Planning Commission Agendas & Minutes

AT THE WORK SESSION OF THE HAMPTON PLANNING COMMISSION HELD IN THE LAWSON CONFERENCE ROOM, 8TH FLOOR, CITY HALL, HAMPTON, VIRGINIA, ON THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 2014, AT 3:00 P.M. Commissioners Carlton Campbell, Andre McCloud, Vice-Chair Tommy Southall, and Chairman Gaynette LaRue were present. Commissioners Gregory Williams, Chris Snead, and Mary Bunting were absent. Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown discussed the proposed housekeeping amendments. Ms. Brown discussed Ordinance Amendment 148-2014 regarding non- conforming signs. She also explained the change regarding group homes which was necessitated by a change in state law. In response to questions from Commissioners McCloud and Southall, Ms. Brown stated that group homes are regulated and that they are allowed by right. In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Ms. Brown explained that there is a point where nonconforming signs need to be brought into compliance. Currently this is based on appraisal value; however, cost replacement is less open to interpretation. In response to a question from Commissioner McCloud, Ms. Brown explained that the designation of adult home use is being changed and is being folded into the use for group homes. In response to a question from Commissioner McCloud, Senior Zoning Official David Stromberg stated that day care is licensed under a different state agency than group homes. The designation for use for single family is still limited to eight or less. Ms. Brown stated there is no difference in group home regulations for adults or children. Juvenile homes and orphanages are different. In response to a question from Chairman LaRue, Secretary to the Commission Terry O’Neill stated that these uses are either required or protected and the Planning Commission does not have control over them. There has been a good deal of evaluation done on the definition of “family.” Ms. Brown stated that building and zoning applications require a property survey and a sketch on the scope of the proposed work to be done. This amendment would allow the Zoning Administrator to waive certain requirements. PC Worksession 20140807 Page 1  City Attorney Vanessa Valldejuli stated a hearing was done under administrative changes years ago. This amendment is a request for clarification. Mr. O’Neill stated there are some requests where there is no need to put the extra expense of a survey on homeowners. Mr. Stromberg explained this amendment would give the authority to allow some items to be waived. Mr. O’Neill stated the amendment for fence and wall regulations (ZOA No. 152- 2014) will be withdrawn to allow for further discussion. In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Mr. O’Neill stated that fences are also considered accessory structures. This is one item where a determination to waive the survey requirement could be made. Ms. Brown stated the amendments for the Subdivision Ordinance and the Site Plan Ordinance are purely housekeeping measures and only relate to numbers being changed. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 3:20 p.m. PC Worksession 20140807 Page 2 AT A PUBLIC HEARING AND REGULAR MEETING OF THE HAMPTON PLANNING COMMISSION HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 8TH FLOOR, CITY HALL, HAMPTON, VIRGINIA, ON THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 2014 AT 3:30 P.M. ITEM I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Gaynette LaRue called the Planning Commission meeting to order. ITEM II. ROLL CALL A call of the roll noted Commissioners Carlton Campbell, Andre McCloud, Chris Snead, Vice-Chair Tommy Southall, and Chairman Gaynette LaRue were present. Commissioners Gregory Williams and Mary Bunting were absent. ITEM III. MINUTES A motion was made by Commissioner Carlton Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Andre McCloud, to approve the minutes of the July 10, 2014 work session and Planning Commission meeting as corrected. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Snead, Southall, LaRue NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting ITEM IV. STAFF REPORTS A. Youth Planner Report Junior Youth Planner Michael York presented the August Youth Planner report and the Hampton Youth Commission’s (HYC) milestones over the past fiscal year. The HYC has a potential partnership with the Mayor’s Youth Commission of Newport News regarding the Youth Friendly Business Guide and how to make the businesses in Hampton more youth friendly. Work is continuing with the Master Plan Update. The Youth Planners put forth a team effort regarding the appendix, the vision and executive letter, and the environmental scan. A community meeting and a joint worksession with the Planning Commission were held in March at the Teen Center. The Youth Planners have been compiling a list of youth-serving organizations so the HYC can reach out and give information regarding special events to local Planning Commission 20140807 Page 1 youth-centered organizations, such as their counterpart in Newport News, the Mayor’s Youth Commission. The Youth Planners also participated in the Armistead Pointe Master Plan Update process. Youth feedback was gathered through Envision Hampton surveys and peer participation. They also recorded public comments during the input session held at the Boo Williams Sportsplex. The HYC and the Youth Planners also worked on the Candidate’s Forum held at the Teen Center. The forum led and run by the youth had a great turnout. All the past milestones have contributed to Hampton’s legacy of 20 plus years of youth civic engagement in Hampton. All of this is so the youth can continue to participate in local government. Mr. York thanked the Commission and staff for their support over the past year. In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Mr. York stated Boot Camp has been completed and the HYC retreat is coming up. Chairman LaRue expressed that the Commission would be looking forward to the Youth Planner’s and Hampton Youth Commissions’ plans for the coming year and participating in and helping with them as much as they can. Senior Youth Planner Chyna Matheny stated this will be her final time before the Commission as she will be leaving to attend Radford University. She explained how she came on board as a Youth Planner. She needed a job because she wanted to buy clothes. Ms. Matheny applied for the position of Youth Planner not knowing what it entailed and got the job Ms. Matheny stated she is looking forward to going on to Radford where she will major in fashion design and Spanish. The skills she has learned from this job will help her as she goes forward. She has progressed over the past two years and this job has gone beyond how to do a job; it has changed her and impacted who she is as a person. The job has helped with her organization and communication skills, networking, and in building and keeping relationships. These are things she will definitely need in the fashion business. Ms. Matheny thanked the Commission for listening to her and caring about what the youth in the City do. It is really important because in a few years it will be these youth who will be the adults. It is important that they know how the City works Planning Commission 20140807 Page 2 and important that they know how to have these skills. She stated she plans to come back whenever she has breaks to see what Hampton is up to and what the youth are up to. The Commissioners wished Ms. Matheny well and congratulated her on a job well done. PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURES Mr. Terry O’Neill, Secretary to the Commission, read key points of the Hampton Planning Commission Public Hearing/Comment Rules in order for the affairs of the Commission to be conducted in a courteous and orderly manner. ITEM V. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: Mr. O’Neill read the public hearing items advertised in the Daily Press on July 24 and July 31, 2014. A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 143-2014: Ordinance to Amend and Re-Enact Chapter 2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia Entitled “Definitions” by amending section 2.1-2 regarding the definition of height, Chapter 17.3, Article V of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia Entitled “Flood Zone District” by amending sections 17.3-31.2, 17.3-32, 17.3-33.1, 17.3-33.2, 17.3-33.3, 17.3-34.1, 17.3-34.2, 17.3-34.3, 17.3-34.8, and adding a new section 17.3-34.9 pertaining to construction requirements for new construction and substantial improvements for properties located within flood zone districts. Approval of this amendment would revise how the height of a structure is measured so as not to penalize properties located in the special flood hazard area that are required to be elevated by the zoning ordinance; it would amend the boundaries of the district to include areas identified as X(Shaded) on the Flood Insurance Rate Map; it would add a new definition of “design flood elevation”, which is the base flood elevation identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map plus the freeboard requirement; it would increase the height of new construction and substantial improvements in the special flood hazard area from one foot to three feet; it would prohibit the construction of basements in the special flood hazard area; and it would require new construction in areas identified as X(Shaded) to be constructed one and one half feet above grade. Senior Zoning Official David Stromberg presented Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 143-2014 relating to the regulation of properties located within the flood zone. One of the recommendations made by the Hampton Waterways Committee was to have city staff look into the possibility of increasing the height of the required freeboard. Staff also looked into amending other provisions of the flood zone Planning Commission 20140807 Page 3 ordinance related to reducing the potential for future flood damages for properties in Hampton. The City of Norfolk has recently made a number of amendments to their ordinances and there have been changes at the Federal level. Staff decided it would be a good time to look at Hampton’s Flood Zone Ordinance and these are the amendments that came about from their review. Mr. Stromberg presented a brief background into why Hampton has a Flood Zone Ordinance. The goal of the Flood Insurance Program is to reduce the cost of damage caused from floods by providing insurance and having standards before damages happen. The program is an agreement between the locality and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and not FEMA and individuals. If the local community does not participate in the program then none of the property owners within that community would be eligible to purchase flood insurance. For a locality to participate in the program the community must have a local Flood Zone Ordinance. There is also a Community Rating System (CRS) offered by FEMA for communities who voluntarily exceed the minimum requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The reason communities do this is to get a discount for the community on policies within the community. Hampton joined this program in 2011 and part of the reason for making these amendments is to hopefully increase the amount of community-wide discounts for policy holders in Hampton. Secondly, by adopting the standards the hope is to protect Hampton properties for years into the future. Approval of this amendment would revise how the height of a structure is measured so as to not penalize properties located in the special flood hazard areas that are required by the Zoning Ordinance to be elevated; it would amend the boundaries of the district to include areas identified as X(Shaded) on the Flood Insurance Rate Map; it would add a new definition of “design flood elevation,” which is the base flood elevation identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map plus the freeboard requirement; it would increase the height of new construction and substantial improvements in the special flood hazard area from one (1) foot to three (3) feet; it would prohibit the construction of basements in the special flood hazard area; and it would require new construction in areas identified as X (Shaded) to be constructed one and one half (1.5) feet above grade. This applies only to properties located in a flood zone area. So far Norfolk is the only locality that has gone to three feet. Some of the potential benefits are the increase of the CRS points in Hampton and a lower insurance premium with having a higher freeboard. There should be less damage experienced if the house is higher up during a storm event. This should give Hampton a competitive advantage when marketing a home in Hampton because of the actions taken by Hampton in this ordinance. Planning Commission 20140807 Page 4  A disadvantage would be the increase in construction cost. This would apply to new construction; a substantially damaged house; or substantial improvement to a house. Areas identified by FEMA as moderate risk that have a 0.2 % chance of flood risk (X-500 or X (Shaded)) are not required to have flood insurance, but some private lenders do have that requirement. FEMA does not require that there are ordinance regulations, but it does help with the CRS by going above and beyond the base requirements. The X (Shaded) areas are typically located directly adjacent to a 100 flood plain area. Boundary lines could shift and a house not considered in a flood zone at one time could find that with the shift it is in a flood zone area. During storm events, water does not stop because of a line drawn on a map. Because of this there is a standard proposal, across the board, to have a 1½ foot elevation requirement of either elevation or flood-proofing of new construction on properties located in an X (Shaded) area. Currently Norfolk is the only locality to have this requirement. The benefits for this are similar to the increased freeboard requirement as stated previously. It does protect homeowners from possible future map amendments. FEMA maps change over time and it is a safe bet that the maps will change several times over the lifespan of a house. There is a chance that homes located in an X (Shaded) area could end up in a 1% flood zone area. The extra 1½ feet gives a little extra protection from increased premiums down the line. Sub grade crawl spaces or basements located in a flood zone will be prohibited. This proposal was brought before the Zoning Ordinance Advisory Committee in April and received their support. This proposal was presented to the Peninsula Homebuilders Association in June and is scheduled to for presentation to the Association of Realtors. The Commission was briefed in June and City Council will be briefed next week and they will be asked to act on it at their September meeting. Staff recommends approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 143-2014. In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Mr. Stromberg stated that FEMA provides maps and requirements for the Zoning Ordinance that are necessary for participation in NFIP (FEMA’s insurance program). A reduction in insurance costs is not automatic. CRS does an audit every 5 years and reviews all changes that have been made. There is a 1 to 10 scale with 10 at a zero discount. Hampton is currently designated an 8 which is a 10% discount. Discounts will not be realized until the next review and only homes in flood areas are covered. Chairman LaRue commented that the East Coast is seeing a rapid rise in sea level and it is important that Hampton leads in making changes that are valuable to its citizens. Planning Commission 20140807 Page 5  In response to a question from Chairman LaRue, Mr. O’Neill stated that the Community Development Department is currently in the process of making modifications and amendments to the Community Plan that would recognize sea level rise and other issues so as to establish broad policies regarding them and bring this information to the Commission in the near future. There is a lot of credible research nationally and in the region being used through VIMS, ODU, and the Planning District Commission on this issue. Secondly, related to that issue is that this whole process originated with the Waterways Committee a few years ago. In looking forward the Committee recognized that repetitive flooding issues and sea level rise were things that Hampton, as a community, would need to pay attention to. They also encouraged that Hampton monitor that set of issues and keep in mind to balance those issues with the cost of construction for homes so it can remain competitive with other areas in the region. There were no speakers. WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day ZOA 143- 2014, a proposed ordinance to amend and re-enact chapter 2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia entitled “Definitions” by amending section 2.1-2 pertaining to the definition of height, chapter 17.3, article V of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia entitled “Flood Zone District” by amending sections 17.3-31.2, 17.3-32, 17.3-33.1, 17.3-33.2, 17.3-33.3, 17.3-34.1, 17.3-34.2, 17.3-34.3, 17.3-34.8, and adding a new section 17.3-34.9 pertaining to construction requirements for new construction and substantial improvements for properties located within flood zone districts; WHEREAS: on the recommendation of the Hampton Waterways Committee, city staff has looked into increasing the height of the required freeboard and amending other provisions of the flood zone ordinance related to reducing the potential for future flood damage for properties in Hampton; WHEREAS: approval of this amendment would revise how the height of a structure is measured so as not to penalize properties located in the special flood hazard area that are required to be elevated by the zoning ordinance; WHEREAS: it would amend the boundaries of the district to include areas identified as X (Shaded) on the Flood Insurance Rate Map; WHEREAS: it would add a new definition of “design flood elevation”, which is the base flood elevation identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map plus the freeboard requirement; Planning Commission 20140807 Page 6  WHEREAS: it would increase the freeboard height of new construction, substantial damage, and substantial improvements in the special flood hazard area from one (1) foot to three (3) feet; WHEREAS: it would prohibit the construction of basements in the special flood hazard area; WHEREAS: it would require new construction in areas identified as X (Shaded) to be constructed or flood-proofed to one and one half (1.5) feet above grade; WHEREAS: this item has been presented to the Zoning Ordinance Advisory Committee, the Peninsula Homebuilders Association, and the Virginia Peninsula Association of Realtors; and WHEREAS: there were no speakers at the public hearing for this item. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner McCloud and seconded by Commissioner Campbell, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends approval to City Council of the ordinance amendment to Chapters 2.1 and 17.3, Article V of the Zoning Ordinance. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Southall, Snead, LaRue NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 148-2014: Ordinance to Amend and Reenact Chapter 18.1 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending Section 18.1-13 Entitled, “Nonconforming Signs,” Pertaining to Damaged or Destroyed Nonconforming Signs. Approval of this amendment would further clarify when damaged or destroyed nonconforming signs must be removed or brought into conformity with the zoning ordinance. Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown presented Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 148-2014 regarding legal nonconforming uses that were lawful at the time of construction but which would not be permitted today under the current Zoning Ordinance. Many signs exist in the City of Hampton that were legal at the time they were constructed but have since become legal nonconforming uses due to changes over time in the Zoning Ordinance. The current Zoning Ordinance language is vague as to when a damaged nonconforming sign must be brought into conformance with the current zoning Planning Commission 20140807 Page 7 regulations. This amendment would clarify that a damaged or destroyed nonconforming sign requiring repairs at a cost of 50% or more of the replacement cost of the sign must be removed or brought into conformity with this ordinance. By contrast, if the repairs would cost less than 50% of the replacement cost of the sign, the owner may repair the sign and the sign will retain its legal nonconforming status. This is a housekeeping amendment and clarification will help the City’s zoning officials make determinations as to the status of damaged or destroyed nonconforming signs. Staff recommends approval of Zoning Ordinance amendment No. 148-2014. There were no speakers. WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day ZOA 148- 2014, a proposed ordinance to amend and re-enact Chapter 18.1 Entitled, “Signs” of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia By Amending Section 18.1-13 Pertaining to Nonconforming Signs; WHEREAS: the current zoning ordinance language is vague as to when a damaged nonconforming sign must be brought into conformance with the current zoning regulations; WHEREAS: this amendment would clarify that a damaged or destroyed nonconforming sign requiring repairs at a cost of 50% or more of the replacement cost of the sign must be removed or brought into conformity with the ordinance, but if the repairs would cost less than 50% of the replacement cost of the sign, the owner may repair the sign and the sign will retain its legal nonconforming status; WHEREAS: this is a housekeeping amendment necessary to assist the City’s zoning officials in making determinations as to the status of damaged or destroyed nonconforming signs; and WHEREAS: there were no speakers from the public. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner Campbell and seconded by Commissioner Southall, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends approval to City Council of the ordinance amendment to Chapter 18.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Southall, Snead, LaRue Planning Commission 20140807 Page 8  NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting C. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 149-2014: Ordinance to Amend and Reenact Chapter 2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending Section 2.1 Entitled, “Definitions” Pertaining to Adult Care Residences, Families, and Group Homes. Approval of this amendment would amend the definition of Group Home to comply with recent changes to the Virginia Code, which permit any staff counselors in the home to be residents or non-residents. Previously, the Virginia Code required staff to be residents of the home. Approval would also amend the definition of Family and incorporate the definition of Adult Care Residence into the Group Home use. D. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 150-2014: Ordinance to Amend and Reenact Chapter 2 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending Sections 2-2 Entitled, “Table of Uses Permitted” and 2- 3 Entitled, “Additional Standards on Uses” Pertaining to Development Standards for Adult Care Residences, Group Homes, Juvenile Residences, Orphanages, and Shelters. Approval of this amendment would remove the use and development standards for Adult Care Residence and incorporate it into the Group Home use. Additionally, this amendment would remove the design standards for the Group Home 2, Juvenile Residence 2 and 3, Orphanage, and Shelter uses in order to comply with legal requirements. Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown presented Zoning Ordinance Amendment 149-2014 and Zoning Ordinance Amendment 150-2014 which are housekeeping amendments necessary to bring the Zoning Ordinance into compliance with 2014 changes to the Virginia Code relative to group homes. The General Assembly changed the laws such that certain types of group homes do not have staff/counselors as residents. One can be a resident or non-resident. Also being folded in are changes and clarifications of adult care resident use so they are governed under the group home use. Under certain circumstances, the City of Hampton is required by state law to treat a group home with eight (8) or fewer residents as a single-family home under the zoning ordinance. Those circumstances include: Category A: A home licensed by the Virginia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services where eight (8) or fewer individuals with mental illness, intellectual disability, or developmental disabilities reside; and Category B: A home licensed by the Virginia Department of Social Services where eight (8) or fewer individuals who are aged, infirm or disabled reside. Planning Commission 20140807 Page 9  This year, the General Assembly amended § 15.2-2291 of the Code of Virginia related to Group Homes in “Category A” above. Previously, “Category A” group homes were required to have a resident staff person or counselor in the home. The General Assembly amended the Virginia Code such that the staff persons could be residents or nonresidents. ZOA 149-2014 would (1) remove the definition of Adult Care Residence because that use is being incorporated into the Group Home use so that the City has one use type that is consistent with the Virginia Code; (2) amend the definition of Family to remove the Adult Care Residence use; and (3) amend the definition of Group Home to comply with the change to the Virginia Code described above. This amendment is related to ZOA 150-2014, which amends the use table and standards on the uses for Group Home and Adult Care. ZOA 150-2014 would incorporate the Adult Care Residence use into the Group Home use so that the city has one use type that is consistent with the Virginia Code. It would also remove the design standards for the Group Home 2, Juvenile Residence 2 and 3, Orphanage, and Shelter uses. Removing the design standards is necessary to comply with current Virginia law. This amendment is related to ZOA 149-2014, which amends the definition of Group Home, Adult Care Residences, and Family. Staff recommends approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 149-2014 and Zoning Ordinance Amendment 150-2014. In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Ms. Brown explained that the only legal requirement based on the Virginia Code is the group home change. This was an opportunity to clarify the ordinance where there was a duplicative definition in use where it could be grouped together as part of group homes. There were no speakers. WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day ZOA 149- 2014, a proposed ordinance to amend and re-enact Chapter 2.1 Entitled, “Definitions” of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia By Amending Section 2.1-2 Pertaining to Adult Care Residences, Families, and Group Homes; WHEREAS: in 2014, the General Assembly amended § 15.2-2291 of the Code of Virginia related to Group Homes such that staff persons in certain Group Homes may now be residents or nonresidents, which necessitates complementary changes to the zoning ordinance; WHEREAS: this amendment would remove the definition of Adult Care Residence because that use is being incorporated into the Group Home use, amend the definition of Family to remove the Adult Planning Commission 20140807 Page 10  Care Residence use, and amend the definition of Group Home to comply with the change to the Virginia Code described above; WHEREAS: this amendment is being brought forward in connection with ZOA 150-2014; and WHEREAS: there were no speakers from the public. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner McCloud and seconded by Commissioner Southall, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends approval to City Council of the ordinance amendment to Chapter 2 of the Zoning Ordinance. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Southall, Snead, LaRue NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting ... WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day ZOA 150- 2014, a proposed ordinance to amend and re-enact Chapter 2 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending Sections 2-2 Entitled, “Table of Uses Permitted” and 2-3 Entitled, “Additional Standards on Uses” Pertaining to Development Standards for Adult Care Residences, Group Homes, Juvenile Residences, Orphanages, and Shelters; WHEREAS: in 2014, the General Assembly amended § 15.2-2291 of the Code of Virginia related to Group Homes such that the staff persons in certain Group Homes may now be residents or nonresidents, which necessitates complementary changes to the zoning ordinance; WHEREAS: this amendment would incorporate the Adult Care Residence use into the Group Home use and remove the design standards for the Group Home 2, Juvenile Residence 2 and 3, Orphanage, and Shelter uses to comply with current Virginia law; WHEREAS: this amendment is being brought forward in connection with ZOA 149-2014; and WHEREAS: there were no speakers from the public. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner McCloud and seconded by Commissioner Southall, Planning Commission 20140807 Page 11  BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends approval to City Council of the ordinance amendment to Chapter 2 of the Zoning Ordinance. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Southall, Snead, LaRue NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting E. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 151-2014: Ordinance to Amend and Reenact Chapter 25 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending Sections 25-2 Entitled, “Review Process for Building and Land Disturbing Permits,” 25-2.1 Entitled “Physical Property Survey,” 25- 2.2 Entitled, “Submitted Plans; Exceptions,” and 25-2.3 Entitled, “Copy of Plan” Pertaining to the Review Process for Building, Zoning, and Land Disturbing Permits and the Application Materials Required. Approval of this amendment would bring the zoning ordinance into compliance with best practices in the Development Services Center by clarifying what materials must be submitted for building, zoning, and land disturbing permits. Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown presented Zoning Ordinance Amendment No.151-2014. The Development Services Center (DSC) reviews and approves applications for many types of permits. Recently, the DSC revised its internal procedures related to what materials are required for review of a building or zoning permit application. Chapter 25 of the Zoning Ordinance governs submission of materials for building and zoning permits. Under normal circumstances, a physical property survey of the development site as well as a scaled two-dimensional plan of the intended development on the site is required prior to issuance of a building permit. Zoning permits require similar materials. This amendment would clarify that the Zoning Administrator may waive the requirement for submission of the survey and/or two dimensional plan when the development being proposed does not warrant submission. For example, a simple shed outside the Chesapeake Bay Preservation District may not warrant submittal of a survey and sketch of the development. Waiver of the requirement under those circumstances will save applicants money and time. In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Zoning Official David Stromberg stated there is written guidance. Anything over 200 square feet requires a building permit and anything requiring a building permit requires a survey. Lot coverage and setbacks are determined from the survey. Anything less than 200 square feet requires a zoning permit and that is where it is typical that the survey requirement could be waived. The legal ability is clarified to allow for flexibility. Planning Commission 20140807 Page 12  Ms. Brown stated the ordinance does not allow for the survey requirement to be waived. Staff always looks for conformity across the board. Community Development Director Terry O’Neill stated this is not an attempt to gain greater authority. This is an attempt to try and keep costs down for smaller projects where the cost of generating a survey would be a major cost of doing a project. Commissioner Campbell stated his concern was that guidelines are in place. He stated he is in favor of this amendment. In response to a question from Chairman LaRue, Mr. Stromberg stated there are guidelines in place to determine when a project would not allow a waiver. Staff recommends approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 151-2014. There were no speakers. WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day ZOA 151- 2014, a proposed ordinance to amend and re-enact Chapter 25 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending Sections 25-2 Entitled, “Review Process for Building and Land Disturbing Permits,” 25-2.1 Entitled “Physical Property Survey,” 25-2.2 Entitled, “Submitted Plans; Exceptions,” and 25-2.3 Entitled, “Copy of Plan” Pertaining to the Review Process for Building, Zoning, and Land Disturbing Permits and the Application Materials Required; WHEREAS: Recently, the DSC revised its internal procedures related to which materials are required for review of a building or zoning permit application; WHEREAS: currently the ordinance requires a physical property survey of a development site as well as a scaled two-dimensional plan of the intended development on the site prior to issuance of a building or zoning permit; WHEREAS: this amendment would permit the Zoning Administrator to waive the requirement for submission of the survey and/or two dimensional plan when the development being proposed does not warrant submission; and WHEREAS: there were no speakers from the public. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner Southall and seconded by Commissioner McCloud, Planning Commission 20140807 Page 13  BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends approval to City Council of the ordinance amendment to Chapter 25 of the Zoning Ordinance. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Southall, Snead, LaRue NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting F. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 152-2014: Ordinance to Amend and Reenact Chapter 1 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending Section 1-13 Entitled “Fence and Wall Regulations” Pertaining to Fence and Wall Regulations. Approval of this amendment would clarify when fences and walls may be located on a parcel and standards for height of fences, walls, and hedges. Secretary to the Commission Terry O’Neill stated this amendment requires additional work by staff and the request at this time is for withdrawal until a later date. On a motion by Commissioner McCloud and seconded by Commissioner Southall, the Hampton Planning Commission recommended the request for Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 152-2014 be withdrawn. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Snead, Southall, LaRue NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting G. Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 14-00002: Ordinance to Amend and Reenact Chapter 35 of the City Code of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending: Article I Sections 35-7 Entitled “Exceptions” and 35-13 Entitled, “Master Plan for Phased Subdivisions”; Article II Section 35-23 Entitled, “Contents”; Article IV Section 35-67 Entitled, “Stormwater Drainage System”; and Article V Sections 35-103 Entitled, “Contents” and 35-108 Entitled, “Construction and Maintenance of Public Improvements; Performance Bond in Lieu of Installation; Maintenance Bonds; Release of Bonds” Pertaining to the Citation for the Stormwater Management Chapter in the City Code. Approval of this amendment would amend the subdivision ordinance to reflect the new number for the Stormwater Management Chapter of the City Code, which was recently updated in order to comply with state law. Staff recommended approval of Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 14- 0002. Planning Commission 20140807 Page 14  WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day SOA 14- 00002, a proposed ordinance to amend and re-enact Chapter 35 of the City Code of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending: Article I Sections 35-7 Entitled “Exceptions” and 35-13 Entitled, “Master Plan for Phased Subdivisions”; Article II Section 35-23 Entitled, “Contents”; Article IV Section 35-67 Entitled, “Stormwater Drainage System”; and Article V Sections 35-103 Entitled, “Contents” and 35-108 Entitled, “Construction and Maintenance of Public Improvements; Performance Bond in Lieu of Installation; Maintenance Bonds; Release of Bonds,” Pertaining to the Citation for the Stormwater Management Chapter in the City; WHEREAS: pursuant to Virginia law, the City of Hampton was required to prepare a stormwater management ordinance consistent with the requirements of Virginia’s new stormwater regulations that took effect July 1, 2014; WHEREAS: the stormwater changes required a comprehensive amendment to the city’s existing Stormwater Management chapter in the City Code; WHEREAS: this amendment would amend the subdivision ordinance to reflect the new chapter number for the Stormwater Management chapter of the City Code, which was 33.1 and is now 33.2; and WHEREAS: there were no speakers from the public. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner Southall and seconded by Commissioner Campbell, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends approval to City Council of the ordinance amendment to Chapter 35 of the City Code. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Southall, Snead, LaRue NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting H. Site Plan Ordinance Amendment No. 14-00001: Ordinance to Amend and Reenact Chapter 35.1 of the City Code of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending: Article I Sections 35.1-2 Entitled, “Application and Scope of Chapter; Definitions,” 35.1-3 Entitled, “Administration and Enforcement of Chapter,” 35.1-7 Entitled, “Exceptions,” and Section 35.1-10 Entitled, “Compliance with Other Ordinances”; Article II Sections 35.1-22 Entitled, Planning Commission 20140807 Page 15  “Contents of a Site Plan” and 35.1-25 Entitled, “Review of a Site Plan – Approval or Disapproval Generally”; Article III Sections 35.1-41 Entitled, “General Requirements” and 35.1-50 Entitled “Stormwater Management Facilities”; and Article IV Section 35.1-106 Entitled, “Construction and Maintenance of Public Improvements; Performance Bond; Release of Performance Bond” Pertaining to the Citation for the Stormwater Management Chapter in the City Code. Approval of this amendment would amend the site plan ordinance to reflect the new number for the Stormwater Management Chapter of the City Code, which was recently updated in order to comply with state law. Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown presented Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 14-00002 and Site Plan Ordinance Amendment No. 14-00001. These two items are related. Pursuant to Virginia law, the City of Hampton was required to prepare a stormwater management ordinance consistent with the requirements of Virginia’s new stormwater regulations that took effect July 1, 2014. This required a comprehensive amendment to the City’s existing Stormwater Management chapter in the City Code. Approval of this amendment would amend the site plan ordinance to reflect the new chapter number for the Stormwater Management Chapter of the City Code. The old chapter number was 33.1 and the new chapter number is 33.2. Staff recommended approval of Site Plan Ordinance Amendment No. 14-00001. WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day SOA 14- 00002, a proposed ordinance to amend and re-enact Chapter 35 of the City Code of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending: Article I Sections 35-7 Entitled “Exceptions” and 35-13 Entitled, “Master Plan for Phased Subdivisions”; Article II Section 35-23 Entitled, “Contents”; Article IV Section 35-67 Entitled, “Stormwater Drainage System”; and Article V Sections 35-103 Entitled, “Contents” and 35-108 Entitled, “Construction and Maintenance of Public Improvements; Performance Bond in Lieu of Installation; Maintenance Bonds; Release of Bonds,” Pertaining to the Citation for the Stormwater Management Chapter in the City; WHEREAS: pursuant to Virginia law, the City of Hampton was required to prepare a stormwater management ordinance consistent with the requirements of Virginia’s new stormwater regulations that took effect July 1, 2014; WHEREAS: the stormwater changes required a comprehensive amendment to the city’s existing Stormwater Management chapter in the City Code; Planning Commission 20140807 Page 16  WHEREAS: this amendment would amend the subdivision ordinance to reflect the new chapter number for the Stormwater Management chapter of the City Code, which was 33.1 and is now 33.2; and WHEREAS: there were no speakers from the public. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner Southall and seconded by Commissioner Campbell, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends approval to City Council of the ordinance amendment to Chapter 35 of the City Code. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Southall, Snead, LaRue NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting ITEM VI. CLOSED SESSION Chairman LaRue entertained a motion to convene a closed session pursuant to the exemption from open meetings allowed by Section 2.2-3711(A)(7) of the Code of Virginia to consult with legal counsel regarding specific legal matters requiring the provision of legal advice by such counsel. A motion was made by Commissioner McCloud, and seconded by Commissioner Campbell that the Hampton Planning Commission enter into closed session. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Southall, Snead, LaRue NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting Certification of Closed Session Chairman LaRue entertained a motion to certify that to the best of each member’s knowledge that: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under Virginia law were discussed 2. Only public business matters as were identified in the motion, by which the closed meeting was convened, were heard, discussed or, considered in the closed meeting by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission 20140807 Page 17  A motion was made by Commissioner McCloud, and seconded by Commissioner Campbell that to the best of each member’s knowledge that: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under Virginia law were discussed 2. Only public business matters as were identified in the motion, by which the closed meeting was convened, were heard, discussed or, considered in the closed meeting by the Planning Commission. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Southall, Snead, LaRue NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting ITEM VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 142-2014: Ordinance to Amend and Reenact Chapter 17.3 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending: Sections 17.3-120 through 17.3-121 and 17.3-123 of Article XVI Entitled, “SPI-IH---Infill Housing District,” Pertaining to Development on Substandard Lots in the R-8, R-9, R-11, and R-13 Zoning Districts. Approval of this amendment would change the process by which building permits are reviewed and approved for single-family homes on lots that do not meet the minimum lot frontage and/or lot area required by the zoning district where the property is located. The process would allow an applicant to submit building plans for an administrative review. Standards related to height, green area, garage placement, and dwelling size would apply. WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day ZOA 142- 2014, a proposed ordinance to amend and re-enact Chapter 17.3 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending: Sections 17.3-120 through 17.3-121 and 17.3-123 of Article XVI Entitled, “SPI-IH---Infill Housing District,” Pertaining to Development on Substandard Lots in the R-8, R-9, R-11, and R-13 Zoning Districts; WHEREAS: this proposed amendment is accompanied by ZOA 147-2014 and ZOA 153-2014, which pertain to the striking of the forced merger provision and providing a reduced parking standard for lots less than 40 feet in width; WHEREAS: the proposed changes to SPI-IH provide dimensional standards for infill development on substandard lots; Planning Commission 20140807 Page 18  WHEREAS: SPI-IH would apply to existing lots and not newly created lots; WHEREAS: SPI-IH would apply to substandard lots with a base zoning district of R-8, R-9, R-11, or R-13; WHEREAS: the Hampton Community Plan (2006, as amended) sets forth Land Use and Community Design Objectives, including 1) Promote the efficient use of land. Recognize land as a limited resource; 2) Be responsive to market and demographic trends and opportunities; 3) Protect community appearance, character, and design; and 4) Protect real property values; WHEREAS: the proposed standards address dimensional elements to ensure development of substandard lots is in keeping with the pattern of the community, including 1) Basing front yard setbacks on the average of neighboring properties; 2) Limiting building height to two stories; 3) Setting a minimum green area for the front yard; and 4) Addressing garage placement; and WHEREAS: there was one speaker from the public, who spoke in support of this amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner Campbell and seconded by Commissioner McCloud, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends approval to City Council of the ordinance amendment to Chapter 17.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Southall, Snead, LaRue NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 147-2014: Ordinance to Amend and Reenact Chapter 19 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending Article III Entitled, “Parking Credits” to Add a New Section 19-9 Pertaining to Parking Exemptions and Reductions in the SPI-IH Infill Housing District. Approval of this amendment would reduce the number of required parking spaces to one space per housekeeping unit for residential development on substandard lots in the R-8, R-9, R-11, and R-13 zoning districts that have a lot frontage of less than 40 feet. WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day ZOA 147- 2014, a proposed ordinance to amend and re-enact Chapter 19 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia by Amending Article III Entitled, “Parking Credits” to Add a New Planning Commission 20140807 Page 19  Section 19-9 Pertaining to Parking Exemptions and Reductions in the SPI-IH Infill Housing District; WHEREAS: this proposed amendment is accompanied by ZOA 142-2014 and ZOA153-2014, which pertain to the striking of the forced merger provision and setting standards for infill development on existing substandard lots; WHEREAS: the current standard of two off street parking spaces on lots narrower than 40 feet would necessitate greater than 50 percent of the front yard be consumed by paved parking area; WHEREAS: the proposed amendment would lower the minimum parking space requirement for existing substandard lots narrower than 40 feet to one off street parking space; WHEREAS: the Hampton Community Plan (2006, as amended) sets forth Land Use and Community Design Objectives, including 1) Promote the efficient use of land. Recognize land as a limited resource; 2) Be responsive to market and demographic trends and opportunities; 3) Protect community appearance, character, and design; and 4) Protect real property values; WHEREAS: lots less narrower than 40 feet are typically found in the City of Hampton’s older, historic neighborhoods where limiting the amount of paved area in the front yard preserves community appearance and character; and WHEREAS: there was one speaker from the public, who spoke in support of this amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner McCloud and seconded by Commissioner Snead, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends approval to City Council of the ordinance amendment to Chapter 19 of the Zoning Ordinance. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Southall, Snead, LaRue NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting Planning Commission 20140807 Page 20  C. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 153-2014: Ordinance to Amend and Reenact Chapter 1 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia By Amending Section 1-22 Entitled, “Substandard Lots” Pertaining to Development on Substandard Lots. Approval of this amendment would remove the requirement that substandard lots held in common ownership with any contiguous lot on the same right-of-way since 1989 be merged as a pre-requisite to development in order to comply with legal requirements. Copies of documents or information concerning this proposal may be obtained from the Community Development Department located in Hampton City Hall at 22 Lincoln Street or from Mike Hayes at 757-728-5244 or mdhayes@hampton.gov. Senior City Planner Mike Hayes presented Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 142-2014, Zoning Ordinance Amendment 147-2014, and Zoning Ordinance Amendment 153-2014. These three amendments are related and will be presented collectively with a separate motion required on each of the three items. As stated by Mr. O’Neill the three amendments are intertwined. They are located in Chapter 17.3, Chapter 19, and Chapter 1 and deal with standards for substandard lots. A substandard lot is generally a previously legally platted lot that does not meet the dimensional standards (i.e. square footage or lot width) of the zoning district in which it is located. Currently there is an involuntary merger, which requires lots that have been in common ownership since 1989 by the same person or even another person would have to be merged. This places the City at a substantial legal risk. Leading this effort is to remove that provision. In addition, City staff has looked at goals and objectives and other things that can be accomplished in moving forward. It was recognized that many of these lots are in older and historic neighborhoods. In most cases there is a definitive pattern as to how those neighborhoods were developed. Making those changes would require future developments to be within those patterns as well. In doing this it helps meet a number of objectives in the Community Plan. One of the big objectives under land use and community design is to promote the efficient use of land and recognize land as a limited resource. This is true globally and especially in Hampton where there is a limited amount of vacant land. This is not only an opportunity to rectify a legal issue but an opportunity to encourage development in Hampton and provide opportunities for investment. Currently the SPI-IH designation only applies to a small section of the City but the recommended changes are for substandard lots city wide for properties zoned R-8, R-9, R-11, and R-13. It is an overlay district so the basic district requirements will still apply. Additional measures will still be provided. Some of the conditions include the front yard setback to a build-to line. Typically setbacks are a minimum setback, but what has been found is that older neighborhoods have a definitive pattern. The build-to line will be developed at the point where the Planning Commission 20140807 Page 21 front of the house must sit and that would be taken from the average of the block. Also taken into consideration is the building height maximum which will be restricted to two stories which will keep from squeezing homes on smaller lots and building them taller than the other dwellings in the area. For lots that are smaller than required and if it is a new development, it is proposed that there be a 50% requirement for green space in the front yard so a developer cannot come in and pave over the entire front yard with a parking pad. Keeping that in mind and recognizing there are some lots in the City that are 40 feet wide and 50% of that would be 20 feet and the parking space minimum would be met. Anything smaller would not meet the parking space minimum. It has been recommended in Chapter 19 to lower the requirement to one space for lots smaller than 40 feet. In neighborhoods where these lots are found, on-street parking has long been the norm. Lastly, if garages are proposed on these smaller lots, it is recommended they be placed behind the front of the house. This is done for safety matters to allow one to see down the street. Once all of the requirements are overlaid, the dwelling size of a district may not be able to be met. This provision would calculate the maximum building that could be placed within the building envelope. The height is still capped at two stories and could limit the amount of building square footage. This provision would allow a new minimum to be set for that particular lot based on the lot’s physical configuration. Staff recommends approval of ZOA 142-2014, ZOA 147-2014, and 153-2014. In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Mr. Hayes stated the minimum parking requirement is one space. A typical parking space is 10 feet wide and there should be enough for space to have one space on a 40 foot lot. If there is a hardship and the one required space cannot be attained, one may still go before the Board of Zoning Appeals. Melissa Wilmer, of 2398 Ponderosa Road, Lynch Station, Virginia, stated she is a concerned land owner who in 2010 purchased a 50’x150’ lot along with a house on an adjoining lot. She has since sold the house and was informed at that time she now has a non-buildable lot. Her reason for coming before the Planning Commission is to plead her hardship as there are houses on the street on the same size lot that are bigger than the one she had been living in. In response to Ms. Wilmer’s questions, Ms. LaRue stated this amendment is designed to help people in this type of situation as the existing law does not allow one to build on this lot. This change in our laws will allow for development of lots that do not fall under the normal zoning size requirements. Criteria and standards will be established through the ordinance. Ms. Wilmer stated she would never have bought the lot had she known about the current ordinance restriction. Planning Commission 20140807 Page 22  Chairman LaRue stated this is a common story that has been heard regarding this issue. There are many lots that are legally filed do not fit into the requirements because Hampton is an older community. Chairman LaRue thanked Ms. Wilmer for coming and expressing an interest in this Zoning Ordinance amendment. WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day ZOA 153- 2014, a proposed ordinance to amend and re-enact Chapter 1 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia By Amending Section 1-22 Entitled, “Substandard Lots” Pertaining to Development on Substandard Lots; WHEREAS: this proposed amendment is accompanied by ZOA 142-2014 and ZOA 147-2014, which pertain to context sensitive dimensional standards for development of existing substandard lots and providing a reduced parking standard for lots less than 40 feet in width; WHEREAS: the definition of a substandard lot is a lot that does not meet the dimensional standards of the zoning district in which it is located, but met the requirements in effect at the time the lot was recorded; WHEREAS: the Zoning Ordinance currently permits development on substandard lots so long as they have not been in common ownership at any point since January 12, 1989; WHEREAS: as a pre-requisite to development on contiguous substandard lots that have been in common ownership at any point since January 12, 1989, the lots must be merged; WHEREAS: the judicial branch has generally held that land use standards and regulations need to be blind to ownership; WHEREAS: the current provision treats legally recorded lots differently based upon their ownership history since January 12, 1989; WHEREAS: the City of Hampton is placed at legal risk due to the existing substandard lot provision in Chapter 1 of the Zoning Ordinance; WHEREAS: the Hampton Community Plan (2006, as amended) sets forth Land Use and Community Design Objectives, including 1) Promote the efficient use of land. Recognize land as a limited resource; 2) Be responsive to market and demographic trends and opportunities; 3) Protect community appearance, character, and design; and 4) Protect real property values; Planning Commission 20140807 Page 23  WHEREAS: the proposed amendment strikes the language requiring, as a condition of development, the merger of contiguous, legally recorded lots that happen to have been in common ownership at any point since January 12, 1989; and WHEREAS: there was one speaker from the public, who spoke in support of this amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner Campbell and seconded by Commissioner Snead, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends approval to City Council of the ordinance amendment to Chapter 1 of the Zoning Ordinance. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Campbell, McCloud, Southall, Snead, LaRue NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Williams, Bunting ITEM VIII. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR’S REPORT A. Updates on Upcoming Community Plan & Zoning Amendments Planning & Zoning Services Manager Keith Cannady presented an update of Fort Monroe. Mr. Cannady explained that this is a process that began in 2004 with the BRAC decision. The Planning Commission and City Council are considering amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance to reflect those changes. Also previously discussed was the uniqueness of Fort Monroe and what Planning and Zoning does in Community Development. One of the things that make Fort Monroe so unique is the National Park Service (NPS), the National Monument at Fort Monroe, and the involvement of the Fort Monroe Authority (FMA) that was created specifically for the purpose of moving this reuse process forward. A graphic was developed early on that shows how the three bodies work together to bring about this reuse of Fort Monroe. The Fort Monroe property is located entirely within the city limits of the City of Hampton, so the City will be the provider of municipal services for Fort Monroe. That was not the case when it was an army base, but as the use and ownership changes the City will be providing all the customary services businesses and neighborhoods expect. Infrastructure was put in place by the Army that does not meet municipal and engineering standards. Efforts are underway to upgrade those services to meet Planning Commission 20140807 Page 24 municipal standards. State codes for Planning and Zoning have to be met. The authorities FMA has will also be looked at. The roles and responsibilities of each are as follows and should answer some of the questions asked at last month’s meeting: CITY OF HAMPTON • Provider of Municipal Services – • Schools, police, fire EMS, animal control, social services, libraries, recreation, courts, voter precincts, etc. • Roads, storm water, water & sewer services: accepted when upgraded to municipal standards (Hampton, VDOT, HRSD, and Newport News Waterworks) • Planning, Zoning, and building permits: except governmental activity on governmental land  Planning and Zoning: the city shall recognize FMA obligations for land use regulation under the reuse plan, design standards and other agreements. (FMA Act 7/1/14) • Ultimately subject to local taxation.  PILOT: payment in-lieu of taxes for real estate to help pay for municipal services while Fort Monroe properties are not subject to local taxation NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • Will own and operate the Fort Monroe National Monument. (Both fee ownership and easements.) • Works in partnership with other federal agencies to implement the National Historic Preservation Act. • Signatory of the Fort Monroe Programmatic Agreement which required enforcement of the design standards. FORT MONROE AUTHORITY • An independent political subdivision created by the Commonwealth to manage the property at Fort Monroe. • Serves as the local redevelopment authority under Federal BRAC law and the primary link between the Federal government and the local community. • Governed by a 12 member Board of Trustees. • Responsible for economic development as well as protection of historic and environmental resources. . . . foster and stimulate the economic and other development of Fort Monroe, including development for business, employment, housing, commercial, recreational, educational, and other public purposes. . . • Ensure the protection of “historic, cultural and natural resources” at Fort Monroe through the use of “covenants, historic conservation easements, historic preservation easements, or other appropriate legal restrictions”. Planning Commission 20140807 Page 25  Going forward the FMA responsibilities are already developed and in place and will be a big part of what the City considers as zoning options are developed for the Fort. In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Mr. Cannady stated regarding “payment in lieu of taxes” means that the FMA makes the payment to the Real Estate Assessor of the City of Hampton. ITEM IX. ITEMS BY THE PUBLIC There were no items presented by the public. ITEM X. MATTERS BY THE COMMISSION Vice-Chair Southall commended staff on the hard work and research involved on all the amendments brought forward today. ITEM XI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:08 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ___________________________________ Terry O’Neill Secretary to the Commission APPROVED BY: ____________________________________ Gaynette LaRue Chairman Planning Commission 20140807 Page 26