Towns,

Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service at the University of Virginia, p. 65 – 71.

83

Overview of Agricultural and Forestal Districts (AFDs) Prepared for Board of Supervisors Public Hearing (Dec. 14, 2020)

Page 2 of 7

• The existence of an AFD must be considered when creating ordinances and making land use planningdecisions.

AFDs in Powhatan County

The Agricultural and Forestal District (AFD) program in Powhatan County is organized under Code of Virginia § 15.2-4300, which allows localities to create local AFD programs. Powhatan County does not have its own separate ordinance regarding AFDs.

The first AFDs were created in 1991 and have been renewed/continued several times since then.

As of January 1, 2020, approximately 6,000 acres of land in Powhatan County were enrolled within ten separate AFDs:

Branch Creek AFD James River AFD Giles Bridge AFD Trenholm AFD Old Timbers AFD Roseneath AFD Appomattox River AFD Pine AFD Pineview AFD Skinquarter AFD

AFDs were scheduled to expire on April 12, 2020 (ten years after the last renewal). Code of Virginia § 15.2A-4311 of the Code of Virginia states that the Board of Supervisors may choose to review AFDs every four to ten years.

Current Review Period

On December 19, 2019, the Board of Supervisors began discussing the AFD Program, launching an initial review period.

On January 27, 2020, the Board of Supervisors passed Resolution #R-2020-05, which continued all AFDs through July 31, 2020, allowing additional time to determine whether a full review of the AFD Program is necessary.

On July 27, 2020, the Board of Supervisors passed Resolution #R-2020-47, which continued all AFDs through December 31, 2020, allowing additional time to determine whether a full review of the AFD Program is necessary. At that meeting, the Board of Supervisors also directed the Department of Community Development to convene the Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory Committee (AFDAC).

The AFDAC met on September 14, 2020 and October 5, 2020 and prepared a recommendation to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors (Attachment #1).2

On November 4, 2020, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the AFD Program. The Planning Commission recommended that the AFD Program continues as-is in accordance with the Code of Virginia.

During this initial review process, one landowner requested that his property be removed from the AFD Program (Tax Map Parcels #26-104 and #26-108: Branch Creek AFD). With the removal of those properties from the AFD Program, the Branch Creek AFD will no longer exist. Code of Virginia § 15.2-4311 allows property owners to withdraw their properties from an AFD during the review period.

2 Prior to September 14, 2020, the AFDAC had not met since 2010.

84


Page 3 of 7

Future of the AFD Program: Different Options

At this time, the Board of Supervisors may choose one of the following options:

• Option #1: Conduct a full (in-depth) review of the AFD Program, analyzing each parcel enrolled in the program;

• Option #2: Continue all AFDs as last renewed on April 12, 2010 (conducting the next review by April 12, 2030); or

• Option #3: Terminate the AFD Program.

More details regarding the different options are described below.

Option #1: Full Review If a full review is deemed necessary, the following actions would be required: • Notice to Property Owners

The owners of properties enrolled within an AFD will be contacted and asked whether they would like their properties to remain enrolled in the program.

• Staff Review The Department of Community Development will review all parcels being renewed to ensure that they are (1) geographically eligible to be part of an AFD, as described by the Code of Virginia and (2) are still being used as part of a bona fide agricultural and/or forestal operation.

• AFD Advisory Committee: Review Each AFD (and its associated parcels) will be reviewed by the Agricultural and Forestal District (AFD) Advisory Committee, which will make a recommendation to the Planning Commission as to whether properties should remain enrolled in the program.

• Planning Commission: Public Hearing and Review The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing and review each AFD (and its associated parcels). After discussion, the Planning Commission may recommend that the AFDs be continued, modified, or terminated. This recommendation is forwarded to the Board of Supervisors.

• Board of Supervisors: Public Hearing and Decision Each AFD (and its associated parcels) will be reviewed by the Board of Supervisors, which will decide whether to continue, modify, or terminate the AFD (after holding a public hearing).

Option #2: Continuation of Existing AFDs If a full review is not conducted, the Board of Supervisors may choose to continue existing AFDs as originally approved on April 12, 2010. Property owners would receive notice that the AFDs will continue.

Option #3: Termination of the AFD Program The Board of Supervisors may discontinue the AFD Program.

If the AFD Program is discontinued, property owners have the option of enrolling in the Land Use Deferral Program.3 That program, which was adopted by Powhatan County in 1976, offers a deferral of a portion

3 On February 18, 2020, the County Attorney’s Office transmitted a request to the Attorney General regarding an

opinion as to the impact of roll-back taxes upon the termination of Agricultural and Forestal Districts. As of December 4, 2020, no response has been received from the Attorney General.

85


Page 4 of 7

of the real estate taxes for qualifying properties. Approximately forty percent (40%) of Powhatan County is enrolled in the land use program.4

Considerations

• Resources RequiredConducting a full review of all AFDs will require a significant amount of staff resources. Every impacted landowner will be contacted by mail. Each AFD (and its associated parcels) must be analyzed andreports compiled for the AFD Advisory Committee, Planning Commission, and Board of Supervisors.Public hearings must be scheduled and advertised before each of the aforementioned bodies.

• Property Owner Notice and InvolvementConducting a full review would facilitate greater involvement from affected landowners.

• Record KeepingConducting a full review will provide an additional opportunity to accurately analyze and recordproperties enrolled in AFDs, which have not been thoroughly reviewed since 2010. New reports andordinances would provide clarity regarding the renewal process.

• Growth Management ToolsThe AFD Program is one tool localities in Virginia use to manage growth and preserve rural areas.Powhatan County has implemented a variety of other tools that are intended to limit developmentoutside of designated growth areas, including the following:

o Zoning: Approximately 82.5% of Powhatan County is zoned Agricultural-10 (A-10), whichlimits residential development to one unit per ten (10) acres. The Rural Residential (RR) zoning district, which is located along eastern portions of the State Route 711 Corridor, encompasses another 3.75% of Powhatan County.

o Conservation Subdivisions: The Powhatan County Subdivision Ordinance has provisions forconservation subdivisions, which are residential developments that cluster single-familydwellings on smaller lots, preserving significant portions of the site (at least 40 percent) aspermanent open space.

o Conservation Easements: Property owners throughout Powhatan County have worked withpublic agencies and non-profit organizations to place conservation easements on theirproperties. A conservation easement is a voluntary, legal agreement that permanently limitsuses on a particular property in order to protect environmental, historic, scenic, and/or othercritical resources. In October 2019, Powhatan County partnered with the Capital Region LandConservancy to provide property owners with information about this tool.

o Comprehensive Plan: The comprehensive plan is an advisory document that establishes avision of what Powhatan County should look like in 20 to 30 years. The Countywide FutureLand Use Plan designates areas where growth should (and should not occur), withapproximately two-thirds of Powhatan County designated Rural Preservation.

o Land Use Deferral Program: The Land Use Deferral Program allows payment of real estatetaxes to be deferred when a property meets qualifying standards for agricultural,horticultural, forestal, and/or open space uses. If the use of a property enrolled in this

4 As of 2017, 75 counties (out of 95 total), 19 cities, and 22 towns throughout Virginia reported having a program similar to Powhatan County’s Land Use Deferral Program, including all neighboring localities (Source: Virginia Local Tax Rates, 2017: Information for All Cities and Counties and Selected Incorporated Towns, Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service at the University of Virginia, p. 59 – 60).

86


Page 5 of 7

program changes (or if the property is rezoned to a more intensive zoning district), the property owner must pay rollback taxes, which is equal to the amount of real estate taxes deferred over the previous five (5) years plus interest. By reducing tax burdens on those using their land for agricultural uses, the program is intended to slow the development of rural lands.

Comments Received

• One property owner (David Anderson: Rancks LLC) requested that two properties be removed from the Branch Creek AFD.

• On June 18, 2020, the Powhatan Farm Bureau Board of Directors sent an email stating that it has passed the following motion: "to support the continuation of the Agriculture and Forestal Advisory Committee and Districts as it exists today."

• At AFDAC meetings held on September 14, 2020 and October 5, 2020 and the Planning Commission meeting held on November 4, 2020, several landowners expressed support for the AFD Program.

Staff Recommendation

Staff recommends concurrence with recommendations made by the AFDAC and Planning Commission. If the AFD Program continues as-is, the Board of Supervisors should dedicate resources to make programmatic changes to increase awareness of the AFD program (and thus its impact).

Recommendation from Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory Committee (AFDAC)

At its meeting on October 5, 2020, the AFDAC recommended that the AFD Program continue as-is. A white paper prepared by the AFDAC (Attachment #1) includes the following recommendation: a. That the Board of Supervisors continues the AFD program as is. b. That the Board of Supervisors directs Planning and AFDAC to operate per the Code, specifically on

those issues listed under #9, above. If the Committee “uncovers” any policy issues, in the opinion of the Committee, Planning Department, Planning Commission, or County Attorney, these will be brought to the Board of Supervisors.

c. That the AFDAC review, in the last quarter of 2021, the specific operational questions and issues listed in (i) Mr. Pompei’s Oct. 5 memo, “Future of AFDAC”, p. 2, and (ii) Mr. Max Timberlake’s questions in his email of Sep. 4, if not already dealt with otherwise in this white paper. These are primarily procedural, administrative, or operational questions and do not affect the recommendations of this white paper.

d. That the AFDAC review existing AFDs in the first quarter of 2021.

Recommendation from Planning Commission

At its meeting on November 4, 2020, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and discussed the AFD Program. After discussion, the Planning Commission recommended that the AFD Program continue as-is, in accordance with the Code of Virginia.

87


Page 6 of 7

Action by the Board of Supervisors

At its meeting on December 14, 2020, the Board of Supervisors may take the following actions: • Initiate an in-depth review of each AFD, with each parcel involved being analyzed by staff, the AFDAC,

the Planning Commission, and the Board of Supervisors.• Continue the AFD Program as-is.• Discontinue/terminate the AFD Program.

Two draft ordinances are prepared and included with the agenda packet. One ordinance (if adopted) would continue the AFD Program as-is, while the other ordinance (if adopted) would discontinue the AFD Program.

Attachments Attachment #1: Powhatan County Agricultural and Forestal District (AFD) Review (Prepared by AFDAC) Attachment #2: Map of Agricultural and Forestal Districts (AFDs) Attachment #3: List of Agricultural and Forestal Districts (AFDs) Attachment #4: Original Ordinances Creating AFD Districts Attachment #5: Minutes from Board of Supervisors Meeting on April 12, 2010 (Last Renewal) Attachment #6: State Enabling Legislation re Local AFD Program

88

Powhatan County Agricultural and Forestal District (AFD) Review September - October 2020

Prepared by the Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory Committee

Attachment #1

89

Powhatan County Agricultural and Forestal District (AFD) Review 1 Prepared by the Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory Committee September – October 2020

1. Recommendation

The law requires that the 10-year review of AFDs consider, as one question,whether to (a) continue, (b) terminate, or (c) review, which may lead to changes.This is the most important question each renewal (and we) must answer: Whatis the AFD Advisory Committee’s bottom-line recommendation to the PlanningCommission and Board of Supervisors?

Answer: THE AFDAC RECOMMENDS UNANIMOUSLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY THECONTINUATION OF AFDs.

The remainder of this white paper provides context and rationale.

90

Powhatan County Agricultural and Forestal District (AFD) Review 2 Prepared by the Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory Committee September – October 2020 2. What is the AFD program and how is it meant to be used?

Answer: The General Assembly created this land-use tool to help localities manage growth and protect critical pieces of land by creating guidelines by which a locality can protect farms, timber tracts, and open spaces in alignment with the locality’s Comprehensive Plan, Vision for its future, and the wishes of its citizens. AFDs ALLOW A LOCALITY TO, ESSENTIALLY, “PURCHASE” DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS OF PIECES OF LAND, FOR A SPECIFIED PERIOD OF TIME, IN EXCHANGE FOR A LAND-USE TAX RATE LEVIED ON THOSE SELECTED PIECES OF LAND.

3. Why did Powhatan County choose to adopt an AFD program?

Answer:

a. Heavy and continued pressure to develop farming/forest/open space into residential uses, with all the services and problems such usages bring;

b. Our aging farmers/timbermen and fewer residents willing to do this hard work;

c. The soaring cost of land, the difficulty paying taxes on large pieces of land, and the temptation (and sometimes, intense pressure) to “sell out”;

d. The clamor of our citizens to ameliorate these pressures and “keep us a rural, farming community.”

e. The desire to use available tools to help the County tie land-use decisions (such as rezonings) to the County’s CP and long-term vision.

4. How many AFDs do we presently have? What is the total acreage in AFDs in Powhatan?

Answer: Nine Districts, about 5640 acres.

91


5. Why is this program so infrequently used?

Answer: This is a “buried” program, not much touted by the County, despitethe fact that it has been in the Comprehensive Plan for decades as a “prime land-use tool” to help local government recognize its intent to manage growth.Additionally, given the long-time chopping up of land into smaller and smallertracts, it is difficult sometimes to cobble together the minimum acreagerequired.

6. What is the process by which AFDs are created?

Answer: Request by the landowner with review and paperwork by the PlanningDepartment; review and recommendation by the AFD Committee; review,including public hearing, by Planning Commission, with recommendation;review, including public hearing, and final decision by the Board of Supervisors.

7. Why has the AFD Committee undertaken this review?

Answer:

a. Code of Virginiab. direction of the Board of Supervisorsc. review by AFDAC, Planning Commission, and Board of Supervisors of process

and status of AFDsd. As a result of this review, misinformation and rumors about AFDs in

Powhatan and the program’s future have come to lighte. (and see #3)

92


8. Why have both land-use taxation and AFDs?

Answer:

a. Most important: even in, and specifically because of the redundancy, AFDsare part of the strong intent of the Board to do everything legally permissibleto abide by our citizens’ overwhelming message, “Protect the rural nature ofour community!” Embracing the redundancy by the County is part of astrong, symbolic message that the Board hears and concurs with the public’sdesire. We are saying by the redundancy, as strongly as we can, that weintend to provide every tool possible to our farmers, foresters, open-spaceadvocates, and citizens-at-large to protect Powhatan, its CP, and its vision forour future.

b. AFDs are in our Comprehensive Plan and land-use taxation is not.c. AFDs must be taken into account when land adjacent is up for a rezoning.

This does not mean that AFD designation automatically stops a proposedrezoning. AFD designation is a tool that helps the Board of Supervisors in itsintent to maintain rural character.

d. Rescinding Land-use Valuation: we do not see a time in our immediate, oreven intermediate, future where Powhatan would rescind Land-useValuation. But if such an event occurred for political or financial orphilosophical reasons, AFDs would provide at least a partial fallback position.

e. Length of time “in” the program: AFDs reviewed every ten years by AFDC;land-use taxation yearly by COR

Note: Most acreage in AFDs would be eligible for the Land-use Taxation rate even if they were not in an AFD. Thus, AFDs do not of themselves create a significant real estate tax loss to the County. The belief that they do fails to consider that most AFD acreage would be taxed at the land-use rate even if that land were not in an AFD. FURTHERMORE—AND THIS IS IMPORTANT—IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT WE RECOGNIZE THAT LU TAXATION IS NOT A “COST” PER SE TO THE COUNTY SINCE STUDY AFTER STUDY HAS SHOWN THAT A COMPARISON OF “COST OF SERVICES” OF LAND IN AN AFD (AND LU-TAXATION) IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS PER ACRE THAN LAND NOT IN THE SYSTEM.

93

Powhatan County Agricultural and Forestal District (AFD) Review 5 Prepared by the Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory Committee September – October 2020 9. What administrative questions have arisen about AFDs? Or what

misunderstandings or non-clear issues have come to light in this review (and previously)?

Answer: The issues this review has “uncovered” mostly fall into one of three categories1. We are calling these AFD Operational Principles. They are in the Code of Virginia.

Category 1: Authority

For any change to an AFD District (or member of the same), the BOS has sole authority to authorize the change. The pathway for changes, additions, deletions, et al: AFD Advisory Committee, Planning Commission, BOS, with an appeal to the Circuit Court if the owner is dissatisfied by the BOS’s action.

Category 2: Roll-back Taxes

If a property is rezoned or changes use, it may be subject to removal from the district and subject to roll-back taxes pursuant to §58.1-32372. If a property is withdrawn or removed from the district, it would be subject to roll-back taxes pursuant to §15.2-4314.

Category 3: Membership in an AFD

a. Voluntary for a 10-year period and there is no requirement to renew. The BOS may decide to “Review” any or all districts between year 4 and 10.

b. During the “Review Period” land within the district may be withdrawn at the owner’s discretion by filing a written notice with the local governing body at any time before the governing body acts to continue, modify or terminate the district.

1 While most of the issues brought to the table were brought by AFDC members, we also acknowledge Planning staff,

COR, County Attorney, and, importantly to us, the public during our public hearings. 2 The County Attorney has opined that termination of a district triggers roll-back taxes. That opinion has been sent

to the Attorney General for review and the County is awaiting a determination from the Attorney General’s office.

94


c. A member may request to withdraw from an AFD at any time. Permissionto withdraw is at the discretion of the BOS subject to the requirementslisten in Category 1, above.

It is important to note that all the issues we have identified are clearly (with one exception) delineated in the Code. Most of our problems, including the public’s ignorance of the operational principles of AFDs, are dealt with fairly clearly by the Code section on AFDs. THEREFORE, A MAJOR RECOMMENATION OF THIS COMMITTEE IS THAT WE SIMPLY FOLLOW THE CODE IN ALL THE PARTICULARS.

10. The AFDAC’s recommendation to the Planning Commission and Board ofSupervisors (repeat):

Answer:

a. That the Board of Supervisors continues the AFD program as is.b. That the Board of Supervisors directs Planning and AFDAC to operate per the

Code, specifically on those issues listed under #9, above. If the Committee“uncovers” any policy issues, in the opinion of the Committee, PlanningDepartment, Planning Commission, or County Attorney, these will bebrought to the Board of Supervisors.

c. That the AFDAC review, in the last quarter of 2021, the specific operationalquestions and issues listed in (i) Mr. Pompei’s Oct. 5 memo, “Future ofAFDAC”, p. 2, and (ii) Mr. Max Timberlake’s questions in his email of Sep. 4,if not already dealt with otherwise in this white paper. These are primarilyprocedural, administrative, or operational questions and do not affect therecommendations of this white paper.

d. That the AFDAC review existing AFDs in the first quarter of 2021.

95

Powhatan County Agricultural and Forestal District (AFD) Review 7 Prepared by the Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory Committee September – October 2020 11. Questions?

Your AFD Advisory Committee is made up of subject-matter experts you have appointed, plus the availability of staff and other expertise the Committee called upon for advice. The AFDAC consists of farmers, timbermen, business people, the President of the Powhatan Farm Bureau, the Commissioner of the Revenue, one former and one current member of the Board of Supervisors, two former members of the Planning Commission, a former Extension agent, and two former members of Monacan Soil and Water. Ex officio, on-call personnel include the Director of Planning, the County Attorney, and a staff representative from the Virginia Farm Bureau. Most important, multiple members of the community participated in public meetings. With all this expertise, we will entertain any questions you might have before you consider a vote to accept the AFDAC’s recommendations, captured in the white paper in front of you and summarized in this presentation.

Respectfully submitted by your AFD Advisory Committee:

• Bill Cox • Robert Harper • David Moyer • Pam Pleasants • Bill Sifers • Jamie Timberlake • Max Timberlake, Vice-Chair • Carson Tucker, Chair

96

GIL

ES

BR

IDG

E A

FD

OLD

TIM

BE

RS

AF

D

SK

INQ

UA

RT

ER

AF

D

RO

SE

NE

AT

H A

FD

JA

ME

S R

IVE

R A

FD

BR

AN

CH

CR

EE

K A

FD

PIN

E A

FD

TR

EN

HO

LM A

FD

PIN

EV

IEW

AF

D

AP

PO

MA

TTO

X R

IVE

R A

FD

£ ¤60

UV288

UV13

UV522

UV288

UV13

PIN

EV

IEW

AF

D

AP

PO

MA

TTO

X R

IVE

R A

FD

¯0

12

34

0.5Mi

les

Exist

ing Ag

ricult

ural F

oresta

l Dist

ricts

(AFD

) in Po

whata

n Cou

ntyFe

bruary

2020

*On M

arch 5

, 202

0, the

owne

r of T

ax M

ap Pa

rcels

#26-1

04 an

d26

-108 r

eque

sted t

hat th

ose p

arcels

be w

ithdra

wn fro

m the

AFD

Prog

ram.

* *

97

AFD Name AFD Case Number AFD ApplicantTax Map

NumberAcreage

Board of Supervisors

ApprovalRenewal Date

R. F. Ranson 26‐104 * 248.687 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

R. F. Ranson 26‐108 * 111.478 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

91‐2‐AFD James R. Willis, Jr. 12‐54 729.39 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

Robert H. Burts 12‐34 21.75 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

Robert H. Burts 12‐35 4.82 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

91‐3‐AFD V. C. Adamson ET ALS** 51‐3** 821.25 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

91‐3A‐AFD Raymond & Joyce Hooper 51‐12A 17 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

Leslie C. & Rebecca L. Wells, Jr. 52‐6A 15.18 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

Betty Jane Osborne Walters 52‐6D 47.98 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

Patricia Arlene Osborne Tomlin 52‐6E 15.18 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

91‐3C‐AFD Bobby O. & Mary A. Stockner 51‐10 44.89 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

91‐3D‐AFD Debra O. Frame 51‐12 48.647 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

91‐3E‐AFD Donald & Lynne Moore 51‐10A 44.88 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

James E. & Elizabeth Cave 51‐17A 3.607 11/18/1991 4/12/2020

Danny L. & Lisa M. Emory 51‐6B 2.166 11/18/1991 4/12/2020

Joseph Anderson 49‐2 29.8 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

Joseph Anderson 49‐3 336.4 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

Virginia Anderson 49‐3A 380.43 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

Huguenot Society 31‐35 325 8/12/1991 4/12/2020

Huguenot Society 32‐9 78.157 8/12/1991 4/12/2020

Moyer Family Land Trust 7‐1E 140.29 12/9/1991 4/12/2020

Milton & Barbara Moyer 7‐1F 101.738 12/9/1991 4/12/2020

91‐9B‐AFD David Moyer 7‐1B 513.45 12/9/1991 4/12/2020

91‐9C‐AFD Raymond Moyer 7‐1 517.9 12/9/1991 4/12/2020

91‐9D‐AFD Milton Moyer 7‐1D 121.12 12/9/1991 4/12/2020

Scott Timberland 23‐46 187 12/9/1991 4/12/2020

Scott Timberland 35‐52 60 12/9/1991 4/12/2020

SKINQUARTER AFD 91‐12‐AFD Aubrey Anderson 61‐33 244.5 4/13/2012 4/12/2020

91‐1B‐AFD Anne Lewis 16‐66 200.53 6/10/1991 4/12/2020

F. D. & Helen Graham 16‐63 232.4 4/13/1992 4/12/2020

F. D. & Helen Graham 17‐21 105 4/13/1992 4/12/2020

F. D. & Helen Graham 17‐6 22.206 4/13/1992 4/12/2020

Dr. Glen Crawford 17‐22 217 4/13/1992 4/12/2020

Dr. Glen Crawford 17‐2‐A 15.56 4/13/1992 4/12/2020

Dr. Glen Crawford 17‐2‐B 31.33 4/13/1992 4/12/2020

* On March 5, 2020, the owner of Tax Map Parcels #26‐104 and 26‐108 requested that those parcels be withdrawn from the AFD Program.** In 2020, Tax Map Parcel #51-3 was split into two parcels, with the new parcel designated Tax Map Parcel #51-3A. This division is not yet reflected on the online GIS.

JAMES RIVER AFD

91‐9A‐AFD

PINE AFD 91‐11‐AFD

ROSENEATH AFD

91‐13‐AFD

91‐13B‐AFD

GILES BRIDGE AFD 91‐4‐AFD

OLD TIMBERS AFD 91‐5B‐AFD

PINEVIEW AFD 91‐6‐AFD

BRANCH CREEK AFD 91‐1A‐AFD

TRENHOLM AFD91‐2A‐AFD

APPOMATTOX RIVER AFD

91‐3B‐AFD

91‐3F‐AFD

John & Jane Simpson III 52‐1A 5 8/12/1991 4/12/2020

Attachment #3: List of Existing AFDs in Powhatan County

Attachment #3

98

Attachment #4Original Ordinances Creating Agricultural and Forestal Districts (AFD)

Note:Some of these AFDs have been modified since the original ordinances were adopted.

99

Mr. Walton moved to deny 09-10 CUP based on public necessity, general welfare, a11d good zoning practices. Messrs. Cosby, Bustos, Daniel, Tucker and Walton voted A YE.

VOTE 5-0

MOTION CARRIED

E. Early Review of Agricultural and Foresta! Districts {AFDs)Mr. Dameron presented the following:

On March 2, 20 I 0, the Powhatan County Planning Commission held a public meeting as pmt of the early review of all Agricultural & Foresta! Districts (AFD) in the County. The Commission issued a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors parallel to that of rbe Agricultural & Foresta! District Advisory Committee.

This reconunendation consists of a proposal to conti1me all AFDs as cw-rently constituted with two exceptions:

• The first exception is the withdrawal of four parcels from the Appomattox River AFD that are owned by Mr. H. David Cave. Mr. Cave has submitted a written request stating his desire co withdrawal his parcels from the Appomattox River AFD.

• The second is the addition of 9·1 -1 B-AFD (Tax Map J 6-66) to the Roseneath AFD. Theaddition became necessary due to the withdrawal of parcels of land from the Branch Creek AFD,of which 91-1 B-AFD has been a pmt of since 1991. The withdrawal of these lots left the remainingparcels of Branch Creek AFD physically separated by more than a mile, which under state codewould prohibit them from inclusion in the same AFD. As a result; it is proposed that 91-1 B-AFDbe added to Roseneath AFD as this parcel is within a mile of that AFD. The remaining twopc1rcels of Branch Creek AFD will re111ai11 as the core of the AFD with a total of360 acres.

On April I. 2010, a letter from Ms. Addie Weisiger was received in the Planning Depmtment requesting that her parcel (Tax Map 52-1) be withdrawn from the Pineview AFD, The Board can act on this request during the public hearing without a recmmnendation from the Planning Commission or AFD Advisory Committee. This withdrawal creates a secondary issue as it leaves one residual parcel (Tax Map 52-1 A) that consists of only five acres in the AFD. The question of residual parcels of less than 200 acres in an AFD as it relates to continuation of that AFD has been referred to the County Attorney for fmther review by the AFD Advisory Committee.

The Board has the option to continue, modify or tenninate AFDs. lfthe AFDs are not terminftted or modified, they shall continue as originally constituted with the same conditions and period before the next review as tlmt established when the AFDs were created.

Staff has no outstanding concerns with these recommendations and it has been adve1tised for public hearing at your April 12 meeting.

Page 43 of 45

Board of Supervisors Meeting April 12, 2010

Attachment #5:Minutes from Board of Supervisors Meeting on

April 12, 2010 (Last Renewal)

112

Mr. Tucker asked who would notify the citizens on roll back taxes if they withdrew Ii'om the AFD,

Mr. Dameron and Mr. Rick did not know the answer.

Mr. Tucker asked if the Board approved the request to withdraw from the AFD.

Mr. Rick said that the AFD authorizes the withdrawal and would communicate with the Commissioner of Revenue, Planning Depm1ment, or COLlnty Administrator) whoever was in charge of this.

Mr. Cosby said that sometimes they already have their land in land use taxation, He said that rezoning to residential should aU!Olnatically trigger the Planning Office.

,;21 /

Mr. Dameron said that six acres would not qualify because one acre was taken out for the house on the propeny.

Mr. Rick said that anyone who wants to withdraw can and anyone who wants to remain can.

Mr. Tucker asked if a five acre parcel could stay because it was part of a two hundred acre parcel at one time.

Mr. Rick said jf the Board approved,

Mr. Cosby said it was fine with him and asked if the owner could sell the house and land.

Mr. Rick said yes but only when you develop do you get the roll back taxes.

Mr. Dameron said the five acre parcel wished to remain.

Mr. Tucker asked how much land has been withdrawn.

M1'. Dameron said there was 251,6 acres left and 246.6 had withdrawn.

M1'. Cosby asked if this could stand alone because evelyone else has withdrawn,

Mr. Dameron answered yes.

Mr. Cosby opened the pnblic hearing, seeing no one he closed the public hearing.

Mr. Tucker moved to accept the analysis and recommendation as presented, Messrs. Cosby, Bustos, Daniel, Tucker and Walton voted AYE.

Board of Supervisors Meeting

VOTE 5-0 MOTION CARRIED

Page 44 of 45

April 12, 2010

113

§ 15.2-4301. Declaration of policy findings and purposeIt is the policy of the Commonwealth to conserve and protect and to encourage the developmentand improvement of the Commonwealth's agricultural and forestal lands for the production offood and other agricultural and forestal products. It is also the policy of the Commonwealth toconserve and protect agricultural and forestal lands as valued natural and ecological resourceswhich provide essential open spaces for clean air sheds, watershed protection, wildlife habitat, aswell as for aesthetic purposes. It is the purpose of this chapter to provide a means for a mutualundertaking by landowners and localities to protect and enhance agricultural and forestal land asa viable segment of the Commonwealth's economy and as an economic and environmentalresource of major importance.

1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1507; 1987, c. 552; 1997, c. 587.

§ 15.2-4302. DefinitionsAs used in this chapter, unless the context requires a different meaning:

"Advisory committee" means the agricultural and forestal districts advisory committee.

"Agricultural products" means crops, livestock and livestock products, including but not limitedto: field crops, fruits, vegetables, horticultural specialties, cattle, sheep, hogs, goats, horses,poultry, furbearing animals, milk, eggs and furs.

"Agricultural production" means the production for commercial purposes of crops, livestock andlivestock products, and includes the processing or retail sales by the producer of crops, livestockor livestock products which are produced on the parcel or in the district.

"Agriculturally and forestally significant land" means land that has recently or historicallyproduced agricultural and forestal products, is suitable for agricultural or forestal production oris considered appropriate to be retained for agricultural and forestal production as determined bysuch factors as soil quality, topography, climate, markets, farm structures, and other relevantfactors.

"Application" means the set of items a landowner or landowners must submit to the localgoverning body when applying for the creation of a district or an addition to an existing district.

"District" means an agricultural, forestal, or agricultural and forestal district.

"Forestal production" means the production for commercial purposes of forestal products andincludes the processing or retail sales, by the producer, of forestal products which are producedon the parcel or in the district. "Forestal products" includes, but is not limited to, saw timber,pulpwood, posts, firewood, Christmas trees and other tree and wood products for sale or for farmuse.

"Landowner" or "owner of land" means any person holding a fee simple interest in property but

1 8/6/2020

Attachment #6: State Enabling Legislation re Local AFD Programs

Code of VirginiaAgricultural and Forestal Districts Act§ 15.2-4300. Short titleThis chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Agricultural and Forestal Districts Act."

1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1506; 1997, c. 587.

114

does not mean the holder of an easement. "Program administrator" means the local governing body or local official appointed by the localgoverning body to administer the agricultural and forestal districts program. 1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1508; 1979, c. 377; 1981, c. 54; 1987, c. 552; 1997, c. 587; 2011, cc. 344, 355. § 15.2-4303. Power of localities to enact ordinances; application form and fees; maps; sampleformA. Each locality shall have the authority to promulgate forms and to enact ordinances toeffectuate this chapter. The locality may charge a reasonable fee for each application submittedpursuant to this chapter; such fee shall not exceed $500 or the costs of processing and reviewingan application, whichever is less. B. The locality shall prescribe application forms for districts that include but need not be limitedto the following information: 1. The general location of the district; 2. The total acreage in the district or acreage to be added to an existing district; 3. The name, address, and signature of each landowner applying for creation of a district or anaddition to an existing district and the acreage each owner owns within the district or addition; 4. The conditions proposed by the applicant pursuant to § 15.2-4309; 5. The period before first review proposed by the applicant pursuant to § 15.2-4309;and 6. The date of application, date of final action by the local governing body and whether approved,modified or rejected. C. The application form shall be accompanied by maps or aerial photographs, or both, prescribedby the locality that clearly show the boundaries of the proposed district and each addition andboundaries of properties owned by each applicant, and any other features as prescribed by thelocality. D. For each notice required by this chapter to be sent to a landowner, notice shall be sent by first-class mail to the last known address of such owner as shown on the application hereunder or onthe current real estate tax assessment books or maps. A representative of the local planningcommission or local governing body shall make affidavit that such mailing has been made andfile such affidavit with the papers in the case. 1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1509; 1978, c. 604; 1979, c. 377; 1984, c. 20; 1987, c. 552; 1997, c. 587; 2005,c. 667;2011, cc. 344, 355. § 15.2-4304. Agricultural and forestal districts advisory committeeA. Upon receipt of the first agricultural and forestal districts application, the local governingbody shall establish an advisory committee which shall consist of four landowners who areengaged in agricultural or forestal production, four other landowners of the locality, thecommissioner of revenue or the local government's chief property assessment officer, and amember of the local governing body. The members of the committee shall be appointed by andserve at the pleasure of the local governing body. The advisory committee shall elect a chairmanand a vice-chairman and elect or appoint a secretary who need not be a member of the

2 8/6/2020

115

http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?111+ful+CHAP0344


http://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/15.2-4309/







committee. The advisory committee shall serve without pay but the locality may reimburse eachmember for actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of his duties. Anyexpenditures of the committee shall be within the amounts appropriated for such purpose by thelocal governing body. The committee shall advise the local planning commission and the localgoverning body and assist in creating, reviewing, modifying, continuing or terminating districtswithin the locality. In particular, the committee shall render expert advice as to the nature offarming and forestry and agricultural and forestal resources within the district and their relationto the entire locality. B. The local governing body may designate the planning commission to act for and in lieu of anagricultural and forestal districts advisory committee if the membership of the planningcommission includes at least four landowners who are engaged in agricultural or forestalproduction. 1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1510; 1987, c. 552; 1989, c. 52; 1997, c. 587; 2011, cc. 344, 355. § 15.2-4305. Application for creation of district in one or more localities; size and location ofparcelsOn or before November 1 of each year or any other annual date selected by the locality, anyowner or owners of land may submit an application to the locality for the creation of a district oraddition of land to an existing district within the locality. Each district shall have a core of no lessthan 200 acres in one parcel or in contiguous parcels. A parcel not part of the core may beincluded in a district (i) if the nearest boundary of the parcel is within one mile of the boundaryof the core, (ii) if it is contiguous to a parcel in the district the nearest boundary of which iswithin one mile of the boundary of the core, or (iii) if the local governing body finds, inconsultation with the advisory committee or planning commission, that the parcel not part of thecore or within one mile of the boundary of the core contains agriculturally and forestallysignificant land. No land shall be included in any district without the signature on theapplication, or the written approval of all owners thereof. A district may be located in more thanone locality, provided that (i) separate application is made to each locality involved, (ii) eachlocal governing body approves the district, and (iii) the district meets the size requirements ofthis section. In the event that one of the local governing bodies disapproves the creation of adistrict within its boundaries, the creation of the district within the adjacent localities'boundaries shall not be affected, provided that the district otherwise meets the requirements setout in this chapter. In no event shall the act of creating a single district located in two localitiespursuant to this subsection be construed to create two districts. 1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1511; 1979, c. 377; 1981, c. 546; 1984, c. 20; 1985, c. 13; 1987, c. 552; 1993,cc. 745, 761; 1997, c. 587; 1998, c. 833;2011, cc. 344, 355. § 15.2-4306. Criteria for evaluating applicationLand being considered for inclusion in a district may be evaluated by the advisory committee andthe planning commission through the Virginia Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA)System or, if one has been developed, a local LESA System. The following factors should beconsidered by the local planning commission and the advisory committee, and at any publichearing at which an application that has been filed pursuant to § 15.2-4303 is being considered: 1. The agricultural and forestal significance of land within the district or addition and in areasadjacent thereto;

3 8/6/2020

116








2. The presence of any significant agricultural lands or significant forestal lands within thedistrict and in areas adjacent thereto that are not now in active agricultural or forestalproduction; 3. The nature and extent of land uses other than active farming or forestry within the district andin areas adjacent thereto; 4. Local developmental patterns and needs; 5. The comprehensive plan and, if applicable, the zoning regulations; 6. The environmental benefits of retaining the lands in the district for agricultural and forestaluses; and 7. Any other matter which may be relevant. In judging the agricultural and forestal significance of land, any relevant agricultural or forestalmaps may be considered, as well as soil, climate, topography, other natural factors, markets foragricultural and forestal products, the extent and nature of farm structures, the present status ofagriculture and forestry, anticipated trends in agricultural economic conditions and such otherfactors as may be relevant. 1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1511; 1979, c. 377; 1981, c. 546; 1984, c. 20; 1985, c. 13; 1987, c. 552; 1993,cc. 745, 761; 1997, c. 587. § 15.2-4307. Review of application; notice; hearingUpon the receipt of an application for a district or for an addition to an existing district, theprogram administrator shall refer such application to the advisory committee. The advisory committee shall review and make recommendations concerning the application ormodification thereof to the local planning commission, which shall: 1. Notify, by first-class mail, adjacent property owners, as shown on the maps of the locality usedfor tax assessment purposes, and where applicable, any political subdivision whose territoryencompasses or is part of the district, of the application. The notice shall contain (i) a statementthat an application for a district has been filed with the program administrator pursuant to thischapter; (ii) a statement that the application will be on file open to public inspection in the officeof the clerk of the local governing body; (iii) where applicable a statement that any politicalsubdivision whose territory encompasses or is part of the district may propose a modificationwhich must be filed with the local planning commission within thirty days of the date of thenotice; (iv) a statement that any owner of additional qualifying land may join the applicationwithin thirty days from the date of the notice or, with the consent of the local governing body, atany time before the public hearing the local governing body must hold on the application; (v) astatement that any owner who joined in the application may withdraw his land, in whole or inpart, by written notice filed with the local governing body, at any time before the local governingbody acts pursuant to § 15.2-4309;and (vi) a statement that additional qualifying lands may beadded to an already created district at any time upon separate application pursuant to thischapter; 2. Hold a public hearing as prescribed by law; and 3. Report its recommendations to the local governing body including but not limited to the

4 8/6/2020

117



potential effect of the district and proposed modifications upon the locality's planning policiesand objectives. 1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1511; 1979, c. 377; 1981, c. 546; 1984, c. 20; 1985, c. 13; 1987, c. 552; 1993,cc. 745, 761; 1997, c. 587; 1998, c. 833;2011, cc. 344, 355. § 15.2-4308. RepealedRepealed by Acts 2011, cc. 344 and 355, cl. 2. § 15.2-4309. Hearing; creation of district; conditions; noticeA. The local governing body, after receiving the report of the local planning commission and theadvisory committee, shall hold a public hearing as provided by law, and after such public hearing,may by ordinance create the district or add land to an existing district as applied for, or with anymodifications it deems appropriate. B. The governing body may require, as a condition to creation of the district, that any parcel inthe district shall not, without the prior approval of the governing body, be developed to any moreintensive use or to certain more intensive uses, other than uses resulting in more intensiveagricultural or forestal production, during the period which the parcel remains within thedistrict. Local governing bodies shall not prohibit as a more intensive use, construction andplacement of dwellings for persons who earn a substantial part of their livelihood from a farm orforestry operation on the same property, or for members of the immediate family of the owner, ordivisions of parcels for such family members, unless the governing body finds that such use inthe particular case would be incompatible with farming or forestry in the district. To further thepurposes of this chapter and to promote agriculture and forestry and the creation of districts, thelocal governing body may adopt programs offering incentives to landowners to impose land useand conservation restrictions on their land within the district. Programs offering such incentivesshall not be permitted unless authorized by law. Any conditions to creation of the district and theperiod before the review of the district shall be described, either in the application or in a noticesent by first-class mail to all landowners in the district and published in a newspaper having ageneral circulation within the district at least two weeks prior to adoption of the ordinancecreating the district. The ordinance shall state any conditions to creation of the district and shallprescribe the period before the first review of the district, which shall be no less than four yearsbut not more than ten years from the date of its creation. In prescribing the period before thefirst review, the local governing body shall consider the period proposed in the application. Theordinance shall remain in effect at least until such time as the district is to be reviewed. In theevent of annexation by a city or town of any land within a district, the district shall continueuntil the time prescribed for review. C. The local governing body shall act to adopt or reject the application, or any modification of it,no later than 180 days from (i) November 1 or (ii) the other date selected by the locality asprovided in § 15.2-4305. Upon the adoption of an ordinance creating a district or adding land toan existing district, the local governing body shall submit a copy of the ordinance with maps tothe local commissioner of the revenue, and the State Forester, and the Commissioner ofAgriculture and Consumer Services for information purposes. The commissioner of the revenueshall identify the parcels of land in the district in the land book and on the tax map, and the localgoverning body shall identify such parcels on the zoning map, where applicable and shalldesignate the districts on the official comprehensive plan map each time the comprehensive planmap is updated.

5 8/6/2020

118








1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1511; 1979, c. 377; 1981, c. 546; 1984, c. 20; 1985, c. 13; 1987, c. 552; 1993,cc. 745, 761; 1997, c. 587; 1998, c. 833;2011, cc. 344, 355. § 15.2-4310. Additions to a districtAdditional parcels of land may be added to an existing district at any time by following theprocess and application deadlines prescribed for the creation of a new district. 1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1511; 1979, c. 377; 1981, c. 546; 1984, c. 20; 1985, c. 13; 1987, c. 552; 1993,cc. 745, 761; 1997, c. 587; 2011, cc. 344, 355. § 15.2-4311. Review of districtsThe local governing body may complete a review of any district created under this section,together with additions to such district, no less than four years but no more than ten years afterthe date of its creation and every four to ten years thereafter. If the local governing bodydetermines that a review is necessary, it shall begin such review at least ninety days before theexpiration date of the period established when the district was created. In conducting suchreview, the local governing body shall ask for the recommendations of the local advisorycommittee and the planning commission in order to determine whether to terminate, modify orcontinue the district. When each district is reviewed, land within the district may be withdrawnat the owner's discretion by filing a written notice with the local governing body at any timebefore it acts to continue, modify or terminate the district. The local planning commission or theadvisory committee shall schedule as part of the review a public meeting with the owners of landwithin the district, and shall send by first-class mail a written notice of the meeting and review toall such owners. The notice shall state the time and place for the meeting; that the district isbeing reviewed by the local governing body; that the local governing body may continue, modify,or terminate the district; and that land may be withdrawn from the district at the owner'sdiscretion by filing a written notice with the local governing body at any time before it acts tocontinue, modify or terminate the district. The local governing body shall hold a public hearingas provided by law. The governing body may stipulate conditions to continuation of the districtand may establish a period before the next review of the district, which may be different from theconditions or period established when the district was created. Any such different conditions orperiod shall be described in a notice sent by first-class mail to all owners of land within thedistrict and published in a newspaper having a general circulation within the district at least twoweeks prior to adoption of the ordinance continuing the district. Unless the district is modified orterminated by the local governing body, the district shall continue as originally constituted, withthe same conditions and period before the next review as that established when the district wascreated. If the local governing body determines that a review is unnecessary, it shall set the year in whichthe next review shall occur. 1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1511; 1979, c. 377; 1981, c. 546; 1984, c. 20; 1985, c. 13; 1987, c. 552; 1993,cc. 745, 761; 1997, c. 587. § 15.2-4312. Effects of districtsA. Land lying within a district and used in agricultural or forestal production shall automaticallyqualify for an agricultural or forestal use-value assessment pursuant to Article 4 (§ 58.1-3229 etseq.) of Chapter 32 of Title 58.1, if the requirements for such assessment contained therein aresatisfied. Any ordinance adopted pursuant to § 15.2-4303 shall extend such use-value assessmentand taxation to eligible real property within such district whether or not a local ordinance

6 8/6/2020

119









pursuant to § 58.1-3231 has been adopted. B. No local government shall exercise any of its powers to enact local laws or ordinances within adistrict in a manner which would unreasonably restrict or regulate farm structures or farming andforestry practices in contravention of the purposes of this chapter unless such restrictions orregulations bear a direct relationship to public health and safety. The comprehensive plan andzoning and subdivision ordinances shall be applicable within said districts, to the extent thatsuch ordinances are not in conflict with the conditions to creation or continuation of the districtset forth in the ordinance creating or continuing the district or the purposes of this chapter.Nothing in this chapter shall affect the authority of the locality to regulate the processing orretail sales of agricultural or forestal products, or structures therefor, in accordance with thelocal comprehensive plan or any local ordinances. Local ordinances, comprehensive plans, landuse planning decisions, administrative decisions and procedures affecting parcels of landadjacent to any district shall take into account the existence of such district and the purposes ofthis chapter. C. It shall be the policy of all agencies of the Commonwealth to encourage the maintenance offarming and forestry in districts and all administrative regulations and procedures of suchagencies shall be modified to this end insofar as is consistent with the promotion of public healthand safety and with the provisions of any federal statutes, standards, criteria, rules, regulations,or policies, and any other requirements of federal agencies, including provisions applicable onlyto obtaining federal grants, loans or other funding. D. No special district for sewer, water or electricity or for nonfarm or nonforest drainage mayimpose benefit assessments or special tax levies on the basis of frontage, acreage or value on landused for primarily agricultural or forestal production within a district, except a lot not exceedingone-half acre surrounding any dwelling or nonfarm structure located on such land. However,such benefit assessment or special ad valorem levies may continue if imposed prior to theformation of the district. 1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1512; 1979, c. 377; 1987, c. 552; 1997, c. 587. § 15.2-4313. Proposals as to land acquisition or construction within districtA. Any agency of the Commonwealth or any political subdivision which intends to acquire land orany interest therein other than by gift, devise, bequest or grant, or any public service corporationwhich intends to: (i) acquire land or any interest therein for public utility facilities not subject toapproval by the State Corporation Commission, provided that the proposed acquisition from anyone farm or forestry operation within the district is in excess of one acre or that the totalproposed acquisition within the district is in excess of ten acres or (ii) advance a grant, loan,interest subsidy or other funds within a district for the construction of dwellings, commercial orindustrial facilities, or water or sewer facilities to serve nonfarm structures, shall at least ninetydays prior to such action notify the local governing body and all of the owners of land within thedistrict. Notice to landowners shall be sent by first-class or registered mail and shall state thatfurther information on the proposed action is on file with the local governing body. Notice to thelocal governing body shall be filed in the form of a report containing the following information: 1. A detailed description of the proposed action, including a proposed construction schedule; 2. All the reasons for the proposed action; 3. A map indicating the land proposed to be acquired or on which the proposed dwellings,

7 8/6/2020

120


commercial or industrial facilities, or water or sewer facilities to serve nonfarm structures are tobe constructed; 4. An evaluation of anticipated short-term and long-term adverse impacts on agricultural andforestal operations within the district and how such impacts are proposed to be minimized; 5. An evaluation of alternatives which would not require action within the district; and 6. Any other relevant information required by the local governing body. B. Upon receipt of a notice filed pursuant to subsection A, the local governing body, inconsultation with the local planning commission and the advisory committee, shall review theproposed action and make written findings as to (i) the effect the action would have upon thepreservation and enhancement of agriculture and forestry and agricultural and forestal resourceswithin the district and the policy of this chapter; (ii) the necessity of the proposed action toprovide service to the public in the most economical and practical manner; and (iii) whetherreasonable alternatives to the proposed action are available that would minimize or avoid anyadverse impacts on agricultural and forestal resources within the district. If requested to do so byany owner of land that will be directly affected by the proposed action of the agency, corporation,or political subdivision, the Director of the Department of Conservation and Recreation, or hisdesignee, may advise the local governing body on the issues listed in clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) ofthis subsection. C. If the local governing body finds that the proposed action might have an unreasonably adverseeffect upon either state or local policy, it shall (i) issue an order within ninety days from the datethe notice was filed directing the agency, corporation or political subdivision not to take theproposed action for a period of 150 days from the date the notice was filed and (ii) hold a publichearing, as prescribed by law, concerning the proposed action. The hearing shall be held wherethe local governing body usually meets or at a place otherwise easily accessible to the district.The locality shall publish notice in a newspaper having a general circulation within the district,and mail individual notice of the hearing to the political subdivisions whose territoryencompasses or is part of the district, and the agency, corporation or political subdivisionproposing to take the action. Before the conclusion of the 150-day period, the local governingbody shall issue a final order on the proposed action. Unless the local governing body, by anaffirmative vote of a majority of all the members elected to it, determines that the proposedaction is necessary to provide service to the public in the most economic and practical mannerand will not have an unreasonably adverse effect upon state or local policy, the order shallprohibit the agency, corporation or political subdivision from proceeding with the proposedaction. If the agency, corporation or political subdivision is aggrieved by the final order of thelocal governing body, an appeal shall lie to the circuit court having jurisdiction of the territorywherein a majority of the land affected by the acquisition is located. However, if such publicservice corporation is regulated by the State Corporation Commission, an appeal shall be to theState Corporation Commission. 1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1512; 1979, c. 377; 1987, c. 552; 1997, c. 587; 1998, c. 833;2000, c. 1069. § 15.2-4314. Withdrawal of land from a district; termination of a districtA. At any time after the creation of a district within any locality, any owner of land lying in suchdistrict may file with the program administrator a written request to withdraw all or part of hisland from the district for good and reasonable cause. The program administrator shall refer the

8 8/6/2020

121




request to the advisory committee for its recommendation. The advisory committee shall makerecommendations concerning the request to withdraw to the local planning commission, whichshall hold a public hearing and make recommendations to the local governing body. Landproposed to be withdrawn may be reevaluated through the Virginia or local Land Evaluation andSite Assessment (LESA) System. The landowner seeking to withdraw land from a district, ifdenied favorable action by the governing body, shall have an immediate right of appeal de novoto the circuit court serving the territory wherein the district is located. This section shall in noway affect the ability of an owner to withdraw an application for a proposed district or withdrawfrom a district pursuant to clause (v) of subdivision 1 of § 15.2-4307 or § 15.2-4311. B. Upon termination of a district or withdrawal or removal of any land from a district createdpursuant to this chapter, land that is no longer part of a district shall be subject to and liable forroll-back taxes as are provided in § 58.1-3237. Sale or gift of a portion of land in a district to amember of the immediate family as defined in § 15.2-2244 shall not in and of itself constitute awithdrawal or removal of any of the land from a district. C. Upon termination of a district or upon withdrawal or removal of any land from a district, landthat is no longer part of a district shall be subject to those local laws and ordinances prohibitedby the provisions of subsection B of § 15.2-4312. D. Upon the death of a property owner, any heir at law, devisee, surviving cotenant or personalrepresentative of a sole owner of any fee simple interest in land lying within a district shall, as amatter of right, be entitled to withdraw such land from such district upon the inheritance ordescent of such land provided that such heir at law, devisee, surviving cotenant or personalrepresentative files written notice of withdrawal with the local governing body and the localcommissioner of the revenue within two years of the date of death of the owner. E. Upon termination or modification of a district, or upon withdrawal or removal of any parcel ofland from a district, the local governing body shall submit a copy of the ordinance or notice ofwithdrawal to the local commissioner of revenue, the State Forester and the State Commissionerof Agriculture and Consumer Services for information purposes. The commissioner of revenueshall delete the identification of such parcel from the land book and the tax map, and the localgoverning body shall delete the identification of such parcel from the zoning map, whereapplicable. F. The withdrawal or removal of any parcel of land from a lawfully constituted district shall not initself serve to terminate the existence of the district. The district shall continue in effect and besubject to review as to whether it should be terminated, modified or continued pursuant to §15.2-4311 of this chapter. 1977, c. 681, § 15.1-1513; 1979, c. 377; 1985, c. 13; 1987, c. 552; 1997, c. 587; 2000, c. 521;2011,cc. 344, 355.

9 8/6/2020

122











O-2020-20

Page 1 of 3

ORDINANCE O-2020-20 AN ORDINANCE TO CONTINUE EXISTING AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL

DISTRICTS FOR TEN (10) YEARS UNTIL DECEMBER 14, 2030 WHEREAS, localities throughout Virginia have organized local AFD programs to help preserve working rural landscapes; and

WHEREAS, Powhatan County has organized a local AFD program under Title 15.2 (Counties, Cities, and Towns): Chapter 43 (Agricultural and Forestal Districts Act) of the Code of Virginia; and

WHEREAS, the first AFDs were created by the Board of Supervisors in 1991; and

WHEREAS, on April 12, 2010, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing, and, after hearing no public comments and considering recommendations made by the AFD Advisory Committee and Planning Commission, voted (5-0) to continue all AFDs with two modifications until April 12, 2020; and

WHEREAS, on December 16, 2019, the Board of Supervisors began an initial discussion of the local AFD Program; and

WHEREAS, on January 27, 2020, the Board of Supervisors passed a resolution (Resolution #R-2020-05) temporarily continuing existing AFDs through July 31, 2020, providing additional time to determine whether a full review of all existing AFDs is necessary; and

WHEREAS, on July 27, 2020, the Board of Supervisors passed a resolution (Resolution #R-2020-47) temporarily continuing existing AFDs through December 31, 2020, providing additional time to determine whether a full review of all existing AFDs is necessary and to receive additional information from the Attorney General of Virginia; and

WHEREAS, the Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory Committee (AFDAC) held meetings on September 14, 2020 and October 5, 2020 and prepared a recommendation to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors, recommending that the AFD Program continue as-is; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 4, 2020 and prepared a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors, recommending that the AFD Program continue as-is in accordance with provisions set forth in the Code of Virginia; and

WHEREAS, owners of properties enrolled within the AFD Program received mailed notice, and the owner of Tax Map Parcels #26-104 and #26-108 requested in writing during the review period that those parcels be removed from the Branch Creek AFD; and

WHEREAS, §15.2-4311 states that the Board of Supervisors may choose to review AFDs every four to ten years.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, that the following AFDs are hereby renewed for a period of ten (10) years beginning December 14, 2020, continuing until December 14, 2030; and

BE IT FUTHRER ORDAINED, that, in accordance with Code of Virginia § 15.2-4309, no parcel

123

O-2020-20

Page 2 of 3

included within the district shall be developed to a more intensive use than its existing use at the time of adoption of the ordinance establishing such district for ten (10) years from the date of adoption of such ordinance. This provision shall not be construed to restrict expansion of or improvements to the agricultural or forestal use of the land; and BE IT FUTHER ORDAINED, that in accordance with Code of Virginia § 15.2-4312, enrolled properties shall automatically qualify for an agricultural or forestal use-value assessment as set forth in Chapter 70 (Taxation), Article II (Real Property Tax), Division 3 (Special Assessment for Land Preservation) of the Code of the County of Powhatan.

Agricultural and Forestal District Parcels (Case #: Original Board of Supervisors Approval) Trenholm AFD Tax Map #12-54 (91-2-AFD: June 10, 1991)

Tax Map #12-34 (91-2A-AFD: June 10, 1991) Tax Map #12-35 (91-2A-AFD: June 10, 1991)

Appomattox River AFD Tax Map #51-3 (91-3-AFD: June 10, 1991) Tax Map #51-3A (91-3-AFD: June 10, 1991) Tax Map #51-12A (91-3A-AFD: November 18, 1991) Tax Map #52-6A (91-3B-AFD: November 18, 1991) Tax Map #52-6D (91-3B-AFD: November 18, 1991) Tax Map #52-6E (91-3B-AFD: November 18, 1991) Tax Map #51-10 (91-3C-AFD: November 18, 1991) Tax Map #51-12 (91-3D-AFD: November 18, 1991) Tax Map #51-10A (91-3E-AFD: November 18, 1991) Tax Map #51-6B (91-3F-AFD: November 18, 1991) Tax Map #51-17A (91-3F-AFD: November 18, 1991)

Pineview AFD Tax Map #52-1A (91-6-AFD: August 12, 1991) James River AFD Tax Map #7-1E (91-9A-AFD: December 9, 1991)

Tax Map #7-1F (91-9A-AFD: December 9, 1991) Tax Map #7-1B (91-9B-AFD: December 9, 1991) Tax Map #7-1 (91-9C-AFD: December 9, 1991) Tax Map #7-1D (91-9D-AFD: December 9, 1991)

Old Timbers AFD Tax Map #31-35 (91-5B-AFD: August 12, 1991) Tax Map #32-9 (91-5B-AFD: August 12, 1991)

Pine AFD Tax Map #35-52 (91-11-AFD: December 9, 1991) Tax Map #23-46 (91-11-AFD: December 9, 1991)

Skinquarter AFD Tax Map #61-33 (91-12-AFD: April 13, 1992) Giles Bridge AFD Tax Map #49-2 (91-4-AFD: June 10, 1991)

Tax Map #49-3 (91-4-AFD: June 10, 1991) Tax Map #49-3A (91-4-AFD: June 10, 1991)

Roseneath AFD Tax Map #16-63 (91-13-AFD: April 13, 1992) Tax Map #17-6 (91-13-AFD: April 13, 1992) Tax Map #17-21 (91-13-AFD: April 13, 1992) Tax Map #17-22 (91-13B-AFD: April 13, 1992) Tax Map #17-2-A (91-13B-AFD: April 13, 1992) Tax Map #17-2-B (91-13B-AFD: April 13, 1992) Tax Map #16-66 (91-1B-AFD: June 10, 1991)

124

O-2020-20

Page 3 of 3

ADOPTED BY THE POWHATAN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON DECEMBER 14, 2020. David T. Williams, Chairman Powhatan County Board of Supervisors Recorded Vote: ATTEST: David T. Williams Larry J. Nordvig Michael W. Byerly Ned Smither, Clerk Bill L. Cox Powhatan County Board of Supervisors Karin M. Carmack

125

O-2020-20

Page 1 of 2

ORDINANCE O-2020-20 AN ORDINANCE TO DISCONTINUE THE

AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT (AFD) PROGRAM WHEREAS, Powhatan County has organized a local AFD program under Title 15.2 (Counties, Cities, and Towns): Chapter 43 (Agricultural and Forestal Districts Act) of the Code of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the first AFDs were created by the Board of Supervisors in 1991; and WHEREAS, on April 12, 2010, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing, and, after hearing no public comments and considering recommendations made by the AFD Advisory Committee and Planning Commission, voted (5-0) to continue all AFDs with two modifications until April 12, 2020; and WHEREAS, on December 16, 2019, the Board of Supervisors began an initial discussion of the local AFD Program; and WHEREAS, on January 27, 2020, the Board of Supervisors passed a resolution (Resolution #R-2020-05) temporarily continuing existing AFDs through July 31, 2020, providing additional time to determine whether a full review of all existing AFDs is necessary; and WHEREAS, on July 27, 2020, the Board of Supervisors passed a resolution (Resolution #R-2020-47) temporarily continuing existing AFDs through December 31, 2020, providing additional time to determine whether a full review of all existing AFDs is necessary and to receive additional information from the Attorney General of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory Committee (AFDAC) held meetings on September 14, 2020 and October 5, 2020 and prepared a recommendation to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors, recommending that the AFD Program continue as-is; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 4, 2020 and prepared a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors, recommending that the AFD Program continue as-is in accordance with provisions set forth in the Code of Virginia; and WHEREAS, §15.2-4311 states that the Board of Supervisors may choose to review AFDs every four to ten years. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, that the Board of Supervisors hereby discontinues the Agricultural and Forestal District (AFD), choosing to use a variety of other growth management tools, including zoning regulations, subdivision regulations, the long-range comprehensive plan, and the Land Use Deferral Program, to help preserve the rural character of Powhatan County.

126

O-2020-20

Page 2 of 2






127

AGENDA POWHATAN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS …

Documents

Transcript of AGENDA POWHATAN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS …