[00:00:04]
GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY, I'D LIKE TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER, AND ASK TO CALL ROLL PLEASE MA'AM.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH AND THANK ALL OF YOU.
WE HAVE SEVEN PEOPLE HERE TONIGHT, THIS IS GOOD.
OK, WE'LL MOVE ALONG WITH OUR MEETING NOW.
WE HAVE THE FIRST THE INVOCATION, MRS. SIMMONS. WILL YOU STAND, PLEASE. [INVOCATION] HEAVENLY FATHER, WE COME BEFORE YOU TONIGHT, THIS IS OUR FIRST MEETING OF THE CALENDAR YEAR.
WE PRAY THAT YOU WILL BE WITH US AS WE GO THROUGH THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS ON THE ITEMS THAT ARE BOUGHT BEFORE US.
WE ASK THAT YOU GUIDE US IN SUCH A WAY THAT WE ARE FAIR AND EQUITABLE TO ALL WHO ARE CONCERNED. OUR FATHER, WE PRAY THAT YOU WILL BE WITH ALL OF OUR MILITARY PEOPLE WHO ARE ABOUT TO GO INTO HARM'S WAY.
KEEP THEM SAFE AND BRING THEM HOME SAFELY.
AND ALL THAT WE ASK AND PRAY THAT YOU WILL BE WITH ALL WHO ARE POOR, WHO ARE HUNGRY AND WHO IN NEED. AND ALL OF THESE THINGS WE ASK IN YOUR SON'S NAME, JESUS CHRIST, AMEN.
AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU MAY BE SEATED , LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT, AND MAY I HAVE A
[ADOPTION OF AGENDA]
MOTION TO ADOPT THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT.MOTION AND SECOND THAT THE AGENDA FOR JANUARY 27TH, 2022 BE ADOPTED, CALL ROLL PLEASE.
THANK YOU. OK, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE RIGHT ALONG WITH OUR MEETING TONIGHT, AND I'M KIND OF I'M NOT TIRED OF BEING CHAIR, BUT ANYWAY, IT'S MY TIME TO MOVE
[ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING]
OUT OF YOUR WAY AND TO GET GET A NEW CHAIR HERE TONIGHT.AND SO MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO.
WE HAVE ADOPTED AGENDA, YEAH MAY I HAVE A MOTION FOR THE NOMINATION OF CHAIR OF FOR CHAIRMAN, CHAIRMAN CHAIRWOMAN, WHICHEVER THE CASE MAY BE.
WELL, LET'S NOMINATE SOMEBODY [INAUDIBLE].
I NOMINATE MR. WILLIE BRESKO, I HAVE ON ROLL MR. BRESKO, DO I HAVE A SECOND PERSON? I'LL SECOND IT. DO I HAVE A SECOND PERSON? HE'S SECONDING THE MOTION.
NO, I KNOW HE'S SECONDING THE MOTION, I ASKED FOR A SECOND PERSON.
DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? AND I NEED TO ASK IT ONE MORE TIME, DO I HAVE A SECOND PERSON? OK HEARING NONE.
WE HAVE ONE NAME THAT'S MR. BROCKWELL.
NO THAT'S MR. BRESKO, BRESKO I'M SORRY, BRESKO THAT'S BEEN NOMINATED FOR CHAIR.
WE HAVE ONLY ONE, BUT CALL THE ROLL ANYWAY, LET'S MAKE IT LEGAL.
MRS. ELDER, YES, MR. JOYNER, YES.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OK, WE NEED A VICE CHAIR CAN I HAVE A NOMINATION FOR VICE CHAIR.
I HAVE ANNOUNCED MR. BROCKWELL MR. BROCKWELL, DO I HAVE A SECOND PERSON'S NAME? DO I HAVE A SECOND PERSON'S NAME?
[00:05:02]
HEARING NONE, I CLOSE THE NOMINATION, MR. BROWN, YES.YOU HAVE A NEW THAT'S MR. BROCKWELL AND MR. MR. BRESKO AND MR. BROCKWELL. I'M SORRY GETTING THE NAMES MIXED UP HERE AND I'M GOING TO GET OUT OF YOUR WAY. [INAUDIBLE] YOU HAVE AN AGENDA, WILLIE? LIKE TO THANK THE COMMISSION FOR HAVING CONFIDENCE IN ME TO BE THE CHAIRMAN, THE NEXT THING IS AN ADOPTION OF OUR PLANNING COMMISSION 2022 MEETING SCHEDULE.
IF IT'S A SUFFICIENT DATE, PLEASES EVERYONE.
I'LL ACCEPT THE MOTION TO ADOPT IT.
SO MOVED, IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND.
MRS. ELDER. YES, MRS. ANDERSON. YES.
NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS THE ADOPTION OF THE BYLAWS.
THERE'S BEEN SOME ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO THE BYLAWS.
ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? MR. CHAIRMAN WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO GO OVER? YES. YES, PLEASE.
SO THE FIRST CHANGE IS IN ARTICLE TWO, SECTION TWO INSTEAD OF THE WORD WORKSHOP, SO NOW ONLY WORK SESSIONS WILL BE HELD ON THE MONDAY PRIOR TO THE REGULAR MEETING DAY, AND THEY ARE HELD IN THE SAME LOCATION AS THE REGULAR MEETINGS, WHICH IS HERE INSTEAD OF THE LANGUAGE WAS WHICH STATES PLANNING CONFERENCE ROOM.
THAT'S THE FIRST MINOR CHANGE.
THE SECOND MINOR CHANGE IS ON PAGE NINE.
IT'S ARTICLE NINE, SECTION TWELVE.
INSTEAD OF, THE COMMISSION SHALL BE ALLOWED TO TABLE A REQUEST.
THE PROPER LANGUAGE WOULD ACTUALLY BE POSTPONE A REQUEST UNDER ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER.
THEN IF YOU LOOK ON THE SAME PAGE, ARTICLE TEN, SECTION ONE, THE VIRGINIA STATE CODE WAS CHANGED, WHICH BASICALLY NOW ALLOWS A PERSON TO ATTEND REMOTELY IF THEY'RE PROVIDING CARE FOR A FAMILY MEMBER THEY CAN ATTEND AN UNLIMITED AMOUNT OF MEETINGS.
PREVIOUSLY IT WAS ONLY FOR A PERSONAL MEDICAL CONDITION.
AND ALSO, IF YOU LOOK A LITTLE BIT FURTHER DOWN THAT PARAGRAPH, IT SAYS FOR PERSONAL MATTERS. PREVIOUSLY, IT WAS ONLY TWO MEETINGS PER YEAR.
NOW IT'S TWENTY FIVE PERCENT OF THE MEETINGS HELD.
SO NORMALLY A MOTION HOLDS TWENTY FOUR MEETINGS.
YOU KNOW, TWELVE WORK SESSIONS, TWELVE REGULAR MEETINGS, SO IT'D BE TWENTY FIVE PERCENT OF THOSE MEETINGS.
IF YOU LOOK ON THE NEXT PAGE, PAGE TEN, THE ONLY OTHER DIFFERENCE IS THE STATE CODE CHANGE WHERE NOW THE COUNTY CAN DECLARE A LOCAL STATE OF EMERGENCY AND HOLD ENTIRELY REMOTE MEETINGS AS LONG AS IT'S TO PROVIDE FOR CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS OR DISCHARGE THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BODY.
SO IF THERE IS SOMETHING THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAD TO HANDLE WHERE IT HAD A TIMELINE UNDER THE TIME RESTRICTION UNDER THE VIRGINIA CODE, AND YOU COULD HANDLE IT THROUGH REMOTE MEETING. NOW, FOR THE PEOPLE CALLING IN TO THE MEETING, WE STILL HAVE TO HAVE A PHYSICAL QUORUM PRESENT IN THE BOARDROOM, THAT DOESN'T CHANGE.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CHANGES? THERE BEING NO QUESTIONS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADOPT THE NEW
[00:10:09]
BYLAWS. I MAKE A MOTION WE ADOPT THE NEW BYLAWS, SECOND.BROWN. YES, MR. BROCKWELL, YES.
MR. SIMMONS YES, MRS. ANDERSON. YES, MR. JOYNER, YES.
[ORDER OF BUSINESS]
NEXT IS OUR ADOPTION OF THE WORK SESSION MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 13TH, 2021 THERE THOSE MINUTES ARE IN YOUR PACKET WERE THERE ANY CORRECTIONS OR, IF NOT I'LL ACCEPT THE MOTION TO ADOPT THEM.MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT THAT THE MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 16TH BE ADOPTED AS WRITTEN. ACTUALLY, DECEMBER 13TH WORK SESSION.
DECEMBER 13TH. OK [INAUDIBLE] RIGHT IN THE WORKS SESSION MINUTES, IT SAYS IT DOES SAY DECEMBER 16TH, IT SHOULD BE 13TH, RIGHT? YES, IT'S DECEMBER 13TH WHERE WAS THE WORK SESSION.
IT SHOULD BE THE WORK SESSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 30TH.
OH, HERE IS WHERE IT'S WRONG, RIGHT? OK. PART UNDER TAB FOUR, ARE YOU SEEING DECEMBER 16TH OR DECEMBER 14TH UNDER TAB FOUR . UNDER TAB FOUR, IT SAYS DECEMBER 16TH.
OK. ARE YOU IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PAGE, APPROXIMATELY? YEAH. YES. OK.
THAT WAS BECAUSE AT THE WORK SESSION, WE WERE REVIEWING THE AGENDA FOR THE UPCOMING MEETING. SO IF YOU SEE UP TOP, IT SAYS WORK SESSION MONDAY, DECEMBER 13TH.
SO I THINK WE'RE GOOD ON THAT ONE.
OK. MRS. ELDER, ARE YOU STILL SECOND THAT? YES PLEASE, THANK YOU.
MR. JOYNER, I ABSTAIN, I WAS NOT THERE.
MRS. ELDER, YES, MR. BRESKO. YES, MRS. ANDERSON SIMMONS. YES.
COMMISSIONERS YOU HAVE THOSE MINUTES IN FRONT OF YOU, IS THERE ANY IF THERE ARE NO ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THEM.
CHAIRMAN I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT THE MINUTE MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER THE 16TH APPROVED AS PRESENTED, SECOND.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND BY MR. BROCKWELL CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.
MRS. ANDERSON, ABSTAIN. MR. SIMMONS, YES.
MR. JOYNER, I ABSTAIN I WAS NOT HERE.
NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, WHICH IS FOR IS OPEN TO ANYONE WHO
[PUBLIC COMMENTS]
WISHES TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSIONERS ON ANY TOPIC THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA.ANYONE SPEAKING, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. I OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENTS PERIOD.
IS THERE ANYONE ON ZOOM? THERE'S NO ONE ELSE ON ZOOM. MEANS NO ONE'S COMING FORWARD.
[00:15:02]
I HEREBY CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS PERIOD.[PUBLIC HEARING]
NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS A PUBLIC HEARING, REZONING RZ-21-03 REQUEST OF DINO LUNSFORD TO CONDITIONALLY REZONE TEN POINT FIVE ACRES OF A FIFTEEN POINT FOUR EIGHT THREE PARCEL.THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED 400 FEET NORTH OF FORBES DRIVE ON THE WEST SIDE OF PRINCE GEORGE, MR. GRAVES, PLEASE GIVE US OUR COMMENTS ON IT.
GOOD EVENING, CHAIRMAN BRESKO AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION AND MR. WHITTEN.
AS YOU HEARD, THIS IS A REQUEST TO REZONE TEN AND A HALF ACRE PROPERTY ON PRINCE GEORGE DRIVE. AND I MIGHT HAVE TO WORK THROUGH A COUPLE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES HERE.
GOT TWO COMPUTERS. THE STRUGGLE IS REAL.
ALL RIGHT, FIRST, BEFORE WE GET INTO THE CASE, THERE IS SOME HOUSEKEEPING ITEM.
THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY TO WORK WITH STAFF ON GETTING THE PAPERWORK STRAIGHT ESSENTIALLY, THAT MEANT THAT THERE WAS A REVISED PROFFER STATEMENT SUBMITTED ON TWO DAYS AGO ON THE TWENTY FIFTH.
NOW THE BYLAWS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION REQUIRE THAT FINAL REVISED PROFFER SHALL BE SUBMITTED TEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
AND THE BYLAWS ALSO SAY THAT THIS TIME LIMIT CAN BE WAIVED BY THE COMMISSION IF BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, AND ALSO REQUIRES THAT THE PROFFER STATEMENT BE SIGNED BY THE OWNER.
SO WE'VE PROVIDED A COPY OF THAT UPDATED SIGNED STATEMENT THERE.
NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE THEY PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED IT.
THEY DID SUBMIT IT LESS THAN TEN DAYS BEFORE THE MEETING PRIOR TO THAT, BUT THAT WAS PRIMARILY DUE TO LIMITATIONS ON STAFF'S RESPONSE TIME.
SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS THAT YOU DO WAIVE THIS REQUIREMENT SO THAT THEIR PROFFER REVISED PROFFER STATEMENT CAN BE CONSIDERED PART OF THE REQUEST.
SO THE REQUEST IS TO THE COMMISSION.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO WAIVE THE TEN DAY REQUIREMENT THAT'S IN THE BYLAWS COMMISSIONERS. WHAT'S DIFFERENT FROM THE REVISED PROFFER FROM THE ORIGINAL PROFFER.
OK. YEP. SO THEY THE APPLICANT ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED A PROFFER STATEMENT FOR THEIR APPLICATION BACK IN DECEMBER, AND THEY WERE WORKING WITH STAFF ON ONE PARTICULAR ITEM, WHICH WAS THE CASH PROFFER AMOUNT, AND THEY SUBMITTED A REVISED PROFFER STATEMENT ON JANUARY 20TH, WHICH WAS SEVEN DAYS AGO.
THEY WOULD HAVE. IT'S VERY LIKELY THAT THEY WOULD HAVE HAD IT WELL OVER TEN DAYS BEFORE THIS MEETING, BUT THERE WERE LIMITATIONS ON STAFF'S TIME TO GET BACK TO THEM AS AS THE CONVERSATION AGAIN, MOSTLY STAFF'S FAULT ON THAT.
SO THEY DID GET THEIR BASICALLY, THE STATEMENT THAT THEY SUBMITTED WAS SEVEN DAYS AGO, AND WITH THE THE REVISED VERSION SITTING IN FRONT OF YOU FROM TWO DAYS AGO, THE ONLY CHANGE BETWEEN THOSE TWO VERSIONS IS THE SIGNATURE BY THE OWNER AND THE DATE CHANGE AT THE TOP AND A DATE CHANGE FOR THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN.
THIS WAS ALSO KIND OF IN RESPONSE TO YOUR QUESTION DURING THE WORK SESSION ABOUT WHICH WHAT DOCUMENT WAS EXHIBIT A.
SO IT KIND OF PUT OUR EYES ONTO MAKING SURE THAT THE DATES AND EVERYTHING WERE ALL LINED UP. SO THE ENUMERATED PROFFERS WERE NOT CHANGED AT ALL.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I WOULD ACTUALLY RECOMMEND THE VOTE AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING TO WAIVE THE PROFFERS JUST BECAUSE IT IS SUBJECT TO A PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT.
I THINK IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE PROCEDURALLY TO HAVE THAT VOTE WAIVE THE BYLAW
[00:20:03]
REQUIREMENT AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING IS HELD.OK, SO YOU CAN JUST CONTINUE YOUR PRESENTATION AND WE'LL VOTE AFTER.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY YOU CAN SEE HERE, OUTLINED IN RED, IS LOCATED ON PRINCE GEORGE DRIVE NORTH OF FORBES DRIVE, SOUTH OF THE CITY OF HOPEWELL.
IT'S ACROSS THE STREET FROM SOME APARTMENT BUILDINGS AND NORTH OF THE FOOD LINE ON PRINCE GEORGE DRIVE. YOU CAN SEE AN AERIAL VIEW OF THAT PROPERTY HERE.
NOW, THE ENTIRE 15 PLUS ACRES THAT YOU SEE HERE IS NOT IS NOT BEING REQUESTED TO BE RESUMED ONLY A PORTION TEN AND A HALF ACRES.
YOU'LL SEE THE YOU'LL SEE WHAT PORTION THAT IS SHORTLY, BUT THAT'S A SUBJECT PROPERTY WITH AN AERIAL VIEW. THE PART WHERE THEY ARE PROPOSING TO BUILD TOWNHOUSES IS COVERED WITH TREES AT THIS MOMENT.
THIS IS THE ZONING MAP YOU CAN SEE IT'S CURRENTLY HAS TWO ZONING DISTRICTS.
ONE IS THE ORANGE COLOR IS R2 THE TAN COLOR IS RA, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL.
IN THIS VIEW, YOU CAN SEE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
YELLOW IS PLANNED FOR RESIDENTIAL.
BROWN IS PLANNED FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
SO YOU CAN SEE THIS GENERAL AREA CALLS FOR RESIDENTIAL AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES.
THIS REQUEST WAS CONTINGENT UPON THE BOARD'S APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, WHICH WHICH WOULD ESTABLISH THE RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE ZONING DISTRICT, THEY DID APPROVE THAT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ON THE 25TH, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THAT.
THE APPLICANT, THIS APPLICANT IS WORKING WITH A NATIONAL HOMEBUILDER, D.R.
HORTON AND PLANNING ADVISORY FIRM BALZER AND ASSOCIATES.
AND THAT FIRM ALSO PROVIDED FEEDBACK ON THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT AND WORKED CLOSELY WITH STAFF ON THIS ON THIS REQUEST.
THE THIS WOULD BE, IF APPROVED, THE FIRST PROPOSED TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT IN PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY. WE TALKED ABOUT THIS WITH THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, BUT THERE ARE THERE ARE BUILDINGS THAT LOOK LIKE TOWNHOUSES IN THE COUNTY.
BUT OFFICIALLY THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST ONE WITH TOWNHOUSES ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS THAT CAN BE INDIVIDUALLY SOLD.
THE APPLICANT'S GOAL IS TO BUILD FIFTY ONE TOWNHOUSE UNITS ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS, AND THEIR REQUEST IS TO REZONE A TEN AND A HALF ACRE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT WE WE LOOKED AT ON THE MAPS AND THEY WISH TO REZONE IT TO RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE FOR A TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT. AND SOME OF THE ELEMENTS OF THAT TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT ARE, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE AGAIN, FIFTY ONE UNITS, THEY'RE PROPOSING A MINIMUM ONE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED SQUARE FEET PER UNIT, MULTI FLOOR, INDIVIDUALLY OWNED.
THEY'RE PROPOSING AND THEY SHOWED ON A CONCEPT PLAN A WALKING TRAIL, PLAYGROUND AND PAVILION. ALL OF THE LOTS AND STRUCTURES WOULD BE SERVED BY PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER.
THEY NEED TO FRONT ON MAIN FRONT STATE MAINTAINED ROADS OFF STREET PARKING WOULD BE PROVIDED FOR EACH UNIT, AND THERE WOULD BE A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION CREATED TO MAINTAIN THE COMMON AREAS AND DO OTHER MAINTENANCE AROUND.
YOU CAN SEE A SAMPLE EXTERIOR RENDERING HERE.
THIS IS A TYPE OF PRODUCT THAT D.R.
AND THIS IS THE GENERAL TYPE OF PRODUCT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN PLANNING TO BUILD IN THIS ONE. THIS IS A SAMPLE FLOORPLAN WITH THE FIRST FLOOR ON THE LEFT AND SECOND FLOOR ON THE RIGHT. THIS IS THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR THIS PROJECT.
YOU CAN SEE THE FIFTY ONE INDIVIDUAL LOTS LAID OUT ON A NEW INTERNAL ROAD, WHICH CONNECTS TO PRINCE GEORGE DRIVE.
AND YOU CAN SEE THE COMMON AREA IDENTIFIED THERE WITH THE PAVILION AND THE PLAYGROUND AND THE WALKING TRAIL.
THIS IS A VIEW FROM ACROSS THE STREET FACING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
AND THIS IS ON THE ON THE RIGHT OF THIS PHOTO.
THERE ARE THOSE THERE'S EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDINGS THAT LOOK LIKE WHAT YOU WOULD CALL TOWNHOUSES SO THAT IT WOULD BE THIS PROJECT WOULD BE SIMILAR IN SCALE TO THOSE.
THIS IS A VIEW OF THOSE APARTMENT BUILDINGS.
[00:25:01]
THIS IS A VIEW FROM THAT SAME SPOT IN THE PREVIOUS PHOTO, JUST LOOKING BACK UP THE ROAD.ALL RIGHT, THE PROFFERS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT.
THE KEY ELEMENTS OF THEIR PROFFERS, WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, WHAT THEY'RE PROMISING WITH THEIR WITH THEIR PROFFERS TO APPLY TO THIS REZONING WOULD BE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD GENERALLY CONFORM TO THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN.
THE MINIMUM DWELLING SIZE WILL BE TWELVE HUNDRED SQUARE FEET GROSS FINISHED FLOOR AREA.
THERE'D BE A MINIMUM OF TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES PER UNIT.
THERE'S A MINIMUM THREE AND A HALF ACRES COMMON AREA INCLUDING THOSE FEATURES.
THEY WOULD PROVIDE AN ENTRANCE MONUMENT THEY WOULD CREATE A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND THERE WOULD BE A CASH PROFFER THEIR OFFERING OF THREE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED FORTY THREE DOLLARS PER UNIT AND THE FULL PROFFER STATEMENT IS IN THE THE THE PACKET.
BUT THAT'S THE THOSE ARE THE KEY KEY ELEMENTS THERE.
I MEAN, THOSE THOSE THOSE PROFFERS WERE ALSO COPIED INTO THE DRAFT ORDINANCE, WHICH WOULD WHICH WOULD GO FORWARD TO THE BOARD IF IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAKES A RECOMMENDATION.
AS A REMINDER, THE DEFINITION OF TOWNHOUSES IS COPIED HERE FOR YOU.
ESSENTIALLY, JUST, YOU KNOW, AN ATTACHED UNIT INSIDE OF A STRUCTURE WITH MULTIPLE UNITS.
NOBODY'S DWELLING IS ON TOP OF SOMEONE ELSE'S DWELLING.
AND SOME OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMENTS THE INTENDED, LAND USE IS PERMITTED IN THIS ZONING DISTRICT ONLY THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING.
AGAIN SO THE RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSES DISTRICT IS THE ONLY PLACE WHERE TOWNHOUSES ON INDIVIDUALLY OWNED LOTS ARE PERMITTED, SO THAT IS THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING. THE CONCEPTUAL PLANS THAT THEY HAVE SUBMITTED UP HERE TO GENERALLY MEET THE STANDARDS OF THE TOWNHOUSE ZONING DISTRICT.
THERE'S DETAILED STANDARDS, OF COURSE, IN THAT IN THAT ZONING DISTRICT.
THOSE DETAILED STANDARDS WILL BE REVIEWED AT THE TIME OF A SUBDIVISION PLAT SUBMITTED TO COUNTY STAFF AND AT THE TIME OF A SITE PLAN SUBMITTED TO COUNTY STAFF.
SO DURING THOSE TIMES, THOSE DETAILED PLANS WILL BE REVIEWED BY ALL THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS AND MAKE SURE THAT THE STANDARDS THAT ARE IN THE ORDINANCE ARE MET.
THE ANOTHER COMMENT FROM PLANNING AND ZONING THAT BUILDING SCALE AGAIN APPEARS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA, MOSTLY BASED ON THOSE BUILDINGS ACROSS THE STREET.
ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC, OF COURSE, CAN BE EXPECTED.
YOU CAN COMPARE THIS TO THE EXISTING FORBES DRIVE ENTRANCE NEARBY, WHICH HAS A SEVENTY LOTS ACCESSING OFF OF THAT THAT ACCESS ON PRINCE GEORGE DRIVE.
ALSO VDOT HAS REVIEWED THIS REQUEST AND THEY PROVIDED COMMENTS, WE'LL GET TO THOSE IN A SECOND. IN REGARDS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP CALLS FOR RESIDENTIAL AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN THIS AREA.
AND EXISTING MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS EXIST ACROSS THE STREET.
ALSO, THE DENSITY THAT'S PROPOSED IS FOUR POINT EIGHT SIX UNITS PER ACRE IN THIS PROJECT AND A COMPARISON, IF THEY RESUMED, IF THEY REQUESTED TO REZONE TO THE ENTIRE PARCEL OR THE ENTIRE TEN AND A HALF ACRES THAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY REQUESTING, IF THEY REZONED THAT SAME AREA TO ONE OF THE EXISTING ZONING, THE OTHER ZONING DISTRICTS R2 OR R3.
THEY COULD GET BETWEEN THREE POINT TWO FOUR AND SIX POINT FORTY EIGHT ACRES BY RIGHT.
SO THIS IS THE PROPOSED DENSITY IS SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE OF WHAT YOU WOULD FIND IN THE OTHER ZONING DISTRICTS.
SO STAFF FINDS THIS REQUEST OVERALL COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND COMMENTS ON THE PROFFERS AGAIN, THAT PROFFER STATEMENT, THE ACTUAL FINAL PAPER DOCUMENT WAS SUBMITTED ON THE 25TH, BUT THEY THEY THEY WAS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETED PRIOR TO THAT POINT. THE MAXIMUM UNIT MAXIMUM CASH PROFIT PER YEAR PER THE COUNTY'S POLICY WOULD BE THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT THAT THE COUNTY CAN ACCEPT IS FOURTEEN THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED AND FORTY. THIS APPLICANT STARTED WITH THAT NUMBER AND THEN APPLIED REDUCTIONS TO COME UP WITH THE NUMBER THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.
STAFF FELT THAT THEIR THEIR RATIONALE WAS REASONABLE AND THAT THE FINAL AMOUNT EFFECTIVELY CONFORMED POLICY.
[00:30:03]
AND THEN OTHER DEPARTMENTS COMMENTS DURING THIS REVIEW THAT MAINLY JUST CAME FROM VDOT.THEY SAID THAT BASED ON THE TRAFFIC GENERATION EXPECTED, A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IS NOT REQUIRED BY VDOT AND BASED ON THE TRAFFIC GENERATION.
NO, NO TURN LANES TO GET INTO THE PROPERTY WOULD BE REQUIRED.
INSIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT, WHEN THEY COME FORWARD WITH WITH THOSE DETAILED PLANS AT LATER STAGES, IF THIS IS APPROVED, THOSE ROADS WOULD NEED TO BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED TO THE VDOT STANDARDS OF COURSE, THOSE WOULD BE STATE MAINTAINED ROADS INSIDE OF THIS PROPERTY.
ANOTHER COMMENT FROM VDOT MUST BE FOUR HUNDRED AND SEVENTY FEET FROM THE NEXT COMMERCIAL ENTRANCE THAT'S TO KEEP, YOU KNOW, ENTRANCES WHERE PEOPLE ARE TURNING IN AND OUT FAR APART FROM EACH OTHER. SO AGAIN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S REVIEWED IN DETAIL AT THE TIME OF THOSE DETAILED PLANS BEING SUBMITTED, BUT BASED ON THEIR CONCEPTUAL PLAN, THIS WOULD APPEAR TO MEET BEYOND THAT.
AND NO OTHER DEPARTMENTS PROVIDED COMMENTS ON THIS.
SO WITH EVERYTHING CONSIDERED, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS, AND THE BASIS IS THAT STAFF THINKS IT'S COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING USES AND DENSITY.
THERE'S A QUALITY HOUSING PRODUCT PROPOSED WITH WITH AMENITIES.
THERE'S BEEN NO DIRECT NEGATIVE FEEDBACK RECEIVED AS THIS HAS BEEN ADVERTISED AS REQUIRED. AND THE PROPOSED PROFFER CONFORMS TO THE COUNTY POLICY.
AND ALL DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO THAT UPDATED PROFFER STATEMENT HAVE BEEN INCLUDED OR PROVIDED TO YOU THAT UPDATE WHATEVER'S IN THE PACKET.
I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE, THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE.
SO THAT'S THE PROPER STATEMENT YEP.
COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS? EXCUSE ME. ANY QUESTIONS? NO, I HAVE NOT A COMMENT, BUT I HAVE A I GUESS YOU ASK FOR AN OPINION I HAVE AN, A STATEMENT ON MY OPINION OF WHAT YOU MENTIONED, A QUESTION YOU ASKED IN THE BEGINNING, IF YOU'RE READY FOR THAT. YEAH.
WELL, ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE OF HIM OR COMMENTS.
NO. NUMBER SEVEN, ON THE COMMON AREA AND THE AMENITIES, WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT? NUMBER SEVEN ON.
WHAT PAGE IT'S ON THE ON THE PROFFER SHEET [INAUDIBLE] OK . WHEN WILL THAT START? IS THERE'S A TIME LIMIT BECAUSE SOMETIMES IN THE PAST OR THEY'RE PLANNING FOR A COMMON AREA, THEY PUT A PICNIC TABLE AND SAYS, OK, THAT'S THE PLAYGROUND.
ARE WE SETTING A TIME LIMIT ON THE GRADING AND TWELVE POINT TWELVE ON THE SQUARE FOOT PAVILION. YEAH, GREAT QUESTION.
SO THE WALKING TRAILS [INAUDIBLE].
HAVING NO LANGUAGE HERE, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD MAKE SURE HAPPENS DURING THE SITE PLAN AND THE TIMING OF THAT WOULD BE SPECIFIED DURING THE SITE THAT SITE PLAN REVIEW.
I CAN ASK THE APPLICANT TO COME UP AFTER IF THEY HAD ANY SPECIFIC PLANS ON THE TIMING ON THAT BEYOND WHAT THE COUNTY WILL REQUIRE.
BUT I WOULD SAY THAT DURING DURING THE SITE PLAN, WE WOULD WE WOULD SPECIFY WHAT THEY EXPECT THE TIMELINE IS.
AND YOU CAN SPECIFY THE TIME LIMIT, CORRECT.
THEY WOULD SHOW THEY WOULD SHOW THOSE THINGS ON A SITE PLAN AND THEN BEFORE THEY COULD GET FINAL APPROVAL FOR ALL OF THE STRUCTURES IN THERE AND GET THEIR CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL, THEY WOULD NEED TO HAVE EVERYTHING COMPLETED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, BUT I'M NOT SO SURE HE'S GOING TO WANT TO ANSWER THEM.
OH, OK, WELL, I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK THE APPLICANT, OK.
OK. THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTION, SO I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[00:35:04]
AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ANYONE THAT HAS COMMENTS ON ON THIS PROPOSAL. AND DID YOU WANT TO ASK YOUR QUESTIONS AND THEN THEY COULD COME UP AND ANSWER THEM? MS. ELDER. SHE WANTED TO.[INAUDIBLE] MY NAME IS IRMA BROWN, AND I'M A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEAL.
MY QUESTION IS, OR MY CONCERNS ARE, AND I KNOW WHEN YOU BUILD THAT, YOU DO HAVE TO HAVE WATER AND SEWER.
BUT MY CONCERN TO THE COUNTY IS THAT.
YOU SEND IT EVERYTHING DOWN TO HOPEWELL, OR I SAY HOPEWELL, BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING THAT DIRECTION, BUT YOU GET TO THE SCHOOL AND YOU STOP THIS WAY.
AND I THINK THAT YOU SHOULD CONSIDER COMPLETING SOME OF THESE JOBS BEFORE YOU JUST KEEP JUMPING FROM HERE TO THERE.
AND I'M NOT SATISFIED AT ALL BECAUSE WELLS DON'T LAST FOREVER.
AND YOU DO HAVE TO RE DIG THEM AND GO THROUGH THE PROBLEM OF WAITING FROM THE SETTLING FOR THE WATER TO CLEAR UP, AND ALL, AND THIS IS WHAT I REALLY TEACH ME.
AND NOT ONLY THAT, BECAUSE IT ALSO BRINGS A LOT OF CHILDREN, AND THAT MEANS MORE CHILDREN IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM.
AND RIGHT NOW, THE BUSSES ARE ALWAYS LATE PICKING UP THE KIDS CHILD SUPPOSED TO GET HOME AT 4:00 HE MAY GET HOME AT 6:00.
SO YOU SEE, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT ALL OF THOSE KIND OF THINGS, AND THAT'S ALL I'M TRYING TO SAY. I'M NOT TRYING TO STOP WHAT YOU ALL ARE TRYING TO DO, BUT I'M TRYING TO MAKE THE COUNTY AWARE OF THINGS THAT WE NEED TO CLEAR UP.
ANYONE ELSE? WOULD YOU WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
MR. WHITTEN, MY NAME IS ANDY SCHERZER.
I'M A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND A PARTNER AT BALZER AND ASSOCIATES, AND WE'VE BEEN LUCKY ENOUGH TO WORK WITH MR. LUNSFORD HERE ON THE START OF THIS PROJECT, AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH TIM AND JULIE AND SEVERAL OTHER MEMBERS OF YOUR TEAM FROM THE VERY BEGINNING JUST TO TRY AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO BRING THIS TYPE OF HOUSING, YOU KNOW, BRING THIS QUALITY HOUSING CHOICE SO THAT THE PEOPLE OF PRINCE GEORGE WILL HAVE ALTERNATIVES.
YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF WHAT OUR NEIGHBOR HAD TALKED ABOUT IN TERMS OF WELLS AND SEPTIC AND AND AND HAVING FACILITIES, YOU KNOW, HAVING A CHOICE WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A LARGE LOT THAT YOU HAVE TO CUT GRASS AND TAKE CARE OF AND THEN HAVE A CHOICE OF BEING ABLE TO HAVE A TOWNHOUSE IS ONE HOUSING CHOICE DIFFERENT THAN THE APARTMENTS OR THE SINGLE FAMILY THAT IS SORT OF IN BETWEEN.
IT IS HOME OWNERSHIP AND AND IT'S A NEEDED PRODUCT THAT OBVIOUSLY D.R.
HORTON, THE NATIONAL HOMEBUILDER, HAS I GUESS CONTACTED MR. LUNSFORD AND SAID, COULD THIS BE CONSIDERED HERE? AND WE JUST BEEN GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS AND TRYING TO OFFER THE CONDITIONS THAT'LL THAT'LL MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DELIVERING A QUALITY PRODUCT AND KEEPING WITH WHAT THE EXPECTATIONS THAT YOUR STAFF HAS INDICATED THAT PRINCE GEORGE IS LOOKING FOR.
AND OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE HERE TO LISTEN TO UNITE.
WE HAVE TALKED PREVIOUSLY WHEN WE WERE HERE FOR THE, YOU KNOW, THE ACTUAL REVIEW OF THE ORDINANCE ITSELF.
AND SO WE'VE HEARD SEVERAL OF THOSE COMMENTS AND WE'VE CRAFTED OUR CASE TO HAVE THE THINGS THAT MAKE A NEIGHBORHOOD A GOOD NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU KNOW, THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES, WE DO PLAN ON THEM BEING THERE FROM THE BEGINNING.
NOW WHAT WE MIGHT SAY IS PRIOR TO THE TENTH BUILDING PERMIT OR SOMETHING, BECAUSE AS YOU ALL WELL KNOW TODAY, BETWEEN SUPPLY CHAINS, ET CETERA, WE MIGHT ORDER A PIECE OF PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AND ONE PART OF IT MAY NOT ALL BE THERE.
YOU KNOW, WHEN WE GO TO TRY TO MAKE SURE WE'RE PULLING IT, BUT WE CERTAINLY AREN'T INTENDING TO DELAY IT TILL THE END.
I THINK HIS EXPECTATIONS WITH THE BUILDERS, THEY WANT IT, THEY'RE UP FRONT TO HELP MARKET THE PROPERTY SO PEOPLE CAN SEE WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE INTO AND WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO. BUT WE DO JUST NEED TO BE SOMEWHAT REASONABLE JUST TO THE CRAZINESS OF WHAT CONSTRUCTION IS TODAY.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL HAVE HEARD IT'S HARD TO GET STORM DRAIN PIPE, WATER PIPE.
EVERYTHING IS HARD TO GET RIGHT NOW, SO WE DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT'S A YEAR FROM NOW OR A YEAR AND A HALF, HOW THAT'S ALL GOING TO SORT OUT.
SO THAT'S THE ONLY CONCERN THAT WE FIGURE WE OUGHT TO TELL YOU BASED UPON WHAT THE COMMENT THAT CAME UP. WE DO FEEL IT'S GREAT BECAUSE WHEN WE'RE PROFFERING IT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A
[00:40:03]
MINI LAW THAT GOES WITH THIS PROPERTY.SO THAT SKETCH, WE WON'T BE ABLE TO CHANGE ANY OF THAT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT WAY UNLESS WE COME ALL THE WAY BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS, COME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, COME BACK TO THE BOARD TO DO THAT.
AND MR. LUNSFORD IS VERY SINCERE AND BRINGING A QUALITY PRODUCT HERE.
HE'S A HOME GROWN DEVELOPER AND BUILDER IN THE PRINCE GEORGE, SO THIS MATTERS AND MEANS A LOT TO HIM AND HIS FAMILY.
SO I THINK IT STARTED OUT AS A VISION FOR YOUR GRANDFATHER.
AND SO HE'S TRYING TO HONOR HIS WISHES FROM BEFORE.
NOW WE CAN TALK ABOUT ANY SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF IT BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT IT FOR THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS SINCE BACK IN THIS PAST SUMMERS WHEN WE STARTED LOOKING AT THE PROJECT AND DISCUSSING IT WITH THE STAFF AT PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY AND YOU KNOW, WE FEEL WE'VE CRAFTED A GOOD CASE, BUT OBVIOUSLY ALL OF THEM CAN BE TWEAKED AND CHANGED TO MEET SPECIFIC NEEDS.
WE DID HEAR SOMETHING ABOUT THE STREETS.
THEY'RE ALL GOING TO BE VDOT STREETS.
THE ACCESS POINTS ALL HAVE TO MEET THE SAFETY STANDARDS THAT THE STATE HAS LAID DOWN.
IT'S NOT LIKE WE GET TO DESIGN IT THE WAY WE WANTED.
IT HAS TO COME OUT AND MEET VDOT STANDARDS AND THAT THAT WE'RE HOPING THAT THAT WILL PROVIDE THE ASSURANCE TO BOTH YOU AND THE BOARD TO KNOW THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A QUALITY PRODUCT THAT WILL BE MAINTAINED OVER TIME.
IT'S GREAT THAT IT'S GOING TO BE PUBLIC ROADS AND NOT PRIVATE ROADS BECAUSE THOSE TEND TO POSSIBLY HAVE PROBLEMS IN THE FUTURE.
BUT HOPEFULLY OUR STATE GOVERNMENT WILL HAVE THE FUNDING BILL TO TAKE CARE OF OUR ROADS FOR ALL ETERNITY.
THAT'S THE PLAN ANYWAY, SO WE CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LAYOUT OR WHAT THE INTENTION IS.
BUT WE FEEL THE PRODUCT MEETS WHAT THE GOALS HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED AND IT'S VERY, VERY SIMILAR IN TERMS OF PROJECTS WE'RE DOING AROUND THE STATE, CERTAINLY IN THE RICHMOND PETERSBURG TRI CITIES AREA.
JUST BECAUSE THE EXPENSE HOUSING HAS GONE UP EXTRAORDINARILY, ESPECIALLY IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THIS TYPE PRODUCT WOULD JUST PRIVATIZE JUST MARGINALLY A LITTLE BIT LESS STRAIN ON A YOUNG FAMILY OR SOMEONE DOWNSIZING FROM A LARGER, MORE MAINTENANCE HOUSE TO HAVE.
THEY'LL STILL BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT PLEASURE OF HOME OWNERSHIP AT A REASONABLE PRICE POINT COMPARED TO, SAY, A TEN ACRE LOT AND A LARGE HOME LIKE THAT.
THIS WILL PROVIDE WHAT WE FEEL WILL BE A QUALITY ALTERNATIVE FOR FOR PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY. GOOD.
WHAT IS GOING TO BE THE AVERAGE PRICE OF THESE TOWNHOUSES? WILL THEY BE SUBSIDIZED BY LOCAL LAW? YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING, SECTION EIGHT AND WHATEVER.
THESE ARE FOR SALE HOUSING WHAT WE HAVE HEARD.
THE NUMBERS WE'VE HEARD FROM D.R.
HORTON IS IN THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND.
THEY WERE TRYING TO STAY AROUND THE TWO HUNDRED AND NINETY THOUSAND RANGE PER TWO HUNDRED NINETY THOUSAND.
OK. WHICH MODEL THAT THEY DECIDE TO PUT IN THERE.
OBVIOUSLY, THEY'LL USE WHATEVER IS THE THE BEST FIT AND THEN TO ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT THE TIMELINE OF THE COMMON AREAS AND SO FORTH.
SO ESSENTIALLY, WHAT I'M DOING WHEN WE WE GET A DESIGN THAT EVERYONE'S HAPPY WITH A PLAN, I'M GOING TO PROVIDE THE INFRASTRUCTURE PUT THE ROADS, THEN DO ALL OF THE IMPROVEMENTS AND A CONTINGENCY OF THE CONTRACT BEFORE HORTON WILL EXECUTE THE CONTRACT AND WE HAVE A CLOSING DATE. I HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE WALKING TRAIL, ALL THE OTHER STUFF HAS TO BE COMPLETED AS A CONDITION OF MY CONTRACT WITH THEM, INCLUDING AN ENTRANCE FEATURE AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS. SO ONCE WE GET MOVING ON IT AND PER OUR CONTRACT, I THINK I'VE GOT, I THINK THEY PUT DOWN EITHER EIGHTEEN MONTHS TO TO FOR ME TO FINISH EVERYTHING ON MY END BEFORE THEY START CONSTRUCTION.
I'D LIKE TO ASK ABOUT THIS POND.
IS THAT GOING TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF FENCING OR SOMETHING WHERE THEY CAN'T GET INTO IT? THE POND IS MORE BEHIND THE OLD LAKEWOOD RESTAURANT INSTEAD OF OFF OF MY PIECE OF LAND.
IT'S MORE LIKE A CREEK BEHIND US.
AND THAT AREA IS I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY FEET AWAY FROM WHERE WE'RE BUILDING, BUT WE PLAN ON LEAVING THAT WOODED.
THE AREA, YOU KNOW TOWARDS THAT PORTION WILL BE IT'S ALREADY HEAVILY WOODED NOW, AND THE TOPOGRAPHY IS PRETTY, PRETTY CHALLENGING AROUND THAT.
BUT THE MAIN AREA OF THE FISH IN THAT POND WHEN I WAS LIKE THIS IS ALL I HAVE OF MY GREAT GRANDFATHER, WHEN WHEN WE OWNED THAT THE OLD, YOU KNOW, THE RESTAURANT AND ALL THAT STUFF. AND BUT THE POND KIND OF ALMOST SITS DIRECTLY AROUND AND BEHIND THE HOPEWELL BODY
[00:45:05]
SHOP/ LAKEWOOD AND OUR OUR PORTION, MORE OR LESS IS LIKE A CREEK.SO I MEAN, IT'S IN THE COMMON AREA.
ABSOLUTELY. IT'S SITTING ABOUT THIRTY FIVE FEET DOWN THE HILL, SO IT'S PRETTY FAR SEPARATED. BUT WHEN WE GO THROUGH THE CONSTRUCTION PLAN, APPROVAL OR LOGICALLY BE PART OF THE EROSION CONTROL, SO WE'LL HAVE TO BE DESIGNED AND ASSESSED AND ESTABLISHED DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PLAN PROCESS.
WHAT PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY'S REQUIREMENTS WOULD BE, WHATEVER THEIR STANDARD REQUIREMENTS FOR A POND LIKE THAT WILL HAVE TO MEET THOSE NORMAL STANDARDS.
WE'RE NOT. IT'S NOT ALL ON OUR PROPERTY, BUT HOW WE TIE IN AND HOW WE UTILIZE IT.
WE'LL BE SUBJECT TO YOUR STAFF'S REVIEW.
YOU KNOW, YOUNG YOUNG CHILDREN, YOUNG KIDS AND SOME OLDER KIDS.
THAT WOULD BE A DRAWING, NO DOUBT ABOUT THEM.
YEAH, THEY'RE GOING TO FIND IT, NO MATTER WHAT WE PUT UP A FENCE OR WHATEVER ELSE I KNOW, BUT AT LEAST WE HAVE TO FOLLOW.
YES, MA'AM. OK. THE OTHER THING IS, I'VE TALKED TO THE SCHOOL BOARD THIS MORNING AND THEY, AS FAR AS WHERE CHILDREN WOULD GO, IS NOT ACTUALLY ESTABLISHED YET.
THEY HAVE LIKE A REDISTRICTING FOR THE SCHOOLS AND THAT HAS NOT BEEN DONE THIS YEAR.
SO IT'S REALLY HARD TO TELL WHAT SCHOOL ANY OF THE CHILDREN WOULD BE GOING ATTENDING AND WHAT IT WOULD DO TO THAT POPULATION IN THAT SCHOOL.
AND SOME OF THE SCHOOLS ARE ALREADY AT THEIR MAX, SO THAT KIND OF BOTHERS ME.
THE OTHER THING IS, WOULD THESE BE OPEN TO LIKE, SAY, I WANTED TO BUY TWO OR THREE OF THESE UNITS AND RENT THEM OUT? WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT? I'M NOT. THAT WOULD FALL MORE UNDER.
I BELIEVE THAT HOA AND I'D HAVE TO TALK TO D.R.
HORTON A LITTLE MORE IN DETAIL AS FAR AS WHAT THEIR PLANS ARE FOR THAT.
I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION TOTALLY, BECAUSE THAT'S UP TO THE BUILDER, REALLY.
THEY'VE INDICATED IN THE PAST IN OTHER CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF THAT IT'S INDIVIDUAL LOTS, INDIVIDUAL HOME OWNERSHIP OF EACH ONE.
THEY'RE SELLING IT TO INDIVIDUALS, NOT TO ANY CORPORATE ENTITY.
BUT THAT WOULD BE IF I WAS GOING TO BUY ONE, YOU'D STILL HAVE THE OPTION.
I WOULD STILL BE AN INDIVIDUAL.
YES, MA'AM. AND WHAT I DO WITH IT IS NOT NECESSARILY THE COUNTY'S BUSINESS, IS IT? AT STATE LAW, AND YOU KNOW.
OK. THERE WERE THE ANSWERS, QUESTIONS I WANTED TO ANSWER.
I WANTED TO ADD ONE THING WHAT WE HAVE FOUND IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS AND WE'VE COMPARED IT AND THAT WAS PART OF OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF IS THAT WHEN FAMILIES HAVE A CHOICE, FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN HAVE A CHOICE OF WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO PLACE THEIR FAMILY RIGHT.
AND GIVEN THAT THEY GENERALLY DO WANT A YARD AND AS MUCH HOUSE AS THEY CAN, SO THEY HAVE AS MANY BEDROOMS, YOU KNOW, EVERY EVERYBODY ASPIRES TO HAVE AS MUCH AS THEY CAN FOR THEIR FAMILY. GENERALLY, FAMILIES AREN'T LOCATING WITH KIDS IN TOWNHOUSE PROJECTS OR WHEN THEY DO, IT'S AT A FAR LESSER RATE THAN A NORMAL OR STANDARD SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE.
SO GIVEN THAT THE PRICE POINT IS RELATIVELY SUBSTANTIAL THERE, THE THE THE CALCULATIONS AND THE ASSESSMENT THAT BEEN IN RECENT YEARS, WE FOUND THAT THERE ARE MUCH A SMALL PROPORTION OF WHAT A SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT WOULD PROVIDE IN TERMS OF KIDS.
TOWNHOUSES GENERALLY PROVIDE FAR LESS IN TERMS OF IMPACT ON SCHOOLS, BUT OBVIOUSLY SCHOOLS CONTROL WHERE THEY'RE HOW THEY DISTRICT THEIR POPULATIONS AND THEY'LL BE ABLE TO HAVE FULL CONTROL AS TO WHERE THEY WANT THEM TO GO OR BE PROVIDED.
BUT I'M JUST THINKING LIKE IF I WANTED TO DOWNSIZE, I WOULDN'T NECESSARILY WANT A THREE BEDROOM PLACE.
YOU KNOW, WHY WOULD I NEED A THREE BEDROOM IF I DIDN'T HAVE CHILDREN OR SOMETHING? WHAT I FOUND IS WE'VE DONE EMPTY NESTING OFFICES AND CRAFT ROOMS BECOME WHAT FORMER BEDROOMS ARE. SO WE USE THE SPACES THAT WE HAVE.
I'M JUST PROVIDING A PERSONAL COMMENTARY.
THAT'S WHAT I'M DOING. YES, MA'AM.
WELL, YOU'RE A PROFESSIONAL SITTING ON THE BOARD, SO ON THE COMMISSION.
SO WE RESPECT YOUR POINT OF VIEW.
WELL, TO HELP PUT SOME OF HER QUESTIONS IN PERSPECTIVE, I MISSED YOUR ANSWER TO MR. JOYNER'S QUESTION.
WHAT IS THE VALUE EXPECTED TO BE, WHAT'S IT COST EFFECTIVE TO BE INTERESTED IN THE MARKET
[00:50:01]
THAT YOU ARE HEADED FOR? MR. LUNSFORD SAID IT WAS TWO HUNDRED AND NINETY THOUSAND IS WHAT THEY THOUGHT.TWO HUNDRED AND NINETY THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND IS WHERE THEY THOUGHT THE MARKET WOULD BE FOR THIS PRODUCT. OK, THAT PRICE THERE WILL CUT OUT A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT OF THE MARKET.
OF COURSE, ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE CITIZENS INTEREST AND THE CITIZENS DESIRE.
I FOUND IT INTERESTING WHEN I WAS READING THE MINUTES FROM THE PUBLIC CITIZEN'S HEARING THAT WAS DONE AS PART OF THE COUNTY PROJECT LAST WEEK.
THE FIRST PUBLIC NOTE I WAS READING THE RESPONSES FROM THAT, AND I FOUND IT INTERESTING THAT SEVERAL OF THE COMMENTS FROM THE CITIZENS WERE A LACK OF AVAILABLE PROPERTIES IN THE COUNTY AND IT BEING DIFFICULT TO BE ABLE TO FIND PROPERTY TO PURCHASE IN THE COUNTY, AS WELL AS HAVING MORE AFFORDABLE PROPERTIES THAT WERE UNDER FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS BEING VERY CONCERNING AND HARD TO FIND IN THE COUNTY.
SO MY FIRST REACTION WHEN I READ THOSE COMMENTS FROM THE CITIZEN REQUEST WAS THAT THERE WERE NUMEROUS COMMENTS THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD SEEM TO TO FULFILL THE REQUEST THAT CITIZENS HAVE VOICED DURING THAT PUBLIC HEARING.
AND I JUST AS FAR AS THE SCHOOLS, I THOUGHT ABOUT THAT ALSO, BUT I'VE ALSO REALIZED THAT WE'RE BUILDING THAT HUGE NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL THAT I WOULD ASSUME WOULD BE OPEN OR VERY CLOSE TO OPEN BY THE TIME THAT THIS WOULD BE OPEN ANYWAY, BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING, AS HE SAID, AT LEAST 18 MONTHS JUST FOR HIM TO DO HIS PART BEFORE IT GOES TO THE BUILDERS AND THEN THE THE WHOLE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION.
I WOULD ASSUME THE PRICE IS GOING TO VARY SINCE IT'S FOR OWNERSHIP.
THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE INPUT AS TO THE QUALITY OF THE INTERIOR AND THE OPTIONS THAT WOULD BE PUT IN IN THE HOMES, WHICH COULD MAKE IT EITHER LESSER OR GREATER, DEPENDING ON ON BUDGET DEMANDS.
AND BY THIS BEING A NEW DEVELOPMENT, THE CITIZENS AND THE POSSIBLE HOMEOWNERS WOULD HAVE AN OPTION TO TO MAKE THAT SELECTION AND CHOICE OF THEIR OWN AS AN ADVANTAGE.
SO JUST FROM WHAT I'VE REVIEWED RECENTLY FROM THOSE CITIZENS COMMENTS, I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING TO SHARE WITH THAT IN CASE THERE WERE MEMBERS HERE ON THE BOARD THAT WERE NOT PRESENT FOR THAT COMMUNITY GATHERING.
THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ON ZOOM FOR COMMENTS? FOR ALL ZOOM PARTICIPANTS, WELCOME TO THE PUBLIC HEARING SECTION OF TONIGHT'S MEETING FOR CASE REQUEST RZ 21 03.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO BE RECOGNIZED.
PRESS THE RAISE HAND BUTTON ON YOUR ZOOM SCREEN NOW.
ALL RIGHT. I DON'T SEE ANY INDICATION OF ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK.
OK IF THERE IS NO ONE ELSE, I HEREBY CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TURN IT OVER TO THE COMMISSIONERS. OUR FIRST ORDER WOULD BE TO.
IT MIGHT HAVE APPEARED BEFORE THAT, I JUST DIDN'T SEE IT.
OK, GO. ALL RIGHT, JUST A SECOND WORD. I CAN SEE MR. MITCHELL IS TRYING TO SPEAK, BUT I'M NOT HEARING HIM.
ALL RIGHT, YOU SHOULD BE UNMUTED.
CAN YOU TRY AGAIN? YEAH, I'M SORRY, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO. OK, THANK YOU.
SORRY. UNFORTUNATELY, CHAIRMAN, WE WEREN'T ABLE TO GET HIM TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK HERE.
[ADDITIONAL ITEM]
BE TO APPROVE THE WAIVER OF THE NUMBER OF DAYS FOR THE PROFFERS.[00:55:10]
YOU WANT YOU WANT A STATEMENT REFERENCING THAT.MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS, I DO THINK THAT THE THE DELAY IN THE INFORMATION THAT WAS MENTIONED BY THE PRESENTER, IT WAS NOT OUR FAULT, IT WAS WAS NOT THE I'M SORRY, IT WAS NOT THE APPLICANT'S FAULT.
IN THAT RESPECT, I THINK WE NEED TO WAIVE OUR ALL OF THAT.
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. BROWN, SECONDED BY MS. ELDER, CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.
MR. BROWN. YES, MR. BROCKWELL. YES.
YES, MRS. ANDERSON. MR. BRESKO. YES.
ALRIGHT AT THIS TIME I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE COMMISSIONERS TO AND ENTERTAIN THE MOTION TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THIS REQUEST.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THIS, THE REQUEST, SECOND.
MR. CHAIRMAN, IT ACTUALLY WOULD BE A MOTION TO FORWARD THE ITEM TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WITH THE RECOMMENDATION.
MOTION BY MR. BROWN, SECONDED BY MR. BROCKWELL, CALL THE ROLL.
MRS. ANDERSON. YES, MR. SIMMONS. YES, MR. BROCKWELL. YES, MR. BRESKO. YES, MR. JOYNER. YES.
MRS. ELDER. NO, MR. BROWN. YES.
ALL RIGHT, THIS WILL BE FORWARDED TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR THEIR PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL.
NEXT IS COMMUNICATION FROM MR.
[COMMUNICATIONS]
GRAVES.ALL RIGHT, GOOD EVENING, COMMUNICATIONS.
FOR ACTIONS OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, THEY EARLIER THIS WEEK APPROVED VARIANCE FOR A REDUCED SETBACK IN THE REAR YARD ON A PROPERTY THAT'S LOCATED NEXT TO PETERSBURG COUNTRY CLUB. AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, OF COURSE, PRIOR TO PRIOR TO THIS MOST RECENT HEARING ON TUESDAY THIS WEEK APPROVED THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CREATE THE TOWNHOUSE ZONING DISTRICT, SO THEY WOULD BE SCHEDULED FOR NEXT MONTH TO HEAR THE THE REQUEST THAT YOU JUST FORWARDED TO THEM.
ALL RIGHT, I'LL ALSO MENTION THE UPCOMING CASES FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL BE.
WELL CURRENTLY, THERE'S THREE OR FOUR SCHEDULED FOR NEXT MONTH.
WE'RE GOING TO DO AGENDA MANAGEMENT, SO IT MAY NOT BE FOUR.
SO AT THE VERY LEAST OF THE CURRENT CASES THAT ARE ARE ON THE TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED.
THERE IS AN INDUSTRIAL REZONING AMENDMENT, ESSENTIALLY TO SIMPLIFY THE ZONING CONDITIONS ON A PARCEL THAT WAS CONSOLIDATED FROM MULTIPLE PARCELS.
ALL RIGHT, AND THERE'S A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR A SPECIAL CARE HOSPITAL.
AND A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR AN ASSEMBLY HALL.
THOSE ARE THE UPCOMING REQUESTS.
THERE'S ALSO THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT FOR BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE, WHICH WE'VE TALKED ABOUT FOR SOME TIME NOW THAT IS ON ITS WAY AS WELL.
SO THOSE ARE THE UPCOMING CASES.
THERE'S ALSO FOR PLANNING COMMISSION TRAINING.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH A TRAINING PROVIDER FOR THE COMMISSION TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY AND STAFF AS WELL TO HAVE SOME TRAINING WITH THE PROVIDER NEXT MONTH.
TENTATIVELY, MS. WALTON ASKED ME TO CHECK WITH YOU IF THERE WERE ANY PREFERENCES.
[01:00:03]
THIS WOULD BE A HALF DAY TYPE TRAINING, SO AN AFTERNOON OR A MORNING OR AN EVENING.SO WE WANTED TO SEE IF IF YOU HAD ANY PREFERENCE ON MORNING, EVENING, AFTERNOON? AND WHERE WOULD IT BE.
WE WILL HAVE IT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY WITH LUNCH SERVED.
I'M HEARING A PREFERRED AFTERNOON, THAT WON'T HAPPEN.
ELDER, I'LL BRING YOU SOME SNACKS.
IT'S WORTH A TRY. IT WAS WORTH THE TRY.
MISSY MIGHT DONATE. I'LL DONATE SOME SNACKS.
BUT OK, ANY ANY OTHER PREFERENCES OR DOES AFTERNOON SOUND LIKE THE GENERAL REQUEST.
ALL RIGHT, WELL, WE'LL FOLLOW UP WITH AN EMAIL WITH SOME, SOME TIME, SOME DAY AND TIME OPTIONS THERE. ALSO, THERE'S A SURVEY.
JULIE JULIE MS. WALTON, SENT A SURVEY, I THINK THAT WAS PERTAINED TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN THAT'S ONGOING.
SHE ASKED FOR YOU TO COMPLETE THEM OR IF YOU HAVE NOT RECEIVED THAT, DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. PLEASE LET ME KNOW RIGHT NOW AND I'LL OK I'M SEEING ONE, OR FOLLOW UP WITH STAFF LATER. WE'LL GET YOU.
MAKE SURE YOU HAVE THAT SURVEY TO COMPLETE, BUT IT'S I BELIEVE IT'S PERTAINING TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE COUNTY, SO I'D REALLY LOVE TO HAVE YOUR INPUT ON THAT SURVEY.
ALL RIGHT. THOSE ARE THOSE ARE THE COMMUNICATIONS THAT I HAD.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE GO? QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? I'D LIKE TO COMMEND YOU [INAUDIBLE] FOR THE NICE WORK THEY DID ON MR. HORTON THERE [INAUDIBLE].
THANK YOU. IF THERE IS NO OTHER QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. I MAKE A MOTION WE ADJOURN, SECOND.
MOTION BY MS. ELDER, SECOND BY MR. SIMMONS, CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.
MR. BROWN. YES, MR. BROCKWELL, YES.
MRS. MRS. ANDERSON. MR. BRESKO. YES.
THANK YOU. MEETING ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.