Loading...
PC Minutes 11 09 2017 PITTSYLVANIA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING Thursday, November 9, 2017 MINUTES VIRGINIA: The Pittsylvania County Planning Commission met on Thursday, November 9, 2017, in the General District Courtroom, Chatham, Virginia. Mr. Stowe, Chairman, called the meeting to order at approximately 7:00 p.m. Mr. Stowe called the roll. PRESENT Morris Stowe Tunstall District Richard Motley Chatham-Blairs District Janet Mease Callands-Gretna District Dr. Charles H. Miller, Jr. Banister District Curtis Arthur Staunton River District H. F. Haymore, Jr. Westover District Brian Horne Dan River District Joe Davis Board of Supervisors Representative Karen N. Hayes Code Compliance Officer/Interim Zoning Administrator Greg Sides Assistant County Administrator/Director of Planning HEARING OF THE CITIZENS Deborah Lovelace and Karen Maute came forward to speak regarding their opposition to the Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC. Their concerns included, but were not limited to, the following: the proper permits have not been obtained; the corporation does not comply with the zoning ordinances; and special use permits have not been obtained for easements in Pittsylvania County. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA A motion was made by Mr. Motley, seconded by Ms. Mease, and by a unanimous vote, the agenda was approved as presented. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES A motion was made by Mr. Motley, seconded by Mr. Horne, and by a unanimous vote, the October 3, 2017, minutes were approved as presented. CHAIRMAN’S REPORT Mr. Stowe read a card from Mr. Odie H. Shelton, Jr., thanking the Planning Commission members for the meal and gift card presented to him following his retirement. THE ZONING PRECEPTS WERE READ by Mr. Stowe TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING at approximately 7:09 p.m. Planning Commission November 9, 2017 Page 2 Case 1, TRC Acquisitions & Holdings, LLC, R-17-039 – Mr. Stowe opened the public hearing at 7:09 p.m. Mrs. Hayes, Code Compliance Officer/Interim Zoning Administrator, reported that TRC Acquisitions, LLC, had petitioned to rezone 2.01 acres, located on State Road 844/Mount Cross Road, in the Westover Election District from RC-1, Residential Combined Subdivision District to B-2, Business District, General. Mrs. Hayes also stated once the property is rezoned to B-2, all uses listed under Section 35-365 are a permitted use. Simon Rutrough with Twin Rivers Capital, LLC, was present to represent the petition. He stated this would be for a Dollar General Store, a neighborhood store, and if the property was rezoned for this use, all permits would be obtained. Terry Trull, Robin Dale Barrett, Jackie Mize and Thomas Mize spoke in opposition to the petition. Their concerns included, but were not limited to, the following: high traffic area (located near three (3) schools); blind hill, traffic accidents, safety concerns, etc. Mr. Trull presented a collection of photographs taken of the site showing the traffic congestion in the area to the Board members. Ms. Mize presented a letter of opposition and a petition with 319 signatures of individuals opposed to the petition to the Board members. Richard Holbrook spoke in favor of the rezoning and stated he owns the petitioned parcel of land and this is a prime location for a Family Dollar store. Mr. Rutrough offered a rebuttal and stated Family Dollar stores have two (2) or three (3) trucks making deliveries per week and these deliveries are made off hours. Mr. Stowe closed the public hearing at 7:24 p.m. During the discussion, it was stated the speed limit in the area is 25 miles per hour; however, motorists speed on this highway. One of the Board members requested a show of hands of those opposed to the rezoning and there were many individuals present opposed to the petition. A motion was made by Mr. Haymore, seconded by Mr. Dudley, to recommend the Board of Supervisors deny the rezoning request. Motion passed unanimously. Case 2, William H. Rogers, Jr., Et Als, William T. Rogers, Sr., Et Als, & Wesley Lee Francis, Et Als, R-17-040 – Mr. Stowe opened the public hearing at 7:30 p.m. Mrs. Hayes, Code Compliance Officer/Interim Zoning Administrator, reported that William H. Rogers, Jr., and Others had petitioned to rezone 1.20 acres, located on U.S. Highway 29 North, in the Banister Election District from R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District to B-2, Business District, General for future commercial development. Mrs. Hayes also stated once the property is rezoned to B-2, all uses listed under Section 35-365 are a permitted use. Mr. William Rogers was present to represent the petition. He stated this site is surrounded by business, has county water, and county sewer is nearby. There was no opposition to the petition. One of the Board members questioned Mr. Rogers as to the future plans for the site, and Mr. Rogers stated the property is used for a business now and it may become a fast food restaurant or another type of public business; however, no decision had yet been made. Mr. Stowe closed the public hearing at 7:33 p.m. A motion was made by Dr. Miller, seconded by Mr. Haymore, to recommend the Board of Supervisors grant the rezoning request. Motion passed unanimously. Case 3, William H. Rogers, Jr., & Judith R. Rogers, R-17-041 – Mr. Stowe opened the public hearing at 7:34 p.m. Mrs. Hayes, Code Compliance Officer/Interim Zoning Administrator, reported that William H. Rogers, Jr., and Judith Rogers, had petitioned to rezone a total of 88.41 acres, three (3) parcels of land, located off U.S. Highway 29 North in the Banister Election District from A-1, Agricultural District and RC-1, Residential Combined Subdivision District to M-2, Industrial District, Heavy Industry for future industrial development. Mrs. Hayes also stated once the properties are rezoned to M-2, all uses listed under Section 35-402 are a permitted use. Mr. William Rogers was present to represent the petition. Mr. Rogers stated he has a prospective client for the site, there are ponds on the site, there are no creeks crossing the properties, the properties are level, there are two (2) entrances to the parcels, and water/sewer is available. He also stated the parcel in front of the petitioned parcels is zoned B-2, Business District, General. Deborah Dix spoke in opposition to the petition. Her concerns included, but were not limited to, the following: safety issues to the neighborhood and speeding on U.S. Highway 29. Mr. Rogers offered a rebuttal and stated he lives beside the petitioned properties and there are parcels located across the highway zoned M-2. Mr. Stowe closed the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. A motion was Planning Commission November 9, 2017 Page 3 made by Dr. Miller, seconded by Mr. Dudley, to recommend the Board of Supervisors grant the rezoning request. Motion passed unanimously. Case 4, Nelson Brack Hines & Deborah R. Hines, R-17-042 – Mr. Stowe opened the public hearing at 7:41 p.m. Mrs. Hayes, Code Compliance Officer/Interim Zoning Administrator, reported that Nelson and Deborah Hines had petitioned to rezone 1.84 acres, located off State Road 950/Tarpley Place, in the Tunstall Election District from R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District to A-1, Agricultural District. Mrs. Hayes also stated once the property is rezoned to A-1, all uses listed under Section 35-178 are a permitted use. Nelson Hines was present to represent the petition. He stated he had nothing to add. There was no opposition to the petition. Mr. Stowe closed the public hearing at 7:43 p.m. During the discussion, it was stated this is consistent with the surrounding properties zoned A-1. A motion was made by Mr. Motley, seconded by Mr. Horne, to recommend the Board of Supervisors grant the rezoning request. Motion passed unanimously. Case 5, Casey A. Wolfe & Kimberly Cox Wolfe, R-17-043 – Mr. Stowe opened the public hearing at 7:44 p.m. Mrs. Hayes, Code Compliance Officer/Interim Zoning Administrator, reported that Casey and Kimberly Cox Wolfe had petitioned to rezone 5.54 acres, located off State Road 757/Orange Road (on Reservoir View Drive), in the Staunton River Election District from R-1, Residential Suburban Subdivision District to A-1, Agricultural District to allow for construction of an accessory building to be used for storage and land maintenance. Mrs. Hayes also stated once the property is rezoned to A-1, all uses listed under Section 35-178 are a permitted use. Casey Wolfe was present to represent the petition. He stated he purchased the property for a future retirement home on the lake. He then stated he and his wife plan to build a house on the property in the future; however, he just wants a storage building now to take care of the property. There was no opposition to the petition. Mr. Stowe closed the public hearing at 7:42 p.m. A motion was made by Mr. Dudley, seconded by Mr. Davis, to recommend the Board of Supervisors grant the rezoning request. Motion passed unanimously. Case 6, Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, R-17-031 – Mr. Stowe opened the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. Mrs. Hayes, Code Compliance Officer/Interim Zoning Administrator, reported that Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, had petitioned to rezone a total of 80.44 acres, two (2) parcels of land, located on State Road 692/Transco Road, in the Banister Election District from A-1, Agricultural District to M-2, Industrial District, Heavy Industry for a gas transmission facility and related buildings. Mrs. Hayes also stated once the property is rezoned to M-2, all uses listed under Section 35-402 are a permitted use. Robert Pichardo, Senior Staff Attorney with EQT Corporation, was present to represent the petition. He gave a brief overview of Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, and then stated FERC has primary jurisdiction, the site will be in full service in the fourth quarter of 2018, and there will be five (5) buildings to protect the equipment. He then submitted a PowerPoint Presentation to the Board members. Deborah Dix, Mark Joyner, Deborah Lovelace, Ann Rogers, Bonnie Law, Glen Pulley, Karen Maute, Irene Leech, Michael James-Deramo and Sonja Ingram spoke in opposition to the petition. Their concerns included, but were not limited to, the following: health issues near compression stations; archaeological studies have not been completed by MVP; no special use permits for easements; M-2 zoning does not follow the comprehensive plan; no proffers or stipulations attached to the rezoning case; safety issues are a lower priority for rural areas; has approval by FERC but no DEQ permits issued; public access to and protection of cemeteries, etc. Mr. Pichardo offered a rebuttal and stated this site is not a compressor station – compressor stations are located in West Virginia. This site is an interconnecting site. He then stated the concerns regarding air quality are null and emission levels are low. He also stated the road will be repaired and Mountain Valley Pipeline is aware of the cemetery on the property and it will be fenced in. Following questions from several Board members, Mr. Pichardo stated water or sewer lines would be 3-4 feet below the gas pipe line. He then explained how the site meets safety controls and is monitored 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and in the incidence of a terrorist attack, the flow would stop and the station would be isolated immediately. He then stated the road would be inspected following repair; however, he could not provide an answer as to whether a VDOT inspector Planning Commission November 9, 2017 Page 4 would be present during the repair of the road. Mr. Stowe closed the public hearing at 8:54 p.m. A motion was made by Dr. Miller, seconded by Mr. Horne, to recommend the Board of Supervisors deny the rezoning request. Motion was tied by a 4 to 4 vote, no further motion was given, and no action was taken on the case. Those voting in favor of the motion were as follows: Dr. Miller, Mr. Horne, Mr. Dudley and Mr. Davis. Those voting against the motion were as follows: Mr. Haymore, Ms. Mease, Mr. Motley and Mr. Stowe. Mr. Vaden Hunt, County Attorney, informed the Board members they have sixty (60) days to make a final decision on the case. This concludes the Rezoning cases. Case S-1, Wanda Felita Lanier and David Lee Lanier, S-17-016 – Mr. Stowe opened the public hearing at 9:02 p.m. Mrs. Hayes, Code Compliance Officer/Interim Zoning Administrator, reported that David and Wanda Lanier had petitioned for a Special Use Permit on 0.87 acre, located on Route 41/Franklin Turnpike, in the Chatham-Blairs Election District for a beauty shop. Wanda and David Lanier were present to represent the petition. They stated the beauty shop would be located in a 20’ x 20’ (400 square feet) building. Following questioning from a Board member, they stated the shop would be located on the parcel adjacent to their home and would be used for a beauty shop only. There was no opposition to the petition. Mr. Stowe closed the public hearing at approximately 9:04 p.m. During the discussion, it was stated this is a nice community, there is another entrance to the site, and Mrs. Lanier currently works in the area and she wanted to have her own beauty shop on her own property, thereby eliminating payment of rent to someone else. A motion was made by Mr. Motley, seconded by Mr. Haymore, to recommend the Board of Zoning Appeals grant the Special Use Permit request. Motion passed unanimously. Case S-2, James L. Gibson & Areta H. Gibson, S-17-015 – Mr. Stowe opened the public hearing at 9:05 p.m. Mrs. Hayes, Code Compliance Officer/Interim Zoning Administrator, reported that Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, as agent for James L. Gibson and Areta H. Gibson had petitioned for a Special Use Permit on 69.87 acres, located on U.S. Highway 40/W Gretna Road and on State Road 781/Rockcreek Road, in the Callands-Gretna Election District for temporary uses – construction activity, including associated buildings for Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC. Robert Pichardo, Senior Staff Attorney with EQT Corporation, was present to represent the petition. He gave a brief overview of Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, and then stated the site would utilize fourteen (14) acres and there is high visual clearance at the site. He then submitted a PowerPoint Presentation to the Board members. Deborah Dix, Ann Rogers, Bonnie Law, Glen Pulley, Karen Maute, Irene Leech, and Sonja Ingram spoke in opposition to the petition. Their concerns included, but were not limited to, the following: noise level and heavy equipment on the road; FERC is not a total deciding factor; no Forestry, Bureau of Land Management, Army Corps of Engineers, or Virginia Environmental Quality permits have been obtained; no Environmental Bond was obtained; on October 2, 2017, withdrawal of the case was improper (Sec. 35-815); unanswered questions; environmental risks, etc. Mr. Pichardo offered a rebuttal and stated Mountain Valley Pipeline must get Federal permits and there are still many processes to go through before proceeding. He also stated the Board of Zoning Appeals can place conditions on the Special Use Permit. Following questioning from the Board members, he stated the length of the pipe is 40 foot joints and there would be no pipe storage yard on the property. Other issues and concerns raised by the Board members included the following: autoCAD radius, removal of the property from Land Use; well located on the property; safety with school buses; possible widening of State Road 781/Rockcreek Road; road width; access off U.S. Highway 40, etc. Mr. Stowe closed the public hearing at 9:53 p.m. A motion was made by Mr. Motley, seconded by Mr. Haymore, to grant the Special Use Permit request. Mr. Motley’s motion to grant the Special Use Permit for a period of two (2) years was based on the following: (1) An AutoCAD Development Program be presented to the Board of Zoning Appeals showing the radius the trucks can handle without any encroachment; (2) The land use on the 14 Planning Commission November 9, 2017 Page 5 acres be processed to the Commissioner of Revenue and the land be removed at the time of the issuance of the Special Use Permit; (3) If a temporary construction entrance cannot be on U.S. Highway 40, a flagman must be present 24 hours a day on State Road 781. Motion failed by a 4 to 3 vote with one member (Mrs. Mease) abstaining, no further motion was given, and no action was taken on the case. Those voting to grant the motion were as follows: Mr. Motley, Mr. Stowe and Mr. Haymore. Those voting against the motion were as follows: Dr. Miller, Mr. Horne, Mr. Dudley and Mr. Davis. Mr. Vaden Hunt, County Attorney, informed the Board members they have sixty (60) days to make a final decision on the case. This concludes the Special Use Cases. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Motley welcomed Mr. Timothy Dudley, representing the Staunton River District, to the Planning Commission Board. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:05 p.m. _____________________________ Morris Stowe, Chairman _____________________________ Kathy H. Belton, Clerk