HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/10/2013 - Public Hearing and WorksessionMINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE TOWN OF VINTON PLANNING
COMMISSION HELD ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2013, AT 7 P.M., AT THE VINTON
MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 311 SOUTH POLLARD STREET.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Dave Jones, Chairman
Paul Mason, Vice Chairman
Bob Patterson
Dawn Michelsen
Bill Booth
STAFF PRESENT: Anita McMillan, Planning and Zoning Director
Karla Turman, Associate Planner/Code Enforcement Officer
Julie S. Tucei, Planning and Zoning Coordinator
OTHERS PRESENT: Theresa Fontana, Town Attorney
Robert Quam, Petitioner
Sherman Sligh, Petitioner
Melvin Bennett, Petitioners’ Representative
Riley and Anne Overbay, Adjoining Property Owners
Chris McMurry, Land Surveyor
John R. “Bob” Patterson, Attorney-at-Law
Debbie Howard, Transcriptionist for Mr. Patterson
Kevin Oddo, Attorney-at-Law
Roger Dunagan, Resident, 705 Olney Road, Vinton
Mick Michelsen, Resident, 225 N. Maple Street, Vinton
AGENDA
I. Call to Order
II. Approval of Minutes:
1. June 13, 2013 Meeting
2. October 29, 2013 Joint Meeting
III. Closed Meeting
IV. Reconvene and Adopt Certification of Closed Meeting
V. Public Hearing:
1. A request by Robert O. and Linda M. Quam, owners of Lot 1, Block 12; and
Sherman E. and Barbara B. Sligh; owners of Lot 7, Block 9, of Plat Book 6, Page 30
showing Map of Section Number 4, Bali Hai Subdivision, property of W.E. and
Olney G. Cundiff, prepared by C. B. Malcolm & Son and dated August 31, 1964,
recorded in the Clerk’s Office of the Circuit Court for the County of Roanoke,
Virginia, on January 5, 1965, to abandon, vacate and deed a fifty (50) foot wide by
approximately one hundred and fifty (150) foot long undeveloped right-of-way,
known as Daleview Drive, to the adjoining property owners.
VI. Briefing:
1. Proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance regarding temporary family health
care structures (Med Cottages).
2. Proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance regarding floodplain districts, the
issuance of permits for development, and by providing factors and conditions for
variances in the floodplain districts.
VII. Citizens Comments
VIII. Comments of Planning Commissioners and Planning Staff
IX. Adjournment
PLANNING COMMISSION
PUBLIC HEARING
DECEMBER 10, 2013
PAGE 2
The meeting of the Vinton Planning Commission was called to order at 6:33 p.m. by Chairman Jones.
Roll was called and all members were present.
Minutes from the June 13, 2013, meeting, and the October 29, 2013, joint meeting, were considered for
approval. Chairman Jones asked for a motion on the minutes. Mr. Patterson made a motion to approve
both sets of minutes as submitted, and Mr. Booth seconded the motion. Roll was called, and all
members present voted in favor of the motion to approve two sets of minutes.
The next item on the agenda was a request to convene in a closed meeting, pursuant to § 2.2-3711 (A)
(7) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, for consultation with legal counsel regarding possible
disposition of real property. Mr. Booth made a motion to convene a closed meeting at 6:35 p.m., which
was seconded by Mr. Patterson. All members voted in favor of the motion.
The Vinton Planning Commission reconvened at 7 p.m. The closed meeting certification, a copy of
which will be made a part of the permanent record, was read aloud by Chairman Jones. A motion to
reconvene the meeting and approve the closed meeting certification was made by Mr. Patterson and
seconded by Mr. Mason. All members voted in favor of the motion.
Next to be heard, was a request by Robert O. and Linda M. Quam, owners of Lot 1, Block 12; and
Sherman E. and Barbara B. Sligh; owners of Lot 7, Block 9, of Plat Book 6, Page 30 showing Map of
Section Number 4, Bali Hai Subdivision, property of W.E. and Olney G. Cundiff, prepared by C. B.
Malcolm & Son and dated August 31, 1964, recorded in the Clerk’s Office of the Circuit Court for the
County of Roanoke, Virginia, on January 5, 1965, to abandon, vacate and deed a fifty (50) foot wide by
approximately one hundred and fifty (150) foot long undeveloped right-of-way, known as Daleview
Drive, to the adjoining property owners. Chairman Jones opened the public hearing at 7:05 pm. He
read the request aloud. Chairman Jones stated that everyone in the room will have the chance to speak
one at a time. He also said that there would be a three to five minute time limit for each speaker. He
asked that they refrain from bringing up items that others have already discussed and not to repeat what
others have already said. Chairman Jones asked Ms. McMillan for a brief summary of the issue. Ms.
McMillan mentioned that Mr. Sligh and Mr. Quam had made a request to close the Daleview Drive
right-of-way. She stated that the hearing was advertised as required and that the adjoining property
owners were notified. She asked everyone who addresses the Planning Commission about this request
to please state their name for the record. The floor was opened for comments. Mr. Quam requested that
Mr. Bennett speak on his and Mr. Sligh’s behalf. Mr. Melvin Bennett stepped forward and stated his
home address—709 Olney Road, Vinton. He said the property owned by the Overbays has been vacant
for 48 years. He stated that the original developer planned to develop the lot behind this right-of-way,
but the City of Roanoke annexed it before he was able to do so. The driveway that the current
owner/developer of the property wants to place in the right-of-way will be shared, but he said that the
Town will not regulate if someone parks a big motor home in it. Mr. Bennett said the City of Roanoke
should make access available to the lot since it is not in the Town or County. He mentioned that they
had submitted a signed petition (a copy of which will be made a part of the permanent record) by the
neighbors in favor of the closure of the right-of-way. He asked that they close the right-of-way as
requested by Mr. Quam and Mr. Sligh. Mr. Kevin Oddo, attorney for the developer, the Overbays, said
he would speak on their behalf regarding this request. He stated that part of the Overbay’s property is in
the Town, but the majority of it is located in the City of Roanoke. He said that they would like to
subdivide the property into two parcels—one 10 acre parcel and one 15 acre parcel. Mr. Oddo said there
PLANNING COMMISSION
PUBLIC HEARING
DECEMBER 10, 2013
PAGE 3
would be no more than two houses built on the property, and the Overbays are willing to put that in
writing. He stated that the City will allow the subdivision if Mr. Overbay has access from Daleview
Drive. Mr. Oddo said that Mr. Overbay is willing to be reasonable and put everything in writing with
the other adjoining owners. He listed seven reasons why the Overbays oppose this request: 1. The
request will, if approved, only benefit the Slighs and the Quams. Mr. Oddo said they do not want the
two houses behind them so this request, if approved, would stop that. 2. In previous hearings, the
people who support the issue now were against it at the earlier meetings. Mr. Oddo read statements
from the minutes of previous meetings made by Mr. Quam, Mr. Sligh, and Mr. Bennett indicating that
they were against the closure of the right-of-way. 3. The right-of-way has been there for 50 years with
no issues. 4. The Overbays bought property based on the plat showing the right-of-way. 5. The Slighs
and Quams use the public right-of-way as if it were their own property. Mr. Oddo stated that they have
their driveways in it and use it to access their properties, and Mr. Overbay should have same right. 6. If
the right-of-way is closed, Mr. Overbay will be irreparably damaged due to City’s access requirement
from this right-of-way. 7. With regard to the concerns about traffic, there will only be two houses
constructed by the Overbays, so the right-of-way will not be a major thoroughfare. Mr. Oddo said that
Mr. Overbay plans to construct a driveway that will match what is in the right-of-way now. He said
there will be no parade of cars and no one will be parking big RVs there. Mr. Oddo stated that the
Overbays ask that the petition to close the right-of-way be denied. Chairman Jones asked for other
speakers to come forward on this request. Mr. Riley Overbay spoke next. He stated that he has owned
this property for 20 years. He said that all he is asking for is the same rights as what Mr. Quam and Mr.
Sligh have had for the last 30 years. He said he is willing to sign an agreement stating that there will
only be two houses constructed. Chairman Jones asked for others who wish to speak to come forward.
Mr. Bob Patterson, attorney, stood and stated that he also represents Mr. Overbay. He said he had
nothing further to add to Mr. Oddo’s statements. Mr. Fredrick Michelsen addressed the Commission
next. He said he does not have a dog in the fight, so to speak. He said he is concerned, as a citizen of
the Town, with taking Vinton resources and using them for a property that is located in the City of
Roanoke. Citizens in the area that he talked to were against it. He said he was told that there is another
access to this property that may not be as desirable. He does not think it is in the Town of Vinton’s or
its citizens’ best interests. Mr. Quam spoke next. He stated that Mr. Cundiff, the original developer of
the subdivision, had promised him years ago that he would always have a corner lot. Mr. Quam said if
there is going to be an easement; it is going to have to be for a street. However, he would just as soon
have it vacated, as they have requested. He asked what would happen if the City allows more houses to
be built back there than just one. He said there could be a hundred houses built on 25 acres. Mr. Quam
said he felt there are no guarantees, even if it is in writing. Chairman Jones read the petition from the
adjoining owners that said they are in agreement with abandoning and vacating the Daleview Drive
right-of-way. Chairman Jones stated that there are 24 names signed on the petition. He said it will be
made a part of the permanent record of this meeting. Mr. Booth asked Mr. Oddo if Vinton will be
supplying the water for the property. Mr. Oddo said he understands that Vinton would provide the water
to the two lots. Ms. McMillan said the City has made that one of the requirements. The Town has
agreed to provide the water, but sewer will not be provided which, Ms. McMillan said, is why they can
only do two lots. Mr. Booth wanted to know why the City would not provide water for its own citizens.
Ms. McMillan said it was cost prohibitive for the City to provide it. Mr. Booth asked why the City
requires the access to be through Daleview Drive. Mr. Oddo said he could not answer that since it is the
City of Roanoke’s requirement. He thinks it is because the Daleview Drive access would come in right
between the two lots. Mr. Booth asked why they cannot use the access that is available from Olney
Road. Mr. Oddo said the City will not allow it to be subdivided into two lots unless the Daleview Drive
PLANNING COMMISSION
PUBLIC HEARING
DECEMBER 10, 2013
PAGE 4
right-of-way is used. Chairman Jones suggested that they could construct a long driveway from Olney
Road to serve the two lots. He asked what needed to be done to get the owners to work together on this
issue. Mr. Oddo suggested that either the Town Attorney could try to facilitate a meeting between the
owners, or perhaps a private person (a mediator) could work with them and try to help bring about a
resolution. He reiterated that Ms. McMillan had just stated that there will only be two lots due to the
number of water connections the Town has agreed to provide. Mr. Oddo thinks that the neighbors fear a
large subdivision will be built. He said that Mr. Overbay is willing to work with the neighbors to
resolve this issue. Mr. Patterson said he would like to see that happen. Mr. Booth asked if there was a
way to get to the property from Berkley’s Bottom. Mr. Oddo said he asked Mr. Overbay about that
today, and unfortunately there is no access from the Berkley Road. Chairman Jones asked if there were
other questions. There were no further questions. Mr. Booth said he would like to see the three parties
reach a consensus in the matter and come to an agreement. Mr. Mason asked what has stopped the
parties from getting together and coming up with an agreement. Mr. Sligh said they were lied to by Mr.
Overbay, and they refuse to have anything more to do with him. Mr. Oddo stated that he has no idea
what lies Mr. Sligh refers to and said Mr. Overbay does not know either. Mr. Mason said they should
attempt to come to an agreement because the Planning Commission has to make its recommendation in
the best interest of the Town and its citizens. Mr. Bennett asked if he could speak about what has been
brought up. Ms. Michelsen said she would like to hear from him. Mr. Bennett stated that Mr. Overbay
lied to Mr. Sligh and Mr. Quam when he told them he had acquired the right-of-way and wanted to give
them some of it. He said that the Slighs and the Quams signed a paper giving their ok, but Mr. Overbay
did not have the paperwork notarized. Later, the Slighs and Quams realized they had been lied to about
the right-of-way by Mr. Overbay. Mr. Bennett said they will not agree to anything. Mr. Patterson,
attorney for Mr. Overbay, asked that the Planning Commission table the request so they can try to go
through mediation. He said he has seen many cases where it was said there would never be an
agreement that have come to one with mediation. Mr. Patterson said the worst that could happen is that
mediation will fail, and they will have to come back before the Planning Commission. Mr. Overbay
stated that he does not know what the lie is that they speak of and said he has not lied about anything
that he knows of. Mr. Overbay said it would be in the best interest of the neighbors to go this route
where they have some control over what will be built on the property. Mr. Booth mentioned that if Mr.
Overbay comes into the lot from the Olney Road side, he might be able to put more houses back there.
Mr. Overbay said that was not the case, but that he could do whatever City zoning allows and the
neighbors would have no control over it. Chairman Jones closed public hearing at 7:45 pm. He asked
the Town Attorney for some guidance. Ms. Fontana stated that they could table it to give time for
mediation, or they could make a recommendation to Council to either vacate it or not. She mentioned
that they do need to state the reason as to why they vote they way they do. Ms. McMillan said the
Council hearing on this request will be held next week, and they will make the final decision as to
whether to table, approve, or deny the request. Chairman Jones asked if, as chairman, he could make a
motion. Ms. Fontana said he could not. Mr. Booth asked if Council would vote to table the request.
Ms. Fontana said Council would have to make the decision. Mr. Booth said he would like to see the
three parties reach an agreement. He made a motion that the Planning Commission table the request for
an appropriate amount of time for the parties to reach an agreement. Chairman Jones asked to amend
the motion to state that it be tabled for 60 days. Mr. Mason seconded the motion. The roll call vote was
recorded as follows: Chairman Jones-“Yes” to tabling the request for 60 days. If no agreement is
reached, the Planning Commission will reconvene and vote on it. Mr. Mason-“Yes” because he would
like to see the three parties resolve it, rather than the Planning Commission telling them what to do. Mr.
Booth-“Yes” because he would like to see it worked out and wants to see the Town and its citizens
PLANNING COMMISSION
PUBLIC HEARING
DECEMBER 10, 2013
PAGE 5
served as best as possible. Ms. Michelsen-“Yes” because she would like to see these folks sit down
together to come up with a solution that is best for everyone. She said this is an opportunity for citizens
to figure out what they want to do instead of the government telling them what to do. She agrees with
the 60 day timeframe, as Chairman Jones amended the motion, due to the holidays. Mr. Booth added
that Daleview Drive has been there for years and is not going anywhere in the next 60 days. Mr.
Patterson-“Yes”.
The next item was a briefing on the proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance regarding temporary
family health care structures (med cottages). Ms. McMillan said Ms. Turman has been working on the
amendment. She mentioned that state code requires a provision for med cottages. She said this is the
work session on it, and once it is agreed upon, they can have a public hearing on it in January or
February 2014. Chairman Jones asked Ms. Turman to provide an update on it. Ms. Turman went over
the changes that the state is requiring. She said that there are two required updates: an increase from 30
to 60 days and to allow for occupancy of two for caretaker and patient. Chairman Jones said he is
encouraged that the State Government is allowing these. He said the cottages are really advanced – even
having sensors in them that alert if someone falls down. Ms. Michelsen mentioned that it is expensive to
put people in nursing homes, and you are not sure what kind of care they will get. She said she is
supportive of it. Chairman Jones, Mr. Mason, Mr. Patterson and Mr. Booth also said they have no
problems with it.
Next to be discussed was the proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance regarding floodplain
districts, the issuance of permits for development, and by providing factors and conditions for variances
in the floodplain districts. Chairman Jones said he needed help on this ordinance. Ms. Turman stated
that the previous version of the ordinance is only 8 pages, and the revised one is about 27 pages. Ms.
Turman said that FEMA and the DCR visited the Town, and found that the current ordinance needed to
be updated. These changes are mandated in order for the Town to remain a NFIP community and so
people will still be able to obtain flood insurance. Ms. McMillan mentioned that the floodplain is an
overlay district. Chairman Jones asked if there was anything negative or that stands out in the new
ordinance. Ms. Turman mentioned the Cedar Avenue mobile home park, in which many of the trailers
are located within the floodplain. She said that FEMA stated that, if a trailer is damaged, the owners
will not be allowed to replace it. She said that FEMA has become more restrictive on this. Chairman
Jones wondered if they carry flood insurance on the trailers. He also wanted to know if FEMA wants
the Town to close the trailer park. Ms. Turman said if the trailers are damaged by flooding, they cannot
be replaced. Ms. McMillan mentioned that normally the requirement for commercial construction is that
it be built a foot above flood elevation, and residential requires it to be built two feet above flood
elevation. She recommended that the owners who might be affected by the changes be notified about
when the public hearing on this amendment will be held. Ms. McMillan asked that they read over the
information provided to them and email any questions they have to her or Ms. Turman. She said, if they
do not have the answer, they will contact FEMA to find out. Ms. Michelsen asked, since FEMA is
requiring the updates, if this has to be done regardless. Ms. McMillan said if the Town wants to remain
in the NFIP and have flood insurance, they will have to do this update. Chairman Jones said affected
property owners definitely should be notified. Ms. McMillan said her office can send letters out soon to
allow time for the property owners to ask any questions they may have about it. She stated that the
Planning Commission could have the public hearing in February, and Council could hear it in March.
PLANNING COMMISSION
PUBLIC HEARING
DECEMBER 10, 2013
PAGE 6
There were no further citizen comments. In Planning Commission and Staff Comments, Chairman
Jones said he thought that tonight’s meeting went well. He said that he appreciated town attorney being
here for the meeting. He stated that this is a difficult issue. He asked if there was anything else to be
discussed. Ms. McMillan said she would like the Planning Commission to review the stormwater
regulations at a later date even though they are not a part of the zoning ordinance.
There were no further comments from citizens, commissioners, or staff. Therefore, with there being
nothing further to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 7:13 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Anita McMillan
Planning Commission Secretary