HomeMy Public PortalAbout07 07 16 PC Minutesof LE
O
VAR G1N�P
The Town of Lees6urg in Virginia
Leesburg Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes
July 7, 2016
The Leesburg Planning Commission met on Thursday, July 7, 2016 in the Town Council
Chamber, 25 West Market Street, Leesburg, VA 20176. Staff members present were Susan
Berry -Hill, Brandon White, Brian Boucher, Barbara Notar, and Karen Cicalese.
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:02 pm by Chairman Welsh Chamblin
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND ROLL CALL
Members Present: Chairman Welsh Chamblin, Commissioners Babbin, Barnes, Burke, Harper,
Kidder, and Robinson and Vice Mayor Burk
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: Commissioner Barnes
Second: Commissioner Kidder
Vote: 7-0
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
June 16, 2016
Motion: Commissioner Kidder
Second: Commissioner Burk
Vote: 6-0-1 (Harper abstained as she was not present at the June 16th meeting.)
DISCLOSURE OF MEETINGS
Commissioner Burk disclosed a phone conversation with Mr. Sevila regarding the Flex Industrial
Amendment and the proposed 60/40 ratio.
Commissioner Harper disclosed that Mr. Sevila had called but that they did not speak.
CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT
Chairman Welsh Chamblin noted that she was looking forward to a productive meeting and that
the Commission would be continuing discussion on two interesting topics
PETITIONERS
Michael Vaughn, 35904 Clover Terrace, Round Hill, VA 20141, St. John Properties
representative, came forward to express his support for the proposed amendment. He noted
that this was a positive step for the Town of Leesburg as it will improve quality of life and
provide a full range of community facilities and diverse business opportunities. St. John
Properties owns, manages, and maintains a portfolio of over sixteen million square feet of
flex industrial office parks. The product they are proposing utilizes brick, anodized
aluminum to create a slick modern appearance. The also landscape their parks and the
Leesburg Planning Commission
July 7, 2016 Minutes
properties are well maintained. The businesses located in park will provide a profitable tax
base for the Town and will have a lesser impact on the community in terms of traffic and
trucking. He expressed concerns regarding the proposed ratio as it will dissuade potential
businesses from coming to the Town of Leesburg. I-1 zoning and a special exception
process will be required to construct a flex industrial office park as well as additional special
exceptions required for uses that have a higher intensity such as day care. This will provide
the Town an additional level of control over the uses.
Kevin Goeller, 907 Rolling Holly Drive, Sterling, VA 22060, Commercial Broker, came
forward to express his support of the proposed amendment. He expressed concerns
regarding the 60/40 ratio; data center and 100% office use, and the auxiliary uses.
Bob Sevila, 30 N. King Street, Leesburg, VA 20176, came forward and noted that he has
been working with St. John Properties to create an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. He
appreciated staff's hard work and felt that they have presented a sound amendment. He
expressed concerns regarding the 60/40 mix as it hinders development. The uses listed in the
proposed ordinance are compatible; however he would like to add light automotive use as
well as a definition of light automotive. The County distinguishes between automotive repair
light and automotive repair heavy and have carefully defined what light automotive repair is.
Lastly, he opined that the special exception review process will allow adequate opportunity
to ensure that St. John Properties adhere to what is proposed; the brick siding and anodized
aluminum, landscaping and screening to ensure that whatever the mix of uses is within the
district, it won't offend anybody outside the district.
PUBLIC HEARING
None
SUBDIVISION AND LAND DEVELOPMENT
None
ZONING
TLOA-2016-0005, Text Amendment Flex Industrial, Brandon White, Deputy Zoning
Administrator
Brandon White began with a brief review of the proposed amendment which is intended to expand
definitions and regulations related to the "flex industrial" use category initiated by Town Council
by Resolution 2016-027 on February 23, 2016. This came about as a response to an inquiry
regarding the development of "flex space" in the I-1, Industrial Research Park Zoning District.
The "flex space" proposal consists of options for light industrial uses (e.g. research and
development), limited retail uses (e.g. convenience store), educational uses (e.g. technical
school), institutional uses (e.g. church), and other commercial enterprises (e.g. daycare,
recreation, offices, etc.) in a business park -like setting. While an office/technology/business park
is achievable within the framework of the current zoning regulations, the level of flexibility and
variety of commercial uses discussed are not fully attainable under the current I-1 zoning
regulations. Besides strict limits on retail uses, the existing regulations allow a number of uses
but most require a special exception approved by Town Council. The proposed amendments
2
Leesburg Planning Commission
July 7, 2016 Minutes
are intended to be mutually beneficial to the business community and the economic development
interests of the Town by providing an expanded yet reasonable level of flexibility in the I-1
District to embrace current zoning trends and to increase the economic viability of the district.
Mr. White addressed issues and concerns expressed at the June 16, 2016 meeting and proposed
options for the Planning Commission to discuss:
1. The justification for the proposed 60/40 use limitation for light industrial and non -light
industrial is that it implements the Town Plan goals, is consistent with the I-1 Zoning
District purpose and intent; avoids conflict with established and preferred nodes of
commerce, and is consistent with past zoning practices. He recommended the following
solutions:
a. Remove the use ratio and all use limitations contained within the proposal.
b. Modify the use ratio, for example: 50% light industrial and 50% non -light
industrial
c. Place specific limitations or performance standards on specific uses
Commissioner Barnes asked for clarification on the light automotive use proposed by Mr. Sevila.
Mr. White explained that staff would need to look into this requested use. He had not discussed
the proposed use with Mr. Sevila s it was just requested tonight.
Commissioner Kidder expressed her support to keep the ratio proposed by staff.
Commissioner Robinson stated that she did not feel the propose ratio was in the best interest of
the town and was in favor of removing it. She was also in favor of removing retail and
maintaining the convenience store limitation of 2,000 sf. She had concerns regarding the light
automotive definition and the differences between vehicular and equipment service facility.
Commissioner Burk expressed concerns regarding what negative impacts will be mitigated by
the 60/40 ratio and noted that he agreed with Gigi's limitation on convenience store use square
footage.
Commissioner Babbin expressed her support to remove the ratio as the special exception process
allows review on a case by case basis and provides control. She expressed concern regarding
the placement of uses within a particular category as she felt it was arbitrary. She was not
opposed to the addition of a light automotive use but felt that staff needed time to review and
analyze if it was appropriate. It was her intent to make a motion to recommend approval,
without any ratio or specific limitations on use, and move this forward to Town Council.
Commissioner Harper was in support of removing the ratios all together.
Commissioner Kidder asked Mr. White to respond to Commissioner Burk's concern regarding
mitigation of negative impacts if the ratio is removed. Mr. White responded that staff was
concerned about introducing more intense commercial uses into the I-1 Zoning District because
those uses will begin to proliferate within those developments. If there are no use restrictions in
place, staff believes that over the course of time there will be more non -light industrial uses and
3
Leesburg Planning Commission
July 7, 2016 Minutes
fewer light industrial uses. Staff was trying to devise a way to ensure that there will be a
considerable amount of light industrial uses in those facilities. Staff did not arbitrarily create a
number. They looked at uses that would be light industrial in nature such as diagnostic
laboratory, distillery, and distribution facility. Next they looked at uses that would be
compatible in that type of setting, such as microbrewery, mini -warehouse facility, printing and
publication facilities, and certain office type uses. This is the I-1 Zoning District and it is
important to maintain some level of industrial character within these developments. Otherwise,
they will eventually become retail centers like Battlefield Shopping Center and Shenandoah
Shopping Center. Staff is not trying to limit how the park functions internally. The concern is
the exterior impacts that would result from certain types of development.
Commissioner Kidder commented that they were a Planning Commission and future
development should be considered.
Commissioner Barnes clarified that it was 60% light industrial and 40% non -light industrial. Mr.
White explained that 60% was the minimum amount. Commissioner Barnes asked if it would be
possible to have the park developed with 100% light industrial uses. Mr. White answered that
this would be permitted.
Commissioner Barnes noted that places of worship are allowable in industrial parks and
expressed concerns regarding parking. Mr. White responded that that would be something the
Planning Commission and Town Council would review during the special exception process.
Commissioner Barnes was in support of the 60/40 ratio or some type of use limitations.
Mr. Sevila opined that a mandatory ratio would create vacancies. He was not concerned that
retailers would move from existing retail centers to a light industrial area. Some retail in a light
industrial area would be useful. This would be an opportunity for a business to locate within the
town without having to go through a costly, time consuming, special exception process.
Commissioner Harper asked for an explanation of a "public utility minor" use. Mr. White
answered that it includes electric transformers, natural gas, water and sewer transmission,
collection distribution metering devices and water and sewerage pumping stations. Major public
utility uses are larger and include electric substations, distribution centers, etc.
Commissioner Robinson asked what would happen if retail uses, like clothing, were not
permitted. Mr. Sevila answered that it would be a lost opportunity for a user of that nature to
locate in this park. Theoretically they would be driven to some other retail property within the
Town or outside the Town. Commissioner Robinson asked what effect the removal of retail uses
would have on the other businesses in the flex industrial park. Mr. Vaughn explained that retail
usually serves the park itself, like a Subway restaurant or small mailing/shipping service.
Commissioner Babbin noted that some retail sales require large warehouse space such as
Ferguson that sells to contractors as well as the public.
4
Leesburg Planning Commission
July 7, 2016 Minutes
Commissioner Robinson noted that there were two uses with space limitations; convenience
store and retail. She asked Mr. Vaughn what the impact would be if retail uses, such as millinery
items, were removed. Mr. Vaughn answered that it would remove the opportunity. They can't
predict the market. Loudoun County puts a 10% cap on ancillary uses which includes retail
thereby limiting those uses.
Commissioner Kidder was in favor of a 10% cap on ancillary uses.
Brian Boucher, Deputy Director, Department of Planning and Zoning, commented on the
proposed ratio dispute noting that removing the ratio limits the opportunity for the Town to deny
a less desirable permitted use, such as a mega church or large gym, provided the impacts are
mitigated. The emphasis should be on maintaining the industrial character of the district.
Chairman Welsh Chamblin summarized the Planning Commission discussion and noted that the
majority of the Commission members were not in support of maintaining the 60/40 ratio;
however there was discussion about having some sort of limitations or guidelines to ensure
mixed use. Commissioner Robinson suggested that this be addressed as a use standard bullet in
the use table. She also asked about the addition of light automotive.
Commissioner Welsh Chamblin explained that there was some discussion on light automotive,
however there is not enough information to add this use. If they act on this amendment tonight,
they could add language in the motion that Town Council consider light automotive.
Commissioner Babbin asked what the difference was between vehicle and equipment service
facility and light automotive. Mr. White discussed the County's definition and the Zoning
Ordinance definition. The primary difference; is that the Town's Zoning Ordinance requires the
service work to be completed in an enclosed environment.
Mr. Sevila stated that after discussing the definitions with Mr. Vaughn and Mr. White, they were
satisfied with the language as written in the Zoning Ordinance.
Commissioner Robinson asked if the Commission wanted to place a size limit on places of
worship.
Barbara Notar, Town Attorney, commented that she had issue with size limitations on a single
use.
Susan Berry -Hill, Director, Department of Planning and Zoning, noted that there were
limitations on other uses, the convenience store and retail, and asked Ms. Notar how this would
be different. Ms. Notar replied that everything should have the same limitation. If a
convenience store is limited to 2,000 sf, than so should the church, light automotive uses, etc.
Mr. White opined that there should be some variation based on use function. It was determined
that more discussion was needed on the use limitation issue.
5
Leesburg Planning Commission
July 7, 2016 Minutes
2. Inclusion of "office" in the Light Industrial section and Non -Light Industrial section of
Table 9.8.4 and 'the desire for greater clarity regarding office uses. Mr. White
commented that including office in both sections added use flexibility and covered a
variety of prospective office uses.
a. If the use ratio is removed, leave "office" in the table, unchanged
b. If the use ratio remains, leave "office" unchanged and provide
descriptions/examples in the use table.
c. If the use ratio remains, include "office" solely in one section of the table (light
industrial or non -light industrial).
d. If the use ratio remains, crate new 'office" terms and definitions and include them
in the appropriate sections.
Mr. White explained that "office" is currently defined as a use consisting of a building, room, or
group of rooms used for conducting executive, management, or administrative affairs of a
business, organization, institution or government entity and/or for the provision of professional
services. For the purposes of this Zoning Ordinance an office use may include accessory
research and development or production uses subject to meeting the performance standards
specified in Section 9.3.17.01 of this ordinance.
Chairman Welsh Chamblin asked the Planning Commission members if they were in support of
the use as currently defined.
Commission Babbin asked how a use would be classified if it were a combination of permitted
uses, such as a retail showroom and warehouse. Mr. White answered that it is classified based
on the predominant use.
The Planning Commission unanimously supported the current "office" definition and Option A.
3. Addition of higher education uses (i.e. college/university) to the flex industrial park use
table.
a. Include "college or university" as a permissible use, without limitations.
b. Include "college or university" as a permitted use with limitations.
Chairman Welsh Chamblin petitioned the Planning Commissioner members regarding the
options provided.
Commissioner Harper asked for examples of limitations. Mr. White answered that it could be a
limit on stand-alone buildings, square footage, types of college facilities, etc. Commissioner
Harper noted that she supported the addition of higher education uses with limitations.
Chairman Welsh Chamblin asked if they were currently allowed in the I-1 by special exception.
Mr. White answered that they were allowed by -right in the I-1 district. Having a flex industrial
business park does not prohibit other allowable I-1 uses. The above options pertain to the use
within a flex industrial business park.
C.
Leesburg Planning Commission
July 7, 2016 Minutes
The Planning Commission determined this to be a non -issue as the use was already permitted by -
right in the I-1 District.
4. More architecture control standards.
a. Revise proposed Section 9.8.5 (Architecture) to include a section of full building
design and architectural standards.
b. Revise proposed Section 9.8.5 (Architecture) to include minimum architectural
standard
c. Apply H-2 Corridor Design Guidelines to flex industrial business parks.
d. Leave Section 9.8.5 (Architecture) unchanged and address architecture and
building aspects during the special exception process.
Commissioner Robinson noted that Section 9.8.5 states that design will be compatible but does
not speak to anything else. She expressed concerns regarding the use of corrugated metal siding
and would like language to address this.
Commissioner Kidder was in agreement that architectural standards were needed.
Commissioner Robinson suggested the following language be added to address concerns
expressed:
"No corrugated metal siding and similar materials may be used for new construction. Materials
such as brick, James Hardie Siding, GAF Fiber Cement Siding type products, stone, wood,
stucco, etc. will blend and be harmonious with adjacent buildings."
Chairman Welsh Chamblin solicited the Planning Commission regarding the options provided
and Commissioner Robinson's suggested language. The Commission unanimously supported
Option B, and Commissioner Robinson's proposed language.
Chairman Welsh Chamblin noted that the only unresolved issue was the ratio. The Commission
supported the removal of the ratio; however, the majority still felt that limitations of some type
were needed. She petitioned the Commission to determine if they were able to take action
tonight or if they felt more information was needed and continue to the next meeting.
Commissioner Barnes responded that he was not prepared to vote this evening.
Commissioner Kidder noted her support of the ratio and was not prepared to vote this evening.
Commissioner Robinson responded that she was ready to vote.
Commissioner Burk noted his sensitivity to the need to move this forward, however a number of
questions were raised and he would like to get additional information and continue discussion to
the next meeting.
Commissioner Babbin noted that she was prepared to vote and make a motion tonight.
Commissioner Harper noted that she was prepared to vote this evening.
Mr. Sevila came forward and explained that he had spoken with Mr. Vaughn and Mr. White and
it was determined that the removal of the 60/40 ratio and a 10% cap on the retail is an acceptable
alternative.
7
Leesburg Planning Commission
July 7, 2016 Minutes
Chairman Welsh Chamblin stated that she would be comfortable voting this evening and called
for a motion.
Commissioner Robinson asked for clarification on media studio as it did not include any
telecommunication appurtenances. Mr. White explained that there would be a separate process
for anything located outside the building.
Commissioner Robinson asked about the trade contractor use and if it included equipment
parking. Mr. White answered that if it were part of their business operations, parking would be
included.
Commissioner Babbin made the following motion:
I move that Zoning Ordinance Amendment TLOA-2016-0005, Flex Industrial, be forwarded to
the Town Council with a recommendation of approval, on the basis that the amendments further
the Town Plan and that the proposal would serve the public necessity, convenience, general
welfare and good zoning practice, subject to the following changes to the language proposed in
the July 7, 2016 staff report.
1. Any reference to a 60/40 split between uses or any percentage maximum of specific
allowed uses is deleted. However, the Commission recommends that a 10% limitation on
retail uses be imposed.
2. Provision 9.8.5 regarding the architecture of any such flex industrial center be fully
defined to delineate appropriate materials for the structure.
Commissioner Harper seconded the motion.
Commissioner Kidder noted that she would not be supporting this motion as the 60/40 ratio has
been removed.
Vote: 6-1 (Nay —Kidder)
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
None
COUNCIL AND REPRESENTATIVES REPORT
Commissioner Kidder attended the EAC meeting where they were developing their master plan
for the year. They will be developing criteria for presentations they make to Town Council.
She also noted the new sculpture in Raflo Park and the bicycle mural in the Town parking garage
were the result of the Arts Commission and the Friends of Public Art.
Commissioner Robinson attended the Parks and Recreation meeting but had nothing to report.
Commissioner Harper informed the Commission that she had submitted her resignation as liaison
to the EDC.
E:3
Leesburg Planning Commission
July 7, 2016 Minutes
Chairman Welsh Chamblin attended the BAR meeting. There was discussion on the repeal of
the H-2 Guidelines and the general consensus was that there needed to be some type of design
review and they would like to schedule a joint meeting with the Planning Commission to discuss.
The Commission will be discussing this at the July 21St meeting and she asked that members be
prepared to discuss dates for a joint meeting with the BAR.
Chairman Welsh Chamblin asked for replacement liaisons for the EDC and Parks and
Recreation. Commissioner Burk will be the liaison to the EDC and Commissioner Babbin and
Commissioner Robinson will split the duties for Parks and Recreation temporarily.
Commissioner Harper noted that there was a lot of shuffling of liaisons amongst the various
boards and commissions and asked if it were really necessary to have a liaison for each one.
Chairman Welsh Chamblin answered that she felt it was necessary to have a BAR liaison as
there is a lot of overlapping; however she was flexible to discuss the other commissions. The
wording in the By-laws was changed from specific commissions to as needed or as assigned.
The Commission was in favor of adding this discussion to a future agenda.
Commissioner Babbin asked how the H-2 repeal will affect the East Market Street corridor
project. Ms. Berry Hill answered that discussions on the project and H-2 repeal will most likely
merge when it comes to this particular part of the East Market discussion. Town Council has
requested the Planning Commission and the BAR discuss the repeal, however no direction to
look at a replacement for the H-2 Guidelines was given. There was very clear consensus, during
the BAR discussion last night, that they were not in favor of an outright repeal; but rather the
guidelines be updated or replaced.
STAFF AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
Ms. Notar explained that she had distributed a hand out that included the PowerPoint
Presentation given to Town Council at their last work session by Ms. Berry -Hill, Mr. Boucher
and herself. The presentation addressed the new proffer law and the Town's process moving
forward. There is an interim policy in place and the Town will no longer accept any proffers for
residential and mixed use rezonings with a residential component. This policy will be in effect
until Town Staff recommends to Town Council that they are ready to proceed as Town Council
directs. Ms. Notar has advised Town Council members not to speak with developers during this
interim period and advised the Planning Commission to do the same. Discussion on this topic
will be continued at the next Planning Commission meeting.
Commissioner Babbin noted that she will not be attending the next meeting and asked if
discussion on this topic be rescheduled to a future meeting where she can be present. This issue
is of great interest to her and she has worked on it quite a bit with Ms. Notar and others.
Commissioner Burk noted that he would also not be in attendance at the next meeting.
After further discussion it was determined to continue discussion to the August 4, 2016 meeting.
7
Leesburg Planning Commission
July 7, 2016 Minutes
STAFF DISCUSSION
None
OLD BUSINESS
Two -over -Two (discussion continued from May 19, 2016), Brian Boucher, Deputy Director,
Department of Planning and Zoning.
Ms. Berry -Hill explained that Mr. Boucher had to leave so she would be leading the
discussion in his absence. On May 19, 2016 the Planning Commission discussed several
concerns with particular features of 2 -over -2 and townhouse units. The purpose was to
consider possible performance standards that would remove certain perceived flaws in the
unit types while providing more desirable living options for residents. After extensive
discussion on characteristics of the residential unit types, the Commission directed staff to
provide two draft performance standards:
Require a typical detail for 2 -over -2 and townhouse units that shows the
arrangement of parking, HVAC units and trash collection location on the
proposed lots.
Require a stick of three or more 2 -over -2 or townhouse units to have at least two lot
widths, with perhaps three lot widths for sticks of six or more units.
Staff has proposed the following performance standards:
1. The typical lot layout must illustrate lot dimensions, building footprint, dimensions
from building to all property lines, driveway width, unit width, ground -mounted
mechanical equipment (HVAC) location and screening, stoop/porch and/or steps, and
trash and recycling pickup location.
2. Any stick of three townhouse units must include at least one unit that has its fagade
setback two feet or more than the other two units, or one unit that is at least two feet
in width different from the other two units. Any stick containing four or five
townhouse units must include at least one unit that has its fagade setback two feet or
more than the other units, and one unit that is at least two feet in width different from
the other units. Any stick containing six to eight townhouse units must include at
least two units that have a fagade setback of two feet or more than the other units, and
two units that are at least two feet in width different from the other units.
The Planning Commission was satisfied with the proposed performance standards; however
concerns remain regarding gas line hook-up, length of parking space, tandem parking, and
alley way width for emergency vehicle access. It was determined to have staff evaluate and
develop performance standards to address these four concerns and return to a future meeting
to discuss.
10
Leesburg Planning Commission
July 7, 2016 Minutes
NEW BUSINESS
None
ADJOURNMENT
The Meeting was adjourned at 9:29 pm
Approved by:
wren Cicalese, Commission Clerk
dZoG-
yndsay W sh Chamblin, Chairman
11