|
Meeting
Convened.
An Adjourned Meeting of the York County Board of Supervisors was called
to order at 6:01 p.m., Tuesday, June 10, 2003, in the East Room, York
Hall, by Chairman James S. Burgett.
Attendance.
The following members of the Board of Supervisors were present: Sheila
S. Noll, Donald E. Wiggins, James S. Burgett, and Thomas G. Shepperd.
Walter C. Zaremba was absent
Also in attendance were James O.
McReynolds, County Administrator; J. Mark Carter, Assistant County
Administrator; and James E. Barnett, County Attorney.
WORK SESSION
ROUTE 17 CORRIDOR
IMPROVEMENTS
Mr.
McReynolds
stated he was pleased with the progress of the Route 17 Revitalization
Committee. Mr. Coxton is here as Chairman of the committee to discuss
their efforts if the Board wishes. Mr. Noel will provide a review of
the committee’s progress and a proposal for a grant funding program to
make the corridor more attractive.
Mr.
James W. Noel, Jr.,
Director of Economic Development, indicated that Steve Cook from his
office was also present representing the business community and who is
an integral part of the committee. He stated a group will be going to
Fairfax later this month to look at a corridor there which is very much
like Route 17. Fairfax is doing some proactive things, and Mr. Carter
will provide the Board with a review. Mr. Noel then reviewed the major
elements that the committee is working on, stating a major issue is to
do things to help local businesses thrive. He stated that looking good
is a large part of being successful, and the committee is approaching
this task in a positive way. The committee wishes to have a town hall
meeting for stakeholders in the project in order to get some input from
them. Mr. Noel indicated that if they aren’t on board, the
revitalization project is going no where. He then reviewed the proposal
for a grant program where the basic idea is to provide a matching grant
to a property owner to improve the facade of his Route 17 business in
landscaping, signage, or other property improvements. He stated the
grant funds would be dispersed after the project is completed, and
projects will have to be approved by the review committee. Mr. Noel
also spoke of an idea not specifically in the grant program to perhaps
offer some free design assistance from one of the local universities,
and something parallel could be done for landscaping by local
nurseries. He stated criteria has been set for evaluating the
proposals, and the committee’s hope is for a big impact. Mr. Noel
suggested that the Board of Supervisors might want to put as much as
$300,000 into this program to come from the Economic Development Fund.
Mrs.
Noll
stated she liked the idea of a town hall meeting, and she felt the
committee has done a super job thus far. She asked how many of the
stakeholders have been involved in the process to date.
Mr. Noel
stated there are probably four or five on the committee.
Mrs.
Noll
noted that the majority of the business owners on Route 17 have not seen
the proposal. Before the process goes much further, she stated staff
should solicit some input from the businesses to see if they think the
committee is heading in the right direction. She stated she would like
to see more involvement from them.
Mr. Noel
stated that can certainly be done. He stated another thing the
committee has been working on is acquiring a good database so
information like this can be distributed. He agreed that it is
imperative that the committee receive input from the businesses along
Route 17. He then noted that Fairfax has a grant program, and the group
going up later this month is going to get some input from them as to
their success.
Mrs.
Noll
indicated the Industrial Development Authority would be responsible for
giving the grants.
Mr. Noel
stated Mrs. Noll was correct.
Mr.
Wiggins
asked which section of the proposal is the part dealing with landscaping
of the junkyards.
Mr. Noel
stated it is not specifically addressed in any particular area of the
corridor.
Mr.
McReynolds
indicated there is already some landscaping that can be done with some
revenue sharing money, but he did not know if the committee had been
able to review it yet.
Mr.
Carter
stated there is a subcommittee working on it, and there should be some
input soon.
Discussion followed about the possibility
of planting in the VDOT rights-of-way.
Mr.
Carter
noted that the committee is also looking at a consistent style of fence
for those properties, and at what the cost might be for the fence to run
across the entire frontage supplemented by some landscaping.
Chairman
Burgett
stated part of the purpose of the committee is to interact with the
owners in a friendly way to get the job done, and he expressed his
confidence that this is the approach that the committee will use with
these businessmen. He asked if the areas of Route 17 will be placed in
zones and specific areas targeted to recruit the right businesses for
the area.
Mr. Noel
indicated that was exactly what has been done. The committee has a
working room at Coxton’s where it has laid out the entire corridor. The
corridor has been broken into sections, and the committee will be
focusing on each section at a time, starting from the south and working
up.
Discussion followed concerning the
possible use of overlay districts.
Mrs.
Noll
stated that perhaps there are too many categories in some of our zoning,
and perhaps there are types of businesses that should be eliminated
because they are not appropriate for Route 17.
Mr.
McReynolds
added that there are also certain businesses the Board might want to
attract to certain areas of Route 17.
Mr.
Carter
gave examples of areas on Route 17 to which the Board would like to
attract certain kinds of businesses.
Mr.
McReynolds
stated staff and the committee have already begun the process of looking
at areas that sorely need attention. He stated that in order to make
the corridor more improved, an option might be to purchase the
properties. He stated all options were being investigated.
Mr. Noel
explained a proposal to the Board members dealing with block signs for
Route 17. He noted that sometimes it's hard to find a certain business
located on Route 17, so the committee has come up with the idea of block
signs to be erected so a business can tell someone on what block of
Route 17 they are in in order to be located. The committee is looking
at landscaping easements to allow the County to improve the landscaping
in front of businesses along Route 17. Mr. Noel indicated another
important piece of the process is documentation, and the committee has
had the whole corridor video-taped for a current baseline.
Mr.
Carter
indicated the County’s sign shop can fabricate the signs. He noted that
the Board can move on this idea immediately for $500 out of the Route 17
fund.
By consensus, the Board directed that
block signs be fabricated and erected along the Route 17 corridor.
Mr.
Shepperd
stated he saw the war room at Coxton’s today, and one thing he saw was a
1974 view of the Route 17 corridor. He stated there is still a lot of
activity available today that was happening then. He then asked about
utilization of zoning, stating the County would have to have the owner
agree unless the County is doing a complete rezoning.
Mr.
Carter
stated the concept of the overlay district would not change the General
Business zoning. He stated that in this case the overlay would actually
relax some of the requirements for redevelopment and revitalization of
projects that are challenged.
Mr.
Shepperd
agreed it has to be a plus from a business perspective. He stated he
was also concerned about community involvement. He noted he didn’t
quite understand the easement acquisition, and asked if it was
development rights.
Mr.
Carter
stated no, that it was essentially permission from the owner for the
County to go on their property and do things outlined in the easement.
Perhaps the improvement could be to remove some concrete or old
foundation and plant some shrubs and maintain them. The owner can do
anything he wants--he can sell the property at any time.
Mr.
Shepperd
asked if the easement goes away if the owner sells the property.
Mr. Noel
stated there is language in the easement agreement that states the
easement is terminated upon development by the owner or sale to another
owner.
Mr.
McReynolds
noted that some of the easements might be negotiated so that the County
is reimbursed when the property is sold. This would be done on a
case-by-case basis.
Mr.
Shepperd
asked if the VDOT Revenue Sharing funds of $30,000 will be adequate.
Mr.
Carter
indicated the County has been successful in obtaining more funding, and
now has about $220,000 available for Route 17.
Mr.
Shepperd
asked if the proposal should also address future properties.
Chairman
Burgett
stated this program is for revitalization of what exists now. If someone
puts something new on Route 17, they will have to meet the current
standards.
Mrs.
Noll
stated she felt that if the Board goes with an overlay zone and there is
vacant property, when it is developed it should be under the same
guidelines.
Mr.
Shepperd
stated if there is the underlying General Business, it doesn't mean the
property owners have to comply with only the basic requirements, and he
asked if in the future the Board can offer the incentive.
Mr.
Wiggins
noted that the Board was not trying to supplement new businesses, but
revitalizing the existing ones for the beautification of the Route 17
corridor.
Discussion followed concerning the
administration of the grant program.
Mr. Noel
stated the committee is a subcommittee of the Industrial Development
Authority (IDA), and program implementation is its responsibility. The
authority for the program and funding is going through the IDA, but the
committee will be making the recommendations for IDA approval.
Mrs.
Noll
asked what recourse does a business have if turned down.
Mr. Noel
stated they could take it to the IDA. He stated it was a good point
that the committee hadn’t addressed.
Further discussion followed on the
administration of the program and eligibility criteria for receiving
grant funds.
Mr.
Carter
then provided the Board members with a handout on the overlay district.
He stated it would relax certain provisions. He provided the Board with
examples, such as building height, reduction in front setback, reduction
in parking requirements, reduction in setback distance for parking
spaces from property lines, replacement of certain signs with larger
signs, reduction in normal landscaping requirements, expedited plan
review process, or sub-areas that will get certain attention. Mr.
Carter stated the committee and staff should be providing the Board with
more specific proposals after the trip to Fairfax. He indicated staff
needs some better guidance in the County ordinance dealing with
redevelopment situations because now they are unsure as to how to deal
with certain situations.
Mr. Noel
also noted there were some very good ideas in the Cox Study, and there
are some things the committee wants to use that will be very good for
the corridor.
Mr.
Junior Coxton,
Chairman of the Route 17 Revitalization Committee, thanked the Board for
giving the business owners the opportunity to have some control over
this process. He stated the corridor has to change, now or later. The
change from 1974 to today is mostly a good change. He stated York
County has done a good job overall, and the residents of the County are
changing--they want better and prettier--they are more involved in their
community. Mr. Coxton stated the committee wants to get the businesses
involved and work with them to make their businesses nicer and better.
He stated this type of program has never happened before, and the
committee is doing a lot of research. The Board of Supervisors should
get recommendations and a final report in August. He stated Route 17 is
made up of expensive property, and he didn’t know of any businessman who
didn’t want to increase his wealth--they just don't know how to go about
it.
Mr.
McReynolds
then reminded the Board members of their next Regular Meeting to be held
on June 17 and a work session to be held on June 24 in the East Room,
York Hall, to discuss Tax Relief for the Elderly and the Landscaping
Provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
Meeting
Adjourned.
At 6:54 p.m. Chairman Burgett declared that the meeting be
adjourned sine die
__________________________________
__________________________________
James O. McReynolds, Clerk James
S. Burgett, Chairman
York County Board of Supervisors York County
Board of Supervisors
|
