Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 19741191 February 4, 1974 This was a regular meeting of the Albemarle County Planning Commission held on February 4, 1974 at 7:30 p.m. in the auditorium of Piedmont Virginia Community College, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were: Dr. Avery Catlin, Chairman; Mr. Clifton McClure, Vice -Chairman; Mr. David Carr, Dr. James Sams, Mr. Wilbur Tinsley, Mr. Louis Staley, Mrs. Ellen Craddock, and Mr. Lloyd Wood, Supervisor. Absent were Mr. Rinehart and Mr. Easter. Dr. Catlin called the meeting to order and established that quorum was present. Deferred item: SP-272 Hickory Ridge PUD Subdivision Located west side Route 665 at intersection Route 662, 3 miles NW of Earlysville. There was a discussion among Planning Commission members as to whether they were to have received copies of the restrictive convenants. Mr. McClure said he compared the convenants and articles of incor- poration and that they were in agreement with the conditions imposed in the approval of the SP. Dr. Sams wanted to know if the staff had any final recommendations? Mr. Tucker stated that the staff recommended approval with the condition that the staff have a chance to review the restrictive convenants. Mr. Carr wanted to know if backup locations of septic fields were shown on the plat? It was ascertained that they were shown on the site plan but not on the plat. /and Section 2 Mr. Carr made a motion to approve Section I of Hickory Ridge subject to: staff's approval in cooperation with the County Attorney of the homeowner's agreement, that the back up locations of septic fields be legally identified and made a part of the plat for clusters in Section 1. Mrs. Craddock seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Upon request by the applicant, Mr. Carr motioned that UP-74-01 be moved to the end of the agenda. Mr. McClure seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 11Q2 a) ZMP-294. India R. Whiting has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to rezone 3.697 acres,from_A-1 Agricultural to RS-1 Residential. Property is situated on the west side of Route 708, and the south side of the C & 0 Railway, about 2 miles west of Ivy. Property is further described as County Tax Map 58, Parcel 13, Samuel Miller Magisterial District. The public hearing was opened and there was no comment except the husband of the applicant explaining exact location and surroundings of the property. /motioned Mrs. Craddock approval the request as it was in keeping with the neighborhood and compatible with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Tinsley seconded the motion which carried unanimously. b) ZMP-295 Monticello Home Builders, Inc. has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to rezone 6.3 acres from A-1 Agricultural to RS-1 Residential. Property is situated on the west side of Route 704, about 114 miles south of Keene. Property is further described as County Tax Map 121, Parcel 39. Scottsville Magisterial District. Mr. Carr tried to ascertain whether the property was near the church. Mr. Tucker noted that the line for the cluster in the Comprehensive Plan was general. He stated that the staff was of the opinion that the parcel is beyond the intent where the cluster should be and should remain in the agricultural zone. Mr. Carr noted that the need for houses on small lots was in demand. It was noted that the average lot size surrounding the property was 6 acres and that the request was quite a bit below this. Dr. Sams motioned that the request be denied with Mr. Tinsley seconding the motion. The motion carried with Mr. Staley voting against the motion. c) ZMP-296 Monticello Home Builders, Inc. has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to rezone 4.37 acres from A-1 Agricultural to RS-1 Residential. Property is situated on the west side of Route 744, at the intersection on Interstate 64, about 1� miles east of Shadwell. Property is further described as County Tax Map 80, Parcel 44. Rivanna Magisterial District. Mr. Tucker read the staff report commenting that if the Keswick cluster develops as generally proposed in the Comprehensive Plan, the 1193 area is better suited for the center for commercial activity. However, the established pattern is single family residential. The existing pattern should be recognized. The public hearing was opened and it was ascertained that this property was bisected by I-64. Upon questioning by Mrs. Craddock, Mr. Bolton stated that there was maybe one lot that was visible from I-64. Mrs. Craddock wanted to know if there was any policy on rezoning land so close to the Interstate which would allow residential buildings. Mrs. Craddock asked if they approved the request could they require screening? Dr. Catlin replied that this was a rezoning and they could not but they would have a chance when they reviewed the plat. Mr. McClure noted that this was a 3-lot subdivision which was usually approved administratively. Mr. Carr motioned that the request for RS-1 be approved. Mr. McClure seconded the motion which carried unanimously. d) SP-321. Herbert and Gertrude Scott have petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to locate a mobile home on 10 acres zoned A-1 Agricultural. Property is situated on the east side of Route 627 at Porter's Precinct. Property is further described as County Tax Map 120, Parcel 44, Scottsville Magisterial District. Mr.Tucker read the staff report commenting that if the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors approve this petition, it should be conditioned upon 100' setback from Route 826 and County Building Official approval. Mrs. Craddock motioned approval of the request conditioned upon: 1) 100' setback from Route 826 2)�°yeaprsra end of which they would have to come back before the Commission 3) County Building Official approval 4)screening, leave as much screening as possible. Dr. Sams noted that this was a 10 acre tract and did not see the purpose of screening. Mrs. Craddock changed condition #4 to read: leave 1194 as much screening as possible between the mobile home and the road. Mr. McClure seconded the motion which carried unanimously. e) SP-322 David W. Moore has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to locate a veterinary office on part of 6.05 acres zoned A-1 Agricultural (Planned Community). Property is situated on the west side of Four Seasons Drive and the south side of Route 631 (Rio Road). Property is further described as County Tax Map 61X(1), Parcel 2 (part thereof) Charlottesville Magisterial District. Mr. Tucker read the staff report stating that if the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors approve this petition, it should be conditioned upon no keeping of animals overnight and the veterinary office be used only for small animals. Mr. McClure asked Mr. Moore if he could comply with the condition " no keeping of animals overnight"? Dr. Moore stated that most of his business would be on an out -patient basis however, he thought it would be necessary to keep very sick animals overnight. Mr. Craig stated that there would be no "boarding" of animals on this property but they board animals in the M-1 zone across the road. Mr. McClure recommended approval of the request with the following conditions: 1) treatment of small animals only 2) no boarding of animals on the premises. Dr. Sams seconded the motion . Mr. Tinsley and Mrs. Craddock suggested that round -proof walls be made a part of the motion, which was in agreement with the other Planning Commission members. "Boarding" was defined as no keeping of animals on the premises overnight except sick animals needing treatment. The motion carried with Mr. Carr voting against it. f)Samuel F. Byers, Jr. has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to locate a mobile home on 3.08 acres of land zoned A-1 Agricultural. Property is situated on the east side of Route 649 (Proffit Road), about 1 mile north of Proffitt. Property is further described as County Tax Map 46, Parcel 33 (part thereof). Rivanna Magisterial District. 19 9 1195% Mr. Tucker read the staff report stating that no screening was necessary. He said that if the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors approve the petition, it should be conditioned upon County Building Official Approval and a minimum setback requirement of 30 feet from access road. After a brief discussion, Mr. Tinsley motioned for approval of 1) the permit for a period of 5 years after which time it would have to come back before the Commission, 2) 30' setback from the access road 3) Building Official Approval. Mr. McClure seconded the motion which carried unanimously. g) SP-324. Charles and Dianne Durham have petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to locate a mobile home on 10.53 acres zoned A-1 Agricultural. Property is situated on the east side of Route 740, near its intersection with Route 22. Property is further described as County Tax Map 65, Parcel 102A. Rivanna Magisterial District. Mr. Tucker read the staff report commenting that the mobile home was presently located on the property which was in violation, and the staff was presently drafting a letter to the Commonwealth Attorney. He stated that if the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors approve the petition, it should be conditioned upon County Building Official Approval, screening along Route 740 and 100' setback. It was noted that the landowner was the applicant's uncle, however, Mr. Durham stated that he gave him $20 per month in appreciation for letting him stay on the land. He stated that he looked after the land for his uncle. Upon questioning by Mr. Tinsley,it was noted that the applicant owned his mobile home. Mr. Durham told the Commission that he was only aware that he had to have a special permit when he called to get the electrical hook-up approved and was informed of this. Mr. Tinsley stated that all of the people in that area were related and that he would like to motion approval of the permit with the 1196 following conditions: 1) 5 year approval at end of which time the applicant would have to come back before the Commission 2) County Building Official approval3) screening along Route 740 and 4) 100' setback. Dr. Sams seconded the motion. Mr. Carr said since this approval was not in keeping with their policy of rental mobile home applicants and was a special case, he thought 5 years was too long a time period and would like to change condition #1 to read: for a total of 2 years with. yearly administrative approval up to a total of five years subject to the conditions being satisfied. Mr. Tinsley was in agreement with this. The motion as amended carried unanimously. h) SP-325. James H. Zimmerman has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to locate a mobile home on 4.27 acres zoned A-1 Agricultural. Property is situated on the east side of Route 630, about 4 miles south of Alberene. Property is further described as County Tax Map 119, Parcel 14 A. Scottsville Magisterial District. As the applicant was not present, Mr. McClure motioned for deferral of the petition, which was seconded by Mr. Carr and carried unanimously. The Commission asked the staff to put this on the agenda as soon as possible but not at a work shop meeting. i) Lawrence Hackney has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to locate a mobile home on 1 acre zoned A-1 Agricultural. Property is situated on the east side of Route 616 adjacent to the C & 0 Railway. Property is further described as County Tax Map 80, Parcel 155. Rivanna Magisterial District. Mr. Tucker read the staff report commenting that if the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors approve the petition, it should be conditioned upon County Building Official Approval, the existing building to be used for storage only or torn down, 100' setback and screening along Route 616. The applicant told the Commission that he had already planted some fruit trees there and planned to plant some pines. He stated that he would like to use the existing building for storage and move it to the adjacent parcel. 1197 Mr. Carr motioned approval of the permit with the following conditions: 1) County Building Official approval. 2) the existing building to be used for storage only or torn down (applicant said he would like /it /it to use for storage and move to adjacent property) 3) 100' setback 4) screening along Route 616 5) 5 year permit at the end of which time he would have to come back before the Commission. Mr. Tinsley secondedthe motion which carried unanimously. Mrs. Craddock said that she would like for the records to show that this was a non -conforming 1-acre lot. j) UP-74-01 Dr. Charles William Hurt has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to amend the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, with the addition of Section 8-1-27(13), to allow asphalt plants in the M-1 Industrial zone with a Special Use Permit. Mr. Tucker read the staff report commenting: " The intent as stated previously of the M-1 zone would dictate that the proposed use as a permitted use by right would not be compatible in the M-1 zone where it abuts residential use. However, added controls and conditions could be applied to the use under the Special Use Provisions. It would appear, that the proposed use could comply with the intent of the M-2 zone. However, M-2 zones are not suited to be located near or adjacent to residential, or commercial zones. Therefore, the staff would suggest that both the County and applicant of the proposed use find themselves in a situation that appears to be unsolvable. The staff concludes that such a use is supplemental to and compatible with an area now being utilized for a quarry and suggests that this is probably the only solution available to the applicant. We make this sugges- tion because if a plant is located in an existing area being quarried, the source of aggregate is readily at hand, thereby precluding additional truck traffic bringing raw material in to the site, thereby hopefully, reducing the overall cost of operation with a result of savings being given to the consumer. We conclude that asphalt mixing or batch plant is an accessory use of the quarry and would be better located on such a facility, when (considering the general welfare, health and safety of the general public. Inclosing the staff has studied the revised zoning ordinance as prepared by the Planning Commission and have found that it is the apparent intent of the Commission to permit asphalt plants only in the new IG Industrial General which is now comparable to the existing M-2." Mr. Boyle, attorney for the applicant, noted that you could put as many conditions as you wanted to on a special permit, regardless of where it is. 1198 He stated that when the ordinance was first brought into effect, asphalt plants were noisy and objectionable. However, he stated that due to certain state regulations, things have been much improved. He stated that they would have a bag house that would cleanse the product and keep it from going into the air. Mr. Moore told the Commission that the plant did not put out /however any fumes, it was noisy,and that there would be vapors releasedfrom the plant. Mr.. Moore stated that he was dualing the road from Route 29 South and would like to be closer by. Mrs. Dorothy Garden, of the Woolen Mills area, stated that they had too much of a traffic problem already in that area. Mr. J. L. Lively, owner of Sunrise Trailer court, was also opposed to the request stating that the southeastern part of the city already had more than they could stand. Mrs. Speidel wanted to know if there was any M-2 land available in Albemarle County? Mr. Tucker replied that he was not sure of the exact acreage,but knew it was a very small amount. It was noted that there was not any land available adjacent to a quarry at this time. Mrs. Graves asked several questions on the technical aspects of the plant. Mrs. Speidel stated that the Commission should consider the visual impact of the plant and stated that it would be hard to deny a plant even under a special use permit. Mr. Carl Muse, Employee of the City of Charlottesville, was opposed to the request because of the additional truck traffic and the impact on the surrounding neighborhood. 1199 It was noted that the Red Hill quarry Would not let a second plant come in and that Luck Quarries was owned by the same firm. Mr. Shannon Shirley, an employee of Va. Land Company, stated that the reason they went this route, was because it was very difficult to get land zoned to M-2 in the County. Mr. Boyle stated that he believedthat the only vacant land in Albemarle County zoned M-2 was owned by Benton Patterson and was near the Madison County line. At this time the public hearing was closed. Dr. Catlin noted that they did have a letter from the Citizens for Albemarle stating it was their opinion that"asphalts plants should be classified as heavy industrial use of land and should remain only in the Industrial, General District of the Revised Zoning Ordinance for Albemarle County, and in the M-2 Industrial District in our current ordinance". Mrs. Craddock stated that it was difficult not to consider a specific site at this hearing and that she would like to see the applicant find a more suitable site and then apply for M-2 zoning. She stated that she would like to see the request denied. Mr. Boyle noted that if zoned M-2, there was a chance of letting in less desirable uses than an asphalt plant. Mr. McClure motioned that action be deferred on the request to see what M-2 zoning is available and to have more time to think about the request. Mr. Tinsley stated that he was generally in favor of the staff recommendations. Dr. Catlin stated that he agreed with Mr. McClure and thought they should look further at the intent of the zone. Mr. Staley seconded Mr. McClure's motion. The request was re -scheduled for the work shop on the 25th of February. 12nn The staff was asked to supply them with a summary of available M-2 in the County and locations of all M-2. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. 1201 February 11, 1974 This was a work session of the Albemarle County Planning Commission held on February 11, 1974 at 7:30 p.m. in the County Executive's Conference Room, 4th Floor, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were: Dr. Avery Catlin, Chairman;Mr. Peter Easter, Mr. Jack Rinehart, Mr. David Carr, Mr. Louis Staley, Mr. Wilbur Tinsley, Dr. James Sams, and Mr. Lloyd Wood, Supervisor. Mr. Humphrey first asked the Commission how they would like to keep a record of their preliminary work on the zoning map. After a brief dicussion, it was the consensus of the Commission that one work copy on file of the maps would be sufficient at this time. Mr. Tucker called to the attention of the Commission that in the minutes of February 4, 1974 the motion for approval of Hickory Ridge subdivision plat was only approved for Section 1, when both sections 1 and 2 were under consideration. It was the consensus of the Commission to correct the motion to read approval of Sections 1 and 2. During the work session, it was generally agreed that as much state owned land as possible would be zoned Conservation. Mr. Carr stated that it was his opinion that land now in use be zoned as much as possible to get rid of non -conforming uses. He stated that possibly they should zone all University property Conservation. Dr. Sams wanted to know if their sloppiness in zoning these lands to Conservation might come back to haunt them. He wanted to know if this use was in opposition to the statement of intent of the Conservation zone. Mr. Rinehart stated that he thought it might be necessary to change the Conservation's statement of intent to go along with this policy. OWMIN a Dr. Catlin wanted to know if the preservation of open space " should be included in the statement of intent of the Conservation zone. The Commission questioned whether they should zone the airport area Conservation. Mr. Humphrey told the Commission that they were presently drafting an Airport District zone to be included in the zoning ordinance. It was noted that drive-in restaurants be included only in CL, not CG. The staff was instructed to look at the definition of restaurant. and related definitions. The staff was also instructed to look at the Ivy Section and to make comments to the Commission on what they thought the trend was. After further discussion on the zoning map, the meeting was adjourned. 1203 February 18, 1974 This was a regular meeting of the Albemarle County Planning Commission held on February 18, 1974 at 7:30 p.m. in the auditorium of Piedmont Virginia Community College, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were: Dr. Avery Catlin, Chairman; Mr. Clifton McClure, Vice -Chairman; Mr. Wilbur Tinsley, Mr. Louis Staley, Mr. Jack Rinehart, Mr. David Carr, Dr. James Sams, and Mrs. Ellen Craddock. Dr. Catlin called the meeting to order and established that a quorum was present. Deferred items: a)SP-320 W. M. Collins (Central Well System) Mr. Humphrey told the Commission that Mr. Collins had said that he still wished to pursue this request even though they had turned down his request for the addition to the mobile home park. However, Mr. Collins was not present, so Mr. Humphrey suggested that they defer action on this item and re -advertise it, if and when Mr. Collins wanted to. Mr. Carr moved that the matter be deferred per Mr. Humphrey's recommendation. Mr. Rinehart seconded the motion which carried unanimously. b) Hamilton Subdivision - 16 lot subdivision zoned A-1 Agricultural located east side of Route 648. Mr. Humphrey told the Commission that the first time the plat came before the Commission, the citizens in the area presented them with a petition in opposition to the request. He stated that they had not received any comments from the highway department and that the department was awaiting approval of the plat before they made any comment regarding the road. He stated that there was a flood plain that traversed a portion of the property. He stated that this flood plain was not of record officially and would not be until after 1204 the public hearing the next month. Mr. Humphrey noted that they would like to have the elimination of lot 5 and thought they may have a problem with septic tanks on lot 5. Mr. Humphrey noted that all else was in order subject to a final plat being submitted and the bonding of roads so that it could be brought into the state system. Mr. Humphrey read a petition in opposition to the request. It was ascertained that the roads would be brought up to state standards. A citizen told the Commission of his concern of whether there was sufficient water supply or not. The public hearing was closed and the matter was opened for discussion by the Commission. It was noted that there was a higher flood plain line/thann what the Corps of Engineers would probably establish. Mr. Humphrey noted that the staff was not aware of the water problems in this area until the meeting. He noted that the only way they would find out whether there was sufficient water, was to drill test wells. He stated that they might be able to go to state geologist to find some type of information about the water supply. Mr. Rinehart thought the matter should be deferred so that 4 test drills could be completed and thought that lots 3, 4, and 5 should be re -worked as he was concerned about the flood plain. He stated however that the applicant may wish not to do this because of the expense, when he had no guarantee that the matter would be approved. Dr. Catlin said he thought maybe the applicant should have to apply for a special permit for a central well system which would answer all of their questions about water. Mr. Carr stated that he thought there had been enough questions raised about the water supply and he could not approve it on this basis. 1205 Mr Carr moved that the matter be deferred for at least 2 weeks (the first meeting in March) for the applicant to decide what he would like to do. He noted that the problem was that the Commission wanted some evidence that water exits on the property. He noted that they wanted this information so that they would know that the lots would not be sold to people who then couldn't get water and that they would not necessarily impede on others in the area. Mrs. Craddock noted that she and Mr. Tinsley had visited the site with Mr. Bell and that she would also suggest that further /just perc tests be taken on the land rather than the first six lots. She suggested that even though this was required before the final plat was approved, this might be to an advantage to the developer. Mr. Tinsley seconded Mr. Carr's motion, which carried unanimously. c) F. 0. Cockerille - request for a 25-foot access easement to serve two -six acre parcels. Mr. Staley told the Commission that Mr. Cockerille had called his wife late that evening and could not attend the meeting tonight and asked if there was any chance they could defer action on this matter for two weeks. Mr. Staley so moved and Mr. Tinsley seconded the motion which carried unanimously. New Business a) SP-316 Ski Land Inc. and site plan. Mr. Vandell told the Commission that he would like to ask for withdrawal without prejudice and that he would ask for withdrawal without prejudice for the rezoning to the Board of Supervisors. He stated that the fuel situation dictated that they would not need,at this time,to add any additional ski slopes. Mr. McClure moved_ . that the matter be withdrawn without prejudice which was seconded by Mr. Rinehart and carried unanimously. 1206 b) Albemarle Green - request to amend conditions of site plan approval. Mr. Humphrey told the Commission that the applicant wished to bring before them for consideration a reduction of one of the conditions placed on the approval;the request to reduce the 70' r-o-w to 60'r-o-w. Mr. Humphrey told the Commission that the conditions of the original approval were 1) updating the Moore's Creek treatment plant and water service by city 2) Highway department approval including a 70' right-of-way from Mountainwood Road 3) sidewalk along Mountainwood Road adjacent to the project. He noted that the highway department received plans showing a 60' right-of-way which they approved. Mr. Huffman noted that the sidewalk had been incorporatedwithin the 60 foot right-of-way. He noted that it would provide for the continuity of the road. Dr. Catlin noted that as he understood it, the only disadvantage would be if they decided to put in a four lane road there would not be enough room to build a four lane highway with a turnaround with the sidewalk also. Mr. Carr moved approval of the request which was seconded by Dr. Sams, which carried unanimously. c) Charlottesville Service Center, Inc. Site Plan - east side Route 742 Avon Street Extended near I-64. Mr. Humphrey told the Commission that this was for a structure which had previously been approved for a warehouse structure only. He stated that they needed a revised site plan indicating the separate businesses involved and the square footage of the building. site plan He stated that it had been reviewed by the re committee and that the site plan had been revised to indicate the loading docks and the parking spaces sufficient enough for employees, etc. 1207 M It was noted that the individual uses complied with the zone; that it was just no longer a warehouse. There was a discussion on whether the Commission could require screening as most members of the commission were in favor of it. Mr. Rinehart stated that he would like to see groups of pines but though it would be economically unfeasible to put a row straight across the building. He stated that he thought the Planning Department could work something out with them on this. Mr. Zerkel noted that he would not like this owner to be required to meet conditions that the two adjacent owners that were already there were not required to do, but he would hate to see it held up because of landscaping. Dr. Catlin stated that he hoped he would set an example of the other owners by making the property as attractive as possible. Mr. Rinehart moved to approve the site plan contingent upon screening the front with white pines to the satisfaction of the planning staff. Dr. Sams seconded the motion which carried unanimously. d) Leroy Snow - request for widening an existing 30' right-of-way to a 50' right-of-way located east side Route 627 near Route 6 and Porter's Precinct. Mr. Humphrey noted that this was a plat of record. He noted that this would be a restricted road. Mr. Carr wanted to know if any Land would be developed beyond this right-of-way. Mr. Snow noted that this land ran all the way down to Route 6. (northeast) Upon questioning by Mrs. Craddock, it was noted that the lots on this plat would still be at least two acres. Mr. Tinsley moved approval of the request which was seconded by Mrs. Craddock and carried unanimously. IWAiZ3 e) Scottsville Shopping Center - revised site plan - located at intersection Routes 6 and 726 near Scottsville. Before discussion on the shopping center commenced, Mr. Carr stated that he thought it would be advantageous to have more layouts at what they were looking at. Mr. Humphrey noted that the original plan was for a type of mall IVA effect. He stated that the revised plan had been reviewed by the Site Plan /the mall Review Committee &• this plan eliminated effect and provided parking in front of the center. He stated that it had been noted on the plan that "Outside lighting shall be so designed, located and directed so as not to pose a nuisance or glare to adjacent property owners or highway". He noted that this plan showed two entrances off of Route 726 and then another plan coming to them tonight with an entrance off of Route 6. Dr. Catlin noted that the preliminary plan had three entrances and that this also had three entrances. Mr. Humphrey noted that he did not see anything detrimental in the change. A representative stated that the entrance which was taken out at the last review should be allowed new road was built. to go in along Route 20 after the There was extensive discussion on the number of entrances, particular- ly the entrance onto Route 20. Mr. Roudabush noted that the road was now going to be a downtown type street rather than a rural highway. It was noted that this entrance would not be developed until the road has been re -developed. Dr. Catlin noted that he wanted to be sure that there would be a deceleration lane or stacking lane there. 1�1- It was noted that the parking was in compliance with the NWOO requirements of the present ordinance. 1209 Mr. McClure moved approval of the Scottsville Shopping Center site plan which was seconded by Mr. Carr which carried unanimously. f) National Bank and Trust revised site plan located intersection Routes 20 South and 726 near Scottsville. Mr. McClure moved approval of the site plan subject to the entrance on Route 20 not being used until improvement of State Route 20 is completed and a deceleration lane at that entrance (regardless of who pays for it). Mr. Rinehart seconded the motion which carried unanimously. g) J. Robert Mahoney - request for a restricted road to serve five parcels located south side Route 53 near Nix Post Office Mr. Humphrey noted that the request was to waive the limit of four lots in the subdivision ordinance and to allow five lots on the restricted road. Mr. Humphrey noted that the approval would be conditioned upon the uniform agreements being prepared and recorded with the plats. Mr. Humphrey noted that there was a minimum standard on restricted roads. The motion for approval was by Mr. Rinehart and seconded by Mr. McClure. After a brief discussion, the motion carried unanimously. h) Charlottesville Shopping World - relocated service drive off Berkmar Drive Mr. Humphrey told the Commission that this was a request for aneasement to serve as a service drive off of Berkmar Drive. (36' width to serve two-way traffic). He stated that the staff would like to ascertain what right lots 15, 16, and 17 have in the easement. He stated that they would like to see this property accessed in the future by the service drive as opposed to Route 29. Mr. Carr said that he would like to see an access to the Shopping World other than Route 29. 1210 It was noted that at present probably no one would enter the shopping center from this entrance,and that a crossover would have to be established first. Mr. Tinsley moved approval of the request which was seconded by Mr. Rinehart and carried unanimously. i) Freddie S. Houchens - request for the extension of a 16� foot easement to serve two parcels. Located north side Route 633 near Covesville. Upon questioning by Mr. Carr, it was ascertained that this would serve a 10 acre tract and a 2 acre tract. The Commission members were in agreement with the 1611 foot easement if the ten acres was not going to be further subdivided. They noted that if they established a 50' r-o-w this would prevent future problems,. and that the applicant would not have to /builtdhe road that wide. Mr. Tinsley motioned approval of a 50' r-o-w and any further subdivision to come back to the Planning Commission. Mrs. Craddock seconded the motion which carried unanimously. j) Ridgefield - request for additional subdivision along an existing restricted road. It was noted that this road would serve 6 lots instead /Commission of 4. Mr. Humphrey told the that this would come under the recently adopted policy on restricted roads. (standards, etc.) Dr. Catlin questioned the location of the! cul-de-sac. Mr. Carr moved approval of the request. which was seconded by Mr. McClure and carried unanimously. k) Logan Village - request for a waiver of the 700' maximum length cul-de-sac requirement. He stated that the road was to be incorporated into the state system and wished to obtain the waiver before obtaining highway deparment approval. Mr. Humphrey noted that the staff felt that the 1211 im request was within the intent of the subdivision ordinance. He noted that the only item really before them was to,_waive the 700' maximum length cul-de-sac requirement and to review the preliminary concept. Mr. Rinehart suggested that Lots 2 and 3 enter onto the cul-de-sac road. There was a brief discussion on this point. Mr. McClure moved approval of the request which was seconded by Mr. Carr and carried unanimously. Dr. Catlin stated that they would like their thoughts on Lots 2 and 3 passed onto the Site Plan Review -Committee. 1) Badger Powhatan - revised site plan showing service drive located east side Route 29 North at North Fork. Mr. Huffman noted that this would be a one way service entrance. Dr. Catlin noted that when the Commission approved the original plan they wanted a minimum of entrances and a service road on both sides. There was extensive discussion concerning this. Dr. Catlin noted that the applicant should be very aware that the Planning Commission is very concerned about limiting the number of entrances off of 29. Mr. Rinehart moved deferral of the request for two weeks (March 4, 1974) and Mr. McClure seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Mr. Carr noted that he was on a committee that was evaluating /airport the master plan of the airport. He noted that the committee would like very much to be present at the work session meeting on the zoning map of that area and would like to know well in advance when the Commission /airport committee was going to discuss this area. He stated that the would like to /with the Commission review it March 25, 1974 if possible. It was the consensus of the Commission to do this. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. 1213 February 25, 1974 This was a work session of the Albemarle County Planning Commission held on February 25, 1974 at 7:30 p.m. in the County Executive's Conference Room, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were: Mr. Clifton McClure,Vice-Chairman; Mr. David Carr, Dr. James Sams, Mr. Louis Staley, Mr. Jack Rinehart, Mr. Peter Easter. /-'4,, Those members absent were: Mr. Wilbur Tinsley and Dr. Avery Catlin. As Mr. McClure was not present at the beginning of the meeting, Mr. Rinehart nominated David Carr as chairman, which was seconded by Dr. Sams and carried unanimously. Mr. McClwre assumed the chairmanship when he arrived. Deferred item: UP-74-01 Dr. Charles Hurt : Mr. Easter stated that he would like for the records to show that he was disqualifying himself from voting or dicussion on this item and that he was leaving the room. Mr. Humphrey reiterated the previous staff's recommendation. Mr. Tucker pointed out M-2 zoning in the county and M-1 land. Mr. Humphrey noted that 75% of the M-1 land in the county was being utilized. land. It was noted that Martin Marietta would not sell or lease their Mr. Rinehart stated that he was not in favor of the M-1 zone being amended but thought the answer was to rezone land, preferably next to existing M-2 land. Therefore he moved denial of the request, which was seconded by Mrs. Craddock and carried unanimously. 1214 The Commission then held a work session on the' zoning map on the Route 20 North area. Mr. Rinehart noted that it would be nice if the land around the Rivanna River could be kept conservation. The staff was asked to find out if flood plain contours could be used as a boundary for zoning. Dr. Hurt commented that it was very dangerous(this rezoning) for developers who have long term planning to have zoning changed. Mr. Wendell Wood commented that when the master plan was adopted a statement was made that there would not be any wholesale rezoning. Mrs. Fran Martin stated that she was in full support of the Planning Commission's approach. As the reservoir area was discussed, Mrs. Speidel expressed concern over protecting the water supply and noted that when the'Commission first talked of starting working on the zoning map, the Commission agreed at this point that any verbal comments made by the public on individual parcels of land would not be allowed. Mrs. Craddock wanted to know what input regarding the reservoir area could be obtained from the State Water Control Board. Mr. Rinehart suggested that the Commission come back to the work map on the reservoir area at a later date. After further discussion, the meeting was then adjourned. 9