Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout03 01 2018 PC MinutesTfie Town of Lees6urg in Virginia Leesburg Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 1, 2018 The Leesburg Planning Commission met on Thursday, March 1, 2018 in Town Hall Council Chambers, 25 West Market Street, Leesburg, VA 20176. Staff members present included Susan Berry -Hill, Rich Klusek, Mike Watkins, Shelby Caputo, and Karen Cicalese. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm by Chairman Babbin Members Present: Chairman Babbin, Commissioners Barnes, Faliskie, Kidder, Lanham, Robinson, and Walker. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Motion: Commissioner Lanham Second Commissioner Faliskie Vote: 7-0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES February 15, 2018 Motion: Commissioner Barnes Second: Commissioner Faliskie Vote: 7-0 DISCLOSURE OF MEETINGS Chairman Babbin disclosed a telephone conversation with Chris Gleckner, Walsh Colucci, who called to let her know that Walsh Colucci will be taking over the representation of Kettler with regard to the small area plan. CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT Chairman Babbin read the following statement: "Thank you for this opportunity to further serve the residents and businesses of Leesburg. I will endeavor, as Chair of this Planning Commission, with the support of my fellow commissioners, to incorporate in our processes the principles recommended by our Economic Development Steering Committee of speed, flexibility and predictability. We will attempt to work efficiently and effectively on all applications to reduce the time it takes to flow through staff and the Commission. With the support of my fellow commissioners, we will take action on applications at the earliest possible date. We will consider our zoning ordinances and other laws and regulations, and all public input as well as stakeholder concerns, but I hope we will not micromanage or attempt to influence the application with our own personal tastes or preferences. On zoning law amendments I hope we will provide the flexibility needed for businesses to thrive, that we will attempt Leesburg Planning Commission March 1, 2018 Minutes to eliminate over regulation where it currently exists and avoid imposing unnecessary regulation in the future. I encourage any member of the public or business with recommendations on how to make our ordinances or processes better or more efficient to contact me directly if they so choose. All ideas are welcome. Just because something has always been done one way it will not be allowed to stand in the way of change for the better. Thank you all for you past and future hard work. I look forward to a productive year." Chairman Babbin added that there will be some changes that will be initiated immediately and include: • Staff reports be summaries emphasizing only key points. • Power Point presentations be used for graphics and maps. Staff reports are available on the Town website on the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting for the public to view. • Motions will be entertained at the earliest practicable time followed by discussion on the motion to eliminate the practice of 2 discussion periods. • Comments regarding changes requested of an applicant or staff be directed to the Chair by the other Commissioners to determine that a majority of the Commission is in agreement with said request. Chairman Babbin wished to comment on the change in their seating arrangement noting that it was at the request of specific commissioners. Lastly, Chairman Babbin addressed complaints she has received from several Commissioners regarding other members of the Planning Commission who have gone to the Town Council members who appointed them to complain about their votes here on the Commission. She stated that she found this to be unprofessional and hurtful and wished to remind everyone that we are an independent body established pursuant to State law. Planning Commission terms are for four years and a member can only be removed for cause. Commissioner Kidder asked if the members of the Commission will have an opportunity to discuss and vote on all the rules discussed. Chairman Babbin responded that the rules, just discussed, are part of "Robert's Rules" and the Planning Commission follows "Roberts Rules" in accordance with their By-laws. If there is an issue that arises it can be discussed at that time. PETITIONERS Neil Steinberg, 139 Woodberry Road, Leesburg, VA 20176, came forward and commented that the Planning Commission's job was to work in concert with Town Council, staff, and the residents to help design, create and sustain a vision for Leesburg. They are supposed to be advocates for the Town and it was the Town resident's decision, within the framework of State i Code and County and Town Comprehensive Plans and Zoning Regulations, as to how we wish to Leesburg Planning Commission March 1, 2018 Minutes shape our living environment. The Planning Commission's job is not to act either as advocates or facilitators for the development community. Their purpose was not to ensure that any developer or development be allowed to maximize profit at the expense of the Town's open space, schools, and transportation systems. He was not suggesting that the process be difficult and was of the opinion that it is not. It was his belief that the majority of Town residents were not in support of unbridled growth and its predictable unpleasant consequences and stressed the need to maintain and follow a strong Town Plan. PUBLIC HEARING None SUBDIVISION AND LAND DEVELOPMENT Leesburg West Street Naming — Mike Watkins, Assistant Zoning Administrator, Planning and Zoning Mr. Watkins explained that the Applicant was requesting the Planning Commission's approval of a street name associated with the Leesburg West 2 Construction Drawings. The property is located near the intersection of Catoctin Circle, SW and West Market Street and is being developed "by -right" under the existing R-4, Single-family Residential District. Development will include twenty-two (22) new single-family detached dwellings and includes one existing single-family detached dwelling. The proposed street name is Harpers Run Court, SW. Chairman Babbin called for a motion. Commissioner Lanham moved to approve the street name Harpers Run Court, SW as recommended in the staff memo presented by Mr. Watkins. Commissioner Walker seconded the motion. Chairman Babbin called for discussion on the motion. Seeing none, she walled for the vote. The motion carried 7-0 ZONING TLOA-2017-0005 Tents and Shade Structures Work Session — Clarification and Discussion, Mike Watkins, Assistant Zoning Administrator, Planning and Zoning Chairman Babbin explained that this was not really a work session as she had a discussion with Mr. Watkins and some of the members of the Planning Commission regarding discussion at the February 1St meeting on this topic and there appeared to be some confusion. It was her understanding that staff had not yet drafted the ordinance and were looking for guidance from the Planning Commission regarding whether an applicant, wishing to erect a tent or shade structure, would be required to go before the BAR on either the first or subsequent applications. She wished to take a straw vote to give clear guidance to staff on this issue. Commissioner Robinson expressed concern over the timing of this request as she felt the direction given at the February 1 st meeting was clear and this was a request for discussion to accommodate members who were not in attendance at the February 1St meeting. She also 3 Leesburg Planning Commission March 1, 2018 Minutes expressed concern that this request seemed to set a precedent that the Planning Commission could only give direction to staff if all members were present. Commissioner Kidder commented that she has had several absences due to illness and asked if this meant that she could recall items, previously voted on, for new discussion. Chairman Babbin responded, that under "Robert's Rules", a motion can be brought up at a subsequent meeting at any time; however, a motion that has been defeated can't be brought up again at the same meeting. Commissioner Kidder asked if staff had understood the direction given at the February 1 st meeting. Mr. Watkins replied that based on the discussion at the February 1st meeting staff had planned to provide options to the Planning Commission in the draft ordinance. Subsequent to that meeting, he had been contacted by a member of the Commission regarding the Planning Commission direction given on February 1 st, and that a request would be made to continue the discussion this evening. Commissioner Kidder asked if this new discussion would cancel out previous direction given. Chairman Babbin clarified that the only item being brought up for clarification was the role of the BAR. Chairman Babbin called for additional discussion, seeing none, she called for a straw vote to determine if the Commission felt that there was a need for BAR approval for the initial, and/or subsequent applications. The majority of Commissioner's were not in support of BAR review and approval for temporary structures. Chairman Babbin explained that staff will move forward with preparing the draft ordinance and will return April St" for a work session discussion prior to the April 19th public hearing. Commissioner Robinson commented that she had requested that a check list be prepared for the applicant and would like to have this included as part of the draft Chairman Babbin asked the Commission members if they were in support of the checklist requested by Commissioner Robinson. The majority of Commission members were in support of including a checklist for the applicants. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING Work Plan and Schedule for the Eastern Gateway District Small Area Plan — Rich Klusek, Sr. Planner, Planning and Zoning al Leesburg Planning Commission March 1, 2018 Minutes Chairman Babbin explained that she had spoken to Mr. Klusek and Ms. Berry -Hill and due to the many meetings on the draft small area plan she felt that another staff presentation was not needed. Commissioner Faliskie had informed her that he had gone through the proposed draft plan and felt that he was up to speed. Tonight's objective was to discuss scheduling to move this forward to Town Council as quickly as possible and she and Commissioner Lanham have worked together to come up with a procedure to expedite the process. There were many straw votes taken when there was a six -member Commission and she is trying to avoid repeating that process. She noted that Commissioner Lanham had a motion to present which will then be open to discussion and debate. Commissioner Lanham read the following motion: I move that the Leesburg Planning Commission defer further action on the Eastern Gateway Small Area Plan until such time as staff is able to prepare and present to the Planning Commission a revised proposed plan incorporating the following revisions: 1. Reword throughout to restate items in plan as "goals" not "requirements", eliminating words such as "shall" and "will" and using instead phrases such as "the goal is", "to the extent practical", and/or "is encouraged", etc.; 2. Remove specificity which is more appropriate for zoning ordinances than a visionary town plan that is meant to be a guideline, including, but not limited to, the following: a. References to prohibitions related to corporate branding; b. Where there are references to pattern books, design guidelines, or architectural guidelines, keep general and leave specific patterns or guidelines to be developed; c. References to existing uses as interim uses; d. Where there is a reference to a community core, eliminate reference to a required specific location; e. References to specific lengths for blocks, incorporating instead ranges stated as guidelines; f. Maps or references to street grids internal to a parcel; g. References to specific widths for sidewalks; h. References to required or preferred structured parking; i. References to FAR except to allow FAR up to 3.0 in appropriate areas; j. References to building standards that exceed building code requirements and that are counter to the objective of encouraging more affordable housing; k. References to circulator transit as opposed to regional transit; 1. References to natural resources objectives that go beyond state requirements, and which add costs that are counter to the objective of encouraging more affordable 61 Leesburg Planning Commission March 1, 2018 Minutes housing — make such policies "to the extent practical' and remove "replicate pre - development hydrology." 3. Incorporate optional land use designations for appropriate parcels that are currently undeveloped or where the envisioned future land use differs from the current use to allow for flexibility and expansion of existing uses; 4. Incorporate flexibility wherever possible to avoid the necessity of continual plan amendments; 5. Clarify that LEEDS certification is not required and that LEEDs best practices should be incorporated only "to the extent practical;" 6. Reconsider proposed land use designations for parcels where current landowner has continued objection. Meet with these stakeholders and attempt to resolve. Incorporate alternate land use designations where possible; 7. In conjunction with the small area plan, incorporate recommendation to Town Council that the Town Plan page 1-9 be revised to read, in relevant part: "The Plan objectives for every Plan element are to be used as a guide for evaluating legislative applications, such as rezonings, special exceptions, or amendments to those that exist. The Town Plan also provides guidance for developing the Town's capital improvements program." Commissioner Walker Seconded the motion. Chairman Babbin explained that under "Robert's Rules" it is appropriate for the person making the motion to speak first during discussion. Commissioner Lanham explained that he felt that this proposed motion was a way to move this project along more quickly as opposed to revisiting the items with tied straw votes. Commissioner Barnes expressed concerns regarding the proposed changes in the motion as it dramatically changes the Town Plan. He asked staff if they agreed with what was proposed in the motion. Susan Berry -Hill, Director, Planning and Zoning, replied that Commissioner Lanham had just read seven points that were a part of the motion. One of those has eleven sub -points. Staff felt that three were easy to do, she disagreed with one, and that staff was unclear on the remainder. She felt that there needed to be discussion on those items. Commissioner Barnes concurred and stated that he would not be supporting the proposed motion. Commissioner Robinson commented that in Chairman Babbin's email she had requested that the Commission be prepared to discuss the motion and proposed addressing each item and discuss some of the points within the motion. For example item number one proposes eliminating the terms "shall" and "will" and it was her opinion that these terms are necessary when demanding certain features, procedures, or avoidances be maintained as well as helping to define what the C:1 Leesburg Planning Commission March 1, 2018 Minutes Town is expecting from a person wanting to develop their land. She stated that she was open to discussing the proposed motion, but would want to address each item specifically. Chairman Babbin clarified that the intent of the proposed motion was to ask for another draft and that there will be at least two more work session discussions to go through these items in detail. Tonight's discussion was to focus on the proposed motion and the Planning Commission has a right to discuss it. Under "Robert's Rules" every Commission is afforded ten minutes and asked Commissioner Robinson if she would like to address any other specifics raised in the motion. Commissioner Robinson continued as follows: • Item 2a — It was her opinion that it was important to keep corporate logos in conformance with the Town. • Item 2b — This would remove all constraints on building and landscaping guidelines. This area is part of the H-2 which can help soften the entrance and make is something enticing and welcoming. • Item 2c — Needs clarification. • Item 2d- A community core, by its very definition, needs a description of where the core should be. • Item 2e- Allowing only a range of block lengths can hinder the Town in achieving the look and usage it is trying to reach as a goal. • Item 2f — Needs clarification. • Item 2g — The width of a sidewalk allows different activity. • Item 2h — She expressed strong views on encouraging structured parking for density until the Town has developed a transit to areas both within Town limits as well as outside such as Dulles Airport and the new metro stations, etc. • Item 2i — A FAR (Floor Area Ratio) is a very important term and number to developers and encourages a density that it envisioned in the planned area. • Item 2j — Needs clarification of what is meant by building standards. • Item 2k — Explanation of the intent is needed. • Item 21- Explanation needed as to what is needed by the Town for hydrology which prevents flooding. • Item 3 — Identification of specific places for future zoning. • Item 4 — Provide strategic places where it is thought flexibility is needed to be inserted • Item 5 — Council just put forth a program to upgrade aging and high energy use systems in commercial buildings and it was her opinion that Council should be happy to endorse LEED certification. • Item 6 — Specifics on who is objecting to their land use designation in the Plan as these property owners have the ability to request a rezoning • Item 7 — Needs clarification. Commissioner Kidder commented that Leesburg has been voted as one of the ten best places to live in the country several times by Fortune Magazine and a number of other publications and the reason for this is due to the fact that Leesburg has paid attention to its ambiance, landscaping, and history protection. The economic development benefits of the historic district maintains 7 Leesburg Planning Commission March 1, 2018 Minutes visitors, promotes businesses locating here, and people wanting to live here. It was her opinion that the proposed motion wipes out anything that the Town has done to get us into the position it is today of being a desirable place to live and work. Additionally, she did not feel that it met the requirements in State Code Section 15.2-2284 and stated that she would not support this motion. Commissioner Faliskie commented that it was his understanding that Commissioner Lanham's motion was simply clarification on what is going to be resubmitted to the Planning Commission. This motion is basically looking at the Town Plan versus the Ordinance. He opined that the Town Plan should be more of a guideline and felt that this was what Commissioner Lanham was trying to lay out. His interpretation of the motion was to have a Town Plan that serves as a guideline and offers greater flexibility. Commissioner Barnes opined that this motion looked as though it had been drafted by a developer, not a Planning Commission. The Planning Commission is responsible for ensuring what is good for the Town, not the developer. Commissioner Robinson noted that she had asked for explanation on a number of the items presented in the motion and asked if she could get an explanation prior to voting on the motion. Commissioner Lanham commented that he was not going to go through each item individually as they could do that at later date. It was his opinion that the Town Plan is a guide and an expression of a community's goals. It is not something that says "will" and "shall. That's not to say that you couldn't have statements like that occasionally in certain places in the document and these types of statements can be added if needed. Rules and regulations belong in the Zoning Ordinance, Design and Constructions Standards Manual (DCSM) , Subdivision and Land Development Regulations (SLDR), Federal Wetland Regulations, etc. not the Town Plan. The Comprehensive Plan should be a flexible document. Chairman Babbin called for the vote. The motion carried by a vote of 4-2-1 (Aye — Babbin, Faliskie, Lanham, and Walker, Nay — Kidder and Barnes, Abstain — Robinson) Mr. Klusek noted that staff was unclear on some of the points in the motion and asked for clarification to assist in re -writing the draft small area plan. Chairman Babbin responded that she and Commissioner Lanham could meet with staff to discuss and clarify this further and asked that staff arrange a meeting. STAFF AND COMMITTEE REPORTS None SRTC REPORT None Leesburg Planning Commission March 1, 2018 Minutes OLD BUSINESS Capital Improvements Program Memo Chairman Babbin explained that staff had prepared a memo from the Planning Commission to Town Council regarding the Planning Commission's recommendations on the Capital Improvements Program. The memo had been emailed to the Commission and was also on the dais this evening. She asked for discussion to determine if the memo accurately reflected the Commission's recommendations. Commissioner Robinson noted that the accompanying memo from Capital Projects stated that the Replacement/Upgrade Computer Aided Dispatch System and Center had been moved from From FY 2023 to FY 2020 and asked that the cost of the project, $370,000, be inserted in their recommendation along with a request to move the project to FY 2019. The majority of Commissioners were in support of this change to their recommendation. NEW BUSINESS Annual Report The Planning Commission reviewed the Annual Report and were in favor of sending it to Town Council. Applicant Presentations Commissioner Robinson suggested asking the Applicant to make copies of their presentation to be distributed to the Commission to allow them to take notes during the presentation to refer to during the questions/discussion section of the public hearing. The majority of the Commission members were in support of this suggestion. Commissioner Kidder asked for an explanation from the Town's Legal Counsel on how the Code for Virginia Section 15.2-2284 is related to the Comprehensive Plan. Shelby Caputo, Deputy Town Attorney, explained that the Zoning Ordinance contains all of the requirements and is the law. The Town Plan is an advisory document as was explained in the memo submitted to the Planning Commission in January by Ms. Berry -Hill and herself. As stated in the memo, in those instances when applicants have appealed the decisions of a locality to the Circuit Court, the Circuit Court can take into consideration various factors of what was considered and what wasn't and whether the locality had acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner. The Town Plan is one of the ten items listed in State Code Section 15.2-2284. This section states that "Zoning ordinances and districts shall be drawn and applied with reasonable consideration for the existing use and character of property, the comprehensive plan, the suitability of property for various uses.... " This code section continues with a number of other factors, ending with what Commissioner Lanham referenced, "the conservation of properties and their values and the encouragement of the most appropriate use of land throughout the locality. " These are things that a locality should consider when looking at and applying their zoning ordinances. The plan is contained within and is one of the things the zoning ordinance or the land use decision should consider. The comprehensive plan is what the locality wants its locality to be. It was her opinion, with the Town's interest at heart, that the Town Plan is an important document. Should a case end up in Court, and the locality relied on the Town Plan, the Court D Leesburg Planning Commission March 1, 2018 Minutes will take that into consideration. If the locality relied on some of the other factors in Section 15.2-2284 a court will take that into consideration as well. If a locality relied on something completely arbitrary, that locality will most likely find itself in trouble. Ms. Berry -Hill asked the Chair for clarification on her request for staff report summaries. Chairman Babbin clarified that she was requesting that staff's Power Point presentations be a summary and not a reiteration of the staff report. ADJOURNMENT Th meeting was adjourned at 8:24 PM A proved by: Ka en Cicalese, ommission Clerk Sharo ab in, Chairman 10