Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 22 77 PC Minutes158 March 22, 1977 \Wool n The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a meeting on Tuesday, March 22, 1977, 7:30 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia, to consider a series of site plans and subdivision plats. Those members present were Mr. Paul Peatross; Mr. Roy Barksdale; Col. William Washington; Dr. James Moore; Mr. Leslie Jones; Mrs. Joan Graves; and Mrs. Opal David, ex-Officio. Other officials present were Mr. Ron Keeler, Assistant Director of Planning; Mrs. Mary Joy Scala, Senior Planner; Mr. Carlos Montenegro, Planner; Mr. Frederick Payne, Deputy County Attorney; and Mr. Benjamin Dick, Zoning Administrator. Absent were Mr. David Carr, Chairman; Mr. Peter Easter, Vice -Chairman; and Mr. Kurt Gloeckner. N In the absence of the chairman and vice-chairman, Mr. Barksdale presided at the meeting. Mr. Barksdale called the meeting to order, after establishing that a quroum was present. MINUTES: The chairman approved the minutes of February 1, 1977, as submitted. Minutes of February 22, 1977, were approved subject to the corrections of Mrs. Graves and Col. Washington. The chairman approved the minutes of March 8, 1977, as submitted. GOLDEN SKILLET SITE PLAN: Mr. Montenegro presented the staff report, informining the Commission that the property is located in Albemarle Square Shopping Center, near the entrance from Rio Road. The B-1 zoned property is an amendment to the Albemarle Square Site Plan, and this is a proposal to locate a restaurant 1,500 square feet in floor area with twenty-eight parking spaces on a site adjacent to the existing Safeway grocery store. The staff recommended the following conditions of approval: 1. Highway Department approval; 2. Grading Permit. He further noted that both entrances are two-way entrances. Dr. Moore stated that he had been under the impression that this was to be held up until other conditions and problems were corrected in Albemarle Square and until the site plan for the shopping center is complied with. Mr. Montenegro stated that the Zoning Administrator has taken care of this and that he will later address the matter to the Commission. Mr. Buddy Edwards stated that all the conditions that have been called for in the matter of corrective measures have been taken care of. Mr. Eugene Powell stated that he was not there to oppose Gold Skillet, however he did want the problems with water from the entire site taken care of. He said that he is concerned about the water that is running onto his property and asked that this site plan be deferred until the matter has been taken care of. He explained the 159' conditions in the area to the Commission. Mr. Peatross asked if there is any surface run-off from this particular site ( Golden Skillet ) which would affect Mr.. Powell's property. Mr. Montenegro stated that all the water from the Albemarle Square Shopping .140/ Center is channelized toward Mr. Powell's property, however he did not feel this would cause any more of a problem than what already exists. Mr. Peatross asked if this property would drain to a catch basin which in turn would drain through the main pipe or any channel going directly toward Mr. Powell's property. Mr. Buddy Edwards stated that this particular site would cause no additional problems. Mrs. Graves asked if the Best Products expansion would be an amendment to the site plan for Albemarle Square Shopping Center. She said that she sympathized with the residents of Woodbrook about this problem, however noted she did not feel Golden Skillet would have any direct affect on Mr. Powell's property. She said she wished to go on record as not supporting any amendments on the end of Best Products until the problems that have been addressed have been corrected. She did not feel it fair to delay Golden Skillet, though. Mr. Ben Dick, Zoning Administrator, stated that he had met with the representative of the contractor, along with Mr. Tom Sinclair, on the site to see what could be done to rectify the problems. ( Refer to the attached sheets.) He said that as far as the run-off is concerned, a berm has been designed to divert water from Mr. Powell's property and the stream bed has been. abandoned. He said that he feels as though the contractor has complied with the regulations of the County and feels the site plan is in compliance with the ordinance. Mr. Peatross complimented the contractor on correcting these problems so rapidly. Mr. Powell said that he is not happy with the situation yet, and feels this site plan should be deferred until everything has been corrected. He said that the only time he gets any cooperation is when he comes to the Commission meetings and complains. Dr. Moore asked what is difficient. Mr. Powell said the ditch is still a problem as well as the rerouting of the water Mr. Dick explained that the entire site work for Albemarle Square has not been completed and that a bond of over $30,000 has been posted with the County in good faith. Work on this has been in process since August, 1976, and the contractor has cooperated with the county in every way possible. Mr. Peatross asked when the water will be diverted to the proper place. Mr. Dick replied " As soon as possible." Mr. Peatross suggested putting this buck on the agenda in two-four weeks to check the status. Mr. Tom Sinclair informed the Commission that there is now less water on Mr. Powell's property than has ever been there, and that 90% has been diverted from the stream bed. MOU a �0 (fonit�uuchon Coptlio"tation GRADING CONTRACTOR P. O. Yox 7405 CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22906 March 22, 1977 Phone 295-2565 Re: Meeting of March 17, 1977 - 9:00 A.M. - Albemarle Square Shopping Center To Whom It May Concern: Those in attendance of the said meeting: Benjamin Dick and Robert Mowbrey of the Albemarle County Zoning Dept., Tommy Sinclair_ of Huffman Engineering and Associates, Jerry Greims and Tony Thompson of Albemarle Construction Corporation.. Problems discussed: Cleaning out silt pond, grassing sewer line ditches, loom seeding Mr. Powell's back yard, removing brush pile, and placing rip -rap in storm water ditch where off - site utility work was done. As per this discussion, work begun at 10:00 A.M. on March 17, 1977. The following manpower, materials and equipment was brought in to accomplish this: March 17, 1977 - 1- Motor Grader 2- Loaders 3- Tandum dumps 1- Crawler backhoe 1- International 444 Tractor 1- 1 ton 10-10-10- Fertilizer 150 lbs. Kentucky-31Fescue Seed 100 lbs. Gurley Seed 5 lbs. Ground & Yard Seed 200 lbs. Lime 8- Men Cont.- 3/.17%77- Albe. Sq. Shoppinter Center /6Z March 18, 1977 - 2- Loaders 1- Crawler Backhoe 1- International 444 Tractor 3- Tandem Dumps 8- Men David E. Dean Albemarle Construction Corp. :2 /63 of ALE31411 . ov ZONING DEPARTMENT 414 EAST MARKET STREET CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901 J. Benjamin Dick MEMORANDUM ZONING ADMINISTRATOR TO: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Director of Planning Albemarle Square File FROM: J. Benjamin Dick, Zoning Administrator ).,fi3�__> SUBJECT: Site Plan Requirements near Woodbrook; Mr. Powell's Complaint DATE: March 17, 1977 The Zoning Administrator met with Mr. Heischman's representative, Jerry Grimes (Project Foreman) and Tom Sinclair, from Aubrey Huff - mans and Associates, at the site. The site plan requirements were *%we reviewed as they pertained to cleaning up and smoothing out soil disturbing activities behind and along side of Albemarle Square (northerly direction). The following actions were agreed upon. I. 1) The area would be regraded, fertilized, seeded and mulched per site plan requirement. 2) Mr. Grimes volunteered to rake, seed, fertilize, and mulch Mr. Powell's yard. The Zoning Administrator left that decision to be worked out by Mr. Grimes. 3) To berm the land adjoining Mr. Powell's land in order to divert the upper hill flow of water away from Mr. Powell's land to the man-made diversion ditch. 4) To rip -rap the area below a state storm pipe in which a pool of water was collecting. This pool has apparently been there well before Albemarle Square site construction, but Mr. Grimes said he would fill it in with left over rock. 5) The silt basin was to be cleaned up and reinforced. Best Products plans to expand and therefore the silt basin ought to be retained for silt and sedimentation control. 6) The debris, trash, and brush would be removed and hauled away. Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr. March 17, 1977 Page Two 144 7) Mr. Grimes volunteered his cooperation at any future time to work with the county on correcting, any problems or meeting any requirements of site plan at the Zoning Administrator's request or by other appropriate authority. 8) Mr. Grimes stated that he had volunteered to fill the old creek bed on Mr. Powell's property. (The water running to that creek bed has been diverted in order to prevent flooding of Mr. Powell's property. This was done at Mr. Powell's request and upon engineering recommendations). Mr. Powell told Mr. Grimes that tie preferred Mr. Grimes not fill the ditch. Mr. Ashley Williams, Assistant County Engineer, verified that conversation between Mr. Grimes and Mr. Powell. The Zoning Administrator shall inspect the site for compliance and report back by memorandum. JBD:TMcl on /415 In ®� C ;?r ZONING DEPARTMENT 414 EAST MARKET STREET CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901 J. BeU* amin Dick ZONING AD INISTRATOR MEMORANDUM TO: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Director of Planning FROM: J. Benjamin Dick, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Site Plan Requirements of Albemarle Square; Compliance (Reference March 17, 1977 Memo on Same Subject) DATE: March 18, 1977 The Zoning Administrator inspected the site for compliance with the actions agreed upon March 17, 1977. All actions agreed upon were complied with although it appeared that a minor mis- understanding had occurred with respect to action number 3. The berm was constructed to direct run-off water into the old creek bed. The Zoning Administrator had understood that the berm would be constructed so as to direct run-off water_ to the diversion ditch. Mr. Grimes was not present at the'time of the inspection to discuss the matter. Other than this matter, Mr. Grimes has done an excellent job. Mr. Powell called the Zoning Administrator twice at his home and complained about Mr. Grimes' work in his yard, the work in the area and at the silt basin, and the berm being constructed to direct run-off to the old creek bed. The Zoning Administrator stated the yard work complaint was between him and Mr. Grimes, The silt basin was still needed and at this stage satisfactory and that the berm needed more work. The Zoning Administrator stated the over all job work by Mr. Grimes' men had been performed according to site plan and that a great improvement had been made. JBD:tMcI 140 Mr. Dick asked that all the information he had read to the Commission be put into the record. Mr. Peatross moved approval of the Golden Skillet Site Plan subject to the conditions recommended by the staff, and asked that the Zoning Administrator report back to the Commission on the status of the water diversion in the next two-four weeks. Mrs. Graves seconded the motion. Discussion: Dr. Moore stated that he disagrees in general, since this is a modification of the general site plan. However, he said that he would support the motion in view of the fact that the Zoning Administrator will soon report back to the Commission that the conditions regarding water diversion have been complied with. The motion to approve subject to the two conditions carried unanimously. WEST WOODS FINAL PLAT - Clarification of conditions of approval: Mrs. Scala told the Commission that when this plat was approved February 15, 1977, there were two conditions which evidently the applicant did not understand. 1. Not more than 4 lots to be served by individual wells ( not including the 4 lots owned by Double C Corporation ); 2. County Engineer approval of the dam. She asked that these two conditions be clarified for the staff. Mrs. Scala explained that when the County Engineer had reviewed the dam, he had approved it as a sedimentation basin, not a dam. Also she stated that the plat cannot be signed until State Health Department approval has been given to the central well, or until the staff knows the intent of the Commission ( if it really meant that individual wells are all right ). Mrs. Scala reminded the Commission that normally two -acre lots have individual wells and septic systems, however, there has been a problem with water and septic fields in the area and this was the reason for the central well approval, or so the staff had thought. Mrs. Graves asked if there were any fire hydrants that were to be supplied by the central well. Mrs. Scala said there were not. Mr. Peatross said that unless there is some hardship, he feels the condition addressing the central well would stick. Mrs. Scala felt that there should be something in the deed restrictions stating that the County is not responsible for the dam. Mr. Payne felt that this would be a good idea. Mrs. Graves questioned giving up Engineering approval of the dams. Mrs. Scala said that if the Commission wants the Engineer to review all dams in subdivisions, the Commission should be aware of what it is up against and then be consistent about this. leo7 Mrs. Graves stated that it is always required in RPN's and PUD's. Mr. Barksdale stated that if the Commission gives relief on the condition for the dam, the applicant must submit a revised plat omitting the word "lake." Mrs. Graves questioned if there were not comment from Blue Ridge Pool on this lake. Mrs. Scala said that the condition regarding Blue Ridge Pool had been the Commission's strong concern abouts lots 32-40, when the Health Department reviewed the plat. Mr. Peatross made a motion that the Commission make no modification on the condition of the central well - that this stand as originally approved by the Commission; that relief from condition on County Engineer's approval of the dam be given, and that a revised plat be submitted changing the word "lake" to "sediment basin". Mr. Jones amended the motion to include notice to adjacent owners of these changes. Mr. Peatross accepted the amendment. Mr. Jones then seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 5-1, with Mrs. Graves dissenting. THURSTON FINAL PLAT: Mr. Montenegro stated that the applicant is requesting that his application be deferred once again, in order that he may develop a better plan. He said that the applicant wishes to get the Commission's opinions on the proposal he will be presenting at the next hearing of this item. 14w/ Mr. Boggs explained the plan, stating that this shows all streams with a 200' buffer. Because this is one of a series of applications, he asked that this be given approval, with the final approval to be given by the staff. He said that the items that have to be addressed yet are merely administrative, such as approval from the State Water Control Board. Mr. Payne advised the Commission that. it does not have the authority to give the staff power to administratively approve. He also noted that this plat does not satisfy the requirements of the subdivision ordinance for a plat. Mr. Jones questioned the number of joint entrances. Mr. Montenegro stated that as many as can be done have bees_ done. He also pointed out that the plat does not have all the requirements a final plat has. Mr. Keeler stated that there are some waivers that need to be addressed that the staff could hesitate to grant. He suggested that this be approved as a preliminary plat and that the final plat be presented at the April 5 meeting. Mr. Boggs told the Commission that it is planned that the first three lots be submitted for administrative approval; then he showed the three pipestem waivers that would be needed. Mrs. Graves stated that the Commission was going to require extra dedication along the lots on Route 810, and if these are to be approved administratively, she wants the staff to make sure the extra dedication is required. IL_ Mr. Barksdale said that the Commission wants to make sure that the 75' setbacks are met from the rights -of -way. Mr. Montenegro suggested that if this is to be considered as a preliminary plat, the final conditions should be placed on this preliminary: 1. State Health Department approval prior to final approval; 2. Albemarle County Service Authority statement of availability of public water; 3. Corner lots must enter off interior streets; 4. Waiver of length of cul-de-sac; 5. Must have a 75 foot setback from all rights -of -way; 6. Note be added to plat stating "No further division without Planning Commission approval." Mr. Peatross moved that this preliminary plat be approved subject to the six conditions recommended by the staff. Col. Washington seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. JARMAN GAP ESTATES FINAL PLAT: Mrs. Scala presented the staff report, reading the letter from the Highway Department. She stated that this is a proposal for fourteen 2-acre lots with individual well and septic systems on property that is zoned A-1 Agricultural. The property is located on the north side of Route 691 in Crozet. She stated that a preliminary plat \4we was approved by the Commission on December 14, 1976. The recommended conditions of approval for the final plat are as follows: 1. Waiver of frontage granted on Lot 14; 2. Entrances subject to Virginia Department of Highways approval. Mr. Jones questioned the small amount of frontage for lot 14. Mr. Barksdale said that both he and Col. Washington are familiar with the property and this is a good use of the land, because of the lay of the land and the good building site at the rear of the property. Col. Washington said that he feels the waiver of the frontage is reasonable in this case because of the terrain. Mr. Singleton, representing the applicant, stated that the conditions set forth by the Highway Department are reasonable. Mr. Monty Wood, an adjoining property owner on Route 691, was concerned about the subdivision because of the conditions of the road. He suggested that some sort of interior street across the back, or a road parallel to Route 6911be required in order to minimize the number of entrances onto Route 691. Mr. Barksdale explained that unless a road is very dangerous, the Commission cannot create lots with double frontage to be served by an interior road. Furthermore, in this case there is inadequate acreage for such a road at the rear of the property. He said that this very matter had been discussed at the preliminary plat stage. Mr. Wood said that what he is really suggesting is a self-contained subdivision. 169 Col. Washington said that he assumes that sometime in the future this road will be widened and straightened. He said that if the entrances are to be on the crest of the knolls he suggested the joint entrances should now be sloped into the hillside to anticipate the road widening. He moved approval of the plat subject to the two conditions recommended by the staff. Dr. Moore seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no further discussion. JOHN AND PAGE FLINN FINAL PLAT: Mrs. Scala presented the staff report, noting that the A-1 zoned property is located on the southwest sic me of Route 601 in Free Union. This is a proposal to divide one 12-acre parcel and, extension of existing 50' easement to serve the parcel. The purpose is to sell the 12-acre parcel. The staff stated that the proposed division is on an existing farm road which has apparently been replaced by a new road. The following conditions of approval were recommended by the staff: 1. Note on Plat: "No further division along this easement without Planning Commission approval." 2. Health Department approval; 3. Highway Department approval; 4. Indicate residue acreage. Mr. Peatross asked if the old farm road has been improved. Mrs. Scala replied that it has not been improved. Mrs. Graves asked if the property is subject to a special use permit. Mrs. Scala responded that the special permit is not involved in this subdivision. Mr. Barrick, representing the owner, stated that the 12-acre piJ7ctd be used for a residence. There was no public comment on the plat. Mr. Jones moved approval of the plat subject to the four conditions recommended by the staff. Mr. Peatross seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. ROBERT L. AND VONDA SNOW FINAL PLAT: Mrs. Scala told the Commission that this is proposed division of one 10-acre parcel, leaving the 52.50-acre residue on the existing 25 foot access easement. The easement presently serves this 62.5 acre parcel, and two other large parcels. The property is located at the end of Route 623 near Boyd Tavern. The applicant wishes to construct his residence on the 10-acre parcel. The approval of this plat is needed in order to obtain financing. There is a note on the plat regarding no further subdivision, and the flood plain limits have been shown. /70 Mrs. Graves asked if this means a commercial entrance will be necessary. Mrs. Scala told her that the Highway Department has no problem with the road and feels it is not affected by the subdivision. Mr. Peatross asked if the easement serves the residue. Mrs. Scala said that it will serve the 52.50 acres and the 10 acres. Mrs. Graves asked if the special permit for the airport is on this 10 acres. Mr. Snow stated that it is not. Mr. Jones moved approval of the plat as submitted. Dr. Moore seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. MONTICELLO HOME BUILDERS PRELIMINARY PLAT: Mrs. Scala presented the staff report, noting that the A-1 zoned property is located on the north side of Route 22 near Cobham. The proposal is a division of one 3-acre.parcel leaving a residue of 17.5 acres. The property will be served by an existing 50' right-of-way ( easement ). There has been considerable subdivision of lots along this easement, most of which have not required subdivision approval. She stated that the tax map shows 17 lots. The Highway Department is requiring a commercial entrance at Route 22. The Commission approved a subdivision of two 2-acre lots on this easement in March, 1974. Staff suggested that the plat be deferred in order that the applicant can meet with the Highway Department to see exactly what is required for a commercial entrance. She stated that any approval of the plat should be subject to: 1. Health Department approval; 2. Highway Department approval. Col. Washington stated that since the applicant does not control the entrance at Route 22 he has a real problem. Mr. Jones moved action be deferred in order to permit the applicant to meet with the Highway Department. Dr. Moore seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. ERNEST R. SNODDY FINAL PLAT: Mrs. Scala informed the Commission that this is a proposed division of two existing 3.5-acre parcels into three 2-acre parcels, zoned A-1, and located on the west side of Route 20 South near Wood Store. The purpose of the division is for the sale of lots. The staff noted that the existing lots were divided in 1967. There is an existing home of the applicant on Lot 3. The existing lot is non -conforming in that the lot width is only 95 feet where the house is built. The proposed division will increase this lot width to 135 feet, which is an improvement, but it remains less than the required 150 feet. The new lots 1 and 2 will be served by a joint driveway easement over two 25' pipestems. Regarding the non -conformity of the existing lot, the Subdivision Ordinances states taht if a resubdivision of non -conforming lots constitutes a more effective use of the property, then it shall not be denied for �7I failure to comply. Although the lot width is improved, staff questions whether this is a more effective division. A variance is not required. Any approval of the plat should be subject to the following conditions: 1. Health Department approval; 2. Virginia Department of Highways approval; 3. Waiver of frontage; 4. Waiver of irregular shaped lots. Mr. Keeler stated that the property can be re -subdivided so that the existing house has adequate lot width. Mr. Boggs stated that applicant's willingness to decrease the pipestems from 25 feet to 15 feet to made the width at the building line conforming. Mr. Keeler also stated that there could be easements instead of pipestems. Mr. Boggs stated that lending institutions prefer road frontage for lots as opposed to easements, which don't allow any frontage. Mrs. Scala stated that the staff feels that easements are better, but if pipestems are! necessary for financing, then that is all right. Mr. Keeler pointed out that the lots are non -conforming as to setback, also, this is a scenic highway. With the pipestems descreased to 15 feet, they will be conforming as to width at the building line. Mrs. Graves, stating that she is unwilling to support the waivers, agreed 1410/ with the staff that this is not as good as the previously approved plat. She moved denial of the plat. Mr. Peatross seconded the motion, stating that he does not feel this redivision is a more effective use of the land. The motion carried by a vote of 5-1, with Mr. Barksdale dissenting. Mr. Boggs, representing the applicant, asked for direction from the Commission. Mr. Peatross, said that if there is no problem with easements ( after checking with a lending institution ), he prefers the easements. Mr. Boggs drew a configuation on the plat, and asked if the Commission felt this might be more agreeable. There seemed to be a consensus that easements were more agreeable, and the Commission felt that the lots should be turned perpendicular and not so irregularly shaped. W.E. AND J.F. BISHOP FINAL PLAT: Mrs. Scala told the Commission that this is a proposed division of two 2-acre lots on a proposed and existing 30 foot easement. The A-1 zoned property is located on the west side of Route 743 and the purpose of the division is the sale of lots. Mrs. Scala noted that the plat was approved in 1976, but the approval is now IMS/ void because the plat was not recorded within six months. The existing easement 17z appears to serve five houses, two of which front on Route 743. There is a note " on the plat regarding further subdivision. The width of the easement is specified as 30 feet. Dedication statement has been deleted. The Highway Department is requiring a commercial entrance with 450 feet of sight distance. She noted that the plat is exactly as it was when it was before the Commission one year ago. Mr. Boggs stated that the applicant is agreeable to all the suggested conditions. Mr. Peatross moved approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Owner is put on notice that the next subdivision along this easement may require that the road be made a 50' right-of-way and brought to state standards; 2. Health Department approval; 3. 25' from centerline of Route 743 should be dedicated; 4. Virginia Department of Highways approval ( this includes the commercial entrance with 450 feet of sight distance ). Mr. Jones seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. WINDRIFT REVISED FINAL PLAT: Mrs. Scala presented the staff report, noting that this is a proposal for twenty lots, with an average size of 3.2 acres, and a minimum size of 2.0 acres on a proposed state road. There are individual wells and septic systems. A final plat was approved in July, 1976 for fifteen lots, minimum size of 2.0 acres, and an average size of 4.11 acres. The lot layout is very similar to the old plan, except the road has been lengthened to accommodate the additional lots. The staff recommended the following conditions of approval: 1. Virginia Department of Highways approval, including Lot 1 to enter on Route 666; 2. Grading permit and road bond; 3. Health Department approval for 20 lots; 4. Waiver of frontage - lot 16, a pipestem lot. Mr. Jones questioned the reasons for the pipestem lot. Mr. Boggs explained that there is an existing dwelling on this lot. This is a more efficient use of the land. Mr. James Hahn, in the interest of two parties interested in purchasing the land, stated that the acreage with the pipestem is much more desirable. Mr. Charles Davis stated that at one time he had a verbal agreement to purchase a strip along lots 2 and 3. Mr. Downing, the applicant, stated that he would abide by that verbal agreement. The owner of Old Estes Farm stated that he felt development of this sort would not be line with the character of the area and questioned the need for this development. Mr. Keeler pointed out that with the existing zoning of the land, it could be divided into thirty lots. This proposal calls for only 20 lots. Mr. Jones moved approval of the plat subject to the conditions recommended by the staff plus the additional condition: 5. Adjustment of the g'operty line along lots 2 and 3, if Mr. Davis purchases this strip. 173 Mrs. Graves pointed out that this plat reads "Section I", and asked if there will be more subdivision. Mrs. Scala said that there may be. Mr. Peatross seconded the motion made by Mr. Jones. 140) Mr. Payne noted that if this plat goes to record prior to Mr. Davis' purchasing the strip, no revised plat showing the adjustment of the property line will be necessary. The motion to approve the plat, subject to the five conditions, carried unanimously. GEORGETOWN VETERINARY HOSPITAL REVISED SITE PLAN: Mrs. Scala stated that this is a proposed revised site plan clarifying existing facilities and proposing new parking area, entrance, and exercise area for horses. The service entrance has been removed. Parking area has been recalculated to accommodate the horse clinic addition. The R-3 zoned property is located on the west side of Georgetown Road. The purpose of the revised plan is to obtain a permanent certificate of occupancy. Mrs. Scala gave the history of the site plan, and noted that on March 1, 1977, the Zoning Administrator stated that the April, 1973, variances does not include the back parcel. Approval of the site plan did not authorize the expansion of the hospital operations onto the back parcel. Any use of the back parcel must comply with the R-3 zone. He ruled that the use of the back parcel was certified as agricultural and non -conforming by letter of Dr. Flynn; that the back parcel may continue to have a non -conforming agricul- tural use but that the County does not approve or acquiesce to any further intense use of the back parcel as it relates to the hospital. Mrs. Scala further stated that the Zoning Administrator has requested that his ruling, dated March 1, 1977, be noted to the Commission and possibly made a condition of the revised site plan. The two existing entrances have been combined at the request of the Highway Department. The staff recommended the following conditions of approval: 1. Virginia Department of Highways approval of commercial entrance; 2. Service Authority approval of water connection; 3. Dedication of 25' from centerline of Route 656 put to record; 4. Zoning Administrator's ruling of March 1, 1977, is part of this approval; 5. Surface treatment of entrance road and parking areas must be bonded prior to issuance of permanent certificate of occupancy along with all other incomplete site work. Mr. Jones asked if, in view of future expansion, the parking facilities are adequate. Mrs. Scala stated that the parking will be checked later, and that there are certain figures that are used to calculate the necessary parking area. Mr. Boggs replied that there is adequate parking for all future plans as well as what currently exists. Mr. Jones said that he feels there should be a de-cel lane. Mrs. Scala explained that there will be a commercial entrance and that this will lengthen the existing de-cel lane. Mr. Boggs stated that in a discuss- ion with the Highway Department they had stated this would be adequate. Mr. Payne advised the Commission that he felt that it would not appropriate to include the Zoning Administrator's ruling as part of the conditions, since it does not impair or enhance this approval. However, he felt it would be appropriate for the Commission to note that they knew the what the ruling is. Mr. Boggs stated that the applicant is aware of, and in agreement to, the Zoning Administrator's ruling. Mr. Peatross moved approval of the plan, noting that the Commission is aware of the Zoning Administrator's ruling of March 1, 1977, and recommended the following conditions: 1. Virginia Department of Highways approval of commercial entrance; 2. Service Authority approval of water connection; 3. Dedication of 25' from centerline of Route 656 put to record; 4. Surface treatment of entrance road and parking areas must be bonded prior to issuance of permanent certificate of occupancy along with all other incomplete site work. This motion was seconded by Col. Washington, and carried unanimously, with no discussion. At this point in the meeting there was a discussion regarding the Snoddy plat. The applicant's representative asked if it would be possible for the Commission to reconsider the plat, permit the applicant to withdraw the plat; or defer action on the plat in order that it can be revised so that the applicant does not have to pay another fee. After a brief discussion to determine if this would set precedent, Mr. Peatross made a motion that the plat be reconsidered. Col. Washington seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. The applicant's representative then requested that any action on the ERNEST R. SNODDY FINAL PLAT be deferred in order that the plat could be amended as suggested by the Planning Commission. Col. Washington moved action be deferred until April 19. Mrs. Graves seconded this motion, which carried unanimously. MICHIE TAVERN REVISED PARKING PLAN: Mrs. Scala stated that this is a proposal for a revised plan for the parking area, including additional landscaping and surface treatment. The property is zoned A-1 with a special use permit for a country store and craft houses, and is located on the south side of Route 53. The staff is currently holding a bond in the amount of $23,950.00 to insure completion of the final site plan. The applicant is requesting approval of a revised site plan, with additional landscaping and surface treatment of the parking area. Due to the fact that he cannot come to an agreement with the adjacent owner over the existing right-of-way which is located at the existing eastern entrance, he is unable to grade in this area. The applicant does not wish to complete the final plan piece -meal; he prefers to wait until he is able to grade the entire site as shown on the final plat. Staff has investigated the possibility of implementing the approved plan on existing grades and has decided that this approach would be unsatisfactory. /75 Other alternatives would be: 1. To void the original parking plan and allow the applicant to proceed with the craft houses and this revised parking plan; 2. To grant an extension of the final plan for 1-2 years. This would require that the bond be held for that period of time; OR 3. The permit for the craft houses could be revoked indefinitely until the applicant is able to complete the plan as originally proposed. No bond would then be needed. Mrs. Scala noted that the staff feels that the legal problems encountered are valid, and that grading of the eastern entrance and the overall plan is not possible at this time. Although the ultimate landscape plan would be the ideal solution, the interim plan has been implemented successfully. The property has been improved considerably since the original permit was granted. The only requirement which has not been met and which should, regardless of any other action, is approval by the Virginia Department of Highways, that this completion of the western entrance and relocation of the sign at the eastern entrance and removal of the white stone wall. Staff recommends.daPPE N4 site plan under alternative #1, subject to the following conditions: 1. Virginia Department of Highways approval, including completion of western entrance to their satisfaction, relocation of sign at eastern entrance, and removal of white stone wall; 2. Replacement of dead landscaping; 3. This revised plan to be completed by May 31, 1977. Mr. Jones addressed the eastern entrance, noting that it is a real problem. He asked if the Highway Department had any plans for improving this. Mrs. Scala replied that removing the sign and white stone wall would improve conditions considerably. Mr. Max Kennedy stated that as a resident of the Jefferson Lake area, he is very concerned about anything that would block the sight distance turning to the left into Jefferson Lake area. Mr. Max Evans, representing Michie Tavern, explained the newest plan to the Commission. Mr. Schur, a resident of Jefferson Lake area, said that any additional planting at the existing eastern entrance could prove quite dangerous. Mr. Evans said that when the sign and wall are removed, the shrubs blocking the view could also be removed. Mr. Peatross said that no shrubs should be removed until after the sign and wall are removed. Then it would be necessary to see just how much of a problem the shrubs are before removing any of them. Mr. John Haskell, adjoining property owner, stated that the road out to the eastern entrance is owned in fee simple by his wife and that Michie Tavern has an easement over it. He stated that the problem with grading in this area is that though it will help Michie Tavern, it will make the steep road leading to the orchar(q even steeper. He stated that this could be abandoned only if a a better route to the orchard is arrived at. He said that there have been negotiations with the Highway Department over this matter for quite some time, however he doubted that any sort of agreement with them could ever be reached, since he felt they would be unwilling to ever give up any of their right-of-way. 174, Mr. Jones moved approval of the revised parking plan, subject to the three conditions recommended by the staff, and noted that the entrance to Jefferson Lakes should considered in relation to the plantings. Mr. Payne suggested amending condition #1 to read: 1. Virginia Department of Highways approval, including completion of the western entrance to their satisfaction, relocation of the sign at the eastern entrance, and removal of the white stone wall and such planting as may be necessary to make the entrance to Jefferson Lake Properties as safe as possible. Mr. Jones accepted this amendment to the motion. Dr. Moore seconded the motion to approve the plan. The motion carried unanimously, with no further discussion. Since there was no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m.