Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08 14 79 PC MinutesAugust 14, 1979 The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a regular meeting on Tuesday, August 14, 1979, 7:30 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were Col. William Washington, Chairman; Mr. Layton McCann; Mr. Kurt Gloeckner; Mr. James Huffman; Mr. James Skove, Mrs. Joan Graves; and Mr. Charles Vest. Absent were Mr. Tim Lindstrom, ex-Officio; Mrs. Norma A. Diehl, Vice-chairman; and Dr. James W. Moore. Other officials present were Mr. Ronald S. Keeler, Assistant Director of Planning; Miss Mason Caperton, Planner. Col. Washington called the meeting to order after establishing that a quorum was present. McGuire/Tyler Plat: Mr. Keeler said that the staff has met with the Highway Department and the applicant on site. The Commission had deferred action because of the site distance and lack of adequate area for a commercial entrance. He read the recommended conditions of approval, noting that the Health Department has approved the plat. Col. Washington advised the Commission and public that after a discussion with the County Attorney, he does not feel he has to disqualify himself from the discussion and action on this plat. Mr. Tyler the applicant said that his mother is giving the land to him. He also discussed at length some of the problems in getting the plat approved, asking that the subdivision plat .review process be changed. He said that he feels the county should have rules for land that is not to have a commercial subdivision. He did note that if required to meet the staff conditions he will have to move two telephone poles at a cost of $1500 each, and on neighbor's land at that. Also he would have to move four large trees and replace with smaller ones. The plank fencing would cost approximately $700 to replace. He noted for the record that this is the fourth generation to own this land and that some basic property rights are involved here. He said that he has a counter proposal for conditions to be,met prior to issuance of a building permit: (1) clear the brush for the 350 foot sight distance; (2) build a landing without hard surfacing. With no public comment, Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Mr. Gloeckner felt that if the Highway Department recommendations are required by the Commission; the applicant will have to spend between $9000 and $10000. That is certainly excessive. Mrs. Graves felt that if there are future land gifts, the intensification of the property might justify the improvements recommended by the Highway Department. Mr. Keeler pointed out that the Planning Commission cannot waive the Highway Department requirements for a commercial entrance. Mr. Tyler pointed out that his mother owns the house that has the other access. Col. Washington remarked that the road is safe, in his judgement, only to 35 miles per hour. Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of the plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The subdivision plat will not be signed until the following conditions have been met: a. All title owners' signatures notarized; b. Compliance with the private road provisions including: (1) County Attorney approval of maintenance agreement; C. Correct "William C. Tyler" to "S. S. McGuire;" d. Correct spelling of "McGuire;" e. Show stream and 100' septic system setback line; f. Note on the plat: "No building permit shall be issued until a minimum sight distance of 350 feet approaching the entrance has been obtained and a gravel ramp has been constructed." Mr. McCann seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 6-0-1, with Mrs. Graves abstaining. ZMA-79-23. Frank C. McCue and Alan Dillard have petitioned the Board of Supervisors to rezone 71.26 acres from A-1 to RPN/A-1. Property is located on the southwest side of Route 677 ( Ballard Road ), and northeast of West Leigh Subdivision. County Tax Map 59, Parcels 6 and 7H, Samuel Miller Magisterial District. Mr. Gloeckner disqualified himself from the discussion and vote by leaving the room. Miss Caperton presented the staff report, and noted the letters from the general public. Mr. Frank Kessler, on behalf of the applicants, said that there is a need for lots in the western part of the county. He favors the RPN approach with the use of utilities. He said that he has met with the adjoining property owners and he said that their concerns are as follows: (a) septic fields entering the creeks; (b) dry water bed in the area of lots 23 and 24; (c) traffic on West Leigh Drive during the construction period. He said that there will be no traffic during the construction period on West Leigh Drive since Mr. Dillard himself is doing the construction work. The broom sage and thistles on the property will be maintained. He said that everything possible will be done to maintain the wildlife along the stream. Mr. Tom Lincoln explained the technical points of the plan. Mrs. Treva Cromwell supported the idea of an RPN over a straight -forward subdivision. However, she did question the possible drainfields in the open space, and who maintains them if they fail. She expressed concern that part of the ground used in open space is land with transmission lines, which is owned by VEPCO. She also noted the pathways between the two sections of the RPN and questioned them. Mrs. Cromwell pointed out that the roads in West Leigh are privately maintained by the residents and they oppose any use of these roads during the construction period of this RPN. Furthermore, the condition of Ballard Road is bad, since the three .144) bridges have 8-10 ton limits and are built of wood. It is much easier to use West Leigh Drive, which she opposed. Mr. Henry Little agreed with the comments regarding Ballard Road, noting that the entire length of Ballard Road should be upgraded. The road is especially dangerous at night. Mr. Abbott said that Ballard Road is becoming very hazardous. He was also concerned about the contamination of the stream, which originates on his property. He asked that the Commission consider the condition of the entire length of Ballard Road. Mr. John Farley said that the bridge directly below the first entrance to the RPN was entirely under water at flash flood time just last year. Mr. Broome was concerned about the condition of Ballard Road - furthermore he expressed concern over the change in character of the area. Mrs. Broome cited the problems of Ballard Road, especially with the increase in traffic. She questioned if this RPN is right for the area owners and right for the county. Mrs. Virginia Hilton said that she is concerned abou the conditions of the road and the additional traffic that will result from this RPN. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mr. Kessler advised the Commission that only one entrance on Ballard Road will be added. He said that he supports using utilities where possible. All the advantages possible are incorporated into this plan. Furthermore, he did not feel the proposal strips the roads. Mr. McCann pointed out that once again the problem is roads. The only way to upgrade roads is to get enough peopole using the road so that it becomes a priority for Highway Department upgrading. He said that he prefers the RPN concept to 2-acre lots. Mr. Skove said that he is bothered by utility land being used as open space. The main concern is the road, though. Mrs. Graves questioned if VEPCO could participate in the Homeowners' agreements. Mr. Payne stated that when VEPCO obtained this land, it was paid for. And it is possible to assume that VEPCO will not permit trees to grow in their utility easement. Mr. Skove pointed out that the land could probably not be used for building any way. Mr. Huffman said that he is always concerned when the roads are not tolerable, but does not know what can be done about it. He did point out that wildlife is usually prevalent along the power lines. Mr. Huffman also noted that one utility is available and the county encourages growth in the area of utilities. Mrs. Graves saw the condition addressing septic setback as contrary to the ordinance, since the setback comes behind the stream. Col. Washington pointed out that from a practical point, only lots 23-30 could take advantage of the optional septic field location. I Mr. Kessler suggested covering the septic fields in the deed restrictions. Mr. Payne said that it may be desirable to put part of a drainfield in the open area, and that the staff is suggesting as many options as possible be kept open. Mr. Huffman moved approval of the request subject to the following conditions: 1. Relocation of the easements serving parcels 7E and 6C on Tax Map 59 to the satisfaction of the County Attorney, prior to final subdivision approval; 2. Approval is for a maximum of 35 lots. Location and acreages shall comply with the approved plan. Open space shall be dedicated in proportion with the number of lots approved, in the final subdivision process; 3. County Attorney approval of homeowners' agreements prior to final approval to include the use of open space for septic facilities, if necessary; provided however that no septic field shall be located within the 100' septic setback; 4. Compliance with Soil Erosion and Runoff Control Ordinances; 5. No grading shall occur until final subdivision approval; 6. Health Department approval of two septic field locations on each lot prior to final subdivision approval; 7. Fire Official approval of hydrant locations prior to final subdivision approval; 8. All units shall be served by a public water supply system and approved by appropriate agencies prior to final subdivision approval; 9. County Engineer and Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of road plans prior to final subdivision approval; 10. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of commercial entrances and frontage improvements prior to final subdivision approval. Mr. McCann seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Skove could not support the motion because the additional traffic would be too much for the road to stand. Mrs. Graves felt that to rezone the land is to imply that the road is suitable for additional traffic. Mr. Vest agreed that the roads are bad, but the RPN is a better use of the property than a conventional subdivision. The motion carried by a vote of 4-2, with Mrs. Graves and Mr. Skove dissenting. Mrs. Virginia Hilton said that if more traffic is put on that road someone will get killed. It is the Planning Commission's responsibility to ensure safety for the users of any road. ( Mr. Gloeckner re-entered the meeting. ) ZMA-79-22. Charles W. Hurt has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to rezone 69.71 acres from A-1 to R-3. Property is located on the northeast side of Route 768, and is northeast of the intersection of Routes 768 and 631 ( Rio Road ). County Tax Map 62, Parcels 17 and 17A. Rivanna District. Y Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Mr. Jim Hill, on behalf of the applicant, said that the development is planned for the ridge line with lots of open space. He noted the access to Penn Park. Miss Fox said that she is concerned about the conditions of Rio Road. She felt that the county does not really.want the land developed, since it is beautiful. Open lands add to the quality of life. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mr. Gloeckner questioned the status of McIntire Road. Mr. Huffman liked the proximity of Penn Park to the development, since the residents would benefit by walking distance to a good recreational area. Mr. McCann said that he supports growth in the urban area, and that both utilities are available. Mr. Vest moved approval of the request subject to the applicant's proffer ( limiting the density to 6 units per acre ). Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. ZMA-79-26. John M. Nokes has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to rezone 5.3 acres from A-1 Agriculture to CO Commercial Office. Property is located on the north side of Route 754 ( Old Ivy Road ). County Tax Map 60, Parcel 51, Jack Jouett District. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Mr. Perkins, attorney for Mr. Nokes, stated that he feels this application should be considered with the other items and asked that the Commission forward it to the Board. There was no public comment, and Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mr. Gloeckner felt there was no problem with CO zoning in the area; he expressed his support for the concept from the beginning, noting that density should be where it belongs. He felt that this location is the proper place, and moved approval of the request. Mr. Huffman seconded the motion. Discussion: Mrs. Graves said that she could not support the motion, since the Commission has not made sufficient study of the application. Mr. McCann said that he prefers to send the application to the Board with no recommendation. Mrs. Graves offered a substitute motion to forward the application to the Board with no recommendation. S Mr. Gloeckner felt that no recommendation is the same as the Commission's failing to do its work. Mr. McCann seconded the substitute motion, stating that the Commission does not know the facts. Mr. Huffman said he could not support the substitute motion, since the Commission would be shirking its duties. The substitute motion failed by a vote of 3-4, with Col. Washington , Messrs. Gloeckner, Huffman, and Vest dissenting. Mr. Gloeckner called the question on the original motion to approve. The motion failed by a vote of 3-3-1, with Mrs. Graves, Mr. Skove, and Mr. Vest dissenting, and Mr. McCann abstaining. SP-79-39. Minor Land Trust #2 has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to locate multi -family townhouses for sale on 1.008 acres zoned B-1. Property is located on the west side of Commonwealth Drive. County Tax Map 61W, Parcel 01-B(3), Charlottesville District. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Mrs. Graves questioned why no conditions were placed on any possible approval. Mr. Keeler replied that the staff feels the application is appropriate for the area. Mrs. Graves felt that there should be a condition limiting the property to one entrance. There was no public comment and Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mr. Vest moved approval of the petition subject to one condition: 1. The property is to be limited to one entrance. Mrs. Graves seconded the motion which carried unanimously, with no discussion. SP-79-44. Appalachian Power Co. has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to locate a sub -station on 4.15 acres zoned A-1. Property is located on the west side of Route 726, approximately 2 miles south of Route 6. County Tax Map 130, Parcel 41A, Scottsville District. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Mr. Jerry Vest, representative from Appalachian Power, explained the operation of a substation. He questioned conditions 3 and 4 as presented in the staff report. 6 Col. Washington explained that without those conditions the Commission would be approving an obstruction to future road improvements. Mr. Huffman agreed with the chairman, noting that all other applicants have to comply with the 15'/18' requirement. Col. Washington suggested that perhaps this application should be deferred until the Highway Department has additional input. Mr. McCann said that he is willing to approve the petition with the conditions recommended by the staff according to the schematic sketch showing the 25' dedication. Mr. Huffman said that he feels the customers of the utility should pay for this rather than the Highway Department. Mr. McCann moved approval of the special permit subject to the following conditions: 1. Maintain as much existing vegetative screening as possible; 2. Provide redwood slatting in cyclone fence to serve as screening, with low growing evergreen shrubs such as juniper, located roughly midway of the fill area, running parallel to the fence and staggered on five (5) foot centers to reasonable satisfaction of the staff; 3. Dedication of 25 feet from the centerline of Route 726 either by plat or deed; 4. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of a commercial entrance; 5. Site plan is to be modified so that no fill, bearing wall or other improvement shall be located closer than 25 feet from the centerline of Route 726. Mr. Skove seconded the motion which carried unanimously with no discussion. Mr. Keeler noted that the soil erosion plan will have to be amended. ZMA-79-28. Robert M. and Helene S. Huff have petitioned the Board of Supervisors to rezone 41,065 square feet from R-1 to R-3. Property is located on the southeast side of Route 656 ( Georgetown Road ). County Tax Map 60A, Parcel 1, Charlottesville District. AND SP-79-41. Robert M. and Helene S. Huff have petitioned the Board of Supervisors to locate a day nursery on 41,065 square feet zoned R-1 ( Proposed to be zoned R-3 ). Property is located on the southeast side of Route 656. County Tax Map 60A, Parcel 1, Charlottesville District. Mr. Keeler presented the staff reports on the two items. Mr. Gloeckner established that there are paths so that parents can walk their children to the day nursery. Mr. Alan Cohen presented a petition of 25 signatures from the Georgetown Road area in opposition to the proposals. He said that the quality of the area is being destroyed by over -commercialism. There are already day nurseries in the area for the local residents. 7- Three other adjoining property owners spoke in opposition to the requests. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mrs. Graves clarified that the proffer is for a single-family dwelling. Mr. Skove moved denial of ZMA-79-28. Mrs. Graves seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 6-0-1, with Mr. Gloeckner abstaining. Mr. Skove then moved denial of SP-79-41. Mrs. Graves also seconded this motion, which carried by a vote of 6-0-1, with Mr. Gloeckner abstaining. The Albemarle County Planning Commission has adopted a resolution of intent to amend the Subdivision Ordinance of the County Code to provide for frontage improvements on public roads. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Mr. Gloeckner said that the cost of $3-5 per lineal foot is ridiculous, since costs are that low only when a project is a million dollar project. He said that if there is any stone work, paving, etc. a more accurate cost for road improvements for a 2-acre lot would be three times what is proposed in the staff report, which would be a minimum of $1350, but more likely on the higher range of $2250. Mr. Skove said that builders always want to know what they face. Mr. Gloeckner said that the rules are made for the large developers, and it is the small man or the family who gets trapped. He said that he does not support this amendment. Mr. McCann said that he is not sure he wants to add to the total cost of lots. Mr. Skove said that the developer will pass the costs on to the purchaser. Mrs. Graves said that she would like the Highway Department present to support its recommendation. Mr. Gloeckner said that if this passes, the Highway Department should share in the cost of the frontage improvements. Mr. Payne said that he sees this as a flexibile rule, that can be considered on a case by case basis depending upon the circumstances. Mrs. Graves moved deferral until the Highway Department could be present, and suggested September 11 as the date. Mr. Skove seconded the motion for deferral, which passed unanimously. 9 Willoughby Section II: Mr. Keeler advised the Commission that the City Planning Commission approved a subdivision along one of the streets in Willoughby. Some of the lots in that subdivision extend 40 feet into the county, and therefore require county approval. There will be no effect on the utilities because of this subdivision. He did note for the record that this plat did not go through Site Review Committee. Mrs. Graves moved approval of the subdivision as approved by the City Planning Commission. Mr. Vest seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. With no further business, the Commission adjourned at 11:40 p.m. M 19