Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 19731151 n December 10, 1973 This was a work session of the Albemarle County Planning Commission held on December 10, 1973 at 7:30 p.m. in the County Court House, Court Square, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those present were Dr. Avery Catlin, Chairman; Mr. Clifton McClure, Vice -Chairman, Mr. Louis Staley, Dr. James Sams, Mr. Wilbur Tinsley, Mr. Jack Rinehart, Mr. David Carr, Mr. Lloyd Wood, Supervisors, and Mr. George St. John,County Attorney. Mr. Easter and Mrs. Craddock were absent. A brief summary of the flood plain report on the James River-Mechunk Creek study was presented to the Commission. Said report being the last of the request by the County of Albemarle. Mr. Hicks, Chief of Flood Plain Management Plant District, Corps of Engineers,presented the report. Mr. Humphrey told the Commission that the County had requested several additional studies those being the Ivy rlrr Valley, the Hardware and the Moorman's River. Mrs. Craddock wanted to know if the Doyle River would be included in the request. Mr. Humphrey replied that it had not but he would check into it. Mr. Humphrey presented the quidelines for mobile home permits to the Commission. He suggested that they study these before they had a discussion on this. Mr. Humphrey presented Alternative #1 and Alternative #2 as a possible alternative to an amendment to Article 27-6-2 of the proposed Zoning Ordinance or Article 15A-9-2 of the Existing Zoning Ordinance. i%w Alternative #1 provided for discontinuance of non -conforming signs, conformance by time period according to value of sign and removal of signs in violation. 1152 Alternative #2 provided that non -conforming signs over a given size be discontinued within a definite period of time. It was the consensus of the Commission being undecided on which alternative to adopt that they take up the matter at a later meeting so that they could review it more carefully. Article "27", General Provisions for Signs" was then reviewed. Mr. Humphrey told the Commission that the area for free- standing business signs in the Agricultural and Conservation Districts was changed from 50 square feet to 30 square feet and business signs(wall) from 100 square feet to 50 square feet. signs He also stated that home occupation /were provided for in the Agricultural and Conservation Districts. He also told the Commission that the ordinances provided that business signs - free standing - would be allowed 50 square feet in area and wall signs 200 square feet. He said it was up to the discretion of the Commission whether they wanted to change this or not. He noted that they had changed the area for free standing or projecting signs in the industrial zone from 100 square feet to a maximum of 70 square feet in area. Mrs. Craddock noted that in her opinion this sign ordinance was an improvement over the present one. The Commission discussed further Alternative #1 and #2 of Article 27-6-2 of the proposed zoning ordinance or Article 15A-9-2 of the existing zoning ordinance. Mr. St. John County Attorney, said he could see no legal problem with either #1 or #2 as other localities have done both of these. 1153 Mr. Lloyd Wood, Supervisor, stated that he did not believe the proposed sign ordinance would get very far 1%r with the citizens as they had a difficult time passing the present, less restrictive ordinance. Mr. McClure stated he would lean more toward Alternative #2 regarding non -conforming signs as signs would be complying with the Ordinance; even at a faster rate. A Mrs. Hundley told the Commission that the Environmental Service of the State Highway Department was working on Inter- state 95 devising signs stating which businesses were located off I-95. After further discussion, the Commission decided to study Alternative #1 and #2 and asked the Planning dept. to recommend value of signs and time periods of compliance under Alternative #1. They also stated they would like to have more time to review the sign ordinance. The Commission then presented a draft of guidelines for a special mobile home permit to the Commission. The draft allowed for notification of adjacent property owners without public advertisement. Dr. Sams commented that possibly the word "prohibit" referring to "The 100' setback" was too restrictive. He felt there might be times when it would be advantageous to allow less than a 100 foot setback. It was noted that some provision stating the applicant could apply for a special permit if he did not meet these requirements was left out and should be included. err, Dr. Catlin noted that it would eliminate 95% of the mobile home permits that come before the Commission. Mr. Carr questioned the fact that bona fide objections 1154 must come from adjacent property owners only. It was the consensus of the Commission that some readible sign should be posted on the property and that applications should be publically advertised. Mr. McClure was of the opinion that the permit should be for a period of 5 years instead of 3. Mr. St. John suggested that some flexibility should be put into this. Mr. Staley was of the opinion that mobile home dwellers would feel more secure if it were for a time period of 5 years. It was the consensus of the Board to have 5 years as the limit, with no automatic administrative renewal. Mr. McClure noted that permits for less than 5 years could be granted if requested. The staff was instructed to revise the draft of the mobile home permit as noted above. There was a discussion following regarding the procedure to follow concerning work on the zoning map. Mr. Humphrey said regarding commercial land, it was a question of reducing the land to a less intense use or eliminating business zoning completely. He said the intent was to bring it into conformity. It was noted that blanket zoning of conservation areas might be considered. Mr. Carr was concerned that it was recommended that citizens not be allowed verbal imput until after some work was done on the map. Mr. Carr recommended to the Commission that the staff be asked to put in writing how they propose to accomplish work on the map. Mr. St. John stated he thought they better do some work on the map before they had public input. 1155 Mr. St. John said unless the zones were utilized on the map, the new zoning ordinance would be non-benificial. Dr. Catlin also recommended that the staff draw up quidelines of how they were going to proceed with work on the map and how they were going to go about putting new zones on the map. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. M 1156 December 20, 1973 This was a regular meeting of the Albemarle County Planning Commission held on December 20, 1973 at 7:30 p.m. in the Board of Supervisor's Meeting Room, 3rd Floor, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were:Mr. Clifton McClure, Vice -Chairman; Mr. Wilbur Tinsley, Mrs. Ellen Craddock, Dr. James Sams and Mr. Louis Staley, and Mr. Lloyd Wood, Supervisor. Mr. Easter, Mr. Rinehart, Mr. Carr, and Mr. Catlin were absent. Mr. McClure called the meeting to order and established that a quorum was present. Deferred item: a) Albemarle Green Apts. Site Plan - deferred from August 20, 1973 Miss White told the Commission that it was deferred by the Commission for several reasons. 1) to visit the site 2) conformation -A..' of sewer connnections 3) highway department report on road conditions 4) impact studies on surrounding schools Miss White told the Commission that the plan was to put a new road in , "Mountainwood Road" which would begin on Route 631 and continue through to Old Lynchburg Road. Mr. Warner stated that their plan would be satisfactory with the condition that they extended their right-of-way from 60' to 70'. Miss White told the Commission that they had two letters from the City stating that the development could be served as soon as the Moore's Creek plant was updated. Mr. Bailey, County Engineer, stated that any approval of this plan should have the condition that the Moore's Creek plant be updated, which he contemplates being 9 to 12 months. A copy of the impact study on roads, etc. was given to the Commission, a copy of which is on file. 1157 Miss White told the Commission that the staff recommended approval with the following conditions: 1)It meet highway dept. err requirements with regard to Mountainwood Road 2) There will no sewer connections until the Moore's Creek Treatment Plant is updated. Mr. Huffman told the Commission that the highway plans for Mountainwood Road had been submitted and approved by the highway dept. Miss White told the Commission that there was one other item which John Humphrey mentioned and which the staff would recommend; 3) /the side of that being, sidewalks along Mountainwood Road which serves the development. Mrs. Craddock said it was her opinion that the County had (densely populated areas) adopted the sidewalk policy (urban area) and the developers should be made aware of it. It was ascertained that this development would be served by city ,**AW water. It was stated that there would be a 12" line that would be entirely adequate. Mrs. Craddock motioned approval of the site plan with the following conditions: 1. Moore's Creek plant being updated and City water 2. Highway Department approval including a 70' r-o-w 3. Sidewalks along Mountainwood Road adjacent to the develop- ment Dr. Sams seconded the motion which carried unanimously. b)SP-310. W. M. Collins. (deferred) for six additional mobile home spaces on Route 706 in the Scottsville District. The Commission was given the written recommendation of the Planning Staff. Mrs. Craddock told the Commission that she and Mr. Rinehart had visited the site and explained what screening was presently at the site. There was extensive discussion on the screening. Mr. Tinsley recommended approval of the special permit with the following conditions: 1158 1. The two mobile homes which are in violation be made a part of this request. 2. The mobile home which is located behind the existing row of mobile homes be relocated at the proposed mobile home site addition. 3. No removal of trees in front of the proposed area. Screening and planning be left up to the planning staff. 4. Health Department approval of septic tank and well. 5. The extension of water lines in terms of size and material be approved by the County Engineer. Dr. Sams seconded the motion which carried unanimously. C) Ednam Forest Section 5 - Preliminary Plat - deferred New Business a) C. F. M. Corporation - restricted road and easement request to serve two parcels off Route 781 (Sunset Avenue) Miss White told the Commission that this request had been deferred for quite some time because of the Board's moratorium. She stated that /road the request had been originally for a restricted to serve parcels B and D. It was noted that the request would not serve parcels A and C. Mr. Huffman noted that the roads could be built to state standards. After further discussion, Dr. Sams recommended approval of the request with the road being built to state standards. Mrs. Craddock seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. b) Buck's Elbow Farm - Restricted Road request to serve 3 -8 acre parcels off Route 682. Miss White showed the Commission a preliminary plan which was approved April 17, 1972. It was approved in concept for restricted roads. The Commission noted that there wereother problems to be solved relative to open space and road maintenance. She stated that they wished to come in with a request to serve 3 of these parcels. Those being parcels 1, 2,and 3. Dr. Sams recommended approval to serve parcels 1,2, and 3. Mr. Tinsley seconded the motion which carried unanimously. c) Fieldcrest Subdivision - easement request to serve one-2 acre lot. Miss White told the Commission that this was a subdivision approved by them in February 1972. She stated that at that time the 1159 subdivision was to be divided into ten lots. One of the lots was 4 acres. She stated at this time, he would like to divide the 4-acre parcel into 2 -two acre parcels; parcel 8 and 8A. He would like access easement across the front parcel to serve the back parcel. Upon questioning by Mr. McClure, it was ascertained that the topo- graphy was too steep to have a joint driveway agreement. Dr. Sams recommended approval of the request subject to: a 25' r-o-w. Mrs. Craddock seconded the motion which carried unanimously. d) Cardinal Recycling Center, Inc. - site plan off Market Street Extd. Mr. McClure stated that he could not participate or vote on this item and that without him they would not have a quorum. It was the consensus of the Commission to defer review and action until January 14, 1974 workshop meeting. e) Hamilton Subdivision - 16 lots zoned A-1 Agricultural. Route 648. Miss White told the Commission that the road would be built to lftw state standards, that perc tests would have to be completed on every lot before approval, and that no house should be built below the 350' contour because of flooding of Mechunk Creek. There was some concern about the traffic on Route 648 and when the highway dept. would get around to making improvements. Mr. McClure reminded the commission that this was not a rezoning and the person had a right to divide the parcels into two -acre tracts as long as they met the requirements of the zoning ordinance. He stated that the planning commission was not in the road building or road main- tenance business. A member of the public asked if they had looked at the area. It was noted that they could not tell the builder what type of houses he had to build. Mrs. Craddock motioned deferral and motioned that a committee be formed to view the site. Mr. Tinsley seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 1160 f) Precision Small Parts, Inc. Site Plan Route 606. Miss White told the Commission that the only recommendations /is they would make that they have 1) Highway dept. approval (staff has recommended a de -acceleration lane) 2) final engineering approval since there were a few drainage problems that were not worked out at the site plan meeting. Miss White stated that they were locating on part of a parcel which was approximately 8 acres. She stated that they were a clean smoke free operation with no industrial waste output, and they expected to employ about 50 people and that their primary need for water would be for the employees' personal use. It was noted that most of their products would be shipped in small boxes by UPS. She told the Commission that they would be using a well and septic system. Mr.Harvey Spangler, adjoining property owner, noted that this was bordering an approved subdivision and wondered how this land came to be zoned M-l? He questioned the number of vehicles that were going to be put on the private road and secondly if you visualize as you come down the road from the airport and turn into the subdivision and go up to the A -frames, what kind of situation would you have at quitting time? He noted that the site view from the north looking south was very restricted and that there was a considerable amount of traffic to and from Chris Greene Lake. He noted that at present the entrance was not safe. Mr. Spangler said it was his opinion that if they approved this site plan they were recognizing this 1-acre M-1 lot to be good planning. Mr. Wood, Supervisor,said that the Board of Supervisors had found from experience that the area around the airport was not suitable for residential use (airport, Deerwood subdivision problems, etc.) and encouraged light industrial uses rather residential uses. 1161 It was noted that the property was zoned M-1 after the ordinance was put into effect. Dr. Sams said he agreed that this was seemingly an ideal facility for this location however, the parking seemed rather close to the four rental units. It was stated that the lot was heavily wooded at this time and they would leave as many trees as possible. Dr. Sams motioned for approval of the site plan conditioned upon the following: 1) Some type of screening and buffer zone between (lots 2 and 3) the parking lot and the rental units. 2) Highway Dept approval of the de -acceleration lane 3) final engineering approval because of drainage problems. Mr. Wood suggested that the condition of 4) no glaring lights which would be problem to the airport at night,be a part of the approval. This was agreeable with Dr. Sams. Mr. Tinsley seconded the motion which carried unanimously. g) Carlton Subdivision - 21 lots zoned A-1 Agricultural. Route 663. Miss White told the Commission that this came before them a year ago for RS-1 zoning which was denied. She stated that the roads would be built to state standards and that two temporary debris basins should be constructed at the head of each of the two streams which ultimately drain into Chris Greene Lake (they will be there during the construction of the roads). She stated that they recommende d that lots 2 and 21 enter onto Joyce Lane rather than Route 663 and a de -acceleration lane. Upon questioning by Mrs. Craddock, it was ascertained that the lots would have individual wells and septic systems. It was noted that some of this land was wet (marshy) and that perc tests would have to be /preliminary completed before the final approval. Mr. Tinsley motioned approval of the request with Highway dept. approval (de-accerleration lane) and lots 2 and 21 enter onto Joyce Lane. Dr. Sams seconded the motion which carried unanimously. It was noted that the other conditions were already on the plat. 41 11-ro2 Mr. Tucker asked the Commission to defer the work session on the Special Mobile Home Permit. It was the consensus of the Commission to do this. The Commission decided to wait until January 7th to decide if they would be in agreement to defer SP-253 Frank Folsom Smith until the third meeting in January. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.