draft - Bedford County
Transcription
draft - Bedford County
BEDFORD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION County Administration Building Boardroom 122 E. Main Street, Bedford, VA September 17, 2013 7:00 p.m. – Regular meeting 1. Call to Order and Determination of Quorum 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes – August 2, 2013 and August 20, 2013 4. Citizen Comment Period 5. Public Hearing a) Special Use SU140001 Maddox & Son Construction, Inc. Car Wash 6. Old Business a) Comprehensive Plan discussion – Revisions to Preliminary drafts 1) Chapter 7 – Utilities 2) Chapter 15 – Bedford City/Town Reversion 7. New Business a) Discussion – rescheduling of Planning Commission October 15, 2013 meeting date 8. Adjourn Planning Commission Minutes August 6, 2013 August 20, 2013 DRAFT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 MINUTES For Bedford County Planning Commission August 6, 2013 The Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, August 6, 2013 in the Bedford County Administration Building Boardroom. Commissioners Burdett, Fralick, Huff, Noell, and Wilkerson were present. Commissioner Craig arrived after the votes on the agenda and minutes. Commissioner Scott was absent. County staff present was Mr. Tim Wilson, Director of Community Development, Mrs. Mary Zirkle, Chief of Planning, Mr. Mark Jordan, Mr. Jordan Mitchell, Planners and Mrs. Patricia Robinson, Planning/Zoning Technician. Mr. Wilkerson called the Planning Commission to order and determined there was a quorum for conducting business. Mr. Wilkerson asked if there were any changes to the agenda. There being none, Mr. Fralick made a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Mr. Burdett seconded the motion. The motion carried with a vote of 5-0. Mr. Wilkerson asked if there were any changes to the minutes of July 2, 2013. Mr. Fralick requested the word “made” to “may” on page 2 line 83. Mr. Burdett made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Mr. Noell seconded the motion. Voting yes: Mr. Burdett, Mr. Fralick, Mr. Huff, Mr. Noell, and Mr. Wilkerson Voting no: None Motion passed 5-0 Mr. Wilkerson asked if there were any changes to the minutes of July 16, 2013. Mr. Burdett made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Mr. Fralick seconded the motion. Voting yes: Mr. Burdett, Mr. Fralick, Mr. Huff, Mr. Noell, and Mr. Wilkerson Voting no: None Motion passed 5-0 Mr. Wilkerson asked if there were any citizens to speak during the Citizen’s Comment Period. There being no speakers, the Citizen’s Comment Period was closed. Mr. Wilkerson continued to Item 4a – Old Business. Item 4a regarded Chapter VI (Transportation) of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Mitchell noted representatives of Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) would speak to the requirements VDOT would be looking for in the update of the Comprehensive Plan, their role in the review of Planning Commission Minutes 1 08/06/13 DRAFT 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 the updated plan and regional transportation issues. He stated the VDOT representatives present were Mr. Michael Gray, Salem District Planning Manager and Mr. Brian Casella, Bedford Residency Area Land Use Engineer. Mr. Bob White, Deputy Director of Region 2000 was also present and spoke to the Regional Long Range Transportation Plan. Mr. Gray addressed the regulatory requirements VDOT has in relation to a jurisdiction’s creation of or update to an existing Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Gray highlighted Chapter 527 - Traffic Impact Analysis Implementation and Chapter 729 – Transportation Plan and Program Coordination. He noted VDOT has access management guidelines which are fairly new and encouraged the county to either include these in the update or make reference to them in the plan. Mr. Gray stated VDOT representatives would work with the county staff to make sure they are aware of the applicable guidelines during the Comprehensive Plan update process. Mr. White provided an overview of the role of Region 2000 regarding transportation. He noted Region 2000 is responsible for the regional transportation planning within the Region 2000 area. A primary responsibility of the MPO is updating and maintaining the Central Virginia Long Range Transportation Plan. He noted the plan was last updated in October 2010. The current update of the plan began in January of this year. Mr. White encouraged the Planning Commission to participate in the update of the plan. Mr. White noted in addition to the working with the MPO, Region 2000 also is responsible for the Rural Long Range Planning process. The Rural Long Range Planning process is supported financially by VDOT. Mr. White noted the various transportation plans and corridor studies are designed to support comprehensive planning efforts. He encouraged the county to use these documents in the update of the transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. White offered Region 2000 assistance to the county in the update of the transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan. Questions/comments from the Commissioners to Mr. White and Mr. Gray covered the following: (a) has the regional greenway/bikeway plan been presented to the Board of Supervisors, (b) does the regional greenway plan tie into the Roanoke’s greenways, (c) how will the waterline from Smith Mountain Lake along Rt. 122 affect the Rt. 122 Transportation Plan and (d) what is the status of the TransDominion Express passenger rail system. Mr. Brian Casella, VDOT’s Bedford Residency Area Land Use Engineer noted he works with the Planning staff in the review of land development plans. Additionally Mr. Casella stated he works with Bedford County Administration staff and the Board of Supervisors in the development of the secondary six year plan. Mr. Casella offered assistance as needed to the county staff as the Comprehensive Plan update process proceeds. Mr. Gray stated VDOT technically has a 90 day timeframe for their review; however the review could be accomplished in a shorter timeframe. Mr. Jordan stated staff with work with VDOT and Region 2000 and prepare a preliminary draft of the Transportation chapter to present to the Commission for review in a November meeting. Planning Commission Minutes 2 08/06/13 DRAFT 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 Mr. Jordan proceeded with a brief discussion regarding the Comprehensive Plan Citizens Advisory Committee. The discussion addressed the nomination of names for committee members and content of the memorandum of instruction to be sent to committee members. Mr. Jordan noted staff may develop a questionnaire to guide the committee members as they review the various chapters. Mr. Jordan moved to item 4a – Review of preliminary draft updates for chapters 3, 4, 5 & 14. Chapter 3 deals with Community Character, Design and Aesthetics, Chapter 4 – Housing, Chapter 5 - Natural Environment and Chapter 14 – Urban Development Areas UDAs. Mr. Jordan reviewed the changes made based on the initial review of each of these chapters with the Commissioners. Discussion continued with Mr. Jordan addressing comments/questions from the Commissioners and his noting additional changes requested by them. Mr. Jordan noted the changes would be incorporated in each chapter prior to the preliminary draft text being forwarded to Citizens Advisory Committee for review and comment. Mr. Jordan stated the next preliminary draft chapters for review will be presented to the Commission on September 3, 2013. The chapters will be Chapter 7 – Utilities and Chapter 15 – Bedford City/Town Reversion. Mr. Wilkerson moved to item 4c continued discussion of the Zoning Ordinance text amendment for Commercial Outdoor Entertainment and requested discussion among the Commissioners. Questions/comments from the Commissioners covered the following: (a) concern possible expansion of the drag strip could result in the buffer of trees between adjoining properties being removed, (b) would like to see the existing buffer line of trees remain (c) need for a design standard(s) regarding trees such as buffer yard D or equivalent on the sides and rear, (d) setbacks in AP district can be as close as 10’ to property line, (e) don’t apply too many restrictions that result in a deal buster (f) set design standards to apply only to the use for a drag strip racing facility where there is an existing commercial and existing commercial outdoor entertainment, (g) considering the buffer only be required on sides due to planes coming in from the rear and (h) how does the noise ordinance affect the current use - is there a conflict. Regarding a motion, Mr. Wilkerson stated he is hearing the Commission continues to agree to their two previously discussed use and design modifications to the proposed text amendment being (1) adding the language they requested that would further limit what could be applied for to drag strip racing facility use only, and (2) to add a mandatory “Buffer Yard D” to be located on side and rear yard areas. Mr. Burdett made a motion to recommend approval of the proposed use amendment with the following modifications: (1) further limit the Commercial Outdoor Entertainment use in the AP district to include drag strip racing facility only and (2) require a Buffer Yard D or equivalent along the side and rear property lines. Mr. Fralick seconded the motion. Voting yes: Mr. Burdett, Mr. Craig, Mr. Fralick, Mr. Huff, Mr. Noell and Mr. Wilkerson Planning Commission Minutes 3 08/06/13 DRAFT 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 Voting no: None Motion passed 6-0 Mr. Wilkerson moved to item 5 New Business – reconsideration of July 2, 2013 Commission initiated zoning text amendment to allow private streets in cluster development subdivisions and asked staff to address the issue. Mr. Wilson stated at the last Board of Supervisors meeting Chairman Arrington added to their agenda for discussion the topic of private streets. Mr. Wilson advised the Board that the Planning Commission had just initiated a text amendment to allow private streets in cluster development subdivisions with specific design standards (in short the VDOT standards minus the surface treatment) in the AP and AR zoning districts. The discussion between the Board Chairman and other Board members appeared to be that the Board was contemplating consideration of allowing private streets in a broader context than just in the cluster developments, possibly including other situations such as planned development districts. Mr. Wilson told the Board he would advise the Planning Commission of their thoughts on the issue. The Commission can move forward with their initiated text amendment, or could withdraw its proposal until such time there could be discussion with the Board to see if a single proposed text amendment encompassing the considerations of both the Commission and the Board could be formulated and advanced. A brief discussion was held regarding to the existing avenue in which a developer can request approval of private streets in a planned district. Mr. Wilkerson asked the pleasure of the Commission regarding the text amendment previously initiated regarding private streets in cluster subdivisions. Mr. Wilson noted if the Commission chose to postpone the text amendment public hearing he could meet with the County Administrator and have further discussions with the Board. Mr. Fralick recommended postponing the text amendment allowing time for both bodies to review the Planned Districts. The consensus of the Commission was to postpone the text amendment. Mr. Wilson will convey the Commission’s decision to the County Administrator. There being no additional business Mr. Fralick made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Burdett seconded the motion. The motion carried with a vote of 6-0. The meeting adjourned at 9:15 pm. Respectfully submitted, _______________________________ Timothy L. Wilson, Secretary Approved by: ________________________________ Steve Wilkerson, Chairman Planning Commission Minutes 4 08/06/13 DRAFT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 MINUTES For Bedford County Planning Commission August 20, 2013 The Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 in the Bedford County Administration Building Boardroom. Commissioners Burdett, Craig, Fralick, Huff, Noell, Scott and Wilkerson were present. County staff present were Mr. Timothy L. Wilson, Director of Community Development, Mrs. Mary Zirkle, Chief of Planning, Mr. Mark Jordan and Mr. Jordan Mitchell, Planners, and County Attorney Carl Boggess. Chairman Wilkerson called the Planning Commission to order and determined there was a quorum for conducting business. Mr. Wilkerson asked if there were any changes to the agenda. Mr. Tim Wilson requested to add item 6B under New Business for distribution of a zoning ordinance text amendment initiated by the Board of Supervisors. No additional changes were requested. Mr. Fralick made a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Mr. Craig seconded the motion. The motion carried with a vote of 7-0. Mr. Wilkerson asked if there were any citizens to speak during the Citizen’s Comment Period. There being no speakers, the Citizen’s Comment Period was closed. Mr. Wilkerson continued to Item 4a – Public Hearing. Planner Mark Jordan provided the staff presentation for rezoning application RZ140001, Maddox & Son Construction, Inc. The request was to reclassify the zoning designation of two parcels from Office District (C-1) to General Commercial (C-2). Parcels 117-A-121 and 117-A-123 are located in the Forest area along Route 122 at the intersection with Grant Road. Mr. Jordan provided the staff presentation on the request and noted there were no voluntary proffers submitted by the applicant for consideration. Mr. Wilkerson asked if there were any questions from the Planning Commission for staff. There were none. Mr. Wilkerson called on the developer or his agent to present the request and answer questions. Mr. Trent Warner, Warner-White Engineering, agent for the developer, provided information related to environmental issues on the site, including the concerns expressed by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) as part of the Technical Review Committee (TRC) process. The DEQ concerns were about the stream length that would be affected by the site development and delineation of forested wetlands. He described the stormwater management on the site for water quality. He described the buffer at the outdoor storage. Mr. Andy Maddox, applicant, then described the project as meeting a need in the community for temporary storage, including residents of The Gables at Jefferson Commons. Mr. Maddox also spoke to the combination of a car wash with the proposed mini-warehouse use. Chairman Wilkerson asked if there were questions from the Commissioners when the applicant concluded. Mr. Fralick asked what the architecture of the storage units would be as they would be visible from Route 221. Mr. Maddox responded that the units would most likely be brick or metal siding but would still be modular in construction. The larger building may be reduced in size with a change to a 2-story design. There may be a Colonial appearance at the office but not Planning Commission Minutes 1 08/20/13 DRAFT 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 a massive metal structure. The units will be a 50/50 mix of climate control and unconditioned spaces. Mr. Burdett said he would have questions related to the special use permit for the car wash when the application is presented in the future. County Attorney Boggess asked about VDOT Access Management requirements regarding what is VDOT requiring and would the applicant be considering a proffer for that. Mr. Warner described the process for Access Management at the site that the developer would ask a neighbor for shared access, and if refused, would then request an Access Management Exception for entrance spacing from VDOT due to topography. He noted there will not be a related proffer because the entrance is part of the site plan process through the County. Mr. Maddox noted the special use permit for the car wash is scheduled for public hearing with the Planning Commission on September 17, 2013. He will be absent from that meeting and asked if Commissioners had any questions that he could address at this time. There were no questions from Commissioners. Chairman Wilkerson opened the public hearing. There were no speakers. Mr. Wilkerson closed the public hearing and asked for Planning Commission action. Mr. Fralick noted he attended the Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) that was held for the request. He referred to the amount of detail and environmental consideration and indicated it was a good project. He also noted one citizen at the NIM expressed concern for run-off related to the past widening project of Route 221 and that Mr. Maddox had provided assurance that would not be a problem now. Mr. Burdett noted that other adjoining properties would have visibility into the site at Grant Road and other concerns he had with zoning compliance related to the submitted rezoning concept plan, but these issues should be handled at the site plan review stage. He was in favor of the rezoning because of the mixed uses in the area with nearby C-2 zoning and was confident that Mr. Maddox would work with neighbors. Mr. Fralick made a motion to recommend approval of RZ140001 to the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Craig seconded the motion. Voting yes: Mr. Burdett, Mr. Craig, Mr. Fralick, Mr. Huff, Mr. Noell, Mr. Scott, and Mr. Wilkerson Voting no: None Motion passed 7-0 Mr. Wilkerson moved to item 5. Old Business. There were no items of old business raised for discussion. Mr. Wilkerson moved to item 6. New Business. Item 6a was for appointment of a comprehensive plan citizen advisory committee as proposed by the Commission to review the Planning Commission Minutes 2 08/20/13 DRAFT 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 draft chapters of the Comprehensive Plan in order to provide feedback to the Commission. Mr. Jordan Mitchell distributed a list of committee members recommended by each Commissioner to be appointed. The presented list of proposed appointments by election district was as follows: Election District/ PC Representative Appointees District 1 (Lewis Huff) Gary L. Pritt Mark D. Gwin District 2 (Jeff Burdett) Gerald Waters David Lowry District 3 (Steve Wilkerson) Harold Brown Jeff Graff District 4 (Fredric R. Fralick) Robert Bashore Josiah Tillet District 5 (Tommy Scott) Mike Thomas Colt Johnson District 6 (Derrick Noell) Brenda Mosby Barbara Field District 7 (Jerry Craig) Pete Fellers John Briscoe Mr. Wilson noted that the actual establishment of the committee and appointment of committee members could be done under a single action of the Commission. Mr. Huff made a motion to establish the Citizen Advisory Committee composed of the citizens on the compiled list. Mr. Burdett seconded the motion. Voting yes: Mr. Burdett, Mr. Craig, Mr. Fralick, Mr. Huff, Mr. Noell, Mr. Scott, and Mr. Wilkerson Voting no: None Motion passed 7-0 The Commission then reviewed the draft letter in the meeting packet prepared by staff that would be sent to the Citizen Advisory Committee to outline the Plan review process and organizational meeting date. Mr. Burdett provided typographical corrections to the letter. Mr. Mitchell noted the letter should go out to the Committee on August 21, 2013 and that it would be helpful for the Planning Commission chairman and vice-chair to be present at the initial meeting of the committee on September 3, 2013 at 6:00pm. Mr. Wilkerson moved to item 6b. New Business and referred to Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson stated the Board of Supervisors initiated a zoning ordinance text amendment for Article I and turned the proceedings over to Mr. Boggess. Mr. Boggess noted the public hearing schedule as follows – September 17, 2013 before the Commission and October 28, 2013 before the Board. He handed out the initiating resolution passed by the Board and the text of Article I as recommended for change. He also gave members a copy of the memorandum he prepared for the Board explaining the changes. The changes generally fit into three categories – 1) to address changes made in Virginia Code over time 2) to reflect staff procedures 3) to provide easier processes for applicants. Mr. Boggess then proceeded in order through the proposed changes for Article I. Planning Commission Minutes 3 08/20/13 DRAFT 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 Mr. Wilkerson asked if the change proposed to the section allowing citizens to request zoning ordinance changes is a refinement to the recently done change. Mr. Boggess confirmed that and noted the proposal is to have citizens present requests to the Board two times a year (page I-9). Mr. Boggess explained the recommendation is to remove the Neighborhood Information Meeting process carried over from the Land Use Guidance System. He noted the Commission may want to debate whether the meeting should be a requirement or a voluntary act (page I-10). Mr. Boggess noted a proposed change to the current 90-day time frame for Planning Commission recommendation that the Board could reduce this time to 60 days when initiated (page I-12). Another proposed change is regarding the posting of a sign at the property that is the subject of a zoning action. The proposed change is intended to reflect the practice of County staff posting a sign (page I-13). He noted a change related to acceptance of proffers at a public hearing is to reflect a Code of Virginia change (page I-14). Mr. Wilkerson noted the Commissioners may want to review the document in order to be informed in later discussions. Mr. Boggess noted that the public hearing date of September 17 would be the next time the Commission sees the text for discussion. There being no additional business, Mr. Fralick made a motion to adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 pm. Respectfully submitted, _______________________________ Timothy L. Wilson, Secretary Approved by: ________________________________ Steve Wilkerson, Chairman Planning Commission Minutes 4 08/20/13 SPECIAL USE SU140001 Maddox & Son Construction, Inc. Car Wash Presenter: Mark Jordan 540-586-7616 ext 1394 540-586-2059 (fax) [email protected] Memorandum TO: FROM: Bedford County Planning Commission ~£.-:::s. Mark E. Jordan, CZO, Planner DATE: August 30,2013 SUBJECT: Special Use Permit Application #SU140001: Maddox and Son Construction, Inc. Maddox and Son Construction, Inc. is requesting a special use permit for a four bay car wash at the intersection of Forest Road (Route 221) and Grant Road. This request is being reviewed in connection with, and is ultimately dependent upon the approval of a related request to rezone two parcels (RZ140001) consisting of 2.76 acres from C-1 (Office District) to C-2 (General Commercial District). A car wash is permitted in the C-2 district by Special Use Permit, thereby requiring approval of this application request should the rezoning be approved by the Board of Supervisors. APPLICANT The applicant is Andrew Maddox of Maddox and Son Construction, Inc., 1152 Gables Drive, Forest, VA 24551. OWNER The property owners are Richard T. Carter, John A. Carter and John L. Carter, PO Box 1464, Bedford, VA 24523. ENGINEER The agent and engineer for the applicant is Trent Warner, P.E. of Warner White Engineering, Inc., 1511B Enterprise Drive, Lynchburg VA 24502. LOCATION Ofthe two parcels that are the subject of the request, subject parcel 117-A-123 is located along Forest Road (Route 221) at the intersection with Grant Road and Tax Map 117-A-121 fronts Grant Road. Tax Map 117-A-123 is 2.19 acres in size, while Tax Map 117-A-121 is 0.57 acres, for a total of 2.76 acres. If the rezoning request is approved, the property line between the subject parcels is proposed to be vacated, and combined into one parcel as shown on the concept plan. Page 1 of9 Context Map Snowden Snowden Snowden Snowden Marble Marble Marble Spring Spring Spring Marble Big Big Big Island Island Island Sunset Sunset Sunset Field Field Field Coleman Coleman Coleman Falls Falls Falls A A Abert bert bert Sedalia Sedalia Sedalia Sedalia Curtis Bear Camp Curtis Curtis Bear Bear Camp Camp Curtis Bear Camp Coltons Coltons Coltons Mill Mill Mill Bedford Bedford Reservoir Reservoir Boonsboro Boonsboro Bedford Reservoir Boonsboro Lynchburg Lynchburg Otterville Otterville A A Antioch ntioch ntioch Otterville Otterville Coffee Coffee Lynchburg Coffee Peaks Peaks Peaks Of Of Of Otter Otter Otter Recreation Recreation Recreation A A Area rea rea Walnut Grove Walnut Walnut Grove Grove Walnut Grove Villamont Villamont Villamont Cool Cool Cool Spring Spring Spring Montvale Montvale Montvale Reba Reba Reba Kelso Kelso Kelso Mill Mill Mill Kelso Irving Irving Irving Shady Grove Shady Shady Grove Grove Thaxton Thaxton Thaxton Union Union Union Bunker Bunker Bunker Hill Hill Hill Stewartsville Stewartsville Stewartsville Stewartsville Flint Flint Flint Hill Hill Hill Joppa Joppa Joppa Mill Mill Mill Chamblissburg Chamblissburg Chamblissburg Meads Meads Meads Store Store Store Hardy Hardy Hardy Goodview Goodview Goodview Diamond Diamond Diamond Hill Hill Hill Suck Spring Suck Suck Spring Spring Perrowville Perrowville Perrowville Norwood Norwood Norwood Goode Goode Goode Lowry Lowry Lowry Lowry Bedford Bedford Bedford Bellevue Bellevue Bellevue Clay Clay Clay Clay Forest Forest Forest Five Five Five Forks Forks Forks Five Otter Otter Otter Hill Hill Hill Body Camp Body Body Camp Camp Body Camp Gillespie Gillespie Gillespie Davis Davis Davis Mill Mill Mill Meador Meador Meador Cifax Cifax Cifax Big Otter Mill Big Big Otter Otter Mill Mill Centerville Centerville Centerville Waltons Store Waltons Waltons Store Store Waltons Store Mentow Mentow Mentow Woodford Woodford Woodford Corner Corner Corner Stone Stone Mountain Mountain Mountain Moneta Moneta Moneta Stone Hendricks Hendricks Hendricks Store Store Store Hendricks Huddleston Huddleston Huddleston Radford Radford Radford Dundee Dundee Dundee Graves Store Graves Graves Store Store Graves Store Kasey Kasey Kasey PERMIT REQUEST The applicant requests approval of a special use permit for the proposed development of a four bay car wash. A car wash requires approval of a special use permit in the C-2 (General Commercial) district. ANALYSIS Zoning/Land Use Compatibility The subject parcels are currently zoned C-1, and are currently vacant/undeveloped. Rezoning application RZ140001 to reclassify these parcels is pending public hearing and action by the Board of Supervisors at their October 15, 2013 meeting. The adjoining parcel to the east is also zoned C-1 and is also vacant/undeveloped. The adjoining parcels to the west along Grant Road are also zoned C-1 and contain single family dwellings. The parcel to the north across Route 221 is zoned PCD (Planned Commercial Development), and contains an agricultural use. The Corridor Overlay district standards will apply to parcel 117-A-123, since this property fronts Route 221. Page 2 of 9 Zoning Ordinance The proposed use is classified as a “Car Wash” which is permitted by special use in the C-2 district, subject to the use and design standards of Article IV, Section 30-85-11 of the Zoning Ordinance. The use definition from Article II (Definitions) reads: CAR WASH - Washing and cleaning of vehicles. Typical uses include automatic conveyor machines and self-service car washes. The Article IV standard requires compliance with Sec. 30-91-10 (Stacking Spaces and DriveThrough Facilities), which requires four stacking spaces per bay/stall for self-service establishments, and five stacking spaces per bay/stall for an automated establishment, with a minimum size of 10 feet by 20 feet for each stacking space. This standard also requires a minimum width of 10 feet per lane for approach lanes, and requires each lane to be striped, marked, or otherwise delineated. Section 30-91-10 is attached. If approved, the uses proposed on the site as shown on the concept plan would require site plan approval to ensure compliance with the Zoning Ordinance for the C-2 district and Corridor Overlay standards. As noted below, this concept plan has been reviewed by the TRC and includes the additional use of a mini-warehouse facility. Comprehensive Plan The Bedford County 2025 Comprehensive Plan contains several goals and objectives that are relevant to this special use permit request. They include: Economic Development: A healthy, diversified economy that is environmentally sensitive and results in business opportunities and quality jobs. 8.1 Business retention, business expansion, and growth in new businesses. Land Use: An orderly, efficient, and compatible growth and land use pattern that is sensitive to the natural environment 9.4 Commercial and industrial development compatible with existing and planned residential development The Future Land Use map identifies the subject parcel and surrounding area as Mixed Use. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation is excerpted below: Mixed Use Areas with a mixture of residential, commercial, light industrial and civic uses located along major transportation corridors. Intention of these areas is to provide Page 3 of 9 convenient services for neighborhoods and prevent strip development and multiple access points along major and secondary transportation corridors. Project Impacts This project appeared before the Technical Review Committee on July 25, 2013. The following information reflects county agency comments from that meeting. Environmental The parcels are heavily wooded with mature trees and undergrowth. A majority of the vegetation will be removed for the development. The impervious area from the development will generate additional runoff which will be regulated by erosion and sediment control laws. A culvert for 299 feet of stream disturbance is proposed, basically realigning and channeling the creek at Grant Road. This will require further review from the Army Corp. of Engineers and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. The Virginia DEQ provided comment for the Technical Review Committee as follows: "Based on the concept site plan and proposed stream impact, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and/or DEQ permits will be required. There may also be forested wetland impacts associated with the project that are not accounted for on the concept site plan. The applicant should prepare a stream and wetland delineation of the site to ensure all streams and wetlands are identified on the site, and so that impacts associated are fully addressed by the JPA submitted for the project". Transportation The project will have a commercial entrance from Forest Road (Route 221). VDOT has requested that the proposed commercial entrance be shared with the adjoining properties, per the required VDOT Access Management Regulations. If shared access is achieved, VDOT will require a copy of the recorded agreement to share use of the entrance. In the event the entrance is not able to be shared, an exception request for review will be required by VDOT. (See enclosed VDOT comments dated July 25, 2013). According to VDOT’s 2011 traffic data, the AADT (average annual daily traffic) on Forest Road from Perrowville Road (Route 663) to Enterprise Drive (Route 1415) is 21,000 vehicles. The threshold for requiring a traffic impact analysis for a rezoning request for a non-residential use is 250 vehicles per hour or 2,500 vehicles per day. Staff estimates that 300 storage units and a four bay car wash would generate a total of 38 vehicles per peak hour, and a total of 507 vehicles per day for both uses, per the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition. Therefore, a Traffic Impact Study is not required by either VDOT standards or Bedford County TIS standards. Utilities Both public water and sewer as provided by the Bedford Regional Water Authority are available along Forest Road (Route 221) and will serve the site. (See enclosed Bedford Regional Water Authority comments dated July 26, 2013). Public Facilities The proposed use will not affect fire/rescue services, parks, schools or libraries. Page 4 of 9 Aesthetic/Visual The property is visible from Route 221 and adjoining properties across Route 221 and along Grant Road. As noted previously, the applicant has proposed two uses. The mini-warehouse use has specific setbacks beyond those required for the C-2 and Corridor Overlay Districts. Per Section 30-92-6 (A) of the zoning ordinance, a 6' wide planting strip is required along the front of the property facing Route 221 for the parking area landscaping. Within the planting strip, one large deciduous, large evergreen, or small deciduous tree shall be planted every twenty five linear feet along the public street right-of-way, and one evergreen shrub is required every five linear feet. CONDITIONS In accordance with Section 30-19-3 (B) of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission may recommend to the board of supervisors any conditions necessary to ensure the proposal meets the specific and general standards for the proposed use. Staff has not proposed any additional conditions for consideration beyond those required by the zoning ordinance. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location/Zoning Map 2. Future Land Use Map 3. Aerial Photograph 4. Application & Concept Plan 5. Article III, Section 30-54 (C-2, General Commercial District) 6. Article IV, Section 30-85-11 (Car Wash) 7. Article V, Section 30-91-10 (Stacking Spaces and Drive-Through Facilities) 8. Section 30-79, Permitted Use Table 9. VDOT comments dated July 25, 2013 10. Bedford Regional Water Authority comments dated July 25, 2013 Page 5 of 9 Location Map RUN Reynard Run REYNARD Forest Road (Route 221) FOREST S E GABL E DRI V Gables Drive T AN GR E D Grant Road ROAD Page 6 of 9 Zoning Map PCD/CO FO RES T RD 22 1 FO RES T RD 22 1 C-2/CO C-2/CO C-1/CO D TR AN GR C-1 C-1 S BLE A G D Page 7 of 9 Future Land Use Map Future Land Use Agricul t ural/Resource Stewardship _ Commercial _ Commercial/ Li gh t Indust rial _ Industrial Mi xed Use Residen t ial - _ D " Rural Residen t ial Subject Parcels ~ ________ _ ~~~-;;c====~~~~;:~~~~~=--=-=-=-=================:~ -------------------- -------------- ------------- ------- -----_________:O:~~'RO:;;;=_=======-----_______--~ \\ Page 8 of 9 Aerial Photograph (2010 Copyright Pictometry) Grant Road Forest Road Page 9 of 9 Bedford County Department of Community Development Division of Planning 122 E. Main Street, Suite G-03 Bedford, VA 24523 (540) 586-7616. Fax (540) 586-2059 www.bedfordcountyva.gov/planning For staff lise only Date nc.il'ed: Fee Paid: $ t/~3 .1~, -' Appl/ca/loll No. : S1)•./ ~O(jJ ' Received by: PC Dale: (~ • "! BOS Dale: TION: Section 30-19: Special uses are established in recognition that in addition to uses pennitted by right, certain uses may, depending upon their scale, design, location, and conditions imposed by the Board of Supervisors be compatible with existing and future uses in a district. A special use pennit application may be initiated by: 1) Resolution of the Board of Supervisors; 2) Motion of the Planning Commission; 3) Petition of the owner, contract purchaser with the owner's written consent, or the owner's agent of the property for which a special use pennit is requested. APPLICATION PROCEDURE: • • • Consultation with Planning Staff: You are required to meet with a planner to discuss feasibility of request prior to submission. Planning Commission: The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing and review the application in order to make a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing and review the application in order to make a decision on the request. In granting the special use pennit, the Board of Supervisors may attach any conditions necessary to insure that the proposal meets the specific and general standards for the proposed use. Please make sure the following items are included BEFORE submitting: iii Application Fee: $300.00 (checks made payable to Bedford County). Applicant is also responsible for the costs of all public notifications including mailings and legal advertisements. iii Concept Plan: A concept plan (one 24 x 36 copy and twenty-four 11 x 17 copies) prepared by a professional engineer, architect or surveyor must be submitted with application. An electronic version submitted via email is also desired (.pdffonnat). The plan shall include at a minimum what is required of a site development plan in Article V of the Zoning Ordinance and address any potential land use or design issues arising from the request. It is the responsibility of the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed use will be in hannony with the zoning district and surrounding area. If the proposed development is to be constructed in phases, all phases shall be shown at the time of the original application. Page 2 of3 Bedford County S )ccial Usc Pcnnit AI)I)lication Please print in blue or black ink or typewrite. If not applicable, write N/A. APPLICANT INFORMATION Note: If applicant is not the property owner, an owner's authority letter must be submitted with application. Applicant Name: Maddox & Son Construction. Inc: Andy Maddox Address: 1152 Gables Drive. Forest. Virginia 24551 Phone: 434-385-6513 Fax: Email: [email protected] Property Owner Name: Richard. John A and John L Carter (TM 117-A-123); Carter & Carter (TM 117-A-121) Address: PO Box 1464; Bedford. VA 24523 Fax: Phone: Email: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ Authorized Agent/Contact Person: Warner White Engineering Partners: Trent J. Warner. PE Address: 118 Cornerstone; Lynchburg, VA 24502 Phone: 434-534-3201 Fax: Email: [email protected] Engineer: Warner White Engineering Partners: Trent J. Warner, PE Address: 118 Cornerstone; Lynchburg. VA 24502 Phone: 434-534-3201 Fax: Email: [email protected] PROJECT INFORMATION Location/Address of Property (directions from Bedford County Administration Building): Both parcels are located adjacent to the Intersection of Rte 221 (Forest Road) and Grant Road TaxMapNumber(s): 117-A-123 and 117-A-121 Magisterial District: Jefferson SizeofParcel(s): Election District: _4_ __________ In acres. 2 .19 Ac (123); 0.57 Ac (121) In sq. ft. if relevant 95.396.4(123); 24.829.2 (121) Amount of area to be utilized 75% of the combined lots Does the parcel meet the minimum requirements contained in the Article IV use and design standards for the use? ( X) Yes ( ) No -- If NO, you must first seek a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals (Sec. 30-14(C». Current Zoning: _C_-_1___~,......._______ Current Land Use: _V_a_c_a_ n_ tL _o_t_s_______ Proposed Use from Permitted Use Table (Section 30-79-2): Mini-warehouse; Car Wash (Requires the Special Use) Bedford County Department of Community Development 122 East Main Street, Suite G.o3. Bedford, VA 24523. Phone (540) 586-7616. Fax (540) 586·2059 111113 Page 3 of3 JUSTIFICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT The Planning Commission will study the special use request to detennine the need and justification for the change in tenns of public health, safety and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Attach additional paper if necessary. Please explain how the request furtbers tbe purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning ofthe applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. This project will help facilitate the creation of convenient, attractive, and a harmonious community. as well as encourage development activities that provide desirable employment and enlarge the tax base. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained In the Bedford County Comprehensive Plan. Economic Development: A healthy, diversified economy that Is environmentally sensitive and results In business opportunities and quality Jobs. Land Use: An orderly. efficient, and compatible growth and land use pattern that is sensitive to the natural environment. Public Services: Public facilities and programs that provide human services needs of the residents of the County. Urban Development Areas: Concentrate housing, commerce and public facilities In a mixed-use pattern within designated urban development araas (UDA). Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area as well as the Impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire/rescue. The site will lend Itself to serving the nearby residents of Forest for storage facilities and car washing capabilities. The existing stream will be permitted for piping purposes. The amount of woods cleared will only be enough for construction. The site will utilize water and sewer services by the Bedford Regional Water AuthOrity. There should not be any direct Impacts to schools, parks/recrealion or flrefrescue. The entrance shown on the plans Is as far from Grant Road as possible. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this application is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge, and I authorize County representatives entry onto the property for purposes of I'eviewi this request. Owner/Agent Signature:/'fC-_---jIOc.L--,,u;.~,,£_..(IIE:~....k..--------- Date: August 2, 2013 Print Name: Trent J. Warner Bedford County Department of Community Development 122 East Main Street, Suite G-03. Bedford, VA 24523. Phone (540) 586-7616. Fax (540) 586-2059 111113 __-"""'- :w_J:!!',="",,-=-,=, .:"t..,~. "" "' _ _._....."_.,,,ODOC ::.;,:';~~'~ .~'.:i'l<U'_ _"" ........ ""-...m_ ......" .. .......:..,.. ___ .. """' ..... --~ ... .. .......,,"' ... -""" ~.=~-=.,"=-.~ . --- .. _--"'" OTTeft~leW INC TOol . 117· .. ·",,, 1.7 . .. Cfte S e...~~~::'''' ~-"''''' ........ ..,.. .... -...''' _..-- 'ZON~O C·, utle • " " C"NT --.."""""""~ -- •......... _"'......,.... -""""""""'" "" _ _ '1"""""0.00 .... =~-.,"""-"" . . . ....jI . _-.","""'" FOREST CAR WASH & STORAGE BUilDINGS aEDFOIIOCOI.JNTV. VIIOGINIA i SEC. 30-54 C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Sec. 30-54-1 Purpose The purpose of the C-2 district is to provide locations for a variety of commercial and service related activities within the urban service area serving a community of several neighborhoods or large areas of the county. This district is intended for general application throughout the county. General Commercial Districts are most appropriately found along major arterial thoroughfares which serve large segments of the county's population. The C-2 district permits a wide variety of retail and service related uses. Site development regulations are designed to ensure compatibility with adjoining land uses. Sec. 30-54-2 Permitted Uses Permitted uses shall be as listed in Section 30-79. Sec. 30-54-3 Site Development Regulations General Standards. For additional, modified, or more stringent standards for specific uses, see Article IV - Use and Design Standards. (A) Minimum lot requirements 1. 2. (B) Lots served by private well and sewage disposal system; a. Area: 1 acre (43,560 square feet). b. Frontage: 100 feet on a publicly owned and maintained street. Lots served by either public sewer or water, or both: a. Area: 15,000 square feet. b. Frontage: 75 feet on a publicly owned and maintained street. Minimum setback requirements 1. Front yard: a. Principal structures: 30 feet, or 20 feet when all parking is located behind the front building line. b. Accessory structures: behind front building line. 2. Side yard: None. 3. Rear yard: a. Principal structures: 15 feet. b. Accessory structures: 3 feet. 4. (c) Maximum height of structures 1. (D) Where a lot fronts on more than one street, front yard setbacks shall apply to all streets. Height limitations: a. Principal structures: 45 feet. Principal structures may exceed the principal structure height limitation provided a special use permit is approved in accordance with Section 30-19. b. Accessory structures: actual height of principal structure. Maximum coverage 1. Building coverage: 50 percent of the total lot area. 2. Lot coverage: 90 percent of the total lot area. Sec. 30-85-11 (A) Car Wash General standards: 1. Car wash facilities shall comply with Article Vs stacking spaces and drive-through facilities requirements. Sec.30-91-10 (A) (B) Stacking Spaces and Drive-Through Facilities Stacking spaces shall be provided for any use having a drive-through facility or areas having drop-off and pick-up areas. The following general standards shall apply to all stacking spaces and drive-through facilities: 1. Stacking spaces and lanes for drive-through stations shall not impede on and off site traffic movement, shall not cross or pass through off street parking areas, and shall not create a potentially unsafe condition where crossed by pedestrian access to a public entrance of a building. 2. Drive through lanes shall be separated from off-street parking areas. Individual lanes shall be striped, marked, or otherwise distinctly delineated. 3. Approach lanes for drive-through facilities shall have the following minimum widths: =12 feet a. One lane b. Two or more lanes = 10 feet per lane 4. All drive-through facilities shall be provided with a bypass lane with a minimum width of 10 feet. 5. Alleys or driveways in residentially zoned areas adjacent to drive-through facilities shall not be used for circulation of customer traffic. 6. Each stacking space shall be a minimum of 10 feet by 20 feet. Stacking spaces shall be provided as follows. 1. Financial institutions with drive-through windows: 8 stacking spaces for the first drive-through window and 2 stacking spaces for each additional window. 2. Car wash: 4 stacking spaces per bay/stall for self-service establishments, and 5 stacking spaces per bay/stall for an automated establishment. 3. Drive-In or Fast Food Restaurant: 6 stacking spaces per drive-through window measured from the order board or station. 4. All other uses: 3 stacking spaces for each window. Article ill Permi/led Use Table USES Civic Uses (L"onlinurd) AI' AR AV R-I R-2 R-3 R-4 PRD RMH C-I C-2 NC PCD R* R' R' R' R' I-I 1-2 PID Ep Educational Facilities, College/University R' R' Educational Facilities, Primaoy/Secondary Family Day Care Home S' S' R' S' S' S' S' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R R' R' R' R' R' R' R R' R R' R R' R R' R' R' R S S S S S S S S Guidance Selvices S Halfway House Home For Adults S Life Care Facility Nursing Home S Park and Ride Facility R' R Post Office S S R' R R' R R' R R' R S S S S S S R' R R' R R' R R' R R' R S R S R S S Public Assembly Public Maintenance and Selvice Facility S R R R R R R R Public Parks and Recreational Areas Religious Assemblv R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' Safety Services. P,ivate S* S' R' S' S' S' R' R' R' R' R' R' S' R' R' SafeI)' Services, Public Utility Services. Major Utility Sendcest Minor S' R S' R S' R S' R S' R S' R S' R S' R Office Uses AP AR AV R-I R-2 R-3 R-4 pRD Clinic S' S' R' R' R' RMH S S R' R S R' R S S S S R' R R' R R' R R S R R' R R R R R R R R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' S' S' S' R' R' R' R' S' R' R' S' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' R' S' R S' R S' R S' R R' R R' R S' R R C-I C-2 NC PCD I-I 1-2 PID EP R' R* R' R' R' R' R* Financial Institutions R* R' R' R' R' R' R' R' General Office R' S R' S R' S R' R R' S R' S R' R R' R R' R R' R' R* R' R' R' R' R' R' C-I C-2 NC PCD I-I 1-2 plD S' R' R' R' Laboratories S' Medical Office S' S' R' Commercial Uses AI' AR AV R-I R-2 R-3 R-4 PRD RMH Adult Entertainment R' AJlIicuitUl al Services Antique Shops R' Auction House R R' R' S' R' S' R' R R' R' R R Automobile Dealership. New Automobile Dealership, Used R' R R' R' S' S' R' R* R* R' R' R' S S' Automobile Graveyard Automobile paotslSupply, Retail S' Automobile Repair Services, Major Automobile Repair Services, Minor S' S Automobile Rental/Leasing Bed and BreakFast R' R' R' S' R' S' S' S' R' R' S' R' R R' R' R' R R' R S' S' S S' R S' R S' S Boarding House R' S Business or Trade Schools R Business SUpp011 Services R S' S' Commercial Indoor Amusement S' S S' S R S Commercial Indoor Entertainment S S R R S S S R S S S S Campgrounds EP S' S' S* Carwash S' R' R' S' R' R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R' S* S* S' S' R' S S' S S S S' S R S R R R R R S S S S S R S S S S R S* S' S R' S S' S R Commercial Indoor Sp0l1s and Recreation Commercial Outdoor Entertainment R Commercial Outdoor Spol1s and Recleation Communications Services Conference Center Construction Sales and Services S' S' S S S S S S R S R R R R R R R R' R' R' S' R R' R S' R R* R* R R R R' R R' R S' S R' S R' S R' R' R* R" Dance Hall R' S Equipment Sales and Rental S' R* R" S' Consumer Re£?ir Senrices Convenience StOl e S' /lI-2 S S' R* COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PO BOX 3071 SALEM , VA 24153-0560 GREGORY A. WHIRLEY COMMISSIONER July 25, 2013 Tim Wilson Director of Community Development 122 E. Main St, Suite G-03 Bedford, V A 24523 Subject: TRC Comments - 072513B - Maddox Carwash and Mini-warehouse - Rezoning Rte. 221- Forest Road - TM#'s 117-A-121 & 123 Bedford County Dear Mr. Wilson, The Bedford Residency has completed a review of the concept plan received on July 18, 2013 , for the above referenced project and has following comments: I. Please review the entrance location for compliance with Access Management spacing requirements. Centerline distances to adjacent entrances will need to be denoted on the plans. 2. Access Management Regulations require new commercial entrances be shared with adjoining properties. Prior to issuing plan approval or an entrance permit, we request you submit a copy of the recorded agreement to share use of the entrance. In the event the entrance is not able to be shared, an exception request for review by this office is required. 3. Please include the measured sight distance, right of way width, and posted speed limit of Rte.22I on the plans. 4. Please provide the anticipated trip generation numbers per ITE based on the proposed land uses. If you have any questions, please call Will Yeager or me at 540-586-7941. Sincerely, Brian Casella, PE, LS Area Land Use Engineer Bedford Residency WGYllbc CY: Trent Warner, PE / Jamey White, PE - Warner-White Engineering LD - Correspondence File WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING Bedford Regional Water Authority 1723 Falling Creek Road Bedford, VA 24523 Phone: (540) 586-7679 ext. 5 Fax: (540) 586-5805 Email: [email protected] Bedford Regional Water Authority CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW (TRC) July 26, 2013 Project Name: Forest Carwash & Storage Project Type: Concept Plan Location: Forest (TM117-A-121 & 123) PSA Job #: Design Firm: Plan Date: Number of Proposed Lots Water Available Sewer Available Plat Required Design Plans Required Water Capacity Concerns Sewer Capacity Concerns Gravity or FM Attachements: GIS Map Existing Water/Sewer Utilities Information Existing Easement Information PSA Plat Checklist Policy PSA Site Plan Review Checklist Policy PSA Water Review Checklist Policy PSA Sewer Review Checklist Policy PSA Location of Utilities Policy PSA Surveyed As-Built Requirements Policy PSA Wastewater Lift Station Requirements Policy PSA Rate Schedule PSA Developer Checklist Other: 2013-051 Warner White 7/3/13 1 Yes Yes TBD TBD No No Gravity Yes Yes No No Yes N/A No Yes No No No No Meeting Notes: • Planning explained that the Concept Plan submitted for Re-Zoning purposes. Once rezoned to C-2 a Special Use Permit will be required for the carwash. A neighborhood informational meeting is scheduled for August 7,2013. • I mentioned possible water/sewer options such as a water only account for the carwash (if you do not wish to discharge the carwash water to the public sewer) and a water/sewer account for the office. Please contact our Customer Service Department to discuss if interested. • I explained that I needed to do some additional research to adequately complete BRWA Concept Plan review comments and that such review comments would be issued via e-mail subsequent to the TRC meetin . Comments by sfoster 2013-051 CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW - 2013-07-26 .docx Page 1 of 3 Bedford Regional Water Authority Bedford Regional Water Authority 1723 Falling Creek Road Bedford, VA 24523 Phone: (540) 586-7679 ext. 5 Fax: (540) 586-5805 Email: [email protected] Bedford Regional Water Authority 1. Our new web address is www.brwa .com. All of our policies and checklists may be found on our new website. 2. Please provide a Vicinity Map on future Concept Plan submittals. 3. Please contact BRWA Compliance Inspector Thomas Cherro for sewer pretreatment/FOG requirements. Contact information [email protected] or (540) 5867679 Extension 123. Requirements must be addressed on the Site Plan. I will be copying Mr. Cherro with these review comments. 4. FFMV must be located outside of RIW and PUE in BRWA dedicated FFMV easement. 5. Easement will be necessary to the proposed FFMV. Easement Agreement must be recorded prior to and reflected on any necessary Plats associated with the project. 6. If a FFMV is needed, it will require a Developer Project with BRWA. Sewer cleanouts/connections may be included in the Developer Project or may be installed by BRWA. Please make it clear on the Site Plan which option is proposed. Further discussion may be necessary with BRWA to make that final determination pending final site layout. 7. Please clarify what EPUE means. 8. BRWA Policy 6.00 states "". No more than one (1) sewer connection will be permitted/or each water connection unless other arrangements are agreed upon in writing by the Authority." Please revise to use a single public sewer connection point on the Site Plan. If there are extenuating circumstances requiring multiple sewer connections for one water connection please describe the circumstances in a written request for BRWA consideration . 9. Proposed gate and fence location would restrict access to the existing public sewer infrastructure. BRWA must have 24/7 access to public water and sewer infrastructure for O&M purposes. 10. BRWA has concerns with the proposed paving over the existing sanitary sewer. Concerns include, but are not limited to: a. b. c. d. e. MH's in pavement & in parking spaces Existing material type is SDR-35 Proposed CO/connection in pavement Sewerline under parking spaces Commercial entrance over uncased SDR-35 11. The side setback is listed as O-ft on the Concept Plan in the location of the existing sewer. BRWA Policy 4.10 addresses utilities in pavement in certain situations. You may refer to the Policy (attached), however keep in mind that the provisions in the Policy are Comments by sfoster 2013-051 CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW - 2013-07-26.docx Page 2 of 3 Bedford Regional Water Authority Bedford Regional Water Authority 1723 Falling Creek Road Bedford, VA 24523 Phone: (540) 586-7679 ext. 5 Fax: (540) 586-5805 Email: [email protected] Bedford Regional Water Authority Planned districts and public roadways and are offered to provide you with an understanding of our goals with respect to utility location and pavement. In recent years, where sewer has been proposed in private paved areas, the sewerline was new construction and various provisions were made in the design stage with respect to materials, specific location, construction etc. These provisions were made on a case-bycase, site specific basis. As a general rule, BRWA's preferred location of public water and sewer infrastructure is outside of pavement. 12. Please provide source information for the existing easements shown. I was able to find two recorded Sewer Easement Agreements (Instruments No 080008992 and 080008993) but neither lists the BCPSA as a grantee. In addition easement locations shown on the Exhibit of the referenced Instruments do not match the As-Built sewerline alignment. Existing sewerline easement will need to be clarified or granted prior to BRWA taking on additional customers or approving a Site Plan based on the Concept Plan. 13. Please call in a Miss Utility Ticket to have utilities marked in the field and survey them for correct and accurate existing utility location information for the Site Plan. Comments by sfoster 2013-051 CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW - 2013-07-26 .docx Page 3 of 3 Bedford Regional Water Authority Comprehensive Plan 2025 Update Revisions to preliminary drafts Chapter 7 – Utilities Chapter 15 – Bedford City/ Town Reversion Presenter: Jordan Mitchell 540-586-7616 ext 1393 540-586-2059 (fax) [email protected] MEMORANDUM TO: Bedford County Planning Commission FROM: Jordan Mitchell, CZO, Planner DATE: September 6, 2013 SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan 2025 Update – Preliminary Draft of Chapters 7 (Utilities) and 15 (Bedford City/Town Reversion) Staff has attached preliminary drafts of Chapters 7 - Utilities from the Comprehensive Plan and a new Chapter 15 – Bedford City/Town Reversion for your review and approval. The revisions to each chapter include changes recommended by the Planning Commission at their September 3, 2013 meeting. Should the Planning Commission have further revisions or recommendations on the preliminary draft of each chapter, staff will make the changes administratively. The Board of Supervisors is expected to initiate text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the attached Chapters at their September 23, 2013 meeting with a tenative joint public hearing date of November 13, 2013. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the attachments, please contact me at (540) 586-7616 ext. 1393. Attachments: 1) Preliminary Draft – Chapter 7 Utilities 2) Preliminary Draft – Chapter 15 Bedford City/Town Reversion Chapter Seven Utilities Goal and Intent Quality public utility systems and services that support the County’s planned land use The goal in the provision of public utilities is to provide properties within the County’s service area with adequate and reliable utility infrastructure and services that meet demand in a customer service oriented manner. These services are achieved through safe, environmentally sensitive, and cost efficient methods by partnering with state and local governments, utility franchises, and other public and private entities. Background and Findings Public utilities available within the County include water, sewerage, solid waste (addressed in a separate chapter), electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications services (telephone, cable television, and internet access). Public utilities that provide water and/or sewer service may be owned by political subdivisions such as the Bedford Regional Water Authority (BRWA), or privately owned by corporations or individuals. Once water and sewer facilities reach a specific size standard as established in the federal environmental regulations overseen by the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), they are designated as “publicly regulated”. The County of Bedford owns and operates the solid waste landfill and localized collection centers. As part of the Reversion agreement between the Town of Bedford and Bedford County, the County will be taking over waste disposal for the town in the future with the Town of Bedford continuing their waste pickup service. Contract solid waste haulers provide private collection services to some individuals and corporations. Electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications services are provided by a diverse set of entities, i.e. corporations, cooperatives, local political subdivisions, and privately owned systems. The value of rights-of-way as a public asset has increased. As more utility and communications providers have become interested in serving County residents, the County has an obligation to charge fair compensation for the use of this asset. The County also has the duty to manage its rights-of-way and easement assets wisely for the public good. Water Facilities Bedford County contains a large number of housing units that obtain water from wells. Recent droughts have led to increased demand for public water in Bedford County. Due to population growth and development over the past fifteen years, a reliable water supply in terms of quantity and quality remains an important point of concern from a health, environmental and economic development of the County. Through the development of a system of publicly and privately owned water supply systems, the County has taken measures to increase the availability of public water where the demand is greatest. The development of a water treatment plant at Smith Mountain Lake has enabled 1 the County to provide better quality and more dependable service in a section of the County with a history of poor quality and limited quantity of groundwater. The plant, which can be expanded, is becoming a major source of water for County residents in addition to providing wholesale water services to Franklin County with the potential to provide services to other municipalities through regionalization efforts. Privately owned water systems (whether by corporations or individuals) vary greatly in the number of customers served, ranging from a few connections in a trailer park to several hundred homes in large subdivision systems. Whether they will be under the jurisdiction of regulatory agencies such as the Virginia Department of Health and or the State Corporation Commission will depend upon how many connections they have or how many customers they serve. Health Department records show approximately 37 privately owned water systems serving 15 or more customers on a year-round basis in Bedford County. These systems all rely upon wells as the source of water. Sewer Facilities Sewage disposal, similar to water supply, can be handled publicly or privately. Bedford County, like many other rural, developing localities, relies on private onsite sewage disposal systems as the main source of sewage disposal. Given current subdivision regulations that permit more dense development when public sewer systems are available, it is anticipated that more residences and businesses will be connected to public systems in the future. The areas of the County that are currently served by BRWA operated public wastewater collection and treatment systems are those bordering Lynchburg in the Forest/Boonsboro area, portions of the County near New London, Montvale, the Town of Bedford and the Smith Mountain lake area near the intersection of Route 655 and 122 (Moneta Wastewater Treatment Plant, shown here). Other residents are served by scattered public systems owned by corporations and private individuals. Publicly-Owned Sewage Systems The BRWA currently provides wastewater collection and conveyance services to the Forest area for treatment at the Lynchburg Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). Montvale’s WWTP serves the area near the intersection of Routes 460 and 741, with the ability to expand its capacity, primarily targeting a growing commercial and industrial development sector of the Montvale community. Other areas within the County, such as New London, Huddleston and Stewartsville have limited wastewater collection and treatment systems that primarily serve local schools and are not equipped to support future wastewater generation. A wastewater study was completed in 2003 documenting investments necessary to bring sewer capacity to growth areas around the County. This study is a guide for 2 assessing what the cost of providing public wastewater to current and future development that is most desired in Bedford County as well as an indicator of where the strongest growth pressures are for development. Additional sewer feasibility studies were completed for the Huddleston area in 2007 and the Stewartsville area in 2012. Based on the Stewartsville study, soils in the Stewartsville area are poor draining. However, the provision of public sewer system for this area is not cost feasible. Privately-Owned Wastewater Discharge Systems Privately owned wastewater discharge systems are defined as any facility which requires a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for point discharge. The Department of Environmental Quality records indicate there are three large NPDES private wastewater treatment works worth noting that serve small residential and commercial areas: 1) Oakridge Mobile Home Village (Now Ramsey Mobile Home Park) – Aerobic Digestion Plant (1500 gallons per day design flow) 2) Eagle Eyrie Retreat Camp and Conference Center – Sequential Batch Reactor System (Approximately 40,000 gallons per day) 3) Georgia Pacific Corporation – Anaerobic/Aerobic Lagoon System (12-15 million gallons per day) There are many other private wastewater discharge systems that serve small subdivisions and neighborhoods. Currently, four (4) individual private Bedford County residences utilize a Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (VPDES). Private Individually-Owned Onsite Sewage Disposal Systems Due to the rural nature of Bedford County, the vast majority of County residents are served by individual onsite sewage disposal systems consisting of a septic tank and soil absorption field. These systems consist of a septic tank that serves as a settling chamber and as an anaerobic bioreactor that promotes partial digestion of retained organic matter. The septic tank effluent, which contains significant concentrations of pathogens and nutrients is then discharged to a soil absorption field for further treatment though biological processes, absorption, filtration and infiltration into the underlying soil. The Virginia Department of Health permits the construction and maintains records of onsite sewage disposal systems. Though there are concerns about the proper maintenance of septic systems within the County, these onsite sewage disposal systems are significantly cheaper than public sewer (generally one-third the cost) and will remain an important piece of infrastructure in the County. With these factors in mind, building relationships and appropriate support systems between public and private waste treatment systems is important for community vitality and public health. The Moneta WWTP has facilities to treat septic tank waste. This can facilitate maintenance of residential septic systems, deferring the need for expansion wastewater collection systems. It has significant expansion capability. The rural nature of the County ensures that individually owned septic systems remain the most cost efficient means of wastewater management for the majority of residents within the County. The wastewater study provides cost information for specific areas of the County. 3 This study, does not, however, provide recommendations on how an area should develop and whether or not service should be provided – these decisions are influenced by many factors and must be evaluated on the basis of community need and growth desires for the various areas. These full spectrum assessments are critical to guide the County in the expansion of its wastewater management infrastructure and other critical utilities and services in key locations throughout the service areas where significant residential and economic development is planned and desired to occur. Because of its importance for any type of development, the location of water and sewer facilities will serve as a primary determinant for new growth centers throughout the County and should be carefully considered as expansion and interconnection decisions are made. Electricity and Natural Gas Three companies supply Bedford County with electric power. American Electric Power Company (AEP), one of the largest electric utilities serving Virginia, supplies power to most of the County. The Town of Bedford has its own municipal power plant on the James River and, in addition, purchases power from AEP and services the community of Big Island and a portion of the north side of the County. Southern portions of Bedford County are supplied power by the Southside Electric Cooperative of Crewe that is furnished electric energy by the Virginia Electric and Power Company of Richmond, the largest power company in the state. Rates vary across the County. Columbia Gas Services, a locally-owned and managed utility, serves part of the County. Portions of the western section of the County are served by the Roanoke Gas Company. Internet Services Several internet providers are available to citizens of Bedford County. Verizon Telephone, Adelphia Business Solutions, Jet Broadband, and Cebridge Connections and B2X provide hardware services to residences and businesses for internet connections. These companies and many others provide telecommunication services and wireless access to programming, 4 telecommunication services, and the internet. The BRWA has entered into an agreement with wireless communication service providers to mount antennas on area water tanks to provide wireless service to targeted communities where hardware access is too costly or geographically prohibitive including the Smith Mountain Lake, Hales Ford Bridge, and Forest areas of the County. Use of existing structures for mounting antennas is an important factor supported in the County’s 2012 Strategic Plan for Commercial Wireless Telecommunication Facilities. The plan outlines industry stealth techniques to disguise and conceal wireless communication facilities. Above ground water tanks and electric power infrastructure are recommended as stealth structures within the plan. In some areas of the County, private internet service providers have been unable to meet the community demand and there has been no indication that they will in the future. In order to facilitate deployment of affordable broadband internet service to these un-served/underserved areas of the County, the Bedford County Broadband Authority was established in 2009. The Broadband Authority continues to work to find solutions to provide affordable broadband internet service to these un-served/underserved areas of the County. Determining Factors • • • • • • • • • • • Citizens of the County are strongly committed to maintaining agricultural areas and natural areas within and around the County. The County supports community center development in appropriate locations that provide housing and community services to area residents. Current by-right development opportunities in the residential districts create significant opportunities for sprawl and adversely impact ability to provide services efficiently and effectively. Areas that currently have developed lands and can support further development are primary targets for growth in housing, commercial, and industrial uses in the County. The cost of providing services to residents must be factored into the overall costs of development for residential and commercial areas of the County. Coordination with the Town of Bedford and surrounding Counties is important to guiding appropriate development along these political boundaries. Water shed resources are crucial and protection of land areas that impact the quality of water in the County must be strongly considered in all development or redevelopment opportunities. Smith Mountain Lake is an important natural resource of the County and development impacts on this resource must be strongly considered for any future development in this area of the County. The protection of quality groundwater in the County is a high priority for residents. Planned development occurring in a planned district must be evaluated on the full cost impacts of each project along with projected revenues and resident benefits of the planned development. The County will continue to adhere to multiple review criteria outlined in Article I of the Zoning Ordinance related to need and justification, effects on properties and public services, and consistency in furthering the purposes of the County’s Zoning Ordinance 5 and planning program when evaluating and acting upon proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. Objectives and Strategies 7.1 Public water and sewer facilities located in areas of high population density/growth areas 7A. 7B. 7C. 7D. 7.2 Public water and sewer facilities strategically developed and constructed in a fiscally sound manner 7A. 7D. 7.3 Water and Sewer Master Plans and Amendments. Capital Improvements Program. Adequate availability of drinking water sources 7A. 7E. 7F. 7G. 7H. 7.4 Water and Sewer Master Plans and Amendments. Amend and adopt the Water and Sewer Master Plan based on the land uses designated on the County’s Future Land Use Map. Water and Sewer Hookups. Restrict water and sewer hookups to designated service and growth areas. Agricultural/Rural Residential Areas. Severely limit hookups to public water and sewer lines in agricultural and rural residential areas where transmission lines exist only to transfer service from the treatment source to the intended service area(s) to prevent sprawl and undesired subdivision development. Capital Improvements Program. Continue to incorporate and fund water and sewer projects into the County’s Capital Improvements Program. Water and Sewer Master Plans and Amendments. Zoning Ordinance Revisions. Revise the Zoning Ordinance to address utility issues including, but not limited to, protecting drinking reservoirs (Smith Mountain Lake), and prohibiting structures in the floodplain and in wetlands. Septic Pump-out Program. Develop and administer a voluntary pilot septic pump-out program in cooperation with the BRWA targeting the Smith Mountain Lake area. Groundwater Monitoring. Implement and maintain a groundwater monitoring program. Wellhead Protection. Continue to support the wellhead protection program within the County through education and voluntary inspection of private and public well facilities. Improved or expanded utility services (electricity, natural gas, propane, cable television, internet access, fiber optics, etc.) that meet the general needs of County residents and businesses 6 7I. Broadband Committee. Continue to support a committee to study improving high-speed Internet service as a basic utility and economic development tool throughout the County. 7 Chapter 15 Bedford City/Town Reversion Background In 2008 the City of Bedford notified the County of its intent to revert from a city to a town, as allowed under Virginia Law. The “Voluntary Settlement of Transition to Town Status and Other Related Issues Between the City of Bedford and the County of Bedford” (Reversion Agreement) was finalized July 23, 2012 and passed after public hearings were held in both jurisdictions in August 2012. The effective date of the City’s reversion to a town was July 1, 2013. The agreement requires each locality to amend their Comprehensive Plan to account for the provisions in the agreement. Upon reversion, all residents of the new Town also became citizens of the County. The County will receive tax revenues from all parcels within the Town boundaries. These revenues will be applied toward the provision of County services. The County areas included in the reversion will be provided the same services from the County that they received before reversion, plus additional services that the Town may choose to provide, such as solid waste collection or Town police protection. The Town may levy a Town tax for urban services they seek to provide “over and above” those offered by the County. Growth Management Areas The agreement calls for certain political boundary adjustments, which will increase the land area and population of the Town of Bedford. These are split into three phases. Phase I adjustments were made immediately upon the effective date of reversion with Phases II and III boundary adjustments contingent upon select criteria including the development of a Joint Water and Sewer Authority, which became an entity on July 1, 2013 as well. Phase II adjustments will be fully realized in 2023. Phase III adjustments would be realized after that, dependent upon the nature and timing of development in six designated target areas. Boundary adjustments for Phases II and III are outlined in Map 15.1 below as “Growth Management Areas”. The Phase II Areas are comprised of areas that are already developed in an urban fashion and additional areas which are likely to develop in the near future and which may all be incorporated into the Town boundaries no later than ten years after the effective date of town status. The Phase III Boundary Adjustment Areas are comprised of six possible urban or suburban development areas that may be incorporated into the Town limits only if and when development occurs. Urban and suburban growth is to be directed to the Growth Management Areas, as well as within the Town, which grew to include the Phase I areas on the date of reversion. Development in the Growth Areas will be compatible with the density and quality of development within the Town. Land uses within the reversion areas will be subject to those shown on the Future Land Use Map for the Town. 1 Population The estimated number of new Town residents included in the Phase I adjustment area is 320 persons (2010 estimate). When the new residents are added with the 2010 Census figure of 6,222, the Town population on July 1, 2013 was estimated at 6,542 people. The number of people estimated to be in the Phase II and III boundary areas is predicated on a number of variables that will be more accurately estimated when either phase occurs. 2 Map 15.1 Growth Management Areas (from Reversion Agreement) 3