Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/2/2024 - Minutes ` KOANp 0�..4 - ROANOKE. COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION 1838 MEETING MINUTE$. J U LY 2, 2024 Commissioners Present: Mr. Rick James, Chairman Mr. Wayne Bower, Vice-Chairman Mr. Jim Woltz Mr. Kelly McMurray Mr. Troy Henderson (arrived during the consent agenda) Staff Present: Mr. Philip Thompson, Secretary Ms. Rachel Lower, Deputy County Attorney Ms. Skylar Camerlinck, Planner Mr. Jason Nowak, Planner I Mr. Nathan Grim, Transportation Planner Mr. Ross Hammes, Planner ll Ms. Alyssa Dunbar, Planner. II Ms. Cecelia Thomas, Recording.Secretary Call to Order Mr. James called the meeting to order at 4:03 p.m. Approval of gen a. Mr. Bower made a motion to approve the agenda, which passed 4-0. Approval of Minutes Mr. Woltz made a motion to approve the meeting minutes from.June 11, 2024. The motion passed 4-0. Consent Agenda. 1. The petition of Joel Calfee to obtain a special use permit to operate a short-term rental on approximately 0.2599 acre of land zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District, located at 1176 Nover Ave, Hollins Magisterial District. Ms. Camerlinck presented the current use, existing zoning, and the future land use designation. Mr. Woltz questioned the grace period regarding short term rentals. It was noted by Ms. Camerlinck that:• applicants are allowed to allow stays that are currently booked but are asked to block out other dates while going through the ap proval g g process. 2. The petition of Reed Road Solar 1, LLC to obtain a special use permit for a major utility service (solar farm) on approximately 36.48 acres of land zoned AR Agricultural/Residential District, located at 9150 Reed Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. (Planning Commission continued the public hearing from its.June 4, 2024; meeting until its August 6, 2024, meeting) Mr. Thompson explained that staff has met with the applicant twice since the last Planning Commission public hearing to work through more of the application. ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 2,2024 3. Roanoke County 200 Plan. The Roanoke County 200 Plan is an update to the County's Comprehensive Plan. It expresses an overarching community vision as well as unique goals for 11 community planning areas within the County. It also provides guidance for public policies about natural and cultural resources, community facilities, transportation, and land development. The Roanoke County 200 Plan includes a main document as well as 11 Community Planning Area documents. Mr. McMurray made a motion to approve the consent agenda, which passed 5-0. Citizens Comments There were none. Comments of Planning Commissioners and Staff Mr. Thompson explained a resolution from the Board of Supervisors directing the Planning Commission to determine whether Roanoke County should amend the Zoning Ordinance to prohibit the sale of tobacco and nicotine vapor products within 1.000 feet of a school. Mr. Thompson noted that Alex Jones, Principal Planner, is moving to Economic Development as the Assistant Director of Marketing and Business Development. Adjournment for Site Viewing Mr. James adjourned the meeting for site visit at,4:32 p.m. EVENING SESSION Mr. James called the evening session to order at 7:00 p.m. Invocation Mr. James led the invocation and pledge of allegiance. Public Hearings 1.The petition of Brad Prescott to obtain a special use permit to develop on a lot without public road frontage and to obtain a special use permit for custom manufacturing in a C- 2, High Intensity Commercial District, on approximately 1.44 acres of land located in the 2900 block of Peters Creek Road, Catawba Magisterial District. Mr. Ross Hammes presented an overview of the petition including the existing use and zoning, proposed use, future land use designation, and suggested condition. Mr. Bower questioned if the water basins on the property would be needed in the future, and it was noted they would not. Mr. Prescott explained the reasoning for his request. Mr. James opened the(public hearing, and with no one wishing to speak closed the public hearing. Mr. Henderson made a motion to approve the application with the following condition: Page 2 of 9 ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 2,2024 1. The site shall be developed in general conformance with the concept plan dated May 10, 2024, subject to any changes required during the comprehensive site plan review process. The motion passed 5-0. 2.The petition of Jonathan Kenneth Burns-Carrera to obtain a special use permit to operate a short-term rental on approximately 1.42 acres of land zoned R-1, Low Intensity Residential District, located at 5909 Old Mountain Road, Hollins Magisterial District. Ms. Camerlinck presented an overview of the petition including the history of the parcel, the existing use, the future land use designation, and suggested conditions. Mr. Bower questioned the comments by VDOT that was in the packet that noted that any expansion or redevelopment may require VDOT approval. Mr. Thompson noted that it may be that if there are additional units built or some other use put on the property that would produce more traffic, then VDOT would look at it. Mr. Bower questioned the use of the basement. Mr. Carrara noted the plan would be for long term rental, but the septic system would need to be upgraded for`that to be approved. Mr. Bower questioned the well, which was noted to have been updated in 2014. Mr. Carrara noted that he has purchased the front driveway so the easement will no longer be needed. Mr. James questioned if this would still be his main residence if this is approved for short-term rental. Mr. Carrara noted he would eventually do long term rental in the basement and live upstairs. Carrara noted that he works with a realtor to manage the property. He noted that he has three cleaners for the property. It was noted that the realtor who helps manage the property lives in Cave Spring. Mr. James opened the public hearing, and with no one wishing to speak closed the public hearing. Mr. Bower made a motion to approve the application with the following seven (7) conditions: 1. The short-term rental shall be limited to the upper level of the existing residential. dwelling (approximately 1,450 square feet). 2. The number of overnight guests shall,not exceed six (6) people. 3. One (1) off-street parking space shall'be provided for each guestroom in addition to parking spaces required for the principal dwelling. All parking shall be provided on-site and shall be located in driveways and other designated approved parking areas. 4. The property owner shall provide and maintain,in good working order every smoke detector, carbon monoxide detector, and fire extinguisher required by law. Exists required by law shall not be obstructed. 5. The property must maintain a residential appearance. No signage shall be allowed with the short-term rental use. Page 3 of 9 ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 2,2024 6. No events such as parties, banquets, weddings, receptions, meetings, or similar events shall be allowed with the short-term rental use. 7. A business license shall be obtained from the Commissioner of Revenue for the short-term rental use. The motion passed 5-0. 3.. The petition of Trail Development Group, LLC to rezone approximately 9.67 acres from I-1, Low Intensity Industrial District, to C-2, High Intensity Commercial District, located near 3475 and 3801 Challenger Avenue, Vinton Magisterial District. Ms. Dunbar presented an overview of the petition including the history of the parcel, existing zoning, proposed use, and future land use designation. Mr. James verified that the parcel is currently zoned I-1 with no conditions, and that the request is to zone the property C-2 with no conditions. Mitchell Tyler, 6560 Goodview Road, presented the background of his business, reviewed the background of the parcel, their reasoning for their application, and provided an overview of their plan for the proposed business. Mr. James noted that this is an exciting project, but he has concern with the application not having any proffered conditions due to the number of uses in C-2 that would not be exciting for the neighborhood. Mr. Tyler noted that he has been working with staff on this project for ten months. He explained that he was unaware that he should proffer conditions. However, Mr. Tyler continued saying that he has no other use in mind for the parcel and has no objection to concept'plan conformance. Mr. James opened the public hearing. Mr. Keith Bo Hunt, Jr., 310 Evans Lane, notes his question and concern is keeping the existing vegetation/buffer intact. He noted that he lives in the patio home development. He stated that he is in a corner unit that looks right down on the parcel. He noted he is worried about the vegetation that exists and is worried about the buffer being cut down. He noted that he believes from what the applicant stated that it will remain intact. However, he wants to make sure that buffer remain intact. . Matthew Tyler, noted that they are established in Blacksburg and Harrisonburg, but Roanoke is home. He noted that he and his brother, the applicant, both went to Roanoke Catholics school. He noted that their kids go there. He noted that they want to invest and be established in Roanoke. Alice Woolak, 5903 Crumpacker Drive, questioned if the traffic study that was done indicated exiting the proposed location would be a right turn only. She questioned if that study took into consideration the accidents that frequently happen near the CVS and the Chick-fil-A. Diane Connell, questioned if they will hold concerts because she noticed a stage in the concept plans. Page 4 of 9 ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 2,2024 Mr. James closed the public hearing. Mr. Tyler addressed the concerns presented by citizens. He noted that the existing vegetation is intended to be kept. He attempted to address the traffic concerns. He noted that he has a passion for concerts and explained the design intent. Mr. James made a motion recommending approval of the rezoning with a voluntary proffer, to include substantial conformance with the concept plan, in consultation with County staff. The motion passed 5-0. Mr. James recessed until 9:00 p.m. Due to technical issues, sound was not recorded for the rest of the public hearing. 4. The petition of Roanoke Valley Holdings LLC to remove a proffered condition on approximately 50.8 acres of land zoned R-1 C, Low Density Residential District with conditions, in order to develop a residential subdivision, located near the 6200 block of Crumpacker Drive, Hollins Magisterial District. Ms. Dunbar presented an overview of the petition, the existing conditions, proposed use, and the future land use designation. Robert Fralin explained the history of the company, and gave an overview of the property and their plans for the property. Mr. James noted that this design is similar to what is currently allowed and questioned why Mr. Fralin wanted to change the design. Mr. Fralin noted that he does not know why it was originally designed the way it was and wants to provide more housing to meet demand. Bobby Wampler discussed from an engineering perspective the reasoning for the proposed changes. It was noted that the sheet flow will be channeled off of people who are currently experiencing it. Mr. James questioned if they were proffering conformance with the concept plan. Mr. Fralin noted that they are willing to proffer general conformance. Mr. Wampler addressed traffic noting that VDOT standards note that the roads are meant for 4,000 trips per day. With the proposed development and existing development, they will only be at 2,000 trips. Mr. Bower questioned the average frontage of existing lots on Crumpacker Drive. Mr. Wampler noted that it depends on the size of the lots. Mr. Fralin noted that there is no financial benefit to smaller houses. He concluded that they have built over 2,000 homes in 22 years, and there was only 1 drainage issue that they could not resolve. Mr. James opened the public hearing. Patrick Callahan, 6116 Morning Glory Drive, noted that he was upset that the application was tabled last time. He thanked staff for their effort with the postponement. He noted that more people wanted to attend the fleeting, but it was difficult due to it being a holiday week. He stated that the proposed lots differ significantly from the Page 5 of 9 ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 2,2024 existing homes. He noted that the developer wants to put more lots on the parcel than what is allowed, and that is the only reason why we are here. He noted the need to have the proffers removed due to development patterns. He mentioned safety issues with children and families that like to walk the neighborhood. He concluded by asking the Planning Commission to reject the petition. James Lewis, 6121 Crumpacker Drive, noted that when they moved to Roanoke, they purchased their home with the understanding of the 2005 proffer limitations being discussed in the petition. He mentioned issues with run off. He noted that the plan shows one point of entrance with all of the streets using Crumpacker. He continued saying that the traffic increase is irresponsible. He noted that the impact on neighboring properties will not be minimal. He noted concerns for the safety of the children. He closed by saying a new Traffic Impact Analysis is needed. Ken Foos, 6104 Morning Glory Drive, recommended rejection of the proposal to rezone the property. He stated that he moved here to retire from the Navy in a child friendly neighborhood and with beautiful nature. He questioned how the stormwater management is going to tie into the stormwater management that was built 20-30 years ago. Will that be able to manage the amount of stormwater created by the new homes. He stated that this does not increase the quality of life in the area by adding an additional 20 homes. Bill Husser, 6107 Wisteria Place Court, stated that the original zoning was a valid plan. He noted that he is against having a higher density just to appease one builder. He does not want traffic. He noted concerns with safet ' and the sewage system tolerance. He noted that he bought a home with drainage issues, and it cost a lot of money to have it resolved. Jeffrey Overbeck, 6213 Crumpacker Drive, noted that he is here to speak in opposition to this request. He noted that they are the original homeowners. He stated that the culvert in his front yard was installed well. He noted that he was told by the builder that they intended to build on 50 acres higher end homes. He was told that the homes would be nicer than the existing homes. He noted that this is not consistent with the existing subdivision. He noted that the townhomes are already too dense. He continued saying that all of the cars will go past his house. He noted that he was okay with the original development plan. He is frustrated about the traffic and concerned that the property value will decrease with small lots and a lot of homes and townhomes. Allyson Woodlak, 5903 Crumpacker Drive, asked the Planning Commission to reject the petition of the additional houses. She noted that it is a very walkable area. Her concern is that the expansion will alter the look and feel of mountain trails. She believes that it will have a negative impact on the neighborhood. She stated that the safety of the children is put at risk. She produced)a petition with 150 signatures requesting a denial of the application. Page 6 of 9 ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 2,2024 Syndi Skilling, 6143 Morning Glory Drive, noted that they previously lived in the Orchards. She noted that they returned to the area and wanted a house in the same neighborhood. She enjoys morning and evening walks and is worried about the increase in traffic. She questioned if the 4,000 trips included the apartments, townhomes, and homes. She questioned where the stormwater retention pond will go. She questioned if it would go above the housing and noted concerns of flood risks. She stated the 2005 agreement should be upheld. Mary O'Conner, 6210 Crumpacker Drive, noted she was nervous about when the new houses go in. She does not trust or understand the layout. 7,200 square feet lot does not fit current houses. She noted that they hike up Read Mountain all the time. She noted that the townhomes being built by Fralin are being built without concern of the neighborhood and no thought on how to make them fit in more. Allen McPherson, 5911 Wincrest Lane, noted that he bought his house in 1995. He stated that they were the third family to move into Samuel's Gate. He noted the beauty and nature of the rural area. He asked the Planning Commission to reject the application. He noted that the Stormwater system had to be redone due to being underbuilt. He noted that the HOA was expensive to redo it. He noted that we are still in the learning curve of stormwater management, and you can not anticipate. He noted that they should air on the side of caution. Ronald Crawford, 607 Ray Street, noted that he is the founder of the Read Mountain Alliance. He noted that Fralin and Waldron gave 150 acres to the preserve. That is why they supported the 65 homes. He noted that there are already issues with the 2005 plan lots and topography. He noted that the proposed lots are % size of Samuel's Gate. He continued saying they are deep and narrow lots with 15% grade; none of the houses shown in Fralin's presentation will fit on tiny lots. The townhomes already changed the characteristics of the neighborhood. Fralin and Waldron said no homes above the powerline. He noted that until a new water tower is put in his well level dropped 60 feet in 15 years. Zac Mister, 6003 Tollman, noted his concerns about traffic. He noted the proposal to connect to Greggin Drive and his concerns. He worries that if they allow 80+ houses that it will look like Connor's Run in Salem. Charles Swanson noted that the homes are so close together that kids cannot play. He noted that Greggin Drive is only 15-18 feet wide. Cars are not able to pass each other. He noted concerns about the streams. He noted that people drive 60-70 mph down the roads. He noted that he counted 400 cars an hour from Huntridge onto Route 460. Patrick Rush, 6128 Morning Glory Drive, commented on the townhouses on the edge of the road with huge apartments being put behind. He noted that there are multiple sinkholes in the neighborhood already. He noted that we need more housing, but so much is already being put in this area. Page 7 of 9 ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 2,2024 Mr. Wampler noted that this project does not touch Greggin Drive. Mr. Wampler discussed tying the existing Stormwater and how they plan to not overload the existing facilities. Mr. James questioned if the traffic study is still relevant. Mr. Wampler noted that he was not familiar with the 2005 study. He looked at traffic per households under state/current standards. He noted that he could not debate more traffic, but they are below capacity. He noted that VDOT traffic numbers 1,500 trips per day on Huntridge Road. Mr. Bower questioned if more wells would be put in, Mr. Wampler clarified that a pump system will be put in not more wells. Mr. Wampler noted that they are required to have sidewalks on at least one side of the development. He noted that the 65-foot width is just a starting point for the lots. Mr. Bower questioned if the number of homes is more than law will currently allow. Mr. Wampler answered that the number of homes is far below the R-1 regulations. Mr. Wampler noted that there will be additional preservation. The concept lots that are deep will be additional greenspace due to credits for Stormwater Management. A 500-foot backyard is not realistic. Mr. Bower clarified that the 65 to 107 lots that are being discussed, 21 are by right. So, it would go from 86 to 107 lots. Mr. Woltz noted that greenspace is a good idea for conservation and water regulations and discharge are all dictated before you even get permits. He noted that they are likely to not even get the number of lots they have proposed due to the topography. Mr. Bower noted that he was against taking off the conditions and leaving the parcel without a condition as to the maximum number of lots. Mr. Fralin noted that the feasibility of more lots is very low. He stated that he is happy to restrict it to what is shown on the concept plan. Mr. Woltz noted that a cap goes a long way. Mr. Fralin reiterated that he is happy to proffer general conformance with the concept plan with a limit to the number of lots. Mr. Bower questioned the water and sewer capacity. Mr. Wampler explained that they are working with the Western Virginia Water Authority on the volumes and pressures needed. Mr. Henderson questioned what the community considered the neighborhood. The citizens responded saying that The Orchards, Samuel's Gate, and all 140 homes involved in the HOA make up the neighborhood. Mr. Fralin recounted his family's history with the parcels. Greg Revice, 6120 Crumpacker Drive, questioned if Crumpacker Drive would be extended through the apartments and townhouses. Mr. Fralin answered that they are phasing the multi-family development. Eventually it is platted to go through on Phase 2 to help the traffic flow. Mr. James closed the public hearing. Mr. Woltz commented on the big picture noting that the most houses he can do. by right is 65. He noted that they are requesting 20 more out of hundreds there. He noted that Mr. Fralin cannot do more than proffer the lot count and general conformance. Mr. Woltz made a motion to approve with the following proffered condition: 1. The property shall be developed in general conformance with the concept plan showing 86 lots entitled "Crumpacker Property Roanoke, VA Rezoning Concept" prepared by Engineering Concepts, Inc., dated April 2, 2024, subject to any changes required during the comprehensive site plan review process. Page 8 of 9 ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 2,2024 The motion passed 5-0. Citizen's Comments There were none. Comments of Planning Commissioner's and Planning Staff There were none. Final Orders r Mr. Thompson noted that at the Board of Supervisors June 25th meeting they voted to approve the application of Franco and Dawn DeBartolo that the Planning Commission recommended approval for at their June 4th meeting. _ The Board of Supervisors at their June 25th meeting also voted to approve the application of Evelyn Liu that the Planning Commission recommended approval for at their June 4th meeting. The Board of Supervisors voted to deny the application of Neil Aneja at their June 25th ; meeting that the Planning Commission recommended for denial at their June 4th meeting. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 11:07 p.m. Respectfully Submitted: what 14 tem4 C elia Thomas Reco ' ecretary, Roanoke County Planning Commission Philip T mpson Secretary, Roanoke County Planning Commission (:)--\V\i J ' _jk,N4 Rick James Chairman, Roanoke County Planning Commission Page9of9