Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 15 77 PC MinutesFebruary 15, 1977 The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a meeting on Tuesday, February 15, 1977, 7:30 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were Peter Easter, Vice -Chairman; Paul M. Peatross, Jr.; William Roy Barksdale; Kurt M. Gloeckner; Col. William R. Washington; Dr. James Moore; Mrs. Joan Graves; Mr. Leslie Jones; and Mrs. Opal D. David, ex-Officio. Absent was David W. Carr, Chairman. Other officials present were Mrs. Mary Joy Scala, Senior Planner; and Mr. Frederick W. Payne, Deputy County Attorney. In the absence of the Chairman, the Vice -Chairman, Mr. Easter, presided at the meeting. Mr. Easter established that a quorum was present and called the meeting to order. For the benefit of those in the audience, Mr. Easter stated that Pyrofax revised site plan, located on Route 29 North, would be deferred until March 15, 1977. CAMELOT SECTION 3 FINAL PLAT: Mrs. Scala presented the staff report, noting that this property is located on the west side of Route 29 North at the North Fork of the Rivanna River. The property is zoned R-2 Residential. A brief history of the property was presented. This proposal is a division of 40 lots in Section 3, with a minimum size of 8,427 square feet, an average size of 10,677 square feet to be served by County water and sewer. A state road is proposed. Roads in Section 1 are in the State System. Roads in Section 2 are not. Camelot Drive in this section will be constructed to carry an estimated 2,800 additional vehicle trips which are anticipated when the remainder of Camelot develops. The applicant has obtained a variance for several of the lots in Sect- ion 3 which do not meet the 125' depth requirement. The preliminary plan shows Jester Lane connected to St. Ives Road. However, topography makes this connection unfeasible. The staff recommended the following conditions of approval: 1. Grading permit; 2. All roads in Section 2 must be bonded for acceptance into the State System before Section 3 can be approved; 3. Subject to Virginia Department of Highways approval; 4. Subject to Service Authority approval; 5. Subject to Fire Marshal approval. Mr. Barksdale moved approval of the plat subject to the conditions recommended by the staff. Mr. Gloeckner seconded this motion. DISCUSSION: Mrs. Graves noted that in the development of other lots in this subdivision, there were soil erosion problems. She stated that she hopes this will not again occur. rm Mrs. Scala replied that according to the conditions of approval there will be a required grading permit. Mr. Barksdale said that a new grading permit will assure that inspectors will be on the sight to view any erosion problems that might be occuring, whether it is with the new development, or on the old development. Mr. Nunnally stated that he anticipates no erosion problems in the development of this property. Mr. Jones asked if since Jester Lane will be taken over by the State if shared entrances would not be better. Mrs. Scala replied that since this is a dead end road shared entrances are not usually asked for. They are usually required only where a high volume of traffic will be generated. She stated that the Highway Department had reviewed the plat and had found everything to be in order as proposed. She also pointed out that in some cases there will be no driveways, that parking will be in front of the houses. Mr. Jones said that he had questioned the possibility because the state would be maintaining the road. Mrs. Scala emphasized that it is the Highway Department who determines the safety of a road. Since this meets their safety requirements, there is not really much else that can be done. She also noted that she sees no problem here. Mr. Jones asked if the staff would question the Highway Department about their feelings on shared entrances in the subdivision. He said that he hated to see a city street in the subdivision. Mrs. Scala said that this proposal is in line with the rest of the development of the Camelot area, but said that she would question the Highway Department about this particular plat and about shared entrances, in general, as requested by Mr. Jones. Mr. Boggs said that these roads are being built to the standards of the remainder of the subdivision. Mr. Payne said that the roads shown on the plat are covered by state standards of the Highway Department. The motion to approve the plat subject to the conditions of the staff (along with the question4regarding shared entrances) carried unanimously. directed to the Virginia Department of Highways MILTON HILLS SECTION 3 FINAL PLAT: Mrs. Scala, in the staff presentation, stated that this A-1 zoned property is located on the west side of Route 729 near Milton. She gave a history of the property, noting that when the approval of Section 2 final plat was given, no maintenance bonds were required, since the road had been built to state standards. There was a moratorium on restricted roads, therefore spurs shown as pipestem lots. The proposal is for 24 lots with a minimum size of 2.08 acres, and an average size size of 3.12 acres. The lots are to be served by individual wells and septic systems. The extension of the existing road and the new road will be to state standards. There are two proposed joint easements in Section 2. 9.3 The staff recommended the following conditions of approval: 1. Milton Hills Drive in Section 1 and 2 must be bonded or brought into the State System before Section 3 can be approved; 2. Waiver required for pipestem lots with joint easements; 3. Subject to Virginia Department of Highways approval, including upgrading of approximately 1,000 feet of Oak Ridge Road; 4. Grading permit; 5. Residue must be combined with adjacent acreage. Mr. Jones questioned the increase in the amount of traffic this would generate for Route 53. Mrs. Scala said that this would be difficult to determine, but it is possible to consider approximately 7 vehicle trips per day per residence. Mr. Jones expressed a concern that the Virginia Department of Highways is working only on upgrading the roads in the northern part of the county, and that more traffic on this road will make it more dangerous that it is already. He said that he is concerned about the situation. Mr. Easter said that there is a problem, and he sympathized with Mr. Jones' concern, however the county has been told that the Highway Department has no funds available for any improvements on roads. Mr. Boggs said that he felt that most of the development would use Route 729 going into Route 250 because it is a better access to the interstate and town than Route 53. Dr. Moore recommended that the two streets be extended to lots 8, 9, 17, and 18. Mr. Boggs explained on the plat that the developer is trying to avoid grading as much as possible, and is attempting to save the trees. He also pointed to the stream at the rear of the property. He stated that this is the reason the roads have not been extended, though these lots are larger than minimum size. Mrs. Graves suggested a noted on the plat regarding no further subdivision without Commission approval of lots 8 and 18. Col. Washington stated that he does not like to see a lot of cuts, though this could be a problem for the eventual owners rather than for the developer. He said that he would like to see some kind of road extension. Mr. Easter said that he assumed that a state road would mean more restrictions. Dr. Moore said that he favors the extension of the roads to those four lots. Mr. Peatross said that with this extension, smaller lots could be encouraged at the rear. He said that he preferred fewer lots with the kind of road shown on the plat than more lots. Mr. Barksdale also supported private driveways to the possible increase in lots. Mr. Barksdale moved approval of the plat subject to the five conditions of the staff plus the additional condition: 6. No further subdivision without Planning Commission approval of lots 8 and 18. 91, Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion for approval subject to the six conditions. The motion to approve carried by a vote of 6-2, with Dr. Moore and Mr. Jones dissenting. RONALD K. BANNISTER FINAL PLAT: Mrs. Scala presented the staff report, stating that this A-1 Agriculturally zoned property is located on the west side of Route 627. The proposal is a division of one 4.151 acre parcel with an existing house. The residue of 308.4 acres is to be placed in a corporation. The staff recommended the following conditions of approval: 1. Note on the plat: "No further division along this easement without Planning Commiss- ion approval"; 2. Correct date on plat. When questioned about the easement, Mr. Boggs stated that it is to serve only the existing residence. Mr. Barksdale pointed out that since it is to be only 30 feet, this is all it can ever serve. Mr. Boggs replied that he is aware of this and that is the intent. Mr. Boggs told Mr. Easter that the 308.4 acres is being farmed, and there is no intent to further subdivide this property. Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of the plat subject to the two conditions recommended by the staff. Mrs. Graves seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. DONALD W. FOSTER FINAL PLAT: Mrs. Scala presented the staff report, stating that the A-1 zoned property is located on the east side of Route 743 near Ardwood. The proposal is a division of an 18-acre parcel into 3 parcels. Two parcels will contain three acres each and will be served by a 50' access easement across two pipestems. The residue acreage contains the applicant's residence. The staff commented that since the applicant will also use this entrance, it qualifies as a commerical entrance with three dwellings. The Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation has stated that sight distance is not adequate unless it is a private entrance. Since the residue (lot is a part of this division, the dedication should extend across Lot 3 as well. The dedication along Lot 3 has been shown. The staff recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of the entrance; 2. Grading permit for the driveway if needed; 3. Health Department approval; 4. Waiver of piepstem lots and easement. 015 Col. Washington questioned the two pipestems and the entrance requirements of the Highway Department. The applicant explained that each pipestem is part of each lot, but there will be only one road. Mr. Jones questioned the sight distance on the other side. Mrs. Scala replied that it is better here, as shown on the plat. The applicant stated that it would be more dangerous to move the entrance, since it is drawn such that one can see both directions. Mrs. Scala stated that the Highway Department is aware of the conditions in the area and they had no concerns about this. Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of the plat subject to the four conditions recommended by the staff. Mr. Barksdale seconded this motion, which carried by a vote of 7-1, with Col. Washington dissenting. WALKER MANLEY PRELIMINARY PLAT: Mr. Gloeckner disqualified himself from the discussion and vote by leaving the room. Mrs. Scala presented the staff report, noting that the proeprty is located on the east side of Route 20 adjacent Marshal Manors Subdivision and is zoned A-1. The proposal is to divide an existing 5.4+ acre parcel into two lots, one 2.0 acres with adequate road frontage, and one of 3.4 acres served by a 25 foot access easement across Lot 1. The staff recommended the 25 foot easement to serve Lot 2 in order that Lot 2 not be landlocked as a result of this division. The applicant owns both Lots 1 and 2. Mrs. Graves asked if the applicant proposed to move the trailer before the house is built and asked if there is a special permit for the mobile home. Mr. Manley stated that the mobile home will be occupied until the house is built, and there is a special permit for the mobile home. Mrs. Graves asked if the mobile home can remain in view of the request for subdivision. Mr. Archie, son-in-law of Mr. Manley, stated that he had been issued a 12 month special permit for the mobile home to be used while the house is under construction. At the end of that 12 months, the mobile home will have to be moved. Mrs. Graves stated that she had asked this question in view of the acreage. Mr. Easter suggested that the residue of lot 2 be added to and become a part of Lot 2. Mr. Manley stated that he would be willing to vacate the property line. Mr. Jones moved approval of the plat subject to the following conditions: ■ 1. Health Department approval; 2. Trailer to be removed at the time when an occupancy permit is granted on the permanent structure; lowd 3. Residue of Lot 2 to be added to and become a part of Lot 1. Mrs. Graves seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no further discussion. W. F. PAULETT AND SON SITE PLAN: Mrs. Scala presented the staff report, noting that the B-1 zoned property is located on the south side of Route 6 near Scottsville Shopping Center. The proposal is for hardware and building supplies - retail sales on 2.186 acres. There is an individual well and septic system. Mrs. Scala stated that the request for rezoning (ZMA-11-76) from R-1 and B-1 to M-1 had been denied in July, 1976. The Zoning Administrator then ruled that this was a B-1 use due to precedent in the County (Lowes, Moores, Dart Home). The citizens appealed that decision to the BZA which voted 3-2 to have the matter decided by the Court. The Court's decision was to reaffirm the Zoning Administrator's ruling due to precedent. A variance of 75 feet from the Scenic Highway setback was obtained on January 11, 1977. The staff noted that Route 6 is a scenic highway. Pertinent regulations include a 50' setback for parking and 150' setback for buildings ( a variance has been obtained ). Landscaping has been provided in front as recommended by the staff, consisting of burford hollies, dogwoods and azaleas. The applicant has chosen to screen the east property line and part of the west boundary with pine trees, 3-4 feet tall spaced 10-12' apart. The staff had suggested staggered rows or groupings of pine surrounding the outdoor storage area. The applicant stated that there would be no outside lighting since the hours of operation were to be 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. However, someone on the Commission pointed out that a minimal of lighting would be desirable for security purposes. Mrs. Parr, an adjacent property owner, questioned how she could be assured that there would be landscaping. Mr. Easter explained that the plan shows the screening and the applicant is legally bound to comply with that plan before he can secure a certificate of occupancy. It was established in a discussion regarding the screening that there would be no screening next to B-1 zoned property. However, Mrs. Graves pointed out that the ordinance points out that it can be required. Dr. Moore asked if the Highway Department has approved the real entrance. Mrs. Scala replied that any entrance there has to be a commercial entrance and meet those requirements. The adjacent property owners were concerned about any future revisions in the plan. Mrs. Graves said that the ordinance requires that any amendments or revisions to the plan would necessitate notification of the adjacent owners. When Mr. Jones expressed his concern about this setting precedent for other businesses in the area, Mr. Easter explained that the property is already zoned B-1 and this is a site plan on B-1 land. 9T Mr. Barksdale moved approval of the site plan subject to the following conditions: 1. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval; 2. Grading permit; 3. Outdoor lighting to be directed away from traffic and residences; 4. Health Department approval; 5. Waiver of frontage granted on final plat of 2.186 acres; 6. Screening along Route 737, same type as shown along property line. Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion for approval, which carried by a vote of 7-0-1, with Mr. Jones abstaining. There followed a brief discussion of the history of the zoning of the property for W. F. Paulett and Son Site Plan, in which Mr. Payne stated that the Court had upheld the position of the Zoning Administrator that such a use could exist on B-1 property, precedent having been established in the County with such places as Dart Home, Lowes, and Moores. TRIANGLE INVESTMENT CORPORATION ( James Beck ) FINAL PLAT: Mrs. Scala presented the staff report, noting that the A-1 zoned property is located on the east side of Route 29 South, on the south side of Route 633 at Covesville. The proposal is a division of 4 lots, with an average size of 2.2 acres and a minimum size of 2.0 acres. There are individual wells and septic systems. The Highway Department has approved the concept of the three entrances on Route 633. Lots 2 and 3 will share an entrance. Dr. Moore asked if Parcel X is being created by this subdivision. Mrs. Scala stated that it is, but it will be added to another parcel. Mr. Barksdale moved approval subject to: 1. Health Department approval. Col. Washington suggested the following condition: 2. 75 foor building line on Parcel X. Mr. Barksdale was agreeable to this condition. Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion for approval subject to these two conditions. The motion to approve carried unanimously with no further discussion. Mr. Jones left the meeting. WEST WOODS FINAL PLAT: Mrs. Scala stated that this A-1 zoned property is located on the south side of Route 677. The proposal is a division of 35 lots ( lots 10-44 ). The average size is 2.27 acres, with a minimum lot size of 2.0 acres. There are central and individual wells and septic systems. State .roads are proposed. The history of the property is as follows: July 1, 1974 - preliminary plat of 49 lots approved with conditions, including County water; August 26, 1974 - request for individual wells denied by the Commission, until evidence of sufficient groundwater is presented; October 21, 1974 - four lots approved by Commission on Route 677 ( lots 1-3, 49 ) with individual wells; February 26, 1976 - Board gave conditional approval to central well for 14 units; April 27, 1976 - final plat of 10 lots ( lots 4-9, 45-48 ) approved with conditions. Preliminary plan renewed with central well instead of County water; June 15, 1976 - Commission approved request to retain driveway for lot 3 on Route 677. The staff made the following additional comments: In the time since the preliminary was approved, a preliminary on the adjacent Cushman tract has been reviewed. In light of this, the staff is recommending that Pinedale Road be shown dedicated to the property line, with a temporary turnaround. The quesitons of the central well vs individual wells or a combinations thereof should be resolved. Staff feels that if a central well is utilized at all, that connection to it by all lots should be made mandatory. The Health Department has been advised of the two concerns of the Commission when the preliminary was approved, that is, the lake lots and the lots which drain into the stream which feeds the Blue Ridge pool. The narrow strip adjacent West Leigh has been traded with a West Leigh resident for equal acreage, thereby creating a new lot 14A on Pinedale Road. When questioned by Mrs. Graves about the recommendations of the Fire Marshal, Mrs. Scala replied that he did not have much to say due to the lack of available County water. Mr. Hill, representing the applicant, stated that some of the residents and recent purchasers have been concerned about the temporary turnaround on Pinedale Road. Mr. Barksdale asked if the Commission has the power to make the applicant open a road he doesn't want to open. Mr. Payne replied that the Commission has the power to require it if it thinks this road would best serve the public. Mrs. Scala explained that the Director of Planning had felt that a network of roads for this area is best. Mr. Goode Love, a resident of the area, felt that this was not best because it would have the potential of becoming a public highway. When the situation of the wells was discussed, Mr. Barkdale expressed the ideal that a central well should be used for as many lots as possible. The central wells should have top capacity. Mrs. Scala stated that she wished to point out that the lakeside lots have the lake included in the acreage. When questioned by Mr. Gloeckner about the dam's maintenance, Mr. Hill responded that this is covered in the deeds - joint maintenance by all fronting on the lake. Mrs. Graves questioned if the Health Department has certain requirements about setbacks for septic fields, etc. from a lake. Mrs. Scala stated that this is correct. Mrs. Graves stated that she wanted the County Engineer to approve the dam. Mr. Harry Marshall, on behalf of Blue Ridge Pool, stated that he is concerned a bout the lots that will feel the stream that feeds the pool. He asked that the Commission stress to the Health Department that this could be a potential problem, noting that more than a perc test may be necessary. Mr. Hill stated that he is agreeable to this. Mr. Barksdale moved approval of the plat subject to the following conditions: 1. Preliminary plat to be renewed; 2. Virginia Department of Highways approval, including drainage easements; 3. Health Department approval, with notice given of the Commission's strong concern about lots 32-40 due to the potential pollution problem of Blue Ridge Swim Club; 4. Source of title; 5. Maintenance agreement for the dam; 6. Not more than 4 lots to be served by individual wells. (Not including the 4 lots owned by Double C Corporation); 7. County Engineer approval of the dam. Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. NORTHSIDE INDUSTRIAL PARK FINAL PLAT: Mrs. Scala presented the staff report, noting that this M-2 Industrial property is located on the west side of Route 29 North. The proposal is a division of 8 lots, with an average size of 1.2 acres, and a minimum size of 1.0 acres, on a proposed state road. The history of the property is that Parcel E final plat was approved April 20, 1976, on a 60' dedicated right-of-way (proposed state road). Hall and Taylor site plan was approved on Parcel E. On April 27, 1976, the Planning Comission lifted the condition that entrances to Industrial Park be kept 600' apart. The staff stated that the road and the entrance, although bonded, have not been constructed. Staff would like to reiterate that Hall and Taylor body shop was approved with Northside Drive as the proposed access, and not the easement which now serves Pyrofax. It would be unsafe to permit these lots to develop without the entrance completed. The staff recommended several conditions of approval. Mr. Mike Boggs, representing the applicant, stated that he feels condition regarding entrance be constructed to state standards before the plat is signed is unfair. He felt that bonding should be sufficient. Mrs. Scala stated that Parcel E is ready to occupy, but can't get a certificate of occupancy since the developer has not proceeded in good faith. After a brief discussion, it was decided to defer any further discussion and action until the developer, Mr. Gelletley, and Mr. Dick, Zoning Administrator, could be present to discuss the construction of the entrance. This motion was made by Mr. Barksdale, and seconded by Dr. Moore. PUBLIC HEARING: The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has adopted a resolution of intent to repeal Section 18-43(c) of the Albemarle County Land Subdivison and Development Ordinance, amend Section 17-6-6 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, and amend Section 7-4(d) of the Albemarle County Code. Due to information from Mr. Payne stating that this need not necessarily be done, and that it could mean a signficant. loss of revenue for the County, the Commission deferred any action, by unanimous vote, until the next meeting, at which time it asked for a presentation of the approximate amount of revenue that would be lost. Since there was no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m. �L6 - '-C44 6. Ro ert W. Tucker, Jr. - S retar 9