Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/3/2004 - Minutes ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES – FEBRUARY 3, 2004 Present: Mr. Al Thomason, Chairman Ms. Martha Hooker Mr. Steve Azar Mr. Rodney McNeil Mr. Gary Jarrell (arrived after the approval of the minutes) Ms. Janet Scheid, Secretary Mr. David Holladay Mr. Chris Lowe Mr. Tim Beard Ms. Susan Carter, Recording Secretary WORK SESSION: Mr. Thomason called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Approval of Agenda Mr. Thomason moved to approve the amended agenda. Motion passed 4-0. Approval of Minutes Ms. Hooker discussed Ms. Krochalis' remark regarding air pollution. She asked staff if their was a problem in the Dixie Caverns area. Ms. Scheid and Mr. Lowe both stated they knew of no specific air pollution problems in that area. Ms. Hooker then moved to approve the January 6, 2004 PC Worksession Minutes. Motion passed 4-0 Ms. Hooker moved to approve January 13, 2004 PC Worksession Minutes. Motion passed 3-0 with Mr. Azar abstaining. Approval of Consent Agenda Mr. Thomason moved to approve the consent agenda. Motion passed 5-0. Site Viewing The meeting was adjourned for site viewing at 4:20 p.m. 1 PUBLIC HEARING: Mr. Al Thomason called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Mr. Thomason gave the invocation and led the pledge of allegiance. 1. The petition of Les and Angela Meadows and Barbara J. Schuyler to obtain a Special Use Permit to operate a Private Kennel on 1.5 acres, located at 5005 Buffalo Circle, Catawba Magisterial District. Mr. Chris Lowe, Roanoke County Planning, presented the staff report. Mr. Lowe explained the definition of private kennel and SUP. He suggested adding the condition granting the SUP to this applicant and no other property owners. He stated he has not received any complaints regarding barking issues. He suggested a condition requiring an administrative review of compliance 12 months from the date the SUP is granted. He stated the SUP could be revoked at that time if the petitioners are found to be non-compliant. Ms. Hooker asked if an administrative review had been used as a condition on other petitions prior to this petition. Mr. Lowe stated this type of condition was applied to a previous petition, Golden Oak Kennel, January 2, 1997. Ms. Hooker asked if the electric fence was currently working. Mr. Lowe stated that the fence was not working and that the petitioners are researching the installation of another fence. Mr. Les Meadows, Ms. Angela Meadows, Ms. Barbara Schuyler spoke regarding the petitioner. Ms. Meadows stated they moved from out of state and were unaware of the regulation limiting the number of dogs in Roanoke County. She stated she and her husband owned 2 dogs and her mother moved in with them and owns 2 dogs. She stated they did inquire about regulations prior to moving but were not informed of this regulation until after their move. She stated all four dogs have been neutered. Mr. Les Meadows stated he was told the electric fence never worked properly for the prior owners and that may have caused problems in the neighborhood. He stated they plan to install another fence once this issue is resolved. Ms. Schuyler stated they take care of their dogs. She stated they do not want their dogs in other yards or other dogs in their yard. Ms. Meadows presented a petition from her adjoining neighbor indicating they had no objection to the current dogs. Mr. Meadows stated his mother-in-law, Ms. Schuyler, moved to Roanoke with them. He stated their dogs are 8 and 18 years old and his mother-in-law's dogs are 2 and 8 years old. Ms. Hooker stated neighbors have expressed concern about the fencing. Mr. Meadows stated whenever their dogs are outside someone is with the dogs. Ms. Meadows stated barking has not been an issue since they moved into the house. Mr. Azar asked if the petitioners have met with staff regarding the suggested conditions. Mr. and Ms. Meadows stated they agree with the suggested conditions. Mr. Jim Reynolds, past Cherokee Hill Civic League President, recommended changing the terminology in the ordinance regarding private kennels. He stated he is not concerned about these 4 dogs but it leaves the citizens uncertain about the intent of the petition. He suggested restricting the SUP as much as possible to prevent future problems. Mr. Azar asked if Cherokee Hills subdivision has restrictions regarding erecting a fence on the property. Mr. Reynolds stated he was unaware of specific restrictions other than those of the county. 2 Mr. Paul Daunt, 5004 Buffalo Circle, spoke against the petition. He stated the 4 dogs have not been out at the same time. He made reference to the previous property owner's dogs being a nuisance. Ms. Lillian Daunt stated she heard the dogs in the garage. She stated if a fence is installed all 4 dogs will be out at the same time. Mr. Daunts stated he does not want to police the neighbors. Ms. Daunt stated there are 10 dogs in the 16 homes, which are located in the cul-de-sac. Mr. Daunt stated if the petition is granted the petitioners may want to have more dogs. Mr. Azar suggested an Administrative Review. Mr. Daunt stated he feels bad about the issue. Ms. Daunt expressed concern about the precedent this could set for the neighborhood. Ms. Norma Stone, 5012 Buffalo Circle, spoke against the petition due to the barking issue. She stated the previous owners dogs were a nuisance. Ms. Hooker asked if she had heard the current property owners' dogs. Ms. Stone stated she heard them today when she went out shopping. Ms. Shirley Woolwine, 4727 Cherokee Hills Drive, stated the word 'kennel' is misleading. She stated the petitioners have answered all of her questions. She stated they originally were opposed to the petition, but unless there is barking, she sees no problem. Ms. Pamela Hughes, 5462 Whispering Wind Drive, current Cherokee Hills Civic League President, expressed concern stating she is afraid this may be setting a precedent. She stated the complaints about the previous owners were never reported to the county. She stated the Home Owner’s Association does have restrictions on fencing. She stated she had not yet been able to speak directly with the petitioners. She noted there are many cats in the neighborhood that are left to breed without any controls. She stated she was unaware of any restrictions on cats in the county. She stated the petitioner’s dogs have not been a problem since they moved into the house. She noted the previous Grisso case had caused that resident to leave the neighborhood. She stated she loves animals. She stated she agrees with Mr. Reynolds that the verbiage needs to be changed regarding “private kennel”. She stated she thought the 4 dogs would be ok if they are kept under control. Ms. Hooker asked staff if a cat limit existed. Ms. Scheid stated there is a cat limit of 6 cats per household. Ms. Hooker stated it is not fair to judge the Meadows based on the previous owners problems. Mr. Azar asked if any comments have been made by the surrounding homeowners regarding safety. Ms. Hughes stated one neighbor was fearful of the dogs biting. She noted all dogs have the potential to bite. Mr. Azar asked if she had received any complaints about these dogs regarding safety. She stated she had not received any complaints. Mr. Wes Lester, 4903 White Eagle Lane, spoke in opposition to the petition. He stated his concerns are this may set a precedent and the potential for noise from barking. He stated the Meadows moved in during November 2003 when it was cold and the dogs were inside the house. He stated he is concerned about the safety of his 18 month old daughter when she plays outside. He stated calling animal control on someone would cause bad feelings between neighbors. Ms. Hooker noted all of the neighbors are allowed to have 2 dogs by right. She noted this home meets the physical qualifications. She stated Animal Control could be called if a safety issue arises. Mr. Lester stated it is unreasonable to ask neighbors to report neighbors. Mr. McNeil asked if the 6 other dogs in the culde-sac are a 3 problem. Mr. Lester stated he assumes they will be bothersome in the summer. Mr. Meadows stated they also have 2 small children. He stated they are willing to conform with the neighborhood. He stated the Daunts asked them to withdraw their SUP prior to the public hearing. Mr. Thomason noted the existing electric fence may too close to the electric meter which may be preventing it from working properly. Ms. Hooker stated this is a volatile issue. She stated she is comfortable with the petitioners' intentions regarding the dogs. Ms. Hooker then made a favorable recommendation to approve the rezoning with the following conditions: 1.) The special use permit shall only be granted to the applicants on the petition, Les & Angela Meadows, Barbara Schulyer, and would not be transferable to any other property owner. 2.) Staff shall make an administrative review of the special use permit for compliance with the ordinance after twelve months. 3.) The number of dogs allowed shall be limited to four. However, upon the death or disposition of any one of these four dogs, the owner shall not be allowed to replace the said dogs above the limit of two dogs. AYES: Thomason, Azar, Hooker, McNeil, Jarrell NAYS: None ABSENT: None 2. The petition of Roanoke Council of Garden Clubs, Incorporated, to Rezone 2.37 acres from R-1 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District to C-1 Office District in order to construct a general office located at 3640 Colonial Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District. Mr. Tim Beard, Roanoke County Planning, presented the staff report. Ms. Hooker asked staff about regulations regarding temporary signs on the property. Mr. Beard stated the Colonial Avenue Corridor addresses temporary signs in the guidelines but it is not in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Ed Natt spoke representing the petitioner. He stated the petitioner is requesting to remove the 75 people limit previously stipulated as a proffered condition. He stated Phyllis Holton of Roanoke Council of Garden Clubs, Sam Lionberger of Lionberger Construction, and Jeff Wood of Rife + Wood Architects were all available to answer questions. He explained the site plan shows a single entrance from Colonial. He stated the site would be developed in substantial conformity to the proffered site plan. He stated the architect may rotate the building 90 degrees but would keep it in the same general location. He stated stormwater management has been discussed with adjoiner, Dr. David Bittel. He stated they plan to install screening between the adjoining residential property. He stated the Garden Club is a good alternate use of the property. He stated the petitioner wants to rent the facility for other uses. He stated the maximum capacity is 115 for a 4 dinner and 140 for an assembly. Mr. McNeil asked if 60 parking spaces would be enough for 75-100 people. Mr. Natt answered yes, they average 2 1/2 people per car. He stated the seating capacity is set by the fire code. Mr. McNeil expressed concern regarding parking along the driveway if parking spaces were not available. Mr. Natt stated he hopes they would not park along the driveway. He stated Dr. Bittel might allow overflow parking during off-hours. Mr. McNeil noted a 20 ft. wide driveway is not wide enough to park cars. Mr. Natt agreed. Mr. McNeil asked about the types of activities that would be held at the facility. Mr. Natt stated the intent is that only activities approved and sponsored by the club would be held at this facility. Mr. McNeil inquired about the drainage pond. Mr. Wood stated they have not engineered the pond yet. He stated they plan for a shallow grassy lawn-like area. He stated a barrier or fencing would be unacceptable to the petitioner. Mr. Natt stated the intent is to keep stormwater run-off away from the adjoining properties. Ms. Hooker stated some of the conditions are subjective and need clarification. Mr. Natt requested flexibility from the county regarding subjective items in the Colonial Avenue guidelines. Mr. Beard stated only temporary signs for club events were allowed. Mr. Hal Jones, 3734 Thompson Lane, stated he owns the property behind this property. He stated the parking lot would be visible from his backyard. He stated the sewer system goes through the back of his property near the property line. He expressed concern that required screening could create a problem with the sewer lines. He stated when the property is graded the manhole may be higher than ground level. He stated he thinks the club is a great idea. He noted nearby Promenade Park detention pond never has standing water in it. Mr. Natt noted this issue had been mentioned at the Community Meeting. Mr. Wood stated he is unsure if the sewer structure is on the petitioner's property. He noted they are now aware they will need to address this issue. Mr. McNeil then made a favorable recommendation to approve the rezoning with the following conditions: 1) The subject property will be developed in substantial conformity with the concept plan dated January 14, 2004 and with the architectural rendering dated January 30, 2004 both prepared by Rife & Wood Architects. 2) Use of the property will be limited to activities of or sponsored by the Roanoke Council of Garden Clubs, Incorporated including offices, meetings and rental of the building. 3) Applicable Colonial Avenue Corridor Design Guidelines shall be in effect with the word "shall" replacing the word "should" as determined during the site plan review process. 4) The proposed building shall be limited to 6,000 square feet of gross floor area and 26 feet in height. 5) Exterior building materials shall be of brick and wood. 6) Parking to the rear of the building shall not exceed sixty (60) spaces and no parking shall be constructed in front of the building. 5 7) Monument-style signage at the entrance of the property shall not exceed 35 square feet. Total site signage shall not exceed 70 square feet. Temporary signage shall be limited to activities directly related to the Roanoke Council of Garden Clubs, Incorporated. AYES: Thomason, Azar, Hooker, McNeil, Jarrell NAYS: None ABSENT: None 3. The petition of Balzer & Associates, Inc. to amend the conditions of Ordinance 032399-8, Condition 4, to increase the maximum light pole height from 22 feet to 33.5 feet for property located at 3270 Electric Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District. Mr. John Murphy, Roanoke County Planning, presented the staff report. He explained the ordinance in relation to this issue. Ms. Hooker asked if Balzer & Associates was confused about the condition limiting the light poles to 22 feet. Mr. Murphy deferred the question to the petitioner. Ms. Hooker asked how long the petitioner has had the lights in place. Mr. Murphy stated they received a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy eight months ago. He stated the county is holding a bond on the site. Ms. Hooker asked what would happen if the issue was not amended or forgiven by the county. Mr. Murphy stated an extension of the Temporary CO would be granted. If not corrected the county would begin enforcement procedures. Mr. Azar asked if the light pole proffer was noted on the site plan when it was reviewed and approved. Mr. Murphy stated yes. Mr. Azar asked if Ruby Tuesday’s light poles are within standard. Mr. Murphy affirmed their lights are in compliance with the 22 foot height regulations. Mr. Craig Balzer, Architect for Balzer & Associates, gave a brief update on the petition. He introduced Mr. Sean Horne, Site Engineer and Mr. Lee Eddy, Consulting Electrical Engineer. Mr. Balzer gave a history of the development of the site. He stated they submitted documents for Site Plan Review in March 2002. He stated Golds Gym hired them to do a feasibility study. He stated Golds Gym has requirements regarding lighting levels, parking, and height of the building. He stated in August 2002 they began the site plan. He stated the proffer regarding the lights was never transmitted or communicated between Balzer & Associates and the subcontractors. Mr. McNeil asked who ordered and installed the lights. Mr. Balzer stated Avis installed the outside lights. Mr. McNeil asked who wrote the specifications for those lights. Mr. Balzer stated Newcomb Lighting. Mr. McNeil asked who was responsible to check the height of the lighting. Mr. Balzer stated it was Balzer & Associates' responsibility. Mr. Lee Eddy, 2211 Pommel Lane, Consulting Electrical Engineer, stated he mainly works with commercial properties. He stated he was hired by John Mann to design this project and was not made aware of the proffered condition limited the light poles to 22 feet. He stated Balzer could shorten the light poles and that would result in more light poles and more dark spots in the parking lot. He stated if 22 ft. poles were installed, they would also have to be installed on the perimeter of the property. He compared two lighting levels – one with 22 foot poles and one with 33 foot poles. He explained conceptual pictures to the commissioners comparing the 22 ft. poles and the 33 ft. poles. He stated 22 ft. poles would need to be closer to 6 the property line, the lighting would not be uniform, and the light which shines onto Westmoreland Drive will not be diminished because that grade is lower than the lot where the light poles are located. Mr. Azar asked if the 33 ft. poles illuminate the parking areas between the poles. Mr. Eddy affirmed they do illuminate these areas. Mr. Azar asked if this design work would work with 22 ft. poles. Mr. Eddy stated the number of islands would need to be increased to place more poles in the parking area. He stated it would substantially complicate the lighting design. Mr. Thomason asked where the communication breakdown occurred. Mr. Eddy stated Balzer did not pass the proffered condition information to Mr. Mann when he was hired to do the lighting. Mr. Richard Baldwin, 3326 Westmoreland Drive, stated his property adjoins the petitioner's property. He stated he has attended all meetings regarding this property. He stated the county has a history of selective enforcement regarding non-compliance. He stated he understands the height of the lights should only reach a certain height in relation to the neighborhood. He stated that if the height and direction of lights is proper, it could be good lighting. He stated the ordinance and laws only work if enforced equitably. Mr. Hal Jones, 3734 Thompson Lane, stated 33 ft. light poles are in violation. He stated it is up to the Planning Commission to correct. He stated the Commission should maintain the ordinance the way it is suppose to be maintained. Mr. Balzer stated in October 2003 he sent a surveyor out to the property. He wanted to make sure the light candle levels were proper. He stated they hired a New Jersey firm to conduct the photometric study. He stated the candle levels are way below limits on the perimeter of the property. Mr. McNeil noted that in the construction business mistakes are made. Ms. Hooker stated she agrees with Mr. Jones that the error needs to be corrected. Mr. Azar commended the petitioner for coming forward. He stated they need to follow the proffered conditions. Mr. Jarrell stated he understands the error, but he cannot support the petitioner's request. Mr. Thomason acknowledged it was unfortunate the information was not passed to all levels during the design and construction process. Mr. McNeil then made the motion to deny the amendment request. AYES: Thomason, Azar, Hooker, McNeil, Jarrell NAYS: None ABSENT: None 4. The petition of Land Planning & Design Associates to amend conditions on Planned Residential Development consisting of approximately 220 acres and rezone 32 acres from R1-C Single Family Residential District with conditions to PRD, located south of the Blue Ridge Parkway at milepost125, Cave Spring Magisterial District. Ms. Janet Scheid, Roanoke County of Roanoke Planning, presented the staff report. She read a letter from Gary Johnson of the Blue Ridge Parkway dated January 30, 2004 supporting the proposed development and complimenting the petitioner on the amount of work they have done and coordination with the Parkway staff. She stated the roads within the project will be built to VDOT construction standards but may be narrower. She stated the project will be built in phases. She stated a 7 pallet of colors to be used on house exteriors will be agreed upon between staff and petitioners. Mr. Frank Radford, Mr. David Radford, and Mr. Tom Wilson spoke regarding the petition. Mr. F. Radford gave a brief history of the area. He explained the site map and development logo. He stated he recognized Cotton Hill Road access to this property was not ideal. He stated they have an option on the Houghton property, which is on Merriman Road. He stated regarding the Last Chance viewshed that this is a model project for protection of the viewshed. Mr. David Radford stated village homes, cluster homes, and single family homes will be included in this development. He stated a walking trail, pool, tennis courts, and community center would be built for the residents. He stated the price of homes would start at approximately $200,000. Mr. F. Radford stated portions of the trail would be constructed of interlocking pavers while more natural materials would be used in wooded areas. He stated only 38% of the property is being used for development. The petitioners presented a power-point presentation with a computer generated drive-by simulation. Mr. McNeil asked if the roads would be private and 20 feet wide. Mr. F. Radford affirmed the roads would be private and 20 feet wide. Mr. McNeil asked if on-street parking would be permitted. Mr. F. Radford stated on-street parking would be allowed for visitors only. He noted all units will have a parking area and garage. He stated the narrow streets provide traffic calming. Mr. McNeil expressed concern regarding parking on both sides of the 20 ft. street and that may impede Fire & Rescue access to the area. Mr. F. Radford stated it should not happen often since the Homeowners Association requires the residents to park off-street. Ms. Scheid stated Fire & Rescue would review the plan during site plan review. Ms. Joann Derryberry, 6954 Briar Ridge Circle, stated her property adjoins the petitioner's property. She stated although she appreciates the development being built in harmony with the Parkway, there is no buffering shown on the plans for the neighboring properties. She stated all sides should be considered. She expressed concern regarding the height of the structures. Ms. Scheid stated the height of the Cluster Homes would be no more than 35 feet. Mr. F. Radford stated he would be happy to screen the area mentioned by Ms. Derryberry. All of the commissioners praised the developers on their plan. Mr. McNeil then made a favorable recommendation to approve the rezoning with the following conditions: 1. Per Section 30-47-5(B) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance all written and graphic information submitted as part of a Planned Residential development rezoning request constitutes proffered conditions. AYES: Thomason, Azar, Hooker, McNeil, Jarrell NAYS: None ABSENT: None 8 Citizens Comments There were no citizen comments. Comments There were no other comments. Final Orders 1. The petition of Cellco Partnership to obtain a Special Use Permit to operate a broadcasting tower on 3.059 acres located at 6720 Thirlane Road, was deniedby the Board of Supervisors at Catawba, Magisterial District the Public Hearing on December 16, 2003. 2. The petition of Berk, LLC to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a mini warehouse facility on 4.0 acres located in the 5300 Block of Hollins Road, was approved by the Board of Supervisors at Hollins Magisterial District the Public Hearing on December 16, 2003. There being no additional business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Approved: Secretary, Roanoke County Planning Commission 9