Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06 18 79 PC MinutesM June 18, 1979 The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a work session on Monday, June 18, 1979, 4:00 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were Col. William Washington, Chairman; Mr. Layton McCann; Mr. James Skove; Mrs. Norma Diehl, Vice -Chairman; Mr. James Huffman; and Mr. Charles Vest. Absent were Mrs. Joan Graves; Dr. James Moore; Mr. Kurt Gloeckner; and Mr. Tim Lindstrom, ex-Officio. Other officials present were Mr. Robert Tucker, Director of Planning; Mr. Douglas Eckel, Senior Planner; and Mr. Frederick Payne, Deputy County Attorney. Col. Washington called the meeting to order after establishing a quorum was present. Mr. Tucker pointed to the map with the detailed water lines and installations and improvements in conjunction with the Capital Improvements Program. Mr. Keeler said that Priority 1 ( for one hydrant on Tax Map 62A1, with 400 feet of 6" line for an estimated cost of $6800 to serve 189 lots ) would benefit the entire system in this area and lots other than those served. Hydrants have been located in previous years in all cases. He said that of the priorities listed ( see attached sheet ) staff recommends funding for only priority #1. Mr. Ira Cortez, County Fire Official, said that he closely reviewed this list that morning and the remaining priorities don't justify the dollar expense in view of the fact that many areas in the county do not have public water available. Mr. McCann suggested appropriating no additional monies if there is Troney left over from the hydrant appropriation from previous years. Col. Washington said that he feels the Commission will still want to review the School Board portion of the Capital Improvements Program once they have completed the Education section of the CIP. Mr. Skove questioned if it is appropriate for the Commission to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that the Board proceed with funding for the Crozet Interceptor with EPA funding. Mr. Tucker said it might be better for the Commission to recommend the Board consider alternate funding. Mr. Skove replied that it is possible the EPA will never get around to funding the interceptor, or at least not until the 1980's. If growth in the Crozet area is encouraged, the interceptor is necessary. Mr. Tucker said that tertiary treatment plants could be an alternative to the interceptor. Mrs. Diehl agreed that she would like to stress alternative methods. The Commission agreed it would take action on the CIP, with the exception of the Education Department requests, on the following day. ,�56 Proposed textual change in proposed zoning ordinance: Mr. Tucker noted that the staff recommends the addition of 13.2.2, with regard to site plans, in the draft ordinance. Mr. Payne stated that this is a means of accommodating those people when a site plan is not really needed; this provision is infrequently used. Mr. McCann moved that 13.2.2 be included in the proposed text. Mr. Huffman seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. ( See attached sheet for addition. ) Mr. Tucker then addressed various alternatives for preparing the proposed zoning map: 1. Reestablish existing zoning with a comparable district from the proposed zoning text; 2. Use the adopted comprehensive plan's land use plans as the basis for establishing the proposed zoning map; 3. Use the more detailed urban neighborhood, community, and village land use plans ( although presently not adopted ) as proposed by each committee as the basis for the proposed zoning map; 4. Defer work on the proposed zoning map until the neighborhood, community, and village land use plans have been adopted as part of the County's comprehensive plan. He stated that the third alternative is what has been followed by the staff because it gives a more definitive basis for making land use decisions in terms of zoning while providing the most expeditious means for preparing the zoning map. However, after the previous work session he suggested the commission considering alternative four, though it would add one to two months to the zoning ordinance process. Col. Washington said that he would like to get the zoning text published so a public hearing can be held; however he would like this text to have a map to go along with it. He said it would be possible to complete the map in the Rural Residential and Agricultural -Forestry areas. The villages and urban areas could be done after completion of the neighborhood plans. That way the map could be completed and adopted at a later date. In Col. Washington's opinion the biggest issues are the AF, RR, and CVN designations on the map. Mr. Skove established that the neighborhood plans go through a public hearing process in order to amend the Comprehensive Plan. Mrs. Diehl liked the idea of dealing with a zoning map in totality. Mr. McCann said that prior to any public hearings on the text and map, the Commission should have a finished product to present. Col. Washington suggested advertising the various neighborhoods, communites and villages for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the upcoming Monday's. 451 • h F�• rt W 1r 1.2 N 1- A F3 Fa F+ M C� GAD C OD D ~ b 7C x x b • t� H C t " r 61 01. N 01 01 a� a1 O� a� c3D C to H m r • O y hi t" FJ F- F+ r: A v N J O N Ut N 0 t, 'yam o 0 In O O Ut O Ut O Om y �O H m it m It ID m CD (DD m (D (DD m w ct rtcct rt, rror R cct rror R cD H z tzj %o N F•+ F•• N Ut F+ 1-+ (/1 fA 0 M H a� a+ to w w A cn 0 w ON O rn z O W J O O - (n N Ut OD Dl rr W fr o O UI O O 0 0 0 0 rr r• y W \ o O O \ O O O O y o m \ \ \ r \ \ \ \ ro a r J N to %o o A a% Aa {A m rt 0 0 F, O N CD r OD w w t{ cD O Co N O O w O P. M a y a+ D, r O o O rr 0 z rr H m F+ H 0 O F= N w r F+ O < M o A J A N ul J M F+ %0 m C air ft W z y N rt H N M H H iP En H W H H n H H En H H rt "o Or rr H W O N- H 3 3 : G 3 cD 3 m 0 3 m 0 m 3 :r H. H P. 3 ICf DI v O N W 3 to 3 m b G En b F✓ a fn cD a 0 0 N N ww m e m wm °e pi 0 a w a ZI w a rt w a Al w tr0 PU X rt 0 F� 0 0 F+ r a rr 1-r 3 r 0 r n 0 0 r m 3 O 3. 1 r to F+ 3 0 F✓ H 1r W F+ W a r m 3 tD H 3 rt a to m r H N xi rt 3 3 01 cn m to a W a a rt r 0 = 0 r 0 .a W a M z N F, b 3' . N a J 3 0 1 a1 O N N F'• a a 0 07 rob a G r In E a J O w '3.' N O a N cn rt 3 P. H = m i+ a o �I+ a N o a v�l+ m a ►3 < rt b C O w cn rr a l+ o N H vi I+ I+ x m x a rt I+ Hf fD 3 a M = r I+ tr M rt N m N M O O M m m m /•� O M m rr cD CD tO 1-+ O m - m a H 3 m M M W m rt r- H m m£ m rt 0 3 n * O. rt m a H. m < ct O P. r• rr 3 H H m 0 3 0 m m rt rr m m rr O S F, O cn a rt m O b In a rr CO m M m 0 b 3 M so LG 0 1 n o 0 ro M o w z rt b N H M £ a o+ 3 G M m ON rr w E f•• N < A m H N O ON 0 _ m H N m P : 3 r• rt m 3 IO 1 • 0 0 m m ON : 0 : m H rt cn : H - m 3 m E w W H a am w a`w0r (D a£ o a N cr 0£ 5 w rr m ob rt ro O a rt H rr In m m a rt P. rt m G H O O H m N- rt m rt m H• m O H r• rt m H m H CT• rt F•• m m O • !A m H < H I+ f] O m H m H a O H (D r O O H N H. M£ rt a m 1-'• G a F+ ',d N N• < P. H. U) 3 (n r H' P. m 3 It F•• H. O H- 3 W m r a cn r F• 3 H 3 m m rr a P. 3 a 3 m 71 F 1 rt - a 0 3 m m m rr ;l m a m N• a O 3 O m ''C of P. m a 0 Ln a n a w + W 1-' f•- 0 0 - - a O ^ Art a a 3 a 3 M E a• 3 £ ra a a. :11 H< • 3 M O 0 3 1— m a 3 r m H a ro m O m w N H. rr O cn cn r m (D U) a (n ° 3 E H E m 3' G t-• C• < ct O r C m m 3 m 3 m b 03 H m �IYr►' (-) H r Ir E H -• m 'IQ m rr b : O In H 3 O a M< to m ,n a O H fY, H rt< 3 H. r m F•• 3 0 O O O H£ ;v N a rt o a m a n E o 3 rrrra 0 I+ H�u 0 3• 0 H m rt a •-3 a :F• q O rm O m Lb rt m 3 ,7 r a G H a r 0 O H a H- - ►� E H m H- Q,0 w G cn a m< 3 m IV 3 N r:C r rr t7 O rr m m M N m H a rt o r• O E W m H a H m H. f•• 3 0 t•• = fj P. a O 0 c (i 3 m a 1•. < M 8 m O ka 1 r X m � G 1-•• H 3 13.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 13.1 INTENT There is a mutual responsibility between the County of Albemarle and the developer to develop land in an orderly manner. The purpose of this section is to encourage innovative and creative design and facilitate use of the most advantageous techniques and highest standards in the development of land in Albemarle County; and to insure that land be used in a manner which is efficient, harmonious with neighboring property and in accordance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan for Albemarle County. 13.2 APPLICATION 13.2.1 A site development plan shall be submitted for any construction, use, change in use or other development in all zoning districts; provided that no such plan shall be required for the following: A. The construction or change in occupancy of any single-family detached dwelling unit which is located upon a tract or parcel whereon are located or proposed to be located an aggregate of two (2) or fewer such units; B. The location of a two-family dwelling on any lot or parcel not occupied by any other dwellings; C. Any accessory structure to a single-family or two-family dwelling; D. Any agricultural activity except as otherwise provided in 4.15. E. Any change in or expansion of a use except where the sale of gasoline is involved; provided that: (a) such change or expansion does not occasion additional parking under the requirements of this ordinance; (b) no additional ingress/egress or change in ingress/egress is recommended by Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation based on intensification of use; (c) no additional ingress/egress or alteration of existing engress/egress is proposed, 13.2.2 The foregoing notwithstanding, the Planning Commission may waive the requirement of a site plan in a particular case upon a finding that the requirement of such plan would not forward the purposes of this ordinance or otherwise serve the public interest; provided that no such waiver shall be made until the Commission has considered the recommendation of the Director of Planning. The Director may recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial of such waiver. In the case of conditional approval, the Director in his recommendation shall state the relationship of the recommended condition to the provisions of this section. No condition shall be imposed which could not be imposed through the application of the regulations of Section 13.0. M The Commission reached a consensus to advertise public hearings for the communities, etc. to be amendments to the Comprehensive Plan prior to working on the map and presentation of the text and map to the public. Mr. Tucker advised the Commission of the cost of a full page, both colored and black and white, in the Daily Progress for the zoning map. The cost of the color was $850 and $650 for the black and white photo. The Commission unanimously approved a black and white photograph of the map for the Daily Progress. With no further business, the Commission adjourned at 5:35 p.m. ash