MORGANTOWN PLANNING COMMISSION
September 13, 2007
6:30 P.M. City Council Chambers
Members Present: Ray Hicks, Marti Shamberger, Sam Loretta, Tim Stranko, Kathryn Greever, Peter DeMasters, Ken Martis, Jennifer Selin
Members Absent: Theresa Rich
Staff Present: Chris Fletcher, Planning Director
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
MATTERS OF BUSINESS
A. Approval of June 28, July 12 and August 9 and September 13, 2007 minutes will be taken care of at the October meeting. POSTPONED
B. Discuss and Approve By-Law revisions. POSTPONED
OLD BUSINESS:
A. MNS07-23 / Burchinal / Lillian Street. The Staff presented request for minor subdivision approval for property located on Lillian Street. It is Tax Map#37, Parcel #295, and an R-1A, Single Family Residential District. The applicant originally requested and was granted approval to subdivide an 11,988.06 sq. ft. parcel into two parcels: Parcel A – 6.276.06 sq. ft. and 80 feet of frontage on Lillian Street and Parcel B – 5,712 sq. ft. and 80 feet of frontage on Lillian Street. Applicant now wishes to add additional property to Parcel B from Parcel A. The new proposed configuration has Parcel A containing 3878 sq. ft. with 47.58 feet of frontage on Lillian Street and Parcel B containing 7,961 sq. ft. with 112.42 sq. ft. of frontage on Lillian Street. The parcels exceed the R-1A minimum lot area of 3500 sq. ft. Hicks then asked if anyone wished to comment either in favor or against the request.
There were no public comments. Fletcher read the staff recommendation that the petition be approved with the following conditions:
1. That the applicant submit three (3) paper copies, signed and sealed by a surveyor licensed in the State of West Virginia, of the final plat for the Planning Commission Chair’s signature; and,
2. That the final plat is filed at the Monongalia Courthouse within thirty (30) days of meeting the conditions set forth above. Shamberger moved for approval. Martis seconded it. The motion was unanimously approved.
B. TX07-06. Text Amendments to revise Article 1349 and 1351 of the Planning and Zoning Code as it relates to the B-4, General Business District and performance standards therein.
Fletcher presented that Staff Report detailing the public forums, requested changes discussed at the workshops, and how the Planning Department has addressed each requested change. Fletcher noted that should the Planning Commission find that sufficient information has been gathered to support the proposed text amendments and that adequate public engagement and consultation has been achieved, then the proposed revisions should be submitted to City Council with an affirmative recommendation to amendment the City’s Planning & Zoning Code accordingly.
Fletcher read letters that were received from Terri Cutright of Main Street Morgantown, Michael Castle of The Phoenix Group, and Kevin Leyden requesting the item be tabled.
There was no public comments either for or against the text amendments.
Martis asked Fletcher if he believed more time was needed so that Main Street Morgantown’s concerns could be submitted to the Planning Commission. Fletcher reiterated that it should be the Commission’s determination as to whether or not sufficient information had been gathered and adequate public engagement and consultation been achieved. Fletcher noted that Ms. Cutright must follow her Board’s position and that her Board may not have had the opportunity to meet to take formal action. Fletcher noted that an additional workshop could be scheduled, if the Planning Commission desired, with the assistance of Main Street so that the Planning Commission meeting, then take final action in October and present it to City Council. DeMasters noted his concern that the people requesting the tabling action were not present to speak to the issue. It was suggested that Fletcher contact these individuals and ask what their specific concerns are. The Planner stated he had met with Michael Castle. He and Teri Cutright are both out of town and could not be available for tonight’s meeting. DeMasters noted that he believed sufficient research and public comment were included in the process and that it was time to send this to City Council. Stranko noted that if an additional workshop would aid the process than one should be scheduled.
Stranko moved to table the text amendments to the October meeting so that an additional workshop could be scheduled. Selin requested that the motion be amended so that the workshop be scheduled between now and the October Planning Commission meeting. Stranko agreed to the amendment. Selin seconded the amended motion. The amended motion to table passed 4-3 with Stranko, Selin, Martis, and Greever voting yes and DeMasters Shamberger, and Loretta voting no (Hicks did not vote).
Fletcher noted that he would contact Cutright, Castle and Leyden to set up the workshop.
NEW BUSINESS:
A. MNS07-24 McCoy 6 Apartments / 1993 Water Street. Request by McCoy 6 for minor subdivision approval for property located at 1993 Water Street. Fletcher noted that the applicant requested that Staff represent the petition. Fletcher stated that the petitioner is requesting that the boundaries for Parcels #44, #45, and #46 be combined and realigned to address buildings crossing parcel lines. The request is a result of financing and/or refinancing purposes.
There was no public comment. Fletcher read the staff recommendation to approve with the following conditions:
1. That the applicant submit three (3) paper copies, signed and sealed by a surveyor licensed in the State of West Virginia, of the final plat for the planning Commission Chair’s signature; and,
2. That the final plat is filed at the Monongalia County Courthouse within thirty (30) days of meeting the conditions set forth herein.
Stranko moved for approval. Martis seconded it. The motion unanimously passed.
B. MNS07-25 / Capuder & Dalton / 525 Astor Avenue. Fletcher read the staff report noting that the petitioner seeks approval to combine two legal, pre-existing non-conforming parcels into one parcel. The proposed parcel will contain 4,500 sq. ft. and exceed the R-1A District minimum lot area of 3,500 sq. ft. and minimum lot frontage of 30 ft. standards. The petitioner was present but offered no comment. It was noted that the application contained an error and should read “R-1A” instead of “R-1”. There was no public comment. Fletcher read the staff recommendation to approve the petition as requested with the following conditions:
1. That the applicant submit three (3) paper copies, signed and sealed by a surveyor licensed in the State of West Virginia, of the final plat for the planning Commission Chair’s signature; and,
2. That the final plat is filed at the Monongalia County Courthouse within thirty (30) days of meeting the conditions set forth herein.
Shamberger moved for approval. DeMasters seconded it. The motion unanimously passed.
C. R207-06 Administrative Request / North Willey. Fletcher read the staff report noting that the administrative request for zoning map amendment is to include recently annexed realty into the B-2, Service Business District. When the WVU Farm was annexed, a sliver of the private property was not included. Since the portion of the parcel has already been annexed, the matter should be considered housekeeping.
Loretta asked if property owners in that area had been notified. Fletcher stated that property owners with 200 feet had received three separate notifications concerning the site – one for the development of significant impact, one for the Variances, and one for the zoning map amendment. No responses were received by the Planning Department.
There were no public comments
Martis moved to recommend the zoning map amendment to City Council. Stranko seconded it. The motion unanimously passed.
D. S07-21.III / Guseman / 332 Bent Tree Court. Fletcher read the staff report noting that the request by Charles Guseman for development of significant Impact (DSI) Site Plan approval for property located at 332 Bent Tree Court.
Scott Krabill, representing Mr. Guseman, stated that the applicant seeks to add another twenty-four 2-bedroom unit apartment building with 43 parking spaces. The design would be consistent with the three existing apartment buildings. There is sufficient property to accommodate the structure. Krabill noted that the Planning Department’s recommendation concerning landscaping and pedestrian walkways was incorporated to avoid the need to obtain variance approval. Verbal approval has been secured from the DOH for an entrance access permit including proposed signage and road markings. Only right hand turns will be permitted in and out of the property at Beechurst Avenue. There will be access to the apartments from both Beechurst Avenue and 8th Streets. Loop access will improve the overall traffic flow
Greever stated that she had concerns over the “paper street” status of a portion of Grant Avenue and whether or not property owners at the end of Grant Avenue could access their property. Fletcher noted that property owners at the end of the “paper street” could open the roadway provided it is developed to City standards and specifications.
Selin advised Krabill that it at the corner of one of the existing apartment buildings the edge of Grant Street may be slipping. She suggested marking the property line to make sure no further slippage will occur. Krabill agreed.
Krabill noted that a retaining wall will be constructed using geo-grid reinforcements, which are hard plastic panels that will extend into the hillside. The maximum height in the back will be 8 to 10 feet and only 3 feet will be visible from the front. There will be no threat to Grant Street.
Hicks asked for, and received no public comment in favor of the request.
Sheila Saab, representing her parents who own property adjacent to the property in question, spoke in opposition of the project. She questioned whether or not the list of requirements for the property have been satisfied to date. She also advised that list of questions were submitted to the City Manager; that the Planner had responded but the City Engineer had not. Saab asked if a surety bond could be required to ensure that the project does not impact the paper street portion of Grant Avenue.
Fletcher responded to Saab’s questions noting that he believed that all her concerns had been addressed during the Technical Review Committee and that the City Engineer had advised that it is not now, nor has it ever been, the City’s policy for bonding to be required for these types of instances.
John Saab, son of the property owners, asked why the Staff Report states the lots are fronting Grant Street instead of Bent Tree Court. Fletcher responded that McClain had been annulled since the early 19050’s, and the lots, not the building, front Grant Avenue. Street addressing is based on how the mail is delivered. Saab then asked if they would be notified of any changes to soil excavation and/or grading changes. Fletcher advised that they contact the City Engineer’s office for additional. Fletcher noted that he would will pass on the request to the City Engineer that any information be provided to the Saabs.
Fletcher read the staff recommendation to approve the petition as requested with the following conditions:
1. That a minor subdivision be approved by the Planning Commission. Recordation documents must include easements across adjacent Bent Tree Apartment complex parcels to ensure common ingress/egress access drive, vehicular circulation, solid waste storage/removal, U.S. Postal Service drop location, etc.
2. That the petitioner obtains all appropriate access permitting from the West Virginia Division of Highways.
3. That the development meets all applicable Fair Housing and American with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards to the satisfaction of the Code Enforcement Division.
4. That addresses for each unit must be assigned by the City Engineer.
5. That a final Site Plan be submitted prior to building permit issuance and include all required elements and be organized as set forth in Article 1385.08 of the Planning & Zoning Code. Final Site Plan drawings and details must address the following issues:
a. That the access point at Beechurst Avenue be designed, constructed, and signed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer so as to ensure right-in and right-out only vehicular movements, stop signage, etc.
b. That a hatched pedestrian walkway be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer between the parking row to the south and the parking row along the front of the building.
c. That a hatched pedestrian walkway be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer from the rear of the building to the rear row of parking.
d. That accessible routes from the parking areas to the building be designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
e. That wheel stops be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer for each stall to protect landscaping and ensure accessible routes along sidewalks.
f. That the dumpster pad be designed, constructed, and connected to the sanitary sewer to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and MUB.
g. That the dumpster enclosure be constructed of masonry materials to reduce potential fire vulnerabilities and include an opaque gate.
6. That a Final Landscape Plan be submitted with the building permit application for review and approval by the Planning Director. Variance approval must be obtained should the Landscape Plan not conform to the performance standards set forth in the City’s Planning & Zoning Code. Final Landscape Plan drawings and details must address the following issues:
a. That the planting schedule be revised to incorporate materials that better address the Planning & Zoning Code’s desired buffering and shading objectives.
b. That a minimum of 5% interior landscaping be provided within parking area.
c. That landscaped terminal islands with concrete curbs and at least 130 ft2 of area be provided to protect parked vehicles, provide visibility, confine moving traffic to aisles and driveways, and provide space for landscaping. Islands may count toward fulfilling 5% interior landscaping.
d. That landscaped islands with concrete curbs and at least 130 ft2 of area be provided every ten spaces or less. Islands may count toward fulfilling 5% interior landscaping. Said islands should be evenly spaced throughout the parking lot to consistently shade paved areas and integrate with hatched pedestrian walkways.
e. That landscaped screening be provided to the south of the dumpster enclosure.
7. That a Lighting Plan be submitted with the building permit application for review and approval by the Planning Director. Variance approval must be obtained should the Lighting Plan not conform to the performance standards set forth in the City’s Planning & Zoning Code.
8. That a Sign Plan be submitted with the related building permit application for review and approval by the Planning Director. Variance approval must be obtained should the Sign Plan not conform to the performance standards set forth in the City’s Planning & Zoning Code.
Stranko motion to approve the site plan with staff recommended conditions as wells as, “that the development’s property line adjoining the Grant Avenue right-of-way, beginning where the existing Bent Tree development borders Grant Avenue nearest Eight Street proceeding thence to it’s terminus at or near Ninth Street, be professionally located, staked, and photographed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Said photographs must be submitted to the Planning Director in hard and digital copy prior to the issuance of any related building permits.”
Selin seconded it. The motion passed with seven members voting yes and Greever voting no.
E. MNS07-26 / Guseman / 332 Bent Tree Court. Fletcher read the staff report noting that the request was by Charles Guseman for minor subdivision approval for property located at 332 Bent Tree Court. The property owner seeks to re-subdivide nine, mostly legal pre-existing non-conforming parcels into four conforming parcels. Scott Krabill, representing Mr. Guseman, advised that they are trying to clean up the lot layout configuration so the existing buildings are sitting on their own lots. The term “mostly legal” has been questioned. The Fletcher noted that alternate wording should have been used but the statement was intended to mean “mostly conforming”.
Hicks asked for public comment in favor of the petition and no comments were offered.
Sheila Saab asked if between now and the time construction has started and changes are requested, who would address those changes. Fletcher advised that changes to parcel boundaries would have to be addressed by the Planning Commission. If changes affected the site plan in a manner that would trigger reconsideration by the Planning Commission, than property owners within 200 feet would be notified.
Fletcher read the staff recommends to approve the petition as requested with the following conditions:
1. That the applicant submit three (3) paper copies, signed and sealed by a surveyor licensed in the State of West Virginia, of the final plat for the planning Commission Chair’s signature; and,
2. That the final plat is filed at the Monongalia County Courthouse within thirty (30) days of meeting the conditions set forth herein
Stranko moved for approval subject to staff recommendations. Martis seconded it. The motion passed with seven members voting yes and Greever abstaining based on the fact that she could not be completely objective.
Public Comments:
NONE
Staff comments:
The Planner advised that Loretta and Selin had agreed to serve on the Design Review Committee and that action to appoint them to the committee was necessary. DeMasters moved for approval. Martis seconded it. The motion unanimously passed.
MEETING ADJOURNED 7:45