HomeMy WebLinkAbout08 23 77 PC MinutesIM
August 23, 1977
The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a meeting on
Tuesday, August 23, 1977, 7:30 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building,
Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members in attendance were Mr. David W. Carr,
Chairman; Dr. James Moore; Mr. Paul Peatross; Mr. Roy Barksdale; Mr. Kurt
Gloeckner; Mr. Leslie Jones; Mrs. Joan Graves; and Col. William Washington.
Absent were Mr. Peter Easter, Vice -Chairman; and Mrs. Opal David, ex-Officio.
County officials in attendance were Mr. Robert Tucker, Director of Planning;
Mr. Carlos Montenengro, Planner; and Mr. Frederick Payne, Deputy County Attorney.
Mr. Carr established that a quorum was present and called the meeting
to order.
Minutes of June 21, 1977; July 12, 1977; July 26, 1977; and August 2,
1977, were approved by the chairman as submitted.
ZTA-77-17. Gelletly Properties, Inc. - request to amend Article 9
General Industrial District to provide for travel trailer sales and
service as a use by right:
Mr. Tucker reminded the Commission that this had been deferred in order
that the applicant could be present. He read the recommended amendment to the
Commission.
Mr. Gelletly stated that his request for amendment did not originally
include mobile homes, though he is agreeable to having that included.
Mr. Carr noted that quite often these types of vehicles cover the ground
entirely, and asked if there is any setback requirement in these zones.
Mr. Tucker stated that they could be located up to the right-of-way, however
this could be addressed at site plan level with each individual request.
Mr. Gelletly also asked that at some future date the Commission consider
including all the uses in the M-1 zone in the M-2 zone, either by right or by special
permit.
Mr. Tucker informed the Commission this could be handled in a similar fashion
to including R-3 uses in the B-1 district, as has recently /bed8ne by the County.
Mr. Peatross moved that the request for ZTA-77-17 be approved to include:
Section 9-1-8.1 Mobile home and travel trailer sales and service.
Mr. Barksdale seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 7-0-1, with
Col. Washington abstaining.
The Commission instructed the staff to review Mr. Gelletly's request to
include M-1 uses in the M-2 zone, and keturn to the Commission at the earliest possible
date. The Commission asked that Mr. Gelletly be advised of this date.
-_11-:1,4-
At the request of the applicant's representative, the Phillip Jessup
plat was deferred indefinitely on the motion of Mr. Gloeckner, and second of
Mr. Barksdale.
ZMA-77-17. Charles Hurt has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to
rezone 102+ acres from A-1 Agriculture to RPN/A-1. Property is located
on the southeast side of Route 729 at Shadwell with a portion on the
north side of Route 729. County Tax Map 79, Parcel 23, and County Tax
Map 79C, Parcel 1, Rivanna Magisterial District.
Mr. Montenegro presented the staff report. He read into the record the
letter from J. Ashley Williams dated August 22, 1977. He also read the following
letters to the Commission and public:
1. letter from James C. Pyles to Robert W. Tucker, Jr., dated August 19, 1977;
2. memo to Carlos Montenegro from Mark Osborne, date August 23, 1977;
3. letter to Ashley Williams from Robert L. Pyles;
4. memo to Carlos Montenegro from J. AShley Williams, dated August 22, 1977;
5. letter from Robert L. Pyles to Ronald S. Keeler, dated August 16, 1977;
6. memo from Edwin S. Roseberry, Thomas Jefferson Health District, to Dr. Charles
Hurt, dated August 16, 1977, giving preliminary Health Department approval;
7. memo from Virginia Department of Highways to Mary Joy Scala, dated July 27, 1977,
addressing Highway Department recommendations on the preliminary plan.
Mr. Gloeckner questioned if the Health Department had had the benefit
of the study accomplished by the office of W. S. Roudabush.
Mr. Montenegro replied that he is not aware of it�if they have reviewed it.
Dr. Moore questioned the density of other developments along Route 250.
Mr. Tucker replied that in that area they are developed at a density of 1 dwelling unit
per acre.
Mr. Barksdale questioned the protection for prospective purchasers regarding
a satisfactory perc test. Mr. Payne replied that there is no protection, since Health
Department approval is necessary only at the time a building permit is sought.
Mr. Roy Parks, representing the application, presented the plan. He discussed
existing conditions on the property, located the lake, woods, access, etc. He
presented a slope study accomplished for the property, and presented a preliminary
lot layout and which cited the position of the proposed units. He also discussed the
road system, and addressed the natural run-off system. He stated that 'kith this plan
the vegetation would be disturbed only to a minimum. Stating that the plan complies
with the comprehensive plan, he asked the Commission to approve the RPN, deleting
condition #11 recommended by the staff. He said that he had talked to Ed Roseberry
and had taken him to the site. According to Mr. Roseberry there would be no problems
with the site locations on the plan, due to the digging he had accomplished on the
site.
At this point Mr. Montenegro read the recommendations of the Roudabush
Study.
Mr. Jack Taggart, representing the Pyles, said that slopes are gradual to
extreme in the area. The average lot size under this plan is 0.94 acres to 1.7 acres.
He said that the soil conditions are very poor, with severe limitations for septic
fields, dwellings, lawns, gradens, landscaping, etc. In his conversations with
Mr. Roseberry, Mr. Taggart said that he had learned that some of the lots are completely
unbuildable. He questioned condition #1 as recommended by the staff. He also
questioned how some of the areas can support a septic field. Mr. Taggart stated
that if this plan is approved, there are potential serious sewer problems, and noted
that there are no plans for public sewer in the area. He also stated that there
will be serious water problems due to soil conditions, according to the 1976 Roudabush
Study. He addressed the inadequate sight distance with the entrance, and cited the
Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation study of traffic volumes along
this road. Approval of this plan would more than double the traffic. He said that
with all these problems, he feels it is questionable that the plan is a good one.
He requested the Commission to deny the rezoning request, or at least defer any
action until there could be a study of the water and sewer problems. He presented
a petition from landowners of the area protesting the rezoning request.
Mr. Charles Helman showed the Commission where he is aware of severe soil
limitations. He asked if houses have to be located within a certain number of feet
of the approved perc tests.
Mrs. Edna Anderson, a resident of Shadwell Estates Subdivision, stated that
she is concerned about the effect of septic fields on wells in the area.
Mr. Leighton McCann requested a more intensive study of possible problem
areas prior to the County's making any decision on the rezoning request.
Mr. Roy Parks noted that slope does not affect septic fields. He said that
he is agreeable to a condition addressing strict compliance with the State Health
Department. He said that he is also agreeable to a condition addressing the water
situation.
Mr. Carr closed the public hearing. He said that in his opinion the main
problems are with Routes 709 and 250, the dam, and Health Department approval.
Mr. Tucker reminded the Commission that this is not an approval for recordation,
however it would be an approval of a preliminary plan.
Mr. Jones said that in view of the various problems and potential problems
he could not support the request. He read from the staff report of Collina the
problems of the soils, noting that they have not changed in the past few years.
Dr. Moore questioned the ratio of open space to dwellings in view of the
separate parcel. Mr. Montenegro replied that there is still 25% open space.
Mr. Barksdale asked if the Commission has the power to cite two drainfields
on each lot. He said that in the past the Commission has not been requiring
condition #11 as recommended by the staff for RPN's.
Mr. Montenegro replied that condition requires a few minor shifts only.
Mrs. Graves said that she has never know the County to review an RPN with
such inherent problems. She suggested that perhaps the Commission could cut the
density from 51 units to a density of one unit per five acres.
Mr. Gloeckner questioned the use of the lake, asking if the residents
of the proposed development could use the entire lake or if they had to stop at
the property line.
Mr. Payne responded they would have to stop at the property line.
Mr. Carr said that he feels an RPN is a good approach to the use of the
property, however the density seems to be too great for the conditions that seem to
exist.
Dr. Moore asked if the applicant has addressed the existing conditions of the
dam.
Mr. Parks stated that will come Af a further point in the development.
Mr. Gloeckner agreed with Mr. Carr that the density is too high, especially
because of the steep terrain and the dangerous intersection.
Mr. Peatross told the Commission that he prefers to address the problems
at this stage of approval, especially the problems of water and sewer. He said that
these need to be studied in order to properly address the density. However, he said
that he is not in favor of denying the request. He suggested that Mr. Roseberry's
presence at the next Commission meeting might be helpful, since both sides have
quoted him.
Mr. Carr suggested taking the Health Department representative to each
building site designated to check for suitability of well and septic systems.
Mr. Gloeckner said that might require a perc test, which would cost
about $150 per lot.
Mr. Peatross said that he feels the Commission should be aware of the Health
Department's preliminary check points.
Mrs. Graves read from the staff report on Collina, which addressed soil
conditions in the area.
Mr. Peatross said that he himself would be willing to view the site with
the proper people to see what sites might be feasible.
Mr. Jones said that he fears conflicting evidence from the experts.
Mr. Carr asked the staff to see Mr. Roseberry and any other source
that is necessary to investigate the possible problems with the soil for well
and septic systems. He asked that Mr. Roseberry put his comments and recommendations
in written form for the Commission, as well as appear at the next meeting when this
is discussed.
Mr. Jones suggested that the Highway Department be present to address the
traffic situations on Routes 709 and 250.
Mrs. Graves asked to have the Zoning Administrator's reasons in writing
for allowing the separate parcel as part of the application.
Mr. Gloeckner moved that any action on this application be deferred until
the earliest date the above can be accomplished. Mr. Barksdale seconded the motion.
The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Payne noted for the record that
the request has to be readvertised, and adjoining property owners renotified,
in order to meet the statute.
Linwood Dabney Final Plat:
Mr. Montenegro stated that the A-1 property is located on the north side
of Route 686 southeast of Cismont. The proposal is to divide a 2.126-acre lot from an
8.126+ acre lot. The purpose is to convey a building site for his daughter. The
staff recommended approval subject to a series of conditions.
Mr. Gloeckner added the following conditions #4, and #5, and moved approval
subject to the below mentioned conditions:
1. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of entrance
facilities;
2. Written Health Department approval;
3. The pipestem part of lot 5 to be part and parcel of lot 5;
4. The residue acreage must be noted;
5. A note must be added stating "No further division along this easement without
Planning Commission approval."
Mr. Barksdale seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
Gayle Jaeger Final Plat:
Mr. Montenegro presented the staff report, noting that the A-1 property
is located on the south side of Route 641 just west of the Southern Railroad tracks.
The proposal is to redivide three existing lots into three new lots, one of which
is under 5-acres and is served by an easement. Lot sizes of 4.80 acres, 29.09
acres, and 11.78 acres. The property is being redivided in order that three different
partners may each own and farm their own property. There is an existing dwelling on
Tract II. The staff recommended approval with no conditions.
Mr. Montenegro told Mrs. Graves that there is a special permit on Tract III.
Mrs. Graves said that she hopes this subdivision does not add to the acreage of the
special permit, otherwise it would require an amendment to that special permit.
Mr. Payne responded that this subdivision does not change the land covered
under the special permit.
Mr. Barksdale moved approval of the plat as presented to the Commission.
Mr. Jones seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
Huntwood Apartments Site Plan Amendment:
Mr. Montenegro advised the Commission that this R-3 zoned property is
located on the north side of Route 654 between Old Salem Apartments and Georgetown
Road.
He briefly noted the history of the property and the site plan, and the conditions
of approval of that plan. That proposal was approved for 59 dwelling units. The
amendment to the plan is for 54 dwelling units on the same 3.15-acre site.
The staff noted that the revised plan reduces the intensity of use of this site
as well as preserving more trees as they exist on the site. Staff recommended
approval subject to a series of conditions.
Mr. Mike Boggs, representing the applicant, stated his objection to
specifically addressing the recreational equipment to be placed on the tot lot,
since this is not required by the ordinance.
Mr. Tucker stated that this was required, since otherwise no equipment
may be placed there, and it would be an open play area.
Mr. Carr stated that something should be in the plan in the way of equipment.
Mr. Payne suggested wording the condition such that the tot lot equipment
is to the reasonable satisfaction of the planning staff before any certificates
of occupancy are issued.
Mr. Bardale moved approval of the plat subject to the following conditions:
1. Fire Marshal approval of hydrant locations;
2. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of entrance
facilities;
3. Tot lot equipment must be approved to the reasonable satisfaction of the planning
staff before any certificates of occupancy are issued;
4. That the applicant provide a basketball half -court between buildings 1 and 2.
Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no
discussion.
Oak Hill Quadraplex Site Plan:
Mr. Montenengro presented the staff report, stating that the R-3 property
is located on the south side of Route 631 just north of the intersection with Oak
Hill Road. The original application was made June 27, 1977, but due to variance
hearings necessary to allow a multi -family facility without a central septic system
this item had to be postponed. The proposal is to locate a 4-dwelling unit facility
on a 38,333 square foot lot. The site will be served by two septic systems and a
central water system. The applicant has obtained a variance in order that he may
serve this development with two dual septic systems. The staff recommended approval
subject to a series of conditions.
Col. Washington questioned the square footage of the lot, with the facilities
that are proposed.
Mr. Payne stated that the variance covers that. Mrs. Graves said that she
would like to see the exact wording of the variance.
Mr. Tucker explained that the Health Department has required and recommended
two septic systems, and that is what the variance is based on.
Mrs. Graves moved denial of the site plan.
Dr. Moore seconded the motion.
Discussion:
Mr. Barksdale said that he could not support the motion, because of the
variance granted by the BZA.
Col. Washington said that he has more than a reasonable doubt about a well
on the same property as the two septic fields.
Mr. Payne explained that Oak Hill water system is part of another problem,
and that is the Whittington water system, which the Commission has previously discussed.
Since that water system is in violation, with notice that the owners of the Whittington
system will be prosecuted it they do nothing about it, the Commission should consider this.
He stated that assuming this quadraplex is approved, it will eventually hook to the
Whittington System, once it is approved.
Mrs. Graves called for the question.
The vote on the motion to deny was 5-3, with Messrs. Barksdale, Gloeckner,
and Peatross dissenting.
After the vote, Mr. Payne stated that the Commission could require that
this quadraplex be required to provide public water from off -site.
Mrs. Graves stated that her first concern was with the variance.
Mr. Payne said that if that is her reasoning, she should appeal the BZA
ruling. He said that he thought her concern had been water should come from off -site.
Col. Washington stated that 38,000 square feet is inadequate for this project
without public facilities. But if the water could come from off site, he said that
he would move to reconsider the site plan.
Mr. Peatross seconded the motion to reconsider, which carried unanimously.
Mr. Gloeckner suggested having the Health Department's recommendation and
BZA ruling prevail until the offsite requirement can become a reality. However, he
said that he is concerned about any long term approval for two septic systems and
a well on 38,000 square feet.
Mrs. Graves said that the R-3 zoning speaks to central water and sewer.
Col. Washington said that he could support the site plan if it were subject
to off -site water prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
Mr. Carr suggested that the matter could be deferred for 60 days to wait
the solution of the Whittington water system.
Mr. Peatross questioned the applicant's desires. Mr. Moore stated that
if it takes a year for the public water system to be approved, he has a problem because
he has begun the quadraplex.
Mr. Peatross said that he favors some sort of interim measure such as a well
until the central off -site water is available. Then the well could be abandoned.
Mrs. Graves said that she is nevertheless concerned about the density on this
lot in view of its size. She noted that a single-family unit could be placed on
the lot. She said that she could not support any motion to approve the plan.
Dr. Moore agreed.
Col. Washington moved approval subject to the following conditions:
1. The development is to be served by an approved off -site central water system;
2. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of entrance
facilities.
The motion to approve carried by a vote of 5-3, with Dr. Moore, Mr. Jones,
and Mrs. Graves dissenting.
Mr. Tucker asked the Commission for a resolution of intent to take to public
hearing a amendment to the Site Plan Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance requiring off -site
road improvements when such improvements are deemed necessary due to proposed development.
Mrs. Graves moved that the Commission adopt a resolution of intent regarding
this. The motion, seconded by Dr. Moore, carried unanimously.
Mr. Tucker also stated that there are some general "housekeeping"
amendments that should be accomplished regarding the duties of the Zoning
Administrator. These could be addressed in a resolution of intent to amend
Sections 15-3 and 11-1-2 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Barksdale moved that the Commission adopt a resolution of intent
to take this to public hearings. The motion, seconded by Col. Washington, carried
unanimously.
Mr. Tucker informed the Commission that several people have questioned
the parking regulations provided in the ordinance. He suggested that the ordinance
should be amended to provide facilities for mid -size and compact automobiles in
addition to the regular sized -parking spaces.
Mr. Barksdale recommended the Commission adopt a resolution of intent
to take this to public hearings. Col. Washington seconded the motion, which carried
unanimously.
In regard to Census Tracts, Mr. Tucker stated that a committee is necessary
to review the work that has been accomplished by the Census Tract Committee. One
representative should be from the Commission. Mr. Barksdale volunteered to serve
on this committee.
WJ
Z7
The Virginia Citizens Planning Association will be holding a meeting
on September 18-20 at the University. Any Commission member interested in attending
should advise the staff as soon as possible, in order that the necessary reservations
' can be made.
Mr. Payne briefly brought the Commission up to date on the Whittington
water system, which had been discussed earlier in the meeting in regard to Oak
Hill Quadraplex. He advised the Commission that the applicant has made the proper
applications to the proper agencies, and he expects this matter to be resolved in
due time.
Since there was no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m.
IR