Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/10/2022 - Minutes oritte ROANOKE COUNTY P PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES MAY 10, 2022 Commissioners Present: Mr. Kelly McMurray, Chairman Mr. Wayne Bower Mr. Rick James Mr. Jim Woltz Commissioners Absent: Mr. Troy Henderson, Vice-Chairman Board of Supervisors Present: Ms. Martha Hooker Mr. Paul Mahoney Mr. Phil North Mr. Jason Peters Mr. David Radford Staff Present: Mr. Phillip Thompson, Secretary Ms. Rachel Lower, Senior Assistant County Attorney Mr. Alex Jones Ms. Cecelia Thomas, Recording Secretary Guest Speakers Present: Nick Britton, Michael Baker International Mike Callahan, Renaissance Planning WORK SESSION Call to Order Mr. McMurray called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Joint Meeting with the Board of Supervisors —419 Town Center Design Guidelines Mr. Thompson noted that the Board of Supervisors implemented the 419 Town Center Plan in July of 2019. The Board of Supervisors and the Planning Commission always knew a design element would be needed for development. Mr. Thompson overviewed the process of hiring the consultants and introduced them. Mr. Britton discussed the community engagement and noted the key comments from citizens in the County. Mr. Britton reviewed the history of the project and noted the Office of Intermodal Planning under a Growth and Accessibility Planning (GAP) technical assistance grant. He reviewed the goals of the project. He noted their goal is to give direction and framework for design, he noted they do not specify how it should be done as that is dependent on many variables. However, they are able to make suggestions that might or might not ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 10,2022 work. He noted they received a lot of positive feedback at the community meetings. He overviewed some of the feedback they received. He noted they heard a lot of comments about the continued success of existing businesses. He explained that this influenced their recommendation of doing things gradually or in phases. Connectivity and accessibility concerns were raised at the community meeting which encouraged them to layout a street design system that will elevate the pedestrian experience. They noted that their goal is to honor the principles that the County has regarding design while ensuring they are not discouraging businesses from coming to the County. He noted that there were also concerns about green space and green space connectivity which they attempted to address with street network changes. He noted they make many suggestions regarding greenway connectivity that they are happy to review. He introduced his colleague Mr. Callahan. Mr. Callahan discussed the key design principles based on the feedback they received from the community. He noted that walkability and short block lengths are important to create a park once environment. He noted early discussions of demand, and would the Route 419 area be able to grow. He noted that there are many economic reasons to be in Roanoke County. He noted that this region is known throughout Virginia for its outdoor activities and greenways. He noted that it is their belief that building the market to emphasize Roanoke's marketability for its outside activities is best for the plan. He noted that them is normally a main street to encourage walkability. They believe that Starkey Road will be that for the Route 419 area. He noted that can continue long-term to the Tanglewood area. He stated that the roads are the framework for creating the plan. Mr. Mahoney questioned why you would not want to make Route 419 the main walkable road. Mr. Callahan noted that Route 419 is not really the main street, not many people are going to want to live or bike right next to it. He continued by saying that Route 419 is a great road for getting people from place to place, but does not encourage walkability. He noted long-term Starkey Road is more ideal as it would be more suited for building up next to the road. Mr. North questioned how to encourage property owners to adhere to design guidelines. Mr. Callahan noted that this is 30 years down the line, and is meant to set a framework for down the line. Mr. Woltz commented that it would be important to create a zoning ordinance that focuses on the long term. Mr. Callahan noted that the theme of the plan is flexibility. He noted that having flexibility will help things evolve in a big box area like Tanglewood. Mr. North noted that what comes to his mind regarding big box areas is Short Pump Town Center. He questioned how people will be able to traverse Route 419. Mr. Callahan noted that pedestrian bridges did not seem like a good option. He noted that the best way is to put crosswalks at a signal where there can be a safe crossing for pedestrians. Mr. Thompson noted the need to incentivize to create small improvements over time. Mr. Callahan overviewed road frontage. He discussed potential character districts and design elements such as step backs and setbacks. He reviewed design intent and the basic elements of the design. He noted that having people park behind the buildings is key to creating a walkable space. He overviewed the framework pieces in the design. He noted mixed-use and creating an urban environment is preferred and will really help with making the space walkable. He discussed sustainable development, distinctive Page 2 of 4 • ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 10,2022 architecture, and space for pop-up events. He clarified that this is design guidance, not a list of what has to be done. Mr. Britton discussed different ways to get developers interested in the space. He noted that if you make it easy for developers, they tend to be more willing to locate in your area. He discussed how zoning needs to look at this from a long-term perspective. He noted that phasing is one of the best tools for a long-term approach. He explained that phasing allows slow development and changes over time. Mr. Britton discussed anchors and incentives. He discussed the team element between the private sector and the public sector. He explained that buildings for public infrastructure appeal to developers by creating more interest in an area. Mr. James questioned if any anchors were recommended during talks with local developers. Mr. Britton noted that parks and green spaces are recommended, especially with residential as a part of mixed uses. He noted many businesses are incentivized by the infrastructure. Mr. Radford questioned if Henrico County was giving flexibility and options to developers, and Mr. Britton explained the process they have in place. Mr. McMurray noted that he is in favor of more outdoor spaces in the County, while not competing with the amphitheater in Roanoke City. Mr. Radford discussed his first experience on a walkable neighborhood. Mr. Mahoney questioned what Charlottesville did in terms of the regulatory oversight twenty years ago. Mr. Callahan noted that the mall they are discussing was built in 1976. He noted that they reintroduced cross-traffic, had small block sizes, and they had a service district area there. He noted they have a mechanism in place to provide a higher level of service. Mr. Mahoney noted that his philosophical approach is to make it a by-right use, but he sees the problems of not having regulatory obligations. He gave the example of the new restaurants being built at Tanglewood that do not have sidewalks to them for ease of access for mall employees or pedestrians. Mr. Radford noted that providing the structure will make it much easier to sell the guidelines. Mr. Thompson discussed reviewing the standards for parking in the zoning ordinance. Mr. Britton noted that not being as restrictive on by-right uses. Mr. Thompson discussed wanting to use the guidelines to use submit future Smart Scale applications. Mr. North commented that he is not thrilled to see the out parcels at Tanglewood being built facing the wrong direction for pedestrian activity. Mr. Woltz noted he did not like it either, but did not see how they can control it. Mr. James noted the answer is to incentivize rather than to require. Mr. Thompson explained the Blackwater has had to negotiate some of the leases with existing businesses for the out parcels to be allowed. He noted that it will take time for things to change, but as more things come over time they will spur more development. Mr. Mahoney noted that the outparcels did meet some of the criteria mentioned in the 419 area plan. Mr. Callahan noted than many owners along Route 419 and Starkey Road have noted how they would like sidewalks. Mr. Thompson spoke to by-right uses along Route 419, and noted that traffic will reduce as more public transit is offered. He noted that when they have passed the Comprehensive Plan and are working on the Zoning Ordinance, they will incorporate parts of the plan into the Zoning Ordinance. He noted that he sees the Incentives and guidelines evolving over time so that it is not super stringent at the beginning and discourages development. He believes that the incentives are the biggest piece to be focused on. Mr. Woltz noted that he Page 3 of 4 ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 10, 2022 would love to see a village area in the more rural areas of the County. Mr. Caywood noted that he came to work at Roanoke County in 2013, no one at that time would have expected the development in the County that has happened since then. He stated that it's easy to overlook the good if you only focus on the perfect. Adjournment With no further comments, Mr. McMurray adjourned the meeting at 6:39 p.m. Respectfully Submitted: (Iiiïi,2 Cia Thomas Recordin Secretary, Roanoke County Planning Commission 4PThPL Secretary, Roanoke County Planning Commission ----) API Kell rray Chairman, Roano • ty Planning Commission Page 4 of 4