Planning Commission Meeting   3/1/2022

Can we call the meeting to order and establish quorum?

Mr. Bailey is not there, correct?

Present Ms.

Moore Here Mr. Clayborne Present Thank you Okay, thank you very much everyone

Or is there anyone out there in public cyber land that would like to make a comment?

Nobody has their hand raised at this time.

Can we have the staff report?

I'm going to share a screen here with you.

We'll play nice.

I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.

Go ahead.

My only question is, does the main entrance change any with this expansion or does that remain as is?

It's in compliance with that site plan.

Thank you, sir.

Okay, Mr. Bivins.

Can you just give me a little bit more about why the shell be as opposed to maybe?

Thank you, Chair.

So I guess we're ready to move on to presentation by the applicant.

Oh.

Yes, now we can.

Can you tilt your screen?

And if you have any questions for me, I'll be happy to answer.

And then after.

When you do, will there be additional entrances so that right now you come in off of that one side route, so if you were to come around the back, would there be an entrance over there or will everyone continue to use the main entrances?

So it's very typical of a strip mall kind of thing.

You might be visiting there.

Thank you.

Okay, thanks.

Mr. Carrazana.

expand.

And Bill could verify that.

Well, thank you for the location for that service.

I didn't receive any advanced names, but has anyone since signed up to speak to this from the public?

And I didn't have anybody sign up early.

Is there anything else you wanted to say?

That's Lily, she wants it.

Yeah.

All right.

All right, then with that, is someone prepared to make a motion for approval or denial?

or I move to recommend approval of SP 2021-000-18 Greenbrier Veterinary Expansion with the conditions outlined in the staff report.

Is there a second?

Second.

Right.

Mr. Clayborne?

Aye.

Mr. Bivins?

Aye.

Mr. Missel?

Aye.

Mr. Carrazano?

Did you say yes?

It froze right before she called.

Yes, I think so.

Okay, great.

ZMA-2021-406 Maplewood.

Sure, if that's part of the staff report.

See down at the bottom of your screen, your little screen share box.

How about that?

OK.

Thanks.

This item, ZMA 2021.

We're seeing multiple screens.

Is that what's happening?

Hang on just a second.

Maybe that'll fix it.

You just need to maximize it.

Yeah, I think I think that does it.

All right, let's try this again.

Okay, all right.

Hang on a second.

You might want to unshare your screen.

I'm just going to enlarge the screen since it's not letting me pick the right one.

Yeah.

Happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Yeah, good to see you this evening.

Do you have a sense now what, if anything, is in play for the property that's adjacent to it to the left-hand side?

The applicant's representative might be able to answer that question.

I don't quite remember how we laid, how we sat down on that or how we came through with that, but I now have a feeling that we were real appreciative of that kind of approach.

That's my recollection.

Yeah, I'd have to dive back into that.

Or in fact, we're sure that the piece that's next to it is going to be commercial, is going to be, is going to be put to commercial use, because we're running out of commercially zoned property in this community.

And that's not a good thing.

And then about the commercial property being released, I can't answer that one.

So I don't know if we just sort of missed it or how we're going to deal with that, but I'm certainly not having been briefed by you, I'm not feeling inclined to sort of deal with that exception which was on their plan.

Where did you get the height?

I'm looking at the materials that were in the Planning Commission box when I picked them up yesterday.

Okay, the application originally was proposed for a height that was above the limit for that area and they have since revised the application and they're now meeting the high requirement, which off the top of my head I believe was 60, 65 feet maybe.

2-10, February 10th, 22, where it says building heights on the left-hand side.

Excuse me, they're in alignment with the comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance requirements for the plan residential.

I'll let you pull that up, but all I'm saying is that a special exception request is being processed with this PRD to remove the requirements of the setback for buildings over three stories in height as permitted by the Albemarle County zoning ordinance.

So they'll either need to meet the ordinance requirements or seek that special exception at site plan.

That's outside of the commission.

But it's at three stories or 45 feet when a step back is required.

Now, I'm putting it out there.

But I also, I guess that's another pin that perhaps the applicant will speak to when it's their turn chair.

Oh, I'm sorry, Luis.

So I'm just wondering why this is not being raised or why is it viewed as not a issue for the commission?

That should have been noted as something that would be a component of the application.

OK.

In your motion or your comments on this item, you can request that that special exception come to you at that time as well.

Okay, thank you.

So I think that's where the confusion is coming in is why this height.

It needs to be cleaned up before the board maybe.

Ragsdale, are you saying, can you come back for a sec, are you saying that they are not going to be asking for a special exception in the future?

So I had not seen that note about the step backs.

And we have the applicant's presentation, please.

Over there.

And I'll hand it back to Ashley.

All right, I'll do that.

Does anyone else have other questions?

I don't think in this case, the step back would serve any planning purpose, but I'm happy to discuss that with the group.

Let's go back to Mr. Bivins.

There's something in the narrative in that same section sort of gave me some pause of whether or not these would be flipped at some point to individuals as opposed to other corporations.

Okay, so if you go ahead and respond, we've got two questions.

Some components have been sold to Stanley Martin to develop, some components we are self-developing, but this is a project that we would self-develop, and then it's a condo unit, so it can be for sale or for rent.

and would you speak to whether or not there will be triplexes or are they all gonna be two and twos?

So I apologize that sentence of the narrative probably should have been removed.

Fred.

I'm just curious.

But I might leave that for Scott to answer if he has any thoughts on that.

Scott, you're muted if you can hear us.

for the residents is within the unit footprint and the driveway.

How are you handling stormwater management and will that potentially impact some of your green space if you have biofilters or above ground management?

So the site really gets kind of pinched down when you start really looking at it.

Thanks.

I have a couple, but I just want to, Corey, go ahead.

I was just curious, does that play into this, the height piece that you guys are asking for?

They are not.

And so I was wondering, could you talk a little bit about, you know, what you foresee the HOA playing out to be and what's included?

Alan, do you want to say anything about that?

And to further clarify what Ashley was saying earlier, these could be rented, but our intent is to sell these, so they'll be for sale and the affordable units would be then owned by somebody that qualifies for the affordability program.

How much did you say?

You sort of stumbled on the amount per month.

And given the amount of units and the fact it's a condo, I mean, probably it should start with a one, I'm guessing low $100 a month, but I'm just, I'm completely just shooting from the hip on that one because we, like I said, we've not done the total analysis on it.

Okay, Corey, did you have, you said you had some more questions?

Thank you for that question.

what you're asking because I know we can certainly, you know, during the site plan phase if there's a way, you know, safe way to get across the street, things like that, if that's the question.

But does that clarify the question?

all ears, but yeah, we're kind of working within the land that we have, so.

So that that connection could be made pretty easily when that road was extended and that property was developed, especially if it was developed by the guy that owns the Food Lion Center, that all of those things would be connected and be nicely walkable.

And you can see that easement called out here that kind of contemplates starting to connect all those components.

If you talk a little bit about how you might mitigate some of those impacts.

We feel like that is the solution to the current overcrowding issue.

I have more questions for later.

Okay, why don't you continue?

So this illustrative plan gives you a really honed in version of what's possible here because as Scott

So, but this is it, what you're looking at here.

Okay, so this is probably the more realistic one.

Okay.

Right, but could you talk a little bit about you know materials we think about durability or sustainability walk us through what you're you're going there what you're what you're trying to do and I ask that question because buildings are they're really important right once you put it here it's going to be here in 50 years and right now I just have a bunch of rectangles on paper which is really hard to get behind so walk me through and I understand it's just a concept but is this kind of what you're thinking

I hope everyone can see the image on the screen right now, which gives you an idea of what we're building.

We just love to hear a little bit about how we, how this proposal will help us achieve our vision.

Hey everybody.

I think the two headlines for this one are about the development area and efficient use of that land and not trying to create, you know, by right sprawling rural developments everywhere by providing some optionality.

So I think that's helpful within the development area as well.

Carolyn, do we have anyone signed up to comment on this application from the public?

No, ma'am, nobody has their hand up at this time.

If the applicant would like to make one more quick statement, we'll entertain that, but then we want to go on to our own discussion.

Thank you.

Did you want to make a comment or ask a question?

I thought you were opening up to the commissioners too.

Go ahead.

of our community.

Moore.

So is that correct, Rebecca?

So it is a little open-ended.

I thought I just I guess I just wanted to lift it back up again because it seemed like that was something that in the narrative my understanding was that was that potentially they were too tall and that that got sorted out but yet it still doesn't feel completely sorted to me and I'm not saying it's like a deal breaker for me it's just an interesting point that I don't really want to lose sight of in the bigger picture thing.

Rebecca, were you gonna add something or your camera came back on?

But like I said, the ordinance does allow and this is set up for some flexibility on the applicant's part.

Okay, Luis.

If our requirement is not to bring it back here, which my tendency right now is to ask

I'm sorry, you cut out and you said your tendency is to ask and then it stopped.

Ask them to bring it back for that exception.

Well, with the building height, not to see, okay.

You said 45, but they just told us it's 50.

It sounds like where we're headed, not to over facilitate you, but just trying to think what your options are as far as what you might want to include in your motion.

Yeah, we wouldn't want to do something that derailed their architecture necessarily, but it is within our purview to put a height limit on the building.

You make that recommendation.

You said it kicks in at 45 feet and they're at 50 feet.

That's OK.

Just a second.

Would that be helpful?

I could just listen to you tell me, but go ahead and put it up.

Can everyone see that?

Well, if you pull the little line of our heads over to the right until we shrink, shrink, shrink.

I don't know if it's 50 feet or 45 as far as where they are with those two of our twos.

with SWK too.

OK.

That is, so for the designs we have right now in our zoning, you know, it currently allows up to 65 feet, but the units that we have planned for this are 52 feet.

Supposing we said no and we'd said yes to the application but yet they can't build the structure so they're not going to do it because let's just say that we said no to going over the 45 feet.

So if I may, perhaps offer some.

but I don't believe that that stops us from, unless perhaps council can advise, but I don't see how that would stop us from dealing with the issue at hand today.

And that would take care of that concern about going to 65 feet, Fred.

Everything else that's been said, I'm in agreement with.

So, Corey.

We know nothing about verticality or connectivity or anything like that.

So to me, it sounds like a good idea to bring that piece back.

Julian started moving his finger and then he disappeared.

But this is something that they need to be aware of, but right now it's got to be built in the way that our ordinance says it's got to be done.

Andy?

The applicant might hear that and ask for a deferral, but unless and until the applicant asks for a deferral, I think the commission has to consider it, either approval or disapproval, and make a recommendation this evening.

All right.

Corey?

Or is that pretty much off limits?

is conditioned on certain items being met.

It's pretty hard to say a motion like similar to the drawings that we saw and they didn't proffer them.

I guess are we in a spot, I don't want to take the floor, Madam Chair, are we in a spot where it sounds like there is approval with the extension of connectivity piece that would be the recommendation we see the connectivity to the commercial areas?

Yeah, you could certainly say, you know, we approve the application as submitted, but we also recommend, we also request the applicant add connectivity, you know, whatever else you want to add before it goes to the board.

I'm wondering how much of a burden we can place on them to prove any kind of connectivity other than to take the pads and the roadways and provide easements, which I think they've done.

They may have very well had that all in mind and just simply neglected to say much about it, which is why they got the reaction from us that they did.

So they just have to essentially explain their intent on the plan is what you're saying.

Right.

Got it.

That could be a variety of things that we don't really have that clarity right now.

I'm not opposed to the rezoning requirements

But I guess that's the problem that I'm familiar with.

Was that right?

That was Corey.

Go ahead.

But my motion, I guess it's not one pulled up, but could someone pull up a motion?

Ben, could you pull up the motions from your staff report and just put them on the screen?

Yes, one moment, please.

I know you love pulling up the screen.

Okay.

All right, can you all read that?

I don't see anything.

Let me try turning off my monitor.

I think I can do it.

I can read the language out for you, Corey, if you can't see my screen.

It was the ZMA, the numeric sequence, but I found it on my agenda, so I'm okay.

But I just wanted you to have that information.

If you're asking me how to proceed, I must say I would accept the deferral.

Mr. Herrick, you wanted to say something now.

If we were to defer to a date specific, there would not be a need to re-advertise.

Take a look at his crystal ball of scheduling to see whether or not you see an opening that we could defer to.

Well, and we might like to clarify with the applicant whether for how long they would like to defer so that we can clarify the applicant's intent in terms of the length of this deferral.

Davies, could you actually let us know what period of time you were looking at to

Thank you.

So Charles, are you able to

Find a date that we could defer to, a date certain.

I would ask at least 90 days so that we have time to accept whatever is submitted and review it, prepare it, schedule everything, advertise public hearings, et cetera.

Well, I think Mr. Herrick was saying if we defer to a date, certainly we wouldn't have to advertise, but I understand staff would still need to do some more review.

Yeah, look at our schedule.

We don't want to cause a planning emergency.

I would say May 24th.

I don't know if that's from earlier or is that is that deferral too long for you to be?

Thank you.

So I'm going to go ahead to Mr. Missel is raising his hand below.

But I just throw that out there as, since these are sort of additional information, additional clarifying elements, would that be a possibility to help streamline things?

We don't, I have no idea.

So, uh, we just don't have an open date until May 24th.

Thanks.

That's what I've gotten from this conversation.

Okay, if that's the case, I'm willing to make my motion.

Mr. Clayborne, before you make a motion, Ashley Davies has her hand up if you would like to give her a chance to speak one more time.

Madam Chair.

Mr. Clayborne, back to you.

Okay.

All right, is it visible?

Yes, sir.

All right, very good.

I don't want to say the wrong thing.

I would say clarity on the building height, Mr. Faber.

I was looking at my notes.

Is there a second?

Are you all pretty much feeling that you are in support of this denial for all the reasons that Corey just stated and what we just discussed?

the fullness of the discussions, I will not be supporting this motion.

Mr. Missel, thank you.

So I would not support the denial.

Moore.

I think there's opportunities there to fix the things that we've discussed.

It's been discussed, so I think we have to call the question.

Moore No Mr. Fager Aye

Is there someone who has a motion crafted in support?

If we have a design that they can show, an actual design in the proposal that can be reviewed by staff and all the elements are reviewed by staff, then I believe that that's a path forward that we signal that to the board and that this is incomplete and those elements will need to be inputted for the board's review.

So is someone prepared to make a motion for approval?

Mr. Bivins.

adding that to the document that they have tonight and that the board understand that the commission felt that these were important issues that they should consider as they look at this particular project.

Can I ask, and we'll have discussion, can I ask council, was that specific enough for a motion?

Yes, that suffices in that it addressed either a recommendation for approval or denial of the application, and then the additional recommendations of the Planning Commission are fine on top of that.

All right.

Carolyn?

Did we lose them all?

Here she comes.

Aye.

Aye.

Mr. Missel?

Aye.

And Mr. Carrazana?

Aye.

Pork rinds.

Pork rinds.

I'm gonna look for a cookie.

Just protein.

All right, at least stretch.

We really appreciate the time.

Let me open one real quick.

I'll show you what I click on.

This is being recorded?

Sorry, what, Carolyn?

They don't pause it when we go to a break like this, so this is part of what will be on the video.

I select screen two, I share it, and you see this icon right here that I'm hovering over?

Sorry.

Let me know when it shows up.

Let me find your cursor.

If I click that, double click it, and it goes to full screen.

And then if that doesn't work, I can turn my monitor off.

So if you want to give it a try, just to show how it works.

Sure thing.

And now anybody who looks at this in YouTube can see how to do it.

We're here to educate the masses, right?

And then double click that button right there.

Yeah.

Let's try that again on share screen one.

Okay, you got it.

Good to go.

And Rebecca, I saw your note about the slopes.

Do a lap around in the maze.

Thanks, Carolyn.

Hopefully they go too far.

That's exactly what it says.

We'll just be a mystery.

So instead, you tell them what you would like them to do, instead of what you dumb-walled them to do, because we're all little rebels.

We have our own group that does that kind of stuff.

Corey, are you there?

He's running.

Come on, Corey.

Might have been out of pork rinds.

I think somebody gave Jenny some nice dinner while we were meeting.

I'm going to have to get that boy a driver's license so he can slip over here too.

May we have the staff report?

And I think I've sorted out the share screen issues.

Don't jinx yourself.

Okay, very good.

I'm happy to answer any questions you have at this point.

Carolyn, do we have anyone signed up from the public to comment on this site?

No, there's nobody with their hand raised.

So please forgive me, Mr. Collins.

So I'm just here to answer any questions as well.

Carolyn?

Nobody has their hand raised this time.

So with that, we can entertain a motion.

Chair, I'd be willing to make a motion on this if the gentleman who shares his screen would be willing to do that again.

All right.

I'm just adding the language to that approval motion on her write up.

Nope, that's the wrong one.

Sky Ridge.

I can get it from there.

The last two digits need to be one, two.

This recommendation, if it goes forward, would allow development within the historic area of disturbance while minimizing encroachment upon the mountain resource area.

Mr. Heraker is going to say something.

Would that be your motion, Mr. Bivins?

Clairvoyant as always.

Is there a second to that exact motion?

Second.

Mr. Clayborne?

Aye.

Aye.

Mr. Missel?

Aye.

Mr. Carrazana.

Aye.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Apogee, take it away.

That is all.

I'm trying to pay attention, but they're just dropping from the ceiling.