Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/6/2004 - MinutesROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 6, 2004 Present: Mr. Al Thomason, Chairman Ms. Martha Hooker Mr. Steve Azar Mr. Rodney McNei Mr. Gary Jarrell Ms. Janet Scheid Mr. Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Mr. David Holladay Mr. John Murphy Mr. Chris Lowe Mr. Tim Beard Ms. Susan Carter, Recording Secretary Guests: Mr. Tim Thornton, The Roanoke Times Ms. Melody Williams, RRHBA WORK SESSION: Session opened at 4:02 p.m. by Mr. Thomason. Approval of Agenda Mr. McNeil moved to approve the agenda as amended. Motion passed 5- 0. Approval of Consent Agenda Mr. Azar referred to a previous discussion regarding limiting the number of petitions accepted for a particular public hearing date. Mr. Thomason stated previously Mr. Hodge had recommended accepting all applications submitted. Ms. Scheid discussed the difficulties of restricting the number of applications accepted. Mr. McNeil suggested restrictions be applied when large cases are to be heard. Ms. Hooker expressed concern regarding fairness to smaller petitions if they are postponed due to larger cases being heard. Mr. Azar expressed concern for staff and timely acquisition of information needed from petitioners. Ms. Hooker moved to approve the consent agenda. Motion passed 5-0. Approval_ of Minutes Ms. Hooker moved to approve the June 1, 2004 minutes and ,lune 15, 2004 minutes. Motion passed 5-0. Discussion of Community Plan Ms. Scheid discussed ridgetop protection issues with PC. Mr. Thomason stated he wants definite clarification of ridgetop protection. He expressed concern about clear -cutting property and building multiple family structures on or near ridgetops. Ms. Scheid stated if it is the only site available to build on, the county would not be able to deny the site due to legal ramifications. Mr. McNeil stated legally it would be a difficult to prohibit the owner from building on a site. Mr. Mahoney stated he had researched clear cutting of trees and types of construction permitted at the ridge line in other localities. He stated a ridgeline definition and application of regulations would be difficult. Mr. Thomason suggested requesting direction from BOS members. Ms. Hooker suggested first writing the ordinance for their review. Ms. Scheid stated after the Comp Plan has been completed, ordinance revisions will need to be addressed. Mr. McNeil stated the primary concern would be the aesthetics of new construction. Ms. Scheid noted although the appearance of construction would be difficult to regulate, development overlays would assist with this aspect. Mr. Mahoney stated aesthetics would only be part of the problem. He referred to erosion issues which have occurred in other developments. He also stated if a site is built on ridgeline, it may be difficult for emergency vehicles and other service vehicles to provide assistance. Mr. McNeil asked about methods to control clear cutting. Mr. Mahoney stated a locality can adopt regulations to limit clear cutting. Ms. Scheid stated the Department of Forestry controls timbering of property unless a site plan has been submitted to the county. Ms. Scheid discussed a letter written by Catawba Valley Ruritan Club regarding future land use. She provided a brief history and options which would be available for the area. Ms. Scheid suggested building off of the ideas Mr. Mike Chandler of Chandler Planning offered regarding how to pay for growth and accommodate growth. Regarding Growth Management & Capital Facilities Planning revisions, Ms. Hooker referred to page 5, number 11 asking if 40% tree canopy coverage would be idealistic. Ms. Scheid noted that Mr. Charlie Blankenship has recommended this percentage. She provided an explanation of the Ozone Mitigation Plan which has been designed to improve air quality. Mr. Mahoney compared our current classification with other localities. Mr. Lowe stated the current ordinance requires 35% ground coverage of developed acreage. Ms. Hooker referred to page 6, number 4, stating it appeared an urban service boundary was being established. Ms. Scheid stated instead of a rigid line, the boundary would be designed according to topography and water and sewer availability. Mr. McNeil provided information regarding designation of urban service boundaries in Northern Virginia counties. Ms. Scheid 4 stated rural clustering may help preserve the rural areas of the County. She stated more discussion regarding this issue would be needed with the health department regarding alternative septic systems. Mr. McNeil noted density issues regarding roads and schools should be carefully considered. Mr. Azar expressed concern regarding page 6, number 3 regarding rural clustering. He stated he agrees with number 4, noting it would be an advantage if both the developers and the county are proactive regarding growth. Mr. Azar inquired about the Western Virginia Water Authority's involvement in Section 2232 reviews. Ms. Scheid stated WVWA has agreed to comply with our Comp. Plan regarding the reviews. Mr. McNeil asked if Roanoke County can accept cash proffers for development. Mr. Mahoney affirmed the county can accept cash proffers. Mr. McNeil noted some Virginia localities required $27,000 per house built. Ms. Scheid and PC discussed the mechanics and protocol of the PCPH and BOS PH regarding time constraints. Site Viewing The meeting was adjourned for site viewing at 5:11 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: Mr. Thomason called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Mr. Thomason gave the invocation and led the pledge of allegiance. The petition of Sam L. and Mercedes P. Hardy to rezone 1.3 acres from AG3 Agricultural Preserve District to PRD Planned Residential District and rezone 97 acres from AR Agricultural Residential District to PRD Planned Residential District, located south of Whistler Drive and Creek Circle and east of Apple Grove Lane, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. Mr. Chris Lowe, Roanoke County Planning Department, presented the staff report. Mr. Lowe stated during his visits to three parkway overlooks, he was unable to see the proposed building sites. He stated he does not think the sites will encroach on the viewshed. He noted wells and septic systems are regulated by the health department. Mr. Azar asked who would enforce citizen stormwater concerns regarding this development. Mr. Lowe stated the Engineering Department would enforce the regulations which apply to all subdivisions over five lots. Mr. Azar asked about the roads in the development. Mr. Lowe stated the roads would be private but built according to VDOT standards. Mr. Thomason asked about the road proffer. Mr. Lowe stated the total road width including shoulders would be 22 feet. Mr. Sam Hardy, 5954 Landview Drive, stated he will make responsible use of the land. He stated he has extensive experience dividing property. He stated he is offering 36 acres to be used as a common space for residents. Mr. Thomason asked if he had begun digging wells. Mr. Hardy stated he has not had any wells dug to date. Mr. Azar asked if the land had been timbered. Mr. Hardy stated it had been timbered five years ago prior to his purchase of the property Mr. Jim Woltz, 23 Franklin Road, stated he owns nearby property. He stated he is in favor of the plan. He noted he was a participant in the Smart Growth Task Force for the Comp Plan. He stated it represents responsible development for a rural area. He stated Mr. Hardy has good knowledge of land development. Mr. Woltz stated he has had well dug in the area without problems. Ms. Amy Murray, 7131 Lodi Lane, asked if Mr. Hardy is bound to build only 13 homes or could he build more that the approved plan. Ms. Hooker stated Mr. Hardy would be bound to the site plan. Mr. Lowe affirmed the petitioner would follow the proffered site plan. CI Mr. Azar asked staff who would regulate the timber issue on this property in the future. Ms. Scheid stated the property would fall under Roanoke County standards after the submittal of the petitioner's plan. Mr. Thomason then made the motion to recommend approval of the rezoning request with the following proffers: 1. Minimum of 18` paved width for private road. 2. Maximum of 16% grade for private road. 3. Development must be developed in substantial conformity with the concept plan dated, 412112004. AYES: Thomason, Hooker, Azar, McNeil, Jarrell NAYS: None ABSENT: None 2. Public Hearing to receive public comments on a proposal to adopt a revised Community (Comprehensive) Plan for Roanoke County, Virginia. The proposed Community Plan is comprised of both text and maps. Once recommended by the Planning Commission and adopted by the Board of Supervisors, the plan will serve as a general guide for a long range use and development of all land within Roanoke County. The proposed plan has been prepared in accordance with guidelines contained in Sections 15.2-2223 and 2224 of the Code of Virginia, and Section 30-8-1 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Scheid presented an overview of the revision process to date. She provided a status update of each section. She stated citizens would have other opportunities to provide input. Ms. Hooker requested clarification regarding a motion on the petition. Mr. Mahoney stated after the discussion has been completed, a motion should be made to continue the petition. Mr. Lowe provided an overview of Stormwater Management section. Ms. Frances Robbins, 620 High Street, Salem, stated she grew up on the family farm located at 3043 Franklin Street. She stated the property is no longer considered rural. She stated her mother developed County Club Estates in the 1980's and that Fairway Forest Estates is also located near this area. She stated water and sewer lines run through their property. She is concerned that proposed revisions to the Comp. Plan and possible zoning ordinance changes would negatively affect her property values. She stated she hope their land will be in the residential designation W1 and out of the rural preserve. She stated she is in favor keeping acre lots and is not in favor of down -zoning. Mr. hen Boone, 5040 Fox Ridge Road, stated it is difficult to support boundaries when the boundaries are unknown. He stated water and sewer should be extended to a reasonable distance. He noted the county wants economic development. He stated restrictions hinder orderly development. Mr. Alexander Boone, 3309 Summercroft Court, stated he has lived in the county most of his life. He stated efficient growth is important. He stated no one is sure of the market in five years. He stated a Section 2232 review is inefficient when a property has already been through the rezoning process. Mr. Ralph Davis, 6633 Sylvan Brook Road, stated he was please to see environmental and quality of life concerns addressed in the draft. He stated the greatest resource the County has to office is its natural setting. He stated since the Comp Plan was to be completed in December 2003, the process should not be rushed. He expressed concern regarding traffic increasing on Route 221 with further development. He stated he is alarmed by development in the Back Creek area. He stated there is a need for sensible boundary designs. He stated developers want an open door policy. Mr. Bob Flynn, 1205 Garcia Drive, spoke representing the Roanoke Regional Home Builders Association. He stated the primary growth areas need to be inventoried. He asked to be informed where the pockets for growth would be located. Mr. Robert Stoffer provided statistical figures regarding increased county growth within the last ten years. He noted assessed values of county properties have also increased. He stated new construction does pay for itself. Robert Seymour, 7552 Boxwood Drive, stated the county needs a concerted effort to get more people involved in the process. He expressed concern regarding water and sewer provisions. He stated residents live in the county because they love it. Mr. Thomason asked if he knew of better methods to attract more citizens to the meetings. Mr. Seymour suggested developing a better notification system, advertise on public channels, use network of people involved in the Citizens Planning Academy. Mr. Thomason noted the county is always looking for new ways to attract people to the process. 6 Ms. Annie Krochalis, 9428 Patterson Drive, expressed concern regarding time constraint placed on citizens. She noted no maps had been included in the draft. She stated she agrees with the urban service boundary. She expressed concern regarding the public paying the costs of the developers. She stated more definition and detail should be included in the revisions. She stated she hopes the commission will allow staff to continue developing the Comp Plan to its full merits. Ms. Kristin Peckman, 8131 Webster Drive, stated a lot still needs to be done. She expressed concern regarding the terms `should' and 'must.' She suggested using scenic value. She stated Comp Plan sections should be coordinated better. She suggested promoting railways or freight in the transportation section. She stated 1-73 will create urban sprawl in rural areas. Ms. Pam Berberich, 6679 Mallard Lake Court, stated participants from the Citizens Planning Academy should be invited to meetings. She described smart growth in areas of Italy which are1000 years old. She stated citizens walk to area stores in close proximity to homes. Ms. Hooker stated she appreciated the efforts to get more citizen participation. Mr. Flynn requested an inventory of land be made available. Ms. Hooker suggested tying in the CIP with urban boundaries. Ms. Scheid stated they do not intend to draw a specific urban service boundary line. Mr. Mahoney stated water and sewer availability will be considered. He stated research will be conducted in each area regarding easements, topography and school considerations. He stated planning in various departments will be integrated into the Comp Plan along with funding for CIP. Mr. McNeil noted the CIP pulls things together. Mr. Azar stated the PC has taken citizen input into consideration and is trying to determine areas which are best to develop. He noted the Comp Plan is a guideline. He stated he continues to look forward to additional citizen input. He stated the PC does not intend to rush the revision process. Mr. Davis requested scheduling information for additional citizen input. Ms. Scheid noted the PC Worksession would be held on July 20th and a PC Worksession would be held with Mr. Mike Chandler on August 17tt'. She also stated there will be an additional worksession with the BOS planned for the latter part of August or September. Mr. Azar stated an additional meeting may be conducted or the citizens can speak at the worksession. Mr. Boone requested more advance 7 notice when receiving notice of the revisions to be reviewed. Mr. Woltz requested changes be highlighted. Ms. Hooker then made the motion to continue the petition for 60 days until September 7, 2004. AYES: Thomason, Hooker, Azar, McNeil, Jarrell NAYS: None ABSENT: Thomason Final Orders There was the amended petition of Kahn Development Company to rezone 9.85 acres from C1 Office District to C2C General Commercial District with conditions, and rezone 5.1 acres from CIC Office District with conditions to C2C General Commercial District with conditions, and rezone 1.1 acres from R2 Medium Density Residential District to C2C General Commercial District with conditions in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District was approved by the Board of Supervisors at the Public Hearing on June 22, 2004. 2. The petition of Slate Hill 1, LLC, Slate Hill Il, LLC, and Woodcliff Investments, LLC, to rezone 4.92 acres from C2C General Commercial District with Conditions to C2 General Commercial District, 8.03 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District, and 17.01 acres from R3 Medium Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at 4486 Summit Street, Cave Spring Magisterial District was approved by the Board of Supervisors at the Public Hearing on June 22, 2004. 3. The petition of Balzer & Associates, Inc. to rezone 4.83 acres from I I C Industrial District with Conditions to R1 Low Density Residential District for a development of single family housing located at Tract BI -A-2 of Mason Subdivision, Hollins Magisterial District was continued. 4. The petition of Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority to amend the zoning on Virginia's Explore Park from EP, Explore Park with conditions to EP, Explore Park with amended conditions in order to remove a natural area designation, located at 3900 Rutrough Road, Vinton Magisterial District was approved by the Board of Supervisors at the Public Hearing on June 22, 2004. N. 5. The petition of Ernest E. Sweetenberg to rezone 1.24 acres from R1 Low Density Residential District to 12 Industrial District in order to operate a construction yard located at 7314 Wood Haven Road, Catawba Magisterial District was approved by the Board of Supervisors at the Public Hearing on June 22, 2004. 6. The petition of James River Equipment Virginia, LLC to obtain a Special Use Permit to conduct equipment sales and rental on 7.7 acres, located near 3902 West Main Street, Catawba Magisterial District was approved by the Board of Supervisors at the Public Hearing on June 22, 2004. 7, The petition of Member One Federal Credit Union, to rezone 1.35 acres from R-1 Low Density Residential District to C-1 Office District in order to construct a financial institution office located at 4975 Bower Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District was approved by the Board of Supervisors at the Public Hearing on June 22, 2004. Comments There being no additional business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Approved: f q� - Secretary, Roanoke County Planning Commission E