HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201700007 Review Comments Zoning Map Amendment 2018-02-16COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
February 16, 2018
Justin Shimp
Shimp Engineering
201 E. Main Street Suite M
Charlottesville, VA 22903
RE: Review Comments — Resubmittal Materials for ZMA-2017-00007 "Hogwaller Farm"
Mr. Shimp:
Members of Albemarle County staff and our partner agencies have reviewed your resubmittal
materials (received January 16, 2018) for Zoning Map Amendment ZMA-2017-00007, which
proposes to rezone Tax Map Parcel (TMP) #77-20 from LI Light Industrial to RA Rural Areas.
After our review of your resubmittal materials, County staff still have concerns about details of
this proposal which we believe should be resolved before the proposal goes to public hearing
with the Planning Commission. We would be glad to meet with you to discuss these issues.
However, you have the right to pursue any of the courses of action outlined in the attached
"Action After Receipt of Comment Letter" document provided with this comment letter.
Review comments regarding the resubmittal materials are provided below, embedded within the
original review comments (dated October 5, 2017). For clarity, the original review comments are
provided in gray typeface and the new review comments regarding the resubmittal materials are
provided in bold typeface.
Planning:
Planning staff s comments are organized as follows:
How the proposal relates to the Comprehensive Plan
The Neighborhood Model analysis
Additional Planning comments
Comprehensive Plan:
Comments on how your project conforms to the Comprehensive Plan will be provided to the
Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors as part of the staff report that will be prepared
for the work session or public hearing. The comments below are in preparation for the Planning
Commission review, and may change based on direction from the Commission and/or with
subsequent submittals.
The property is located within the portion of the Development Area addressed in the Southern
and Western Urban Neighborhoods Master Plan ("Master Plan"). The future land use designation
for this property is as follows:
Parks and Green Systems —
This future land use designation is a reflection of the existing natural environmental features and
values. Parks and Green Systems could include agricultural and forestal uses.
In this particular location — the heavily forested floodplain and low-lying riparian area of Moore's
Creek, an impaired urban waterway — this Parks and Green Systems future land use designation is
most reasonably interpreted as suggesting that the ecological and hydrological values of this
property are to be preserved, protected, or (at minimum) managed in a low -impact,
environmentally sustainable way. Therefore, the use or management of this property primarily for
"green infrastructure" purposes seems more in keeping with the intent of the Parks and Green
Systems future land use designation than does developing or managing the land for agricultural or
public recreational uses.
This is especially true with consideration of the health of the Moore's Creek watershed: Moores
Creek has been designated by Virginia DEQ as impaired for recreation (e.g., swimming, based on
fecal coliform bacteria levels) and also for aquatic life (based on benthic macroinvertebrate
sampling) for many years, including the most recent statewide assessment in 2014. This means
the stream does not meet state water quality standards for these two uses.
(http://www.deg.vir ig nia og v/Programs/Water/WaterQualiiylnfortnationTMDLs/WaterQualityAs
sessments/2014305(b)303(d)IntegratedReport.aspx)
In summary, the Comp Plan calls for the primary use of this property to be undeveloped open
space (generally for purposes of preserving riparian systems, conserving urban forest, protecting
water quality, and floodplain management).
Proposal —
Your proposal is to convert the existing forest land cover to agriculture. Although the Comp Plan
and Master Plan contain clear support for agricultural operations and working farms, forests, and
fisheries, there is also extensive commitment to environmental sustainability in general, and to
watershed protection and forest conservation in particular. The most specific, relevant examples
are found on page 53 of the Southern and Western Urban Neighborhoods Master Plan, which
contains the "Plan for Future Parks and Green Systems." This plan includes the following
"Natural Resource Protection Recommendations" —
"Preserve environmental features include streams, stream buffers, floodplains, wetlands,
and systems of steep slopes. Special attention is needed for the following:"
o "The stream buffers, systems of steep slopes, floodplain and wetlands adjacent to
the Rivanna River, Moore's Creek, and Biscuit Run should be preserved."
o "Minimize stream impacts and improve the health/quality of Moore's Creek... "
�a
The application materials do not provide sufficient information to reach any conclusions about
the appropriateness of the proposed use (converting riparian forest land cover to agricultural and
forestal land uses). The proposal includes some language describing desirable, appropriate uses or
improvements; but there is also a lack of clarity or specificity which creates difficulty in trying to
evaluate this proposal in a detailed manner. For example:
■ Neither the concept plan nor the project narrative indicate the extent of proposed land
conversion or limits of clearing.
The revised concept plan identifies "Limits of Land Clearing."
■ The concept plan does not identify the conceptual locations of any stormwater
management facilities or related improvements.
The revised concept plan does not include the general locations for where you
propose to "provide more adequate BMP's for culvert outflows" for "catching
runoff from developments up to Monticello Road."
■ Neither the concept plan nor the project narrative provide specific details about the
location or dimensions of the proposed riparian buffer that would be implemented "to a
portion of Moore's Creek." More specifically, the section of the project narrative titled
"Consistency with Comprehensive Plan" includes language about Parks and Green
Systems being "a major component of the development along the Moore's Creek edge of
the property within the Water Protection Ordinance Buffers." However, as noted above,
the locations, size, and degree of protection for this proposed riparian buffer are unclear.
The revised concept plan addresses this lack of clarity by proposing a "35 FT
riparian buffer from top of bank." However, please reference new review comments
regarding staffs evaluation of the adequacy of this proposed buffer, in the
"Neighborhood Model" and "Additional Planning Comments" sections, below.
Neighborhood Model:
General comments on how well the proposed development meets the principles of the
Neighborhood Model are provided here. More detailed comments may be provided at a later date
if changes are made and/or after more detailed plans are provided.
Pedestrian • There are no dwellings or structures being proposed. Use of the land would
Orientation presumably be limited to occupants of adjacent residences (in the City).
. The opportunity for a trail connection may exist on this property.
• The revised project narrative states that the proposed "riparian buffer on the
property adjacent to Moore's Creek provides the opportunity to establish a trail
and possible connections to the Rivanna Trail Network, furthering the
recreational potential of the property." However, it is not clear if the
establishment of a trail and/or trail connection is part of this ZMA proposal —
there is no trail shown on the revised concept plan, and there is no information
about any associated access easement or other commitment to establishing a
trail and/or connection to the Rivanna Trail. If you are proposing a trail or trail
connection with this ZMA request, please coordinate with Dan Mahon in the
Albemarle County Parks and Recreation Department at
dmahon(&albemarle.org.
Mixture of Uses . The only proposed use for this property is agricultural/forestal operations.
• The use of this property would be part of a larger, innovative development comprised
of agricultural operations and multi -family housing.
�J
. This principle is otherwise not applicable to this proposal for this subject property.
Neighborhood . This principle is not applicable to this proposal for this subject property.
Centers
Mixture of
This principle is not applicable to this proposal for this subject property.
Housing Types
I
and Affordability
This principle is not applicable to this proposal for this subject property.
Interconnected
Streets and
Transportation
Networks
Multi -modal
This principle is not applicable to this proposal for this subject property.
Transportation
Opportunities
. The proposed use of this subject property (agricultural operations) could partially be
interpreted as recreational amenities and open space for the associated multi -family
Parks,
Recreational
Amenities, and
housing (in the City).
Open Space
. Without a formal commitment to preserving riparian forest and establishing
appropriate stream buffers along Moore's Creek, the goal of protecting `green
systems' is not met.
• The revised concept plan includes a proposed "35 FT riparian buffer from top of
bank;" while this represents an improvement from the original concept plan,
staff believe that a 35' wide stream buffer would not adequately address the
issues and concerns identified in the "Comprehensive Plan" section, above.
Please reference the "Additional Planning Comments" section, below.
Buildings and
. This principle is not applicable to this proposal for this subject property.
Space of Human
Scale
• This principle is not applicable to this proposal for this subject property.
Relegated
Parking
. This principle is not applicable to this proposal for this subject property.
Redevelopment
Respecting
Terrain and
. It is unclear if the proposed land clearing will involve land disturbance that would be
considered "grading" or "re -grading."
Careful Grading
and Re -grading of
. It is unclear what type of stormwater management facilities are being proposed, or
their conceptual location, or if they would involve "grading" or "re -grading."
Terrain
. Importantly, it is unclear if the "Approx. 30 ft. berm separating farm crop from
Moore's Creek" involves any grading (either cut or fill). The project narrative
indicates this is an existing natural feature — but neither the project narrative nor the
concept plan clearly convey the berm's location, size (height), and whether or not the
feature is being modified (enlarged) in part or in its entirety.
. Staff are unable to determine if this principle is met.
. The unclear information about the existing "berm" has been removed from the
revised concept plan.
• The revised concept plan includes a proposed "35 FT riparian buffer from top
of bank" and a note on the concept plan further explains that the proposed
buffer would be outside the "limits of land clearing." It is appropriate that no
land disturbance occur within any stream buffer; however, as noted elsewhere,
4
Clear Boundaries
with Rural Areas
staff believe a 35' wide stream buffer would not adequately address the issues
and concerns identified in the "Comprehensive Plan" section, above. Please also
reference the "Additional Planning Comments" section, below.
. This principle is not applicable to this proposal for this subject property.
Additional PlanninE Comments:
As indicated above, staff are unable to clearly assess if this proposal would be consistent and
compliant with the Comp Plan and Master Plan goals and recommendations. This is primarily
true with regards to environmental issues, which are very important and which include issues
such as: the proposed land conversion, impacts to water resources; and possible grading
within the flood hazard overlay district.
The revised concept plan and revised project narrative contain additional information
which has enabled staff to more clearly evaluate the proposal.
2. Some specific questions that have arisen from Staff review of this proposal (as submitted)
include the following:
a. What are the proposed extents of land clearing? The revised concept plan
specifies the "Limits of Land Clearing."
b. Will best management practices be utilized in conjunction with land clearing
operations? The resubmittal materials do not include information about
methods or best management practices that would be utilized for the
proposed land clearing operations.
c. Will any existing riparian forest be preserved? If so, how much and where? The
revised concept plan clearly identifies the areas that are proposed to be
preserved as a "35 FT riparian buffer from top of bank."
d. Will any sort of permanent riparian buffer or stream buffer be established? The
revised concept plan clearly identifies the areas that are proposed to be
preserved as a "35 FT riparian buffer from top of bank."
e. Will there be any grading (cut or fill) within the Flood Hazard Overlay district, in
connection with the berm along Moore's Creek or anywhere else? The revised
concept plan shows land clearing activity would occur within the Flood
Hazard Overlay District and (more specifically) within the Floodway. The
revised project narrative states "there will be no fill placed in the floodplain
on the property."
3. Staff believes these questions and issues should be addressed through revision of the concept
plan, and resubmittal, to provide clarity on the proposal and to demonstrate a commitment to
addressing and mitigating the impacts associated with these issues.
Revised materials were received as a resubmittal on January 16, 2018.
4. Proposed buffer along Moore's Creek needs to be measured from the top of the stream bank,
not the bottom of the stream bank or edge of the waterway.
The revised concept plan indicates that the proposed buffer was measured from the top
of the stream bank, as is necessary.
5
5. The "35 FT riparian buffer from top of bank" has been reviewed by numerous
Community Development staff in multiple Divisions; staff have concluded that a 35'
buffer width is not sufficient. Rationale for this conclusion include the following
considerations:
a. The subject property is entirely located within Flood Hazard Overlay District
(and is largely located in the regulatory Floodway), with extensive frontage
along the impaired Moore's Creek;
b. The emphasis and "special attention" in the Southern + Western Urban
Neighborhoods Master Plan focusing on improving conditions in and along
Moore's Creek; and
c. The relatively large difference between the width of the standard Water
Protection Ordinance stream buffer in the Development Areas (100') and the
proposed buffer (35').
6. Staff strongly recommend that the proposal be modified to include a commitment to
establish a permanent stream buffer along Moore's Creek which is 100' wide (as
measured from top of stream bank) or which is located along the boundary between the
"Floodway" and "Flood Fringe" (as identified by FEMA on the applicable FIRM),
whichever is greater.
However, if the applicant proposes development (as defined with regards to the Flood
Hazard Overlay District, which includes farming activities as a man-made change to
improved or unimproved real estate) that would encroach into the regulatory Floodway,
the owner shall first request a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) or a Conditional Letter
of Map Revision (CLOMR) from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA),
and obtain applicable FEMA approval(s), prior to commencing any development
activity(s) within the regulatory Floodway [30.3.10.A.3].
Staff further recommends that a stream buffer with a minimum width of 100' (as
measured from top of stream bank) be preserved at all times to minimize water quality
impacts to Moore's Creek, even if the owner pursues and obtains FEMA-approved
LOMR/CLOMR in order to increase the area of development into the regulatory
Floodway.
7. Staff recommend that any permanent stream buffer along Moore's Creek be fenced for
livestock exclusion, using materials and methods that are appropriate within the Flood
Hazard Overlay District.
8. Staff recommend that the proposal be modified to include enhancement or restoration
of the "existing drainage ditch" water course, in ways that would address (improve)
water quality and water quantity issues associated with the proposed land cover
conversion from riparian forest to "urban farm" (agricultural operations).
9. Agricultural operations in the Development Area along an impaired stream could result
in water quality impacts; a nutrient management program / nutrient reduction program
would be beneficial towards minimizing any such impacts to water quality.
Engineering•
The following comments related to engineering have been provided by County Engineer Frank
Pohl, P.E., C.F.M., on 9/19/2017:
6
Map Comments:
1. Add note stating the approx. 30-ft berm is 'existing'.
2. Add note that the entire property is within the 100-yr floodplain, or show actual limits
based on GIS mapping, including on the other side of Moore's Creek. It appears one
corner of the parcel is out of the floodplain.
3. Show Zone AE floodway on map.
4. Show 100-ft stream buffer on map.
5. Extend Nassau Street to limits of mapping.
6. Delete proposed units shown within the City limits.
7. Show limits of wetlands.
8. Change note regarding fencing to: "Any fencing provided within the floodplain shall meet
the requirements of Section 18-30.3.15.17 of the Albemarle County Code."
Narrative Comments:
If fill is proposed in the floodplain, the applicant shall submit and obtain an approved
Floodplain Development Permit prior to any fill activities. In the last sentence of the
section'Impacts on Environmental Features', delete "little to..." and just state "no fill will
be placed..."
The following comments related to engineering have been provided by County Engineer
Frank Pohl on 1/18/2018:
■ Change 'riparian buffer' to 'stream buffer' — Albemarle County does not use the
term 'riparian.'
■ Revise hatching for 35-ft stream buffer to start at the top of bank, similar to the
original plan. Add the critical slopes hatch back to the plan.
■ Add a note on the plan that the proposed buffer will not be disturbed and will be
protected under an easement. I am concerned that the buffer will be forgotten about
many years from now.
■ Parking area improvements are not exempt from VSMP permitting requirements
unless the area of land disturbance is less than 10,000 sf 117-3031. Previous plan did
not show parking within the County limits.
■ Construction of the parking area is not exempt from floodplain permitting
requirements, regardless of the area disturbed 118-30.3.12]. Previous plan did not
show parking within the County limits.
■ Accessory structures are allowed by -right in the floodplain but a floodplain
development permit is required for these structures 118-30.3.121. Accessory
structures shall not exceed 200 sf 118-30.3.51 unless a variance is approved [18-
30.3.17]. Accessory structures constructed within the floodplain shall be constructed
in accordance with the floodplain Construction Standards 118-30.3.151. Applicant
shall confirm with building official if sheds can be connected/attached as shown on
the Conceptual Plan dated 01/16/18. Previous plan did not show the 'farm sheds'
within County limits.
Inspections:
The following comments were provided by Mr. Michael Dellinger, Albemarle County
Building Official, on 1/19/2018:
7
No issues; be advised that if this application is approved, the building plans must be drawn
and stamped by a RDP to show compliance with flood requirements of the building code.
Zoning:
The following comments were provided by Mr. Francis MacCall, Principal Planner, on
1/31/2018:
Please provide a note on the plan regarding the farm sheds, that as accessory structures, no
single farm shed shall be more than 200sgft per 30.3.5 and each farm shed shall obtain a
building permit to comply with the construction standards outlined in Section 30.3.15.
Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA):
The following comments were provided by Mr. Richard Nelson, Civil Engineer, on
2/07/2018:
ACSA recommends approval for ZMA-2017-07 (Hogwaller Farm) with the following
conditions:
Show RWSA 36-inch sewer main location on parcel, with RWSA 30-foot easement,
centered over the sewer main.
■ Add a note that structures and improvements to RWSA easements are not
permitted.
Action after Receipt of Comments:
After you have read this letter, please take one of the actions identified in the attachment "Action
After Receipt of Comment Letter."
Resuhmittal:
If you choose to resubmit, please use the attached form. A fee is required for any additional
resubmittals. The resubmittal date schedule is provided for your convenience.
Notification and Advertisement Fees:
Prior to scheduling a public hearing with the Planning Commission:
$ 364.00 = Cost for newspaper advertisement
$ 215.00 = Cost for notification of adjoining owners (minimum $200 + actual postage/$I per
owner after 50 adjoining owners)
S 579.00 = Total amount due prior to Planning Commission public hearing
Prior to the Board of Supervisor's public hearing, payment of the newspaper advertisement for
the Board hearing needed.
S 364.00 = Additional amount due prior to Board of Supervisors public hearing
S 943.00 = Total amount for all notifications. Fees may be paid in advance. Payment for both
the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors public hearings may be paid at the same
time. Additional notification fees will not be required unless a deferral takes place and adjoining
owners need to be notified of a new date.
s
Please contact me using the information provided below if you would like to set up a meeting to
discuss this comment letter or any other aspect of your proposed project, or to share any
questions or requests for assistance you may have.
Sincerely,
Tim Padalino, AICP
Senior Planner I Community Development Department I Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 x. 3088 1 tpadalinogalbemarle.org
9
AI
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ACTION AFTER RECEIPT OF COMMENT LETTER
Within 30 days of the date of this letter, please do one of the following:
(1) Resubmit in response to review comments
(2) Request indefinite deferral
(3) Request that your Planning Commission public hearing date be set
(4) Withdraw your application
(1) Resubmittal in Response to Review Comments
If you plan to resubmit within 30 days, make sure that the resubmittal is on or before a
resubmittal date as published in the project review schedule. The full resubmittal schedule may
be found at www.albemarle.org in the "forms" section at the Community Development page.
Be sure to include the resubmittal form on the last Dane of vour comment letter with vour
submittal.
The application fee which you paid covers staff review of the initial submittal and one
resubmittal. Each subsequent resubmittal requires an additional fee. (See attached Fee
Schedule.)
(2) Request Indefinite Deferral
If you plan to resubmit after 30 days from the date of the comment letter, you need to request
an indefinite deferral. Please provide a written request and state your justification for
requesting the deferral. (Indefinite deferral means that you intend to resubmit/request a
public hearing be set with the Planning Commission after the 30 day period.)
(3) Request Planning Commission Public Hearing Date be Set
At this time, you may schedule a public hearing with the Planning Commission. However, we
do not advise that you go directly to public hearing if staff has identified issues in need of
resolution that can be addressed with a resubmittal.
After outstanding issues have been resolved and/or when you are ready to request a public
hearing, staff will set your public hearing date for the Planning Commission in accordance with
the Planning Commission's published schedule and as mutually agreed by you and the County.
The staff report and recommendation will be based on the latest information provided by you
with your initial submittal or resubmittal. Please remember that all resubmittals must be made
on or before a resubmittal date.
By no later than twenty-one (21) days before the Planning Commission's public hearing, a
newspaper advertisement fee and an adjoining owner notification fee must be paid. (See
attached Fee Schedule) Your comment letter will contain the actual fees you need to pay.
Payment for an additional newspaper advertisement is also required twenty-two (22) days prior
to the Board of Supervisors public hearing. These dates are provided on the attached Legal Ad
Payments for Public Hearings form.
Please be advised that, once a public hearing has been advertised, only one deferral prior to the
Planning Commission's public hearing will be allowed during the life of the application. The
only exception to this rule will be extraordinary circumstances, such as a major change in the
project proposal by the applicant or more issues identified by staff that have not previously
been brought to the applicant's attention. As always, an applicant may request deferral at the
Planning Commission meeting.
(4) Withdraw Your Application
If at any time you wish to withdraw your application, please provide your request in writing.
Failure to Respond
If we have not received a response from you within 30 days, we will contact you again. At that
time, you will be given 10 days to do one of the following: a) request withdrawal of your
application, b) request deferral of your application to a specific Planning Commission date as
mutually agreed to with staff, or c) request indefinite deferral and state your justification for
requesting the deferral. If none of these choices is made within 10 days, staff will schedule
your application for a public hearing based on the information provided with your original
submittal or the latest submittal staff received on a resubmittal date.
Fee Payment
Fees paid in cash or by check must be paid at the Community Development Intake Counter.
Make checks payable to the County of Albemarle. Do not send checks directly to the Review
Coordinator. Fees may also be paid by credit card using the secure online payment system,
accessed at http://www.albemarle.org/department.asp?department=cdd&relpage=21685.
11
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY SP # or ZMA #
Fee Amount $ Date Paid By who? Receipt # Ck# By:
Resubmittal of information for Special Use Permit or
Zoning Map Amendment
PROJECT NUMBER: Z MA - Z,o 11 • 0000l PROJECT NAME: 4y6WP(Ue, R ORM
Resubmittal Fee is Required ❑ Per Request ❑ Resubmittal Fee is Not Required
IlM �A'DPSI�tNO
Community Development Project Coordinator
2 1.4�1$
Signature 611Date
Name of Applicant
Signature
FEES
Phone Number
Date
Resubmittal fees for Special Use Permit — original Special Use Permit fee of $1,075
❑ First resubmission
FREE
❑ Each additional resubmission
$538
Resubmittal fees for original Special Use Permit fee of $2,150
❑ First resubmission
FREE
❑ Each additional resubmission
$1,075
Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $2,688
❑ First resubmission
FREE
Each additional resubmission
$1,344
Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $3,763
❑ First resubmission
FREE
❑ Each additional resubmission
$1,881
❑ Deferral of scheduled public hearing at applicant's request — Add'I notice fees will be required
$194
To be paid after staff review for Public notice:
Most applications for Special Use Permits and Zoning Map Amendment require at least one public hearing by the Planning Commission
and one public hearing by the Board of Supervisors. Virginia State Code requires that notice for public hearings be made by publishing
a legal advertisement in the newspaper and by mailing letters to adjacent property owners. Therefore, at least two fees for public notice
are required before a Zoning Map Amendment may be heard by the Board of Supervisors. The total fee for public notice will be
provided to the applicant after the final cost is determined and must be paid before the application is heard by a public body.
MAKE CHECKS TO COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE/PAYMENT AT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNTER
➢ Preparing and mailing or delivering up to fifty (50) notices
$215 + actual cost of first-class postage
➢ Preparing and mailing or delivering each notice after fifty (50)
$1.00 for each additional notice + actual
cost of first-class postage
➢ Legal advertisement (published twice in the newspaper for each public hearing)
Actual cost
(minimum of $280 for total of 4publications)
County of Albemarle Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Voice: (434) 296-5832 Fax: (434) 972-4126
1/24/17 Page I of 1
Albemarle County, Virginia
2018 Submittal and Review Schedule
Special Use Permits and Zoning Map Amendments
Resubmittal
Schedule
Resubmittal Dates
Comments to applicant
for decision on whether to
proceed to Public Hearing
Payment Due for Public
Hearing Legal Ad
Planning Commission Public
Hearing Date*
No sooner than
Monday
Wednesday
Friday
Tuesday
Dec 18 2017
Jan 17
Jan 26
Feb 20
Wednesday, Jan 3
Jan 31
Feb 9
Mar 6
Tuesday, Jan 16
Feb 14
Feb 23
Mar 20
Jan 29
Feb 28
Mar 16
Apr 10
Feb 05
Mar 7
Mar 16
Apr 10
Tuesday Feb 20
Mar 21
Mar 30
Apr 24
Mar 5
Apr 4
Apr 6
May 1
Mar 19
Apr 18
Apr 27
May 22
Apr 2
May 2
May 18
Jun 12
Apr 16
May 16
Jun 1
Jun 26
Apr 30
May 30
Jun 1
Jun 26
May 7
Jun 6
Jun 15
Jul 10
May 21
Jun 20
Jun 29
Jul 24
Jun 4
Ju15
Jul 13
Aug 7
Jun 18
Jul 18
Jul 27
Aug 21
Jul 2
Aug 1
Aug 10
Sep 4
Jul 16
Aug 15
Aug 31
Sep 25
Jul 30
Aug 29
Aug 31
Sep 25
Aug 6
Sep 5
Sep 14
Oct 9
Aug 20
Sep 19
Sep 28
Oct 23
Tuesday Sep 4
Oct 3
Oct 5
Oct 30
Sep 17
Oct 17
Oct 19
Nov13
Oct 1
Oct 31
Nov 9
Dec 4
Oct 15
Nov 14
Nov 20**
Dec 18
Oct 29
Nov 28
Dec 21
Jan 15 2019
Nov 5
Dec 5
Dec 21
Jan 15 2019
Nov 19
Dec 19
Dec 21
Jan 15 2019
Dec 3
Jan 2 2019
Jan 4 2019
Jan 29 2019
Dec 17
Jan 16 2019
Jan 25 2019
Feb 19 2019
Jan 7 2019
Feb 6 2019
Feb 8 2019
Mar 5 2019
2019 Dates are tentative; shading indicates a different year
*Public hearing dates have been set by the Planning Commission; however, if due to unforeseen circumstances the
Planning Commission is unable to meet on this date, your project will be moved to the closest available agenda
date.
**Off -date to accommodate holidays.
Dates in bold italics fall on a Tuesday due to a holiday.
13