HomeMy Public PortalAbout04 18 2019 PC MinutesThe Town of Lees6urg in Virginia
Leesburg Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes
April 18, 2019
The Leesburg Planning Commission met on Thursday, April 18, 2019 in Town Hall Council
Chambers, 25 West Market Street, Leesburg, Virginia 20176. Staff members present included
Susan Berry Hill, Brian Boucher, Chris Murphy, Bill Ackman, Shelby Caputo, and Karen
Cicalese.
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm by Chairman Kidder.
Members Present: Chairman Kidder, Commissioners Barnes, Barney, Faliskie, Lanham, and
Walker (arrived at 7:02 pm)
Absent: Commissioner Nacy
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: Commissioner Lanham
Second: Commissioner Barney
Vote: 5-0-2 (Macy absent and Walker not present for vote)
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
April 4, 2019 Draft Minutes
Motions: Commissioner Barnes
Second: Commissioner Faliskie
Vote: 5-0-2 (Macy absent and Walker not present for vote)
DISCLOSURE OF MEETINGS
Commissioner Lanham disclosed a telephone conversation with Corey Martin regarding the CVS
at Allman application.
CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT
Chairman Kidder gave an overview of the meeting schedule noting that there will be a public
hearing for the CVS at Allman Property, an overview of the Form -Based Code Institute final
report, a work session on the Crescent Design District Modifications Text Amendment and if
time permits a Comprehensive Plan review and an update to the Planning Commission Bylaws.
PETITIONERS
None
PUBLIC HEARING
TLZM-2017-0004 CVS at Allman Property, Chris Murphy, Sr. Planning Project Manager,
Planning and Zoning
1
Leesburg Planning Commission
April 18, 2019
Chairman Kidder opened the public hearing at 7:04 pm and invited staff to make their
presentation.
Mr. Murphy explained that the issue before the Planning Commission was whether the approved
Concept Plan and Proffers for rezoning TLZM-2008-0005 should be revised to permit the
following:
9,700 sq. ft. single story Pharmacy with drive-through
22,500 sq. ft. two story mixed-use building comprised of:
■ Up to a maximum of 6,000 sq. ft. Eating Establishment uses (fast food without
drive-through)
■ A minimum of 7,000 sq. ft. of retail uses
■ 9,500 sq. ft. of Office uses on the second floor
Mr. Murphy gave an overview of the project history which had its first Planning Commission
public hearing on December 6, 2018. Opposition to the plan included adverse effects of
incompatible site design and architecture on the historic Greenway Manor property/the southern
corridor into the Town, the intensity of proposed uses and the tractor trailer deliveries negatively
impacting the adjacent residences. A work session was scheduled for December 201h and the
Applicant submitted a revised plan for review. However, the Planning Commission still had
concerns regarding the adverse effects of incompatible site design and architecture on the
historic Greenway Manor property/the southern corridor into the Town and the size of the tractor
trailers and delivery hours. Additionally, concerns were expressed regarding stormwater
management, fiscal impact analysis methodology and the result, the speculative nature of
building "Part A", loss of office space, and the design and amount of pedestrian areas and open
space. At that meeting, the Chair asked the Commissioner's to indicate how they would vote, if
a vote was taken that night and seeing that a majority of the Commissioners would vote to deny
the Applicant asked to postpone action to give them time to make revisions in response to the
issues and concerns expressed at the public hearing and the work session.
Mr. Murphy gave a brief review of the property, zoning and adjacent uses noting that this
property is tied to the Stanfield property through the approved rezoning TLZM-2008-0005.
Mr. Murphy gave an overview of the approved rezoning TLZM-2008-0005 and the proposed
Concept Plan and Proffer Amendment TLZM-2017-0004 highlighting the proposed revisions.
He provided a comparison of the plans outlined in the table below.
Permitted Uses
TLZM-2008-0005
(Approved)
TLZM-2017-0004
(Proposed)
Restaurant
6,000 sq. ft.
6,000 sq. ft.
Retail
13,000 sq. ft.
7.00Osq. ft.
Office
13,000 sq. ft.
9,500 sq. ft.
Bank with Drive-thru
4,000 sq. ft.
0 sq. ft.
Pharmacy with Drive-thru
4,000 sq. ft.
9,700 sq. ft.
Total Gross Floor Area
36,000 sq. ft.
32,200 sq. ft.
Leesburg Planning Commission
April 18, 2019
Mr. Murphy explained that the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) shows a 9% decrease in the
number of average daily trips in and out of the property. However, staff has concerns about when
those trips will be occurring. Typically retail and restaurant keep longer business hours and are
open seven days a week versus office and bank uses that normally keep the usual 9:00 to 5:00
Monday through Friday schedule. Staff is concerned about the potential impact more evening
and weekend trips will have on the adjacent residential uses.
Mr. Murphy discussed Town Plan Compliance as follows:
Southwest Policy Area:
• Planned Land Use: Low Density Residential
• Land Use Objective 6 allows for the development of approved Greenway Farm
Neighborhood Commercial Center (TLZM-2018-0005) and also allows it to be modified
with special exception uses, up to a 100,000 sq. ft. maximum. A total of 91, 843 sq. ft.
was approved with TLZM-2008-0005.
• Although the total Gross Floor Area (GFA) is proposed to be reduced by 11%, staff
believes the proposed uses will be more intensive and will adversely impact surrounding
residential uses, as well as diminish the integrity of the Greenway Manor historic
resource.
Community Design and Heritage Resources
• Staff acknowledged the uniqueness of this "urban" zoned in a "suburban" area
• The Greenway Farm Manor house complex is a Town character -defining resource the
Town Plan seeks to preserve
• The preliminary architecture of "Part A" has been revised to mirror the approved
Building "H"
• The B-2 Corridor Commercial -style design of the "Part B" building is not complimentary
to and will detract from the manor house farm complex historic resource
• The approved layout is more compliant because it is more sensitive to the adjacent
historic resources, has three smaller building foot prints and provides a more human
scale, has better pedestrian access, and provides a better transition to the single family
development.
Mr. Murphy discussed the Fiscal Impact Analysis dated September 27, 2017 noting
that the Planning Commission previously expressed concerns regarding the methodology
employed by the study as it puts a very heavy emphasis on the site being anchored by a CVS
Pharmacy.
Mr. Murphy noted that there were two modification requests to reduce the width and buffers in 2
buffer yards which had been approved by the Land Development Officer.
Other site development issues were addressed as follows:
Leesburg Planning Commission
April 18, 2019
• The Applicant has adequately addressed requirements relating to site development issues,
i.e. Outdoor Lighting, Parking and Parking Lot Design, Landscaping and Buffering,
Traffic Level of Service, Utilities, etc.
• The Department of Plan Review continues to have concerns with the addition of a pipe
intended to convey stormwater from the Stanfield property through the Property to outlet
off-site.
• Designs will be finalized as part of subsequent site plan review(s).
Mr. Murphy discussed the proffers noting that there were no changes to fiscal and/or
construction commitments proffered with TLZM-2008-0005. Proffer #4 Delivery Vehicles has
been revised to restore the limitation on deliveries by SU -30 type vehicles and establishes
delivery hours of 9:00 am to 7:00 pm. Proffer #5 Phasing establishes no guarantee that both
buildings, "Part A" and "Part B" will be constructed.
Mr. Murphy gave an overview of Rezoning Approval Criterial TLZO Sec 3.3.15 and staff
findings. Mr. Murphy concluded that staff was unable to recommend approval at this time. He
noted that significant revisions have been made to the Concept Plan intended to address
comments and concerns expressed by the public, the Planning Commission and staff and that the
rezoning application to establish a two -pad retail center at this site is generally compatible with
the Town Plan. However, there are important deviations which include Town Plan Compliance
— Design/Historic Resources, compatibility with adjacent uses, stormwater management and
rezoning criteria. It was felt that the application could better meet the approval criteria specified
in the Town Zoning Ordinance by addressing the outstanding issues identified in the April 18,
2019 staff report.
Chairman Kidder called for Planning Commission questions.
How is phasing addressed in the existing proffers?
Mr. Murphy explained that the phasing was set up so the Stanfield Property could develop
separately from the Allman property as long as they accommodated each other. Individual
buildings were not addressed.
What are the hours of operation for the CVS and can they operate 24/7?
Mr. Murphy responded that staff did not know the hours of operation and explained that there
were no ordinance limitations on hours of operation for any business.
Chairman Kidder invited the Applicant to make their presentation.
The Applicant delivered a four part presentation. Josh Johnson, Walsh Colucci, gave an
overview of the site and the proposed application. Corey Martin, JEM X, LLC, Project
Developer, discussed the revisions made. Travis DiMico, Civil Engineer, discussed storm water
management and pedestrian amenities. Alan Hanson, Architect, DBI, addressed building design
and massing for Building H (Part A).
4
Leesburg Planning Commission
April 18, 2019
Chairman Kidder called for public comment.
Valerie Stalnaker, 627 Diskin Place, SW, Leesburg, VA 20175, came forward in opposition to
the proposed development as it did not enhance the southern gateway into Leesburg.
Tom Solhario, 521 North Street, NE, Leesburg, VA 20176, came forward in opposition to the
proposed development. He noted the importance of protecting the southern gateway into
Leesburg.
Brian McAfee, 204 Lawnhill Court, SE, Leesburg, VA 20175, came forward in opposition to the
proposed project. Concerns expressed included the intensity of uses, traffic generation, design
and uses are incompatible with adjacent residential properties and the lack of need for an
additional pharmacy and fast food restaurants.
Kim Berkey, 208 Lawnhill Court, SW, Leesburg, VA 20175 came forward in opposition of the
proposed application. Concerns expressed included use, aesthetics, fit, and the uncertainty of the
2nd building.
Greg Wigfield, 19736 Evergreen Mills Road, Leesburg, VA 20175, came forward in opposition
of the proposed development. He expressed concerns about the size of the pharmacy and the
amount of commercial property being developed in close proximity to this site.
Chairman Kidder called for Planning Commission questions and comments.
Request for clarification regarding staff's concerns about the storm water management plan.
Bill Ackman, Director, Plan Review, explained that he did agree that the Applicant had come a
long way with their stormwater management plan, however it is not construction plan worthy.
There are a lot of issues with drainage divides and flawed calculations. Staff did think it was
close enough for this stage of the project.
Does the proposal, as it stands today, meet all the requirements of the H-1 Overlay?
Mr. Murphy explained that the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) would need to review each
building and issue a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA). No COA's have been issued yet.
Does the proposal meet the requirements of the Journey Through Hallowed Ground program
requirements?
Mr. Murphy explained that the Town does not administer that program. Staff will look to make
sure it comports with the Hallowed Ground landscaping plan. The landscaping along the King
Street frontage of the property is in compliance with the Journey Through Hallowed Ground
requirements. The Applicant has also put indicator notes on their plans committing to full
compliance and review by Journey Through Hallowed Ground under their guidelines.
How will the Town manage and control the delivery truck size?
5
Leesburg Planning Commission
April 18, 2019
Mr. Murphy explained that the Applicant is proffering that no deliveries will occur in a truck
larger than an SU -30. If a tractor trailer shows up and a complaint is receive the Town will
notify the property owner that they are in violation of the proffers. If this practice continues, a
legal process would follow.
How can the Applicant address the issues listed in the staff report in order to meet the criteria?
Brian Boucher, Deputy Director, Planning and Zoning, explained that the issue is the 9,700 sq.
ft. pharmacy. It is staff s opinion that it presents too intense of a use on this corner surrounded
by residential development and does not meet the intent of the Town Plan for this area.
Additionally, it is not in keeping with the H-1 character.
Is this property zoned like the downtown?
Mr. Murphy responded that the zoning is B-1 with H-1 Overlay and is exactly the same as the
downtown. This was done to protect the historic Greenway Manor farmstead. Staff
acknowledges the fact that this is in a suburban area and represents challenges. The approved
plan, depicting the three building figuration, would not be built as what would be expected in the
downtown area as it will have parking fields, etc. However, in staff s opinion, the buildings are
more respectful of the aesthetics of the farmstead the Town is trying to preserve and the
surrounding residential development.
Have they met all the requirements?
They have met parking requirements, travel isles, etc. There are some storm water management
issues outstanding. Staff has to look at other factors such as the Town Plan to determine how to
balance the impacts of this development.
If the plan were approved and property were to be sold, would the new owner have to build what
is shown on the approved plan?
Mr. Murphy responded that the property would be proffered to that development and would be
held to the commitment of substantial conformance. It may not be exact, but it would be
substantially conforming.
Would the Applicant still have to get BAR approval?
Mr. Murphy replied that they would.
Is the second building proffered?
Mr. Murphy explained that the proffer is worded so that any building can be built at the
discretion of the owner and there is no obligation that the other building be constructed.
[:
Leesburg Planning Commission
April 18, 2019
Concerns were expressed regarding the following:
• The number of emails received opposing this application
• The questionable viability of the proposed pharmacy as the adjacent residential property
owners were in opposition and would likely not support the pharmacy
• The pharmacy is overwhelming in size and stature for this zoning district
• Phasing of the 2nd building
• The approved plan fits into the historic entry way into Town and compliments the
farmstead
• Building design and materials
Chairman Kidder closed the public hearing at 8:49 pm.
Mr. Johnson stated that the Applicant would prefer that the Commission take action at this
meeting and not defer to a future work session.
Chairman Kidder called for a motion.
Commissioner Lanham moved that Rezoning Concept Plan and Proffer Amendment Application
TLZM-2017-0004, CVS at Allman Property, including the Concept Plan revised through April 1,
2019 and the proffers dated July 14, 2018 revised through April 1, 2019, be forwarded to Town
Council with a recommendation of denial, on the basis that the Approval Criteria of Zoning
Ordinance Section 3.3.15 have not been satisfied and based on the findings contained on Page
29 of 29 Items A, B and C of the staff report dated April 18, 2019.
Commissioner Barney seconded the motion and the motion carried by a vote of 6-0-1 (Macy
absent).
Chairman Kidder called for a brief recess at 8:57 pm and the meeting resumed at 9:08 pm.
SUBDIVISION AND LAND DEVELOPMENT
None
ZONING
TLOA-2019-0003 Crescent Design District Modifications Work Session, Brian Boucher,
Deputy Director, Planning and Zoning
Mr. Boucher gave a brief history of the proposed amendments noting that on August 14, 2018,
Town Council approved Resolution 2018-102 to initiate several items related to the Crescent
Design District (CDD), including, as an interim step, new modification allowances to regulations
in the district. The goal is to expand the ability for applicants to request modifications within the
CDD so long as the vision and intent of the CDD is met. The ordinance amendments
themselves should be an expansion of the modifications currently permitted in the CDD to
address areas where more flexibility is advisable to make the intent of the district more
achievable. The modifications proposed are based on actual experience implementing the
ordinance and consultation with potential developers in the district.
7
Leesburg Planning Commission
April 18, 2019
Mr. Boucher gave an overview of the proposed amendments which are intended to address a
need for flexibility identified through actual implementation of the ordinance through work with
potential developers in the CDD. The proposed amendments are as follows:
Modification #1: Allow the Town Council to modify the setback standard for buildings on lots
abutting residences as part of a rezoning or special exception found in TLZO Sec. 7.10.4.G.
Modification #2: Allow the Town Council to modify the setback standard for buildings on lots
abutting public open space as part of a rezoning or special exception found in TLZO
Sec. 7.10.4.H Structures on Lots Abutting Public Open Space.
Modification #3: Allow the Town Council to modify the setback standard for buildings on lots
abutting residential district as part of a rezoning or special exception found in TLZO Secs.
7.10.4.G, Sec. 7.10.9.A.2 [5], Sec. 7.10.9.B.2.[4], Sec. 7.10.9.C.2 [2], Sec. 7.10.9.D.2 [2], Sec.
7.10.9.E.2 [2], Sec. 7.10.9.F.2 [1], and Sec. 7.10.9.G.2 [1].
Modification #4: Allow the Town Council to modify TLZO Sec. 7.10.9.A.2 CD -RM townhouse
20' rear yard setback as part of a rezoning or special exception application.
Modification #5: Allow the Town Council to reduce the TLZO Sec. 7.10.4.A Required Build -to
Line frontage requirement from 66% to 50%.
Modification #4: Permit a modification of TLZO Sec. 7.10.5.A.1 Maximum Number of Parking
Spaces to allow certain B-1 parking standards to be utilized in the CDD.
Modification #6: Permit a modification of TLZO Sec. 7.10.8.A.1 Minimum Height and Stories
Required to allow Council to modify the minimum number of stories required in a building.
Modification 47: Permit a modification of TLZO Sec. 7.10.8.F Height Zones to allow Council to
permit more than the maximum number of stories required in a building.
Modification #8: Permit a modification of TLZO Sec. 7.10.5.A.1 Maximum Number of Parking
Spaces to allow certain B-1 parking standards to be utilized in the CDD.
Modification #9: Allow the Town Council to modify TLZO Sec. 7. 10.1 LG Street Access as part
of a rezoning or special exception application.
Modification #10: Permit a use modification to allow uses not otherwise permitted in the use list
for the CD-MUR, CD-MUA, CD -C and CD -C Districts.
Amendment 411: Set review and approval standards for the proposed 10 modifications so that
they meet the intent of the CDD.
Amendment # 12: Permit the Town Council to decide on all modifications made as part of a
rezoning or special exception application.
8
Leesburg Planning Commission
April 18, 2019
Chairman Kidder called for a motion.
Commissioner Lanham moved that Zoning Ordinance Amendment TLOA-2019-0003 Crescent
Design District Modifications be forwarded to the Town Council with a recommendation of
approval on the basis that the amendments further the objectives of the Town Plan and that the
proposal would serve the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning
practice.
Commissioner Faliskie seconded the motion and the motion carried by a vote of 6-0-1 (Macy
absent).
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
Town Plan Review — Chapter 3, Susan Berry Hill, Director, Planning and Zoning
This was deferred to the May 2, 2019 meeting.
STAFF AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
Form Based Code Institute Final Report on the Crescent Design District Briefing, Susan
Berry Hill, Director, Planning and Zoning
Ms. Berry Hill explained that in August of 2018, Town Council passed a resolution to provide
some direction to staff and the Planning Commission on how to begin looking at the Crescent
Design District. In this area we have a hybrid form based code zoning meaning part is form
based and part is use based. Staff had discovered some issues with the Crescent Design District
regulations and asked Town Council to hire the Form -Based Code Institute (FBCI), which is a
non-profit organization with a membership of planners, architects, engineers and land developers
who are interested in good planning design, to review our Crescent Design District regulations
and make recommendations. The FBCI is promoting form based codes as a means of achieving
better urban design.
Geoff Ferrell, Principal, Ferrell Madden, Chris Zimmerman, Vice President for Economic
Development, SGA and former Chair, Arlington County Board, and Marta Goldsmith, Director
Form -Based Code Institute, SGA delivered their presentation to Town Council on April 8, 2019.
The presentation focused on the major concerns and major recommendations, Columbia Pike as
an example of form -based code and threshold questions. The threshold questions were identified
between staff and the FBCI as key issues that the Council needs to provide policy direction on.
Lastly, next steps were identified.
Major concerns were as follows:
• Not user-friendly for developers or administrative staff
• Too many use -based sub -areas with minimal differences
• Regulations are confusing, contradictory and/or burdensome
• Many regulations are suburban in nature
D
Leesburg Planning Commission
April 18, 2019
Major recommendations were as follows:
• Regulating Plan to identify priority areas and character of sub -areas
• Reorganization of regulations for simplicity and clarity
• Include significantly more graphics, illustrations, tables and maps
• Replace Suburban -like standards with provisions that will result in more compact,
walkable, mixed use development
• Remove multiple cross-references to, and dependence on, other sections of the Zoning
Ordinance to make the CDD more distinct and easier to use
• Streamline the approval process to allow by -right development to achieve development
patterns
Chris Zimmerman, a representative from the Columbia Pike area discussed their experience with
form -based code and the development of their code.
Threshold Questions:
1. Does Council continue to support the Purpose and Goals in the CDD?
2. Should the use requirements/zones in the CDD be simplified, and place more emphasis
on urban form and should a Regulation Plan be included?
3. What is the optimum level of legislative review for proposed projects?
4. Does the Council want to consider a public investment strategy to support the vision of
the CDD?
5. How should architectural standards be addressed in the CDD?
The answers to these questions will help inform how the Town proceeds with comprehensive
revisions to the CDD regulations.
The work of the FBCI is now complete. The next step is for staff to get general cost estimates
for hiring a consultant to work on comprehensive revisions to the CDD regulations. Once
received, staff will return to the Council and seek initiation of the comprehensive text
amendments to the CDD regulations and permission to post a Request for Proposals to solicit
consultant interest in the project.
SRTC REPORT
None
BAR REPORT
None
TOWN COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT
None
OLD BUSINESS
None
NEW BUSINESS
10
Leesburg Planning Commission
April 18, 2019
Bylaws, Shelby Caputo, Deputy Town Attorney
Discussion was deferred to the May 16, 2019 meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:43 pm.
Ap roved by:
Ka en Cicalese, mmission Clerk
"K4�&-
Doris Kidder, ChWir
11