Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09 18 79 PC MinutesSeptember 18, 1979 The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on Tuesday, September 18, 1979, 7:30 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building, Charlottes- ville, Virginia. Those members present were Col. William Washington, Chairman; Mrs. Norma Diehl, Vice -Chairman; Mr. Layton McCann; Mr. Charles Vest; Dr. James Moore; Mrs. Joan Graves; Mr. James Skove; and Mr. James Huffman. Commission member who was absent was Mr. Kurt Gloeckner. Also absent was Mr. Tim Lindstrom, ex-Officio. Other officials present were Mr. Frederick Payne, Deputy County Attorney; Mr. Ron Keeler, Assistant Director of Planning; and Mrs. Idette Kimsey, Planner. Col. Washington called the meeting to order after establishing that a quorum was present. Minutes of September 4, 1979 were approved as submitted. Minutes of September 6, 1979 were approved as submitted. JAMES YOUNG FINAL PLAT - located north of Scottsville off the northwest side of Rt. 637, tax map 131, parcel 60 and 58 in the Scottsville District. Request for a division of three parcels, average size 2.2 acres. Mr. Frederick Payne disqualified himself from the discussion by leaving the room. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report mentioning Fluvanna County may not have rules about entrance approval and that Mr. Batten, a neighbor, may have some of his property involved on frontage improvements. She also said that Route 637 originates in Fluvanna County. The easement that is used by both Mr. Young and Mr. Batten is in Albemarle County. Mr. Vest established that Mr. Batten and Mr. Young both use the easement. Applicant's granddaughter, representing the applicant who is 86 years old, said the applicant wishes to straighten out any problems so he can sell his land to pay bills which accrued before and during his wife's death. He is on a fixed income and can't make ends meet. Mrs. Smith, Mr. Batten's daughter, reported that the property fronting on Route 637 belongs to her sisters, brother, and herself. She says she has been paying taxes on the property to Albemarle County and was told the day before that her property is in Fluvanna County. She asked why this case was before the Albemarle County Planning Commission if her property is in Fluvanna County. She said Mr. Young's property is in Fluvanna County and that when he bought the property her family granted a 15-foot right-of-way to him. She said that when Mr. St. John was granted a right-of-way, by the Albemarle County Circuit Court Judge, through her property, she was not notified. She said only her father was notified. She would like to protest this division because there will be too much traffic on a 15-foot roadway. Col. Washington replied that the staff condition relating to the maintenance agreement must have Albemarle County Attorney approval as standard procedure but other things have to be done before approval is final. He said it is his understanding that reciprocal agreements exist between counties concerning property that straddles county lines and that the counties decide by some method as to which county collects the taxes. 115 He said Mrs. Smith's neighbor's taxes might be collected by another county if his property is split also. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mr. Keeler stated a 30-foot easement is needed if six lots are involved. Dr. Moore established there is enough land for additional easement if needed for access to Rt. 637. Mr. McCann said he doesn't believe parcels in Fluvanna County should be included in the approval. Mr. McCann moved for approval amending the staff's conditions to include only parcels in Albemarle County and reading as follows: 1. This plat will not be signed until the following conditions are met: a. Health Department approval; b. Compliance with the private road provisions, (with all parcels located in Albemarle County) including: 1. County Engineer approval of the road; 2. County Attorney approval of the maintenance agreement. Mrs. Graves said she doesn't believe Mr. Batten should be excluded from any decision about this application. County. Mr. McCann replied he will not be excluded if his property is in Albemarle Mr. Vest seconded the motion. There was no further discussion of the motion. The vote was 6-2 for approval with Mrs. Graves and Col. Washington dissenting. Mr. Payne re-entered the meeting. THOMAS C. GENTRY RESIDENTIAL SITE PLAN - located east of Route 20 North on the north side of Route 612, tax map 63, parcel 43 in the Rivanna District. Request for a third house on a 134-acre parcel. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report, acknowledging staff feels the highway department's recommendations may be rather unreasonable because of the specifications involved. Mr. Gentry questioned the reasons for a 36-foot right-of-way for the use of only three cars. He said the road is closed on the side of Archibald Craig's property. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Col. Washington asked Mr. McCann if he had seen the area in question. Mr. McCann replied that he had and he didn't see any problems as there is not much traffic involved and even though the road is not a very good one, he said he thinks condition B should be struck. "t Col. Washington said if a road has been closed and fenced off, then in his opinion it could be considered a dead-end road. condition: Mr. Skove moved for approval (striking condition B) subject to the following 1. No building permit will be issued until the following conditions are met: a. Note parcel number (43) on the plan. Mrs. Diehl seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous for approval. RICHARD DEBUTTS FINAL PLAT - located east of Mount Alto, south of the inter- section of Rt. 626 and 735, tax map 134, parcel 9 in the Scottsville District. Proposed division of one 3-acre parcel leaving 29 acres residue. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report, noting the highway department recom- mends pavement improvements for the existing commercial entrance. Also, she noted staff had received two phone calls from a Miss Baber and a Mr. Gilmer who have asked that this submittal be deferred so they could have more time to make their comments and evaluate this subdivision. Mrs. Graves pointed out that there should be a note on the plat saying no further subdivision without Planning Commission approval. Mr. Debutts said he had bought this land with two other people because he owned land across the road and he wanted this property for protection and recreation for himself, the other buyers and their children. He said there is a house on the parcel he wishes to subdivide off and it is a nice, old house but it has been vandalized. He said that while the house is still marketable, he wants to sell it before it is burned down by vandals. He said he and the other buyers have no plans for further sub- dividing the land. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Col. Washington established with Mr. Payne that the plat is technically incorrect. Mr. Huffman asked if the C & O Railroad wanted access to the land to repair the railroad tracks, would they have to be party to a private road agreement. Mr. Payne answered that it would be advisable, but it is not always possible to get it. Mr. Huffman reported he was called by a Mr. Baber that day from Washington, D. C. who asked that this application be postponed until he could be present. He said Mr. Baber said he had no access on the road but he is an adjoining property owner. He told Mr. Baber he would pass his comments on to the Planning Commission and established that Mr. Baber's only objection is that Mr. Debutts promised back when he bought the land that he wouldn't change anything or subdivide. Mr. McCann moved for approval with staff's recommendations and two additional recommendations as follows: �n 1. This plat will not be signed until the following conditions are met: a. Health Department approval; b. Compliance with the private road provisions including: 1. County Engineer approval of road; 2. County Attorney approval of maintenance agreement; C. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation commercial entrance approval as recommended in their letter of September 7, 1979; d. Owners' notarized signatures; e. Show property line to center of right-of-way; f. No further division without Planning Commission approval. Mr. Vest seconded the motion. There was no discussion and the vote was unanimous for approval. Col. Washington told Mr. Huffman that if he should have further conversations with Mr. Baber, he might consider telling him that the Commission is not empowered to enforce a private agreement. Col. Washington: "I would like to suggest that the Commission consider expressing to Mr. Lum the fact that his plans that he submits to the Commission are technically incorrect - more than any other known surveyor or land planner we deal with, and request that he do his best to try to comply with our Ordinance. Don't know whether it will do any good or not, but seems to be almost half of the applications he submits have technical problems." Mr. McCann: "Just about every one. More than half, I think. Every one seems to have something missing on it." Col. Washington: "Would that be appropriate, Mr. Payne? Are we out of order to do such a thing?" Mr. Payne: "I think the Commission can make whatever comment it pleases, as long as it is not defammatory or something." Mrs. Diehl: "Are you suggesting that the Staff write him a letter?" Col. Washington: "Yes, expressing the views of the Commission." Mrs. Graves: "I think one change in what you say - instead of saying more than any, I'd say more than most and then you won't be singling him out as the worst one." Col. Washington: "Do we have a motion in that regard?" Mr. Vest: "So moved." Mr. McCann: "Seconded." The vote was unanimous. GARDNER FINAL PLAT - Located near Porters, south of Rt. 715, on the east side of Rt. 627, tax map 120, parcel 34 and 35 in the Scottsville District. Request for a division of five lots of 2.8 acres each. 6)r Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report noting that staff feels condition 1C is a little strenuous for this type of subdivision. Mrs. Diehl asked if it should be necessary to add a condition requiring lots 5 and 1 to use the internal road. Mr. Keeler replied that the ordinance requires this and a condition is not necessary. Mr. Gardner reported that he uses the existing entrance 99% of the time and there is 300+ feet of vision on the driveway on each side. Mr. Skove asked if it was the taper that staff found to be too much. He asked if there were no problems with sight distance mentioned in the highway department's recommendations. Col. Washington commented it was just possible that the highway department's recommendation of a taper and turn lane was because of inadequate sight distance. Mr. Keeler offered the information that the highway department historically required tapering and a turn lane for seven lots or more because seven lots were supposed to generate 50 vehicle trips per day and 50 vehicle trips per day was the requirement the highway department demanded for paving a road. He said that evidently the requirements were becoming more stringent as this was the first case he had been able to recall which required a taper and turn lane for five lots. Mr. Huffman said it bothered him that the highway department would require a private individual to build a taper and turn lane when not more than 700 or 800 yards up the road the highway department had built a road for 8 or 10 houses and did not construct a taper and turn lane for them. Mr. Gardner reported these are family plats and he did not anticipate any construction on the back lots. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mrs. Graves pointed out the fact that Mr. Lum has a 125-foot taper requirement on the plat. She said she feels the applicant agreed to the taper. Mr. Huffman said he believes Mr. Lum revised the plat after the highway de- partment made their recommendations. He said he does not remember a taper and turn lane at the site plan review meeting. Mr. Keeler commented that if the Commission disagrees with the taper and turn lane, they can strike it. Mr. Vest commented that he would like a vote to be taken tonight on this application. Mr. McCann moved for approval with staff's recommendations, striking part of Condition C and adding Condition E as follows: 1. This plat will not be signed until the following conditions are met: a. Health Department approval; b. Owners' notarized signatures; c. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of a commercial entrance; d. Compliance with the private road provisions, including: 1. County Engineer approval of road; 2. County Attorney approval of maintenance agreement; e. Remove note 5 on the plat. Mr. Vest seconded the motion. There was no discussion and the vote was unanimous for approval. THOMAS RENTAL CABINS SITE PLAN - Located on the south side of Rt. 708, between Rts. 29 South and 20 South, tax map 101, parcel 58E in Scotts- ville District. Request for addition of 16 rental cabins be added to 3 existing dwellings on a 38-acre parcel. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report mentioning that on November 19, 1970, the Board of Supervisors denied the request for a special permit to locate a mobile home park on the property. Also mentioned was a letter from an adjacent owner, a Mr. Barnett, who expressed concern over no fire protection, low rent residences and noise. for water. Mrs. Diehl asked what comments the Health Department had about using a spring Mrs. Kimsey answered the Health Department only mentioned they would have to give approval. Col. Washington commented that to the best of his knowledge, the Health De- partment will not approve a spring nowadays. Mrs. Diehl said she sees by the conditions in the staff report a refer- ence to a central well but sees nothing on the plat about a central well. She asked if there is other information indicating a central well. " Mr. Keeler suggested the condition relating to the well be changed to read central water system." Col. Washington asked if the applicant or applicant's representative was present. Receiving no answer, he announced the Commission would move on in the night's agenda and return to this application later. CRAWFORD FINAL PLAT - Located north of Rt. 708, on the east side of Rt. 29 South, tax map 88, parcel 23A in Samuel Miller District. Division of one 2-acre parcel leaving 8 acres residue. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report noting the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation recommends either a private entrance for Lot 1 or upgrade the existing entrance to a commercial entrance with a deceleration lane and widening of the entrance. Mr. Crawford said he would hate to spend $5,000.00 for another bridge to the property. He said he was just trying to give his son some property. The bridge he built some years back was built 24 feet wide with asphalt. Mr. Roger Ray, representing the applicant, says the lot has adequate V.i frontage on Rt. 29. He said Mr. Crawford and his neighbor went to considerable expense to build an entrance to the properties. He said Mr. Crawford's daughter has a right-of- way to the property he gave her and now he wants his son to have a right-of-way. There is very little traffic coming from the south to require a turn lane and taper. Only three houses use the present entrance at this time. Mr. McCann agreed that most traffic travels south from Charlottesville instead of coming from the south to Charlottesville and he sees no need for another entrance. He said he believes there is only a need to upgrade the present entrance. Mrs. Diehl agreed with Mr. McCann. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mr. McCann said he thinks it is unreasonable to have to do five thousand dollars'worth of work to give a child a piece of land. follows: Mr. Skove moved for approval striking part of condition C and reading as 1. This plat will not be signed until the following conditions are met: a. Health Department approval; b. Compliance with the private road provisions, including: 1. County Engineer approval of the road; 2. County Attorney approval of maintenance agreement; c. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation commercial entrance approval. Mr. McCann seconded the motion. There was no discussion and the vote was unanimous for approval. AMATO/TILMAN FINAL PLAT - Located in Crozet on the south side of St. George Avenue, tax map 56A(1), parcel 101 in the White Hall District. Division of one parcel into two, each a half acre. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report noting that on September 11, 1979, the Board of Zoning Appeals approved the applicant's request for a variance of size on the condition that Lot B connect to public water. Mrs. Amato stated Mr. and Mrs. Hite have rented the house on Lot B for 23 to 24 years and now they would like to buy the house. The rest of the property is to be sold to Crozet Baptist Church as they are building a new sanctuary and need an area for parking. Mr. Gillam, representing Crozet Baptist Church, reported that the Church will meet all requirements of the Health Department. They have no intention of ever building on the property and will not pave the property. The Health Department will have access to the property for repair. The Church needs the property for parking for 2 hours on Sunday morning. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mrs. Diehl asked if the cars will be parking over the septic field. Mr. Gillam replied they would not. It is written in the deed that they will 9y not park over the septic field. Mrs. Diehl moved for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. This plat will not be signed until the following conditions are met: a. Note on plat "no structure on Lot A until public sewer is avail- able;" b. Albemarle Service Authority approval of water plans and connection; c. Compliance with Board of Zoning Appeals' action of September 11, 1979. Mr. Skove seconded the motion. There was no discussion and the vote was unanimous for approval. RAPPOLT FINAL PLAT - Located 1.5 miles south of Earlysville on the north- east side of Rt. 660, tax map 44, parcel 9E in the White Hall District. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report mentioning the applicant had Planning Commission approval of this division in April, 1975, but failed to record the plat within six months after it was signed. Mrs. Diehl asked about the possible erosion problems mentioned in the staff report. Mrs. Kimsey answered that the erosion problems were mentioned in Mr. Yager's report but that she had not seen any steep slopes on the property when she went out to look at the property. Mrs. Rappolt explained that there is a creek in back of the land that had eroded over the years. She said this application started back in 1975 when she decided she wanted to give her two daughters some land. She said after the lots were approved, she did not record the plat due to the fact her daughter left for Alaska. Now her daughter has returned. She said she needs a pipestem access to the back parcel because she would have to build a bridge otherwise. There are no plans to build on the parcels at the present time. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mrs. Graves pointed out to the Commission that the stream is not shown on the plat and she thought streams were supposed to be shown on plats if the land is in the runoff area. Mr. McCann said if the highway department plans to realign the road, he saw no reason to improve the frontage. Mr. Keeler reported the fact that the highway department would not be realign- ing the road in front of the parcel. Mr. McCann asked if condition 1 "b" could be worded so that frontage improve- ments could be done at the time of any construction on the lot. Mr. Payne replied that there is always the question of if you're not going to do anything with a piece of property, why are you subdividing it. Mr. McCann said Mrs. Rappolt told the Commission she wanted to give the 9,�- land away and that there are no plans to do anything with it right now. Mr. Payne answered that there is no way to enforce that statement. Mrs. Kimsey said she would like to ask the Commission to eliminate the condi- tion requiring a grading permit since no construction is planned for the present. Mr. Skove moved for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. This plat will not be signed until the following conditions are met: a. Health Department approval; b. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of frontage improvements and private entrance as recommended in their letter of September 7, 1979; C. Locate stream and 100-foot setback line on the plat; d. Correction of Ivy District to Jack Jouett Magisterial District; e. Waiver of minimum frontage requirements; f. Correction of plat to show correct acreage; 2. Grading permit may be required. Mrs. Graves seconded the motion. The vote was 5-3 with Mr. Huffman, Mr. McCann and Mr. Vest dissenting. RAPPOLT FINAL PLAT - Located 1.5 miles north of Earlysville on the north side of Rt. 664, tax map 18, parcel 38 in White Hall District. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report noting that in April, 1975, the Planning Commission approved the nine lot division but the applicant failed to record the plats within six months. She also noted the parcels are not served by easements. Mrs. Rappolt stated the old road bed has been there since 1924. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mr. McCann asked if it will be necessary to fill the old road through there to get the 15 to 18-foot frontage requirements. Mr. Keeler answered there will probably be a need for fill dirt to get a direct access from lots to road. For lot 2 to get a direct access, a significant amount of fill will be needed. Mr. McCann said he thinks the road improvement requirements by the highway department are unreasonable. He moved for approval with the following conditions: 1. This plat will not be signed until the following conditions are met: a. Health Department approval; b. Culverts for driveways be set back to the 18-foot ditchline. Discussion: Col. Washington asked the applicant is she had looked into the cost of fill and improvements. Mrs. Rappolt replied that she had and the cost was so prohibitive that she decided to apply for a 3-lot instead of 9-lot subdivision. She said if she had left it the way it was originally intended, by the time the improvements were made, the lots would E have been priced too high to be competitive. She expressed concern about the fact that improvements required caused property to be so expensive that the "little person" and young people could not afford to buy land any more. She said she had wanted to sell the original 9 lots one at a time very slowly when she needed the money, thereby allowing the area to develop slowly with each buyer doing with the lot what he wished. She said that now she will just try to sell the three lots and find a buyer for the residue as she cannot afford the improvements. Mr. Keeler said that if the applicant found that the fill required would be too expensive, she could return and ask the Commission for relief from the conditions at a later date. Mr. McCann said he didn't think the applicant should have to return. Mr. Vest seconded the motion made by Mr. McCann. The vote was 6-2 with Mr. Skove and Mrs. Graves dissenting. Mrs. Graves said she felt the Commission could not specifically change the highway department's recommendations. TIFFANY COUNTRY STORE FINAL PLAT - Located south of I-64, north of Rt. 250 West, tax map 55, parcel 19C in the White Hall District. Request is for a division of a 2.001-acre parcel leaving 28 acres residue. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report mentioning the highway department recommends that as additional development occurs, a right turn lane should be required Mr. Rick Richmond informed the Commission that he is the attorney for Mr. John Ewald, and Mr. Ewald has no objection to this application. Mr. Ewald is now the owner of the entire property where Patricia Ann's County Store is located. He said the application was originally in the name of Mrs. Tiffany. The entire property has now been sold to Mr. John Ewald, whose wife operates a catalogue sales operation which will be done from the premises. Mrs. Ewald's business will not be open to the public daily. Mr. Payne informed the Commission that the entire parcel was sold with a buy back clause. There can be one store on the entire 30 acres. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. The Commission discussed the fact that several conditions were not met when the special permit was granted several years ago to the previous owners. Mr. Keeler said that it was his understanding that these conditions will now be met by the Ewalds. Mrs. Diehl moved for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. This plat will not be signed until the following conditions are met: a. Correct the zoning to A-1 on the plat from B-1; b. Health Department approval; C. Owners' notarized signatures; d. Compliance with the private road provisions (by all parcels served by this easement) including: 1. County Engineer approval of the road; 2. County Attorney approval of the maintenance agreement; e. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation commercial entrance approval as recommended in their letter of September 7, 1979; G'AJ' f. Note lot number on plat. Mr. McCann seconded the motion. �%r✓ There was no further discussion and the vote was unanimous for approval. MANSON AND UTLEY OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE SITE PLAN - Located off Rt. 29 North on the north side of Northside Drive in the Northside Industrial Park, tax map 32, parcel 72 in the Rivanna District. Request for 2 office and warehouse buildings. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report mentioning erosion difficulties. Mr. Keeler explained that rain water does not enter the 18-inch pipes pro- vided but pops over the pipes and runs down to Route 29 creating a delta because of the silt. Mr. Payne said that Condition "C" (grading permit) is very important in this case. He said no building permit will be issued until the erosion problem is solved. Mr. Utley stated he understood when they bought the property that a substantial amount of money was in escrow fund to correct the erosion on the entire group of lots which has not been done. Mr. Payne said the permit which existed was revoked in accordance with the Ordinance. The Ordinance provides that if you don't comply with the plan that you submit, and you don't clean up your act after the Zoning Administrator orders you to do so, he can revoke your permit and Mr. Hurt has done that in this case. So there is no permit at this point. There is a bond outstanding, but he said he doesn't know what the amount is but he said he has notified the surety that the principle is in default and the County is going to sue and that is where things are now. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mrs. Graves noted'industrial park" and "periwinkle" are misspelled on the site plan and should be corrected. She then moved for approval with staff's recommendations as follows: 1. No building permit will be issued until the following conditions are met: a. Health Department approval; b. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation commercial entrance approval as recommended in their letter of September 7, 1979; C. Grading permit; d. Note: "Landscaping to be maintained and replaced if any should die;" 2. A certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until the following condi- tion is met: a. Fire Official approval. Mrs. Diehl seconded the motion. There was no further discussion and the vote was unanimous for approval. FIRST VIRGINIA BANK DRIVE-IN BANK SITE PLAN - Located in Crozet IGA-Shopping Center, off north side of Rt. 240, tax map 56A(2), parcel 29 in the White P__ Hall District. Request to locate T.V. Teller unit. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report noting that it would appear the location of the proposed remote teller units may be difficult for vehicles entering from the westernmost entrance from Rt. 240. Marilyn Gale, representing the applicant, stated she drove a rather large car to the site and exited to the far left with no difficulty. She said the grade is high, visibility is good. Col. Washington said he understood the real reason the bank is making a change is because there is a traffic problem with the present drive-thru window. When the big trucks come in to service the stores, the turn on the corner is so sharp they actually drive up on the sidewalk to get around it. So if people park their cars there and try to get back, he said he has visions of somebody getting caught between the wall and a truck. He says people aren't going to stay in their cars after parking them there. Mrs. Diehl asked if he was suggesting that the area should be employee parking. Col. Washington answered that he was suggesting that if the area was employee parking, it would be a lot safer. Mr. Keeler said the reason for the condition relating to Fire Official approval came about because there is a gas island with underground storage tanks and access to these tanks has been improperly installed. The manhole covers are high enough to get the bottom of a car caught on them. Staff suggestion is for Fire Official approval for the entire shopping center, inasmuch as this application is being made by the owner of the shopping center on behalf of First Virginia Bank. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mrs. Graves asked is there isn't supposed to be a sedimentation basin in the back of the bank area. She asked if the new parking was to go over the existing septic field. She said she would like a condition added for Health Department approval so that these questions could be answered. Mr. McCann moved for approval with the recommendations made by staff and a new condition to be added and reading as follows: 1. No building permit will be issued until the following conditions are met: a. Note on site plan some type of bumper guards to be used to identify the parking stalls in the gravel area; b. Note curbing on site plan around the access to the remote T.V. bank; C. Fire Official approval; d. Health Department approval. Mrs. Diehl seconded the motion. There was no further discussion and the vote was unanimous for approval. NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST/PANTOPS SITE PLAN - Located on the west side of State Farm Boulevard, south of Rt. 250 east, tax map 78, Lot 1, in the Rivanna District. Request for a bank location. Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report mentioning that the Virginia wad Department of Highways and Transportation commented that urban street design may be necessary. UM• Mr. Keeler reminded the Commission that in a prior application the highway department commented on the fact that they did not want any properties along State Farm Boulevard to have direct access to State Farm Blvd. Staff feels, however, that State Farm Blvd. serves a different function than Route 29 North since it is not a through road. He reminded the Commission that the words "urban street design" mean a design having deceleration lanes and turn lanes. Staff feels that in this particular application, they recommend redesigning the entrance to allow an "in" lane only and allowing only one "out" lane where there were two "out" lanes. Mr. Dale Hamilton, of Stainback and Scribner, representing the applicant, said there should be no reason for a decel lane as cars will be going slowly. He said, however, they would like two exits and feel they are necessary and also they feel an "in" and "out" lane at the entrance will be necessary so no backup of traffic will occur. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. The Commission discussed the traffic pattern at some length and referred to the plat in their discussions. Mrs. Graves said she feels the traffic circulation is very unwieldy. Mrs. Diehl moved for approval with the following recommendations: 1. No Building Permit will be issued until the following conditions are met: a. Health Department approval; b. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of the commercial entrance plus one-way entrance only as recommended in their letter of September 7, 1979; c. Grading permit; d. Fire Official approval of hydrant locations; e. Staff approval of landscape plans; f. One lane exit only on future street until future street connections are complete. Dr. Moore seconded the motion. The vote was 7-1 with Mrs. Graves dissenting. WINDHAM PLACE SITE PLAN - Located in Crozet on the west side of Rt. 240, tax map 56A(1), parcels 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 60A, 58 and 59 in the White Hall District. Request to locate an adult living center, library, bank and convenience store on a 3-acre parcel. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report mentioning that no grading will be necessary and that paving already exists. Mr. Gareau, of Land Planning and Design Associates, explained that there is adequate sight distance upon entering and leaving the site, that major parking will be at the rear of the site, and there will be no on -street parking in the future. Mr. Wilcox, the applicant, mentioned that Health Department approval and State Water Control Board approval is still needed for the new bank building. Col. Washington asked how on -street parking could be prevented. Mr. Keeler answered that on -street parking is permitted now because there is not adequate parking available now but the site plan shows adequate parking in the future. Mr. Payne said you cannot require the highway department post streets and that is the only way to stop on -street parking. However, the highway department recommends a decel lane for this application and they won't require a decel lane and then allow parking on it. Mr. Thompson, representing the Albemarle Service Authority, said condition 1 "e" needed a little clarification and suggested a new condition that would cover approval of the Department of Health and State Water Control Board. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mrs. Graves asked for the Fire Official's comments. Mr. Wilcox stated the Fire Official said he would like a letter from the City Fire Chief stating that they will co-operate with a hook and ladder in the event of need for the main building. Mr. Keeler read the Fire Official's comments to the Commission. Mrs. Diehl moved for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. No Building Permit will be issued until the following conditions are met: a. County Engineer approval of drainage system and curbing on site plan; b. Grading permit; C. Runoff control permit; d. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation commercial entrance as recommended in their letter of September 7, 1979; e. Albemarle Service Authority approval of water and sewer plans (and other appropriate authorities); vad f. Conceptual approval of connection of the new buildings to the package treatment plant by Virginia Department of Health and State Water Control Board; 2. No Certificate of Occupancy will be issued until the following condition is met: a. Fire Official approval. Mr. Vest seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous for approval. THOMAS RENTAL CABINS SITE PLAN continuation . . . . Mr. Hackenberg, representing the applicant, said it is the applicant's intent to use the spring on the property for water if the Health Department approves. If there is too much bacteria in the water or not enough water, then a well will be drilled. Mrs. Graves asked if the dwellings are laid out so that they can be subdivided in the future. Mr. Hackenberg answered that the project needs to be under single ownership. ship. Mr. Huffman commented that that would be creating a self-imposed hard- LIM Mrs. Diehl established the area is wooded. Mr. Hackenberg established there is sufficient percolation of the soil in the area to prevent contamination of the springs. Mr. McCann moved for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. No Building Permit will be issued until the following conditions are met: a. Health Department approval of the septic system; b. Central water system to include use of springs and shall be approved by all appropriate authorities; C. Compliance with the private road provisions including: 1. County Engineer approval of the road; d. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of the commercial entrance including turn lane with taper, frontage improvements and sight distance as recommended in their letter of September 7, 1979. Mr. Huffman seconded the motion. Mrs. Diehl stated she will support the motion but does so reluctantly. The vote was 6-2 with Col. Washington and Mrs. Graves dissenting. With no further business to discuss, the Commission adjourned. The time was 12:40 a.m. �al 9 19