Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon everybody. It's so nice to have uh those that are with us um here today. Beautiful day. Um I'd like to call this work session um meeting of the board of supervisors to order. Thursday, April 23rd, 2026 at 2:00 p.m. Uh we have an invocation. Mr. Mitchell is not yet here. Uh, Mr. Tatum, would you mind um offering the invit invitation and then it'll be followed by the pledge of allegiance. Mr. Carter, would you do that? Yes, ma'am. Okay. Thank you. Stand, please.

Let's pray. Our dear heavenly father, we come to you today, Lord. We just thank you for this opportunity that we have to serve the people of Franklin County. Lord, we pray that every decision that is made for this body will be one that is according to your precious will and that we follow your guidance, not that of our own. And Lord, we pray that everything we say and do will be according to your will and pleasing in your sight and serve the citizens of Franklin County to the best of our ability. And Lord, we just thank you for our men and women that are serving our country today and protecting us in the military. Lord, we thank you for our first responders here locally that protect us each day. And Lord, we just pray your protection on each one of them and their families. In Jesus name I pray and ask it all. Amen.

Amen. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Welcome, Mr. Clear. Thank you. Okay. Um you have before you um our agenda for this afternoon. Um are there any requests for changes, additions, or deletions of the agenda that's as submitted? Um Madam Chair, quick question. At the bottom, recess until Tuesday, May 13th. Um with the new budget work session, should that be show that as our recess, too?

Well, I think we're ready to get consensus. Do we I'm not aware that we've got consensus from every supervisor for the third. Do we Mr. Sandy? I'll I'll defer to Samantha. I think we may have except for one except for Supervisor Mitchell. Everybody else agreed on the time and date except for who? Supervisor Mitchell. Okay. So, we were hoping to get concurrence today. That's fine. I just wanted the record to show if that's case. So, I just Yeah. However, we would proceed on that situation. And I'm happy if knowing that we we have quum and I I have no reason to think that Mr. Mitchell wouldn't be there unless he's got, you know, a true family conflict because that's starting at four. Correct. So, I think we probably You know what? I'm inclined to go ahead and make that May 4th. Okay.

Yeah. And um Mr. Mayor, if I appreciate your attention to that, that detail form. You're welcome, Madam Chair. Is that May 4th, 2 p.m.? Yes. No, 4 p.m. 4 p.m. 4 p.m. 4 to 4. Then that's the budget war session. Correct. It's what will be title. Okay. Yeah. That the intention of that meeting will be to discuss the proposed budget. Correct. Um that you'll be considering to adopt on May 19th. Correct. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. All right. Welcome. Are there any other requests for changes, additions, solutions? Hearing none, I will um ask for a motion to approve the agenda as submitted. So move. Is there a second? Second.

Thank you. All those in favor, please say I. I. All those opposed, like sign. Okay. Very good. Um the board has a need to um enter to go into a closed session. It hopefully will be somewhat brief in nature. Uh we've got a a manner that we need to deal with. Um and so Mr. Carter, if you would be so kind to read um the motion taking us into close session.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The Franklin County Board of Supervisors moves to enter into a close meeting in accordance with 2.2-3711 2-3711. A3, discussion of the acquisition of real property or the disposition of real property. A5, discussion concerning a prospective business or industry or the expansion of an existing business or industry. A8 consultation with legal counsel employed or retained by a public body regarding specific legal matters requiring the provision of legal advice by such counsel of the code of Virginia as amended. Thank you, Mr. Second. Supervisor Mitchell. Yes. Supervisor Carter.

Yes. Supervisor Meredith. Yes. Supervisor Quinn? Yes. Supervisor Tatum? Yes. Supervisor Jameson? Yes. And Chair Smith? Yes. Uh, gentlemen will um adjourn to 275 for this close session. Correct. And following that, we'll reconvene in this room. Yep.

Okay. Um, we are back uh from close session and Mr. Carter, if you'd be so kind to certify the close session. Thank you, Madam Chair. I certify that only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act were heard, discussed, or considered in the close session to which this certification applies. and only such business matters as were identified in the motion by which this closed session was convened were heard, discussed, or considered in the meeting to which this certification applies. Thank you, Mr. Carter. Is there a second? Second. Thank you, Mr. Tatum. Madame Clerk, would you please do a roll call? Supervisor Carter? Yes. Supervisor Tatum? Yes. Supervisor Quinn is absent for the vote.

Supervisor Jameson, yes. Supervisor Mitchell, yes. Supervisor Meredith, yes. And Chair Smith, yes. Okay. Thank you, gentlemen. Mr. Quinzy. Yes. Okay. Uh thank you all so much. Uh we are now going to move into our work sessions for the afternoon. Um the first of which, um is uh public safety and CTE project discussions. U Mr. Sandy, if I'll let you open the floor for discussion on that, sir.

All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, as you mentioned, we have kind of two work session topics today that we wanted to to cover with you folks. Um, both really kind of update in in most of what we're talking about is um is is by way of update, as I said, on these two uh issues. I'm thinking too, we we don't have a good catchy name for what we're calling this. So, we're going to have to come up with something better than the former Majikraft uh property, but

I think we've got some excellent staff. So, we we'll have to work on work on some ideas there. But, um, of course, this is the property that that we've purchased with the intention of, uh, putting a public safety building, which would be the public safety administration and the new E 911 center, as well as the CTE uh, facility. And so, what we would like to do is continue to give you updates and continue to keep that project moving forward. And so the crux of uh today we'll be talking about some of those uh mechanisms that are available to us to move forward to starting to get design work and ultimate construction work going on the site. So Bry's got a presentation prepared. I think you have a copy of it uh at your seat that she's going to go through with with some of those updates and some descriptions about those different types of uh procurement methods that are available to us. Hopefully, we can get some good discussion. If we need to find more information, we can come back with more information. If if we have consensus on a direction to move, we can we can start moving in that direction. So, that's kind of really the the purpose of today's work session for this for this item.

Miss Roser, thank you for being with us.

Of course. Um good afternoon, Chair Smith and members of the board. Um I am going to provide some project um progression updates for you all. Um, first starting with the public safety center, which um, as Mr. Standy had stated is that'll be our sheriff's office 911 uh, dispatch center along with our fire and EMS administrative offices. Um, county staff and the sheriff's office have toured several 911 centers um, which are listed on this slide. Uh, very valuable visits to figure out what's working for them, what's not working for them, um, and really give a good idea of what we feel like should be incorporated in the new facility. Uh sheriff's office staff is also working to secure grant funding to conduct a comprehensive needs assessment um of their current facility. Um that's about a six-month process. Um the consultant would come in, evaluate what they have, and look at um regulatory compliance um and a lot of other things to see what it would take to move it over to the new facility. Uh so we feel like that could be a very valuable tool moving into the design. As far as the education facility, county and school staff have um again toured packedric and Henry's Met. Um the career academy in Henry County um and Rono Countyy's future CTE center which is under construction. Um we have had various general contractors um tour the Majukraft facility to kind of get an idea of the scope um of what we'll probably be looking for for those projects um and to see the the current condition of the building. Um, and finally, the CTE advisory committee is continuing to hold their regular meetings, so they're still moving forward. Um, as planned, uh, just looking at the overall project, um, site cleanup does continue. Uh, we removed just over 230 tons of material, um, utilizing just the sheriff's office trustees. So, they have been an enormous help. Um, and also the lease that we signed with Southern Heritage Homes, they assisted with cleanup of the

exterior of the facility in the back. Um, again, they've been an amazing partner. Uh, finally, we have been researching, uh, project delivery strategies, and that's what I'm going to be touching on next. So, next steps for the project. Um, county staff is really at the point now where we need direction from the board um, as to what project delivery status or strategy you feel like we need to utilize. Um the four that we've analyzed have been design bid build design build construction manager at risk and then private private education facilities and infrastructure act. Um I'm going to do a highle overview of each of those strategies. It's definitely not an all-inclusive like um digging in like way into it. I just want to give you guys an idea of how the process work. Um and then hopefully at the end we can come to a consensus as to um maybe taking one or two of those strategies for us to explore further. So looking at design bid build or DBB um that is your traditional construction u project delivery method with three very distinct phases. You have your design, you have your bidding and you have your construction. Um the owner contracts separately with a design team. So your architect and engineer and then a general contractor. So you have two contracts. Uh the design team develops the contract documents and that'll include all of your drawings and specifications uh before the bidding process even begins. Uh this approach ensures clear rules, cost transparency um and accountability making it suitable for u most public projects. Looking at the general structure of DBB, the owner contracts separately again with the A&E um and the contractor. Uh construction is competitively bid after 100% design documents have been completed. Um some key characteristics. It is a linear process. Again, design, bid,

build, and the lowest responsible bidder is typically selected. Um once you bid the project, uh the owner does hold most of the cost and schedule risk under the strategy. Um and there's also a high level of owner coordination. Uh there's several advantages to DBB. Um the design team contracts and works directly with the owner um in the development of the project. The scope um the project design scope and budget so the owner um has full control. Uh there is transparent competitive pricing. Uh construction documents are fully developed prior to the project being bid. Uh all biders must bid on the same uh definitive documents and there is a clear separation of roles throughout the project. Uh looking at a few disadvantages uh the contractor is typically selected on the lowest responsive and responsible bid. So um while we we want to be uh good stewards of our taxpayers funding, sometimes the low bid um you get what you pay for. So you have very little control over the quality or the workmanship um of the the contractor that's selected. Uh there is no contractor input during the design. That would be exclusively between the owner um excuse me um and um the architect architect engineer. Um the risk of exceeding the project budget through change orders can be very high especially for a project such as this that's very complex and specialized. and there is a longer overall schedule. Typically, this type of strategy is best for u projects that are very straightforward um and also when the lowest initial price is the primary driver of the project. Option two is design build or DB. Um this is a construction delivery method where a single entity is responsible

both for the design and the construction of a facility. Um it does contrast with traditional methods such as the DBB where separate contracts are established for those services. Um in design build the owner enters into one contract with a design build firm. Um thus streamlining communication and coordination of the project. Again looking at the structure of DB, the owner contracts directly with the design build team. Uh the designer and the contractor work under one contract under that structure. key characteristics. There's overlapping in design um in design and construction. The costs and schedule are often fixed earlier in the process. And the owner has one contractual entity to manage. Um the graphic on this slide will compare the first design bid build um on the top with the design build on the bottom. And you can see where the elimination of that bidding process that's what fasttracks this project um and would make the implementation um faster. So you can see where the time being saved is through the elimination of the bidding process. Some quick advantages of DB. Um it does have the fastest overall delivery. It has reduced owner coordination burden. Um and I don't want to use the term burden um as a negative. I just think with our staffing levels and our capacity, there's only so much we can take on. Um so a design build process does kind of reduce some of that uh burden for our staff. Um there is earlier cost certainty and that's where you get your guaranteed maximum price. Um I do want to be clear that when you enter into like a design build or um another one of the methods I'll talk about in just one second, you don't get that guaranteed maximum price straight up front. Like you have to go through the design process. So we would have to get a design build firm on get through part of the design process before we will ever get that guaranteed maximum

price. uh disadvantages for design build. It is regulated by state law. Uh so we will have to adopt appropriate pro procedures. Um there is reduced owner and um A&E control over the design detail that kind of falls more u with the contractor that's selected and it does require a strong owner project definition upfront. Um that can be both a pro and a con. I would say the only con about it is that it would be pretty labor intensive um for our staff in the initial parts of the project. Um, this type of strategy is best for scheduled driven projects or projects that have repetitive or programmatic facility types. The third option um is a newer one to me, so it's been an interesting one to learn about and it's construction manager at risk. Um, this is a delivery method where the construction manager is hired early in the project so that they can provide input on design, cost um, and constructibility. Unlike traditional DBB or DB methods, um Seymar uh separates the design and construction contracts, but then it incorporates a construction manager into both phases to ensure collaboration among uh the design team and cost control of the project. The structure of this um strategy, the owner does hold two contracts. You have your architecture architect engineer contract along with a contract for your construction manager or your CM. Your manager joins during the design um and later becomes the constructor of the project. Um the manager also provides a guarantee uh maximum price after the design has occurred. some key characteristics. The construction manager uh provides the cost, constructibility and schedule input during the design u which can be very valuable. The manager holds the subcontracts um and construction risk. So that risk

will be removed from the county and transferred over to your construction manager. Um this type of strategy often uses open book pricing um which a lot of people like to see. Um this graphic kind of shows how the um construction manager at risk system works. You'll have the owner at the top. Um to begin the project, we would bring on the architect um and go through some initial um programming of the projects. Um once that is started, we would bring in the construction management contractor. Um any design consultants needed would fall under the purview of the architect. And then the use of contractors and subcontractors would be the responsibility of your construction manager. So some quick advantages for Seymar projects. Um you have that earlier cost certainty again through the guaranteed maximum price. Um you are likely to have reduced change orders or the elimination of change orders altogether given um that you do have that guaranteed maximum price. You have a faster delivery through phase construction. Um and there is strong collaboration between the owner, your A&E firm and then your construction manager. Um some disadvantages of the method, it is regulated by state law again similar to design build. So we would have to adopt appropriate procedures. It requires more owner engagement early. Um it is not purely a low bid selection. Um and I think I've listed that both as an advantage and a disadvantage depending on the method. Um, sometimes you love to look at the low bid and the low price. Um, and other times it's just not appropriate for the project. You really need to find the the contractor that has the best fit for the project. Um, uh, while the project is collaborative in nature, the success of a project under Seymour heavily relies on a quality construction manager. So, if we were to go this route, we'd need

to be very careful in the selection of that person um, to ensure that that the project would run smoothly. Um, Semar is usually best for public projects with complexity or tight schedules, uh, renovations, phase projects or occupied facilities, um, and projects where the owner is seeking risk mitigation and predictability. The final option, um, and I promise I'll stop talking, um, is public private education facilities and infrastructure act or PPE. Um this is an act that was um approved by the general assembly in 2002 and really it serves as a legislative framework that promotes collaboration between public entities in Virginia and private partners to develop various projects not just schools that serve public needs. PPA project management framework can be implemented on any building or facility um as long as it's for use u by a public entity and it allows the owner to facilitate timely and cost-effective project delivery. Quickly looking at the structure of PPE, the owner contacts directly with the design build team um and the designer and the contractor work under one contract. So there are not two contracts to manage. Key characteristics are the overlapping of design and construction. Uh cost and schedule are often fixed earlier. Again referring to that guaranteed maximum price. The owner has one contractual entity to manage and um it is a common project delivery strategy for public entity facilities um including schools where projects um require innovative financing models. So advantages again fastest overall delivery with reduced owner coordination burden. Um early cost certainty. It encourages competition and innovation and project delivery. Um it does give

you the ability to be flexible and to adjust terms of the contract. Um so the owner may be able to choose the most qualified or best value um bid rather than um just basing it solely off of of a monetary amount. Um and finally, competitive bidding is completed by the general contractor and not the owner. Some disadvantages, uh there's reduced owner and A&E control over the design. Um that does fall on your your contractor, um a little more in this method. The process can be very cumbersome, not going to lie. Um it has a it's a has its place, but it can be a lot. Um the interim agreement or bridging documents may be necessary to clearly establish design and scope prior um to a comprehensive agreement um and the development of that guaranteed maximum price. The cost of thirdparty review will will add to the total cost. Um there will be a heavy third-party reviews um that are essential to making sure that we meet quality standard accountability. Uh PPE is typically best used for projects that require timely and cost-effective delivery um and also complex projects where the owner seeks to mitigate risk. Now the county has engaged in PPA projects before. Um we have utilized this method um during broadband implementation um and during some of the mitigation bank work that's been done at Smith Farm. So we have already adopted um the guidelines that are required um to utilize this. So um looking at those guidelines that are already in our code um proposals may be submitted on either a solicited or unsolicited basis. Um and the proposers are required to follow a two-step process. Um so if we went down this road we would um the initial phase would have specific information on proposer qualifications and experience, project characteristics,

uh project financing, anticipated public support or opposition and project benefit and compatibility. Um the detailed pro proposal would take that a little further and would contain um specific deliverables. Um you can see the difference between the solicited and unsolicited proposal definitions. Uh basically if you solicit a proposal, a formal solicitation was issued um seeking those proposals. Um if a formal invitation is not issued, we still could accept the unsolicited proposals. Um when those proposals are received, the county has a certain amount of time to either um accept or reject that proposal. And at that point, we would have to advertise it for a certain number of days and allow other um contractors or companies to come in and submit a competing proposal. There is also a $20,000 proposal review fee that is required by the county. So, if we receive an unsolicited proposal um we get $20,000 from um the company that submitted it, that will pay for um legal fees, our county staff time um to review the proposal and evaluate its appropriateness. uh the evaluation process. Um the responsible public entity must adopt guidelines which we already have. Um so we're ahead of the game on that. Um and we'll use that to evaluate both the solicited and unsolicited um proposals just so we can ensure that there's a fair and competitive process. Uh finally, submission guidelines um are pretty basic. The proposals must clearly be identified as PPE proposals and submitted to the proper designated contacts. So, some of the considerations we have when looking at these four methods um would be the potential timing of the referendum on the 1% sales tax uh for school capital projects. Um contract flexibility and that may be tied

directly to that referendum and whether or not it is approved or not. Um phase construction and project timing. Uh we've kind of said from the beginning we think that the first project will be the front project, the public safety. Um and that the CTE project may be on a slightly longer uh timeline. The intensity of owner coordination um and finally risk mitigation. Um I can't stress enough it's a highly complex project. It can be very specialized in areas. Um so any opportunity we have to mitigate that risk up front is going to be very important. Um so our path moving forward um given the considerations above um and the research that we've done staff is recommending that we move forward with either the construction manager at risk or the public private education facilities and infrastructure act or PPE method. Um if this board agrees, staff will continue to explore each of those options um and bring back a final recommendation at a future meeting. Um and I know um Kathy Underwood and John Gardner with Branch are actually in the audience. They are currently engaged with Ronote County right now on their CTE project under a PPE PPE arrangement. Um I'm sure they would be happy to answer any project specific questions or um specific questions about the PPA process in general.

Oh, and Haskell is on the phone. Sorry. He has done a Seymar project before. It is not a method that I have undertaken myself before, but um he he may be able to answer a few questions if you have those as well. And Haskell is part of our county attorney team. Yes, ma'am. For clarification.

Okay, Brandy. Thank you so much. This is a great presentation. Um if you don't mind hanging out, um I'd like to open the floor up to supervisors. Uh do you have something? if you don't mind. I was just going to say a couple things quickly just to summarize. You know, as you can see, there there's there's very different methods that that can be used, all fully legal and and in compliance with state code. Um, you know, and so that's why we really wanted to have this discussion about the preferred method um of of moving forward with this project. And again, some of the different considerations to to take into account um you know, because it's just it's not as simple as um not necessarily as simple as as just a paving project that you might just put out for bid where everybody's bidding on the exact same project and and it's a very concise kind of set of standards. So it this project, you know, as well as many others, you know, it just has a different level of complexity to it. And so we wanted to make sure we kind of made you aware of the different options that are available. As Brandy said, uh we're happy to to dig in any of them or all of them and get more information and and come back with that uh to help make a decision. But we we certainly want to make sure that whichever direction we go, the majority of the board is in consensus to move in that direction uh as we move forward because um obviously this is going to be a a long project. it's going to be, you know, it's going to be an expensive project and so we want to make sure we get it right from the beginning. Um, and I I'll just add one other note to maybe just something that she said just to keep in the back of your mind is, you know, the the 1% sales tax is obviously one way we're looking to hopefully fund some of the school project part of this. Doesn't doesn't mean we won't necessarily do the project if we don't get the 1%, but that's something to consider. Um, and as

she noted, the timing of that and and if if that is on a referendum this year or it has to wait till next year, you know, what whatever that timing looks like might affect some of this. Um, and I think we need to keep that in consideration. And um, she mentioned the the project in Renault County. So that was actually the CTE structure, but it also included two elementary schools. And so if you remember back to our ABM discussions and there was really there's really three other schools that are needing improvements. And so there's there's a potential of including them in this project making it all one great big project. There's you know there's also the opportunity to leave them separate and and kind of do them a separate way. So just wanted to throw out all those things on the table and just just we'd love to hear some feedback and further discussion that that the board has. And as Brandy said, anything we can do to kind of narrow it down and um, you know, kind of point in a certain direction, we can certainly gather more information there. And of course with Haskell and Jim's office, any legal questions, um, certainly we we can work on those as well. So, thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Sandy. Okay, floor is open. Mr. Carter. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, looking at this just initially, I like the appeal of the PPA. I like the the fact that it's a one contract thing with the limitations of our county staff, Brandy. What's your input on this? Which one of these do you like?

I I think initially I was I was straightforward like PPA PPE. Um I've really started just now digging into this construction manager at risk concept. Um and that's why today I don't know that we were necessarily ready to say we absolutely need to go with one. I would like to talk to a few more people in the industry just to to truly understand the pros and cons of that that strategy. Sure. Is that second? Okay. Mr. Meredith, please.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, sure, Miss Roser and even Supervisor Jameson, I know you've dealt with contracts. um with us doing as I know we're talking about the 911 building being probably completed first with fundings and then working to the school

and then also this option of our elementary schools as a package deal. Would any of these different processes um benefit or would it hinder of having a design and then we're starting construction at different stages potentially at we we complete this one because funding's there we go to the education center or we go to elementary school can they do one design and hold that design to then or is that going to have any effect depending on which method we take

from the contractors I've spoken with so far I feel like everybody's pretty comfortable with phasing these projects how we need to. Um what we may run into is um if we end up delaying the education project because we didn't get the 1% sales tax is we may be paying for the design upfront and having to hold it knowing that we've already paid for the design. But again, that's going to depend on the delivery method um as to whether or not we pay for the design up front or if it it's like spread out over time. So none of one of none of these four options you've given us it doesn't really matter which one we take that would have the same effect on every option

shape or form yes like we don't have to do everything on the exact same timeline. Okay. Thank you. Does that get to your question Mr. Meredith? Yes. I I just that was a I know we're talking about funding and so it's like if we're paying for design of everything would that effect as we're looking at different options for different projects. Absolutely. Yeah. This is the great benefit of group discussion on this because we're seeing this stuff for the first time. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Quinn.

Yes. I'll So Brandy, one of the this on this slide considerations when selecting a method. One of the most important things to me is getting the best value for the taxpayers, right? That's that that's probably the most important point. It's not even on here, right? And it's been one of the challenges with the two school contracts I've seen. So with both of those school contracts, they issued a tiny contract that was competitive and then we were at the mercy of the contract or for a huge contract. So the two are the ABM contract, right? They did a $25,000 survey and then they soul source a $4 million contract that's not put out to bid. And and so I I really don't like these little contracts that are competitively big a bid where we're then held hostage on the big contract on the original um site at at the high school. The way they did that, they put out a tiny contract for the initial design work. It was like I don't know $150,000. I'm I'm off by a little bit. And then that's done. And then the final design work, they wanted $2.8 million for it. And it can't and they said it can't be competitively bid because the first company did the initial design and nobody wants to work with their initial design. So you're held hostage. And so if you go I guess go back to the um the design bid build just for a second and go to go to where oh yeah this is yeah this is good here. So, one of the interesting things in here is it's missing a bid because you have a bid in the beginning. This this project is $40 to $50 million. Probably 10% of it is going to be in the design work, right? So, this initial design contract, this is a $4 to5 million contract, right? This is not a little, it's not a couple hundred thousand. And so there's really a bid piece in the

front where you competitively bid this design work and then there's a second bid piece where you're getting the construction piece, right? What I like about this is both pieces are competitively bid. So the call $5 million for design and I'll call it a $50 million product and $45 million for construction. I like that part. Mhm.

Kind of what's missing here to me that you have in the other one is that um that contractor of the general contractor overlay or that that top um the top guy who's kind of overseeing this would that would help you have this be seamless because when you go so on this one just go to the um advantages and disadvantages slide for a sec. Okay, perfect. So on the um on on this one, I I I feel like the owner does have full control over quality and workmanship if you have a good contract. If you don't, you don't have control, right? But if you have that top guy that's overseeing it, somebody I almost see somebody in between you and the design company and and in between you and the construction company. So there's an I'm almost thinking uh seeing a hybrid where I really like this because both sections are bid, but then I like that that idea of having that that oversight general contractor who's working for you. That's kind of kind of the watchdog. He's he's your watchdog. He's watching everything they do to make sure that we're getting good value for the money. And it's a tiny bit of money. It's one one person's salary compared to spending $50 million. So, and then here, um, you know, no contractor input during the design, you know, that your guy can be helping with that. So, I I kind of see this general oversight guy helping you a lot. I I think in those other two options that you're mentioning, I think that you lose that ability to competitively bid big chunks of the project and you're not going to be get the best value for your for your dollar on the other the other two. But the but one element I like is that that contract um what do you call them? The contract uh what's the p

contract manager? Yeah, the contract man I really like the contract manager concept with this design bid build option myself. I've utilized a um an owner's representative on larger projects like a regional jail project was I did was a design bid build. Um but we did have a third party um owner's representative that was on site every day that specialized in correctional design. So I think that that is an option if we were to go down the design bid build route. Um some in some cases your architect is kind of your owner's representative uh if they can be on site that frequently but um from my experience I've done more like owner's representatives

and and with that person one of the things you have here risk of exceeding project schedule through change orders can be high. Well, if if you have a sloppy design work or you don't have that person, the change orders eat you alive. But the better your overall plan is going into construction phase, you really minim the goal is minimize these change orders because they cost so much money. That's it. Thank you, Mr. Quinn. So, did you desire one over the other or a hybrid model? I actually like um one with whatever you called that person, Brandy. The uh just like an owner's representative or a third party consultant based on the DBB or is that construction man?

I like option one with with um with whoever you u need over that top. I there was a nice name to it in option three and four. I forget what you had. I mean construction manager. Yeah. Yeah, the construction management. I like I like option one with the title you gave or the construction manager or somebody cuz it's not I it's just not even you don't have the time to oversee this like you need somebody every day looking at everything here. I think it's such a big project you know somebody that's working for you that's overseeing this.

Can I ask a question? Uh Mr. Quinn. Um this is you know we're getting a first look at this stuff on the um the model that that you're looking at. I noticed that um that part of the disadvantages Brandy if you'd slip back to that please. Um is that we um we have to rely on the low bidder um and uh the lowest responsible bid um and that we don't have full control over the quality workmanship. So within the same, you know, within the same um think, you know, as we think through this, um we want to make sure that we're getting the biggest bang for our taxpayer money, but it also needs to be quality for the taxpayers's money. So I'm looking for and it perhaps may be a a hybrid model of some kind. I don't like having to rely on the lowest bid. I mean, that's Virginia procurement 101,

I think. And I think we've all been involved in projects where you have three bids that are close together and then you have the one that is like significantly lower and it kind of raises flags. And the only option I think you still have um if it's still available through code um is if you have a bid that you could declare as non-responsive. Um and I don't know the ins and outs of what those protocols would be. Um but that's what I worry about. I'm trying to look at all of these independently. Um and I think you're making some great points. I too uh Dan like the construction manager piece. I like that that interim person that's working between staff and and the uh the A&E and the uh you know the contractor.

Yeah. So I I think about well federal contracts where you have low cost technically acceptable and that's kind of getting at what I I don't like those actually. It's the low bid gets it automatically the low bid gets it. But the step up from that, the really interesting acquisition strategy I like is best value because the best value allows you to not take the absolute low bid because I'm I'm not in this wanting to take the absolute cheapest one. But when you have multiple people bidding on the design work, you'll you'll really get you'll both get interesting ideas, I think, but you'll also get the best value. So, if if some kind of best value acquisition strategy works, then I really like option one with your um with with your

your construction manager or Brandy Bry's title for whatever she has. I really like that. So, I don't know that that's I like that best value. I think you make a great point. Low bid technically acceptable. That that one's scary sometimes. Yeah. So, Brandy and I don't know if there's any flexibility. I mean, is this strictly based on uh Virginia procurement, this low bid piece? I mean, is there any is there any wiggle room with that in terms of best value? I don't believe there is unless you have a strong case that they're not responsive or responsible. Um and I will say you can get into legal um issues very quickly when you declare somebody not responsive. I know if you don't have a valid case for it.

Yeah. But that's what I'm worried about because the first my first just running through these, you know, from the top down, that's the only thing I saw that was really concerning to me about that option. So, we'll move on. We've got a lot of food for thought here. Just a followup question. I mean, whenever did you have something to add before? No, I just want to uh on the PPE, which I'm not, but it says disadvantage reduced owner and AE control over design. Mhm. Uh could you elaborate a little more like uh what would be our reduced design detail?

Um just under PPE. Um trying to see how to to word this properly. Um when you have a contractor, your general contractor come in that's responsible for the design and the construction, they do get to make some of those design decisions. I'm not going to say that the owner won't have input, but it's not on the level typically of like your DBB. Okay. Um and you know, I'll be happy again to let branch um speak to the PPA process if you guys have questions that that that doesn't answer. Yeah, let's finish getting some just round table feedback from supervisors and Mr. Meredith, if you would like that to take you further down.

No, that's fine. I just I think this is one thing we need to have a lot of input and anytime I see ours is reduced I don't you know this is our money is our you know our county our citizens so we should have as much as possible to make sure it's absolutely so I'm I'm good thank you so much yes yes sir Mr. Mitchell, I want to hear from Marshall. As far as I'm concerned, he's a expert.

Um, I would like to see the board, you know, just pause a little bit and look, start looking back. We've got a lot of good contractors in the area that's that's use these different procedures in and in in construction. I think I know I've talked to uh LPA Rick Hughes LPA engineer uh Bill Hume u with uh IDG they're out there doing a tea company now these people are people that's involved in it every day and they can come in and I think they could get and really enlighten the board as far as uh hey this is what we're looking at here. Here's the advantages that we see.

Um, and you know, I I think it would be a great help to the board to to pause and listen to them because there's a lot of information out there. The a lot of this is going to depend on the design upfront. Yeah.

Uh the the price you're going to get back only the best price you're going to get back is what you input you can give them. Now, I don't know how much the school's involved in it. I don't know how much we going to be involved in. How much are we going to rely on engineering architect, but if we are going to have any input in it, now's the time to do it up front. And as much input as we can give them, the better set of plans I'm going to get in far as construction, the better job we're going to get. Um, like I said, contractors out there, same way. A lot of well I know MB out there they have been involved in it. Ranch for years has been involved in it. I mean we can learn from these people and they're the ones that's actually got their hands in it the feet on the ground that they know much more than we're going to know.

So you do you just envision like an open invitation um for these contractors to come in and just have just general roundt discussion and pick their brains a little bit. I know the two engineering firms I talked to, they'd see that they said they'd be more than glad to. I talked to a couple contractors. Yes, sir. We'll be glad to come down and sit and give you our thoughts on it and what we feel like would be the best value for your money. Okay, that's really good to know, Marshall. Thank you. You are Mr. Franklin County Contractor. We rely on you a lot.

I I will say that's one reason why staff has engaged some general contractors already that have done CTE projects or projects of this nature. Not every contractor is going to be able to take on uh and I'm I'm not saying this is how much this project would cost a $50 million project. So, we're going to have to find the right contractor for that. And they're going to be the ones responsible for uh all their subcontractors. And hopefully that's where we see if we don't have a local company that could handle um the general contract contracting part of it that they're at least a sub under that contract.

Gotcha. Gotcha. So, do you have an opinion, Mr. Mitchell? I I agree with Marshall, but I also believe the design bid build with the um project manager is probably going to be our best our best option. Even though Brandy, and you may have elaborated on this in your presentation, what what part of a design bid build gives you the risk of exceeding project budget? So, change orders being as in the project changes, making changes as you go along. Is that is that what that means? there's a risk when you take your low bid that if they start having project overruns that they're going to change order you to death. They're going to find ways to get their money back.

Um the the other thing is this building has been sitting empty for 10 years and there are some unknowns with the project. We're going to get in there and we're going to find issues. Um so and that's in addition to any contingencies. Yes. I mean, every project you're still going to have a contingency in there because like you can have a owner um an owner requested change order on some of these where I say that there's a guaranteed u project cost if um if we come in and change our mind after the design is done, there could potentially be a change order there. So, you typically carry a contingency. Yeah. Um to cover it. Well, and Lori, I guess all I would say is um you know, I just supported a a tax increase day before yesterday. And uh my intent for that was not to grow government.

Sure. Not to throw it at at more people, more employees. My every year since I've been here, every budget talk we get into and every year when we're trying to talk about paying for fire trucks, working on buildings, I'm ready for this project to move. And we haven't had a budget work session I since we set the rate. So, I guess that's on May 4th. It is. And uh I hope we'll have some good talks and come up with some good ways to throw some to get some money set aside to get this product. We we as a board decided to to go down this path and uh it's going to be expensive to get it going and um we need to make some decisions that put put the resources there to do it.

Yeah. And I think Davenport um Mr. Sandy, you can correct me. I think Davenport did some initial very preliminary modeling um for this project. So that does exist um and we can maybe have them revisit that um as we look, you know, getting close to having to consider that. Mr. Mitchell, I think that's a great point. Um but I think we do have some initial modeling. Oh, yeah. Yeah. They've looked at it um probably a couple times. Yeah.

Um you know, of how to layer in the debt and how to kind of work through the the borrowing that it would take to to do these projects. Um, and again, it kind of depends on how we're doing it, too. Are we going to do this project and three elementary schools all in one lump? We're going to do it that way. Are they going to be separate? Do we get the 1% sales tax, which helps pay down the debt service? All those things will be factors in sure figuring out how, you know, how it gets paid for. But, um,

yeah, I guess I guess my point being I'm not interested in this sitting here, you know, because even if we do get the referendum, there's no guarantee it passes. So, I'm not interested in this sitting. We need to be setting aside some dollars we know we're going to have to get this project moving. It doesn't I'm I'm dedicated to doing that. Of course, if we have to make cuts elsewhere, that's that's where I'm at. And I think that's a great point. And I I think one of our first steps that I don't know I would yield to Mr. Sandy's expertise, but maybe one of the first steps in order to answer your question is that we revisit that that modeling, that preliminary modeling to see what was least the baseline of what Mr. Rose had in mind uh in the approach to this project. Would that be a good place?

Yeah. And we could probably dust some of that off for the May 4th as well. That would be great. No, that's fine. It wasn't really No, it's fine. But it it wasn't a question as much as it was a comment. No, I I think we all support you in that for sure. Yeah, that's all I have. I I think what we can say is we will have to borrow money to build this project. You know, I think we can safely say that. Now, how it gets paid off is we already have is going to be Yeah. And and we didn't really mention that earlier, but part of the initial borrowing we did is helping to pay for some of these the initial design cost and all that. That is actually part of the borrowing. That was fall $20 million borrowing. Okay. Mr. Carter, are you still sitting on PPE? I think it's I think it's it's still All this is up for discussion.

Oh, of course. I didn't know if anything you've heard has changed your mind. So, that's kind of just where you are right now. Okay. Mr. Jameson, um, you've given your feedback. So, of the feedback you all have provided, uh, and before I ask these two questions, Mr. Meredith or any of the other supervisors, would you all like, uh, for the individuals from branch to come up and and give us some experience um, with what they've been doing? I think Ronut County. Yes, ma'am. Um, is there any interest? Do you have questions that you would like answered u by hearing from them? Pretty fine. You like that? Okay, Mr. Meredith, that good for you as well, Mr. Mitchell? Yep.

Yes. If you could have them come forward, Brandy, that would be great. Thank you, Kathy and John. And I think as they're coming, I think theirs is actually a design build under PPE. So, it's kind of a consolidation or hybrid of of maybe the delivery method there. So, and then don't forget also we have Haskell on the line if there's any uh questions from his experience as well. But, um I just wanted to make that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much for being with us. It is very kind of you to give of your time um to help give us some guidance and insights.

Yeah. Do you want to start with questions or do you want I mean do you have specific questions you'd like us to answer? Let let's find out a little bit about Do you all just want a general overview or do you have specific questions? Yeah. Why don't you start with what you the project y'all are doing for Rono?

Okay. And and just the breath of our experience. We actually do all four different types of procurement. So currently we're in a CM um with Virginia Tech um and a couple other CM projects. So if there's questions on that, we're knowledgeable about that. We do a lot of design, bid, builds. So Christiansburg High School right now is a design, bid, build project. And then the Reno County CTE and two elementary school bundle is a PPE. Um so I'll talk about it first. Um so the PPA, the way that one is set up, as uh Mr. S said, it's the two elementary school. It's addition renovation and then it is um a new CTE center. And one of the reasons I believe that Renick County picked PPE is because it was uh it was complex because you had three projects all on a different kind of phasing and uh timeline. And so part of the PPA process included figuring out what was the best path based on the funding sources and when funding was going to be available and what made sense um in term in terms of being able to put under contract and complete in a timely fashion based on that funding. And then within the project we've been able to keep the funding separate. So for Renick County between the supervisors and the school board, they actually have a memorandum of understanding that defines what dollar values were appropriated for each group. And so uh during the uh pricing process, we kept all that separate so that they could make sure that they were within their memorandum of understanding uh and that could be discussed. Now, as far as the selection and how that worked, um that was actually an unsolicited PPE and so the submission went in. Then they advertised for competing proposals. They received them. We moved to a detailed phase. So again, we prepared additional information based on their um

guidelines, their PPA guidelines, which are a little bit different than yours, but not a lot. There's most of them are very similar in nature. And so then once that happened, part of that actually includes a cost component, a a qualifications basis. So it's a best value selection and it's competed. So you see the architect's cost, you see the contractor's costs, and then you get an idea of the budget, but obviously it's not fixed at that point because the design is not far enough along. And then from there, we went into an interim agreement. We worked through the design. there was transparency in the cost. You see what the subs are um giving us for feedback as far as cost. We talk about scope. We talk about priorities, what's most important. We um the design team sat down with all the different uh departments in the Renick County School System, understood what their priorities and program needed to be. That went into some preliminary designs. We priced those. We that's an iterative process throughout the design and then we ultimately got to a GMP. The way we got to that GMP is through competitive subcontractor uh pricing. So we have a qualification base to make sure that they meet our um financial and quality standards to make sure that they can make it through a project and then um they submit bids and then we uh analyze those with the client and then um ultimately get to a comprehensive agreement that includes schedule, cost, all the things. And in that process, it was very helpful because we were looking, everyone on the team was looking at the costs on the owner side and on the construction side. And so we were making sure there were no gaps. So if there needed to be a stoplight or there was something that the county was going to do from infrastructure standpoint, but it still was coming out of the one budget that the board of supervisors had passed in that case. Um, we were looking at the whole thing to make sure they were getting an all-inclusive comprehensive project and

then we were defining roles about responsibility and who owned what and there was a lot of clarity there. So, that project should finish up in uh this year. Oh, yeah. That's what I thought. Okay. Super. Any questions, comments about that experience? When when the change orders come through from your subs and all, do y'all analyze that before you sit down and talk to the owner? Yes. So, you justify through your sub. Verify that it's right.

Yes. Absolutely. Especially in either the CM AR or um the PPA because you've spent a lot of time talking about scope and understanding what's in the project. there's certain gaps that we would expect to be priced in because we're talking about them and understanding even with the trade partners. But then when we do receive um any kind of change order, yes, we sit down, we make sure we understand and it it may not be a change order that needs to pass through to the owner. um right depending on what the scope of that change is but we would sit down and analyze it get make sure we completely understand it before we would pass it through and sit down with the owner and discuss it.

Thank you. So uh when does the value engineering phase it does that fall into the PPE model and maybe the others as well?

Yes. So in PPE it should be iterative right? So we should be at points in time. So you know if I if I use some standard terms which would be SDS which are schematic design, DDS which are design development and then CDs. So at each of those stages we're doing a full cost analysis and a schedule analysis. So you should be getting feedback. We're we're gaining and giving uh data and feedback based on pricing at the time material availability resource limitations and availability in the region. There's a lot of really good contractors in our area. Um and there's a lot going on in the area. So it's really important to understand how other projects are impacting the cost of your particular project. Um so we're looking at all those things at these iterative stages and then we provide that feedback and then so I'll say value engineering sort of happens live in those moments because then we can look at options and say okay but if we we have the these options we can do this this or this and then together collectively we sit down and work through what those options and what your desire is. because I've done a middle school um $25 million middle school renovation and you know I set many days in the construction trailer. So value engineering came into play very much so when we had the A&E work done for the um concept and then it moved into the programmatic phase of course and then when they bring uh final draft um back for you know you start to see you know nice architecturally designed you know high standards but you can't always afford

right um what an architect may bring it may be beautiful and most of them are however However, it's what you can afford to do. Uh, and I have found value engineering to be a key strategy um, in terms of looking at budget versus quality um, of the quality materials even that that you want to use in a project. Yeah. And the earlier you can implement those strategies or have them identified, the more options you have to choose from. Okay. And so that is true. So in a design bid build that's going to happen after the bid and you figure out what the total cost is and then you would enter a value engineering stage which typically needs to be done extremely quickly because you want the project to start

in a CM or a PPA. I typically say the most important estimate we will do is the schematic design because it really sets the baseline and tells you where you are on a lot of those. They may not be fully vetted out as far as design options, but we're starting to get a good idea of what that could look like. We had to have those kind of conversations for even the Renick County CTE. There were decisions that had to be made based on budget and Sure. design. Sure. Thank you.

Well, I'd like to add to that where value engineering uh comes into play on this is through the design bid build process. basically you're you're eliminating it except as Kathy said at the end. Well, that's it's chopping project scope out of something at the end. So true value engineering, value management is what we call it. It branch it's it's it's continuous and it takes place from the very start. So that's the one issue with the with the design bid build process is you lose um the most uh valuable uh value management uh process. it ends up essentially becoming chopping the scope at the end to get something in budget rather than having it work and built in as it's designed.

Thank you for that. I didn't know it had changed um it's value management now. Okay, Mr. Quinn, I

I have a question on the PPA PPA option. I'm not that familiar with it, but when you put out an RFP that will include this design build team or the designer and contractor, right? there's an RFP for that team, right? And are their costs fixed at that point? Do they put in a complete cost proposal? So, you know, for this entire co this entire project, what my cost is for this team and then after that contracts that for your um design build team, then they're actually negotiating with or they're actually putting out like little RFPs for the subcontractors that come and do the work. So, all those components are also competitively bid. Is that true?

Yeah. So, there's a cost component in the selection and the negotiation. Just typically what you do with your architect when you hire, you put out an RFP and they're going to respond to it and then you're going to interview and then you're going to um make some determination. A lot of times they're going to base it on a percentage of total construction budget. Although some of those aren't always known at the time, it's very similar in the PPA except you're getting a whole design build team and we're putting in a cost proposal for that team. Sometimes that's a percentage based depending on what the early information is and what the owner uh wants to look at and sometimes that's a fixed number but then yes then you bring on that team and then later as we're working through the GMP then each of the subtrades are bid out and so that is a competitively bid process as well. So competition and pricing actually happens in a couple of different places whether it's CM or it's PPE or it's design bid build.

All three of them well and I keep leaving out design build but you guys haven't focused as much on design build but there is cost competition at all levels. So, I think you heard some of my concerns with these other contracts that I've seen led by the school where where there's a tiny contract, right? And then you're held hostage, right? And you like then you have to give them the big contract because nobody wants to start with that little piece that was done. So, are you are you avoiding that kind of dilemma where you're you're now held hostage on price? So in any of these scenarios on a large project like this that you wouldn't be contracting for a small portion of that design work, you would know exactly what you're committing to and the scope you're getting and not be locked into then something larger that you wouldn't have control over. and PPA and CM CM or CMR they have um offramps for an owner in the process so that if you can't you're never so committed that you have to then commit I'm going to use Bry's number you know a $50 million you're not locked in there are offramps after what we call a preconstruction phase which is really where you're working through the design and the detail and you're understanding schedule and cost and if something doesn't marry up or it's not in alignment then you have offramps in each of these mechanisms in order to not commit to each other for the full duration,

you know. But those offramps are typically very expensive because now you have to get a new company to come in to pick up where the old one left off and that transition is expensive typically possibly. So the off-ramp at Christians, they um actually switched from a CMR to a hard bid. Virginia Tech has done the same thing. They get in the process and then they go through it and then switch it. So it doesn't necessarily have to mean a big cost uh impact, but it's not ideal, right? I mean, ideally, you're going to start and finish with the with the team that has uh the most knowledge of the project and the most understanding of the risks on both the contractor and the owner side, and that's going to be your best path forward.

Okay. And so I think about the design work being kind of order of magnitude, 10% of the total project cost. And I know that's not a hard number, but just order magnitude. What would you say the order of magnitude is for this design build team? Like what percent would of your total project would go to that team before all the subs or bidding and all that and and m so that that doesn't include the subs it doesn't include the materials. It's just their professional services for the design. The biggest part of that is still going to be the design fees. I mean a very small part is going to be into the pre-construction. So it probably still falls in that 10 to 15%.

But they are you say pre-construction, aren't they following through the entire construction like all the way till the end till the architect is? But usually you know what that full commitment to that architect is because they're going to break it down into the different phases that I mentioned so that you're committing to the part that they're working on. Okay. All right. Thank you. Certainly. Anybody else? Mr. Carter. Yeah, sure. Thank you, Madam Chair. And you may not be able to answer this. Our project is a very complex project, redoing an existing building. It's not a repetitive type project.

So, between design, build, and a PPA, in your opinion, which one of those do you think would suit that project? between design build and PPE, I would lean towards a PPE because I like the the flexibility in the process. I mean the the flexibility of the PPA gives you some um kind of four which I don't know that you're considering all four but the finance the design the construction and then the maintenance and other options at the end kind of service agreements that gives you the full breath of figuring out what you really want to do. Um, and I I like the PPA because the way the guidelines are written and the way the interim agreements typically work very much you're working through it at a stepbystep

uh basis and gives you the best flexibility and option. Great. Thank you. You're welcome.

Okay. Anybody else? I think where um gentlemen, we are a couple things. Um, obviously Mr. Jameson has recommended maybe we have a a meeting where we would invite contractors in just have some round table discussion on these various meth methodologies. Um and then uh perhaps if the board wishes to narrow down uh two of these areas for further um more indepth discussion and information being brought to you. That is also an option. We've got several things, then we can do both of these things simultaneously. But I need to get an idea of what your desires are off for next steps.

Sounds to me like the PPE and the design bid build are the two. Okay. The two that everyone's leaning towards. Okay. Is is it possible to add the CM too? I mean, I just I think that came up y'all have used that as experience with that, too. So, I think option two, I didn't hear too much favor of that one, but I think those three I've heard discussion on three of them. So, I mean, I know it's adding one on there, but this is a huge and that would be your desire to add that one to I Yes, ma'am. Yes, madam chair. Sure.

You know, Brandy, what I'd like to see, you have this on option one, you show when your bidding the bidding is taking place. I'd like to see that on the PPE because we don't see that time. I don't really understand when bidding's taking place. That'd be really interesting to see is is a a little diagram like you have on this option. I can get that for you. Yeah, that'd be great. Good point. Okay. So, um is there consensus um for Mr. um Jameson's suggestion to bring contractors in? Yes.

Okay, that's great. So, we'll u Mr. Sandy, if you can help us facilitate that process. U Mr. Jameson, I'm sure you'd be happy to work with staff on that. Um and the next thing we would do uh with Miss Roser perhaps is uh you and Mr. Sandy uh work towards um let's do the Seymar uh DBB and PPE and maybe do a little bit more of a drill down on on those three options. Does that sound reasonable and doable? Is it I think it does.

Okay. So, I want to make sure that what you've provided us today is is overview and that there is more that we can ask for Brandy or are you covering most of it today in these slides? I mean, if we ask you to bring back on those three issues, can you is it substantive enough to do so? Yeah, I think we can definitely bring back especially looking at like design bid build, we can throw in the component of an owner representative and how that may look, right? um along with the other suggestions you guys have or questions that you right

as part of that Brandy also I would like to hear something about staff considerations for this project so that I don't think we've got a huge staff to man this I want to make sure we're we're making the right selection based on the county staff we have to help manage the project of course yeah staff capacity is always something I appreciate you bringing that up Mr. Carter, it's very important. Okay. So, Mr. Sandy,

could maybe a little clarification on this round table. Um, is this I mean certainly if if the board is there, it's a it's a advertised meeting. So, is this at a regular board meeting? Are we suggesting an additional meeting for this round table kind of a little more direction there might help? I would suggest for your consideration um that we do work session time for this. It really in my you know estimation falls outside the purview of general business board meeting. Do you all agree with that? Yeah. The work session work maybe the May work session. Yeah. Is is a goal a target. And we can look at calendar Mr. S.

Well I I guess for my perspective that would lean if we knock out all our budget business on May 4th. If not that may need to fall over to the May work session. Mhm. We'll do our best to look at calendar and and because we try to manage time and content, you know, um I don't like us to have a work session where we have to rush through things. Um but at the same time, we need to be very efficient and make sure we're getting the information that we want. So, does that sound okay with everybody? Yep. Yep. Okay. All right. Mr. Sandy, um did you need any further direction from the board uh with what we've kind of articulated? No, I think we're good for now.

Okay. Gentlemen, I'd like to thank you very much. Um, this has been a good discussion. Randy, I hope it's been helpful for you as of course and I thank you all so much again for being with us. You've given us some good good some good thoughts. Okay. Uh, we can take a quick fivem minute break unless you want to move on. Uh, gentlemen, what's your what's your desire?

Ready to go. All right. Uh, the next item on our agenda is the zoning ordinance draft update. Uh we set this work session um a aside um some time ago to begin as a board. We felt like it's really important that we as a board have time to start collectively discussing this draft rewrite. Um you know the draft got out and it's been on the table. It's still on the table for changes and will be for a while. Um and but we just haven't had time as a board um to discuss it. maybe think about uh any next steps you want to see. Um and so with that in mind, uh Mr. Sandy, um this is a document that um I requested you guys work on and I'm going to give it to you at this point. Um and I was hoping that this document will provide a you know an easier way to consider um the things that are before us. U so Mr. Sandy, I'll turn it over to you, sir.

Yes, sir. All right, get myself in order here. So, did want to uh speak to the zoning ordinance update um and give an update on the update um and kind of walk through some things uh with the board. I've got um I did hand out a copy of the presentation, but I also have two other handouts um well, two handouts you already have in front of you relative to the Berkeley group. Um, and and I have two handouts uh with me now that I think I'll go ahead and pass those out. Well, no, I'm going to wait till I get to that.

You're going to surprise us, aren't you?

And then, um, what I would say is these documents that have given to you today and that we're going over today, they will be online. We will put them on the work session or the zoning ordinance update. So, they'll be online, the exact same documents that you're receiving. um just for full print transparency and to keep everybody engaged in in kind of the process and where we're at. So um but what I did want to do was I felt like maybe we needed kind of a reset and we needed a kind of a recap of how did we get here, you know, and and what have we done, what's transpired and and kind of outlining the path to get to where we've gotten to now and then looking at the direction of where we go as we move forward in this process. So, if you would indulge me, I I go through, you know, some of it is redundant, but as I was going through it, um, you know, I think we probably have I know we have one board member, at least maybe two, that weren't even part of this conversation way back when when we started. So, u just felt like it was necessary to to kind of recap that for the board, but also for the public in general of where this process began and how it's kind of uh gone and to the point we are now. So, just starting out the zoning ordinance. Um, you know, I wanted to just it it seems obvious, but I wanted to make it clear that we already have zoning. Zoning is in place in the county. Um, the the county did adopt zoning regulations in 1988. And so, we have been operating under a zoning ordinance since that time. So, 38 years. Um the the uniqueness for us is that when it was adopted, it was only adopted for part of the county.

And so as a portion of the county that it falls under that zoning and it's remained that way for 38 years. That line has not moved um and not changed. And I'm I got a map. I'm going to show that um as we move into this further. There have been small updates that have made to been made to the ordinance over the years. And I think a good way to to really uh define that is patches. I I think over year over the years we've kind of made patches here and there to the ordinance for various reasons. Um if I remember correctly in 1994 the first short-term rental regulations were added. Um more recently we added a section on the solar energy and so things like that that have been added kind of hot topic items of the time or the day and and changes were made to kind of reflect those that maybe weren't in the original ordinance. And so in some ways we're doing that again where we want to take a look at, you know, what has changed in the 38 years that's not in the ordinance that really needs to be reflected there. And so that's that's part of what this process has really been about. And and over the years there there's been a number of noted deficiencies in the ordinance. And a lot of times it's like we'll fix that. We'll fix it later. We'll fix it when we get to this update. We'll fix it when we get to the update. I've been here 10 years and I've I know I've had those conversations for 10 years that we'll we'll fix that one when we get to the to the update. So, um we've seen those uh a lot of times we'll see those deficiencies when you hear public hearings. So, whether it's a reasonzoning or special use permit, um again, more recently, a good example is you're seeing a number of special use permits for short-term rentals come to you. And so that's that's obviously been one topic of discussion in all this is if you repetitively see the same cases coming back, maybe there needs to be an amendment to your zoning ordinance to to reflect that so you're not hearing the same ones and you're applying the exact same conditions to all of them. And so that's a more recent example of of

something to look at with a zoning ordinance update. So as far as the process, again, just wanted to kind of go back through, you know, when this process really started. So October of 23, uh the board was presented with some long range projects. Uh one of those being the comprehensive plan, uh which was actually adopted last July. The other was the update to the zoning ordinance. These are multi- multimonth but really multi-year projects. And so the board moved forward. Uh we did have um staff at the time in the planning office and we were able to do the comprehensive plan inhouse with with staff in the planning office. Um and then we discussed also moving forward with the zoning ordinance update. So later fast forward January and May of 2024, we had more discussions uh with the board and at that time it was the consensus to move forward with the update process and utilize the Berkeley group for that work. In June of 24 uh the contract was approved by the board uh in the amount of 159411. And if you recall, we also got a Virginia housing grant at that time and that paid $20,000 on that. So basically paid that down $20,000. Uh that contract was signed by the previous administrator and the county attorney reviewed it and that was June of of uh 24. Following that, we had a kickoff meeting, a joint work session kickoff meeting with the Berkeley Group, the planning commission, and the board in August of 24. uh in January of 25 had another joint work session. September of 25 uh we had a board work session update and that was from staff. It was not a Berkeley group update. And all the while uh in the meantime there once the project was kicked off, the planning commission was going through this monthly in their work sessions really taking it chapter by chapter uh looking at the at the zoning ordinance uh with

staff and with the consultant to identify potential updates to each chapter. So again, this is kind of a graphic that you've seen and it's been utilized in some other um some other presentations as well that just kind of indicates what I really just kind of went through started back in uh August 2024 when we really kicked it off and kicked off the contract. And you see kind of here at this point you enter the drafting phase and that's really the phase where the planning commission took hold of it and um you know did what I always say is the heavy lifting. they they spent hours and hours going through this in uh in work sessions and their meetings uh every Tuesday. Uh and those were public meetings that they were considering these changes and going through it. So, I know there's been questions about the the Berkeley group. So, I figured let's just let's just talk about why the Berkeley Group, why did we why did we end up selecting the Berkeley Group? and you have a handout that talks about some of the things they do uh in the Commonwealth and some of their u some of their clients. So, Berkeley Group is uh in in my opinion, Berkeley Group is an experienced firm that has successfully performed zoning and subdivision ordinance updates throughout Virginia, including right here in Rocky Mount, which was adopted in 2024. Uh they utilize Berkeley Group to do that work for them as well. Um, you know, another reason that the group was chosen was because county uh planning staff, as I think Mr. Carter mentioned early, staff staff is limited. I mean, we don't have a excessive amount of staff in in any area. And so, there were staff limitations with uh resources and expertise to to take on a large multi-month project like this. Uh so the county did develop a unique contract with Berkeley Group and that was authorized through cooperative agreement utilizing a rider in the Lexington

Virginia contract. So um and this was under the Virginia public procurement act this was for non-professional services and so under that act uh professional services are more like uh engineers architects uh doctors I couldn't list all of them but this this falls on the nonprofessional side. So, they're under that under that section, they're considered non-professional services. Um, but the the flexibility was still there to u to revise general terms and conditions uh for our project specifically to modify the scope of work. Really, the cooperative agreement just set forth the the rates of of hours that and the pay that would be part of that project. So, uh what were the goals for this update? uh because I know this is another topic of you know why we entered into this, why we started this process and I just pulled this actually from a slide from the January 23rd um 2025 work session. And so this lists um some of those uh project goals that we hope to get to through this process. And so number one, comply with code of Virginia requirements. Number two, preserve agricultural land use land and uses modernize. So address modern issues, uses and best practices, streamline content and processes to be more user friendly. Align the ordinance uh standards to the comprehensive goal uh comprehensive plan strategies and goals. So as I mentioned, we just adopted the comprehensive plan. And so typically in in land use planning, you you use the zoning ordinance to as the tool to help you implement the aspects of the comprehensive plan that you've developed. Um and then if you recall the the comprehensive plan is more of a guiding policy document. The zoning ordinance is actually the what the regulation that actually helps you achieve those goals. Um and then the final one was expand housing opportunities. And again we we got a

Virginia housing grant. So a part of this was to look at what can we do to help promote housing in in various areas of the county and that's all housing opportunities. So, you know, it was looking at that across the board of what can we do through the zoning ordinance to help us uh expand those opportunities. So, back to the uh existing loan zoning line or zoning map, whatever term we want to use, you know, so the the question here was will the existing zoning line or map be changed as part of this process? No. Um the and I'll jump down a little bit. the board of supervisors made a decision at the beginning of this process that that would not be part of this process that um nothing that is updated in this ordinance would affect areas that are not currently zoned. So, um just a little explanation, you know, that was originally set up in 1988 partially and this is my conjecture just summarizing it was um kind of the the eastern part of the county wanted zoning protections and and maybe Rocky Mount as well wanted the zoning protections. And so what ultimately came to to pass was that part of the county got zoning. The other part of the county said we don't want zoning. And so basically drew a line down the middle and and so it was based on uh the election districts in 1988. So if I recall it was four districts uh voted to have it and three districts didn't want it uh from the board of supervisors. And so that's how we ended up um with those districts. So the zoning line itself has not changed over the years. But but what has changed is those election districts. And so that's why now you're at a situation where the Blue Ridge district is the only district that does not have zoned area. So um Mr. Jameson district initially didn't have zoning, but as that district has gotten bigger. So as

we do a redistricting every 10 years uh based on the census, we have to to look at those election districts and keep them roughly the same amount of people in each district. And so what you've seen happen is the eastern part of the count, eastern and northern part of the county growing at a faster rate than the western part of the county. So those areas that have not grown as fast, those districts have gotten a little bit bigger over time. The ones that have grown faster, Gills Creek as an example, have gotten smaller over time. Still the same number of people in each district, but the districts themselves have changed each each um 10 years, every 10 years. So does that make sense? I I want to pause there just for a second just to to make sure that's clear. So the line has always been where the line is, but those districts have have changed over over those times. So I just wanted to if there was some uncertainty or if that wasn't clear, I kind of wanted to explain how that uh came about. So the line doesn't move as those election districts move. The line is the line is is where it is and that line doesn't move. It's a hard line um on a map and I'll show you the map in just a second.

So Mr. Sandy, with respect to um some of the unzoned areas now having some zoned pieces, it's what I think I heard you say. Um are no, that's not what you said. So, please tell me. There aren't unzoned areas that now have zoning. That that's not the case. There's portions of districts that have zoning now that were previously unzoneed. So, let me shift. An example, Lori would be so my district has has moved toward Union Hall and took behind um like where the BB&T Bank used to be. Well, that line was the river for the election district. Gotcha. How the election district has moved. Magisterial districts are the same. Yeah.

So, I have taken in zoning while property has left the Union Hall district because the the Union Hall population is growing and the Snow Creek district has to get bigger to take in more people. I gotcha. Okay. Thank you for that clarification. Good. That was good, wasn't it? Right. So, and and that's a good uh summary of kind of what's happened and you can maybe see it here in the Blackwater district. Maybe you can see it more clearly is um this area um you know th this line was here in 1988. So, the Blackwater district kind of stopped there. Well, now the Blackwater district goes almost over to 220.

And so, for for Mr. Jameson's district. He's he's basically picked up all this zoning area over time in the last 38 years. So, with the three census, the three censuses that that line has continued to kind of gradually move. So, I just wanted to make sure that made sense to everybody. We talk about partial zoning and and I wanted you to see the map as well. So, so this red line is that zoning line and and we know where that line is and we have it mapped and as supervisor Mitchell said on the eastern part of the county it generally is following the Pig River there is is kind of generally the marker. Uh but everything on this part up here where it's different colors that's all the zoned area. So everything that's not in those colored areas is not subject to this zoning ordinance, not subject to 1988 ordinance, not subject to the new ordinance.

Right?

If you were nonzone previously, you're still nonzoneed after this process. So I just I know there's been some confusion and and I can understand the confusion. Um we are the only county in the state that has this scenario. So um it makes us unique in that sense. But I just wanted to spend a little bit of time on that just to make it clear that, you know, if if you're in a zoned area, you already subject to zoning regulations. Um, yes, there are some changes that are being proposed and we're going to talk about those, but if you're in a non-zoned area, the changes don't affect you because you're still not subject to the zoning regulations. So, again, I hope I haven't beat that to death, but I just wanted to make sure that that that was clear um as we move forward. So, um, this was stole this slide again from actually from a town hall meeting that, uh, we had with with, uh, Supervisor Quinn just because I thought it was just a good snapshot of of some of the communication and community engagement that took place at the beginning of the process. So, this was really um, when we started, there was a public survey and some public workshops and focus group sessions that were done by Berkeley Group at the beginning. And you can see relatively lightly attended and in my experience that is not unusual. Um you know it's it's difficult to to get engagement a lot of times. A lot of times you'll see you know relatively small survey results. Um 94 responses on the survey is probably actually not that bad for beginning of the process. Um and so wanted to point that out that you know at the beginning there was a community engagement process and then as I said the planning commission had been working through it chapter by chapter in the med in the meantime and then we get to the last box which is where um draft number one of the complete full ordinance was presented and at that meeting there were

108 attendees um plus or minus um I think that was at the Franklin Center and then uh there was a subsequent session with developers that was held on March 31st uh and there were 134 attendees uh at that session. So just quickly as far as the zoning ordinance update itself um it is broken down into 10 articles and chapters which is which is similar to the way it is now. It's it's it's broken down in articles but that some of those articles have been moved around. There's been some reorganization of the ordinance. So, um, where it's not all totally being rewritten, it it does look a lot different and it does feel a lot different u because you're we're moving things around in different sections, hopefully making things a little bit easier to read. I'll be the first to acknowledge that this is not the easiest document

to to read and understand. I've worked with zoning ordinances for close to 30 years now, so to me, it's it's it it's common, but I know it's not a common practice for most people to know and understand. um the zoning ordinance. It's it's complicated. Um and as I mentioned, the planning commission has worked through uh update one article at a time um with uh text updates of those articles were were provided to the board on May 25th, August 25th, and January 26th. Um or May of 25, August of 25, and January 26. And then like I said earlier, the first full draft of the document was provided to everybody. Uh it was dated March 26. And this is just a snapshot of uh one of the pieces of the ordinance. Again, kind of stolen from uh one of the slides from the town hall. Um and this this is actually again, even though it may seem hard to read, this actually is designed to make it easier to um figure out where certain uses. So on left hand column is is a list of uses. This is article six of the proposed ordinance. Um uses are identified and broken down by category. agriculture, residential, commercial, industrial. Um, and then as you move across this page to the right, you'll see the various zoning districts across the top. And in each column, uh, if you see a P, that means that use is is currently proposed to be a byite use in that district. If you see an SUP, that means uh you have to go through the SUP process, which for us that means you have to make application, you have to go to the planning commission, and then you have to appear before the board to public hearings before your project could be approved uh or denied. You would have to go through that process. If there's no mark there, if there's no P or SUP there, that use is not permitted in that district. And so th this is a real handy tool for staff, for

architects, for engineers, for people that are utilizing uh this zoning ordinance a lot. Um this is a a quick reference tool, if you will, to help identify which uses uh appear in which districts. The far right column is uh references use standards. So this is also a reference to um go um across the page and you can say for that particular use on the left hand side if you go all the way to the right it tells you what the the standards specific to that use are. So an example could be short-term rentals. Again short-term rentals is going to have a list of standard uses and it's going to tell you where that reference is on the right hand side. And it's kind of a a quick reference guide like I said. So, uh kind of want to close, come to a close and then and get a little bit of feedback from from the board as we move forward. But wanted to identify, you know, we we've had um feedback at the open house. We've had feedback at the developer meeting. We had feedback at the town hall. We've had people uh come to board meetings uh speak. We've had people sending emails uh to the planning staff with with their comments and concerns. And so this is not an exhaustive list. I I'll point that out. But but there are a number of similar concerns and and issues that have been raised in the first draft of the ordinance. And so wanted to kind of point those out. And again, not an exhaustive list there. There's there's other things I'm sure that could be on this list. And I'm going to hand you I'm going to do that now. Hand you the list. Thank you. And so we've still got it.

We have it listed as draft currently because, you know, certainly want to get some additional feedback from the board. And then um like I said earlier, we'll we'll put this document out on the web page as well um to to kind of identify what are some of the major changes or the the key issues that are being raised with the the first draft of the zoning ordinance update. And so I'll go through those. This this list on the PowerPoint, you know, generally follows the list you have uh there. But, you know, one of one of the primary things I think we're we're hearing is concerns about the agriculture A1 district and the new agriculture A2 district. Um A2 district is is is new and and I'll talk about, you know, part of the thought process there. Um the at the A2 district, no one is currently zoned A2 district. So, what this will mean is this will be a new district on paper, but the only way people will become zoned A2 is if they come and ask you to change their zoning to A2. But it's giving folks another opportunity um to of how they could have their land uh zoned. So, a minimum of 2 acres uh to subdivide 150 foot of frontage, 40% total lot coverage, and 25% building coverage are just some of the specifics that are proposed with the A2 district. The A1 district is has is there's a big change that's been proposed um in the A1 district and that is primarily regarding the lot size. And so the the current proposal is to have a minimum 10 acre lot size when you subdivide the property 150 foot of minimum frontage which is a a little increase and then uh 20% total lot area. Um the other thing that's happened with the A1 is that a number of the uses have either been uh combined into one group or actually moved out of A1 into another

zoning district. And so I'll try to give some examples. Um there is I if you recall there's been a number of times that we've said the A1 district is kind of a catch-all district and so there are a lot of uses that maybe just aren't appropriate uh to be in the A1 district and maybe are more industrial in nature or something like that. And so there's been an effort by the planning commission to to really reduce that list of permitted uses in A1 um to kind of take out more of the non-aggricultural type of uses and move them to either a commercial or a industrial um um zoning district. So, that's another change in the A1 district where uses, and I think Supervisor Quinn has brought this up before, is uses that may have been permitted in the A1 district previously will no longer be permitted because they've been moved to a different district. Um, and for those that wanted to do them, uh, now they might have to reszone to to a different district. So, as an example, you might have to reszone to a B2 district to do a more commercial use instead of keeping it A1. Um the the other item that has drawn a lot of attention obviously is uh bees and chickens. And so we'll we'll just touch on that as well. Um there there's a couple things that relative to this that was being attempted u with this change to the ordinance. And I'll start on the residential side. So we have residential subdivisions uh that are zoned R1 um or or some residential zoning district. There is no provision currently in our ordinance that would allow people to have chickens or bees on their property. Um, and so you could have a I'll just make up an example. You could have a 3 acre track zoned R1, but you were not allowed to have chickens or bees. And and we understand that a lot

of people like to have a few chickens, backyard chickens, uh, kind of they call it, um, and have their own eggs and so forth. And so what we were looking for was allowing the opportunity for people to have that within reason. So putting a restriction on the number, putting a restriction on roosters, things like that. So folks in residential districts could have the opportunity to have um to raise chickens on their property and potentially have um beehives as well because we know that's that's uh has increased interest uh here recently. And so again, in residential areas, that opportunity was not there for people to have that. And so there was an attempt to get this in the ordinance to allow that. This was also in the A2 district is also a permitted use. And it's called agricultural residential is is the definition. Um, and really what it says, um, I'm going to get the number wrong, but I think it's five chickens per acre. So, back to the example, if you had R1 and you had two or three acres, you could actually have more than than five or six chickens, you could have that, you know, based on the acreage size. That restriction was carried over to A2 districts and A1 districts. And so I think since it was carried over to the A1 district, I think that's what's created some of the some of the concern and and even some of the misunderstanding that you were going to be limited in in the A1 district on how many chickens you could have. So let me let me make a statement there. The way it is currently written, if you have a lot less than 5 acres in A1, you would have a restriction on the number of chickens. If you have an A1 lot above 5 acres, there is no restriction. This this restriction only applies to 5 acre lots or less under the current draft of the ordinance. Another item we've heard is about data

centers. Um the so the proposed ordinance has some updated use standards for data centers. Obviously 1988 this wasn't a a hot topic. Uh it wasn't something that was in the media and the press at that time. And so, um, you know, there's been some updated, um, use standards. Um, there was an amendment several years ago to our residential or regional enterprise park zoning district. Um, that was a new district that was added a few years back. The only, uh, area that has that zoning is Summit View Industrial Park. Summit View Business Park has that zoning and that uh because that's a newer ad to the zoning ordinance, data centers does appear there in that district and it is a by-right use in that district. And so the proposed um ordinance, this first draft of the ordinance maintains that byite use for um in the REP district for data centers, but it also adds it as a potential SUP use in the M2 industrial district, which is our heaviest industrial district. So just wanted to to clarify that. Um there's um been some intensive uh another one that was added several years back was intensive livestock. Um that was something that that was a concern um 10 or 15 years ago I think that language was added to our existing ordinance about intensive livestock operations. Um there's been some minor tweaks to that in the in the new ordinance, but for the most part that's that's stayed significantly as it was when it was initially adopted. Short-term rentals uh is another one. As I mentioned a couple times, this is one that, you know, we hear a lot about and we hear from both sides. We we hear folks that think it should be allowed in more places. Uh, and there should be more opportunities and we hear the converse side of people saying, "Well, it's it's a business use. It's not a

residential use. It shouldn't be allowed in subdivisions. Um, it has an impact on neighbors." And so again, looking at how do we balance those um those needs and concerns that citizens have expressed on both sides. And um what is currently proposed in the um draft of zoning ordinance is that this would uh move to be a permitted right in uh A1, A2, RE, RC1, RPD, and PCD. Now, currently the ordinance allows it by right in RPD and PCD, but it uh is a special use permit uh is required in A1. Of course, A2 is a new district, so it's not uh it was never in A2. Um so, but but also with that, there's been expanded use standards that have been added. So, as I mentioned earlier, you guys have have seen a number of these and you've attached a number of conditions to these. And so those conditions that you have uniformly attached to those SUPs are now being incorporated into the ordinance. And so it's a permitted right by use, but you would have now have to follow all those conditions similar to what you guys have put on those special use permits. So yes, it's being allowed in more districts, but there's more standards that have been applied to it, if that makes sense. Um solar um there's been you know solar was actually uh recently added to the ordinance u by this board probably less than three years ago. I don't remember the exact time but it was uh relatively recent where the the board adopted a significant solar ordinance uh as part of the um as part that's one of those where solar was becoming more and more prevalent. And so the board decided at that time, let's let's go ahead and enact an ordinance to to help us um regulate uh solar generation facilities. And so there's been a few little minor tweaks to that with this proposed

ordinance because it is, like I said, it was relatively new. Um so there's a differentiation between solar energy facility, ground mounted, medium scale ground mounted, structure mounted, and utility scale ground mounted. And then uh accessory dwelling units is another one that um we've seen some increased um people increased desire to have an accessory dwelling unit. So, you know, in most cases, you're going to have one house on a lot is is generally what we see, but there are cases where there's more than one. And what what we find here is is people want the ability to have an accessory dwelling unit. So, a secondary dwelling unit that could be for an aging an aging parent. It could be for uh a child. It could be a rental income. It could be for a lot of different uses. Currently in our ordinance, we we only allow you to have a second dwelling on the property if it's for a family member. So, it has to be for a family member. And don't quote me, but I think in most cases it's a special use permit that you have to to go for. And so as part of the housing crisis and and and concerns that have been raised in the state and across the country, the general assembly is actually making it this uh kind of mandating that localities allow this opportunity for accessory dwelling units to to be in your ordinance. And so what we're doing is is updating the ordinance to reflect those requirements of the general assembly and also to to make it an opportunity that people have more access to on their property to have a second dwelling unit. So again, I think not an exhaustive list of all the changes obviously, but wanted to hit some of the key ones and and probably most of the ones that you've heard about um could could fall in those buckets um of of changes. So, just wanted to hit those because we I know we do have time constraint. We have our 5:00 meeting um with the with the Farm

Bureau. So, uh I'll wrap up here with just one or two more slides, but um as part of this process, as I mentioned earlier, we've gotten feedback from citizens at the open house and there was a survey as part of that um meeting on March 26. There was uh feedback received at a developer contract meeting, contractor meeting on March 31st. Um, as I mentioned, there's been email comments that have been submitted to staff, planning commission members, board of supervisors members. Um, Union Hall, uh, Representative Quinn had a town hall. We gathered comments at that meeting. Uh, I know Supervisor Smith is proposing one, uh, next week. We'll also gather comments that we have there. Um, all those comments are being compiled and will be submitted to the board and the planning commission for your upcoming work session on the 13th. So, you'll see them. Um, I think similarly to what I just discussed, we we'll we'll try to put those in buckets, you know, and and kind of group them in in similar areas of concern. Um, that way they should be a little easier to kind of um differentiate between the the different questions and concerns. Um and so Berkeley Group is preparing to provide u those comments and then also provide options on May 13th of how do we potentially address some of these concerns. So we can reduce lot sizes, we can reduce setbacks, we can expand uses, we can limit limit potential uses. Those sorts of things are what we uh are hoping to have uh discussion about and have dialogue about at your work session, your joint work session with the planning commission on um May 13th. And all that would be in preparation for a second draft of the ordinance that would come out uh based on those changes that have been uh recommended. So, uh, how can citizens continue to find information about this and how can

they provide additional comments and feedback? Um, if you go on the homepage, the county's homepage, there's a zoning update, zoning ordinance update tab on the main page. You can click on that. It will take you to the current first draft um, of the ordinance. There's a link there to to click to the the March 26 or March 28th. Hope I didn't say that wrong. One of those, whatever the date is on that. uh current draft. Um it'll take you there. As I said, um you'll find some other documents there. You'll find the documents that that you guys have gotten today. Um you'll find those there as well. Uh probably those things will be uploaded sometime tomorrow and and we'll have that information up there uh for folks to see and look at. So So what are some of the next steps? Um the planning commission will meet again on uh May 12th and I think they'll talk about some of the feedback and comments that they're getting uh as well uh at that meeting. The the joint work session is scheduled for for May 13th at at 5:00 p.m. and that's the joint work session of the planning commission and board of supervisors. Um we'll continue to evaluate that feedback from constituents on the potential changes to the ordinance. Um there, as I mentioned, there some some supervisors are holding town halls and and getting additional uh input. Um a after we put out a second draft, we we will work on identifying some opportunities to have meetings for input um to to consider the the revised draft, the second draft. And then I I left these on there because the original schedule had a June 9th planning commission public hearing and a July 21st board of supervisors public hearing. And so um I at this point I think those those meetings are going to shift. They are going to move out and and part of that thought process is May 13th we'll be identifying changes for

the second draft. Berkeley will need a few weeks to to put those changes into effect and we'll put the second draft out on the street. And my thought process is is we want to allow probably 60 days to to get feedback and comment on that on those changes before the planning commission would have any kind of public hearing on those. There may still be significant feedback that we want to do a third draft, but I think at this point I think all we can say is there will be a second draft um coming out of the May 13th meeting that um you know we'll we'll provide that time period for comment before the planning commission would would really schedule their public hearing to act. So

So Mr. Sandy, I notice on here um my understanding is that we were going to try to have a board of supervisors work session on this um rewrite prior to the joint work session with the planning commission on the 13th. Correct. So the joint session would be at 5:00 p.m. What we have what we have discussed is the board would convene earlier that day to to potentially go over, you know, additional comments or concerns that the board may want to Yes. So, whatever goes out to the public, let's make sure that we're alerting the public to that that there's going to be another work session of the board on this. Okay. Um, if I may make another comment. Is this your last slide? Uh, I think it is.

Okay. Um, if I can just make a comment seeing that you had um if you move back one slide please. Um, this one. No, it's okay. I know what No, you're fine. That's okay. talking about the um the second reddraft that comes out.

I have a couple concerns. Um we are assuming that everybody has a computer and everybody is online and just relying on that in addition to social media. my the feedback I'm getting is that we're missing some residents that don't utilize um electronic media for information. So, if if you and staff can put your heads together a little bit and think about how we can make sure that the general, you know, the populace of Franklin County understands there's a reddraft um you know, so that it can be commented on. Um, and again, if we could maybe have a a chart like what you've done here that tries to capture um some of the changes over what this this rewrite is. Um, when that second rewrite comes out, if we can, you know, do that quick reference document.

Sure. For that purpose. And and again, I want to make clear that the the list that we gave you does not include every change. No, it doesn't. I'll admit that. And I don't want anybody to accuse us of not listing every change because there there are a number of changes, but some of them are relatively small. Some of those represent moving from one article to another, you know, things like that. So, what we've really tried to cover with this sheet is is not every single change in the ordinance, but some of the major ones that that we've heard feedback on. Okay. Um, and and it doesn't mean these are the only ones that are going to get addressed. It just means these are the major ones that we've heard feedback from. And I think that's probably the major areas you guys have heard feedback from as well. So, Mr. Sandy, if it's okay with you, u may I open the floor up or did you have

Yeah. No, just to to further answer your question or to address your question, um, you know, we will make sure that the second draft that there's a hard copy available in this building at the libraries, th those sorts of things for people that may, you know, not have that internet access um, you know, available to them. So, that's certainly not a problem. And I'm and I don't want to be quoted on it, but I'm pretty sure we did that with the first draft, but we'll make sure that the second draft is available for people to see.

I just know that, you know, because this process has been a prolonged process dating back to 2024, you know, all of us have heard a great deal, you know, from everybody from um citizens to businesses and contractors that they didn't know anything about it. Um and that's been a general feedback. And so what I've been doing is trying to think um you know because a lot of the initial stuff was under the planning commission under their piece on the website but other than that if you didn't know to go to the planning commission tab and I don't know how later we put that little um uh link on the homepage but that's been fairly recent. Yeah.

Okay. It would have been hard for normal citizens to understand that this is something that's important. So, I just want to make sure that we are doing our utmost to make sure that things that are evolving with this process have a lot more transparency attached to it and efforts to get as many of our citizens reached as we can. Sure. And and that's why I wanted to cover this and talk about the the times that it was on the agendas. Sure. That it was out there. But agree. I think, you know, we're certainly moving forward, we're certainly going to get

more information out there and make it make it as available as we can to to folks and and we do have a lot of people that are looking at it now, which is good. I mean, we we want the feedback and that's that's how we're going to get the document that ultimately we we want to adopt is is by getting that feedback. Thank you very much. Sure. Um I know that we're a little time constrained, but I would like to open um the floor up for supervisors. Um anything that you'd like to share? Um Mr. Quinn,

I'll start. So I want to talk about a I have a lot of commentary and challenges, but I come down to what I think is a good solution. So a couple things um about the whole process. So I feel like the Berkeley group did a poor job in general, and I didn't see everything, but I saw certain data points. For example, we were handed the zoning ordinance and then called into a meeting two at a time and they simply asked us, "Do you have any questions?" with no tools. They didn't do any analytics on it to help us understand what are the big changes that you're making. So, it was just like, "Do you have any questions?" And I felt a little bit like it's where where's Waldo? Then they had the open house and they didn't anticipate the public would come in not reading this. They want to hear presentation. They want to they want to know what changed and and there there was nothing there. The Berkeley group did they should have anticipated that they've done this in a lot of counties. Why wouldn't they anticipate and I'm not asking for answers. It's a rhetorical question but why wouldn't they anticipate the public wants to know what changed and and then they didn't anticipate where the problems was like were like here you talk about the minimum lot size going from 08 to10. They could put a red flag there and say this is going to be a huge problem. you're going to have a lot of people very angry at this. Oh, I'm glad to hear that. If I read through this, I I don't really pick that up without help from from the consultant. And then that there's still deliverable gaps, things that we should have gotten that we didn't. And I'm going to come back to that in a second. So then I go back to the original premise, the original scope for this. And I remember Stephanie standing up and saying, "Nobody's zoning is going to change." That was the expectation. And and Steve, I'm not beating you up. this is for the benefit of of our board and everybody here. But the expectation was nothing's going to change from from the landowner perspective. Well, that's not true. Sure, they're A1, they're A1 today, they're A1 tomorrow, but you lost a lot

of by route by uses. You now can't subdivide your property. There are lots of changes to your zoning. So, it's not true. And and that's part of what's really irritating people is you are we we are making a lot of changes. So then the when I think back to what we were going to do, we're going to modernize the language. We're going to comply with state laws. We're going to fix heirs. Collectively, I would call those things nondiscretionary. Those are things you have to do. I I'm a big supporter of doing those things that I'm calling non-discretionary. And this is going to be a theme as I go about this is discretionary versus non-discretionary. So then I think over the two years we had scope creep. We went from doing all these mandatory things that we agreed to to suddenly there are a lot of discretionary things that are added like this going from8 acres to 10 acres. That's discretionary. That's not state law. It's to preserve open spaces or farmland. So, there were a lot of discretionary things and and the board of supervisors, they weren't approving these discretionary things along the way. I didn't even think I don't even think we all collectively realized all these discretionary things were being now baked into the zoning ordinance. So, then I I had a a number of meetings either with one citizen, with a group, I had the 110 people at the town hall and I can tell you coming out of this, all the problems are with the discretionary items. They're not with the mandatory stuff. It's all discretionary items. And when I look at the things, the problems, they're discretionary items. And and I would say this is a discretionary item. Going from 08 to 10 acres is discretionary. And then there for for example, it says you can't build anything below the 800 foot level. Well, we could no longer build docks at Smith Mountain Lakes. So that's simply an air. So but the discretionary items, that's

where all the focus um the people have. So now I look at I talked about the Berkeley group not giving us deliverables. There were gaps and one of the big ones for me is understanding all of these changes each one. Was this a state law? Was it discretionary? If it's discretionary, why are we doing it? And this becomes really important to educate the board because I think ultimately we are going to have to make a decision on these discretionary items. It's not fair for the planning commission, the planning department for you to have to make these changes. We I think we are going to have to vote on on say it could be one change or maybe it's a collection of changes. How do we vote? Everybody votes and we either include it or we don't include it. So now so I'm getting close to the end, but I think it was important to give that as a background. Now I'm to the solution. I think that we need to develop a zoning ordinance that only has the nondiscretionary changes. So what do I have I kind of the starting point is I had the old zoning ordinance but I have state law changes. I have language clean up because I changed something here one year and I didn't change it somewhere else. So I have to do that and and um and I have to fix air. So, and I want to modernize the language, but how can I have a copy of this zoning ordinate or ordinance that only has non-discretionary changes in it? And I think that becomes important because you could think about this as a phase project. I could release phase one. Phase one of the zoning ordinance has all the things we must do. It's it's the public can't argue with it. We have to do these things. Nobody's going to argue this is state law. You put it in the zoning ordinance and you do it. So this phase one could be very clean. It could be very non-controversial. Then you separately list all of the discretionary changes and and I'm not

saying the some discretionary changes I think are good. Some I don't like. So I'm not painting a a picture and I'm sure everybody here has a different opinion about the the discretionary changes. Like you get to bees and chickens and we we talk about that. But I but you separately you've pulled out all your discretionary changes from this and those two slides. Could you go back to the key issues um raised I just want just the first slide. So the way I presented this at the town hall is this is a collection of what I think is causing all the agitation. This slide and the next slide. These two slides were a collection of everything that I had heard. Now, I've heard little things since then, but this this slide and the following one are still a pretty good um set of things that are causing all the agitation. And I would say this set of things is all discretionary. And this set of things is all stuff I think we have to vote on and agree we're going to put it in or not put it in. So then um I I think after so now I have a list of all the discretionary things. So I have this slide and I have some other things. But now the last step. So, and I've released phase one of this zoning ordinance. It's all the mandatory stuff. The stuff I had no say over the state law, the the cleanup. I've released that. Phase two of the zoning ordinance. We have work to do because now we have this up for a vote. So, how do each one of us feel about this? We go on record. So, do you want lot sizes increased from 08 acres to 10 acres? There are arguments on both sides. I think your staff could come in and tell us why the the pros and cons of this group of things and and then we're educated. We really understand why it could be a good idea idea to do it or why it's might be a bad idea to do it and we vote. And so I think I just think at the end of the day we're going to have to vote on these really difficult discretionary changes that a lot of people don't like. So that's everything I have. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Can I make a couple comments? Of course. Of course. So I I think I understand uh what you're saying. I I think part of my response would be it's it's it's not quite that neat and clean. So data centers for example, you know, so part of

updating terminology and and updating things, it may seem benign, but when we add a use, what districts does it go in? So that's where it then becomes a discretionary action, you know, by the board. So we've added a use that wasn't currently in the ordinance. That's benign in and of itself, but then the discretion comes in. Where do we want to put it within the ordinance? So, I think that there's going to be some of those kind of things that just they don't fit neatly in one box or the other, if that makes sense. Yeah.

Um, and so I think that'll just be a process we'll we'll have to go through um to to get that consensus on those items. But I think we're almost talking about the same thing, but rather than separating rather than adopting one ordinance and then coming back and adopting another ordinance. Uh what we're suggesting is on May 13th, what we want to do is talk about those hot topics and we want to know at that point, how do you want to address this issue? How do you want to revise it for the for the next draft? And so I think we're in some ways we're headed on the same path of of getting there and getting those answers and and again that's the the point of the work session would be to get some clarity on those hot topic items and those key issues so we know how to move forward and and keep that process moving forward um you know at that point and getting the consensus from the board of which what's the direction and what's the solution um that the board would like to put in place to you know for those those certain issues. Yeah. And so I think you're saying putting the two phases together. I'm okay with that. It could take a little bit longer, but it's neater. You do it all at one time. But I I think you know there's certain thing like the data centers updated use standards. I couldn't vote on that today. I don't understand it well enough. Right. And I So we need to be educated on each one of these things where I can say, "Yep, I really understand this and I can vote on one way or the other."

Okay. So, what we could do is is we could, if it would be helpful, pull out those individual sections for the board out of the the zoning ordinance that you have, pull out those sections specifically and and you know, you guys can take a look at some of those um things that are in the ordinance now before the May 13th meeting to to kind of familiarize yourself. I was going to suggest that maybe I do some some um phone calls or interaction with each supervisor to kind of more specifically get an idea of um where your reference points are of concern. um and if you have any suggestions what you'd like to see those types of things so that like as Steve said when we get through the 13th right

we'll have an opportunity to see collectively are we all saying some of the same stuff or are there things that maybe as an example Mr. Quinn may bring up that we hadn't thought of. Is that kind of moving in that direction? And then the sections listed on the right is where you find the information relative to that particular topic. And so um you know if you can flip to that section number, you'll see what's currently proposed um and what that language looks like there. Sure. And these two slides, Steve, if you go back to those two slides that we put together for the town hall, um, for Lori, for your discussion, this slide

and the one before it are what we came up with as a complete set of the things most agitating the people. And so, so, well, it's interesting to hear from supervisors.

Did you hear of anything else that's not on this list? Yes. You know, is one, but but then how do you feel about these things on the list is a second point. And that's a great point and I think this is the kind of thing that these two slides are are are great utilities for that. Um but like for me there there's one or two things that aren't on here. So I'm thinking as we continue to gather information and I check with you all prior to the 13th that we can make sure that this document represents collective thinking of all of the supervisors so that we can staff especially can have an idea of how to present and work through these things methodically. on the 13th. Am I getting that right, Mr. Sandy?

Yes, it's exactly. So, again, that list wasn't meant to be exhaustive, but those seem to be the the primary issues that that most people were hearing about. Again, the 800T contour, we've heard that one and and I think we can fix that. That's really just a language thing about how that's worded. Um, so that I I didn't include that on the list because I think that's one that we're just going to fix and we're gonna we're going to take care of that because that certainly was not the intention that people would not be long be able to build docks uh under the 800T contour. Well, and I got a a a list, I think maybe Lori, you did too, from Ron Willard today, and they did they did some work on it, and they identified some other things that aren't on these two pages, like maybe now I have to have three cars per two people. Instead, I could have two cars before, well, two parking spaces, you know, little thing nuances like that. But, you know, one one other I'll just give you food for thought on this. to the extent of that you have the old zoning ordinance in electronic format and we have the new zoning ordinance in electronic format and we put cla or chatbt on them. It'll totally tell you every change like it's that's a it's it's like a twominute project for it to go through 300 pages and do

Yeah. But it's not it's not it's not super clean. So yeah, it's not clean but it but rather than having because we've moved some things around it it complicates that. But rather than handing 300page manuals to an analyst and please go do this work. I mean it's a a tremendous starting point for them to go through. It's not going to be complete. I agree. But a lot of work could be done with with AI on it. Okay. So um if I may I'm c

can I just one more point I was just going to make on this this slide here and just going back to some of Mr. Quinn's uh comments. I think that that when you talk discretionary and non-discretionary, I think the two the couple areas where we kind of see that come into play for uh discretionary is going to be aligning the ordinance to the comprehensive plan. That that totally is going to be a policy non-discretionary or discretionary type of decision of how we do that, you know, and and going back to the lot size in A1, that's that's really coming back to these goals of the of the zoning ordinance. So, I did just want to say these were goals that were listed in the beginning to to look at those things. So, I didn't want it to sound like we've gone beyond the scope because this was always the scope of looking at how do we align this with the comprehensive plan and how do we work to preserve the agricultural land and the the rural character. If you remember in the comprehensive plan, that's number one thing that everybody says we want to preserve the rural character of of Franklin County. And so one of the goals has been to to try to figure out ways to help us do that. Um and so just wanted to point that out that you know when when he talks about discretionary and non-discretionary I agree completely agree but some of those discretionary items are going back to some of the goals that were identified and early on in this process and also tie back to the comprehensive plan.

Okay. Um we are running up against our meeting with the Farm Bureau. Um, does anybody have anything a brief comment that you would like to make? Mr. Carter? Thank you, Madam Chair. I had a whole lot of comments I wanted to make, but running out of time. But for my colleagues on the board, as I've been working my way through this, I want you all to pay close attention to the use of two words, shall and may.

Uh, legally, shall means mandatory. That means it's a done deal. in May is maybe at Lisa's discretion or it's at somebody's discretion. So, as you work through this, pay attention to where those two words are used a lot. May is not in there very often, but shall's in there a lot. That's a really good point. Yeah. And I in some of my presentations I've pointed that out, you know, that the differences between this comprehensive plan, which is a policy document, the zoning ordinance, it's law. I mean, it is. So, so you're correct. There are a lot of shells in there because the these are requirements um that are being placed on certain certain things. So,

and Mike, I will talk with you offline about maybe getting some of your things um in writing and I'll help you with that um and getting them out before um in May. Mr. One more thing, the B thing is absolutely absurd. That whole that whole B thing needs to be tossed or totally redone. It's ridiculous. And that's all I have. Thank you. I just have just one more of a comment than a statement is um you know and I kind of agree with Dan on the Berkeley group thing, but if the Berkeley group had so many work sessions with our planning commission, chapter by chapter,

how and Lisa, this is probably a question for you. How did anyone ever think that a 10acre minimum lot size was going to fly? How did that not throw a red flag in one of those work sessions? I think when the planning commission and Berkeley Group was here and we were doing that article, um, Berkeley Group and staff, it was a way to preserve farmland because what you what you are doing is if a developer comes in to buy that up, you are telling them you're going to have to reszone to a residential district to be able to get the smaller lots. Well, and I and I understand where where Berkeley Group and staff may have looked at that and thought that was a way of preserving farmland, but when you talk to a land owner,

your normal everyday land owner in the county, they're going to say that is the worst way to preserve Yeah.

agricultural land, period. Because if someone comes in and wants to do that instead of just tying up their one and I don't mean to pick on anybody, but when someone owns a farm and say they want to give their kid an an acre or say they want to sell an acre to to pay their taxes or something that they need to do farming farming was a rough year and they need to generate some money. Giving up that one acre is much better than the 10 acres because if you give them the 10, it's not like they're going to say, "Oh, well you can come uh you can come mad a hay on this other nine." and no, they're going to plant. They're going to do something crazy with it. It won't be farmed anymore. So, I I understand where the Berkeley Cook Group came from, but I think it was backwards and and that's just the perspective I've gotten from Franklin County land owners.

Right. So, that's why you have a draft ordinance. Yes, ma'am. And and I basically we probably missed the mark planning commission staff Berkeley Group and that's why we're up here today to discuss it. What is the number that we need? Is it 5 acres? Is it back to what it was originally? I think a 1 acre clean cut deal would be pretty good. 08 is what it currently it was 08. I think a 1 acre clean deal would be pretty good. And that may where we end up. And I think if we do end up with that, we might want to look at the A2 of changing some things. Yes, ma'am. Well, and that's the purpose of why we're starting this out today.

Yep. as so we can collectively discuss this stuff and find out where we need to move to to get the kind of draft and eventual adopted document that's going to represent Franklin County residents, their needs, how we want to move into our future with land uses, all of that. And u I I agree with my colleagues. I don't think we've got that document right now. And I think you'll hear some ideas on the 13th. I mean, I know there is a county that does um sliding scale in the A1 to help preserve farmland and that might be an option. It's worked in some um other localities. Okay. U Mr. Meredith, did you have a quick thought? Um

but I hope he's got one more handout for me because Tuesday night I was told I would get one today and that's all I got to say. Okay. That is this you talking about the one you and I discussed? Uh I asked for the state regulations. I think okay I want to make sure I didn't drop I was told we would get one today with this. So that's all I'm going to say. We had said we would highlight the things in the chart that would represent state regulated items like in red or something or or not annotated in some way. And I think it goes back to what Dan was talking about. It would be great to see what the state mandates or requires. Sure.

And discretionary and non-discretionary. So, uh, but, uh, I was just reminding what I was told. Thank you. We'll follow through with that, Mr. Meredith. For sure. For sure. Mr. Jameson, do you have anything quick?

Okay. Thank you all for your indulgence this afternoon. Um, this has been good conversation. I think we've got a good place to move to in May. Um, but let's kind of roll our sleeves up here in the interim. Keep talking to our citizens and uh I'm happy to help you in any way I can to facilitate your questions or if you want to set meetings up, we'll move forward with some of the things we discussed earlier this afternoon. So with that in mind, um I am going to adjourn this meeting um so that we can move into um our dinner meeting with Farm Bureau um at 5:00 uh which is 501 now. Um and from that meeting, I'll adjourn that meeting until May 4th. So thank you all. I appreciate all the work. Thank you staff. Uh and thank you those that are in attendance with us today. We greatly appreciate it.