Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07 17 79 PC Minutes0 July 17, 1979 The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on Tuesday, July 17, 1979, 7:30 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were Col. William Washington, Chairman; Mrs. 11orma Diehl, Vice -Chairman; Mr. James Huffman; Mr. Layton McCann; Mr. Charles Vest; Mr. James Skove; Mrs. Joan Graves and Mr. Tim Lindstrom, ex-Officio. Other officials present were Mr. Robert Tucker, Director of Planning; Mr. Ronald Keeler, Assistant Director of Planning; Mr. Frederick Payne, Deputy County Attorney; Mr. Doug Eckel, Senior Planner; Miss Mason Caperton, Planner; and Mrs. Idette Kimsey, Planner. Col. Washington called the meeting to order after establishing that a quorum was present. Miss Caperton presented a memo and cover sheet on Squirrel Ridge, noting that the preliminary plat was approved in June with a condition concerning the soil report. She asked the Commission if a separate overlay was desired showing the location of septic fields. Mrs. Graves stated she would like to have the overlay to get the relation- ship of the ravine to the septic fields. Col. Washington said he wants to see the relationship of the septic fields to the proposed lot lines as they are now. Capital Improvements Program Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. By unanimous vote, the Commission recommended to the Board of Supervisors that the Capital Improvements Program with respect to Education be approved as set forth in the attached staff report. SP-79-30. James and Lila P. Gibson to locate a mobile home on 4.28 acres zoned A-1. Property is located on the north side of Route 29 South approx- imately 1 mile northeast of the intersection of Routes 29 South and 745. County Tax Map 45, Parcel 15, Samuel Miller Magisterial District. Mr. Eckel presented the staff report, noting that the request is before the Commission because of an objection from an adjoining property owner. Mrs. Graves asked if the trees on the property were deciduous. Mr. Eckel answered yes. Mrs. Gibson explained that she wishes to move out of her large house and into a mobile home. She plans on having her son move into the house. Mr. MacWhitten, an adjoining property owner, stated that he lives next door and has had to furnish water to Mrs. Gibson for the past three years in the summer. ,3v5 Mrs. Gibson assured the Commission that a well is being dug and a septic system will be installed. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mrs. Diehl noted the fact that there are a number of old cars on the property that appear to be inoperable and asked what determination there is for them. She also noted that in the winter, the mobile home will be in full view. Mr. McCann moved for approval with staff's recommendations. Mr. Vest seconded. Discussion: Mrs. Graves stated there should be a third condition added to move the cars off the site. Mr. McCann replied that the zoning administrator would take care of the cars. Mr. Huffman noted that it is not up to the Planning Commission to decide on whether the cars are there legally or illegally. Mr. Skove agreed with Mr. Huffman. The motion was carried by a vote of 6-0-1 with Mrs. Graves dissenting. MORTON FROZEN FOODS, PARKING ADDITION SITE PLAN: Located on north side of Route 240 at Morton Frozen Foods in Crozet. Proposed parking lot and roadway for Morton employees. White Hall District. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report. Mr. Hall, representing the applicant, reported that Health Department approval is not needed. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mrs. Diehl moved for approval subject to the conditions as stated by staff. Mr. Vest seconded the motion which carried unanimously. WINDRIFT SECTION II PRELIMINARY PLAT: Located three miles northwest of Earlysville on the southeast side of Route 664. Property described as Tax Map 18, Parcel 21, part of, and 21D in the White Hall District. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report. Mr. Roger Ray, representing the applicant, reported the applicant will concur with recommendations of the staff. There was no public comment and Col. Washington closed the public hearing. 3�)6 Mrs. Graves asked if a slope analysis had been done. Mr. Ray replied that slopes above 25% is 6% of the entire area. Mrs. Graves asked if the roads will come under the runoff control ordinance. Mr. Keeler replied the roads must comply with the ordinance. Mr. Huffman moved for approval with Staff recommendations. Mr. McCann seconded. Discussion: Mrs. Graves stated another condition should be added stating Lot 28 and Lot 1 must enter on the internal road. Mr. Huffman accepted the amendment. The vote was unanimous for approval with amendment. THE CHURCH OF THE BLUE RIDGE FINAL PLAT: North side of Rt. 689 near Hillsboro. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report noting staff comment that frontage improvement should be limited to Lot 1 since lot "Y" will be a part of the adjacent property. Mr. Roger Ray, representing the applicant, stated "Y" will become a portion of Parcel 33C, tax map 71. The row of trees along the fence serves as a screen and if road improvements are done, it would destroy the screen of Lots 1, 2 and 3. On behalf of his applicant, Mr. Ray requested the requirement of frontage improvement on Lot 1 be deleted. Mrs. Graves asked if the trees were on the highway right-of-way. Mr. Ray replied yes, as 25 feet had been dedicated to the highway and the trees are 15 feet from the centerline. Mr. Ralph Taylor, an adjacent property owner, asked if there would be an increase in traffic flow on Rt. 688 due to the church. Mr. Keeler replied that the rear parcel may be used for a church but that is not before the Commission at this time. Col. Washington agreed, stating a church at this time is extraneous and not a part of this application. Mr. Purcell Thomas, neighbor of applicant, stated Rt. 688 is gravel road, very narrow, and there are places where 2 cars cannot pass and remain on the road. Mr. Thomas noted the Highway Department informed him that no improvements are scheduled for 6 more years. Mr. Ray replied that most traffic will be on Rt. 689 rather than 688 and there are only 5 lots involved in the application. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. ,3vF Mrs. Graves moved for approval subject to conditions stated by Staff. Mrs. Diehl seconded. Discussion: Mr. McCann stated the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation says the roads are tolerable, the developer objects to frontage improvements and he feels he cannot support the motion. The vote was 6-0-1 with Mr. McCann dissenting. BOWERS SUBDIVISION PLAT: Located on west side of Rt. 659, north of Rio Road West. Tax Map 45, Parcel 29 in Charlottesville District. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report. 19 Mr. Ray, representing the applicant, said he had no comment and no objections. Mr. Bob Walker, a neighbor, asked if applicant should be allowed to cut off less than one acre that must have a septic system. Col. Washington replied that the square footage meets the subdivision ordi- nance requirements when public water is provided. Mr. Walker asked why are the rules different on the eastern side of the reservoir from the western side as to the size of a subdivision. He asked why a septic system can't be installed on a one -acre lot on the western side. Col. Washington replied that 2 acres are needed when a well is to be in - stalled. Mr. Ray pointed out that staff had recommended Health Department approval and the applicant concurred with that recommendation. Mrs. Graves noted that she would like 5 acre zoning around the reservoir but said we are stuck with what we have. Mr. Huffman asked if the Commission had approved residences within 1500 feet of the reservoir before this application. Mr. McCann replied yes, many of them. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mr. McCann moved for approval with staff recommendations. Mr. Huffman seconded. There was no discussion. The vote was unanimous.for approval. 9 3,,V L. M. HARRINGTON SUBDIVISION PLAT : Located on the east side of Rt. 639 adjacent to the C & O tracks, east of Rt. 615. Tax Map 51, Parcel 13 in the Rivanna District. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report pointing out the dedication on plat. Mr. Ray, representing the applicant, stated he had no comment. Mr. Rick Carter, attorney for the applicant, stated the old boundary line was thought to be a stream that no longer exists. The complete property was 20 acres divided by Rt. 639. There was a general store and storage shed and across the road was the home place. The contract purchaser for 1.9 acres is the son of the deceased. There is another purchaser for across the road. The road deadends a mile north of the buildings. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mr. Vest moved for approval with staff recommendations. Mrs. Diehl seconded the motion. There was no discussion. The vote was unanimous for approval. HUNTER'S HALL PRELIMINARY PLAT: Located on the north side of Rt. 250 East near Shadwell. Tax Map 78 and 79, Parcel 4 in the Rivanna District. Acreage is 58.87 acres with 20 lots of 2.7 acres average lot size. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report. Mr. Roger Ray, representing the applicant, concurred with the general recommendations of the Planning Staff. He said applicant would take exception to curbs and gutters and would like to work out with the Highway Department the curbs and gutters. Mrs. Graves asked what the B-1 zoning speaks to on the location of dwellings. Mr. Payne replied that dwellings are by special permit. Business, by right_ Mr. Huffman asked why the main road doesn't come back to where the cul-de-sac ends instead of the access road. Mr. Ray replied that it was more economical and the lots were better served with private access. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mr. Ray stated that Lots 1 and 20 will have access from the interior road. The Highway Department would not allow access from Rt. 250. Mr. McCann moved for approval with added conditions of a private road mainte- nance agreement and the requiring of Lots 1 and 20 entering from the interior road. Mr. Vest seconded. 907 There was no discussion. The vote was unanimous for approval with the added conditions. 19 HURT, LOT I, PANTOPS FINAL PLAT: Located off Rt. 250 East on State Farm Boulevard. Tax Map 78, Parcel 20, part of, in the Rivanna District. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report. Mr. Tom Sinclair, representing the applicant, stated Item C is not necessary as the Highway Department hasn't accepted State Farm Boulevard yet. Mr. Payne noted that the applicant wouldn't need a maintenance agreement if the road were bonded. Col. Washington asked Mr. Payne what changes should be recommended. Mr. Payne answered that a new Item C should read "Bonding of State Farm Blvd. to the south edge of the property until roads are taken into the State Highway System" and a new D to read "Provide an easement over 'Future Road' to benefit Lot 1." Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mrs. Diehl moved for approval with conditions A and B and the new C and new D. Mr. Vest. seconded. Discussion: 19 Mrs. Diehl suggested amending her motion to read simply "Health Department approval" under condition A. Mr. Vest agreed. The vote was unanimous for approval with amendments. EUGENE AND AGNES BALDWIN FINAL PLAT: On the north side of Rt. 250 West just east of the intersection with Rt. 240. Tax Map 56, Parcel 35C in the White Hall District. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report. Mr. Baldwin stated that quite simply he was trying to deed a piece of property to their son. He said they are trying to get 3 parcels instead of 4 or 5 parcels. There is a total of 31 acres and they are trying to pull out 6+ acres with an easement to get to the property. Mr. Payne suggested a condition "D" be added stating "Residue parcel to the south of 6.113 acres parcel to be joined to and become a part of Tax Map parcels 56-34B and 56-35D." Mr. Skove moved for approval with conditions of staff and Mr. Payne's 141) condition D. Mrs. Diehl seconded the motion which carried unanimously. �l� PEACOCK HILL SECTION 4 FINAL PLAT: Located on the west side of Rt. 708, north of Interstate 64. Tax Map 73, Parcel 29 in Samuel Miller District. Acreage is 56.81 acres with 30 lots of 1.81 acres average lot size. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report. Mrs. Graves asked if the dark areas on the plat represent the open space. Mr. Smith, the applicant, responded that in the lower regions of Peacock Hill, 90 acres have already been dedicated. He said it is also known where the septic drainage fields will be on all sites and they have planted more trees than they have removed. He stated the sites with steeper slopes are larger and the water system will be extended and will be governed by the Peacock Hill community association. Col. Washington said he needed clarification on the common or central water and sewer. Mr. Smith responded that there are 5 approved wells - 7 all together. They are State approved. There are plans to put in a 10,000 gallon tank for water to serve higher lots. There are dual fields for the septic system for the community functions. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Col. Washington asked if there were plans to surface treat the road. Mr. Smith replied that the entire road will be surface treated. Mrs. Diehl stated she would like no septic systems on more than a 25% slope included in the Health Department approval and she would like Mr. Payne to word the condition. Mr. Payne replied that condition B relating to Health Department approval should read: "Health Department approval for two septic facilities for each lot other than those served by the central septic system. The Health Department is requested to be particularly mindful of the County's intent to discourage the location of septic tanks and/or drain fields on slopes of 250 or greater since such practice has been described as questionable by the Health Department. Health Department approval of central septic system and repair field for the same." Mrs. Graves moved for approval with the amended conditions. Mr. Vest seconded. There was no discussion. The vote was unanimous for approval with the amended conditions. MCGUIRE/TYLER FINAL PLAT: Located off the east side of Rt. 691, south of Rt. 250 West. Tax Map 70, Parcel 15G in the Samuel Miller District. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report noting that applicant can use J// another easement that is not proposed on the plat. The entrance he is proposing on the plat requires a commercial entrance to make sight distance adequate. Further- more, the proposed entrance is really improper as the access to the property. Col. Washington questioned the alternate access. Mr. Tyler explained the two different accesses from Rt. 691 - one at the top of the hill, the other at the bottom of the hill. He preferred the entrance near Stockton Creek at the bottom of the hill. Col. Washington noted that that entrance, at the moment, is appropriate for only a tractor. Mr. Tyler replied that he planned for himself and the residue to have access there. He reported his mother is planning a family division of four 5-acre tracts. The grade is steep near the stream. The top parcel can have access from his mother's property. If he is forced to have an entrance at the top, he cannot easily get to the bottom part of the land. He said he would really like access from both places. Mr. Keeler reported the bridge access does not have adequate sight distance and cannot be made adequate within the existing right-of-way. The Planning Commission deferred action on the plat in order that the staff investigate the two possible entrances to determine which will make the better commercial entrance. BALLARD MEADOWS SITE PLAN: Located on the east side of Route 677 north of 250 West. Property is described as Tax Map 59, Parcel 28 in the Samuel Miller District. Acreage is 10 acres with 144.06+ residue. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report noting zoning department comments. Mr. Keeler pointed out that upon conferring with the Zoning Administrator he was told that although the site plan shows the units as appearing attached, they are not as the areas shown are actually roofless patios six feet wide between the units. Mrs. Graves was wondering if the subdivision ordinance addressed the problem of subdividing when there is a communal septic field. Mr. Payne replied that there is absolutely no question in his mind that this property would be divisible at some future date. They must stay rental units. The only way they could be divided as single units would be with an RPN or PUD. The reason is because of the yard requirements. Mr. Edgerton, representing the applicant, described the application as 5 rental units with enough land for drainfields and 3 wells serving 5 units. He said there would be a private road serving only the units and the remainder of land will be in crops. Mr. Keeler asked Mr. Edgerton if the ten -acre parcel was separate from the remainder of the property. Mr. Edgerton replied that he had not understood the application process 31.21 and the 10-acre parcel had been drawn off as a possible subdivision until he found out it was not possible to subdivide the property inasmuch as his grandmother (the applicant) was buying the land over a period of time, Therefore, the parcel would be subject to a lien on the contract. The lines just haven't been deleted. Mr. Payne noted that the notes on the plat should be removed as a condition. Mr. Keeler reported that the matter has been complicated as a result. He reported the Virginia Department of Highways and Transporation could request a 25-foot dedication from the center line. Mr. Edgerton asked if he could wait until the Westview RPN was approved as the sight distance on his side would improve as a result. Mrs. Graves asked if the applicant would like to withdraw the application. Mr. Payne stated the applicant should get legal guidance. Mr. Edgerton requested deferrment. Mr. Skove moved for a deferrment until August 21, 1979. Mr. Vest seconded and the vote for deferrment was unanimous. By unanimous vote, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution of intent to amend the Subdivision Ordinance to provide for family division as required by the Code of Virginia. By unanimous vote, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution of intent to add veterinarians' offices to the Cl district of the proposed Zoning Ordinance. No action was taken by the Planning Commission on the Fire Official's request that the requirement of fire flow and hydrants, which is mandatory on central systems, be made discretionary. The Commission adjourned at 12:15 a.m. Robert W. Tucker, Jr. - S retary Jla 9 P9 CIP - 1979-1984: School Board Proposals STAFF COMMENT Most of the projects proposed by the School Board consist of improvements, renovations, and completions of projects initiated previously which are not directly related to changes in enrollment. Staff has viewed these projects as "maintenance/replacement" activities consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Some of the projects listed have not been prioritized by the School Board and staff reserves comment at this time. For example, several alternative actions have been proposed for the Greenwood -Crozet schools, but none has been selec- ted. Likewise, the proposal for land purchase funds appears ambiguous at this time. Both of these projects would require more detailed analysis in reference to the Comprehensive Plan than the "maintenance/replacement" type projects. Projects for new schools and school consolidations are more directly related to enrollments than most of the projects currently proposed for the CIP. In the past, the Planning Staff has attempted to provide reliable enrollment projections for this purpose. Recently, dramatic changes in enrollment have occurred, which staff attributes primarily to changes in the demographic characteristics of the population. Enrollments appear more responsive to socio-economic factors than to more easily measurable factors such as devel- opment, birth rates, employment, etc. Projections based on socio-economic factors require resources not readily available to the staff (data gathering and interpolation, computer time, manpower). As previously recommended to the School Board, staff recommends consideration be given to an in-depth study, possibly conducted by the University (i.e. - Tayloe Murphy Institute; Colgate Darden School of Business). Should this course of action not be chosen, staff remains prepared to provide the most reliable projections possible (Staff opinion is that current projection techniques are reliable for the short-term, however, these techniques become suspect for long-term projection). R M