HomeMy WebLinkAbout12 05 78 PC Minutes/3 z.
OR
December 5, 1978
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a regular meeting, December 5, 1978,
7:30 p.m., Third Floor, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members
present were Dr. James Moore; Mr. Charles Vest; Mr. Layton McCann; Mrs. Norma Diehl; Mr.
James Huffman; Mrs. Joan Graves; Mr. Kurt Gloeckner; Mr. Peter Easter, Chairman; and
Col. William Washington, Vice -Chairman. Other officials present we-e Mr. Ronald Keeler,
Assistant Director of Planning; Mr. Tim Lindstrom, Ex-Officio; Mr, Robert Tucker, Director
of Planning; and Mr. Fred Payne, Deputy County Attorney.
Mr. Easter established that a quorum was present and called the meeting to order
at 7:30 p.m.
The minutes of November 14, 1978 were approved as corrected.
WOODVALE LAND CORPORATION FINAL PLAT
Mr. Easter informed the Commission that Mr. Shaw -Kennedy, the applicant, had called
him to request deferral of his item.
Mr. Gloeckner moved for deferral.
Mr. Vest seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no further discussion.
SP-78-69. JOICE G. PAYNE has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to locate an
antique store on 3.79 acres zoned A-1. Property is located on the south side of the
intersection of Routes 231 and 600 at Cismont. County Tax Map 65, Parcel 31A, Rivanna
Magisterial District.
Mr. Keeler presented the applicant's request. Mrs. Payne, the applicant, was present
and had no comments.
Col. Washington asked if there was any on -site parking.
Mr. Keeler stated that at this time there was uncontrolled access to this property.
He noted that the`§taff is recommending that the Highway Department review the access to
this site. He also noted that the staff is requesting, approval of the parking layout and
lant', ;; L, .
14r. Easter noted that he thought a site plan was usually required for a special
permit of this nature.
Mr. Keeler stated that the Commission has given the staff the authority to approve
parking layouts in t':a oast -
Mr. Tucker stated that the Commission could delete conditions 1 and 2 and require
a site plan.
Mrs. Diehl asked if the staff approves this site plan will a site plan be submitted.
Mr. Gloeckner commented that a site plan will be on file and that the only difference
l3 3
will be that the staff approved the plan, instead of the Commission.
Ms. Fields, property owner, stated that this property has a larger parking area,
in front, which extends along the side of Route 600. She noted the parking to the
side is marked and the front area is used by customers at the Service Station. She
stated that there has never been a problem with the Highway Department concerning the
access to this property.
Mr. Payne stated that if the Ordinance requires a site plan and the Commission is
relying upon it, there is no problem. A site plan will have to be submitted. He also
noted that he has not studied this location, but it seems there is adequate parking space
and the complete frontage of the property is an entrance.
Mrs. Graves asked that since this area was formerly used for storage and was now
proposed as a business would this be an additional use.
Mr. Payne noted that this would not be considered an additional use, just a change
in use.
Mr. McCann moved for approval with the following conditions:
1. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of controlled access to
the site;
2. Staff approval of parking layout and landscaping;
3. No outdoor display of merchandise;
4. No auctions;
5. Approval of appropriate state and local agencies;
6. Sign sizes to comply with Article 13, Scenic Highways.
Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion.
r-)l. Washington stated this site is located at a crossroads and he has always felt
crossroads are a traffic problem. He noted that he would like.some assurance that this
site will be put to good use and be safe.
Mr. McCann's motion carried unanimously, with no further discussion.
SP-78-70A. JANET SCHUYLER BROAN ha.s.petit.ioned the Board of Supervisors to locate a
commercial kennel on 22.38 acres zoned A-1. Property is located on the northwest side of
Route 231 at Saddle Pond Farm in Cismont (at intersection of Routes 231 and 22). County
Tax Map 65, Parcel 12A.
Mr. Keeler presented the applicant's request. Ms. Broan, the applicant, was present.
Mr. Keeler noted that the applicant proposes 8" cement block for insulation of the
walls. He noted that building plans have been submitted, but the Building Inspector has
not had a chance to review them at this time.
Col. Washington asked who is the owner of the buffer strip.
Ms. Broan noted that she does not know who owns this property, but has been trying
to locate them.
Mrs. Graves asked if these hours of operation are the same as the hours placed on
previous Special permits for kennels.approved.
/.3 V
Mr. Keeler noted that he had pulled files on previous submittals and he believed
these hours correspond with hours of operation placed by the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Huffman moved for approval with the following conditions:
1. Hours of operation from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Dogs shall be kept in soundproof
building at all other times;
2. Limited to not more than 30 dogs, including dogs owned by applicant;
3. Soundproofing of the kennel so that sound emitted between 6:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m.
shall not exceed 40 decibels at the nearest property line (40dB is the average noise
level of a residential area at night);
4. Staff approval of site plan including Virginia Denartment of 'ighways and 12ransportation.
approval of entrance;
3. Approval of other appropriate state and local agencies;
6. Site plan approval;
7. Sign sizes in accordance with Article 18 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. McCann seconded the motion.
Mrs. Graves amended the motion to delete condition #4, since #4 and 46 conflict
concerning approval of a site plan.
Mr. McCann seconded the amended motion, which carried unanimously, with no further
discussion.
SP-78-70. CHARLOTTESVILLE-ALBEMARLE RESCUE SQUAD AND SEMINOLE TRAIL VOLUNTEER FIRE
DEPARTMENT have petitioned the Board of Supervisors to locate a fire and rescue station
on 3.3 acres zoned B-1 Business. Property is located on the west side of Berkmar Drive
approximately 1000 feet north of Route 29 North. County Tax Map 61-M-U, Parcels 12-1.
Mr. Keeler presented the annlicant's request. Mr. Lynch represented the applicants.
Mr. Gloeckner questioned whether the staff is recommending the extension of CommonwealtY
Drive through this site because the Comprehensive Plan recommends it or if the Comprehensive
Plan should be amended to show Commonwealth extended to Rior Road.
Mr. Keeler stated that the reason an alternative was given is because the residents of
Berkley and Four Seasons did not think extending Commonwealth Drive would be very advanta-
geous to them.
Mrs. Diehl asked if the Fire Department's request for Bingo would come to the Planning
Commission before going to the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Keeler noted that Bingo would go straight to the Board of Supervisors, who issue
the permit for this use, and would not come before the Planning Commission.
Mr. Easter asked if this is similar to permits issued for carnivals and circuses, that
also don't come before the Commission.
Mr. Payne stated that Bingo is included under a different State statute than these
other uses.
Mr. Lynch stated that the Fire House plans to have a community room, which will be
used by the public as well as the fire department. He noted that Bingo is the only means
the fire department has of raising funds. He also stated that the amount of parking is
required by the County and they will make every effort to save as many trees as possible.
135
He stated that the access is for one way traffic only and will be used for emergencies
only.
Mr. Nichols, an adjoining property owner, stated that he is not opposed to the
fire department, but he is opposed to bingo. He noted that he is concerned about
property values and feels the residents of Berkley are being discriminated against,
because they must bear the burden of the fire department and their bingo operations.
Mrs. Nichols, an adjoining property owner, stated that one of their neighbors just
bought their home and had told her that they would never have'brought'it,.'if they heLd
known bingo would be played at their backdoor. Mrs. Nichols also noted that the access -
road would go directly by their bedroom window.
Mr. Gloeckner noted that the Commission should discuss whether Commonwealth Drive
should be extended through Berkley or co through to Rio Road.
only. Dr. Moore noted that he would favor this extension being used by emergency vehicles
Mr. McCann stated that he would be in favor of extending Commonwealth Drive. He
commented that this would keep traffic from having to enter Rt. 29 when going from Rio
Road to Berkley.
Mr. Easter stated the he is very sympathetic with the residents of Berkley, but
this parcel is large enough to accomodate this use. He noted that there appears to be
three alternatives to the problem with the access and they are public access, emergency
access or no access.
Mr. Lynch noted that they intend to control access by having a gate which would_
operate on remote control.440)
Mr. Easter asked the Commission if they felt this access should be public.
site. Mrs. Graves noted that she does not feel that a public road could run through this
Mr. Payne noted that if this access has been dedicated any control on access would
have to be at the applicant's property line.
Mr. Gloeckner asked what the applicants' plans for road improvements are.
Mr. Lycnh noted that they plan to improve the road up to their property line.
He stated that they do not own the remainddr of the access and it is currently wooded.
Mr. Easter asked how the staff could recommend an access if someone else owns the
property.
Mr. Tucker noted that this is public land and is not privately owned.
Mr. Easter stated that the Commission then would have the right to recommend this
access.
Mr. Tucker noted that they do have this authority.
Mr. Cochran, representative of the Rescue Squad, stated that the Rescue Squad
needs this access very badly. He stated that they have a heart unit, which is badly
in need of this easy access, since the first five minutes of a heart attack are the
most important in saving a person's life.
Mr. Easter stated that the County does not have money to improve roads and if the
Fire Department and Rescue Squad need this road they will have to work out something
between the two of them to get this road improved.
Mrs. Graves suggested that condition 3 be changed to say "as an emergency exit only."
Mr. Gloeckner suggested that it read "either/or" since the access will be needed.
Mrs. Diehl asked what would happen if nothing was decided about this access.
Mr. Tucker informed her that if something is not worked out the applicants. would
have to come back in with an amendment to the special permit.
Mrs. Graves asked if hours were placed on the Scottsville Volunteer Fire Department
limiting the hours for Bingo.
Mr. Keeler noted that the Board of Supervisors dropped the staff's recommendations.
Mrs. Graves suggested 10:30 as a suitable hour for Bingo to end.
Mrs. Diehl noted that the type of screening was not specified in condition 1.
Mr. Keeler noted that this condition is placed on special permits so the applicant
will be aware that screening is required.
Mr. McCann moved for approval with the following conditions:
1. Site plan approval to include screening at rear of site;
2. Use of sirens only when necessary;
3. Access to Commonwealth Drive will be for emergency use only;
4. Operation of Bingo will end at 10:30 p.m.
Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no further
discussion.
SP-78-68. JOE PRICE & JEFFERSON CABLE CORPORATION has petitioned the Board of
Supervisors for public utilities and a river crossing in the area of Kankaskia Court
in Key West Subdivision. The 110.107 acres involved is zoned A-1 and is identified as
County Tax Map 62, Parcel 17; and County Tax Map 62B(1).
Mr. Keeler presented the applicant's request. Mr. Price, the applicant, was present.
Mr. Price stated that Jefferson Cable has received a number of requests for residents
of Key West for cable service. They propose to use existing poles to the point the cable
would cross the river. He noted that their proposal would cause very litte site damage
and there will be no removal of trees. He also noted that he does not have much expertise
in carrying a cable under the river bed, but he feels it would be a very expensive venture.
Mrs. Graves asked if there is a sewer line crossing the river in this area.
Mr. Huffman noted that the sewer line for Squire Hill crosses the river, but it is
further north.
Mrs. Diehl asked if anyone had figures on the expense of ,underwater crossing of
/:3.7-
cables. (No one had any estimates of cost.)
Mrs. Diehl noted that she would support either of the staff's alternative methods
of crossing the river, but doesn't agree with making a new crossing on the river, since
cable is not a necessary use.
Mrs. Graves asked if the easement for the cable would go along Pen Park Drive and
then through the park.
Mr. Price noted that the cable would be along the telephone -poles to the north of
Pen Park to Jackson Village and then run underground.
Mr. Gloeckner stated that he would support running the cable under a stream, but
this is a major river, in a flood zone,- and this would be an expensive installation. He
noted that running the cable over the river is the best alternative in this situation.
Mr. Gloeckner moved for approval.
Mr. Vest seconded the motion.
Mrs. Diehl stated that she could not support the motion, because another crossing
is not essential.
Dr. Moore noted that he agreed with Mrs. Diehl.
Mrs. Graves made a subsitute moticn to defer this item for one week, in order to
check into the location of the sewer line crossing the river.
Mrs. Diehl seconded the motion, which carried with a 6-3 vote. Mr. McCann, Mr.
Gleockner and Mr. Huffman dissented.
Mr. Price noted that he has looked in to other methods of running the cable. He
stated that the sewer line is further north and would not be economically feasible.
ZMA-78-19. W.`,W. STEVENSON & ALTON F. MARTIN have petitioned the Board of Supervisors
to rezone 32.6 acres - 19.0 acres to B-1 Business and the remainder to R-2 Residential.
Property is located on the west side of Route 29 North just north of the Rio Road and Route
29 intersection. County Tax Map 45, Parcel 94.
Mr. Keeler presented the applicant's request. Mr. Bain, the applicant's representative
was present.
Mr. Bain noted that the applicant presented a plan similar to this in September, which
was not approved. He noted that this plan allows for increased commercial use, which ties
in with other uses in this area. He also stated that this rezoning request corresponds
with the Comprehensive Plan. He commented that. a traffic study in this area would be on-
going and does not believe this rezoning would generate the traffic that was stated_ in the
staff report.
Dr. Moore asked if the changes in this request are enough to warrant bringing
this item back in less than a year.
1. O
Mr. Keeler noted that the original application requested rezoning of 26 acres to
commercial and 6+ acres to R-3 Residential. He noted that the change in traffic counts
would justify bringing the request back in.
Mr. McCann stated that he would support this rezoning. He noted that this area
is currently used commerically and believes commercial uses should remain in this
area.
Mrs. Graves stated that she could not support this request, since the Comprehensive
Plan calls for limiting congestion in the streets, which this rezoning would not do.
She commented that she is not opposed to the rezoning of A-1 to R-2, because of the Urban
Residential Growth.
Mr. Gloeckner moved for approval of the rezoning as requested. by the,_,applicant.
Mr. McCann seconded the motion, which carried with a vote of 6-3. Mrs. Diehl,
Dr. Moore and Mrs. Graves dissented.
SP-78-73. R. REYNOLDS COWLES, JR., has petitioned the Board of Supervisors for a
professional office on 65 acres zoned A-1. Property is located on the northeast side of
Route 667, approximately 2.5 miles from Route 665. County Tax Map 17, Parcel 35E.
Mr. Keeler presented the applicant's request. Dr. Cowles, the applicant, was present.
ir. Cowles noted that this office would be used for on -call visits only. He also
stated that Mr. Dick, Zoning Administrator, advised him to apply as a professional office
as it would be more applicable. He also stated that there would not be a noticeable
increase in traffic.
Mr. Huffman moved for approval with the following conditions:
1. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of entrance;
2. Amendment of this permit shall be required for on -site treatment and/or on -site
treatment facilities.
Mr. Vest seconded the motion.
Col. Washington stated that he had no question about the concept, but feels if this
operation turns into a hospital then it would be a different matter.
Mr. Huffman's motion carried unanimously, with no further discussion.
Im
9
009
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 5, 1978
Members present: Dr. James Moore; Mr. Charles Vest; Mr. Layton McCann; Mrs. Norma
Diehl; Mr. James Huffman; Mrs. Joan Graves; Mr. Kurt Gloeckner; Mr. Peter Easter,
Chairman; and Col. William Washington, Vice -Chairman.
The Albemarle County Planning Commission has adopted a resolution of intent to
amend Article 17 of the Zoning Ordinance to provide for administrative approval
of certain site plans; and a resolution of intent to amend Chapter 18 (Land
Subdivision and Development Ordinance) of the Albemarle County Code to provide
for administrative approval of certain subdivision plats.
Mr. Keeler: "We reviewed the Planning Commission comments from October 31, when this
was last considered and concern . was expressed over notification of the
public and over staff approval of subdivisions. (Mr. Keeler reads staff
report.in to record.) The obvious problem with that is the applicant puts
the signs up and someone else takes the signs down and we will just have
to deal with that, if that occurs. Also in here, where we are talking
about public notice wesare recommending an amendment to Section 17-3-2,
to delete the requirement of notification for site plans by registered
or certified mail. in that fashion we will'be able to reduce the site
plan fees. For example now, if someone comes in to locate four dwellings
on ten acres, as rental units., the site plan fee is $100.00. With this
reduction in mailing cost, we would be able to reduce this fee to $75.00.
Then, there would be other reductions in.fees in here too. For subdivision
approval four lots out of ten acres now, four lots out of any acreage,
for a preliminary plan and final plan approved by the Commission would be
$83.00. Under staff approval proposal it would be $38.00. So there
would be -a savings there. That is not the total savings that the applicant
would obviously realize. He would also realize a savings of coming before
the Commission, sitting with his surveyor and attorney until his item came
up on the agenda. It would also save that. (reads from staff report)
Now, if you take item 4 by itself and don't permit staff approval you'll
greatly increase the Planning Commission's time devoted to site plans and
subdivisions."
Mr. Gloeckner: "You want the preliminary plat so you will know what you are coming
up against?"
Mr. Keeler: "So hopefully we can........"
Mr. Gloeckner: "Cut your work down."
Mr. Keeler: "Cut our work down, cut the expense down to the applicant....."
Mr. Gloeckner: "Essentially, now, what you are asking for is two submittals."
Mr. Keeler: "That is correct."
Mr. Gloeckner: "Instead of one."
Mr. Keeler: "If there are three lots or more and the amended Section 18-13(a), Subdivision
Ordinance, would read as follows...... (reads from staff report). The
remainder of the amendments you all have had for some time now."
m
rn
Em
Im
In
VM
/ q c,
M
Mr. Easter: "Alright, does that conclude your presentation?"
Mr. Keeler: "Yes, Sir."
Mr. Easter: "Mr. Tucker, do you have any remarks you want to make on this?"
Mr. Tucker: "No, Sir, Ron has covered everything on this I think."
Mr. Easter: "Any questions of Mr. Keeler?"
Dr. Moore: "A couple of questions. Under the existing administrative approval of three
lots how many have been approved by the staff?"
Mr. Keeler: "I have no idea, Sir." Do you mean in 1978?"
Dr. Moore: "Well, whatever period you have available."
Mr. Keeler: "Well, I didn't review it;"
Mr. Easter: "Do you think it will be a greater figure or a lesser figure than .......
Would you approve a lot more with under three than ......"
Mr. Tucker: "That's all we have the power to approve is three or less."
Mr. Easter: "Yeah, well, what I'm getting at is there more of those .... considerably
more of those than the number the Commission has dealt with?"
Mr. Keeler: "I think that's very difficult to say. I would be really hesitant.to guess
at that, some weeks we may not have any administrative approvals and other
weeks we may have three or four plans a day submitted for approval."
Dr. Moore: "A couple of years ago, this same type of approval was studied and at that
time the study seem to indicate that there wouldn't be enough non -controversial
situations so that any significant amount of time would be saved. Do you
feel that something is different now than that study showed."
Mr. Keeler: "No, I feel that on the 19th you will probably look at 12 site -,plans and
subdivisions and that the meeting will go until after 11:00."
Dr. Moore: "About how many of those would have gone through administrative approval
without any controversy?"
Mr. Keeler: "If you want to assume that half of them are subdivisions that would be
six and 75% of six would be five subdivisions that would be onythat
agenda that you probably would look at under this proposal. Five out of
twelve items, I would think would reduce the time spent on it."
Mrs. Diehl: "You are assuming that there was no questions on those five items."
Mr. Keeler: "Beg your pardon."
Mrs. Diehl: "You are assuming that there were no questions on those five, because, if...."
Mr. Keeler: "I don't know what you mean by questions, Commission questions?"
Mrs. Diehl: "No, citizen input, if citizen's requested a review. You are assuming that
no review was requested."
cm
en
m
005
En
P+i
Mr. Keeler: "I'll totally confused by this now. I was trying to speak to the time
you would save. Oh, right, that would be a maximum of 75% reduction,
but I think as Mrs. Shatz indicated to you that its not very often that
the City has appeals, and you might think back on this in your own mind,
how many subdivision plats under ten lots has there really been a lot
of public discussion on recently. The Commission discusses them but the..."
Mr. Gloeckner: "It's hard to compare because we have never really given the staff the
leverage to get what the County is desiring. So, we might do away with
a lot,of subdivisions and site plans if we would give Bob the authority
to.... we give him all of the responsibility and the Board puts a
tremendous amount of pressure on the staff, but it seems to me they don't
allow the authority to go with the responsibility. Especially when the
staff is in my opinion highly professional and more qualified than the
Board of Supervisors or the Planning Commission in many cases. I think
its hard to compare what we would see and what we wouldn't see, because
we have never really given Bob the authority to use his authority."
Mrs. Melcher: (League of Women Voters: read a letter into record; attached.)
Mr. Easter: "Your organization is to be complimented for the time you have spent
monitoring the affairs of the County and as you sit here in these
meetings don't you worry over the fact that the Commission can not
see the forest for the trees? We discuss something like a dumpster
for a � hour when we should be doing some long range planning, that we
don't have time to do.'"
Mrs. Melcher: "I'm afraid the League has the same problem. It's a problem we have
here in the County, simply because of the tremendous amount of growth
I�N,.,r in this area. Because of this very problem and because of the amount
of pressure that is on the planning staff, we feel a great amount of
security in having an appointed board reviewing these things."
Mrs. Moore: "I feel that sometimes individuals are hesitant to have to go up hill on
an appeal. I believe that they would like to have a forum to hear them
on up."
Mr. Payne: "on the amendments to the site plans there are two provisions that are
specifically worded to provide for decisions to be -made by -the Planning
Commission. The two -are decisions involving sidewalks and decisions
involving improvement of adjacent public roads. I think that simply
by oversight these were not covered in this draft. I would suggest
that simply one sentence would take care of the problem, as far as
the language is concerned. The second thing, as Mr. Keeler, pointed
out, on 17-3-2, he is suggesting that you eliminate the requirement
for registered or certified mail and when this was done, originally
in 1975, it was done to contact the Statute requirements for certified
mail. Since then the Statue has been amended to permit notification
by first class mail under appropriate circumstances. I would suggest
that it would be a good change, whether you wanted administrative
approval or not."
Mr. Easter: "I think that would be great. I know they sneak in after hours and
leave you a note that you have some registered mail and then you have
to drive out to the Post Office, five or six miles, which is only open
certain hours and you get your certified mail three days later than
first class mail."
cm
M
E5
m
M
M
Mrs. Graves: "The Code as I understand it, calls for an affadivit to be signed
by the person sending out the mail and I would like to see that
included in the Ordinance."
Mr. Keeler: "The Code has no requirements for notification of a site plan."
Mr. Payne: "I don't see where there is any real significance in this. If you want
an affidavit requirement on this you certainly can, but I don't
think its required."
Mrs. Graves: "I think the public would feel better knowing that the list of people
who have been notified is a true and proper list."
Mrs. Diehl: "It doesn't seem to be that much of a problem. If someone comes in
raising a fuss about not being notified the staff could pull out this
list that has been notarized."
Mr. Easter: "You would keep a list of who you sent them to whether it is an
notarized affidavit or not?"
Mr. Tucker: "We do that for subdivisions. They are sent first class, but it isn't
notarized."
Mr. Lindstrom: "To what extent to the minimum requirements for a site plan in the
proposed ordinance compare to the current ordinance?"
Mr. Tucker: "They are basically the same. They have taken some things out because
they have taken some provisions that were in the planned development
sections and they have listed some requirement for site plan in a
'40- planned development, light industry, etc. except for the site plan
requirements in that section. Then they have a standard site plan
ordinance section, that is very similar to our Article 17."
Mr. Lindstrom: "I know the reason for doing this is to give the Commission more
time to do other things, but what I would like to know is what
are some of these other things the Commission could be doing?"
Mr. Tucker: "The Commission has dealt very litte with the CATS proposal. Norma is
very interested Captial Improvement plan, we look at it one night
for maybe 1� hour. We have to wait until there are five Tuesdays in a
month to have a work sesssion."
Mr. Gloeckner: "How about the never ending review of the Comprehensive Plan. We
just spent how many thousand dollars on consultants. Assuming that
we take all of it, or part of it, I don't feel the County should
have to hire consultants every five or six years, whenever this thing
needs to be redone. That continuing look is what I consider planning.
As far as I'm concerned the Planning Commission does absolutely no
planning."
Mr. Keeler: "Kurt, that's an excellent example. We have been meeting with the
neighborhood committees during the day"fQr:the past year or so and coming
in here at night with site plans and subdivisions, when you could be doing
some planning with the citizens at night."
Mr. Lindstrom: "The time that is spent on site plans and subdivisions is time that is
completely within your discretion. You don't need to spend a � hour
locating a dumpster. If this is a matter you are willing to relinquish
0
In
to the staff isn't this a matter you would only have to take five minutes
on instead of 30 minutes. Isn't the time you have to devote to planning
reduced because you are unwilling to discipline yourself?"
Mr. Gloeckner: "You have nine people each with a different idea,and each expert in his
own field trying to decide where a dumpster is going when we've got
much more qualified people to decide that sort of thing. We get bogged
down in technical items that we don't need to discuss in here. Many
times items come in here and everyone sits looking at each other wondering
who's going to speak first and they speak simply because there is dead
silence.
Mr. Easter: "We have a staff, with working with them for the past five years, I have
a great regard for them. They have a great deal of experience and are
certainly looking out for the good of this County. I think we are under-
cutting them to the point that the County is only benefiting from about
50% of the good that we could from just their experience and qualifications.'
Mr. Gloeckner: "There are certain things that if Bob had the responsibility and the
authority, that he could request certain items and he could get them
because time wise the developer would rather spend the money on the
item Bob is requesting than waste the money sitting around dickering
with the Planning Commission or the Board. Right now they are doing
this because they won't give Bob anything because they know they
are coming here to dicker with us and usually they end up getting more
than if Bob had the authority to ask for things and administer those."
Mr. Huffman: "We were confronted tonight with a rezoning, which according to staff the
business corridor is over zoned, but this particular request was in
r.r compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Now, if this situation exists in
the County this body here should be doing something about it.
Mrs. Diehl: "We did talk about the paper notice and did ask if this could be included
in the ordinance and it's not included here, which doesn't bother. me, if it
is stated somewhere that we will have that policy of having that ]a page
advertisement.
Mr. Gloeckner: "Do you feel that we are doing enough planning?"
Mrs. Diehl: "I would like to do some more planning. I would like very much to work
on the Capital Improvements Program and some of the other planning items
that we by time neglected, but at the same time I don't want to neglect
any of the duties we have to the public."
Col. Washington: "You have to give the team the ball to run with or they are not going
any where. What I'm saying is put it on the agenda. I don't know
that we have failed to act on items that we have been scheduled for.
Sometimes we defer them for two or three meeting, but we get to them.
I think we can do more planning than we've been doing and it doesn't
necessarily follow that you have to get rid of site plans and subdivisons
to do it. I'm reluctant to change something unless I can see the benefit
of the change. Saying Bob has the responsibility, but not the authority
I would like to draw you out on that a little bit, because I don't
know what authority you are lacking. How are we under cutting you?"
'*..r
Mr. Easter: "One of the things I think is being referred to, is all these items that are
tacked on to the end of the agenda where they layout a building a coun'- of
feet from what the site plan says, that seens to run in bunches.
cm
cm
LJ
14.
I believe the staff doesn't have the authority to decide on their own and to me
that is a terrible inefficent process. On something like that Bob Tucker and his
staff are more qualified to make the judgement on that than any of us sitting here
except Kurt."
Mr. Gloeckner: "The reason I say that is, I've dealt with the Huja, at the City, and
that's a whole different ball game. When you deal with Huja if you
don't have something on there...... Mrs. Shatz said there system was
working very well and for the most part Huja has the power to aske-
for a great deal more than the ordinance calls for. Because of that
power he usually gets what he wants. Right now they know that Bob
can not make a decision, so they are going to hold out for everything."
Mrs. Diehl: "I had another question. I quess it will refer to 17-7-7. Which speaks
to Board review, that any aggrieved person can agrieve to if they are
agrieved by a decision of the Planning Commission. Unless I have missed
it in the reading, there is no such provision for a person who is aggrieved
by staff administrative decision.
Mr. Payne: "I think the answers right here. I think its in 17-7-5: "The Director of
Planning determines if the plan is in compliance with the Article and there
is no written objection from any citizen...." then he approves it. You get
your opportunity to object to it before he approves it. If there is an
objection to him approving it, he doesn't approve it; it goes directly to
the Planning Commission.
Mr. Lindstrom: "I feel it would be a better legal certainty if the appeal is from the
written instead of from the decision itself. There is a slight
theoretical gap there."
Mrs. Diehl: "But you are not adding a step. You see because if Bob sents it up to us
and they don't like our decision, then they can go ahead and appeal on
our decision, but there is no provision here, if he approves it there is
no mechancism built in whereby they can appeal it. I don't think that's
right.
Mr. Payne: "Well, that perfeptly consistent with every other scheme of appeal' in_:the
legal system."
Mr. Vest: "My concern is I have noticed here that many decisions are contrary to staff -
recommendations and I think some of these recommendations are very good ones.
I think we have made them look kind of shabby at times in front of the
developers."
Dr. Moore: "I don't see that anything has changed since our previous study of this
problem. At that time I regarded it as part of our public duty to consider
these things and I think that many of the site plans and subdivision that
come in here to, we take care of these in a few minutes and they don't
really add up to that much time. I think to, that the period of distrust
in the government procedure hasn't been too long ago and I think just one
mistake would return us to the same level of distress."
Mr. McCann: "I have supported this from the very begining and there have been a lot
of changes since this thing was started.
With the safeguards built in with the call up by the adjacent owners.
I don't see any real problem with it. I still think we are going to
get the ones that we have problems with now and just the easy ones
cm
In
In
Lon
M
I`fs
09
we would just past on, Bob should be able to make the decision on. This
is a stream line system that will sale time for the staff and will give us
more time for other things and will safe money. "
Mrs. Graves: "I want to make it clear that my concern with our keeping this method
we have now is not because of the professional or personal deficiency
in the staff I feel, I feel we owe it to the public. That's what we
were appointed for and we serve a very good role as a backup to the
staff."
Mr. Easter: "I would suggest this. I think the ....I want to recommend that motion
be made and you either vote it up or down on the philosophy of this thing."
Mr. Huffman: I made a motion that we vote for the concept of administrative
approval of site plans."
Mr. Gloeckner: "Second." (There were three no votes: Col. Washington, Dr. Moore and
Mrs. Graves.)
Mr. Easter: "Now let's take the same motion regarding subdivisions."
Mr. Huffman: "So move."
Gloeckner: "Second." (There were four no votes: Mrs. Deihl, Col. Washington, Dr. Moore
and Mrs. Graves.)
Mrs. Graves: "Section 17-7-1. I would like a member of the Soil Conservation Service
to be a member of the Site Review Committee. on 17-7-2, I would like
something settled as to whether the public will be able to participate
in Site Review."
Mr. Gloeckner: "I thought that was the idea, that we were going to let them do that
if we had administrative approval."
Mrs. Graves: "Are the Commissioners going to be on a rotating basis like it is now
or is the Chairman going to designate two permanent members?"
Mr. Gloeckner: "I don't see the necessity of it namely because I can't go to them."
Dr. Moore: "I'm going to have to suggest that we move it to evening. There has been
quite a lot of public comment about the public not being able to get in
for these daytime meetings."
Mr. Gloeckner: "You can't get the other people there."
Mrs. Graves: "17-6-5 about which speaks to revisions. I want to know if these revisions
will go to site review committee. I think its important that adjacent
owners get notified of these revisions to site plans."
Mr. Gloeckner: "I think we are just taking the authority away from Bob. If you don't
want him to have it say so."
Mrs. Graves: "But he's supposed to be advised by the Site Review Committee and some of
these revisions might make a difference."
v4w,,,, Mrs. Graves: "In 17-7-4, when will the adjacent owner know that site plan is in its
final form? "
Mr. McCann: "If they are really interested they would probably be in the first day."
fir': *400
1 *,
Mrs. Graves: "Will requests for modifications be considered objections."
Mr. Easter: "If Bob got a request for something like additional buffering, if he
`%wr° couldn't work it out with the applicant, he would knew if it needed to
come before us."
Mrs. Graves: "Under specific items to be shown reads as follows: "Signature panels
shall be provided for the Chairman and the Secretary of the Albemarle
County Planning Commission;" I'd like to see them signed personally added
to that. Because it is ridiculous to add a signature panel for someone
who's not going to sign. I know it's been an excepted thing. In the
past the Director of Planning has signed the Planning Commission's name
but I don't think that ought to continue."
Col. Washington: "How does the neighbor or adjoining property owner know that Bob has
approved site plan?"
Mr. Tucker: "The only way you would know is by coming in and reviewing the plan. It's
the only way he knows if you have approved anything."
Col. Washington: "If they come, they hear us vote 5-3 or whatever it is. They know
whatever action we took. How do they know what action you took,
because they hadn't been any public meeting."
Mr. Payne: "One way to solve that problem would be to put a time limit on the
Director of Planning; five days after the Committee's action or three
days. The problem with that is if you have a hot problem that is not in
compliance and he says go fix it, then the Surveyor really has to hop to
fix it."
Dr. Moore: "Coming back to this evening meeting business, I think the public has
many times said that a daytime meeting, in which in this case, would be
the only public input is not adequate for proper public exposure. I
think if we go with this plan it should be evening meeting."
Mr. Gloeckner: "I've heard it the other way around. People don't like sitting here
at night. They don't mind going with their officials when its working
hours, but they have to pay them time and a half to sit here at night.
I'm not talking about the applicant's and the surveyors, the general
public doesn't want to sit here until midnight."
Mr. Easter: "Ladies and Gentlemen, what I want to recommend is that we get Mr. Payne
and Mr. Tucker to commit these changes to writting and bring them back
to us.
Mr. Tucker: "If it's the consensus of the Commission to have a night meeting, we're
talking about this technical committee they're not voluntary. Sometimes
it's difficult to get them to come to the day meeting."
Dr. Moore: "This is no longer a technical meeting, its a public meeting now."
Mr. Tucker: "I'm talking about the members of these various organizations. "
Mr. Payne: "What I think Mr. Tucker is saying, is that no one in the County has the
authority to order these people to show up."
Mrs. Diehl: "If it's impossible to have these meeting in the evening, what procedure
On
cm
in
CM
147
`e
could we use to see that all the information gets to the interested parties
that couldn't get in that day."
Mr. Easter: "Do all those people submit written reports?"
Mr. Tucker: "Yes, I think they do."
Mr. Tucker: "They come into our office or call and we could send them the written
comments that people have recommended. That's the only way I could
think of to get the information to people who did not come in for the
meeting."
Mr. Easter: "Ladies and Gentlemen, don't you think in view of the hour, don't you think
the only thing to do is to have Mr. Tucker and Mr. Payne bring this thing
back in with the changes I believe we have agreed upon. Don't the changes
in these two fairly track each other?"
Mr. Gloeckner moved to defer both administrative approval of site plans and subdivisions
for one week.
Mr. McCann seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
There was no further discussion and the meeting adjourned at 12:20 a.m.
W. Tucker, Jr. - S
05
err err+''