Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07 30 79 PC MinutesJuly 30, 1979 The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a work session on proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan on Monday, July 30, 1979, 4:00 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were Col. William R. Washington, Chairman; Mrs. Norma A. Diehl, Vice -Chairman; Mrs. Joan Graves; Mr. Kurt Gloeckner; Mr. Layton McCann; Mr. Charles Vest; Mr. James Skove; Dr. James Moore; Mr. James Huffman. Absent was Mr. Tim Lindstrom, ex-Officio. Other officials present were Mr. Robert Tucker, Jr., Director of Planning; Mr. Ronald S. Keeler, Assistant Director of Planning; Mr. Douglas Eckel, Senior Planner. Col. Washington called the meeting to order after establishing that a quorum was present. Mr. Tucker noted that the Commission has been requested to address the following three issues that were submitted at the public hearing on the Hollymead Community: 1. Property on the northeast quadrant of the Route 29 North/Route 649 intersection, shown on the present proposal as "high density residential." The request is for recognition of existing trend of development and existing zoning in a "commercial" designation. 2. The property adjacent to Jefferson Village to the west, shown on the present proposal as "medium density residential. Request states concern over lack of transitional density or buffer zone between the "low density residential" and the "medium density residential"; requests removal of "medium density" designation; and requests consideration of provision of natural buffer between proposed school site and existing residential development. 3. Property located in the north central portion of the community to the east of Route 29, both north and south of Route 649, shown on present proposal as primarily "low density residential." Request is for moving "medium density residential" closer to Route 29, and designating land along Route 29 as "commercial." Mr. Tucker advised the Commission that the staff has no real problems with request #1 and #2. Dr. Moore said that he hopes Route 29 will not be stripped any more than it already is. He preferred to see a plan for the entire area. Mr. Gloeckner felt that the Hollymead community should be shifted to the north. Mrs. Graves established that KDA recommended all the schools shown on their proposal if the area is developed to what is projected as the top limit. Mr. Gloeckner suggested a grade separated intersection at the airport, moving the commercial to the north somewhat, and making the center of the community the grade separated intersection. He felt that the present proposal would be just an extension of the urban neighborhood. Mr. Gloeckner felt that there should be some "breathing space" between the communities. Mr. Skove pointed out that the boundary will be the limits of water and sewer and the Board will revise the jurisdictional area of the Service Authority. Mr. McCann stated that the communities and villages should be larger in view of the restrictions proposed for the rural lands of the county. He said that he is not as concerned about the southern boundary of the Hollymead Community as he is about the northern boundary; he suggested that the northern boundary be extended. Mrs. Diehl pointed out that if the areas proposed for schools are not used for schools, rather used for low residential, the area would be tremendously impacted. Mr. Tucker pointed out the floodplain area at the south fork of the river. Col. Washington said that he feels the county can extend the boundaries of the communities at any time in the future. Mr. Huffman pointed out that if the southern boundary is moved up, a lot of water and sewer lines will be wasted. Col. Washington suggested deleting about 3000' from just north of the south fork of the river, and with 1000' of floodplain, there would be about 1 mile of open space between the communities. Mr. McCann said that he could not support diminishing the size of the community because of the availability of water and sewer lines. Mr. Skove moved that the southern boundary of the community be at Route 643. Mr. McCann seconded the motion, which failed by a vote of 4-5, with Messrs. Skove, McCann, Washington, and Huffman supporting the motion. Dr. Moore moved that on the east, west, and north the boundaries be as shown on the staff proposal, and on the south the boundary would be the Hollymead PUD, including the mobile home park. That motion was seconded by Mrs. Diehl, and failed by a vote of 4-1-4, with Mr. Vest abstaining, and Messrs. McCann, Huffman, Gloeckner, Skove dissenting. After a brief discussion, Mrs. Diehl moved the Commission reconsider the motion proposed by Dr. Moore. Mr. Skove seconded the motion for reconsideration, which carried by a vote of 6-3, with Messrs. Huffman, Gloeckner, and McCann dissenting. The motion proposed by Dr. Moore carried by a vote of 5-4, with Messrs. Gloeckner, Huffman, Vest, and McCann dissenting. The Commission then discussed the area in the north central portion of the community to the east of Route 29, both north and south of Route 649. Dr. Moore felt this area should come in for review as a complete plan. Mrs. Graves suggested high density near the schools, for proximity to playgrounds and so that children could walk to school. ;33�7 Mr. Huffman moved that all four quadrants of this area ( Route 29/Route 649 ) be commercial. Mr. McCann seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 8-1, with Mrs. Graves dissenting. Mrs. Graves then moved that the industrial in the northeast quadrant of Route 649 be removed and replaced with low density residential. Mrs. Diehl seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 6-3, with Messrs. Gloeckner, Vest, and McCann dissenting. ( Mrs. Diehl left the meeting. ) Mr. Huffman moved that commercial be shown south of the intersection of Route 649, and that the medium density be replaced with high density. Mr. McCann seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Mr. Gloeckner felt that the area of the elementary schools should be expanded to add areas for high and middle schools. There was Planning Commission consensus to do this. The Commission forwarded the following recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on the Hollymead Community: ' 1. Land in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Route 29 and Route 649, proposed for high density; redesignated this commercial; 2. Land along the east side of Route 29 north of Route 649, proposed for industrial; redesignated low density; 3. Land south of a line drawn across the community from the western border to the east, below the existing mobile home park and along the edge of the southern boundary of Phase I of the Hollymead development; this land to be excluded from the community and an additional buffer space between Urban Area Neighborhoods 1 and 2 and Hollymead ( i.e., moving the southern border to the north approximately 3000 feet; 4. Land in the north central portion of the community, east of Route 29 and south of Route 649, proposed for low density and medium density residential; redesignated the land along Route 29 commercial, land to the east of the commercial redesignated high density, and the residue to be low density residential. 5. Land along the southern side of Route 649 east of Route 29 near the proposed institutional land, proposed for medium density residential; recommended this be redesignated institutional as well in order to supply land for the high and middle school complex deleted from the southern portion of the neighborhood. CROZET: After discussing the proposed land use plan briefly, the following recommendations were made to the Board of Supervisors: 1. Land along the north side of Route 250, proposed for low density residential to be redesignated commercial; 33 j 2. Land in the northwest quadrant of the Route 250/Route 240 intersection, proposed for commercial, redesignated low density residential; 3. Land in the west -central portion of the community near Route 240, proposed for public institution of "park"; recommended the land designated institutional be cut back and confined to the existing stream area; 4. Land near the southwestern quadrant of the Route 250/Route 240 intersection proposed for low density residential redesignated to commercial. Upon the motion of Mr. McCann, and second of Mr. Huffman, the Commission voted 8-1, with Mrs. Graves dissenting, to recommend the following textual amendment: Pages 6 and 14, under "Timing - the five year perspective." delete the word "undertaken" in the Phrase "Mobile home park development should be stimulated by the private sector or undertaken by the public sector..." and substitute "encouraged." IVY: Mr. Tucker stated that the staff had no specific comments to make on this proposed land use plan. Mr. Gloeckner established that if zoninq applications are made on property very near the boundary of these villages, communities, etc., the matter will be flexible. Mr. Payne pointed out that these boundaries are not binding for zoning, except that they are the boundaries used in setting the zoning. The Commission briefly discussed the fact that if Route 637 is improved, the village would probably extend all the way to the interstate. Mrs. Graves moved the Commission accept the Ivy Plan, with a redrawing of the western border to the east of the Murray School site. Mr. Huffman seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. NORTH GARDEN: Mr. Tucker reviewed the comments from the public hearing on this village. Mr. McCann stated that he does not like lots of open space in a village, noting that the land will not be suitable for farming. Col. Washington felt that the upper strip along Route 29 should either be deleted or shown as residential. Mr. McCann felt it could be used for village residential. The Commission unanimously accepted the North Garden plan with the following change: extension of the southern border below the Zion Church approximately 2000 feet, recognizing existing commercial at the southeastern quadrant of the Route 29/Route 692 intersection, shifting the public institution at both the Trinity Church site and the Red Hill School site to the east. EARLYSVILLE: Mr. Gloeckner moved the commission accept the larger map as the proposed land use map for Earlysville, extending the northwestern border beyond the existing cemetery to the north of Route 663. Mr. McCann seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. NIX: Upon the motion of Mr. Skove, and second of Mr. Gloeckner, the Commission unanimously accepted the map for Nix. STONY POINT: Mr. Tucker noted that the fire station should be shown as semi-public or institutional. Mr. Huffman moved that this suggestion be added to the Stony Point Plan and the land use plan be accepted as presented. Mr. McCann seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. SCOTTSVILLE: Mr. Huffman questioned the need for some medium density residential on Route 726 since water is available there. Mr. McCann said that if someone wants to develop within the boundary it can be done. Mr. Gloeckner noted that with water and sewer available, one would anticipate some sort of higher density development such as townhouses. Col. Washington said that he feels the area is inappropriately called a "town." Mr. Payne noted that the boundaries of this area are political boundaries. M Mr. Skove moved that the Commission accept the land use plan for the Town of Scottsville as proposed. Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. KESWICK: Mr. Huffman moved the Commission delete Keswick from the Comprehensive Plan as a village, based onthe desires of the local residents. Mr. Vest seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. With no additional business, the Commission adjourned at 8:15 p.m. 9 19