Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11 27 79 PC MinutesNovember 27, 1979 The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on Tuesday, November 27, 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. James Huffman; Mr. Layton McCann; Mr. Charles Vest; Dr. James Moore; and Mr. James Skove. Other officials present were Mr. Frederick Payne, Deputy County Attorney; and Miss Mason Caperton, Planner. Commission members who were absent were Mr. Kurt Gloeckner and Mrs. Joan Graves. Also absent was Mr. Timothy Lindstrom, ex-Officio. Col. Washington called the meeting to order after establishing that a quorum was present. Col. Washington deferred consideration of the minutes to a later date. PHILLIPS/BROOKS FINAL PLAT - Property described as part of parcel 22 on tax map 9; White Hall District; located off the east side of Route 663, north of Route 806 on the Lynch River. Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. Brooks, on behalf of the applicant, explained that this is a transfer of property from his mother-in-law to his wife. The present house is too large for his mother-in-law to maintain and his wife will be the purchaser of the house with 2.51 acres of land. Miss Caperton said the easement is not shown on the plat and needs to be put on but she is under the impression that the easement will measure approximately 10 feet. Col. Washington explained to Mr. Brooks that the Planning Commission looks at subdivisions from the view of resale or transfer and the future ease of doing so. He said since the easement is an unspecified width, the Planning Commission has a problem with this situation. Col. Washington established that three residences would be using the entrance to the property. Dr. Moore asked how three residences could be using the property since it has not be subdivided. Mr. Brooks replied that the property has already been subdivided and that the applicants would like approval from the Planning Commission but they don't think it is absolutely necessary. Col. Washington said he would entertain a motion for deferral until the County Attorney could check on the legality of the subdivision that has taken place and until requirements are met for the stated width of the right-of-way. Dr. Moore moved for deferral. Mr. Huffman seconded. The vote was unanimous for deferral. �G� Mr. Payne entered the meeting. IVY WEST RENTAL COTTAGES SITE PLAN - Property described as parcel 12F on tax map 42, Samuel Miller District; located off the north side of Route 676, west of Route 678. Request for 2 additional cottages (rental) making a total of 5 cottages. Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. Mike Boggs, representing the applicant, reported the applicant lives close by. All renters are working couples. There is little traffic. The right-of- way was created in 1904. Never any accidents on entering the property or exiting. The applicant never has had any intention of subdividing the property. Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Col. Washington established the distance to Rt. 676 is 2 mile. He inquired about sight distance at the entrance. Miss Caperton said the road is a non -posted road which the Highway Department feels should require 550 feet required sight distance. Mr. Skove asked if each cottage can be subdivided in the future with 2 acres. Mr. Boggs answered that subdivision can take place under an RPN as each cottage has sixty thousand square feet. He went on to say that the paved right-of- way to the property is one of the better maintained in the County. The applicant takes the position that the entrance is an existing commercial entrance and has been used as so since 1936. The cottages will require no grading except for foundations and septic fields. Mr. McCann moved for approval following staff's recommendation of no conditions. Mr. Huffman seconded the motion. Col. Washington expressed the opinion that this is another instance of a road not being posted that should be posted. The vote was unanimous for approval. MEL DIXON OFFICE BUILDING SITE PLAN - Property described as parcel 53A, tax map 61, Rivanna District; located on the south side of Rio Road East, east of the Southern Railroad. Proposal to locate a three-story office building with 12,000 square feet. Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. Dixon stated he had no comment and had no problem with the staff's recommendations. Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Mrs. Diehl established there is no appreciable difference between this plan and the previous one. Mr. Skove moved for approval with the staff's recommendations as follows: 1. A building permit will not be issued until the following conditions have been met: a. Fire Official approval of screening of dumpster; b. County Engineer approval of the stormwater detention provisions; C. Compliance with the Soil Erosion Ordinance; d. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of commercial entrance; e. Written Health Department approval; f. Staff approval of landscape plan; g. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water plans. Mrs. Diehl seconded the motion. There was no discussion and the vote was unanimous for approval. IVY MEADOWS FINAL PLAT - Property described as parcel 81F on tax map 57 and parcel 11 on tax map 58, Samuel Miller District; located on the west side of Route 708, south of the C & O Railroad, west of Ivy. Proposal to divide 14 parcels totalling 3.452 acres, leaving 25.844 acres in common open space. All lots except lots 6 and 7 have common building lines. Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. W. W. Stevenson stated he felt it should be noted that there is an ease- ment across lots 6 and 7 for sewer lines to the septic field for lots 5A and B and 6. He said he also thinks it should be noted that wells will be in the common open space areas also. Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Mr. Skove established that the earlier objections that the fire marshall had have now been taken care of with this plat. Mr. McCann moved for approval with staff's recommendations and two new recommendations taking care of Mr. Stevenson's suggestions and reading as follows: 1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions have been met: a. Compliance with conditions 1-3 of ZMA-79-09; b. County Attorney approval of homeowners' agreements to include the maintenance of Ivywood Lane and the use of open space for septic facilities; C. Health Department approval of two septic field locations for each unit; d. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of im- provements to Route 708 and commercial entrance; e. Compliance with the Soil Erosion and Runoff Control Ordinances; f. No buildings are to be located on slopes in excess of 250; g. County Engineer approval of any feature of the septic system within the septic setback, if needed; h. Note septic easements over lots 6 and 7; i. Staff approval of appropriate notes on the plat for the allowance of wells in the open space. Mr. Vest seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous for approval. -:;;I01 KIRTLEY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY WAREHOUSE SITE PLAN - Property described as parcel 23B(l) on tax map 59, Samuel Miller District; located on the north side of Route 250 West adjacent to the Kirtley Realty Office Building. Proposal for a 5,000 square -foot drive -through warehouse building. Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. Carwile, representing the applicant, said the applicant objects to the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation entrance requirements. It would be reasonable and proper to make a decision on the entrance relative to the litigation between Mr. Kirtley's original site plan and the Highway Department. Mr. Payne stated he doesn't recommend abiding by Mr. Carwile's suggestion. He reminded the Commission that Mr. Kirtley has the right to challenge any condition. He also reminded the Commission that this is the third addition on the site and there is still no deceleration lane. Mr. Carwile suggested that the Commission could make the condition of the entrance conditional on the outcome of litigation. Mr. Kirtley could post a bond which would be subject to the result of the court decision. Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Mr. McCann asked if the court will decide whether there is to be a deceleration lane or not. Mr. Payne answered yes. Dr. Moore reminded the Commission that the court is not considering this present increase of use. Mr. Payne said it is not theoretically advisable to make a condition subject to a court decision. He said he will not approve a bond subject to the outcome of litigation. Mr. Carwile suggested a building permit not be denied but a certificate of occupancy could be denied pending the outcome of the litigation. Mr. Payne reminded the Commission that Mr. Dick's interpretation of the con- ditions on the previous application is at variance with his interpretation and that Mr. Dick issued a building permit to Mr. Kirtley when staff, Mr. Tucker and the Planning Commission did not mean for him to have a permit. lot. Mr. Carwile stated the required deceleration lane goes beyond Mr. Kirtley's Mrs. Diehl asked what was found regarding the water system at Site Review. Miss Caperton answered that it was found that an unreasonable length of pipe was required to connect to public water and no other suggestions were made re- garding this problem. Mr. Vest. moved for approval of the application subject to staff's recom- mendations as follows: 1. A building permit will not be issued until the following conditions have been met: a. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of commercial entrance; p21G) b. Staff approval of landscaping, including screening within the grass area on the west side of the building; c. Written Health Department approval; d. County Engineer approval of pavement specifications and drainage; e. Fire Official approval of trash storage; f. Note the number of employees; staff approval of change in parking, if required. Mr. Skove seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous for approval. MIRAN FOREST, SECTION 2, FINAL PLAT - Property described as parcel 40 on tax map 85, Samuel Miller District; located between Routes 692 and 694, 1.3 miles southeast of Batesville. Proposal to divide the remaining 13 lots leaving a total of 273+/- acres in natural area. Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. Tom Shumate, representing the applicant, had no comment. Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Col. Washington established that Hartwood Road is a private road. Mr. Shumate said the applicant would like to request bonding of Hartwood Road since winter is coming and the road probably won't be finished until next summer. Mr. Huffman stated he would like to see all lots enter on the internal road with the exception of Lot 17. Mr. Payne suggested that a note be put on the plat concerning Mr. Huffman's suggestion. Mr. McCann said probably no traffic will be generated on the road until summer and he approves of the bonding. He moved for approval with the addition of another condition speaking to Mr. Huffman's suggestion and reading as follows: 1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions have been met: a. Compliance with the private road provisions, including: 1. County Engineer approval of road plans for Section 2; 2. County Attorney approval of maintenance agreements; b. Compliance with Soil Erosion and Runoff Control Ordinances; C. Hartwood Road shall be completed or bonded prior to final approval; d. Note on plat: "All lots to enter onto interior roads except lot 17." Mr. Vest seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous for approval. MOUNTAIN HOLLOW, LOTS 11, 30-35 FINAL PLAT - Property described as part of parcel 1 on tax map 70 and tax map 69B, parcel 11, White Hall District; located on the east side of Route 650, north of Route 250 West. Proposal to divide lots 30-35 (14+ acres) and lot 11 (2.050 acres) leaving 48+/- acres residue. A Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. Tiffany, the applicant, explained that the lots are in conformity with the master plan and the back lots are being platted now. He said a large portion has been sold as a 16-acre tract to Dr. Middleton. Mr. Nicholas Spencer, who lives adjacent to Lot 1, said he is confused as to which is Lot 30. Miss Caperton explained that there are different sections of Mountain Hollow that have the same numbers. Mr. Tony Crusco stated he just moved to Mountain Hollow 2 months ago and wondered if the covenants he is supposed to abide by apply to other lots in the subdivision. Col. Washington said the Planning Commission has no forcing authority with neighborhood covenants and that civil action is the only recourse available to anyone at odds with neighborhood covenants. Mr. Walt Brown, another neighbor, complained about the covenants also. He complained that Mr. Tiffany was building a house that appeared to have less than 1500- square-feet when the covenants forbid this. Mr. Clay Holmes expressed concern about the Greenwood school and the addition of more students as a result of this proposal. He said he is worried about busing. Col. Washington explained that the Greenwood Elementary School's closing is a live issue but not because of over -capacity but rather because of under - capacity and structural problems. Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Mrs. Diehl established there is no central well system because there is no demand on the part of the property owners. Col. Washington established that the applicant has no problems with the conditions. Mr. McCann moved for approval with staff's recommendations as follows: 1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions have been met: a. Written Health Department approval; b. Any lots proposed to be connected to the central well system will require the appropriate approvals; C. Shared entrances be located, where appropriate, subject to the approval of the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation; d. Show the departing line for the 50-foot "proposed street" and a waiver of this pipestem is required; e. Correct tax map and parcel number for lot 11 (69B-11). Mr. Huffman seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous for approval. 9 ROBERT CRAFT RESIDENTIAL SITE PLAN - Property described as parcel 64D on tax map 58, Samuel Miller District; located between Routes 738 and 250 West, 19/1;� west of Ivy. Proposal for a log house and garage with guest quarters on the parcel with an existing house. Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. Morris Foster, representing the applicant, said he had no problems with the conditions. Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Mrs. Diehl established that three total dwellings were included in the estima- ted pupil growth. Mr. Skove moved for approval with staff's recommendations as follows: 1. A building permit will not be issued until the following conditions are met: a. Written Health Department approval; b. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of a commercial entrance; C. Dedication of 25 feet from the centerline of Route 738 by separate deed or plat and recorded. Mr. Vest seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous for approval. CRAIG FINAL PLAT - Property described as parcel 6A on tax map 43, Jack Jouett District; located on the north side of Route 676, between Routes 601 and 614. Proposal to divide the 8+ acre parcel into 4 lots with access off a private road. Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Morris Foster, representing the applicant, says he doesn't think the entrance to Lot 1 should be any problem until the conversion is made from private road. He has no other comments. Mr. Roland Cronemeyer, who owns property directly to the east, said there was a previous survey in August, 1956 and there are several differences between the two surveys. The previous plat (of August, 1956) is part of the deed of the original sale of that property to a Miss Bruce and the deed at that time had an area generally along the line where the easement is for a private road that is restrictive for any sewerage or septic system. This does not appear on the recent survey. He said the restriction was to prevent runoff into a spring on his property which is a secondary source of water to them. He said the traffic on Garth Road is non -tolerable and there is a passing zone on the stretch along this property. Mr. Thomas Craven, another neighbor, said he is concerned about drainage also. He wanted to know how many people from the Planning Commission and Planning Department have been on the property concerned. He is worried about wells and septic tanks being too close together. Mr. Foster said the problem with the previous surveying was inaccuracy. He feels the widening of the entrance will achieve the sight distance necessary. Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Mr. McCann stated that since this proposal meets the requirements of the Ordinance, he moved for approval subject to recommendations made by the staff: 1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions have been met: a. Compliance with the private road provisions, including: 1. County Engineer approval of road plans; 2. County Attorney approval of maintenance agreements; b. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of a commercial entrance; C. Compliance with Soil Erosion and Runoff Control Ordinances. Mr. Skove seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous for approval. Col. Washington stated the restrictions on the deed still prevail. FAIRGROVE, PHASE III FINAL PLAT - Property described as parcel 25 on tax map 30, Rivanna District; located on the east side of Route 662, north of Route 660 and east of the Rivanna Reservoir. Proposed division of 29 lots with an average size of about 2.7 acres. Miss Caperton presented the staff report mentioning that staff recommended in their list of conditions a reversal of the corner lot setbacks with 75 feet on Route 662 and 30 feet on the interior roads. Mr. Morris Foster, representing the applicant, said he had hoped to have the Soil Scientist's report but the weather prohibited the work being done on time. He went on to say that reversing the building lines is an interpretation of the Ordinance and his interpretation is not the same. Mr. Payne agreed with Mr. Foster that the Ordinance seems to have conflicting provisions. He said when the A-1 zone was amended, the setback was bumped back to 75 feet and he feels the correct interpretation is 75 feet on both sides of a corner lot. After discussion at some length, Mr. Foster requested permission to check the lots extensively and he would like a compromise and go to 50-foot side yards instead of 30-foot side yards. He said he had no objection to talking with the builder to try and get more setback. Mrs. Diehl established frontage improvements and turn lanes were required before by the Highway Department. She said she has a problem with approval if all frontage improvements are not done as this would create a non -tolerable road. The road is poor, narrow and is a gravel road. Mr. Skove established the paved section of the road is 200 feet. Mr. McCann moved for approval with staff's conditions of approval as follows: 1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions have been met: a. Written Health Department approval of two septic drainfields and well locations; b. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of commercial entrances; C. Compliance with the Soil Erosion and Runoff Control Ordinances; d. Compliance with the private road provisions, including: 1. County Engineer approval of road plans; 2. County Attorney approval of maintenance agreements; M e. No buildings or septic systems are to be located on slopes of greater than 25%; provide evidence showing that lots 23-25 have adequate building sites and staff approval of any necessary revisions; f. Note on the plat: "All lots except lot 1 shall have access on interior roads;" g. Soil studies to determine the suitability of septic drainfields to be provided by a soil scientist approved by the Health Department; h. Owner's notarized signature; i. Note on plat: "No further division along 40-foot easement without Planning Commission approval." Mr. Huffman seconded the motion. The vote was 4-3 with Mrs. Diehl, Dr. Moore and Col. Washington dissenting. With no further items on the agenda to discuss, the Commission proceeded into Executive Session at 10:30 p.m. a/5 19