1) Council’s
intention to adopt an ordinance in regards to a rezoning request by Rita
Irvin and Glen Holmes for property at 310 Holmes Street (tax parcels 497
– ((A)) – 33, 34 and 35) from A Agricultural to R-3 Multi-Family
Residential. The property contains approximately 1.0 acre and is
scheduled as Residential in the Future Land Use Map of the Christiansburg
Comprehensive Plan. The Public Hearing is set for June 17, 2008.
The follow are simply my comments based upon the information given. Obviously, the Planning Commission and Town Council must have much more than that information in order to make effective and fair decisions on behalf of citizens. Hopefully, my comments will help citizens to see some of those other issues.
(A) How is this a public necessity?
Affordable
Housing is often used to support public necessity. I am doing some
research right now (using the criteria in the State Codes) to determine
the percentage of Affordable Housing that is currently provided by the
Town of Christiansburg and if that percentage is proportional to the
overall area (including Radford, Blacksburg, and Montgomery County). No
single jurisdiction should be carrying the bulk of affordable housing
for a region. I frequently hear from people who are taking 'Townhomes'
and equating them with 'trailer parks' these days. (What will this do to future property values?)
(B) How does this apply to the matter of
convenience of citizens?
Is
this site and the proposed buildings on it likely to contribute to the
overall convenience of the citizens of the Town of Christiansburg? I do
not see any way that it could unless you reach way out into right field
and come up with something like, if people live closer together it is
easier to visit. Even that only shows convenience for a relatively few
people.
(C) How does this affect the general welfare of
citizens?
(This
section will really be dependent upon the use the property owner wishes
to make of the property via this rezoning. I am using an example where
townhomes would be built).
If this is to be used for multi-family dwellings: How can it possibly be enhancing the general
welfare of citizens when instead of 1 or 2 additional vehicles there
are now many using the adjacent roads. Rather than one family, you may
have multiple families all adding students to the school system. The health and welfare of our waterways is crucial to a healthy environment for many reasons. In any instance where a proposed development could have an impact on a waterway (a creek in this instance), the amount of impervious surface and runoff can be crucial in the decision-making process. What if any additional drainage facilities will need to be included in order to prevent damage to the waterway and who will pay for it? Will there be requirements for water and sewage connections? Who will pay for those?
(D)How does this relate to good zoning practices?
As
to the issue of good zoning practices, lets look directly at the Zoning
Ordinance to see what Multiple-Family Residential District-R3 is all
about:
My
first question is what can be done on this one acre of land if it is
zoned R3? According to Sec. 30-47. Statement of intent. "This district
is intended for medium density residential uses and to provide for [a]
variety of housing types as well as for those public and semi-public
uses as may be necessary or are normally associated with residential
surroundings. Professional offices and certain other uses needed in the
community may be permitted in appropriate locations by means of a
Conditional Use Permit. (Code 1972, §30-47; Ord. of 10-24-89)
Sec. 30-48. Permitted uses.
This section covers a very broad range of uses (some of which would also require a conditional use permit) from single family dwellings, townhomes, boarding/rooming houses, fire, police and rescue squad station, schools, recreation facilities, libraries, churches, homes for mentally retarded or physically disabled or handicapped persons, day homes (day care), rest homes, clubs/lodges, parks and playgrounds, professional offices, home occupations and even item "(t) Public utilities such as poles, lines, distribution transformers, pipes, meters and other other facilities necessary for the provision and maintenance of public utilities, including water and sewerage facilities; pumping and regulatory stations; substations; communications antennas. Communications monopoles with a Conditional Use Permit."
My next question has to do with the size of the lot and what would be allowable as far as building density. (From Sec. 30-49 of Zoning) This lot is 1 acre in size or 43,560 square feet. (a) The minimum lot size for single-family dwelling is 10,000 square feet. Up to 4 homes can be built here. (b) Two-family dwelling and other permitted nonresidential uses requires 12,500 square feet. Only 3 of these 'duplexes', schools, child day care centers, professional offices, etc. could be built on the site. (c) Multiple-family dwellings require 15,625 square feet of lot space with no more than 10 dwelling units per gross acre. So 10 apartments could be put in on the property. A review of Article XX Townhomes, indicates the quantity of 10 would hold for the one acre property.
The reason why I have looked at so many different options is because it is possible for some one/business to come in and request a rezoning change and perhaps say it was for the 4 single-family residents they plan on building. While they are waiting to build something happens and they decide to do 10 townhomes instead. The impact of these two different applications is considerably different. Traffic needs increase, water/sewer needs increase, impact on schools increase, and so forth. Or, perhaps they decide to sell the land and the new owner decides to put in a private school, communications antennas, or anything else the zoning change allows him/her to do.
Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan's Future Land Use Map is NOT compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. While the Future Land Use Map may specify an area for Residential, a great deal more needs to go into determining what type of residential applications are appropriate. This is the job of the Planning Commission. This group of individuals (appointed by the Town Council) MUST take a long and clear look at any Rezoning/CUP request to determine the impact on the overall welfare of the Town's citizens today, tomorrow, and far into the future. The Planning Commission MUST take a long term view of how development will affect the future of Christiansburg.
This particular rezoning request is simply being used as an example of the complexity of zoning related issues. It is in no way intended to present an opinion on whether or not the property should be rezoned. The actual property in question is not likely to lend itself to many of the applications listed above unless the property owner does considerable work to deal with the slope of the property. That is, however, a possibility that the Planning Commission should take into consideration.