Planning Commission Meeting   4/6/2021

and if you would please call the order so we know if we have a quorum.

Mr. Bivins?

Here.

Mr. Randolph?

Present.

Mr. Keller.

Present.

Thank you.

Okay.

Are there matters not listed on the agenda from the public this evening?

No one has their hand raised.

I have a item on the consent agenda.

Is there a motion to accept?

May we have the roll for vote please?

Mr. Keller?

Yes.

Mr. Randolph?

Aye.

Mr. Bivins?

Yes, fine.

Mr. Clayborne?

Aye.

Thank you.

May we here have the staff report, please?

Right now, this is scheduled to be heard by the board on June 2, and I'd be happy to answer any questions that anyone has.

Thank you very much.

Yes, Rick.

Is that not correct, Andy?

If the standard of an ordinance or a decision of the Board is deemed arbitrary or capricious, that makes it subject to legal challenge.

The second thought I have in here relates to, let me find the exact passage, Bill.

There we go.

involved with the project, that I feel there's an obligation for the applicant to be more forthcoming in terms of a concept plan that's provided both to the Planning Commission and to the Board of Supervisors.

So that's why you see the difference in the two types of plans.

that also can help inform the neighbors of exactly what the intention is with the application.

That information would be available at the Planning Commission stage.

I noticed that and it just jumped out at me.

So that is carried over language from past actions by the board.

Thank you, Bill.

But there's the subtleness there that if county dollars are invested in it outright, that that automatically shifts it into a different level, that there'd be an expectation for a deeper amount of information.

I would hope that there would be some

Well developed narrative in the proposal about how jobs might be lifted up and multiplied by this investment.

Charles, are you okay with that?

Okay, I had a hard time reconciling that what on page 27 under C where it says the application will not be for the process of reviewed by county staff.

And that is for public hearing purposes.

Once it's deferred, could you direct me to where I would be able to know that if I deferred, I could expect to have a conversation?

Let me find it here real quick.

It's okay.

It's no longer in a deferral stance because it's in a reactivated stance.

We could better clarify C1 about it would not be further processed to clarify that that really is only for the public hearings.

Wearing another hat.

Other questions, comments?

And I'm going to ask before I open it to a public hearing, do we have people who are waiting in the phone?

Oh, wait, wait, Mr. Williamson.

And let's go forward.

You have three minutes to speak and it starts now.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else out there?

No, there isn't.

On that note, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to us for further conversations or further questions.

I see you're so overwhelmed.

Andy Herrick, Bart Sobota, Amelia McCulley, a lot of people helped on this project to make sure we dotted all the I's and crossed all the T's.

So Rick, would you please?

Please recall the roll.

Mr. Bivins.

Hi.

Mr. Randolph.

Hi.

Thank you.

I will pass it along to the team and thank you very much.

Thank you.

Charles, do you have anything to tell us?

I actually went back we haven't had a board meeting since our last one so we'll be meeting with the Board of Supervisors tomorrow to talk about a popular topic of Crozet's master plan and then we will reconvene as a commission next Tuesday to start one of several conversations about our comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance update that we have two major projects so look forward to that.

Wow, this is amazing.

Bye, Bart.

I'm getting you a guinea pig.