Mr. Mark Jordan, Mr. Brad Robinson, Planners and Mrs. Patricia ...

MINUTES For Bedford County Planning Commission

December 17,2013 The Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, December 17, 2013 in the Bedford County Administration Building Boardroom. Commissioners Burdett, Craig,

Fralick, Huff, Noell, Scott and Wilkerson were present.

County staff present was Mr.

Tim Wilson, Director of Community Development, Mrs. Mary Zirkle, Chief of Planning,

Mr. Mark Jordan, Mr. Brad Robinson, Planners and Mrs. Patricia Robinson, Planning/Zoning Technician. County Attorney, Mr. Carl Boggess was also present. Mr. Wilkerson called the Planning Commission to order and determined there was a

quorum for conducting business.

Mr. Wilkerson asked if there were any changes to the

agenda. Mr. Fralick requested to add item 6b under New Business. Mr. Craig requested item 6a under New Business be moved ahead of item 5 Old Business. There being no additional changes Mr. Scott made a motion to approve the agenda as amended. Mr. Huff seconded the motion. The motion passed by a 7-0 vote.

Mr. Wilkerson asked if there were any citizens to speak during the Citizen's Comment Period. There being none, the Citizen's Comment Period was closed. Mr. Wilkerson moved to Item 4a under Public Hearing and asked for the staff presentation on Special Use Permit SU140005. Mr. Brad Robinson stated the applicants are Curtis and Dara Farrar, 773 Sunnymeade Road, Rustburg, VA 24588. The applicants are requesting a special use permit to establish a private horse stable on their property in Forest. The applicants propose to establish a 23.8' x 50.5' private stable (1,201.9 square

feet) for the keeping of four horses. The stable would accommodate two horses upon approval while the remaining two horses are desired in the future. The owners also intend to construct a single-family home on the property if the special use permit request is successful. The proposed home is permitted as a use-by-right and is not a part of this request.

The subject parcel is identified as Tax Map 81-A-21P and located along

Cottontown Road (Route 621) approximately 0.12 miles north of the intersection with

Shade Tree Drive (Route 1319). The parcel is a total of 10.5 acres. There were no questions from the Planning Commission for Mr. Robinson. Mr. Wilkerson asked for the applicant's presentation.

Mr. Russ Nixon of Nixon Land

Surveying, LLC, 1063 Airport Road, Suite C, Lynchburg, VA 24502 spoke as the agent for the applicants.

Mr. Nixon noted the property was purchased to be a residential

property with the intent of placing four horses on the property. Also a proposed 50' x 24' stable will be built on the property. Currently the property is vacant and in pasture and woods. The owners did not realize at the time of purchase due to the size and location of the property that a Special Use Permit would be required for the stable.

There are no

plans for removal of trees, therefore leaving a buffer between adjoining property owners. Due to the existing vegetation along Cottontown Road chances to view the site should be minimal.

Planning Commission Minutes

1

12/17/13

Questions/comments from the Commissioners to Mr. Nixon covered the following: (a) where is the location of the 4 acre pasture land to be fenced and (b) will the cluster of trees shown on the concept plan to the west of the proposed stable location remain? Mr. Nixon indicated the location of the pasture land to be fenced and stated the trees in question would remain.

Mr. Wilkerson asked if there were any citizens to speak regarding the application. There being no speakers Mr. Wilkerson closed the public portion of the hearing and asked for discussion among the Commissioners. Mr. Scott made a motion to recommend approval of Special Use Permit SU140005. Mr. Craig seconded the motion.

Mr. Fralick noted the property is zoned part PRD Planned Residential District and R-l Low Density District. The property may have been zoned incorrectly; however across the street is a residential development. Does this not warrant some discussion? Mr. Wilkerson asked staff if there were any issue related to the split zoning the Commission needed to consider. Staff indicated no. Mr. Burdett noted there are other stables currently located on this road. The view along Cottontown Road is a rural rustic nature. Allowing this request is protecting the 10 acre parcel from being split up into possibly 15 lots. Additionally the request is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The condition for the Special Use Permit stated in the staff report was:

1) The site shall be developed in conformance with the concept plan dated October 28, 2013 as prepared by Nixon Land Surveying, LLC. Voting yes: Mr. Burdett, Mr. Craig, Mr. Fralick, Mr. Huff, Mr. Noell, Mr. Scott and Mr. Wilkerson Voting no: None

Motion passed 7-0

Mr. Wilkerson moved to Item 6a New Business and asked for the presentation by the Bedford County Agricultural Economic Development Advisory Board. Mr. Jeff Powers, Chairman of the Ag Board thanked the Commission for the opportunity to present information on a topic for their consideration. Mr. Powers introduced Mr. W. P. Johnson, Chairman of the Intensive Animal Agriculture committee. Mr. Johnson provided a power point presentation which covered the following: (a) what is intensive livestock, (b) review of current setbacks, (c) comparison of area counties, (d) proposal of new setbacks, (e) reason for new amendment, (f) benefits and opportunities and a conclusion at the end of the presentation.

Mr. Johnson addressed questions or concerns raised by Commissioners. Mr. Wilkerson noted the Planning Commission would not be discussing the setbacks tonight. The Planning Commission can request staff to review the information regarding intensive livestock and bring language for the Commissions review. Mr. Johnson stated he could Planning Commission Minutes

2

12/17/13

arrange a trip to an intensive livestock facility for the Commissioners if they would like. The Commissioners viewed favorably on a site visit. Mr. Johnson stated he would provide copies of the power point presentation to members of the Commission. Mr. Wilkerson thanked Mr. Johnson for the presentation.

Mr. Wilkerson moved to item 5a under Old Business. Item 5a is for the continued discussion of the proposed amendments to the Bedford County Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances initiated by the Board of Supervisors October 15 and October 28, 2013. The discussion began with Sec. 30-91, Off Street Parking, Stacking and Loading. The following comments/concerns were raised: (a) businesses know how much parking they need, (b) if a business does not provide enough parking they will only hurt themselves, (c) should the county be involved in parking at all, (d) some business are okay with their customers using other businesses parking, (e) allow the Zoning Administrator to use flexibility and deal with the parking on a case by case basis, (f) need some minimum standards but still allow Zoning Administrator flexibility, (g) what was the source material for the current parking regulations and (h) allow common sense to play a role in parking needs. Mr. Wilkerson appointed a sub-committee of Mr. Burdett and Mr. Fralick to review the proposed amendments in Sec-30-91, Off Street Parking, Stacking and Loading. The sub-committee will bring revised text for the Commissions consideration at a later meeting.

Mr. Wilkerson continued with the proposed text amendments for Sec-30-77-6(a), Corridor Overlay District, Site Development Regulations, Signage. Mr. Wilkerson noted this section is proposed to be rescinded in its entirety. He asked if staff had prepared a visual presentation of existing signage found along the highways in the Corridor Overlay District. Mr. Wilson stated staff did have pictures illustrative of signs by the Corridor Overlay District standards as opposed to signage by comparison that would not be subject to those limitations. Mr. Wilson reminded the Commissioners the Corridor Overlay District itself is not proposed for rescinding, just the signage provisions. Mrs. Zirkle displayed the pictures of the signs taken by staff which depicted both conforming and non-conforming signs. The following comments/concerns were raised: (a) businesses need to have adequate signage, (b) density on the commercial corridors justify a higher level of regulation than density off the main corridors, (c) what is adequate is in the eye of the beholder, (d) like the current standards, (e) can compromise some but do not want to do away with all of the standards, (f) does anyone know of a business who can't get their name out in front of their business in one of the corridors, (g) smaller signs make it hard to locate the business, (h) many individuals use their mobile phone, not signs, to locate businesses and (i) don't see the need to change the standards.

Mr. Craig made a motion to recommend approval of the proposed text amendment to Sec. 30-77-6(a), Corridor Overlay District, Site Development Regulation, Signage. The proposed amendment is to rescind this section in its entirety. Mr. Scott seconded the motion.

Voting yes: Mr. Craig, Mr. Huff and Mr. Scott

Voting no:

Mr. Burdett, Mr. Fralick, Mr. Noell and Mr. Wilkerson


3

12/17/13

Motion failed 3-4

Mr. Fralick made a motion to recommend denial of the proposed text amendment to Sec. 30-77-6(a), Corridor Overlay District, Site Development Regulation, Signage. The proposed text amendment is to rescind this section in its entirety. Mr. Burdett seconded the motion. Voting yes: Mr. Burdett, Mr. Fralick, Mr. Huff, Mr. Noell and Mr. Wilkerson

Voting no:

Mr. Craig and Mr. Scott

Motion passed 5-2

Mr. Wilkerson continued with the proposed text amendments for Sec. 30-100-18, Short Term Rentals. The following comments/concerns were raised: (a) what brought this up for rescinding, (b) why are we visiting this issue, (c) need to keep, (d) existing standards should be modified with stricter standards, (e) have not heard any requests from citizens to rescind, (f) consider this part of the general county code and remove from the zoning ordinance, (g) determine the best mechanism for enforcement, (h) leave the standards in place, (i) a resort/commercial use located in residential neighborhood deserves some regulations, 0) regulation offers some protection for individuals living in neighborhood in which short term rentals occur, (k) unless prepared to modify existing text this section should be rescinded, don't think we should be involved in this (1) what is the biggest concern regarding short term rentals, (m) would these standards hold up in court if challenged, (n) consider implementing Franklin County requirement that all lake residents have septic tanks pumped every five years, (o) overcrowding, noise and parking are a few of the problems with the rentals. Mr. Burdett made a motion to recommend denial of the proposed text amendment to Sec. 30-100-18, Short Term Rentals. The proposed text amendment is to rescind this section in its entirety. Mr. Noell seconded the motion.

Voting yes: Mr. Burdett, Mr. Fralick, Mr. Huff, Mr. Noell and Mr. Wilkerson

Voting no:

Mr. Craig and Mr. Scott

Motion passed 5-2

Mr. Wilkerson continued with the proposed text amendments for Sec. 30-9, Zoning Permits. Discussion was held which further explained the types of uses which would no longer require zoning permits. The following comments/concerns were raised: (a) with unknown stormwater management issues forthcoming removal of regulations for lot coverage would be inadvisable for driveways and sidewalks, (b) why should a permit be required for a satellite dish, (c) item 4 of proposed text amendment is too broad, (d) if a zoning permit is not required simply because a building permit is not required how is the Planning Commission Minutes

4

12/17/13

use category, lot coverage and adherence to setbacks verified for compliance, (e) take no action until clarity of stormwater regulations, (f) consider still requiring a permit but do not charge fees, (g) recommend removing items 3 and 4 of proposed text amendments, (h) permit would allow individual to be educated with ordinance requirements, i.e. use, setbacks, lot coverage, to prevent possible problems, (i) new stormwater regulations require each lot will have to undergo a stormwater review and approval even at the residential level.

Mr. Burdett made a motion regarding the proposed text amendments for Sec. 30-

9, Zoning Permits. Recommend approval of Sec. 30-9(A)(l). Recommend in Sec. 30-9(A)(3) satellite dishes be returned as an exemption. Create a new Sec. 30-9(A)(4) to read "The construction of a roof over an existing porch, stoop or deck which does not result in a change in the square foot of the structure". Remove the proposed new Sec. 30-9-(A)(4) "In those circumstances where a building permit is not required" altogether; such that a zoning permit is still required to be obtained (even if a building permit is not) with a recommendation that the fee be waived in those circumstances. Mr. Fralick seconded the motion.

Voting yes: Mr. Burdett, Mr. Craig, Mr. Fralick, Mr. Huff, Mr. Noell, Mr. Scott and Mr. Wilkerson Voting no:

None

Motion passed 7-0

The Planning Commission resumed after a five minute recess. Mr. Wilkerson asked for a motion regarding Sec. 30-100-12, Table of Metric Equivalents.

Mr. Fralick made a motion to approve the proposed text amendment to rescind this section in its entirety as presented.

Mr. Craig seconded the motion.

Voting yes: Mr. Burdett, Mr. Craig, Mr. Fralick, Mr. Huff, Mr. Noell, Mr. Scott and Mr. Wilkerson Voting no:

None

Motion passed 7-0

Mr. Wilkerson noted the remaining items in the proposed text amendments in the Zoning

Ordinance are the parking standards and in the Subdivision Ordinance the private streets. Mr. Wilkerson asked Mr. Boggess if he had the revised language on private streets for the Commission's review. Mr. Boggess indicated no. Mr. Craig and Mr. Burdett briefly reviewed the remaining proposed changes for consideration. Mr. Scott restated his earlier proposal from the previous meeting regarding the private street issue. Mr. Fralick noted he would like to have language for the private street for a generic subdivision from Mr. Boggess. Mr. Fralick asked the Commission not act until the revised language was brought back to the Commission. Mr. Boggess stated the revised language would be Planning Commission Minutes

5

12/17/13

brought back to the Commission at their meeting on January 7,2014. Mr. Scott stated he

would like to act on this issue tonight. Mr. Scott stated we keep putting the landowner off and this thing keeps going on and on. Mr. Craig asked if we are placing a hardship on the landowner.

Mr. Fralick noted we have to look at this issue generically.

Mr.

Wilkerson noted if a waiver process works properly it leaves room for communication Discussion continued regarding further items considered

between the parties involved.

for changes to be removed. Mr. Fralick asked Mr. Boggess if the requirement of an HOA can be put in a deed. Mr. Boggess stated yes. Mr. Wilkerson suggested that due to the late hour that the matter be tabled until minds were fresher. Mr. Fralick made a motion to table the issue for Article 8 - Waivers and Appeals

of the Bedford County Subdivision Ordinance until the Planning Commission meeting on January 7, 2014. Mr. Huff seconded the motion. Voting yes: Mr. Burdett, Mr. Craig, Mr. Fralick, Mr. Huff, Mr. Noell, Mr. Scott and Mr. Wilkerson Voting no:

None

Motion passed 7-0

Mr. Wilkerson moved to item 6b New Business and asked Mr. Fralick to address the issue he added to the agenda. Mr. Fralick stated the Planning Commission will be losing a long standing member of the Commission tonight. Mr. Wilkerson was recently elected to the Board of Supervisor by the citizens of Election District 3. He noted Mr. Wilkerson has served on the Planning Commission for the past 18 years. Mr. Fralick stated Mr. Wilkerson has always had the best interest of the whole county as he dealt with issues. Mr. Fralick on behalf of this Commission and past Commissioners thanked Mr. Wilkerson for his wisdom, guidance and occasional moments of dry humor.

Mr.

Wilkerson's guidance has served this county well and he will be missed on the Commission. Mr. Wilkerson thanked Mr. Fralick for the kind words. Commission has been an experience and a pleasure.

He noted his time on the

Mr. Wilkerson thanked for input

received from staff and the public. He noted he has watched individuals grow as Planning Commissioners and involved citizens. Mr. Wilkerson noted he needed to add an item as 6c under New Business. The issue regards a request from a constituent in District 5. The issue deals with a Landscape or Lawn Company not being a use by right in an Agricultural/Rural Preserve (AP) District.

Garden centers are allowed as a use by right with additional standards. Mr. Wilkerson noted he suggested the citizen call her Planning Commission and Board of Supervisor's member to discuss.

There being no additional business, Mr. Burdett made a motion to adjourn. seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 9:43 pm.

Mr. Craig

Respectfully submitted, Planning Commission Minutes

6

12/17/13

/rn

Timothy L. Wilson. Secretary

Approved by:

Steve

son. Chairman


12/17/13