Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-13-21 Planning Commission Minutesra,. IA PULASKI MINUTES Town of Pulaski Planning Commission September 13, 2021 Commissioners Present: Kevin Meyer, Chair; Terry Hale; Tracy Belcher; Chris Conner; Luke Seigfried Commissioners Absent: Janet Jonas, Vice -Chair Town Staff: Brady Deal, Planner/Economic Developer/Zoning Administrator 1. Call to Order Chairman Meyer called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call of Commission A quorum was determined since five of the six commissioners were present. 3. Review and Approval of Minutes a. August 9, 2021 Minutes The minutes were unanimously approved by voice vote on a motion by Chris Conner and a second by Terry Hale 4. Public Hearing a. Case 2021-06ZA - A proposed amendment to Section 5.3.3, Table 2: Off - Street Parking Space Requirements for Multi -family Residential Use to change the parking requirements. Mr. Deal provided the staff report for Case 2021-06ZA. He stated, The Town of Pulaski staff has proposed an amendment to section 5.3.3 table 2: Off Street Parking Space Requirements for Multi -Family Residential use to change the parking requirements to one space per unit for one -bedroom apartments, one and a half spaces per unit for two- bedroom apartments and two spaces per unit for three-bedroom apartments, with an additional parking space requirement to equal 10% of the total unit count. Mr. Deal said the current zoning ordinance language requires 2.5 spaces per unit, regardless of unit makeup. With the need for diversity of housing options to accommodate new residents and provide current residents with adequate housing alternatives, multi -family housing projects have been solicited by the town and after reviewing the parking requirements in several neighboring and/or similar localities as a part of the Comprehensive Pian update, it was determined that the current language was particularly high. Mr. Deal stated, the proposed amendment is an effort to bring us more in line with these other localities, limit the large-scale construction of impervious surface, reduce the impacts on stormwater management, and make the town more attractive to developers. He further elaborated, as the Planning Commission recalls, we have spent a few meetings reviewing this language, and at one meeting we discussed three various alternatives, including the more sort of creative alternative that we have before us here tonight as well as other standard alternatives. Mr. Deal said, and then we also reviewed several alternatives for additional parking space requirements. And based on the last Planning Commission meeting and the one before that, this is the language here that most commissioners have felt somewhat comfortable with moving forward. Mr. Deal stated that he would be willing to answer any questions. Chairman Meyer asked if anyone had any more questions from Mr. Deal. There were no immediate questions from the commissioners. Chairman Meyer opened the public hearing. With no comment from the public Chairman Meyer closed the public hearing. Mr. Seigfried stated that he actually had a comment. He wanted to discuss potentially considering striking the 10% clause based on how much parking is necessary and how much it actually changes the overall total. He asked how the commissioners feel about the striking the 10% requirement. Chairman Meyer stated that he would personally prefer to leave it in there. He stated what we have here is a pretty big change from the two and a half spaces requirement and he did not think it would be a smart move on our part to towards a Blacksburg or Christiansburg model. He stated that there is not as much parking per unit in those Towns and he does not want to make too big of a jump and end up with a development getting built and open and there is not enough parking for the people living there. Mr. Seigfried stated that he agreed that Blacksburg and Christiansburg are very different and that coming from a college town recently his -self, he did not want to have those issues but he felt that eliminating the 10% clause would allow the commission to not have to revisit this issue for a long time, while still furthering development within the Page 2 of 7 I September 13, 2021 Town. He stated that this is something that staff has brought up in their conversations with developers as the considered the Town. He stated that the current proposed developments are not considering large room count units and would be constructing more compact units and there necessitate less parking. Chairman Meyer asked what everyone else thinks. Mr. Hale responded that he agreed with the Chairman. Chairman Meyer asked Mr. Deal a question. He stated if we leave it in there, is there a mechanism could ask for an exception due to particular circumstances and/or type of project. Mr. Deal stated that he was unsure how one would apply for that outside a variance. He stated that they would have to prove a hardship to receive the variance. He further elaborated and stated, let's say they built somewhere place that typographically, they could fit 90 spaces but couldn't fit another nine. There is no way they could fit another nine unless they brought in a bunch of topsoil in one area, bring it up and level it out and that in and of itself would be considered a topographical hardship for the property that the BZA could grant a variance. He stated that he did not know if there was another way for an "exception" to be granted. Chairman Meyer asked if we were to have an assisted living facility for folks of a certain age, and that most of them did not want to drive but had individual apartments. In a situation, like that no where near as much parking is needed. He added that he wonders if there is room for this type of situation to be addressed in the ordinance. Mr. Seigfried asked Mr. Deal if he could give an example of two or three developments looking to the town or in the middle of being developed and how many bedrooms are they looking at putting in each unit. Mr. Deal stated that the two large developments, Claremont School and Pulaski Middle School have not had those breakdowns finalized. Mr. Deal stated that they are both more heavily focused on the one and two bedroom units. He stated that he thinks only 10 or so of the apartments at Claremont School will be three bedrooms. Mr. Seigfried stated that if eliminating some of the spaces could actually expand the number of units that a developer can construct on the property, which can add to the affordable housing that is available in the time. Chairman Meyer stated that if the unit breakdown is as Mr. Deal had said, that would mean there would need to be 81 parking spaces at the Claremont School. Mr. Deal that regardless of how you play with the unit breakdown, the new parking requirements usually come out to 1.5 to 1.75 spaces per unit which is very standard. He further mentioned that the state standard for North Carolina is 1.75 spaces per unit. Page 3 of 71 September 13, 2021 Chairman Meyer stated that he still has the concern and he hopes it doesn't matter in the end. He stated if we add families to the Town, they often have two vehicles if not more vehicles including for grandparents and/or teenagers as they grow up. Mr. Deal mentioned that a non-traditional approach to housing is surging throughout the state with the cost of housing. He stated that other areas of Virginia are dealing with the construction of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and that zoning practitioners and planners are discussing ways to handle this trend. He further stated that more non- traditional housing is likely going to come to the Town of Pulaski and that staff is trying to determine the best route to accommodate this surge. He feels that this parking space amendment originated from this effort to ensure that the Town is prepared to accommodate the future development and that as it pertains to the 10% requirement staff would defer to the Planning Commission as residents of the community and that he could not provide a recommendation one way or another. Mr. Deal stated that at the end of the day, this is likely a discussion over 5-10 spaces. Mr. Conner stated that he agreed with the Chairman and felt that requiring developers to add these few additional spaces can only safeguard against parking shortages and is truly not a large cost as it pertains to the collective development. He stated, for our community, this amendment is a pretty big change in numbers. I think the 10% is kind of a fair trade off, in my opinion. Like I said, we're only talking on average, five to ten spaces extra. Chairman Meyer asked what the largest apartment complex was in Town. Mr. Deal stated that it was Washington Square, he believed, and that there are about 120 units in that complex. Chairman Meyer stated I just don't think we're going to have a lot of large apartment complexes in town unless something drastically changes. 'Virginia Tech decides it doesn't want to be in Blacksburg, but it likes Pulaski and comes here. Mr. Deal stated that he thought the chairman was correct due to the lack of large tracts of vacant land. He further elaborated, and said that what we have right now is a lot of old vacant properties that are likely going to have to be converted from industrial or civic use to commercial and residential. And the easiest way to put this is it's a lot easier to make money on residential adaptive re -use than commercial adaptive re -use because people are always in need of housing. But people aren't always in need of commercial spaces, especially right now when a lot of people that maybe worked in commercial spaces are transitioning to online business models, either working from home, we're actually doing online selling and purchasing and buying of inventory. So really what we're seeing with a lot of our properties is a push to create new residential locations for the overflow that's happening. As you mentioned from Christiansburg, Radford, Blacksburg, where there's Page 4 of 71 September 13, 2021 just a really slim amount of available residences and those residences that are available are costly. Chairman Meyer stated, he worries if the Town becomes a 'bedroom community that it is more and more difficult to provide a larger tax base instead of the growth of commercial and industrial operations. Mr. Deal stated that staff is working everyday with prospects for all businesses including large industries to try and recruit these individuals to the Town to increase that tax base. He added that there is a lot of synergy and energy and that landing an employer like a James Hardie is hard to do and something that doesn't occur often. Chairman Meyer said that the commission needed to get back to the actual discussion. He stated we can either keep talking about having a 10% requirement or not, or we could have a motion to adopt this or some other form of it or something totally different. If anybody would care to offer a motion where we can keep talking about 10%. Mr. Conner made a motion to recommend to Town Council the Zoning Amendment as presented to the Planning Commission this evening, including the 10% additional space requirement. Ms. Belcher seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0 on the following roll call vote: Chairman Meyer — Ms. Jonas — Absent Mr. Conner —Aye Mr. Hale — Aye Ms. Belcher —Aye Mr. Seigfried — Aye Chairman asked Mr. Deal to forward this recommendation to Town Council. 5. Old Business a. Comprehensive Plan Update L Final Working Group Meeting Update ii. Survey Response Breakdown iii. Focus Group Plan b. Discuss Strikethrough/Edit of Zoning Ordinance Chairman Meyer asked Mr. Deal to discuss the items under Old Business. Mr. Deal provided an overview of the final working group meeting and stated that a final synopsis on the meetings will be provided at the October meeting. He stated that staff had met with Town Council and discussed their developmental goals. Mr. Deal provided the commissioners with a snapshot from the survey and stated that the total number would increase and that their goal was to collect over 400 responses. Page 5 of 71 September 13, 2021 He stated that this snapshot provides a solid perspective on the main concerns/thoughts from respondents. He the provided a detailed overview of the survey responses and the main themes from the responses. Mr. Deal then described some of the projects that are already underway which will positively address some of the concerns/thoughts that were produced during the community engagement process. The Planning Commissioners then discussed housing options with a focus on the meaning of affordable housing since that was one of the reoccurring mentions in the survey data. Chairman Meyer stated that affordable housing was a top concern but that most of the respondents own a single-family home. He asked what definition is being used to gauge affordable housing. Mr. Deal stated that an individual that pays more than 30% of their income in housing would be considered to live in unaffordable housing. Mr. Seigfried stated that possibly in a future survey there could be a branching question to provide more clarity into this affordable housing concern. He then asked if anyone was surprised by anything else in the survey. The other commissioners did not mention anything specific as a surprise. Mr. Deal then handed out paper copies of the strikethrough/edit of the Zoning Ordinance and stated that Aphi and himself would like to go through this with the Commissioners to ensure that any grammatical errors or other issues would be addressed. 6. New Business 7. Staff Report 8. Other Business 9. Adjournment With there being no further business to discuss, Chairman Meyer adjourned the meeting at 6:54 p.m. Page 6 of 71 September 13, 2021 Kevin ever, Chair Page 7 of 71 September 13, 2021