Planning Commission Agendas & Minutes

AT THE WORK SESSION OF THE HAMPTON PLANNING COMMISSION HELD IN THE LAWSON CONFERENCE ROOM, 8TH FLOOR, CITY HALL, 22 LINCOLN STREET, HAMPTON, VIRGINIA, ON THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2017 AT 3:00 P.M. Chairman Christopher Carter called the meeting to order at 3:01 p.m. A call of the roll noted Commissioners Trina Coleman, Carole Garrison, Ruthann Kellum, Vice-Chair Tommy Southall, Pete Peterson, and Chairman Carter as being present. Commissioner Jimmy Gray was noted as absent. Staff in attendance were Secretary to the Commission/Director of Community Development Terry O’Neill, Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown, Planning & Zoning Administration Division Manager Michael Hayes, Senior City Planner Tolu Ibikunle, City Planner Lucy Stoll, City Planner Porter Stevens, and Recording Secretary/Administrative Assistant Kristie Graves. The Commission and staff discussed the following agenda items, with the following information being provided: Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00004: by the City of Hampton to Amend and Re-Enact Chapter 9, Article 2 of the Zoning Ordinance Entitled “O-CBP District – Chesapeake Bay Preservation overlay”. The current Chesapeake Bay Review Committee is comprised largely of city staff with the exception of one member. The request shifts exception reviews to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) which is a citizen appointed board, and is intended to eliminate conflicts in the existing review process and place the duty with an existing board already structured to deal with quasi-judicial decisions regarding zoning provisions. Staff proposed the amendment to Council and various options were discussed. Typically each chapter of the Zoning Ordinance will have its own amendment. In this case, all of the changes to the Chesapeake Bay Overlay District – except for the definitions changes -- are presented together in one package. In order to separate the BZA issue from the rest of the changes, the item should be deferred and re- advertised. Use Permit Application No. 17-00012: by David Swartz to permit the application of a vehicle storage lot for ten (10) to thirty (30) vehicles at 1619 W. Pembroke Avenue. The use permit application applies to the property but conditions limit the location where the vehicle storage can occur on the submitted site plan. The use is limited to a certain area; other vehicles stored on the property are being repaired by an auto repair businesses. If auto repair is a permitted use for the other portion of the lot, it cannot be used for the vehicle storage to be in compliance with the use permit conditions. The use permit will not negatively impact any permitted use on the site; it allows the area specified in the site plan only to be used as additional vehicle storage use. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00008: by the City of Hampton to Amend and Re-Enact Chapter 8, Article 7 of the Zoning Ordinance Entitled “Phoebus Districts”. The current Ordinance states that “All buildings shall be a minimum of 18’ and a maximum of 50’ and 3 stories in height”. Staff recommends striking the language “and 3 stories” that restricts limits on the permitted height of new buildings in what is known as the historic Phoebus business district. The Phoebus District extends on Mallory Street from I-64 to Mercury Boulevard and on Mellon Street from Libby Street to the Fort Monroe Bridge. In comparison to downtown Hampton, Mallory and Mellon Streets are equivalent to King and Queen Streets, but as you move away from the historic core of these districts, the height standard changes to taller buildings. When writing the ordinances, staff balances different perspectives and the height standard allows a reasonable limit on scale of buildings. Staff worked closely with the Partnership for a New Phoebus, Inc. in developing the standard for the maximum height. A developer can apply for a rezoning of a WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 1 site; their development would be reviewed before the Planning Commission and City Council who will decide if it is appropriate for a taller building to be on that site. If elevation of the ground floor for parking removes the building out of flood elevation, the developer is not penalized. If the building is not in a flood area or Code does not require the building to be lifted, the 50’ height maximum starts at the ground. Free boarding only applies when in a flood zone; otherwise the stories begin at the first floor of living area. There is no generic definition as to what defines a story; it is dependent on the type of building, construction and architecture and whether a commercial or residential building. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Nos. 17-00006 and 17-00007: by the by the City of Hampton to Amend and Re-Enact Chapter 2, Section 2-2 of the Zoning Ordinance Entitled “Definition” to add the definition of public and private schools, and Chapter 3, Section 3-2 of the Zoning Ordinance Entitled “Uses Permitted” to remove dance school and business school from the use table. Public and private schools are listed in the use table but do not have definitions previously, the two amendments help to clean up the definitions of school as a permitted use. Those specific schools defined and listed in the ordinance are very specific and limiting, and can present problems when an applicant submits a use permit. Staff decided to remove the specially named schools to have only two categories, public and private. If adopted, business and dance school would fall under the definition of private school. Council Chambers Renovations: This is the first Planning Commission meeting being held in Council Chambers since renovations. Planning Commissioners will receive a brief tutorial on the new technology. Work session adjourned at 3:30 p.m. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 2 AT THE REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING OF THE HAMPTON PLANNING COMMISSION HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 8TH FLOOR, CITY HALL, 22 LINCOLN STREET, HAMPTON, VIRGINIA, ON THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2017 AT 3:30 P.M. l. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Christopher Carter called the meeting to order at 3:35 p.m. II. ROLL CALL A call of the roll noted Commissioners Trina Coleman, Carole Garrison, Ruthann Kellum, Vice-Chair Tommy Southall, Pete Peterson, and Chairman Carter as being present. Commissioner Jimmy Gray was noted as absent. Staff in attendance were Secretary to the Commission/Director of Community Development Terry O’Neill, Deputy Director of Community Development Steve Shapiro, Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown, Planning & Zoning Administration Division Manager Michael Hayes, Development Services Center Manager David Stromberg, Senior City Planner Tolu Ibikunle, City Planner Lucy Stoll, City Planner Porter Stevens, Zoning Official Hannah Sabo, Junior Youth Planner Symone Gibbs, and Recording Secretary/Administrative Assistant Kristie Graves. III. MINUTES – SEPTEMBER 21, 2017 WORK SESSION & PUBLIC MEETING A motion was made by Commissioner Trina Coleman and seconded by Vice-Chair Tommy Southall to approve the minutes of the September 21, 2017 Work Session and Planning Commission meeting. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Coleman, Garrison, Kellum, Southall, Peterson, Carter NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Gray IV. MINUTES – OCTOBER 19, 2017 WORK SESSION A motion was made by Commissioner Ruthann Kellum and seconded by Vice-Chair Tommy Southall to approve the minutes of the October 19, 2017 Work Session. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Coleman, Garrison, Kellum, Southall, Peterson, Carter NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Gray V. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS Secretary O’Neill read the 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 manner. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 3  Secretary O’Neill suggested that the next two related public hearing items be part of one presentation and public hearing. A separate motion and vote will be required for each item. A. ZOA 17-00004 – AMEND AND RE-ENACT CHAPTER 9, ARTICLE 2, “O-CBP DISTRICT – CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION OVERLAY” Secretary O’Neill read the public hearing notice on the agenda item. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00004: by the City of Hampton to Amend and Re-Enact Chapter 9, Article 2 Of The Zoning Ordinance Of The City Of Hampton, Virginia Entitled “O-CBP District – Chesapeake Bay Preservation Overlay”. Approval of this amendment would reorganize the ordinance, create new “special green area” requirements, authorize administrative review of the permitted encroachments into the Resource Protection Area buffer, and transfer responsibility for review of exception requests from the existing Chesapeake Bay Review Committee to the Board of Zoning Appeals. This item is proposed in conjunction with Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00005 to amend definitions pertaining to the O-CBP District. Copies of documents or information concerning this proposal may be obtained from the Community Development Department located in City Hall at 22 Lincoln Street, or from Mike Hayes, 757-728- 5244 or mdhayes@hampton.gov. B. ZOA 17-00005 – AMEND AND RE-ENACT CHAPTER 2, “DEFINITIONS”, SECTION 2-2, UPDATE O-CBP DISTRICT – CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION OVERLAY” Secretary O’Neill read the public hearing notice on the next agenda item. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00005: by the City of Hampton to Amend and Re-Enact Chapter 2 Of The Zoning Ordinance Of The City Of Hampton, Virginia Entitled “Definitions” By Amending Section 2-2. Approval of this amendment would update definitions pertaining to the O-CBP District including “Green Area,” “Impervious Surface,” “Resource Delineation,” “Special Green Area,” “Water Quality Impact Assessment, Major,” and “Water Quality Impact Assessment, Minor.” This item is proposed in conjunction with Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00004 to reorganize the O-CBP District. Copies of documents or information concerning this proposal may be obtained from the Community Development Department located in City Hall at 22 Lincoln Street, or from Mike Hayes, 757-728-5244 or mdhayes@hampton.gov. Planning & Zoning Administration Division Manager Michael Hayes presented the staff report on the subject amendments, copies of which are attached to the original minutes. He stated staff recommends approval of the two (2) zoning ordinance amendments. In response to questions from Commission Southall, Mr. Hayes responded that the Chesapeake Bay Review Committee currently reviews exception requests, as well as future administrative approvals, such as driveways, additions into the buffer area, and clearings not associated to water related uses. The Committee reviews less than one exception request per year; although, there were several exception requests regarding a particular subdivision. Under the current ordinance, the Chesapeake Bay Review Committee can grant relief via exceptions without the applicant going to the Board of Zoning Appeals. There is the potential for houses WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 4 adjacent to each other to have different front yard setbacks due to the Special Green Area setback relief. Commissioner Garrison commented that she had sat on the Chesapeake Bay Review Committee, attended meetings, and felt she was more familiar than most of the members on the Planning Commission. She shared that some of the cases that come before the Committee involved homeowners who have built too close to the Resource Protection Area (RPA) buffer, want a large back yard where there is the RPA buffer, or where a developer has built up to the RPA buffer and implies to the homeowner that the area can be cleared. The homeowner clears the area but gets fined and has to go before the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) because of the violation. Commissioner Garrison believed that the “special green area” requirement is good for people new to the area who are not aware of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act. She said that it was good for an applicant to be able to go before a smaller board set up by the City like the Chesapeake Bay Review Committee with members who are trained specifically, as opposed to BZA which is not set up by the City. She also shared concerns with third parties having to go to Court to appeal when they are affected by a decision made by BZA. Commissioner Garrison stated that the change in process would be hurting the majority of people who live in those particular areas. She felt that the RPA and “special green area” are different and not related; and therefore should not be voted on together. The RPA is by the General Assembly and the “special green area” is by the City. Commissioner Garrison added that she will request that the Zoning Ordinance Amendment be deferred and separated into two amendments. In response to Commissioner Garrison’s comments, Secretary O’Neill assured that although BZA is not currently trained in administering this Ordinance, if the amendment is approved by City Council, members will be trained in the technical aspects of how this Ordinance is administered. There is a commitment on behalf of the City that members of BZA or any other Board will have to be trained on the nuances and specifics of their particular Board’s responsibilities. He added that it is Council’s intent to try to ensure that the members of the Board bring enough training and expertise to do their job well, as well as represent wide diverse perspectives on any given issue. He did not want any Commissioner to have reservations because they believed that the responsibility would be going to a Board that is not trained on what their responsibilities are. In response to a question from Commissioner Peterson, Mr. Hayes answered that the amendment proposes splitting two different types of reviews that currently go before the Chesapeake Bay Review Committee. The “Permitted Encroachments” will be authorized under administrative reviews and will impact more people. The “Exceptions” will go before the BZA. The “special green area” will be reviewed at the subdivision level because it requires proof that there is buildable area outside of the “special green area”. Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown elaborated that if an application does go before the BZA, the hearing is advertised in the local newspaper two weeks prior to the hearing date and the adjacent property owners receive an individual notice of the public hearing. Commissioner Garrison further commented that she has been to hearings where one developer had fifteen houses and others where there were developers with houses in different areas. She felt that citizens were being limited on what they can respond to with regard to the property that they are paying taxes on. She stated that she felt the particular cases should be switched to a citizen’s board instead of BZA. She also commented that she believes the BZA members are very qualified but the City cannot demand training, they can only request it and members can comply, which is not the same as being required. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 5  In response to Commissioner Garrison’s statements, Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown stated that BZA is a Circuit Court-Appointed Board. City Council makes a recommendation to the Circuit Court of who to appoint to the Board. In her experience with the City, the Board members have never rejected a training opportunity. Community Development Department staff has had one Chesapeake Bay training session with the BZA in anticipation of this Zoning Ordinance Amendment. She noted that she does not foresee training as an issue. Jill Davis, 42 Wallace Road, spoke in opposition of the subject amendments. Ms. Davis stated that she had emailed the Planning Commissioners prior to the meeting expressing several concerns she had about the amendment. Her first concern was that she believed that two separate items are linked together in one vote and shouldn’t be. She stated that if a person agrees with the “special green area” requirement but does not agree with the transferring the responsibility of the Chesapeake Bay Review Committee, they are in a “lose-lose situation” because you could not have one and still have the other. She added that she would like to see the items separated for vote. Secondly, she shared that after reviewing the paperwork submitted by the City, she was unable to find the guidance from City Council on this item, documentation that shows problems and/or conflicts with the Chesapeake Bay Review Committee process or a basis for the assertions made in the beginning of the proposed amendment. Her third concern was that if the documentation is not included in the package, it does not become a part of the public record. For example, if she wanted information from today’s meeting, Council’s recommendation to staff regarding the proposed amendments or other documentation, she would have to submit a FOIA request to receive it from a public meeting. She further agreed with Commissioner Garrison’s comments in that it is an unnecessary financial burden on citizens to have to pay money and go to court. She added that transferring the review process from the Chesapeake Bay Review Committee removes any transparency from the process. There were no additional questions or speakers. A motion was made by Commissioner Carole Garrison and seconded by Commissioner Trina Coleman to defer Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00004 until the December 21, 2017 Hampton Planning Commission meeting to allow further consideration to determine which Board will responsible for hearing exception requests. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Coleman, Garrison, Kellum, Carter NAYS: Southall, Peterson ABST: None ABSENT: Gray Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown recommended that the related Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00005 be deferred to the December 21, 2017 Planning Commission meeting as well because they are interrelated. There were no additional questions or speakers. A motion was made by Vice-Chair Tommy Southall and seconded by Commissioner Carole Garrison to defer Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00005 until the December 21, 2017 Hampton Planning Commission meeting; the item is proposed in conjunction with Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00004 which is deferred to the December 21, 2017. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 6  A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Coleman, Garrison, Kellum, Southall, Gray, Peterson, Carter NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: None Secretary O’Neill clarified that for the December Planning Commission meeting, staff will be presenting Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00004 to the Commission with the “special green area” requirement as a separate amendment from the action that transfers the responsibility for reviewing exception requests to the BZA. Secretary O’Neill suggested that the next two related public hearing items be part of one presentation and public hearing. A separate motion and vote will be required for each item. C. ZOA 17-00006 – AMEND AND RE-ENACT CHAPTER 2, “DEFINITIONS”, SECTION 2-2, ADD PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS Secretary O’Neill read the public hearing notice on the next agenda item. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00006: by the City of Hampton to Amend and Re-Enact Chapter 2 Of The Zoning Ordinance Of The City Of Hampton, Virginia Entitled “Definitions” By Amending Section 2-2. Approval of this amendment would add the definition of public and private schools to the Zoning Ordinance. This item is proposed in conjunction with Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00007 to remove dance school and business school from the use table. Copies of documents or information concerning this proposal may be obtained from the Community Development Department located in City Hall at 22 Lincoln Street, or from Tolu Ibikunle, AICP, 757-728-5237 or tibikunle@hampton.gov. D. ZOA 17-00007 – AMEND AND RE-ENACT CHAPTER 3, “USES PERMITTED”, SECTION 3-2, REMOVE DANCE AND BUSINESS SCHOOLS Secretary O’Neill read the public hearing notice on the next agenda item. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00007: by the City of Hampton to Amend and Re-Enact Chapter 3 Of The Zoning Ordinance Of The City Of Hampton, Virginia Entitled “Uses Permitted” By Amending Section 3-2. Approval of this amendment would remove dance school and business school from the use table. This item is proposed in conjunction with Zoning Ordinance Amendment 17-00006 to add the definition of public and private schools to the Zoning Ordinance. Copies of documents or information concerning this proposal may be obtained from the Community Development Department located in City Hall at 22 Lincoln Street, or from Tolu Ibikunle, AICP, 757-728-5237 or tibikunle@hampton.gov. . Senior City Planner Tolu Ibikunle presented the staff report on the subject amendments, copies of which are attached to the original minutes. She stated staff recommends approval of the two (2) zoning ordinance amendments. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 7  There being no additional questions or speakers, the Commission approved the following resolution: WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00006 by the City of Hampton to Amend and Re-Enact Chapter 2 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia entitled “Definitions” by amending Section 2-2; WHEREAS: approval of this amendment would add the definition of public and private schools to the Zoning Ordinance; WHEREAS: the City of Hampton Zoning Ordinance does not define the aforementioned uses; however, they are currently allowed in select zoning districts subject to additional provisions; WHEREAS: this item is proposed in conjunction with Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17- 00007 to remove dance school and business school from the use table because these uses will fall under the definition of the more general terms, public or private school; WHEREAS: the key distinction between a public and private school is whether the service is provided by a governmental entity or a private entity; WHEREAS: these definitions are limited to elementary, middle, and high school levels of education and do not include pre-school or secondary education; WHEREAS: the Hampton Community Plan (2006, as amended) indicates the importance of the Zoning Ordinance as an implementation tool and the importance of updating the Zoning Ordinance as applicable; and WHEREAS: no members of the public spoke for or against this proposal. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner Ruthann Kellum and seconded by Vice-Chair Tommy Southall, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends to City Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00006. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Coleman, Garrison, Kellum, Southall, Peterson, Carter NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Gray The Planning Commission also approved the following resolution: WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00007 by the City of Hampton to Amend and Re-Enact Chapter 3 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia entitled “Uses Permitted” by amending Section 3-2; WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 8 WHEREAS: the Use Table is located in Chapter 3 of the Zoning Ordinance; it lists public and private schools together and business and dance schools independently; WHEREAS: approval of this amendment would remove dance school and business school from the Use Table; WHEREAS: the City of Hampton Zoning Ordinance does not define the aforementioned uses; however, they are currently allowed in select zoning districts subject to additional provisions; WHEREAS: this item is proposed in conjunction with Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17- 00006 to add the definition of public and private schools to the Zoning Ordinance; WHEREAS: the Hampton Community Plan (2006, as amended) indicates the importance of the Zoning Ordinance as an implementation tool and the importance of updating the Zoning Ordinance as applicable; and WHEREAS: no members of the public spoke for or against this proposal. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner Carole Garrison and seconded by Commissioner Ruthann Kellum, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends to City Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00007. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Coleman, Garrison, Kellum, Southall, Peterson, Carter NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Gray E. ZOA 17-00008 – AMEND AND RE-ENACT CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE 7, “PHOEBUS DISTRICTS” Secretary O’Neill read the public hearing notice on the next agenda item. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00008: by the City of Hampton to Amend and Re-Enact Chapter 8, Article 7 Of The Zoning Ordinance Of The City Of Hampton, Virginia Entitled “Phoebus Districts.” Approval of this amendment would maintain the 50’ maximum height for buildings while striking the language limiting the number of stories to three (3). Copies of documents or information concerning this proposal may be obtained from the Community Development Department located in City Hall at 22 Lincoln Street, or from Mike Hayes, 757-728- 5244 or mdhayes@hampton.gov. Planning & Zoning Administration Division Manager Michael Hayes presented the staff report on the subject amendment, a copy of which is attached to the original minutes. He stated staff recommends approval of the zoning ordinance amendment. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 9  In response to a question from Chairman Carter, Mr. Hayes responded that if the zoning ordinance was amended, it would permit a developer to construct a building with four stories but does not change the physical height maximum of 50’. Commissioner Coleman stated that she had concerns regarding the limitations of the heights of the buildings in that large district. She added that she felt it would stunt the economic growth of Phoebus over the long term by not allowing different types of establishments to be built. She wants Phoebus to be able to have more flexibility within the heights of the buildings, particularly in those areas that are currently not developed. Commissioner Peterson commented that he did not believe the amendment was changing the current 50’ height of the buildings, but only changes the conflicting language that states buildings have to be 50’ and three stories. There being no additional questions or speakers, the Commission approved the following resolution: WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00008 to Amend and Re-Enact Chapter 8, Article 7 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Hampton, Virginia entitled “Phoebus Districts” by amending Section 8-62(3)(e)(i); WHEREAS: the PH-1 Special District is a zoning district created in 2015 to regulate development within the historic Phoebus commercial district; WHEREAS: the development standards for PH-1 are designed to ensure new/infill development along Phoebus’s historic main street is contextually sensitive, reinforces the District’s sense of place, and generally enhances the downtown area; WHEREAS: the proposed amendment maintains a maximum height of 50’, but eliminates the restriction of three stories; WHEREAS: by removing the restriction of three stories, a property owner has greater flexibility in the use of the interior of their building and can reasonably attain four stories without exceeding the maximum height of 50’; WHEREAS: the Partnership for a New Phoebus was notified of the proposed change and had no objection; and WHEREAS: no one from the public spoke for or against this proposal. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner Pete Peterson and seconded by Vice-Chair Tommy Southall, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends to City Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 17-00008. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 10  AYES: Garrison, Kellum, Southall, Peterson, Carter NAYS: Coleman ABST: None ABSENT: Gray F. RZ 16-00008 – JONAH Z, LLC, 56 BUTLER FARM ROAD [LRSN 13004560] Secretary O’Neill read the public hearing notice on the next agenda item. Rezoning Application No. 16-00008: by Jonah Z, LLC, to rezone approximately 9.9± acres of vacant land located at 56 Butler Farm Road [LRSN: 13004560]. The application is to rezone the property from One Family Residential District (R-11) to Limited Commercial District (C-2) with proffered conditions. Approval of this application would permit an accessory storage lot for “New Vehicle Sales” to include 717± parking spaces. The property is currently zoned One Family Residential District (R-11) and Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (O-AICUZ). The Hampton Community Plan (2006, as amended) recommends business and industrial land use for the northernmost section of the parcel adjacent to Tarrant Road and low density residential for the southernmost section of the parcel immediately adjacent to Butler Farm Road. This application was deferred from the September 21, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. Copies of documents or information concerning this proposal may be obtained from the Community Development Department located in City Hall at 22 Lincoln Street, or from Tolu Ibikunle, AICP, 757-728-5237, or tibikunle@hampton.gov. Senior City Planner Tolu Ibikunle presented the staff report on the subject application, a copy of which is attached to the original minutes. She stated that staff recommends approval of the rezoning application with five (5) conditions. Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown later corrected that there are seven (7) proffered conditions. Ms. Ibikunle stated that the applicant was available to answer questions as well as present a proposal. In response to questions from Chairman Carter, Ms. Ibikunle pointed out the entrance to the subject parcel and the projected extension of Coliseum Drive on a map in the staff report. The road is projected to run adjacent to the rear western edge of the subject parcel. Attorney Lindsey Carney of Patten, Wornom, Hatten & Diamonstein, 12350 Jefferson Avenue, represented the applicant Jonah Z, LLC. Ms. Carney shared that Bob Rombs, Director of Operations at Tysinger Motor Family, was also present on behalf of the property owner. Ms. Carney thanked the Planning Department for their hard work, as well as the adjacent property owners for their courtesy and suggestions in assisting with the conditions for the proposed development. She provided a presentation on the history of the subject parcel’s zoning and the proposed development. Since September 2017, three community meetings have been held as well as additional discussions with the adjacent property owners to address concerns regarding the rezoning application and proposed development. In response to those concerns, the applicant has revised the site design and planning of the proposed development and added additional conditions. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 11  Some of the changes Ms. Carney pointed out were: • Reduction in the number of parking spaces by three on each side of the driveway on Butler Farm Road • Installed three different types of buffers on the property: o 1 – Left side (adjacent to projected extension of Coliseum Drive) o 1 – Rear and along right side to Butler Farm Road (20’ buffer of higher and taller trees adjacent to residential properties) o 1 – Adjacent to Butler Farm Road (6’ – 8’buffer of deciduous trees, evergreen trees and evergreen shrubs) • Digital video surveillance equipment o Recording capability o Monitored off-site 24 hours per day o Speaker component for communication to police and/or trespassers • Restriction on location of construction vehicles, equipment and materials on Butler Farm Road during development • Limit loading and offloading of vehicles on Butler Farm Road • Installation of controlled access ornamental gate for security and screening (in direct response to a request from one of the adjacent property owners) Ms. Carney mentioned qualities of the proposed rezoning and development: • Promoting employment opportunities – will allow for the employment of additional employees • Nurtures and supports an established business – the Tysinger Motor Family has contributed to the economic growth of the Hampton with regard to sales taxes, gross receipts taxes, and real estate taxes paid annually • Retain, expand and attract businesses that provide jobs with family-supporting wages – the average Tysinger employee will earn $45,000 annually Ms. Carney provided letters of support from adjacent property owners who were not able to attend the public hearing. She requested that the Planning Commission support the rezoning application, recognizing the compatibility of the proposed use with the surrounding properties, and considering the efforts the property owner has made to minimize any negative impacts to the neighborhood demonstrating their commitment to being a good neighbor. Ms. Carney requested rebuttal time to respond to opposing speakers. In response to questions from Commissioner Garrison, Ms. Carney responded that there will not be a fence surrounding the property; a 20’ vegetative buffer will be surrounding the property. The controlled access locked gate will be located at the entrance on Butler Farm Road. The security system is the same that is used at the car dealership. In response to questions from Chairman Carter, Ms. Carney explained that the trucks will offload the vehicles on Airborne Drive, which is behind the Tysinger dealership. The vehicles will then be driven individually to the site during the hours Monday through Saturday 8AM to 9PM. The trucks can hold eight vehicles and will not be delivering vehicles consecutively; the vehicles will be checked in at the dealership before being delivered. In response to questions from Commissioner Coleman, Ms. Carney responded that the dealership currently has an overflow of vehicles but not enough land to store the vehicles. Since there is currently no fence surrounding the perimeter at the existing dealership, the applicant feels that their surveillance is sufficient. There will not be a person on site 24 hours per day, but someone will patrol the location periodically throughout the day, as is at their dealership. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 12  In response to questions from Commissioner Kellum, Ms. Carney stated that Sandra Charity was not present at the public hearing but she had spoken with Ms. Charity twice over the telephone and had sent an earlier email. Ms. Charity’s biggest concern was lighting which is being addressed in one of the conditions. The applicant has proffered Dark Sky lighting, meaning all lights are turned down to reduce glare in the public right-of-way or adjacent properties. Secretary O’Neill stated that four members of the public were signed up to speak at the public hearing. Rhonda Toomer, 118 Watts Drive, spoke in opposition of the rezoning application. She felt that there is enough land in the area where Tysinger can have their storage lot in a business/industrial area. She stated that she does not want to see cars, activity and a building behind her house. She was told that houses would be built behind her property. Sherry Callahan, 41 Butler Farm Road, spoke in opposition of the rezoning application. Ms. Callahan thanked Ms. Carney for working with the property owners and explaining the rezoning but she does not want a vehicle storage lot across from her house. Ms. Callahan stated that the lot may bring money to the City but it does not improve her neighborhood. Jock Boardraye, 43 Butler Farm Road, spoke in opposition of the rezoning application. The proposed storage lot will be located across from his house. Mr. Boardraye says when he purchased his property; he thought there would be residences built not a business or future car dealership. He stated that it does not benefit his neighborhood or any other neighborhood on Butler Farm Road. He believes that the Planning Commission’s job is to look at what is best for the community. Nathaniel Henry, 44 Butler Farm Road, spoke in opposition of the rezoning application. Mr. Henry purchased his property with the intention of building his retirement home. He did not envision having a vehicle storage lot adjacent to his property. In response to a question from Vice-Chair Southall, Mr. Henry responded that he purchased a lot in the neighborhood four years ago with the intention of building his retirement home on the site. He moved to Hampton because of the military. He purchased the property because he wanted to be close to Langley. The back of his property is adjacent to the proposed storage lot. As rebuttal to the public’s comments, Ms. Carney pointed out on the concept plan of her presentation the location of Buffer A, which is adjacent to the residential properties. Buffer A is proposing to preserve as many existing mature trees that are currently in the 20’ buffer as possible, in addition to deciduous trees that will be 6’ – 8’at installation, evergreen trees and shrubs. The original application from 2015 did propose a dealership but there is not a building on the concept plan which they are bound to. If in the future they decide to put a building on the site, they would have to submit another application to be presented before the Planning Commission as well as City Council. A building is not possible under the current application. In response to questions from Commissioner Coleman, Ms. Carney explained that if approved by City Council, the applicant would submit their site plan for approval which takes 90 days, and then apply for permits. Construction is not expected to begin until Spring 2018 and is expected to take between 90 – 120 days from permitting to completion. It is projected that Phase 1 will satisfy Tysinger’s inventory needs for five years, after which they will need Phase 2. Ms. Carney has assured the residents that she will keep them updated throughout the process of WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 13 construction and they should contact her, Mr. Rombs, or City staff if they feel the proffered conditions are not being met. In response to questions from Commissioner Garrison, Ms. Carney pointed out Rhonda Toomer’s property on the concept plan. The buffer between Ms. Toomer’s property and the proposed development is 20’ wide and consists of a mix of evergreen shrubs, evergreen trees, deciduous trees, and the existing trees that will be preserved. The buffer is the largest and tallest buffer the applicant has proposed. Commissioner Peterson referred to the previous comments made by Ms. Callahan and Mr. Boardraye noting their ties to the Air Force and Langley, and remarks that Langley had no impact on development of the site. He remarked that the Hampton-Langley Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) conducted several years ago discussed encroachment on the base and limited the types of development that could occur with the encroachment zones, whether noise or landing encroachment. It also mentioned lessons learned from Naval Air Station Oceana, Virginia Beach (NAS). There were recommendations from the study that the City agreed on and City decided to follow. In response to comments from Commissioner Peterson, Secretary O’Neill stated that the JLUS study was a joint effort between the City and Joint Base Langley-Eustis (JBLE) with recommendations that are specifically geared toward protecting JBLE from a land use compatibility perspective. In either the crash potential zones (area closest and most directly aligned with the flight path) or the noise zones, residential land uses are the least preferred. We have recommendations and lists that guide staff’s recommendations when it comes to discretionary decisions made by the Planning Commission or City Council regarding land use. The City’s agreement is that the discretionary decisions will be in line with the recommendations in the JLUS study. Commission Peterson added that as long as the agreement is in place, additional residential properties will not be developed in those areas. He mentioned that there is a similar type of storage area on Cunningham Drive near the intersection of Todds Lane. He drives past the area every day, it is well maintained and he very seldom sees activity in or out of the lot. He said that he understood the residents’ concerns with having the storage lot very close to their homes but he does not believe a housing development will be built on the vacant parcels. In response to questions from Vice-Chair Southall, Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown emphasized that C-2 will become the zoning on the property and the proffered conditions will become additional zoning regulations that will apply in perpetuity until the property is rezoned again. Because the applicant has proffered the concept plan, the only things they could do on the property would have to be consistent with the plan, which is parking spaces. Ms. Brown elaborated that if the applicant wanted another use or required a building on the site, they would have to come back through the process for an amendment to the conditions. The applicant has strictly restricted what they can do on the site with the proffered concept plan. Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown confirmed Vice-Chair Southall’s statement that the applicant could not put a vehicle dealership on the site without coming through the public hearing process. In response to a question from Commissioner Coleman, Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown stated that an applicant can always request a rezoning or if the applicant wanted to change the proffers, they would have to come back through the same process as a rezoning. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 14 There is nothing to stop the applicant from requesting an amendment to the conditions in one or two years from now but there would be public hearings at Planning Commission and City Council. In response to a question from Commissioner Garrison, Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown answered that proffers stay with the property and are recorded in the land records for any subsequent owners, just as a deed is. If the property was ever sold by the applicant, the new owners would be bound by the same conditions. Commissioner Coleman commented that she believed the concept plan is set up to open a sales dealership in the future based on the layout of the Phases. Chairman Carter related that he can concur with the residents, in that a project of that magnitude in a neighborhood would tear up the harmony of the area. He remarked that when he purchased his current home eleven years ago, he was not told that Commander Shepard Boulevard would be built in his back yard with a wall. In response to a question from Commissioner Kellum, Secretary O’Neill explained that if the application was approved by City Council, the applicant would be required to go through the normal land/site development review process. As noted on the concept plan, the applicant has made some estimation on how they would deal with stormwater management. This is not typically a detail that the Planning Commission or City Council deals with, it is an administrative technical review if the use goes forward. He further stated that all of the requirements set forth by local and State regulations have to be met by the development. There were no additional questions or speakers. A motion was made by Commissioner Pete Peterson and seconded by Commissioner Ruthann Kellum to approve Rezoning Application No. 16-00008 subject to seven (7) proffered conditions. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Kellum, Southall, Peterson NAYS: Coleman, Garrison, Carter ABST: None ABSENT: Gray The motion to approve the rezoning application failed for lack of majority. Vice-Chair Southall emphasized that the decision was very difficult because he is very neighborhood oriented. He added that the residents have spoken that they want tranquility but in looking at what is allowed in the R-11 zoning, a car lot would be much more tranquil than most of the other uses that are permitted. Secretary O’Neill questioned that if there is an alternate motion, the Chairman can proceed with it; otherwise, the application will go forward to City Council without a recommendation from the Planning Commission. Chairman Carter noted that there is no alternate motion at this time. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 15  In response to a comment from Vice-Chair Southall, Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown acknowledged that the Planning Commission cannot recommend conditions or proffers. While it is up to the applicant to proffer the conditions, it is in the province of the Commission to explain why they voted against the proposal, which some of the Commissioners have done. The applicant can choose to add conditions or not. Ms. Brown suggested that another alternative for the Planning Commission is to defer the application to the next month’s meeting when they may have seven members present. Commissioner Coleman stressed that there should be conditions surrounding the phases because the applicant could sell areas of the property labeled Phase 2 and Phase 3 because of the current lack of need. Vice-Chair Southall questioned if the residents would be amenable with a different phase being constructed first which would give the applicant an opportunity to speak more with the community and see if there is agreement that can be made. It is projected that in five years Phase 2 would be constructed. Chairman Carter expressed that the community had already spoken and they do not want the proposed development in their neighborhood. Commissioner Peterson shared that he would be more troubled if the applicant had not included the other phases in the concept plan because he would not approve a parking lot. He believed that changing the phases will not make a difference with the residents. Commissioner Kellum stated that she respects all neighborhoods and mentioned a house in her own neighborhood for the homeless that she was not aware of when she moved there. She understands the concerns of the community and believes a good faith effort has been shown by the applicant to be positive neighbors. She agrees that the development of the phases should be left as is because that is their intent. There were no additional questions or speakers. A motion was made by Commissioner Ruthann Kellum and seconded by Vice-Chair Southall to defer Rezoning Application No. 16-00008 until the December 21, 2017 Hampton Planning Commission meeting. Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown directed attention to Attorney Lindsey Carney, who conveyed that the applicant wished to proceed with the 3 – 3 vote, if it pleasured the Commission rather than defer. Commissioner Kellum withdrew her motion to defer Rezoning Application No. 16-00008 until the December 21, 2017 Hampton Planning Commission meeting. Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown stated for the record that the application will go forward to City Council noting the Planning Commission’s inability to make a recommendation. She continued that it is within City Council’s authority to receive the application and refer it back to the Planning Commission for a vote and recommendation. G. UP 17-00011 – DAVID RIDDICK, 227 CHAPEL STREET [LRSN 2001911] Secretary O’Neill read the public hearing notice on the next agenda item. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 16  Use Permit Application No. 17-00011: by David Riddick to permit the operation of a private school for approximately fifty (50) students at Central Methodist Church, 227 Chapel Street [LRSN 2001911]. The property is currently zoned One Family Residential (R-8) which allows for private schools with a use permit. The Hampton Community Plan (2006, as amended) recommends mixed-use development for this area. Copies of documents or information concerning this proposal may be obtained from the Community Development Department located in City Hall at 22 Lincoln Street, or from Tolu Ibikunle, AICP, 757-728-5237 or tibikunle@hampton.gov. Senior City Planner Tolu Ibikunle presented the staff report on the subject application, a copy of which is attached to the original minutes. She stated that staff recommends approval of the use permit application with seven (7) conditions. In response to questions from Chairman Carter, Ms. Ibikunle pointed out the parking for the proposed school. The minimum parking requirement for the site is 56. There are 64 – 65 available parking spaces which consists of 18 on-site spaces, on street parking on Lee Street, and two separate parking lots owned by the church Ms. Ibikunle stated that the applicant was available to answer questions as well as present a proposal. David Riddick, 346 Wells Court, provided a presentation on the subject application and the history of Beauty for Ashes Contemporary School of Dance (BFACSD). The organization has been around for eight years and has reached over 400,000 people while at its current location in Downtown Hampton at 5 W. Queens Way. The applicant would like to relocate his school to Central United Methodist Church. BFACSD is an independent non-profit organization whose mission is to educate and enrich the knowledge of the fine arts to youth primarily in the underserved communities of Hampton Roads. BFACSD is in partnership with various City departments and social organizations including Park, Recreation and Leisure Services, Hampton City Schools, the American Theatre and Thomas Nelson Mary T. Christian Auditorium. The school provides services such as STEM classes and workshops, after school programs, summer workshops and internships in fine arts and business, and audition prep for colleges/universities. BFACSD is an asset to the City because the school educates and prepares students and their parents for success in the fine arts through workshops. Renowned directors, teachers, choreographers and dancers from around the world share their expertise with the students. The school invests in its students through guidance, security, community, family and love in self- esteem classes. Students are encouraged to become well rounded through eight week summer intensives in different cities. Many students give back by performing at various nursing homes throughout the Hampton Roads area, and high school students complete their Capstone projects by hosting summer camps and workshops for underserved students. This also provides employment for the youth in arts. BFACSD will be offering scholarships to ten youth who are interested in participating in dance, VLAP – Visual Literacy After-School Program and the Athletic Department. The Athletic Department is sponsored by Planet Fitness and uses licensed and degreed physical therapists, nutritionists, physical trainers and doctors to help dancers facilitate a healthier lifestyle. Their College Program is led by an admissions counselor who provides assistance with SAT and ACT prep and college applications in partnership with various colleges and universities. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 17  Riddick Dance was founded by Mr. Riddick in 2009 and aims to enrich the range of cultural offerings of the Hampton Roads region by focusing on a wide range of performing arts, especially expressive dance. Riddick Dance has been added to the touring directory for the State of Virginia Commission for the Arts and will go on national tour in New York City in June 2018. BFACSD and Riddick Dance believe in the City of Hampton and have offered many employment opportunities to dance teachers, choreographers, interns, professional dancers, costume designers and more. It is important for new and existing students to see that there are real job opportunities and careers in the arts thorough the Hampton Arts Academy. In response to a question from Chairman Carter, Mr. Riddick responded that he is not a native of Hampton, his mom moved to Hampton from the Islands. Mr. Riddick is the Executive Director and Artistic Director of BFACSD. Chairman Carter complimented Mr. Riddick on a job well done with the school and his presentation. Secretary O’Neill stated that three members of the public were signed up to speak at the public hearing. Grace Wynn, 5 Roberts Trace, spoke in support of the use permit application. Ms. Wynn has been dancing at BFACSD for five years and said that dancing has given her a deeper appreciation for the arts. She has not only learned movement but it has also taught her professionalism, respect, structure, responsibility and critical thinking skills. Ms. Wynn has attended various intensives and workshops with renowned dance companies and has performed in numerous performances. In response to a question from Chairman Carter, Mr. Riddick answered that BFACSD also teaches Liturgical dance. Leslie Seagraves, 5 Roberts Trace, spoke in support of the use permit application. Her daughter has attended BFACSD for five years. Ms. Seagraves was impressed with the quality of the teaching at the school; it is not a competition dance such as with a dance team. She believes that the teachings get to the heart of the art of dance. Velma Gause-Price, 270 Newport News Avenue, spoke in support of the use permit application. She stressed that BFACSD is a powerful addition to the City of Hampton. There being no additional questions or speakers, the Commission approved the following resolution: WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day Use Permit Application No. 17-00011 by David Riddick to permit the operation of a private school for approximately fifty (50) students at Central Methodist Church, 227 Chapel Street [LRSN 2001911]; WHEREAS: the name of the proposed private school is Beauty for Ashes Contemporary School of Dance (BFACSD), with proposed business hours of operation from Monday through Friday 10AM-8:30PM, Saturday 8AM-5PM, and Sunday 1PM-2PM. WHEREAS: in addition to dance classes, the applicant is proposing to offer a variety of educational services such as: stem workshops, music education, afterschool WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 18  programs, college preparatory courses, nutrition, academic counseling, summer workshops, internships in fine arts and business, community outreach, and mentoring; WHEREAS: the subject property is zoned One Family Residential (R-8), which allows for private schools with an approved use permit; WHEREAS: the Hampton Community Plan (2006, as amended) recommends mixed-use development for this area; WHEREAS: the Hampton Community Plan details the City’s economic development objectives to attract and retain businesses; WHEREAS: the Hampton Community Plan indicates the importance of creating a safe and caring community where youth have access to fun and educational opportunities that help prepare them for adulthood and a desire to reinvest in their community; WHEREAS: the Downtown Master Plan (2004, as amended) also recommends the subject property as mixed-use development as a way to create a vibrant community; WHEREAS: there are seven (7) conditions attached to this use permit application based on the proposed use’s operational characteristics. Staff is recommending the following conditions: hours between Sunday 1PM-5PM, Monday through Friday 8AM-9PM, and Saturday 8AM-7PM. A capacity condition will permit approximately 66 occupants or the maximum capacity determined by a City building official, whichever is lower. Other conditions relate to various State and City codes and ordinances; and WHEREAS: three (3) members of the public spoke in support of this proposal. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner Ruthann Kellum and seconded by Vice-Chair Tommy Southall, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends to City Council approval of Use Permit Application No. 17-00011 with seven (7) conditions. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Coleman, Garrison, Kellum, Southall, Peterson, Carter NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Gray H. UP 17-00012 – DAVID SWARTZ, 1619 W PEMBROKE AVENUE Secretary O’Neill read the public hearing notice on the agenda item. Use Permit Application No. 17-00012: by David Swartz to permit the operation of a vehicle storage lot for ten (10) to thirty (30) vehicles at 1619 W Pembroke Avenue, which is on the south side of W Pembroke Avenue [LRSN 1002424]. The property is currently zoned General Commercial (C-3) which allows for vehicle storage with WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 19  a use permit. The Hampton Community Plan (2006, as amended) recommends business and industrial for this site. Copies of documents or information concerning this proposal may be obtained from the Community Development Department located in City Hall at 22 Lincoln Street, or from Charles “Porter” Stevens, 757-727-6256 or cpstevens@hampton.gov. City Planner Porter Stevens presented the staff report on the subject application, a copy of which is attached to the original minutes. He stated that staff recommends approval of the use permit application with eleven (11) conditions. Mr. Stevens stated that the applicant was available to answer questions. In response to a question from Commissioner Coleman, Mr. Stevens responded that the property is mostly vacant although there are a number of vehicles on the site related to some of the adjacent car repair businesses. In response to a question from Vice-Chair Southall, Mr. Stevens answered that the applicant is aware that the vehicles can be kept on the property for only 60 days, and it is a condition that has been discussed with the applicant. In response to a question from Commissioner Kellum, Secretary O’Neill stated that if it is proven that the vehicle has been kept on the property for longer than 60 day, it becomes a zoning violation as part of the conditions. Beyond 60 days, the vehicle must be removed from the property. David Swartz, 13 Paddock Drive, Newport News, owns Old Towne Recovery Services. They primarily provide road side assistance and towing services with motor clubs. He would like to expand his business into Hampton as well as work with the State and local police. Mr. Swartz needs a location to store the vehicles until insurance companies ship the vehicles off for repair. In response to questions from Chairman Carter, Mr. Swartz responded that he would be storing vehicles that have been repossessed. After 60 days, the vehicles are sold at auction or transported across the street to the salvage yard and be crushed. If the vehicle cannot be sold, it has to be disposed of. In response to a question from Commissioner Coleman, Mr. Swartz acknowledged that the business operates 24 hours per day. Retrieval of personal property will be conducted during normal business hours during the day. Tow trucks will have to enter the lot during early morning hours for vehicle accident and break down towing but make every effort to cause as little a disturbance as possible, as quickly as possible. In response to a question from Vice-Chair Southall, Mr. Swartz pointed out the alleyway entrance onto the subject parcel. Mr. Swartz proposes to enclose the storage area with 6’ opaque fencing so the storage area is not visible from the street and considered an eyesore. There is also an 8’ foot privacy fence and a wooded area that will serve as a landscape buffer from residences. In response to questions from Commissioner Coleman, Mr. Swartz stated that the vehicles currently on the lot are from Garrett Motors and he will be renting the space from Garrett Motors. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 20  Senior Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Brown elaborated that applicants who are different from the property owners are allowed to apply for use permits as long as they have the consent from the property owner. This information is reflected in Mr. Swartz’s use permit application. There being no additional questions or speakers, the Commission approved the following resolution: WHEREAS: the Hampton Planning Commission has before it this day a proposal by David Swartz to operate a vehicle storage area at 1619 W Pembroke Avenue [LRSN 1002424]; WHEREAS: the applicant is proposing to store vehicles collected by his towing business at this location; WHEREAS: the site contains extensive well established vegetation, that staff has determined are effective buffers that shield the proposed storage lot from adjacent properties; WHEREAS: the applicant will enclose his vehicle storage area by installing new opaque fencing and modifying existing fencing to comply with Zoning Ordinance requirements for vehicle storage areas; WHEREAS: the property is zoned General Commercial (C-3) District, which permits vehicle storage subject to approval of a use permit; WHEREAS: the Hampton Community Plan (2006, as amended) recommends business/industrial uses for this site; WHEREAS: the Hampton Community Plan establishes policies that direct us to nurture small and startup businesses, and encourage corridor-oriented commercial development; WHEREAS: eleven (11) conditions are attached that address operation aspects of the day care, including limits on how long a vehicle can be stored at this site, installing opaque fencing, and maintaining vegetated buffers; and WHEREAS: no one from the public spoke for or against this proposal. NOW, THEREFORE, on a motion by Commissioner Carole Garrison and seconded by Commissioner Trina Coleman, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Planning Commission recommends to City Council approval of Use Permit Application No. 17-00012, subject to eleven (11) conditions. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Coleman, Garrison, Kellum, Southall, Peterson, Carter NAYS: None ABST: None ABSENT: Gray WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 21 V. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR’S REPORT A. UPDATE ON LANGLEY R&D DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT Secretary O’Neill updated the Planning Commission on the status of the Special District development for the Langley Research and Development Park (“the Park”) and the collaboration with the stakeholders. The Planning Commission representatives are Carole Garrison and Vice-Chair Tommy Southall. There have been three meetings with the committee which meets every two weeks. Secretary O’Neill feels that good progress is being made. Discussions have been had on how the members will operate as a group and the collective vision on how the committee will move forward in developing a special district for the Park that will produce a new vision and image for the Park. Drafting of the ordinance will begin with the Intent Statement and then going through all of the Regulations. Vice-Chair Southall added that the representatives of the Park have been very receptive to the planning process and he feels that they have made headway and they are headed in the right direction. B. YOUTH PLANNER PRESENTATION Junior Youth Planner Symone Gibbs presented the Youth Planner report for October. October 2nd marked the first Hampton Youth Commission (HYC) meeting for the month. The purpose of this meeting was to fulfill work plans. The Adventure Hampton Committee focused on the logistics of the app’s creation, which is created to citizens explore new and exciting areas in Hampton, and relates to the 2020 Youth Master Plan Goal – Youth Are Active. The Youth Voice Committee members discussed ideas for the Hampton Youth Forum, a method of receiving feedback from high school and middle age youth on ways Hampton can be made better. The Simulated Economy Committee focused on editing the Money Life program, which relates to the 2020 Youth Master Plan Goal – Youth Are Prepared. The Grant Exploration Committee members edited that proposal that will be presented to City Council with hopes that the Grant Program will be reinstated. The October 9th HYC meeting was a joint meeting with the Neighborhood Commission. After an icebreaker Commissioners were divided into two groups for a teambuilding activity and given 90 seconds to generate as many responses to the questions: Why did you join NC/HYC? A common answer between both Commissions was “to make a difference in the community”. Commissioners then enjoyed refreshments and discussed issues in Hampton. The third HYC meeting in October held on October 16th was to collaborate with Mayor Donnie Tuck regarding the Hampton Youth Forum, and analyze work plans from past meetings. The Adventure Hampton Committee continued discussing the logistics of the app’s creation, as well as sponsorship opportunities. Members of the Simulated Economy Committee researched financial statistics pertaining to money use in the U.S. for the purpose of equipping the Commissioners with skills in financial literacy. The Youth Voice Committee members finalized the logistics for the Hampton Youth Forum. Members of the Grant Exploration Committee continued editing the proposal that will be presented to City Council in hopes of reinstating the Grant Program. The next Hampton Youth Commission meeting will be held on November 20th at the Ruppert Sargent Building, 1 Franklin Street. WS & Public Meeting Minutes 20171116 Page 22