Loading...
10/01/2018 Minutes14 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS JOINT MEETING WITH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 1, 2018 Supervisors in Attendance: Ms. Dorothy A. Jaeckle, Chair Ms. Leslie A. T. Haley, Vice Chair Mr. Christopher M. Winslow Mr. James M. Holland Mr. Stephen A. Elswick Dr. Joseph P. Casey County Administrator Planning Commission Members in Attendance: Mr. Gib Sloan, Chairman Mr. Michael Jackson, Vice Chairman Mr. Gloria L. Freye Mr. Craig Stariha Mr. Peppy Jones CALL TO ORDER Ms. Jaeckle called the meeting to order at 2:02 p.m. on behalf of the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Sloan called the meeting to order on behalf of the Planning Commission. Ms. Jaeckle briefly highlighted the severe weather events that took place on September 17th, which resulted in an abrupt ending of the joint meeting. Mr. Sloan stated the Planning Commission has made a number of recommended changes and several Board of Supervisors members have indicated some changes that they would like to see incorporated with the Plan. He stated today is an opportunity to continue that exercise so that both the Board of Supervisors and the Planning Commission will be in agreement with the Draft Plan prior to moving forward with community meetings. He further stated staff will have the opportunity to make further changes after receiving feedback from the community. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE HIGHLIGHTS Mr. Steve Haasch provided an overview of the various chapters of the Plan update. He began the presentation by highlighting desired outcomes relative to Chapter 10: The Land Use Plan which include a balanced and harmonious land use pattern; a range of housing, employment, services, and lifestyle choices; land development guidance; thriving urban, suburban and rural communities; coordination with public infrastructure provision; and mixed-use centers as community focal areas. He stated the goal of the Comprehensive Plan is to make sure there is a good balance between residential and 18-684 10/01/18 commercial employment growth. He further stated the buildout analysis does show if the Comprehensive Plan is followed relative to land use decisions, the county would become a net exporter of jobs. He then reviewed additions to the land use chapter. He stated just because the Comprehensive Plan might say an area is appropriate for residential, commercial, or industrial use, it does not mean that the time is right for that zoning to come forward. He further stated there might be large areas of territory in between that zoning case and the edge of development, and we do not want to get ahead of our ability to service zoning and development with infrastructure by not following an orderly pattern. He then reviewed new development guidelines which include timing of development; placemaking; mixed use development; connectivity; housing variety; open space and conservation easements; voluntary downzoning; landfills; special districts; and waterfront/ riverfront . In response to Mr. Elswick's question regarding landfills, Mr. Haasch stated zoned landfills cannot be eliminated; however, any further landfill zoning operation guidelines can be revised. Mr. Haasch continued his presentation by reviewing a map depicting the land use plan vision as the county grows and develops. Mr. Elswick recommended having Planning staff work with public safety to determine numbers relative to connectivity. Ms. Jaeckle also recommended having a developer complete connectivity to neighborhoods upfront and get paid back by the county/state. She stated it is very difficult to add a road when residents have become used to having a dead-end. Discussion ensued relative to voluntary downzoning and the potential for incentives. Mr. Elswick made a recommendation for the Planning Commission to review the zoning ordinance requirements relative to solar farms. Discussion ensued relative to the appropriate designation for solar farms and all conditional uses. Ms. Jaeckle noted Dr. Casey's absence and stated he would be arriving to the meeting late due to a prior commitment. Discussion ensued relative to the current issue of stub roads within the county and the future development of adjoining land. Mr. Michael Jackson expressed concerns relative to residential, community and regional mixed-use definitions and changes to density. He stated the definition allows and permits that residential mixed-use as well as community and regional mixed-use may have only one single use and can be granted higher density. He suggested giving residential mixed-use a different title. In response to Mr. Winslow's question, Mr. Jackson stated the title gives the impression there are mixes of uses, where the definition could describe one individual use of residential to provide more clarity. 18-685 10/01/18 PC D Mr. Haasch continued his presentation by discussing Chapter 13: Transportation desired outcomes which include the creation of a safe and efficient multimodal transportation network; support of mobility options for all ages and abilities; promotion of context sensitive, innovative designs; support of comprehensive funding strategies; enhancement of connections between community destinations; and support of business development efforts. He stated several changes to the transportation chapter were driven by the new 527 state regulations of the Virginia Department of Transportation which require certain guidelines to be in the Comprehensive Plan. He then highlighted various additions to the chapter which include updated date throughout; added Transportation Vision section; added LOS table; added Street Design section with graphics; added How a Road is created graphic; added Alternative Intersections section; added definition boxes throughout; added section on importance of transportation funding; added Secondary six-year Improvement Plan projects and map; revised Transit section; added Park and Ride section; and added Tri -Cities Multimodal Study options. He then reviewed a map depicting the county's Thoroughfare Plan. In response to Ms. Jaeckle's question, Mr. Smith stated the design for the park and ride lot at CTC at Hull has begun. Mr. Holland noted he does not believe Chesterfield County will be able to have a light rail transit service as an option for transportation. Regarding revitalization, Mr. Haasch stated this chapter is among the heavier, revised chapters in the Comprehensive Plan. He stated the Department of Community Enhancement is tasked with revitalizing county communities and Mr. Daniel Cohen, Director, has gone through the draft Plan and supports the direction the strategy is headed in general. In response to Mr. Sloan's question, Mr. Cohen stated his recommendation for proposed changes and incentive programs are not critical to include in the draft Plan before it is presented to the public. In response to Mr. Jackson's question, Mr. Haasch stated he is not making any changes to the 9/17/2018 draft Plan unless the Planning Commission and/or the Board of Supervisors directs him to do so today. Mr. Haasch then reviewed Chapter 7: Revitalization Strategy desired outcomes which include preventing and addressing community decline and blight; leveraging public infrastructure investment as a catalyst for private investment; supporting appropriate public and private reinvestment in established communities; partnering with the community, nonprofits and the private sector to address revitalization concerns; creating tools, incentives and programs to encourage revitalization efforts; supporting enhancements to communities identified by residents and businesses; and encouraging community events, celebrations and other pride -instilling efforts. Ms. Jaeckle stated the county charges for public safety aspect for community events. She further stated Board members pay for those events through District Improvement Funds and those funds should be incorporated into the public safety budget. 18-686 10/01/18 Mr. Holland stressed the importance of determining the best vision for determining future land use for goods and services among adjacent communities within the county. Discussion ensued relative to determining the goals and criteria needed to identify new Special Area Plans. Mr. Elswick stated revitalization indicators need to be clearly laid out and transparent across the whole county. Discussion ensued relative to revitalization indicators and criteria pursuant to individual zoning cases. Ms. Jaeckle stated aging housing stock should be an important reason for why an area is considered for revitalization before those areas become blighted. Ms. Haley noted the absence of utilities infrastructure among the list of desired outcomes. She stated there are small pockets of underserved communities within her district. Mr. Jackson stated success in revitalization has an inverse effect on areas classified as established communities. He further stated the frequency of those lists updated and refreshed impacts how an area may score. Discussion ensued relative to cash proffers and incentives available for homeowners to enhance aaina commiinties_ Mr. Haasch then highlighted various additions to the revitalization chapter which include added key terms in definition boxes; added .Background Section on why, past efforts, success stories, lessons learned, best practices; added Countywide Toolkit Section; added Revitalization Indicators Section; added Strategic Themes Section; added Implementation Guidance; and added Zoning Review Guidance. In response to Mr. Holland's question, Mr. Haasch stated the 2012 plan was the first time in the county's Comprehensive Plan to have a chapter dedicated to revitalization. He further stated the revision is a much deeper approach towards revitalization of communities. Mr. Haasch then highlighted Chapter 6: Neighborhoods and Housing desired outcomes which include the promotion of affordable homeownership opportunities; support of a range of housing options in both neighborhoods and mixed use centers; connecting housing to services, jobs and recreation; support of high quality and innovative community designs; encouraging housing maintenance, rehabilitation and affordability programs; support of special needs housing for elderly and disabled persons; and fostering partnerships with housing agencies, nonprofits and the private sector to address housing concerns. He reviewed additions to the Neighborhoods and Housing chapter which include revised overview and data sections; added definition boxes for key terms; added Neighborhood Types and Design sections; added Generational Needs section; revised affordable housing definition (state match); and added Special/Senior Housing sections. He then highlighted development guidelines which include collaboration; community identity; connectivity; education and outreach; integrated, supportive housing; housing variety; and neighborhood and home maintenance. Discussion ensued relative to incorporating language around "healthy communities" and ways of integrating active lifestyles into sustainable neighborhoods. 18-687 10/01/18 It PC It 14 Ms. Jaeckle requested guidance relative to apartments and townhomes and what factors such as turnover, owner/renter occupancy and others made some projects more successful than others. In response to Ms. Jaeckle's remarks, Mr. Haasch stated more multi -family and townhomes have come online since the cash proffer has been relieved. Dr. Casey noted associations and amenities embedded in a neighborhood help increase/maintain the overall value of the property. In response to Mr. Jackson's question, Mr. Haasch stated staff has contemplated adding a map of all vacant residential zoning into Chapter 4 Demographics and Trends. Mr. Haasch then highlighted Chapter 15: Public Facilities desired outcomes which include supporting efficient, equitable and effective provisions of public facilities and services; identifying appropriate levels of service standards; providing guidance to new, replacement and renovated facilities; use of the public facility provision as a catalyst for development and redevelopment efforts; supporting private sector efforts and partnerships in community service/ facility provision; and providing guidance to the Capital Improvement Program. Ms. Jaeckle stressed the importance of incorporating pocket parks in strategically placed areas within neighborhoods with higher density. Mr. Haasch then reviewed the Parks section of the draft plan, including facility type recommendations. Regarding general services, he highlighted the Government Center Master Plan and various improvements around campus; aviation services; solid waste convenience centers; and fleet facilities. Mr. Holland requested an inventory and cost versus benefit analysis of leased space the county currently utilizes. Mr. Haasch continued his presentation by stating the Government Center will remain the administrative center for the Community Services Board/Mental Health Support Service/Social Services operations. He noted further consideration for satellite/community resource centers for population -centered service/program delivery. Mr. Elswick recommended consideration of leased space opportunities in high -demand areas for service/program delivery. In response to Mr. Elswick's recommendation, staff concluded the consideration has been captured in the draft. Discussion ensued relative to the placement of a healthcare facility in the Route 1 corridor as well as other opportunities and incentives for partnerships within the community. Mr. Haasch continued his presentation by highlighting the addition of a broadband infrastructure section, support and telecommunication guidelines which include impact mitigation; co -location; development proposals; utility easement sharing; economic development; public facilities (tech centers); and 5G system support. Discussion ensued relative to the challenges of inadequate broadband coverage in rural areas of the county. 18-688 10/01/18 Mr. Haasch then reviewed the topic of school public facilities. He highlighted. the school's addition to the chapter which includes a new focus on design capacity for planning and level of service purposes, trailers, specialty centers and projection methodology. He noted staff is awaiting school recommendations for facility renovations/ replacements and new facility design capacities. Mr. Elswick expressed concerns relative to potential difference of opinion regarding the list of school renovations/replacements between the county and school staff. I ') Ms. Jaeckle stressed the importance of re-inserting previous Comprehensive Plan verbiage relative to linking schools to communities by providing greater access, flexible designs, and locations to better meet the needs of the communities in which they are located. Discussion ensued relative to recommendations to increase maximum design capacities of new elementary, middle, and high schools. Mr. Holland expressed concerns relative to the reduction of design capacity and the number of modular units at Bensley Elementary School. In response to Mr. Holland's concerns, Ms. Nita Mensia- Joseph, Chief Operating Officer for Chesterfield County Public Schools, stated none of the trailers are currently being used at Bensley Elementary School. She noted facility recommendations would be updated after the redistricting process has been completed. Ms. Jaeckle expressed concerns relative to fluctuation in capacity statistics for Thomas Dale High School. In response to Ms. Jaeckle's remarks, Ms. Mensia-Joseph stated that school staff has reviewed the design capacity methodology and stated the intended numbers are based on the architectural layout of the school and the Virginia Department of Education calculations. Discussion ensued relative to the accuracy of design capacity limitations at Thomas Dale High School and other county school facilities. Ms. Haley recommended scheduling a meeting between the Board of Supervisors and School Board to discuss school capacity figures and address concerns relative to those calculations. In response to Mr. Winslow's questions, Ms. Mensia-Joseph stated the Virginia Department of Education capacity calculations are based on classroom space multiplied by a standard pupil -teacher ratio. She further stated scheduling and programming of space can bring functional capacity down 25-30 percent. She stated school design capacity, programming, and utilization data has been captured to determine functionality. She noted trailers are not used in capacity calculations. Discussion ensued relative to school instructional functional capacity calculations and modular unit data. 18-689 10/01/18 Mr. Holland stated the Board expects the Planning Commission to review school capacity and educational impact to students relative to future zoning cases. He further stated before the school division presents a plan to the public to revitalize schools, the Board of Supervisors needs to weigh in heavily on the issue before asking the community for more money. He concurred with Ms. Haley's recommendation for both Boards to meet to discuss school capacity figures and address concerns relative to those calculations. Ms. Mensia-Joseph stated an inventory of classroom space is gathered every year and presented to the School Board. She further stated the School Board is taking a very serious look at how classroom space is being utilized and its significant impact on capacity. Discussion continued to ensue relative to school capacity calculations. Mr. Elswick acknowledged that increasing design capacity thresholds may be the only option in areas of the county where residential development is growing at a fast pace. Ms. Haley stated she is not comfortable presenting recommendations based on facility design capacity figures and projection methodology to the public. Discussion continued to ensue relative to school capacity calculations and citizens' opportunities to provide input on changes to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Stariha stated there needs to be tools and mechanisms in place to forecast growth of schools. He further stated the forecasted growth is woefully inadequate in his opinion. (W Discussion ensued relative to forecasted growth of schools in expanding areas of the county. Dr. Casey noted Mr. Allan Carmody, Finance Director, is working directly with the county's demographer to determine logistics and variables relative to student enrollment and future enrollment calculations. Discussion ensued relative to the importance of creating a dialogue between both Boards to determine facility design capacity figures and projection methodology. Mr. Sloan stated when it comes to substantial accord, what is in the Comprehensive Plan becomes the Planning Commission's decision-making tree. He stressed the importance of the intentions to follow the Plan once it has been finalized. Ms. Mensia-Joseph welcomed the opportunity to work with county staff and noted the school division is also working directly with Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service to provide demographic data and population projections needed to determine forecasts for future school enrollment. In response to Mr. Holland's concern relative to actual versus budget, Ms. Mensia-Joseph stated the school division has a ten-year history analysis and noted student enrollment affects the budget. Mr. Holland stressed the importance of preparing the community for the possibility of future school redistricting. Discussion ensued relative to the tracking of demographics and vital information needed by the Planning Commission to determine impact on schools in relation to zoning cases. 18-690 10/01/18 Mr. Sloan stated because of today's meeting, the Planning Commission's desire was to ask the Board of Supervisors if there were any subsequent changes needed to make to the draft Comprehensive Plan before the information is presented to the public. He noted the October community meetings are an opportunity to solicit feedback on the draft Plan and make material changes based on those recommendations. It was generally agreed upon that district community meetings will be collaborative meetings with School Board and Planning Commission representatives for the purpose to gain valuable input from the community relative to the draft Comprehensive Plan and various county topics. Mr. Haasch continued his presentation by reviewing recommendations for future school facilities in the western part of the county and reopening of Chester Middle School as a middle school. Discussion ensued relative to the placement of future school facilities in conjunction with student enrollment forecasts. In closing, Mr. Haasch highlighted the community outreach effort, specifically district community meetings to be combined with Budget staff to discuss various county topics, and next steps for the initial and detailed Comprehensive Plan chapter review. Mr. Holland requested a summary from staff of all district community meeting input. Mr. Elswick recommended excluding county -promoting comments from the draft Comprehensive Plan and focus the purpose of the material on land use. Mr. Haasch stated an executive summary is planned to synthesize the content and highlight the major parts of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Holland also requested a timeline and deliverables of zoning ordinance updates from staff. Ms. Jaeckle and Mr. Sloan adjourned the meeting at 4:40 p.m. 4 a. Wh P. Casey Dorothy A. Ja ckle County Administr or Chairman 18-691 10/01/18 9 F