Planning Commission Meeting   6/14/2022

Right.

because they'll be incented to do more projects like this.

Thank you, Rich.

It's a short meeting.

Mr. Alejandro, please.

Highlights include the tree planting plan, updating tree data, participation in zoning ordinance rewrite, and taking a more active role in city staff review of development plans to increase and protect trees.

Russell, please.

and then finally in from a transportation update the Commonwealth draft budget was released and includes funding for a regional transit government governance study as well as funding for the Albemarle transit expansion demo grant that draft budget will go before the okay so it's a draft budget it'll go before the board in the June meeting

Mr. Stolzenberg, please.

Thank you.

Do we have a Mr. Palmer?

Thanks.

At this time, I would like to hear from the Neighborhood Development Services, please.

Does anyone have any questions for me?

So the writing of the actual ordinance, that's happening when?

So we are going to start some of the formatting work this summer, but the bulk of the actual drafting of the ordinance will begin after that meeting in September.

One of the things Mr. Brees mentioned at LUPEC was that the actual ordinance itself is going to be more

Yeah thank you that I think that's one of I mean there's many great objectives in here but I think one of them is moving towards a more readable more readily understandable zoning ordinance so that the average resident can pick it up understand what they can do with their property or perhaps more importantly understand what can happen at the end of their street or in their neighborhood or or somewhere else in the city more clearly so

the draft or the, I'm sorry, participate in this meeting.

I don't know the outcome of that discussion, but I know that they realize that we have potential for a number of new people.

Glad it's being planned.

Other questions about zoning?

Or is it going to be more of an interactive writing at meetings, that sort of thing?

I can't remember exactly what those are, but there's three, basically there will be three pieces of the zoning ordinance that are released sequentially to begin that review and dialogue and process.

Yeah, thanks.

And so you've got to kind of release some logical chunks that kind of interact and work well together so that people can see the big picture of what's being presented.

Thanks.

And Lachlan Hills is also, you can talk about as well if you wish.

and at this time we do not have any hands raised.

Do I hear a motion on that item?

I would move to approve both items in the consent agenda.

Second.

Do we expect that typically at the preliminary site plan part or the final site plan or did I just miss it?

Thanks.

I'd like to hear a vote on the consent agenda item.

Yes.

How do we want to handle this?

Was it in the packet?

It makes a lot more sense with the report.

Yeah, so as I was browsing through the folder, I was like, wait a minute.

where's the memo and so in all the yeah the 30 documents I sent you that was the one that got missed so hopefully that just it doesn't change that item just hopefully gives you a little more context thank you that does help yeah and the questions in particular those were the ones that's just what I wanted you to get so if you read nothing just the questions for consideration that would be perfect thank you that helps

Council, are we in order?

We've got a quorum.

Mr. Haleska, can you take us away?

The applicant is present and does have a presentation.

Mr. Mitchell, do you have any questions for staff?

Yes.

Correct.

How do you counsel us to think about that?

but the road itself already is kind of it's a narrow road it has some traffic issues now particularly I know we received some complaints about sight lines and that's one of those safety concerns where you would potentially have to you know move around some no parking signs to create better sight lines I guess I'm not particularly worried about this one site I'm worried about the cumulative effect of this

So that traffic is on the way.

Did you have anything else?

I think that's it for questions.

Thank you.

Mr. Hibab, please.

Can you just walk us through, I know there are a few minor changes from the last application, and that could be a question for the applicant, too, but if you had any thoughts on that.

I believe there's probably been a little bit of changes to the design of the building, but I would certainly welcome the applicant to talk about that in greater detail.

Mr. Landrum?

No questions for Mr. Haleska.

Russell?

No questions.

Mr. Stolzenberg?

Thanks.

And Mr. Palmer?

Thank you.

I'd like to hear from the applicant, please.

Turn it over, next slide.

Kelsey, anything to add to that?

promoting housing and redevelopment and infill development that supports bicycle and pedestrian oriented infrastructure improvements and robust public transportation and this project is very much directly consistent with that.

Next slide, please.

I think that's kind of all that I wanted to say for transportation, so I'll turn it back over to Kevin.

Next slide, please.

And I'll turn it back to Kevin to see if there's anything else he wanted to add.

So I think with that, I'll say next slide and that would just end us with questions.

Mr. Payne, do you have questions for staff or counsel?

I guess a couple questions for staff related to the Office of Community Solutions comments on the application as I'd just be curious to hear more from staff about specifically concerns about the rental affordability periods as well as assurances that vouchers would be able to be accepted.

So that was why we raised those couple of concerns.

And what would assurances that vouchers would be accepted look like in practice?

It would depend on the developer, their willingness to work with staff and the housing authority to set that price level at the point where folks with vouchers would be able to use it in those units.

And final question for, is it just questions for staff right now?

Either is fine, please.

when you talk about an acceptable marketing plan on how to market the designated affordable units, would that look like in practice some sort of, sort of like you'd mentioned, some sort of communication or collaboration with CRHA and their long wait list of people with vouchers to even have them, the individuals on that wait list even know that this property could potentially accept their voucher?

So a CRHA is usually in the equation in terms of the marketing plan to make sure that those that are on the waiting list with vouchers have the opportunity to inquire about those units.

As the applicant, did you have any thoughts on the feedback in the report from the Office of Community Solutions about the plan on how to market the designated affordable housing units and whether vouchers will be accepted in the development?

So sorry for the, you know, obscurity in that front.

You know, of the existing units there, do you know how many are currently occupied?

At the moment, I believe they're all occupied.

And do you know how many of those tenants were people who had been living there before ownership changed?

And of those, there are six tenants who remain in the units and rent at well below market rates.

Did all the tenants there have the choice to renew their lease?

If anyone wasn't, it had to do, from my understanding of it, just with the ability to uphold the terms of the lease.

And of the six tenants who remain, do you know if any of them use housing vouchers?

I'm uncertain about that.

Thank you.

Mr. Pinkston, questions for staff, questions for the applicant?

Is that the main thing?

That is the only request.

And then the other piece was in terms of these affordable units or the fair market rate, the things that you outlined, would that only be in the new piece or spread throughout the whole development?

Thank you.

Questions for the applicant, please.

Why?

The mixed-use component of it affords a small commercial space that fronts a community corridor, a neighborhood corridor, and that affords a storefront for a small business.

It just seems sort of random.

That is also kind of represented in the additional 550 square feet on the fourth floor, is if that leasable square footage is gained, can we then go more aggressive with our affordable housing component?

Like I say, I voted for the project first time around.

So I think just adding, I think you brought up the great point of opening it up to the community and that was kind of the main big design driver behind that.

That's all I've got.

Mr. Mitchell, questions for the applicant, please.

Available, applicable to all seven units.

Yes, thank you.

So an acceptable condition would be that Section 8 vouchers will be applicable, acceptable, accepted by all seven affordable units?

I mean, if someone comes forward with a voucher, you know, the intent is to accept it, so.

But the voucher, are you saying that since the city voucher is up to 125 percent, that you guys are inclined to accept the voucher at 125 percent?

Okay.

I'm looking at you.

All right.

Mr. Rabat, please.

Can you talk about why 10 years and where that came from?

you know whenever an applicant is coming before you and I think this is pretty clear in the affordable housing plan kind of like accepting city funds that that should be the expectation just as if when an applicant utilizes LIHTC funding you know they have to meet certain thresholds they have to offer affordability for a certain period of time and so when an applicant utilizes city funds there should be you know a standard by which they adhere to in this case 10 years is what we can commit to on this project

and what practically do you see being able to use that commercially?

Thank you.

Russell?

I'm a little confused by the viability and the usefulness of that commercial part.

Can you speak to that?

And also, you know, trying to create a unified, cohesive, thoughtful design.

Okay.

Mr. Stolzenberg.

You guys are not our legal counsel, but isn't it the case that source of income discrimination, which means discriminating against voucher holders, is illegal by state code?

As you said, we're not your legal counsel, but I would agree with that statement.

Is that right?

Yeah, that's correct.

Do you happen to know that by chance?

And so I imagine it's either coming from an analysis of a prospective commercial tenant.

I think that is all I have.

Mr. Palmer, do you have questions on this one?

Thank you.

Can we please?

I will unmute Brandon Collins who is our first speaker.

CHRIS JERRAM.

Do we have anyone else?

And we also received from another audience member very similar feedback on the rules there.

Mr. Mitchell.

Mr. Abbott.

to lock them into it, or is that something we can't do?

That sounds like a question for staff.

Mr. Oleska, can you speak to that?

Thank you.

Mr. Alejandro, please.

Thank you.

Russell.

I don't have any comments.

Mr. Stolzenberg.

And I hope it can move past that baggage.

Mr. Palmer, did you want to share some thoughts on this topic?

That's it.

Mr. Payne, would you like to share thoughts on this?

That's not on the table right now probably, but it's worth keeping in mind as we're thinking about development as an iterative process where expectations may influence actors' behaviors.

Mr. Pinkston, could you share your thoughts on this?

No comments.

Mayor Snook, do you have thoughts on this?

But I do know that there's not a lot of difference between a 10-year and a 30-year affordability period for most analyses.

Thank you.

And I'm open to a friendly amendment.

Whatever the application number is.

That's it.

Did you want to put the date on that?

April 12th.

Second.

And to my mind, this is not a compatible project with its context, with the buildings next door, with its relationship to the street, and I find it unfortunate in its design.

Additional discussion on this item?

Did you have any stronger feelings towards the design presented previously, the one that Commissioner Habab, I think, just referenced?

I'm sorry, say that again.

So I think what Commissioner Habab was, what was the amendment that you suggested?

I understand.

I mean, again, I don't love the materials, but I'm not an architect and nobody likes my aesthetic opinions anyway.

Which just discounted your entire opinion.

Creasy, can you please call the roll?

Mr. LeHindro?

No.

Mr. Habab?

Aye.

Mr. Stolzenberg?

Aye.

And Mr. Solla-Yates?

Mr. Haleska, can you please take us there?

I think that's all I have and so I'm happy to answer any questions you may have and representative of the applicant is present and does have a presentation.

Mr. Alejandro?

What is that alley for?

So that's there.

or not the residents that's behind this problem.

It's not very formalized and I'm guessing it's probably not a publicly accepted street given its condition, but it is a public right of way.

Russell, please.

No, I have no questions.

I would defer to the applicant on that one.

Mr. Palmer, do you have questions on this one?

It was one of those lost lots on Harris Street that I had never realized was there.

Mr. Payne, do you have questions for staff?

Maybe I missed it, but clarify, what is the property that is behind 923 Harris Street?

I'm familiar with it just because it was an adjacent property to the pet care facility which has gone through at least two special use permits in my time

Has there been any analysis of all of how, if at all, this development would impact access to that property as well as just like any other impacts that it could have on that existing residence?

They also have frontage along the Cynthiana right-of-way as well.

MR. No questions.

Thank you.

Mayor Snow, please.

Am I alone in it?

so yeah it is a it's a larger discussion my rationale on this one was more along the lines of this is a fairly small property area wise and so having a hard time imagining this being you know a key part of industrial development in the future but it is a point that is that has been raised before and consideration as we move forward in the zoning rewrite

That's my thought.

This is good.

Thank you.

But we're thinking like a 700-square-foot area that would be artist studio space.

That's all we have for you.

Mr. Rabaugh.

Did you consider, are those shade trees on the sidewalk or are they like medium trees?

We had, I believe they're shown conceptually as kind of a medium or even an ornamental in the back there clearly showed as shade, but as far as, I mean, we're going to comply with the ordinance and what we have to provide along the street frontage.

I was wondering if you considered some kind of textured, either stamped concrete or raised sidewalk to reinforce that pedestrian access.

Thank you.

Mr. Landrum?

But I have no other questions.

Russell?

Never mind.

Mr. Stolzenberg.

I remember my question.

Please.

The commercial space, is it intended to be in the front of, you know, at the street front?

Kermel, can you speak to that?

It would be towards the rear and encompass the rear yard as a sculpture garden.

That's all.

Mr. Stolzenberg.

And if so, would you consider perhaps larger units or more commercial space to make that viable to build out?

I feel ambivalent about it.

Yeah, I mean, I suppose maybe the problem would be that you would need, if you added a third bedroom, you would hit up against additional parking requirements.

Yes, the parking requirement is the issue.

It's just better to have a nice, simple box.

And, you know, the idea that I think every single person that lives here is going to have a car doesn't seem realistic to me.

Yep, yeah, I mean, I wouldn't say I feel so strongly about it that I'm going to vote it down because it has that depth back, but I mean, I don't know the opinion of the other commissioners or council, but it seems reasonable.

Is it not possible to have more of a street setback to allow for larger street trees and somehow adjust that ratio?

Is the front setback really the limiting factor on the street trees in the first place?

You know, shifting the site back or reversing the kind of step back so it's street facing.

Curse me now, though, that might reduce the space for parking, which may be an issue.

Gotcha.

Yep, I'll save the rest about walkability and parking stuff for comments and to wax philosophic about industrial zoning.

Mr. Palmer, do you have questions for the applicant on this one?

Is that correct?

Correct.

Thank you.

Mr. Haleski, can you confirm the alley changes?

As I've been thinking about it, the more I'm remembering, yeah, there was a sign posted there saying alley closure.

Can you clarify the canopy tree issue?

One of the other considerations is obviously soil volume and whether you have an adequate planting area for that tree to thrive.

Jared, can I jump in?

Could we add a condition comparable to the one we added for the 1,000 Monticello saying that trees should be provided at least in conformance with what we've seen in the application?

I believe so, sure.

Not that I don't believe that you guys will add trees.

Mr. Payne, do you have questions for the applicant?

I have no questions this time.

Mr. Pinkston?

No questions.

Thank you.

and again we don't have any phone folks at this point in time but if we did they would hit star nine and that would raise our hand again any anyone who would like to speak please raise your hand chair we don't have any hands raised hearing none I'd like to close public comment thank you very much

Mr. Mitchell, can you start us off?

So I'll let you guys pontificate for a while, then I'll make a motion.

Mr. Stolzenberg, please, speech apply.

That's all I got.

Mr. Herbop, did you have a speech prepared?

Thank you very much.

Mr. Lohendra.

So I'm very disappointed with this application.

Russell, did you have thoughts on this?

I do understand this is a by right use and an increase in density, so I don't have any major opposition to this application.

Mr. Palmer, did you have thoughts on this item?

In a future where cars are not needed, that could be repurposed, you know, for some sort of

you know additional space to support whatever the commercial space on the bottom becomes so you know you might have a little bit of flexibility there in the future but that that was not only comment thank you uh for me the the comment that the parking requirements are driving the design absolutely hurts my brain uh oh we need to get out of the world um i heard something about a motion oh i'd love to do that please

And I am open to a friendly amendment from Mr. Stolzenberg if you would like to add one.

Is there such a thing?

Yeah, I would suggest an additional condition requiring at minimum the streetscape trees shown in the conceptual landscape plan on sheet six submitted 15 March 2022.

Discussion on this item?

Because it is actually a three-story building over structured parking and so we don't want to commit to a certain height that's actually not a total and I'm very sorry for not bringing that up in the presentation and interjecting in the middle of the motion Mr. Oleska can you give us some clarity on this issue?

uh I was aware of the change that uh Micheline pointed out I don't think staff has any objection to it thank you that's helpful uh Mr. Mitchell what are your thoughts I am happy with uh altering uh altering condition two as outlined by the applicant thank you additional discussion on this item please

If they were to come back for an additional parking reduction, then we could remove that condition at that point if we wanted to potentially get rid of it entirely, which probably not, but does that make sense?

Any changes would go through this process.

All right, never mind.

Creasy, would you please call the roll?

We do have a second.

I have a second, yeah.

Okay.

I would suggest perhaps considering at least the possibility of having one on-site unit to meet that requirement.

As a condition in this?

No, just to the applicant.

Creasy, would you please call the roll?

Mr. Lahindro?

No.

Mr. Hrabab?

Aye.

Mr. Stolzenberg?

Aye.

And Mr. Solla-Yates?

Thank you.

Come on down to that hole.

You can just come to the ARVs and hang out.

Only if I get to use the plotter.

There he is.

Mr. Faleska I believe can take us there.

With that, I think I will entertain any questions you have, and there is a representative of the applicant virtual that I believe has a presentation.

The new owner is still bound by the proffers.

A public hearing, notice, all of those elements.

But I think you're suggesting that the IPP is a quicker and better way to do this?

And so, yes, the IPP process would be the quickest way of doing that.

And the IPP process will preserve the building.

Okay.

Sorry, we'll come to you, sir.

Just the, I guess the quick follow-up is, so the mechanism to get a property designated as an IPP is to, is that something that the applicant has to start, or is that something that council can enforce, or how does that work?

The City Council ultimately retains all the ability to rezone property, and so the City Council with the recommendation of the Planning Commission or BAR could entertain a rezoning, but ideally the applicant and the owner of the property is on board and supportive.

Mr. Landrum?

Thank you.

Russell, please.

If the rezoning would be resubmitted, what are we trying to achieve out of this conversation tonight?

you know if that were to be dealt with by the applicant are there other concerns from the Commission that you want brought out and I think there are I think there's concerns of seeking

Maybe I'm just raising that as an additional concern right now.

So wouldn't they then have to, like, submit a new application and then pay all the fees for ZMA?

The main issue with dealing with that tonight is it has not been properly advertised and noticed.

You see what I'm saying here?

I will let them speak on their behalf.

Well, yeah, I'd like to understand the mechanics of what you're recommending that we consider this application and make a recommendation, but how do we then guarantee that we get them to do the IPP?

thrilled with the idea of having to go to BAR for everything, but I would assume that they don't want to submit a whole new rezoning application, pay all the rezoning fees, again, just to get all these restrictions out of their property.

Weddings is what you're interested in, and that's what we do in churches.

They're not going to do that.

I believe that they are aware that that concern is a big concern and that there is a way to address it and it appears they are willing to move in that direction, but we will let them speak further to that.

Please.

Right.

Correct.

Mr. Palmer, questions for staff?

Thank you.

Mr. Payne, questions for Steph?

Or maybe that's best to hear from the applicant in terms of what they're intending by that use.

It's always fun going into 1200.

Do you guys want me to read that?

Okay.

Thank you.

Is there a statutory definition?

It's futuristic.

In terms of staff questions, could we hear from Mr. Warner as to the process for an IPP?

Please, Mr. Warner, can you tell us the story?

Be careful with that.

Does that make sense?

So we could not tonight ask the BAR to make a recommendation next Wednesday.

Right.

And again, we've already sort of... But if we got the approval of the applicant tonight, and then we may... If you had that, that would help tremendously.

It's a separate initiation, but we should probably ask them what they think.

Any additional questions for Mr. Werner?

So we had recognizing that the national district is different than a local district and the study was for national register, right?