Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04 18 78 PC Minutes433 April 18, 1978 The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a meeting on Tuesday, April 18, 1978, 7:30 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were Mr. Peter Easter, Chairman; Col. William Washington, Vice -Chairman; Mrs. Norma Diehl; Mr. Layton McCann; Mr. Charles Vest; Mr. Kurt Gloeckner; Dr. James Moore; Mr. James Huffman; Mrs. Joan Graves; and Mr. Timothy Lindstrom, ex-officio. Other officials present were Mr. Robert Tucker, Director of Planning; Mr. Ronald Keeler, Assistant Director of Planning; Mr. Carlos Montenegro, Planner; and Mr. Frederick Payne, Deputy County Attorney. Mr. Easter established that a quorum was present and called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Susie Ballard Final Plat: Mr. Montenegro stated that the 70+ acres, zoned A-1, is located at the end of St. George Avenue in Crozet. The proposal is to divide a 2-acre lot from a large tract. The entire property is served by a 15 foot wide right-of-way. The division will create a third lot served by the 15' wide right-of-way. The staff is concerned about increasing the use of the right-of-way without a maintenance agreement. The staff also noted its concern about future development of the property without adequate access facilities. The staff recommended the following conditions of approval: 1. Written Health Department approval; 2. A written Maintenance Agreement be approved by the County Attorney's office and recorded with this plat; 3. Note the location of stream at the rear and note a 200' septic setback from it; 4. County Engineering Department approval of private drive; 5. The applicant shall provide evidence to the County Attorney's office that there exists a right-of-way of not less than 15 feet, and that the fee of such road is owned by the owners of lots abutting the right-of-way thereof or by an association composed of the owners of all lots in the subdivision. Mr. Mike Boggs, representing the applicant, stated that the Ballards plan to build a house for themselves; he did not feel it would be possible to ascertain that they own the entire fee. Mr. Montenegro replied that either the lots abutting the fee will have to own it or else the Ballards will have to own it. There was no public comment. Col. Washington determined that the residue is served by a 60' right-of-way from Route 240. ( Mrs. Graves entered the meeting. ) Mr. Easter felt that condition #5 recommended by the staff protects the county. Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of the plat subject to the five conditions recommended by the staff. Mr. Vest seconded the motion, which carried unanimouly. Mason W. Fisher Final Plat: Mr. Montenegro stated that the 14.44 acres of A-1 property is located on the south side of Route 743 just west of Route 664. The proposal is to divide a narrow 14.4+ acre parcel into three (3) lots. The two lots in the rear will be served by a 30' wide access easement and the front lot will have a separate private entrance. The applicant is proposing two private entrances to serve the three lots because he could not obtain necessary sight distance to obtain a commercial entrance permit. Staff recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. A written maintenance agreement to be approved by the County Attorney's office and recorded with this plat; 2. County Engineering Department approval of road specs; 3. 30' side yard setback from lot 1, since it, is a corner lot. Mr. Montenegro noted for the record that written Health Department approval has already been received. There were no comments from the applicant or the public. Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of the plat subject to the three conditions recommended by the staff. The motion, seconded by Mr. Vest, carried unanimously, with no discussion. Robertson Electric Site Plan: Mr. Montenegro stated that the 1.0+ acres of M-1 property is located on the west side of Berkmar Drive. The proposal is to expand the existing contractor's facilities. Improvement of the existing entrance is proposed and a new entrance to the North is to be added. The proposed plan, in staff opinion, is a vast improvement over the existing situation. The staff recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of commercial entrance permits; 2. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer facilities; 3. The gasoline pump is to be for personal use only; 4. Add note that, "landscaping is to be maintained in a healthy condition." Mr. Robertson stated that he does not understand the requirement for a handicapped parking space since he is a contractor, and has no retail business. Furthermore, his walk-in clientele is almost nothing. Mr. Montenegro stated that this is part of the state code, and according to the interpretation he had received from the Building Official, any building that the public might use needs handicapped facilities. Besides, he noted that this has already been shown on the plat. Mr. Darnell said that it is shown because this was a requirement by the Planning Staff. However, he felt that the Code of Virginia does not cover handicapped facilities for this particular kind of use. He presented a copy of the applicable section, and upon reading those uses which did require this space, pointed out to the commission that a contractor's offices is not one of them. Furthermore, he y,35 stated that upon talking to Mr. Vaughn, he had discovered that this would not be required by the Building Inspections Department, so he would like to be permitted to remove the note from the site plan. Mr. Payne stated that the BOCA Code addresses this matter, and that it has been adopted as the statewide building code. Mr. Montenegro said that he had been instructed in the past by the Building Inspections Department that any place of public accommodation has to have handicapped facilities. Mr. Tucker suggested conditioning the site plan on the fact that this be clarified by the Building Official. There was no public comment on the matter. Col. Washington stated that perhaps the Planning Commission should know the legality of this requirement in order to protect the public from a overzealous county department. Mr. Payne advised the Commission that he is concerned about their waiving this or making it a requirement until he has researched the matter a bit more. Col. Washington moved that the site plan be deferred until April 25, 1978. Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. Hollymead Section III Final Plat: Mr. Montenegro stated that the 8.88+ acres is located along the east side of Hollymead Drive. This is part of the Hollymead Planned Community. The proposal is to divide three parcels into 32 single-family lots, averaging 12,100+ square feet. The lots along Hollymead Drive have joint entrances and are served by public water and sewer. The proposal conforms with the recently amended SP-77-70 Hollymead Planned Community Master Plan. Sidewalks are required along this side of Hollymead Drive. Staff recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. A sidewalk will be constructed to the satisfaction of the County Engineering Department. An easement shall be granted to the Hollymead Homeowners' Association, with the burden of maintenance on the Hollymead Homeowners' Association. The language of the easement shall be approved by the County Attorney; 2. Fire Official approval of fire fighting facilities; 3. Show a 30' front yard setback on all lots, corner lots shall have a 25' side yard setback. Mr. Tom Sinclair, representing the applicant, said that it is desirable to maintain the existing atmosphere and there are not setbacks specified throughout the remainder of the planned community. Mr. Easter suggested that condition #3 might make the neighborhood liveable. Mrs. Graves stated that each subdivision plat of a PUD has to be a minimum of 10 acres. Mr. Sinclair stated that this plat is in line with the preliminary that was recently approved by the Commission. Mr. Payne stated that Mrs. Graves is correct and that each subdivison plat in a planned community must contain minimum of 10 acres. Mr. Montenegro stated that the 8.88 acres does not include the open space which is also shown to be platted with this subdivision. He said that there are 11.5 acres of open space. Mrs. Graves ascertained that the plat shows the open space. Mr. Easter asked if setbacks have been required in the plat. Mr. Montenegro replied that they have not been. Mr. Payne stated that if no setback is imposed, it is conceivable that the develper could build all the way up to the right-of-way line. Mrs. Graves said that she would like to see the developer adhere to the front yard setback, however did not feel that the side yard setback was necessary. Col. Washington said that he has no problem with the setbacks, since in the past year the County has paid some special attention to setbacks throughout the county increasing them to 75 feet in the agricultural zone. Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of the plat subject to conditions 1 and 2 only. Mr. McCann seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 7-2, with Col. Washington and Dr. Moore dissenting. Lane Implement Site Plan: Mr. Montenegro presented the staff report, stating that the 2.882 acres of B-1 property is located on the west side of Route 29 North, just north of Wonder Bread. Mr. Montenegro reminded the Commission that the Board of Supervisors approved a rezoning and special use permit in February of this year. He read the conditions of approval for the retail farm outlet store. This proposal is to locate a feed and seed store. Access will be from Route 29 North. A repair garage is proposed at the rear, as well as a machinery storage area. A self-service gasoline pump will be located in the front of the property. The entrance shown on the site plan does not meet Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval, therefore, the staff in conjunction with the Highway Department is recommending an alternate plan. The staff recommended that the Planning Commission consider relocating the gas pumps at the rear near the garage. Staff recommended approval of the site plan subject to the following conditions: 1. Provide a recorded 2. The entrance shall dated 4/18/78, and 3. Staff approval of 4. The display area a base ( approved by access easement to adjacent parcel on North; conform to the sketch proposed by the Planning Department a commercial entrance permit shall be obtained; Landscape plan including adequate screening of storage areas; Long the Northern side of the main building shall have a stone the County Engineering Department ); q57 5. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer; 6. County Engineering Department approval of water and sewer; 7. Fire Official approval of gasoline pumping facilities; 8. All conditions of SP-77-82 must be met; 9. County Engineering Department approval of pavement specifications; 10. Staff approval of location of access easement; 11. This approval does not speak the proposed sign; 12. County Engineering Department approval of grease and oil retention devices for garage and gas pumps; 13. All parking spaces shall be either 9' x 18' of 10' x 18' and shall have either curbing or bumper blocks; 14. Grading permit; 15. Compliance with technical points of Article 17, Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance. He noted the letters from William Stevenson and A. F. Martin. He stated that any easement to the Stevenson property should not be the sole access to that property. Mr. Montenegro stated that the entrance as proposed by the applicant for Lane Implement is offset from the crossover, and will cause on -coming conflict. Mr. Gale Pickford stated that the easement being discussed is of no importance since it is not mentioned in the deed. Mr. Jim Murray, representing Wallace Hatcher, gave a history of the Wonderbread property and noted that there are many difficulties in working out any agreement for the easements due to the major corporations involved. Mr. Tucker stated that as far as access from one property to the other, this is covered by a section in the Site Plan Ordinance. Mr. Pickford, on behalf of Mr. Lane, said that the conditions are agreeable, except condition #1. He did state that he disagrees with the one addressing the gas pump. Mr. Foster, surveyor, said that the location of the gas pumps shown on the plan is the only permissible location, since it would cause difficulties for an attendant at the rear. Mr. Foster also stated that he wants it understood that any landscaping plan submitted to the staff will not block the view of the display area. Mr. Montenegro said that this has been discussed with the architect and deciduous trees are agreeable to the staff. Mr. Easter said that he feels that this matter should be deferred in order that the three attorneys could get together to discuss condition #1 as recommended by the staff. He also asked the staff to address the gas pumps, and requested that the Commission be notified ahead of time, preferably in writing, of any settlement that is reached on the easement. Mr. Tucker said that condition #1 as recommended by the staff deals only with an access easement over the Lane property. He pointed out that Mr. Stevenson's problem for access rests with Star Realty, who owns the adjoining property to Lane. Mr. Jim Murray asked for the configuration drawn by the staff to present to the large companies in his negotiations. Mrs. Graves suggested that the staff research the tapes and minutes of the originally approved site plan, if this is necessary. Mrs. Graves moved that further discussion and action on this site plan be deferred until May 9, 1978. The motion was seconded by Dr. Moore and carried unanimously, with no further discussion. There was a brief recess and Mr. Lindstrom arrived at the meeting. Solomon Court Phase III Site Plan: Mr. Montenegro stated that the 20+ acres of R-3 property is located off Hydraulic Road at the rear of the existing Solomon Court Apartments. He said that in February, 1978, the Planning Commission approved the Westgate IV site plan for 78 apartment units. The proposal is to develop 24 apartment units served off the existing entrance to Solomon Court Phase II. This development will share recreational facilities with the first two phases. Since Phase III will share recreation facilities, the staff feels that all three phases should conform to the recreation requirements of the Zoning Ordinance ( 50 square feet/unit ). There has been much comment from the public regarding the future development of the Mowinkle Property. The staff feels that this proposal is a natural addition to the Solomon Court Complex and recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of commercial entrance on Hydraulic Road; 2. Fire Official approval of fire hydrant location that provides a fire flow of 1,000 g.p.m. at 20 P. S. I. within 400' of any major structure; 3. County Engineering Department approval of storm drainage facilities and pavement specifications; 4. Staff approval of landscape plan; 5. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer facilities; 6. Parking and access easements shall be approved by the County Attorney and recorded; 7. Approval of City Gas Division prior to any site work; 8. Grading permit; 9. Handicapped facilities shall meet Director of Inspections approval including handicapped ramps; 10. This approval does not indicate approval of a subdivision; 11. All parking spaces shall be either 9'xl8' or 10' x 18'; 12. Provide an additional dumpster in a central location; 13. Conformance with technical points required by Article 17 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance; 14. Staff approval of recreation facilities. Mr. Montenegro read into the record a petition with 70 signatures from area residents on the traffic in the area, as well as any impact on the Bennington Road area. Mr. Rotgin generally discussed plans for. the Mowinkle property, and told the citizens present that a special use permit will be before the Commission on May 9, on the Mowinkle tract, however he does plan to have meetings with citizens of the area during the meantime. Mr. Easter aksed if the Mowinkle tract has access to Bennington Road. Mr. Rotgin said that it does. 14400 Mr. Woody McGill, a resident of Benning Road, said that he is concerned Y31 about his neighborhood and what will happen when a project of this sort comes very close to a single-family neighborhood. Mr. N. 0. Cray said that he is also concerned about what is happening to that area. Mr. Easter told the citizens present that their concerns seem to rest with problems that will be before the Commission on May 9, and urged that they be prepared to discuss them with the Commission at that time. Mr. McCann said that the County Engineer needs to look into the runoff at Solomon Road. Mr. Montenegro said that the develper may put in a retention pond at the rear of the property. He said that the plans for Westgate are currently being reviewed by the County Engineer. The conditions of approval address Mr. McCann's concern. Mr. McCann then moved approval of the site plan subject to the 14 conditions recommended by the staff. Mr. Huffman seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. Copperfields Apartments Site Plan: Mr. Montenegro said that this 4.69+ acres zoned R-3 is at the end of the new Commonwealth Drive just East of Peyton Drive. The proposal is to develop a 50 unit apartment development served off the intersection of Commonwealth Drive and Peyton Drive. All units are to be two -bedroom. Picnic tables are proposed as the recreation facilities. The staff feels that the layout works well with the topography. However, the staff would like to see an area of active recreation, such as basketball or volley- ball. Sidewalks on both sides of the proposed entrance drive to the intersection with Peyton Drive are recommended, and the parking lot needs to be modified to conform with ordinance requirements. Staff recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of entrance location; 2. Staff approval of landscape plan; 3. Fire Official approval of fire hydrant location and sizes of water lines; 4. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer facilities; 5. County Engineering Department approval of pavement specifications and storm drainage facilities; 6. Sidewalks shall be installed along the entrance driveway to Peyton Drive; 7. Grading permit; 8. Parking spaces are to be 9' x 18' in size; 9. Staff approval of recreation facilities; 10. Staff approval of parking area layout and curbing. There were no comments from the public. Col. Wasington suggested inclusion of a tot lot within the recreational area. There was a consensus among the Commission members that active recreation as suggested by the staff is agreeable. The applicant said that was agreeable. Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of the site plan subject to the 10 conditions recommended by the staff. Mr. Huffman seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 7-1-1, with Mr. Easter abstaining, and Mrs. Graves dissenting. g4-O SP-78-15. F. Bosley Crowther has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to locate a planned community on 1650 acres zoned A-1. Property is located between Routes 20 South and 631 South, south of Interstate 64. County Tax Map 89, Parcel 85A, part thereof; Tax Map 90, Parcels 5; 6, part thereof; 9A, part thereof; and 15A; and County Tax Map 90A, part thereof. Samuel Miller and Scottsville Magisterial Districts. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report, and stated that it is incomplete as far as recommendations due to the fact that he has not had comments from the various agencies who normally submit comment. He read the comments from the Education Department, noting that they have a meeting scheduled in the near future to duscuss the reservation of a school site and the number of acres they will require. He also read the comments from the Highway Department. He pointed to the narrative from the applicant that had been forwarded to the Commissioners. Mr. Keeler noted that careful planning will be necessary for the development of the more intensive parts of the project due to the slopes. Mr. Tommy Thompson of the Albemarle County Service Authority said that there are no plans for the Service Authority to extend any lines in this area. Mr. Easter asked if the developer installs the lines if public water will be available to the project. Mr. Thompson said that water would be available in any direction he might choose to lay the lines. Mr. Easter questioned the sewer lines. Mr. Thompson said that a contract has not been awarded for the construction of the AWT plant, and once that contract is awarded, construction will take two and one-half years. Mr. Keeler asked that the Commission address whether this community as proposed would be self-supporting and does not rely on the surrounding property for support., or if this should be the focal point for neighborhoods 4 and 5, as they are designated in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Easter questioned if the commercial and industrial area were limited to only this proposed development how many acres would be needed. Mr. Keeler said that the topography is difficult, however he would give a rough estimate of 50-55 acres to support just the development. Mr. Gloeckner questioned if, within the 125 acres shown as commercial and indust- rial on the plan, there are 50-55 useable acres. Mr. Keeler said that probably there is. Mr. Stan Tatum, landscape architect for the proposal, explained the concept for the property through the various proposed land uses. He felt that for the commercial area to exist financially, it would have to serve the community outside the planned community. However, the primary purpose of that commercial area is to serve the immediate community. He noted that in terms of slopes, the site development is critical throughout. Mr. Keeler pointed out on the topo map the land that is in the flood plain. `44-1 Mrs. Graves questioned if the damming of water would affect the flood plain. Mr. Keeler stated that it would reduce the flood plain. Col. Washington said that k he does not believe it will reduce it after the lake is filled up. Mr. Gloeckner pointed out that the dam is a protection factor up to a point. Mr. Keeler did note for the record that a special use permit is needed for the dam. Mr. Crowther addressed the commercial area, noting that he does'not contemplate using more than 500 of the industrial land, since a good portion of that land will be used for buffering from surrounding land uses. Mrs. Trina Cromwell asked if ground water will serve the project in the initial stages of development. Mr. Tatum replied that the plans are to put all the development on public water from the beginning, with the exception of what is called the "farm community" ( this "farm community" will have 100 houses on 500 acres that will be served by individual wells ). Mr. Charles Yost asked what will happen to Southwood Mobile Home Park with the construction of the dam. Mr. Crowther replied that he is currently negotiating with the Service Authority to serve the mobile home park with public water. Mr. Bruce Rasmussen, representing approximately 15 farmers of the area, opposed the plan. He suggested that any discussion and action on this plan, which would have a tremendous impact on that area, should be deferred until the neighborhood meetings have been held on this area of the County. He felt that there should be citizen input on this large development, otherwise this would set a bad precedent for projects of this size. Mr. Easter explained to Mr. Rasmussen that neighborhood committees are being formed, however, due to the lack of staff, time, etc., it has been impossible to form and meet with all the neighborhood committees proposed by the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Tucker stated that the staff has completed its work with three neighborhoods. This area will certainly be studied within the next two months, however pointed out that after all the neighborhood meetings the Board will still have to work to amend. the Comprehensive Plan as a result of these meetings. Furthermore, he reminded the Commission that there have been numerous rezoning requests on this property, and the County has always advised the previous applicants that it wishes to see a plan on the entire acreage. Mr. Keeler advised the Commission that the gross density for the 1650 acres is 1 dwelling unit per two acres, and 1 dwelling unit per 1.182 acres if the commercial and industrial land is excluded. It complies with existing zoning in the area and what is shown in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Crowther said that he has gone to great lenghts to inform the residents of that area about his plans, having passed out information, talked with individuals, given them a tour of the property, etc. L"g2' Mrs. Graves did not feel that a two month deferral would be too long to wait for the citizen input that she felt was necessary. Mr. Keeler again reminded the Commission that the Board of Supervisors is yet to ratify any of the neighborhood plans. Mr. Easter said that as a practical matter, he does not see how the county can put a stop to everthing about this proposal until the neighborhood committee is formed and makes some final recommendation. He said that there are too many unknown factors to impose that upon the applicant. He noted that there will be plenty of input from the planning staff, the other agencies, the Commission and Board. Mrs. Graves said that the Comprehensive Plan was adopted on the basis that the Neighborhood Plans would be adopted as amendments to the Plan. Mr. Lindstrom said that he is sure that there will be many questions from the Board of Supervisors since this is a substantial development that will have a great impact on the development of the entire county. He felt that the staff should consider how approval of'this plan would affect the Comprehensive Plan as it now is and the overall impact on the county. Mr. Gloeckner suggested a work session on the proposal, in which the community would be present to participate. He felt that: this would expedite the matter. Mrs. Diehl, Mr. McCann and Mr. Easter agreed that this was a good idea. Mrs. Graves said that she would like the comments from the Highway Department, the Health Department, and other agencies for that meeting in order that the community residents could understand the plans. After a brief discussion, there was a unanimous consensus that the staff should consider that the commercial and industrial areas of the plan would not be considered in and of itself. The Commission advised the applicant and staff that it wants the Highway Department recommendations, the comments from the other agencies that will be involved, the utility of the lake, information regarding the most intensive uses on the steep slopes, for the work session that it intends to hold. Mr. Crowther told the Commission that this will be an 8-10 year plan. Dr. Moore moved that a work session be held on Monday, May 8, 1978, on the request. This motion was seconded by Col. Washington, and carried unanimously. Dr. Moore then moved that the public hearing be deferred until May 16, 1978. This motion was also seconded by Col. Washington, and carried unanimously with no discussion. The Commission requested that Mr. Rasmussen and The Daily Progress be advised of the final plans for the work session on the eighth. With no further business, the meeting 76 urned at 11:50 p.m. L�Zjf W. Tucker, Jr. - Secre ary