Board of Supervisors Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission Joint Public Hearing   12/21/2016

The Board of Supervisors meeting for December 21, 2016.

And I call the Planning Commission to order.

So before we get started, we are here for one item only, but I would like to just make note that we have Sergeant Carrico here joining us this evening.

Thank you.

I know you have the staff report, so I'm not going to go through each item in the staff report.

If you have questions, I'll be happy to answer them.

At your seat, there was a resolution that was adopted by the Crozet Advisory Committee, Citizen Advisory Committee, so that's new information that you have.

So, sorry.

This property is the site of the former Barnes Lumberyard and the property is currently largely unused.

Most of the buildings have been removed from the property and a number of vacant building pads remain.

A rezoning application for Crozet Square has been submitted.

That rezoning covers the area highlighted in blue that you have on the screen, as well as the area shown in yellow.

That's the Crozet Square.

What you're doing tonight is just the blue area.

The applicant intends to continue to pursue the Crozet Square project, which is for a mixed development for DCD.

And the rezoning before you tonight is to amend the existing proffers to allow an interim use of the property by research and development type businesses.

Ultimately is envisioned that those uses will be incorporated into the overall redevelopment of the property as part of the Crozet Square proposal.

This property is designated as downtown and mixed office research and development and commercial.

Uses in this area include employment and office uses, research and development, and that's what the applicant is proposing.

The dotted black line, and that's this line here and this line here, shows future road connections through the property.

The applicant is proposing to use the property for research and development offices, and the proffered uses fit the types of uses envisioned in the plan.

The applicant has also made a proffer that accommodates the connection shown in the comprehensive plan.

These are the proposed proffers and they are in addition to the existing proffers.

The proffers from the 90s were intended to allow expansion of the lumber yard and they largely limited activities to those associated with wood processing, which is obviously not going to happen on the property now.

The proposed proffers add uses which are less intensive than those permitted

by the original proffers from the 90s.

The proposal proffers at office and research type uses and address road connection issues addressed in the comprehensive plan.

Because the site has been so extensively developed in the past, we see no need for a concept plan or proffered plan.

The provisions of the HI district will take care of that.

The impacts of any construction will be addressed by the review of building permits or site plans if they are necessary.

That's the end of my presentation.

I have a question.

You indicated that the Crozet Square plan would integrate with this proposal.

Well, actually what it will do is it will replace this proposal.

So this rezoning is simply allowing an interim use of the property.

It has no impact on your future discussions about Crozet Square, and they'll have to figure out how to accommodate any users that are on the property into the Crozet Square development.

This is simply a stopgap rezoning to allow

Okay, so the area in blue is the area you're acting on tonight.

It's those two parcels.

Seeing no more questions at this time, we'll go ahead and open up the public hearing.

And this is a public comment portion of the public hearing.

Under the commissions and board's rules and procedures, the applicant will have 10 minutes to make a presentation.

Any other person speaking on this matter will be allowed to make one appearance and speak for three minutes.

Following the comments from the members of the public, the applicant will have five minutes for rebuttal.

These periods may be extended to answer questions by commissioners and board members.

So this will be a joint public hearing with the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors.

Just make sure to adjust your... Hi, my name is Frank Stoner and I'm with Milestone Partners and also Crozet-Newtown Associates, who is the owner of the Barnes-Lumber property and the CSX property.

And I'm here tonight with Greg Schar, who is the Chief Operating Officer for Perron Robotics.

and I want to just I don't have a formal presentation I want to express my deep gratitude to you all for being willing to meet here at six o'clock on a Wednesday right before Christmas to hear this and to hopefully help us move this project forward it's a really unique opportunity for us a unique opportunity for Crozet

and so again my deepest thanks because I know nobody really wants to be here this close to Christmas.

We're having a lovely time.

We're always happy Frank.

In the interest of time I'm happy to answer questions but I'm not going to make a presentation because you probably know most of what I would tell you anyway so if Greg is here and happy to answer questions on behalf of Perron if you have specific

Thank you.

Sure.

My name is Amal Growth and I live at 3015 Indigo Road and it was difficult to have a multicolored graph up there and I'm just wondering, no, not that one, there was another one.

There we go.

I'm on Hilltop.

We usually do, but on our regular meetings, but this being a special meeting of the joint board to take in the Planning Commission, we don't do the moment of silence and the Pledge of Allegiance.

But yes, we almost always do.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening members of the board, planning commission.

My name is Morgan Butler.

I'm with the Southern Environmental Law Center.

Just wanted to take a brief moment tonight to voice our support for the requested proffer changes that are before you.

The zoning on this parcel, the HI zoning, is not exactly consistent with the comprehensive plan designation for this site.

But the uses that are requested to be added in the proffers, because they add office uses, R&D, things like that, will actually make this proposal more consistent with the comprehensive plan.

So we think that that is a plus.

We appreciate that they are respecting the area that's been designated as open space and green space in the comprehensive plan and respecting the stream buffer.

And then just the broader point, stepping back and thinking about what the growth management section of the comprehensive plan, what the economic development section is about.

This proposal would facilitate the expansion of a home-growth, high-tech business within the county's development areas.

And I think that's exactly the type of thing that the Conference of Plan is calling for.

Thank you very much.

Is there anybody else who would like to speak to this matter at this time?

Okay, seeing no one else, we'll close the public hearing, but before the-

Oh, I was going to get Bill to answer the question about Hilltop.

He gets his rebuttal again.

I didn't know if he...

I didn't... Do you want a rebuttal?

There's nothing to rebuttal.

Would you like another chance to come up?

I can address Hilltop.

Okay.

Yeah, I can simply indicate it will not impact anybody on Hilltop.

Thank you very, very much.

The slide that you had up with the blue and orange showed buildings.

I'm wondering if you could point to the buildings that would be occupied.

The pink warehouse.

So the building, the proposed location that for Perone is right about here, the property is more or less this defines the southern parcel, it doesn't include these parcels here.

So the property does go to a border with properties adjacent to Hilltop.

There is a stream buffer in this area, so the eastern portion has a stream buffer.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioners, are there questions for staff?

Discussion?

Before we take action.

I'll make a motion.

Is there a second?

Second.

Further discussion?

Ms. Moore.

Aye.

Ms. Farhawk.

Okay.

Do we have any discussion from our supervisors?

I don't have any questions.

I think the only thing about this that's abbreviated is the process because the community has been talking about just this type of thing for years and so they are as you can see by the resolution from the CCAC this is the third meeting in which the community discussed this project and at two different organizations and there's lots of input and lots of

rejoicing and how can we make sure this happens kind of support so I'm very very glad that the combined sort of fast-track process actually has had a chance to work and to succeed in just the way it was designed four years ago so I think this is a step in the right direction and after people have had a chance to speak I'd be glad to make a motion

Second.

Ms. Alex?

Yes.

Ms. McKeel?

Yes.

Ms. Palmer?

Yes.

Okay and so this has been the absolute shortest meeting that we've ever had on the Board of Supervisors and I suspect the Planning Commission but I'm glad it all went quickly and well and there's no problem and so I get to adjourn.

Before you do that is there could we have a couple minutes after the Planning Commission adjourns to talk about whether we want to talk about something in the next meeting.

It needs to be relatively quick because I know everybody has places to go.

Is there interest on the board to have a work session amongst ourselves to talk about the different ways which we could operate with transit and do more with transit to just prepare for more meetings with other jurisdictions later on in the winter?

I think we definitely want to lose this momentum and this opportunity.

Thank you.

Okay, so I am just adjourning this to our regular meeting on January 4th.

We're done.

Hearing no objections, right?

And only have one thing to talk about.