TUESDAY, JULY 31, 2012–
Duane Laible, Vice Chair
Angie Heath Younce, Chair
Diana Morton, Secretary
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
B. Meeting Guidelines
C. Liaison/County Staff Business National Night Out Reminder
D. Approval of Agenda Posted, Including Any Deletions or Corrections
F. Action: Nominate a representative and an alternate to serve on the Community Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) Dee Gatliff and Angie Heath-Younce nominated
IV. COMMENTS BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC – None
V. TOWN BOARD INPUT Ask CCPRO to focus again on sign and related violations at DI & Jones
VI. PLANNING & ZONING
Possible action to be taken on the following applications:
Items on the agenda may be taken out of order.
The Spring Valley Town Advisory Board may combine two or more agenda items for consideration.
The Spring Valley Town Advisory Board may remove an item from the agenda or delay
discussion relating to an item at any time.
next meeting date –
1. UC-0159-12 – FISHER HOLDING COMPANY, LLC:
APPEAL USE PERMIT to allow
outside storage/display of rental trucks and trailers visible from public
streets and a residential development in conjunction with an existing
convenience store and car wash on 1.7 acres in a C-2 (General Commercial)
located on the east side of
Applicant was unable to create a plan where the truck storage could not be seen from the street or from homes. Noise mitigation was not addressed for nearby residences. He proposed a short-term approval with review to see if anyone objected, saying the trucks could be removed thereafter. As there was no way presented to be in compliance the board chose denial.
2. NZC-0331-12 – WESTMONT, INC:
USE PERMIT for a senior housing facility.
DESIGN REVIEW for a senior housing facility on 3.7 acres. Generally located on the
north side of
1 neighbor appeared in favor of the proposal, 1 neighbor opposed. The TAB acknowledged a well-planned housing proposal, but questioned the increased density and 1.4 acre C-2 element. These did not comply with various land use plans and policies. The comment from board members was this was a good proposal in a bad location that was simply not appropriate. TAB concurred with staff recommendations.
3. UC-0025-12 – SOUTHERN
USE PERMIT for a congregate care facility.
WAIVER OF DEVELOPMENT STANDRADS to allow access to a local street where access to an arterial or collector street is required.
DESIGN REVIEW for a congregate care facility on 5.0 acres in an R-E (Rural Estates
Residential) Zone in the MUD-3 and
Approved 4-0 with staff conditions
TAB concurred with the staff recommendations
4. UC-0309-12 – MONTE CRISTO PLAZA, INC:
USE PERMIT for
a psychic arts establishment within an existing shopping center on a portion of 1.8 acres in a C-2 (General Commercial)
Zone in the MUD-3 Overlay District. Generally located on the south side of
Approved 4-0 with staff conditions
5. WS-0292-12 – ST. MICHAEL ANTIOCHIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH:
WAIVERS OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following: 1) allow a place of worship to be accessed from a local street where access from a collector or arterial street is required; 2) alternative landscaping standards adjacent to a less intensive use; 3) increase the height of a decorative block wall; 4) increase the height of a decorative fence; and 5) reduced setback.
DESIGN REVIEW for a previously approved place of worship on 2.1 acres
in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) (AE-60) Zone in the
Approved 4-0 with additional waiver of wall on west side of proposal as the church has now acquired the abutting parcel and is considering expansion options. Any such proposal to be brought back before the TAB.
The TAB did not
consider a condition on the west wall to require its construction should the
parcel be developed or sold as currently zoned residential or similar use. The
WAIVERS OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following: 1) allow tandem parking spaces where not allowed; 2) waive screening required of mechanical equipment; and 3) waive trash enclosure requirement.
DESIGN REVIEW to convert an existing single family dwelling into an office
located on the north side of
The applicant’s representative was aggressively rude and dismissive of questions raised by the TAB members. We attempted to understand various issues involving requested waivers and traffic. With responses such as “Oh, get real…” and “Come on…” and “I’ve never seen such behavior…” he was admonished by the chair to stop being rude. He accused the board of being rude. Unable to get clarity on issues related to the waivers and traffic concerns, the board voted 3-1 to deny. At that point the representative leaned over our table and resorted to name-calling and other confrontational behavior.
Comment: I request and
· Trash enclosure
· Parking requirements and possible options
· Screening of mechanical equipment on the roof
· Potential for back-out from driveway to DI