Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05 24 77 PC Minutes-17-yz- May 24, 1977 The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a meeting on Tuesday, May 24, 1977, 7:30 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia, to consider a series of site plans and subdivision plats. Those members in attendance were Mr. David Carr, Chairman; Mr. Roy Barksdale; Mr. Paul Peatross; Mr. Kurt Gloeckner; Dr. James Moore; Col. William Washington; Mr. Leslie Jones; Mrs. Joan Graves; and Mrs. Opal David, ex-Officio. Absent was Mr. Peter Easter, Vice -Chairman. Other officials present were Mr. Carlos Montenegro, Planner; and Mr. Frederick W. Payne, Deputy County Attorney. to order. Mr. Carr established that a quorum was present and called the meeting Minutes of May 16, 1977, were deferred until May 25, 1977 meeting. Minutes of April 12, 1977, were approved by the chairman subject to the addition of Col. Washington. ( Mrs. Graves entered the meeting. ) UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA STUDENT RECREATION CENTER SITE PLAN: Mr. Montenegro informed the Commission that this proposed recreational facility for the Alderman Road -Observatory Houses dormitory area is located on the University grounds along Observatory Road at Edgemont Road. Thirty-two parking spaces will be provided for this 42,5000 gross square foot building. Mr. Montenegro stated that this site plan is before the Commission for information only, and no action is needed other than noting that this plan conforms with the County's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Sensabaugh, representing the University showed the Commission the overall site plan for University of Virginia. He stated that this recreation center is to financed entirely by student activity fees. It is a very adaptable building with minimal maintenance and upkeep. He briefly explained the site plan. Col. Washington questioned if the University is exempt from Soil Erosion Ordinance. Mr. Sensabaugh replied that it is not, and the University has made an environmental impact presentation to the proper control agencies. Mr. Carr stated that the County appreciates the fact that the University keeps the County informed of its plans. Mr. Peatross moved that the Commission note that the plan is in substantial compliance with the county's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Barksdale seconded the motion which carried by a vote of 6-0, Messrs. Moore and Gloeckner abstaining. ANNA CRENSHAW FINAL PLAT: Mr. Montenegro located the property for the Commission on the west side of Route 649 between Route 29 North and the Southern Railroad tracks. The property is zoned A-1. Lot 1 was approved by the Commission in September, 1976. This proposal is to divide the residue into three lots, average size of 2.02 acres. The staff recommended approval subject to the following condition: 1. Written Health Department approval. Mr. Montenegro further noted that the staff does not recommend joint entrances because of the curvature of the road. Mr. Barksdale moved approval of the plat subject to the condition recommended by the staff. Mr. Jones seconded this motion, which carried unanimously. EMERSON WALDMAN FINAL PLAT: Mr. Montenegro presented the staff report, noting that the A-1 property is located off a 20' wide easement off the North side of Route 677 near Ivy. The proposal is to divide one 2-acre lot from a 57+ acre parcel,at the same time combining a 1.47 acre lot with the residue, making the residue acreage 58.67+ acres. The 20' easement will serve two lots only. Staff recommended approval subject to the following condition: 1. Note dedication of 25' from the centerline of Route 677. Mr. Gloeckner asked if there has been a dedication of frontage of lots 1, 2, and 3. Mr. Snow replied that there has been a dedication. Mrs. Graves asked if there is any special reason for the odd -shaped 2-acre lot. Mr. Carr said that it is odd -shaped only to the extent that it is exactly two acres. Mr. Peatross questioned the note on the plat regarding no further subdivision. He suggested that the standard note be required. Mr. Peatross moved approval of the plat subject to the condition recommended by the staff, plus the following condition: 2. Note on plat to read as follows: "No further subdivision along this easement without Planning Commission approval. Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no further discussion. PAUL SURATT FINAL PLAT: Mr. Montenegro stated that the A-1 property is located on the west side of zfy Route 810 just south of Doylesville. The Commission approved Parcel A in November, 1976. The applicant has obtained a commercial entrance permit at Route 810 from the Highway Department. Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Written Health Department approval; 2. Record a maintenance agreement approved by the County Attorney's Office for the maintenance of the non-exclusive easement. Mr. Montenegro said that the maintenance agreement has been discussed with the applicant's representative and there is no problem with this. Mr. Jones questioned what will be built on this parcel. Mrs. Suratt said that there will be a private home. Mr. Barksdale moved approval of the plat subject to the two conditions recommended by the staff. Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no further discussion. ALBEMARLE SQUARE PHASE III SITE PLAN: Mr. Montenegro reported that this B-1 property is located on the north end of Albemarle Square Shopping Center west of Best Products. The proposal is to develop 18 commercial shops, average size of 1,500 square feet. The staff prefers that the parking areas have perpendicular parking stalls as in the rest of the shopping center. However, if angled parking is to be approved one-way circulation should be enforced. The Staff recommends approval of this plan subject to the following conditions: 1. Fire Marshal approval of water lines ( Mr. Montenegro said that this has just recently been accomplished ); 2. Parking lot should have one way circulation with a 20' wide minimum aisle; all spaces must be 20' x 10'. 3. Land scape plan ( which has just been received that day ); 4. All landscape items must be replaced if they should die. Mr. Montenegro said that the applicant's representative, Mr. Thornburg, has a site plan with the angled parking, and one-way circulation to present to the Commission. Mr. Barksdale asked why the staff objects to the angled parking. Mr. Montenegro stated that they do not object if there is one-way circulation. Mr. Jones questioned the number of parking spaces required. Mr. Carr said that the parking is equated to the entire shopping center. Mr. Thornburg presented to the Commission the layout, with the angled parking. He explained that it is a better parking arrangement to serve this particular part of the shopping center. ( Mrs. David entered the meeting. ) /f5 Mrs. Graves asked if the project has already begun. Mr. Coburn said that it has not, but that the applicant had borrowed some equipment from the Highway Department and there has been some cleanup work done. Perhaps that was what she was speaking of. Mr. McFarland said that the storm sewer pipes run exactly up to his fence and empty water there. He suggested that a man-made structure empty the water into the stream. Mr. Montenegro said that he would advise the zoning administrator of this problem. Mr. Jones suggested that this be addressed in the conditions of approval of the site plan. Mr. Payne stated that such a condition would be appropriate only if Mr. McFarland grants an easement to the developer. Mr. McFarland said that he is agreeable to this. Mr. Barksdale felt that the zoning administrator should still be advised of the problem. Mr. Montenegro suggested bumper blocks with the angled parking. Mr. Carr felt they might cause winter clean-up problems. Mr. Carr questioned if the rear of the buildings will be seen with the develop- ment of this phase. Mr. Thornburg replied that some of the buildings will be seen. However, to make it as little offensive as possible, he said that the backs of the buildings would be painted two-tone. 1140) Mr. Jones suggested adding a condition about screening at the rear to make it more attractive. Mr. Carr agreed that this would be very desirable, especially for at least half of the distance at the rear. Mrs. Graves questioned if any cars parking in front will obscure any sight distance onto Route 29. Mr. Thornburg said that it would not. Mr. Coburn of the Highway Department agreed this is correct. Mr. Gloeckner moved approval subject. to the following conditions: 1. Parking lot should have one-way circulation with a 20' wide minimum aisle; all spaces must be 20' x 101; 2. All landscape items must be replaced if they should die; 3. Screening to be accomplished along the rear of the property line, at least half the distance of the buildings; 4. Storm sewer pipe to be run to the stream, provided Mr. McFarland grants an easement to the developer. ( The Zoning Administrator is to be advised of this problem. ) Mr. Jones seconded this motion, which carried unanimously. Mr. Carr suggested a completed site plan for the entire shopping center to be on file in the Planning Department when the development is completed. ;� ALBEMARLE BANK AND TRUST SITE PLAN AMENDMENT: Mr. Montenegro located the B-1 property on the east side of Route 29 North, opposite Dominion Drive. The original site plan was approved by the Commission in January, 1977. It called for a three-storie banking and office building with adequate parking. The new proposal calls for a four-storie banking and office facility with adequate parking. The layout of this facility is basically the same as the previous one differing only in the height (54') of the facility and in the number of parking spaces. Staff recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Provide a 50' access easement along the west side of the southern property line for adjacent property; 2. Provide a turn lane on the southbound lane on Route 29 North, 200 feet long with a 200 foot taper; 3. Label bank parking and office parking area. Mr. Carr questioned condition #3. Mr.Montenegro responded that customer parking could be inconvenient otherwise. Mr. Carr said that it is certainly not a condition that is easy to administer. Mr. Jones questioned the note on the site plan addressing landscaping. Mr. Montenegro said that the staff has suggested additional landscaping; also he noted for the benefit of the Commission that there is more bank to the rear of the property with less slope. Mr. Jones questioned the fire protection for the additional storie. Mr. Montenegro replied that the Fire Marshal has seen the plans and had no problem with them. Mr. Carr questioned the setback from the edge of the pavement. Mr. Montenegro said that it is 96 feet. Mr. Jones said that in his opinion, the higher a building, the more it should be setback from the road. He asked that the staff review this and report back to the Commission at a later date. Mr. Barksdale pointed out that some three-storie houses are almost as high as this office building/bank. Mr. Campbell, representing the applicant, stated that if the 50' easement is ever used, it will eliminate the parking. Mr. Montenegro said that this easement is required by the ordinance. Mr. Barksdale felt that if it is used, the parking will be lost, and the applicant will not have to make it up somewhere else. Mr. Montenegro agreed. Mr. Wood, developer, said that he feels the easement at the side is excessive. He questioned its use. Mr. Montenegro said that in the future it may be used to connect the parking lot of the adjacent property, to avoid going out onto Route 29. Primarily, it is for traffic circulation. Mr. Gloeckner asked why the easement is necessary if the setback is required. Mr. Montenegro said that it is for a different use, primarily traffic circulation. Mr. Wood said that he does not object to the easement if its purpose is only to join the two parking lots. 2,�7 However, he said that he objected to it if it. is to become the sole exit of the adjoining property. 114 Mrs. Graves questioned why the Virginia Department of Highways approval is not part of the conditions. Mr. Montenegro said that there is an existing commercial entrance. Mr. Gloeckner suggested omitting condition #3 from the approval. Mr. Coburn said that if the Commission does not require the turn lane on the southbound lane the Highway Department will require it. Mr. Carr said that he feels the Commission should support the recommendation of the Highway Department only if it agrees that it is proper planning. Mr. Wood said that this was not a requirement on the original site plan. Mr. Carr replied that there has been a storie added to the building. Mr. Peatross also noted that 31 parking spaces have been added. Mr. Payne pointedt out that there is the existing commercial entrance sor but furthermore, this/turnlane has been required in ereMrbus approvals by the Commission. He said that the Commission should require it if it is a good planning matter, and not rely on the power of the Highway Department to require it. Dr. Moore said that he supported this turnlane. Additionally, he pointed out that the Highway Department has asked for the County's support in its recommendations. n Col. Washington felt that it should be required. He felt that this `� banking use would generate more traffic than even a car dealership, for which such a requirement has been made. Mr. Campbell said that adjoining properties will benefit from its construction without sharing the expense. He said that in his opinion it is not the responsibility of the private property owner to upgrade and maintain public property. Col. Washington suggested amending condition #1 to read "across" instead of "along." Mr. Carr asked that the County Attorney properly word condition #1 to correctly state that the reservation will be no greater than 90 feet. This could be used for any future service road. Mr. Gloeckner felt that the state should accomplish condition #2. Mr. Peatross said that if that is the case, it will never be built. Mr. Barksdale moved approval of the site plan, subject to conditions one and three as recommended by the staff. Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion. The motion lost with a vote of 2-6, with only Mr. Barksdale and Mr. Gloeckner supporting the motion. ,:FFY Col. Washington moved approval of the plat subject to the following conditions: 1. Provide an easement at the southern boundary of the property line for access, 50 feet in width, as measured from the western property line; 2. Provide a turn lane on the southbound lane on Route 29 North, 200 feet in length with a 200 foot taper; aisles 3. Label bank aisles for parking for bank and office/ for office parking. Dr. Moore seconded the motion, whine carried by a vote of 6-2, Messrs. Barksdale and Gloeckner dissenting. Mr. Carr said that if the Highway Department has no funds to build these turnlanes, then it has to become the responsibility of the developer. GELLETLY FLORIST BUILDING SITE PLAN: Mr. Montenegro said that this B-1 property is located on the west side of Berkmar Drive near Shopper's World. The proposal is to locate a commerical florist facility with 19 parking spaces. The site will share a 50' wide entrance with the office building to the north. Staff recommended approval with the following conditions; 1. All landscape items must be replaced if they should die; 2. Fire Marshal approval of fire protection facilities for the site; 3. Grading permit to be obtained; 4. Landscape plan to be approved by the Planning Staff. Mr. Montenegro further noted that the applicant will be clearing theproperty at the rear to the stream, though this will be covered in the grading permit. He also stated that delivery will be from the rear. Mr. Jones moved approval of the site plan subject to the conditions recommended by the staff. Col. Washington seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. PIZZA HUT SITE PLAN: Mr. Montenegro reported that this B-1 property is on the south side of the Wonder Bread Thrift Store. The proposal is to build a combination sit-down and carry -out restaurant on a site 23,000 square feet. Provision is made for 34 parking spaces. The site plan is in order except with regard to the location of the dumpster enclosure which does not meet the minimum setback requirement of 50 feet from its adjacent residential zone. The applicant has applied for a rezoning of the R-2 zone with which there is a conflcit. Staff recommended approval subject to several conditions. Mr. Gloeckner questioned the setback of 90 feet. ,31/ Mr. Montenegro replied that the optimal location for service roads is at the back of the property. If it is located in the front, all the parking will be taken. Mr. Peatross asked when the rezoning application comes to the Commission. Mr. Montenegro replied in the next month. Mr. Peatross said that he is concerned with the condition which addresses the location of the dumpster, since he feels it commands it be relocated. He asked that this condition be amended. ( The condition as recommended by the staff: "Relocate dumpster to a location no closer than 50 feet from the R-2 zone and which meets the Fire Marhsal's approval. ) Mrs. Graves said that she wants the intent of that condition to remain. Mr. Jones said that lighting should be directed away from on -coming vehicles on Route 29 North. Mr. Barksdale moved approval of the site plan subject to the following conditions: 1. Dumpster to be located no closer than 50 feet to the R-2 zone and to meet the Fire Marshal's approval at the time of issuance of the certificate of occupancy; 2. Highway Department approval of entrance facilities; 3. Lighting to be directed away from on -coming vehicles on Route 29 North. Mr. Jones seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. DOGWOODS PHASE I SITE PLAN: Mr. Montenegro informed the Commission that this R-3 property is located on the nroth side of Greenbrier Drive west of Commonwealth Drive. This proposal calls for 52 townhouse and 23 basement garden apartments on 7+ acres. It also calls for the extension of Whitewood Raod on a 60 foot right-of-way. There is a swimming ppol and a 30' x 30' tot lot. All access to the site is from Whitewood Road. The staff rioted its concern about the proximity of the recreation facilities to the adjacent dwelling units. Therefore, the staff recommended that buildings 9 and 10 be shifted toward the parking area an additional 15+ feet. Mr. Montenegro said that since the staff report was written, building #9 has been moved. The staff recommended approval subject to: 1. Fire Marshal approval of dumpster locations; 2. Provide handicapped ramps for all sidewalks, in addition locate six handicapped parking spaces ( two per dwelling unit as required in BOCA Code ) as close as possible to their respective units; 3. Engineering Department approval of curbing on site; 4. Landscape plan must note type of shade trees and size of small plantings*in addition pool facility must be screened with burford holly 36" in height; 5. Landscape items must be replaced if they should die. Mr. Carr said that he owns an adjoining parcel, and asked Mr. Payne if he has any conflict. Mr. Payne said that. he does not. Col. Washington suggested amending condition #4 to read "shrubs" . since he feels that the Commission would be overstepping its bounds to require a certain type of shrub, and then have the developer replace it if it dies. He said that he does not want to be responsible for such a condition, especially since 900 of the burford hollies died this past winter. Mr. Montenegro said that this was specified because the shrub is relatively hearty and a fast grower. When questioned by Mr. Jones about the lighting to be provided by Vepco, Mr. Hunter said that it is not at Vepco's expense, rather at the developer's expense and assured the Commission that it will be done. Furthermore, Mr. Jones questioned the parking, suggesting that parking be provided around the pool. Mr. Montenegro said that 150 spaces are provided, which is more than adequate. Mr. Carr stated that it is not customary to require parking around a pool; that residents usually walk to this facility. Mrs. Graves said that a grading permit should be required. Dr. Moore suggested amending condition #4 to read "evergreen shrubs", since they will be used for screening. Mr. Barksdale moved approval of the site plan subject to conditions 1, 2, 3,`and 5 as recommended by the staff, and amending condition #4 to read "evergreen shrubs 36" in height,"plus the following condition: 6. Grading permit. Dr. Moore seconded this motion. Discussion: Mr. Peatross suggested including the staff's request regarding building #10. Mr. Boggs said that building #9 has already been moved and that the develper is agreeable to moving building #10. Mr. Barksdale amended his motion to include the following seventh condition: 7. Building #10 to be shifted toward the parking area an additional 15+ feet. Dr. Moore accepted this amendment. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Carr reminded the Commission of the work session on the comprehensive plan the following evening. IV/ Mrs. Graves suggested that the Commission, Board of Supervisors and Highway Department have a meeting shortly to discuss some of the requirements on site plans. With no further business, the Commission adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Rob rt W. Tucker, Jr. - Sec tary �;r' P] P]