HomeMy WebLinkAbout06 07 77 PC MinutesJune 7, 1977
The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a meeting on Tuesday,
June 7, 1977, 7:30 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building, Charlottesville,
Virginia, to consider a series of special use permits and rezoning requests.
Those members in attendance were Mr. Peter Easter, Vice -Chairman; Mr. Roy
Barksdale; Mr. Leslie Jones; Mrs. Joan Graves; Col. William Washington; Mr. Paul
Peatross; and Dr. James Moore. Absent were Mr. David Carr, Chairman; Mr. Kurt
Gloeckner; and Mrs. Opal David, ex-Officio.
In the absence of the chairman, Mr. Easter, Vice -Chairman, presided.
He established that a quorum was present and called the meeting to order.
Minutes of May 16, 1977, were approved by the chairman as presented.
Minutes of May 24, 1977, were approved by the chairman as presented.
ZMA-77-02. David Breeden
Mr. Keeler informed the Commission that the staff is in receipt of a letter
from the applicant requesting withdrawal without prejudice. Since the letter
was received only at noon on the seventh, the staff had contacted by telephone
all the adjoining property owners to advise them of the requested withdrawal.
Mr. Barksdale moved that the Commission accept this request for withdrawal
without prejudice.
Col. Washington seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
SP-77-20. PAUL MARTICK has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to locate a single-family
dwelling on 4.21 acres zoned B-1 Business. Property is located on the southside of
Route 250 West, adjacent and east of Yancey Lumber Mill, and approximately l� mile
east of the I-64 interchange. County Tax Map 55, Parcel 111A, White Hall Magisterial
District.
Mr. Keeler presented the staff report, noting that a house currently exists on the
property, however, it has been abandoned for more than 2 years and has consequently
lost non -conforming status. Staff recommended approval conditioned upon approval
of appropriate state and local agencies.
Mr. Martick said that the house has been standing since 1810, and he has almost
completely restored it. It will be used as a single-family dwelling for Mr. Martick.
Col. Washington questioned if the applicant intends to make further use of the 4.21
acres. Mr. Martick said that he does not intend it for anything but a residence.
Mr. Barksdale moved for approval subject to the approval of appropriate state and
local agencies.
Col. Washington seconded the motion, which carried unanimously with no discussion.
OVA
SP-77-23. BERKMAR ASSOCIATES, LTD. has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to
locate an accessory living accommodation on. 2.55 acres zoned B-1. Property is
located on the east side of Berkmar Drive behind Charlottesville Hardware.
County Tax Map 61, Parcel 121A, Charlottesville Magisterial District.
Mr. Keeler presented the staff report, stating that this is an accessory living
accommodation to house a caretaker/nightwatchman. Staff recommended approval
subject to the following conditions:
1. Approval of appropriate state and local. agencies;
2. Staff approval of site plan revision.
( Dr. Moore entered the meeting. )
Mr. Stowe stated that this type of use requires a caretaker for security reasons.
Mrs. Graves questioned if the accessory accommodation will always be a mobile home,
or if at a later date it will be replaced by a conventional dwelling.
Mr. Stowe said that he really can't answer this, but hopefully the business will
prosper enough that the mobile home can be replaced.
Mr. Keeler told the Commission that he had been under the impression that the
mobile home is to be a temporary unit to later be replaced. However, he said
that he will check with the Zoning Administrator about the status of this.
Mrs. Graves said that she is concerned about what this might mean in the future,
and she realizes that mobile home cannot have a time limit placed upon it.
Mr. Payne said that in this case a time limit could be placed on the mobile
home since this is an accessory dwelling accommodation. A time limitation
could be of benefit to the owner to provide a permanent unit.
Mr. Tucker stated that this permit was issued by the Zoning Administrator as
a temporary mobile home permit. It was based on the good faith of the owner that
he will provide a permanent unit in a reasonable time period.
Mr. Payne read the provisions of the temporary mobile home permit to the Commission
and the applicant, noting that there is ^time limit on the permit in anticipation
of construction of a permanent unit.
Mr. Easter asked the applicant if he were aware of this provision of the temporary
mobile home permit. Mr. Stowe said that he is aware of it.
Mr. Easter then closed the public hearing.
Col. Washington said that before this special permit is approved, the Commission
should discuss if it had intended for mobile homes to be permitted under accessory
dwelling accommodations. He said that he feels the Commission should defer this
item until that. has been properly discussed.
Mr. Payne felt that this point could be decided in this vote.
Col. Washington said that he does not want to make this case a precedent,
and felt the Commission should carefully consider this point before acting
on SP-77-23.
Mr. Easter said that in his opinion, since this is to be a temporary mobile
home, he does not consider it precedent setting.
Mr. Payne said that the precedent could be eliminated by amending the ordinance
to specifically state that accessory dwelling accommodations do not include
mobile homes.
Col. Washington said that he is concerned because there is nothing in the staff
report indicating that it is a mobile home, and wonders if the public has been
properly notified. He moved that action be deferred until such time the matter
can be reconsidered.
Dr. Moore seconded this motion for deferral.
Discussion:
Mr. Easter said that he does not see any problem with a temporary mobile home
here, in view of the way the ordinance reads.
Mr. Keeler again told the Commission that the staff had not been informed that
this might be a permanent unit, and had considered the matter in terms of a
temporary mobile home. He suggested that if the Commission approved SP-77-23
that a time limit provision be added.
Mr. Stowe, the applicant, told the Commission that he is willing to have such a
time limit placed on the permit, since he feels there will be no problem in
view of the progress that is being made with the mini -warehouse project.
Mr. Jones said that he questions the legality of the public notice.
Mr. Payne stated that there is enough ambiguity in the definition of accessory
dwelling accommodation that he feels the ambiguity must be resolved in favor of
the applicant.
Mr. Barksdale said that he wishes to make the substitute motion that the Commission
recommend approval subject to the following conditions:
1. Approval of appropriate state and local agencies;
2. Staff approval of site plan revision;
3. The mobile home may remain no longer than 18 months from the date of issuance
of this permit unless construction of a permanent residence shall have commenced
and is thereafter prosecuted in good faith. In any event, the mobile home shall
be removed not later than 3 years from the date of issuance of this permit.
Mr. Peatross seconded the motion.
Discussion:
Mr. Keeler told Mr. Jones that Fire Marshal approval is covered under condition #l.
The vote was 4-3, with Messrs. Jones, Washington, and Moore dissenting.
The Commission briefly discussed adopting a resolution of intent to reconsider
the accessory dwelling accommodation. Col. Washington stated that he wants
the public to be more adequately and properly informed about the type of
structure. Mr. Payne suggested that the intent of the Commission could be
covered by amending Article 16 - this would be an alternative to reconsidering
accessory dwelling accommodation. Col. Washington stated that he wants to
specifically address if mobile homes are to be permitted for accessory
dwelling accommodations on B-1 property. Mr. Payne suggested that the Commission
review a staff presentation of the two alternatives before adopting a resolution
of intent. That would ensure the exact legal notice in the newspaper. The
Commission felt that this was an acceptable suggestion, and directed the staff to
prepare information on the two alternatives.
SP-77-24. EARL BEACH has petitioned the Board of Supervisors for an
addition ( two bay garage ) onto an existing non -conforming grocery store
located on 0.46 acres zoned A-1. Property is located on the northeast side of
Route 620 at "620 Market." County Tax Map 104, Parcel 14(5A), Scottsville
Magisterial District.
Mr. Keeler presented the staff report noting that this is an existing store
with gas pumps and a one -bay garage. Approval of this petition would bring the
store and garage into conformance with the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant
owns both adjacent parcels and therefore, expansion should be no problem.
Mr. Jones questioned the recommended size lot for a store and garage, since
a residential lot in the A-1 zone is at least 2 acres.
Mr. Keeler said that there is no recommended lot size, however, in this
case, there should be no problem, because both larger adjoining parcels belong
to this applicant. He further pointed out that this is an existing non -conforming
lot of record, and the applicant is attempting to bring the use into conformance
through the special permit process.
Col. Washington addressed condition #2 as recommended by the staff, suggesting
that it should read "Fire Marshal approval."
It was determined that the applicant was not present, and the Commission deferred
any further discussion and action until he or his representative is present.
SP-77-25. JAMES RIVER SUPPLY, INC., AND CARTER AGENCY, INC. have petitioned the
Board of Supervisors for a warehouse with wholesaling on 9.1 acres zoned M-1.
Property is located off 5th Street, north of I-64, along Moore's Creek. County
Tax Map 76M(1), Parcel 4A, Scottsville Magisterial District.
Mr. Keeler presented the staff report, noting that there is no permit for the
mobile home located on the property. He also noted that the creek identified
as Biscuit Run throughout the staff report is really an unnamed creek, and asked
that the Commission note this for their records. The staff noted its concern
about fire lane access, especially in view of the non -operational, randomly
parked tractor trailers on the site. It was noted that the entrance road and parking
area are in disrepair. An extensive section of curbing on the southern border
adjacent to the creek has collapsed and is non functional, resulting in
soil erosion problems. Mr. Keeler further reported that the Zoning Administrator
has requested soil erosion measures and the applicant has attempted to stabilize
the bank with trash and debris, which is not acceptable.
_
Mr. Keeler stated that the trash is clearly visible from I-64 and Route 742 in
winter months, and will likely move downhill to the creek over a period of time.
He noted that the staff is reluctant to recommend approval of this petition,
because of these outstanding problems, however, the applicant has already moved
in and is operational. Thus the staff recommended approval subject to the
following conditions:
1. Soil erosion plan, submitted within 30 days of Board of Supervisors aprpoval
and stabilization of eroding areas along the creek and entrance road within
60 days of Board of Supervisors approval;
2. Reconstruction of curbing and drop inlets along the creek within six months of
Board of Supervisors approval. Plans for curbing to be submitted as a part of
soil erosion plan. Temporary berming or other substitute for curbing as approved
by Soil Erosion Committee to be complete within 60 days of Board of Supervisors
approval;
3. Trash and debris, inoperable trucks and trailers, abandoned equipment to be
removed from site and disposed of property. This is to be accomplished to the
reasonable satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator within 30 days of approval
by the Board of Supervisors, however, such trash and debris which in the
opinion of the Zoning Administrator is functionally stabilizing eroded banks may
remain no longer than 1 year;
4. Fire Marshal approval to include emergency access;
5. In the event of willful non-compliance with any of the conditions stated herein,
the Zoning Administrator shall refer this petition back to the Planning Commission
and Board of Supervisors for further consideration.
Mr. Robert Blodinger, representing the applicant, stated that there have been ongoing
problems between this applicant and the staff. He said that this mobile home
is vacant, but will be used as a showroom for the warehouse. Mr. Blodinger stated
that this is a less noxious use than the concrete building operation.
Col. Washington asked if the provisions setforth in the letter of May 4, 1977, from
Mr. J. Gordon Yager - District Conservationist - to Mr. Carter are acceptable.
Mr. Blodinger stated that they are acceptable.
Mr. Ben Dick, Zoning Administrator said that he has not received a confirmation
from Mr. Carter that these provisions just mentioned are acceptable. Mr. Dick
also noted for the record that Mr. Carter inherited these problems for the most
part.
Mr. Carter said that he is willing to correct the soil erosion as he is financially
able to correct it. He said that Mr. Yager's suggestions are acceptable. Furthermore,
he said that he feels quite capable of correcting and understanding the problems,
but wishes to do so in his own good time, as time and money permit.
Mr. Easter closed the public hearing, since there was no public comment. He
noted that this is a use which requires a special permit in the M-1 zone. Furthermore,
to complicate matters, there is an erosion problem on the property as well as
trash which needs to be removed.
Mr. Ben said that the trash that should be removed is that which is not being
used for stabilization - this loose trash is considered by the Fire Marshal to
be a fire hazard.
Mr. Barksdale asked if without conditions 1-3, as recommended by the staff,
if the erosion problem can be controlled. Mr. Dick replied that with the
zoning department's overview, and with Mr. Carter's acceptance of Mr. Yager's 44)
recommendations, it can be controlled.
Mr. Blodinger stated that he does not see what bearing the soil erosion has on
the request for the special permit.
Mr. Easter replied that there is an existing situation on this property which
needs attention, for the good of the community, as well as for the good of
the applicant. He did not feel that 5-10 years would be a reasonable time for
these problems to continue.
Mr. Payne reminded the Commission that there have been a number of previous situations
where this kind of subject was addressed at the special permit level. Therefore,
there is a decided precedent to address these erosion problems and the problem
of trash removal.
Mr. Blodinger felt that these problems can be solved outside this special permit
review. The trucks and trailers will be repaired and put into use as the applicant
is able to accomplish this.
Mr. Easter said that he feels there should be a reasonable solution to the problems
within a reasonable time frame.
Mrs. Graves asked if the provisions of the site plan ordinance apply here.
Mr. Keeler replied that it is the opinion of the staff that would be an
unnecessary expense to the applicant.
Mr. Jones suggested deferring action to determine what is reasonable regarding
trash removal to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal. Mr. Dick said that the
Fire Marshal is specifically speaking to the exposed trash on the bank.
Dr. Moore said that he would like the conditions listed that Mr. Dick intends to
enforce.
Mr. Peatross agreed, stating that these are the conditions that the Commission
:should be discussion.
Mr. Payne suggested that condition #5 as recommended by the staff is inappropriate,
since the intent is to make the applicant aware of Section 11-13-3. He read
from the ordinance to the applicant the provisions of this section, stating that
puts the applicant on fair notice about willful non-compliance.
Col. Washington said that he is agreeable to conditions 1, 2, and 4 as suggested
by the staff without change. Mr. Barksdale said that he would like to strike
condition #2.
Col. Washington recommended approval subject to the following conditions:
1. Soil erosion plan, including provision of surface water drainage control
measures, submitted within 30 days of Board of Supervisors approval and
stabilization of eroding areas along the creek and entrance road within
60 days of Board of Supervisors approval;
2. Inoperable trucks and trailers, abandoned equipment to be removed from site
and disposed of properly within 90 days of approval by the Board of Supervisors.
Such trash and debris which in the opinion of the Zoning Administrator is
functionally stabilizing eroded banks may remain no longer than 1 year. This
is to be accomplished to the reasonable satisfaction of the Fire Marshal and
Zoning Administrator;
3. Fire Marshal approval to include emergency access. Removal of trash and
debris to the reasonable satisfaction of the Fire Marshal and Zoning Administrator
within 30 days of Board of Supervisors approval.
Mrs. Graves said that she wants to make sure that adequate parking exists, and cited
examples where the special permit has required site plans for this type of approval.
Mr. Keeler said that there is adequate parking on this site.
Mr. Jones said that he wants to offer the substitue motion of deferral in order
that members of the Commission who have not viewed the site may do so.
Mrs. Graves seconded this substitute motion, which lost by a vote of 2-5,
with Messrs. Peatross, Barksdale, Easter, Washington, and Moore dissenting.
Mr. Easter read the motion proposed by Col. Washington, noting that it had been
properly seconded. This motion, carried unanimously.
ZMA-77-09. WALTER A. AND LUCY M. YOUNG have petitioned the Board of Supervisors
to rezone 5.189 acres from A-1 Agriculture to RS-1 Residential. Property is located
on the west side of Beagle's Gap Road, approximately 0.2 mile from the intersection
with Route 691. County Tax Map 54, Parcel 41I(1), White Hall Magisterial District.
Mr. Keeler presented the staff report, giving the history of previous applications
on this property. He said that under existing zoning this property could be
divided into parcels. Under the requested zoning, with individual well and septic
systems, three parcels could be achieved; and with either central water or sewer,
5 parcels could be achieved.
The staff recommended denial of the request because the request is not incompliance
with the Comprehensive Plan; such rezoning would set precedent for similar
requests in the rural area of the County; and the County recently rezoned from
RS-1 to A-1 several properties in Boyds Tavern area on the basis that RS-1 was
inappropriate to that area.
Mr. Young addressed the fact that all other parcels in that area are very small,
and such a rezoning as this proposal would not change the character of the area.
He felt that such small lots were good for low income housing. He pointed to the
fact that he has a good water supply, and will have a state maintained road by
July 1, 1977. This property is directly across from property zoned RS-1, and he
plans no further development after this, especially in view of the fact that no
room will remain.
Mr. Keeler pointed out the area on the map that is designated for 1 dwelling unit
per five acres, according to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Keeler also noted for
the Commission that after the adoption of the subdivision ordinance, the staff
no longer supported RS-1 zonings in the rural areas of the county.
Mr. Young stated that this will be rental property, and that currently 2 houses
exist on the 5.189 acres.
Mr. Keeler said that as long as this property remains in one parcel, with
a central well or central sewer, there can be five units; however, if it is
subdivided, there cannot be five units, because of the 60,000 square feet requirement.
Col. Washington said that he does not want to set a precedent for such rezonings
throughout the county. However, he did point out that the Comprehensive Plan is
a guide and the lines set forth in it are not finite. He agreed with Mr. Young
that there is no real reason for conservation zoning here. He said that the County,
in the past two years, granted zoning of this sort on land in Newtown for low
cost housing. Col. Washington noted that the road leading to Mr. Young's property
is a dead end road, and that many of the lots along this road would not qualify under
the current county rules. Furthermore, this request does not conflict with the exist -
character of the area. He said that. the matter comes down to water and sewer.
Mr. Young stated that he intends to have a central well of some sort for this
property.
Col. Washington established from the staff there there is no other way than rezoning
to increase the density on this property.
Mr. Keeler pointed out that the Health Department will have to approve the location
of any central well in relation to the location of the septic systems.
Col. Washington stated that he is not sure about a good,strong well for three houses,
and he does not know in a rezoning how to cover the problem of water and sewer.
He noted that it cannot be developed as an RPN because less than 10 acres is involved.
He felt that in order to rezone there needs to be some flexibility and assurance
on the water system.
Mr. Payne said that it would be possible to amend the density in the RS-1, R-1,
and R-2 zones as has been done in the R-3 zone; then such a request as this would
not be a problem.
Mr. Peatross said that he is sympathetic to the application, however he cannot
support it because the County does not have conditional zoning. He moved for denial.
Mr. Barksdale said that he supports the request since it is an extension of what
exists.
Mrs. Graves seconded the motion for denial.
Mr. Jones said that he cannot support the request because of lack of information
regarding water and sewer systems.
Dr. Moore said that in view of the additional information, he wished to know
if the staff would make the same recommendation. Mr. Keeler said that it would.
Dr. Moore said that it has been pointed out that the railroad is a natural boundary
for conservation zoning, and asked if it would also be a natural boundary for RS-1
zoning. He said, however, that he shill has concerns about the water and sewer.
Col. Washington pointed out that this request is in complete character with the
neighborhood as it exists now.
Mrs. Graves said that it is unfortunate that the County does not have conditional
zoning. She called for the question..
The vote to deny the request carried by a vote of 5-2, with Messrs. Barksdale
and Washington dissenting.
Mr. Barksdale moved that the Commission resolve to review the area regulations
in all districts in the zoning ordinance as they relate to the minimum area
requirements of the subdivision ordinance.
Dr. Moore seconded this motion, which carried unanimously.
SP-77-26. MICHAEL Trainum has petitioned the Board of Supervisors for a craft
shop ( for woodwork and master carpentry ) adjoining an existing single-family
residence on 5 acres zoned A-1. Property is located at the intersection of Routes 631
and 708, with frontage on Route 708, west of Route 631. County Tax Map 100, Parcels
30 and 30A, Samuel Miller Magisterial District.
Mr. Keeler presented the staff report, stating that condition #4 is easy for
the applicant to meet since he is a member of the church.
Mr. Stevens, an adjoining property owner, on behalf of himself and
Mr. Walker Cowan, another adjoining propety owner, expressed support for
the request.
Mr. Easter closed the public hearing.
Mr. Jones moved approval subject to the conditions recommended by the staff:
1. Improvement of entrance to and circulation within the property to the reasonable
satisfaction of the staff and Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation;
2. Staff approval of sketch plan to include location of buildings and access;
3. Operation limited as described in this staff report;
4. Coordination with church to limit operation during church services;
5. Approval of appropriate state and local agencies.
Mr. Barksdale seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
Mr. Easter said that he is always concerned about such requests as this and
the upcoming request, becuase they may affect the community as it grows.
SP-77-28. PAUL BLAISE GASTON has petitioned the Board of Superivsors to locate
a craft shop on 13 acres zoned A-1 Agriculture. Property is located off Route 668
approximately 3/4 mile north of Route 668. County Tax Map 16, Parcel 15, part
thereof. White Hall Magisterial District.
Mr. Keeler presented the staff report, noting that there was a letter from
Mr. Lawrence J. Reynolds, an adjoining property owner, in support of the application.
Mr. Easter closed the public hearing.
Mr. Barksdale recommended approval subject to the following conditions:
1. Operation limited as described in this staff report;
2. Staff approval of sketch plan;
3. Approval of appropriate state and local agencies.
Col. Washington seconded the motion for approval, which carried unanimously.
-10 Upon the motion of Mr. Barksdale, and a second by Mr. Peatross, the Commission
unanimously deferred action on SP-77•-24 until the applicant or his representative
could be present.
Mr. Keeler asked that the Commission review the information it has received
on private roads in terms of the definition of subdivision.
with no further business , the meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m.
P!
9