HomeMy WebLinkAbout06 06 78 PC Minutes514
June 6, 1978
The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing
on Tuesday, June 6, 1978, 7:30 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building, Charlottesville,
Virginia. Those members present were Mr. Peter Easter, Chairman; Col. William R.
Washington, Vice -Chairman; Mrs. Norma Diehl; Mr. Layton McCann; Mr. Charles Vest;
Dr. James W. Moore; Mr. James Huffman, Jr.; Mr. Kurt M. Gloeckner; Mrs. Joan Graves;
and Mr. Tim Lindstrom, ex-Officio. Other officials present were Mr. Robert Tucker, Jr.,
Director of Planning; and.Mr. Frederick W. Payne, Deputy County Attorney.
Mr. Easter established that a quorum was present and called the meeting to
order.
SP-78-28. Charles W. Hurt has petitioned the Board of Supervisors for
a Day Nursery pursuant to Section 6-1-21(2) of the County Zoning Ordinance
on 2.909 acres zoned R-3 Residential. Property is located on the south
side of Whitewood Road at the corner of Whitewood Road and Greenbrier
Drive. County Tax Map 61, Parcel 29C, Charlottesville Magisterial District.
Mr. Tucker presented the staff report, noting that the applicant has already
submitted a site plan to the Planning Department. Furthermore, he read the comments
from the Highway Department. Mr. Tucker then explained to Mrs. Graves that the
use will only be on 1.07 acres and the property is being re -subdivided to show
this; however he did not know if the plat has been recorded.
Mrs. Dorothy Davis and Mrs. Elizabeth Reilly, individuals who will be
operating the school, passed out to the commission a supplementaryinformation
sheet on what is planned at the school. They asked that this become part of the
special use permit file.
Mrs. Diehl questioned if this will be a 24-hour operation. Mrs. Davis
replied that it will be open after 5:00 p.m. by appointment only. All children
using the school, whether in the evening or daytime, will have to meet all the
health requirements.
Mr. Gloeckner established from Mrs. Reilly that slightly over 1 acre is
adequate to meet all the requirements and needs of the school and the children.
Mrs. Graves established that outdoor activities will be on -site and that the
area will be completely fenced on the side and in the rear.
Mr. Gloeckner noted the bad curve and the sight distance at that point.
Mr. Tucker said that as yet the Highway Department has not commented on that aspect
of the road. He expected those comments by the coming Thursday.
Mrs. Davis and Mrs. Reilly explained to the Commission they conducted a survey
prior to initiating this project and feel it will be for the good of the county and
the citizens.
Mr. Vest questioned if additional acreage is available if they find it is
necessary.
51!5
Mr. Tucker stated that the property is under one ownership, and he did not
really see any problem with acquiring more land if it does indeed become necessary.
Mrs. Reilly responded to a question posed by Mrs. Diehl that the children
will be divided by age groups, but noted that all the programs are interrelated.
Mr. Easter closed the public hearing, since there was no public comment.
Mrs. Graves said that it is not the proposal that concerns her, rather the
area in which it is to be located. She also noted her concern for the road condition.
Upon questioning from Mr. Easter, Mr. Tucker noted that the applicant has complied
with the standards recommended in the Planning Advisory Service and he said that the
staff report attempts to note that the density is greater than what it would be if
developed as R-3. He said that state certification should ensure adequate facilities.
Mr. McCann said that if it meets the state requirements, he sees no problems.
Mr. Tucker noted for the record that the recreational area will be used in shifts,
and that not all 125 children will in the play area at one time.
Mr. McCann felt this is a good area for such a use.
Mrs. Graves questioned if this will be at the future intersection.
Mr. Tucker did not feel that it would be and noted that the Highway Department will be
aware of the location of the crossroads when it reviews the site plan.
Mrs. Diehl determined that 40-45% of the enrollment will be present from
9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Dr. Moore said that he has no objections, since it will be covered by state
regulations and review by the Highway Department plus site plan requirements.
He moved approval subject to the following conditions:
1. Enrollment limited to 125 children or that number approved by the Virginia Department
of Welfare, whichever is less;
2. No other use may be made of this property without amendment of this special use
permit;
3. Site Plan approval to include landscaping and buffering from adjoining properties;
4. Licensure by the Virginia Department of Welfare as a child care center. In the
event of license expiration, suspension, or revocation, the Zoning Administrator
shall refer this petition to the Board of Supervisors for public hearing after
notice pursuant to Section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia. It shall be the
responsibility of the applicant to transmit to the Zoning Administrator a copy of
the original license and all renewals thereafter and to notify the Zoning Administrator
of any license expiration, suspension, or revocation within three days of such
event. Failure to do so shall be deemed willful non-compliance with the provisions
of this special use permit;
5. Approval of appropriate federal, state, and local agencies. Conditions stated are
supplementary and nothing stated herein shall be deemed to preclude application of
requirements and regulations of the Virginia Department of Welfare of any other agency;
6. Inspection of the premises at least twice annually by the Albemarle County Fire
Official including at least one unannounced inspection.
Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion.
Mr. Tucker questioned if the Commission intends to address the Highway Department
recommendations. Mr. Gloeckner suggested that they be addressed at site plan review
5 /6
level, which the Commission frequently does.
The Commission agreed to this suggestion.
The motion carried by a vote of 7-0-2, with Messrs. Easter and Washington
abstaining.
ZTA-78-05. Wendell W. Wood has petitioned the Board of Supervisors
to permit aircraft assembly plants in the M-1 Industrial Zone as a use
by right.
Mr. Tucker presented the staff report and read a letter from Mrs. Alfred McClatchy
in opposition to the requested amendment.
Mr. Wood, the applicant, had no comments.
There was no public comment.
Mr. Easter closed the public hearing, noting that he feels the request is
agreeable; he did stated that "punch pressing" can have varied meanings.
Dr. Moore said that he feels "punch pressing" should remain in 8-1-33 as an
exclusion, since punch pressing could address many uses in the M-2 zone;
the only other way he knew to address the matter was through the size of the parts.
Mr. Payne suggested some amended wording if the Commission approved the
amendment.
Mr. Wood noted that punch press will be used here, and suggested limiting
this by the ton of press - a five ton press is very small.
Dr. Moore pointed out that the noise level, even with a small tonage press,
can be very high.
Mr. Huffman said that he feels the special use permit would cover the punch
pressing that might be done.
Mrs. Graves agreed, pointing out that the hours of operation could be limited.
Mr. McCann said that on a 42-acre site he did not see how a punch press could
be offensive.
Dr. Moore said that this amendment could ultimately affect the entire county.
Mr. Gloeckner said that he supports the amendment as proposed by the staff.
Col. Washington determined that in a broad sense the amendments meet the needs
of the applicant.
Mr. Huffman moved approval of the amendments as follows:
by right
Section 8-1-33. Assembly and fabrication of machinery including engines, motors, and
vehicles, including but not limited to aircraft, from component parts
manufactured off -site and including such on -site accessory uses as
machining, welding, and sheet metal, but specifically excluding such
intensive uses as punch pressing, drop hammering, and foundry.
51�
and by special permit
Section 8-1-27(15). Assembly and fabrication of machinery including engines, motors,
and vehicles, including but not limited to aircraft, from
component parts manufactured off -site and including such on -site
accessory uses as machining, welding, sheet metal work, foundry,
punch pressing, and drop hammering.
Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion.
Discussion: Col. Washington suggested speaking to the statement of intent in the
amendments.
Mr. Tucker said that this could be covered through such wording as "Press
punching less than 40 tons."
Dr. Moore felt that this opens the amendment up too much, and makes the amendment
too general.
Mr. McCann said that the special permit gives some control.
Mr. Lindstrom suggested the generalness of the staff proposal. Mr. Tucker said
that the staff had attempted to cover more than just this one particular request which
will eventually accommodate Bede Aircraft.
Mr. Easter favored the staff's proposal, since it seems to be ridiculous to
have an amendment each time one use varies somewhat from what is already provided
in the ordinance.
The motion to approve the amendments carried by a vote of 6-3, with Dr. Moore,
Mrs. Graves, and Mrs. Diehl dissenting.
Mrs. Graves said that she feels this sort of use is too intensive for the M-1
zone, even with a special use permit.
Mrs. Diehl said that she would be more comfortable with an amendment that
specifically addresses the use that is planned.
ZTA-78-06. Caleb N. Stowe has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to amend
Article 7, Business General District, to permit the following by special use
permit: "Receiving and storage of electronic components for distribution,
including testing and limited assembly of pre -manufactured components."
Mr. Tucker presented the staff report.
Mr. Sandy Lambert, on behalf of the applicant, said that this is a combined
result of making use of an existing building and property, whose use is currently
in question. He said that he feels the use to be in compliance with the overall
zoning ordinance. Mr. Lambert explained to the Commission the uses and compared it
event a service station, TV and radio repair shop. He stated that the use complies
with the intent of the B-1 District and has none of the nuisance factors, such as
heavy traffic, that a business use has.
Mr. Stowe stated taht the building is a financial burden and is currently
costing $8,000 per month. He stated that he is trying to make the best of a bad
situation.
518
Mr. Stowe did say that he does not feel that M-1 zoning is appropriate for
this piece of property.
There was no public comment and Mr. Easter closed the public hearing.
Dr. Moore questioned the square footage in the basement. Mr. Stowe responded
that it is 12,000 square feet, and the total square footage of the building is 41,000
square feet.
Mr. Lindstrom questioned the indication of the Comprehensive Plan for this
property. Mr. Tucker replied that it is commercial type use, with some M-1 zoning
at the end of Berkmar.
Mr. Stowe pointed out that Phillips Building Supply is M-1 property.
Mrs. Diehl asked if the amendment as proposed by the staff is acceptable.
Mr. Stowe replied that it is.
Mr. McCann said that he realizes there is a hardship here, but why permit this in
the B-1 with a special permit when it is already permitted in the M-1. He did not
feel that it is necessary to amend the zoning text for 70 some people to come to work
on this property.
Mr. Huffman pointed out that a use of this type would relieve some of the
traffic problem in that area.
Mr. Gloeckner stated that with M-1 zoning on the property, though, all sorts
of uses that are more intensive could be located. He felt that what is being proposed
by Mr. Stowe is similar to the use across the street that no one probably has ever
even been aware is there - it is so unobtrusive.
Dr. Moore questioned why discriminate in favor of electronic components.
Mr. Gloeckner stated that he feels the use being proposed here is a clean type
industry.
Mr. Huffman said that what is being proposed is no more than Sears, Woolco, etc.
in their assembly uses.
Mrs. Diehl asked if the special permit could be limited to one floor of the
building. Mr. Payne felt that this could be accomplished.
Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of the following amendment:
Section 7-1-42(14). Receiving and storage of electronic components for distribution
including testing and limited assembly of premanufactured
components with hand tools and specifically excluding such tools
and uses as lathes, millwork, jigging, sheet metal work, punch
pressing, drop hammering, welding and foundry.
Mr. Huffman seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 6-3, with Dr. Moore,
Mrs. Graves, and Col. Washington dissenting.
M
sfc '5
SP-78-29. Caleb Stowe Associates, Ltd. has petitioned the Board of
Supervisors for receiving and storage of electronic components for
distribution including testing and limited assembly of premanufactured
components on 4.5 acres zoned B-1.
Mr. Tucker presented the staff report, noting that this goes along with
the zoning text amendment just approved by the Commission.
use
Mr. Lambert again stated that the developer feels this is a better by special
permitthan rezoning the property.
Since there was no public comment, Mr. Easter closed the public hearing.
Dr. Moore asked if this would be limited to a certain floor.
Mr. McCann said that if that is a condition, any expansion will require a
special permit over and beyond this one.
Mr. Stowe said that at this time he only has a committment on the lower floor
and does not even know if expansion will ever be necessary.
Mrs. Graves said that she prefers to have the special permit on more of the
property since that assures the county of knowing how the entire parcel is being used.
Mr. Huffman moved approval of the special permit subject to the following
conditions:
1. Staff review of Charlottesville Hardware site plan prior to occupancy by
any future tenants to insure adequate parking;
2. Staff approval of parking area expansion if necessary in future, restricted
however to the area delineated on Approved Plan.
Mr. McCann seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 8-1, with
Col. Washington dissenting.
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has adopted a resolution of intent
to amend the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to allow industrial parks in
Albemarle County.
Mr. Tucker presented the staff report briefly explaining the various provisions
of the ordinance. He said that he feels it to be a good ordinance which provides
flexibility. The County will be able to control the types of uses with this ordinance.
Mrs. Mary Lupton expressed some concern about the maximum intensive uses that
would generate a great deal of traffic.
Mr. Wendell Wood said that after looking at the ordinance as proposed, he is
sure it will never be used due to the expense to develop a park under these rules.
Mr. Tucker said that some of the specifics will not be addressed until the final
plan is done.
S2 0
Mr. McCann said that it would seem difficult to lay out an industrial park
until the specific uses are known. He felt that the county would be asking for a
lot if this ordinance were developed.
Mr. Tucker explained that the categories are broad.
Mr. McCann said that the developer will already be locked into the streets,
layouts, etc. with this.
Mr. Gloeckner said that he favors a provision for an industrial park; however
he feels there are many items impossible to determine in the early planning stages.
Mr. Wood advised the Commission that it is no problem to plan utilities from
the beginning, however a traffic analysis would be impossible.
Mr. Gloeckner said that a cross-section of the roads would be impossible.
Mr. Payne said that an easy solution would be to make the categories cumulative.
Mr. McCann said that the cost is prohibitive at the preliminary level, and
said that in his opinion all this can be controlled at the site plan level.
Dr. Moore felt that this ordinance would tie the developer down to certain
specifics.
Mr. Tucker said that specifics would not be addressed until the site plan level.
Mr. McCann said that some things cannot be legislated out of existence and he
sees a lot more trouble for those attempting to develop land in this county all the
time.
Mrs. Graves said that she sees the ordinance as a "give and take situation"
since the county will want to have certain controls if industrial development is permitted
such a scale.
Mr. Payne said that there are some differences in this type of rezoning to a
traditional rezoning. First, a general layout of the streets will come with this.
Secondly, this contemplates a mix of different types of uses all the way from the RTM
to the most intensive uses with a special permit. Furthermore, the plan for a PID
can be amended and there are no provisions for waivers in a conventional rezoning.
In a conventional rezoning, there is no limitation on the various uses, and though
there is considerable control with the site plan ordinance some control does come with
a rezoning of property. There is now no minimum lot size in industrial zones and the
idea with this is developing raw land in an orderly fashion.
Mr. McCann said that he objects to a lot more controls by the county, and
especially in this case to a traffic analysis, which is certain to be impossible.
Dr. Moore pointed out that the developer is bound by nothing in a straight
rezoning.
Mr. Bob McKee said that he will point to how specific the ordinance is by
noting that it even calls for the caliper of trees on the preliminary.
Mr. Wood said that he would also like to know if off -site road improvements
will be required with this ordinance.
Mr. Lindstrom stated that it appears that phasing is important.
Mr. Tucker said that this ordinance forces some planning of a quality
nature, but some things like road improvements would certainly be determined
at the preliminary stage.
Mr. Easter stated that he approves of the concept, especially when dealing
with a large piece of land. And a mix of uses would also be a good idea. Another
good provision is that the plan could be amended and the cumulative concept from
his viewpoint is also a good idea. He did express considerable concern about a traffic
analysis.
Mr. McCann agreed that the concept is not that bad however pointed out that
he is not yet ready to vote on this proposed wording. Dr. Moore agreed that neither
is he. The Mr. McCann noted that whatever is going to be required in the way of
upgraded roads should be included in the ordinance, so that the developer will know
what is expected of him as well as all the adjoining property owners.
The Commission agreed that the following items should be addressed prior to
any adoption of the oridnance: the traffic analysis plan, the minimum acreage for a final
site plan, the idea of the cumulative categories, the minimum acreage for an industrial
park, and the off -site road improvements.
Mrs. Graves questioned the terms "ancillary uses" in the ordinance. Mr. Tucker
replied that such things as field storage, cafeterias, etc. would qualify as ancillary useE
Mrs. Diehl felt that the idea of developing woodlands, as in the Comprehensive
Plan, should be addressed.
Mr. Gloeckner said that he has concerns about the scale, the topographic
maps required and some of the other technical requirements that would be exorbitant
to obtain.
Mr. Wood suggested dropping the scale back after an application is at least 100
acres.
Mr. Gloeckner also stated that he is concerned about the general road alighnments,
sidewalks and pedestrian ways, sizing of lines ( since this depends on the category ).
Mr. Tucker felt it would be possible to handle these at the site plan level in terms
of use. Mr. Gloeckner also felt that a major schematic utility plan should not be binding.
Col. Washington suggested "primary alignment" of sewers be included in the wording.
After a brief discussion about the next public hearing on this matter, Mr.
Gloeckner moved that the amendments be deferred until .Tune 13, 1978, when the Commission
would discuss only the off -site road improvements. Col. Washington seconded this motion,
which carried unanimously, with no further discussion.
With no further business, the meo.ting�Acjourned It 11:05 p.m.
rt W. Tucker, Jr. -
19