HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 1973Page 789
FEBRUARY 5, 1973
This was a scheduled workshop session of the Albemarle County
Planning Commission held on February 5, 1973 at 7:30 P. M. in the
Board Room of the County Office Building.
Present were: Chairman Avery Catlin, Vice -Chairman M. Clifton
McClure, Mr. David W. Carr, Mr. Wilbur C. Tinsley, Mr. M. Jack
Rinehart, Mr. Louis C. Staley, Dr. James Sams, Mr. William S. Roudabush,
and Mrs. Ellen B. Craddock. Also in attendance was Mr. Gerald Fisher,
County Supervisor. Mr. Lloyd Wood, Supervisor, arrived later during
the meeting.
The meeting was called to order and a quorum established.
It was noted that item 4 on the agenda "Ednam Village" , would be
deferred until next Monday, February 12, because the applicant could
not be present at this time.
Item 5 on the agenda which read: "Proposal to appeal decision of
Board of Zoning Appeals regarding Holiday Inn Sign Variance", was
presented by Mr. Humphrey. Mr. Humphrey informed the Commissioners
that Holiday Inn which is located at interchange of Rt. 631 and I-64,
had been granted a variance by the Board of Zoning Appeals to allow their
sign to be 47 feet in height as compared to 30 feet required in the
ordinance, 400 sq. ft. in area, as compared to 100 sq. ft. in the
ordinance. Further, he stated that Holiday Inn desired flashing lights,
but the Board of Zoning Appeals restricted this.
Dr. Catlin informed the Commissioners that he had this put on the
agenda because of the major difference in size that the B. of Z. A.
permitted than the Sign Ordinance permitted.
Mr. Carr questioned the basis of the variance. Miss White, of the
Planning staff, said the only basis they had was that this sign was a
Page VO
-2-
national trademark and recognized by most people.
Mr. Rinehart asked if the Planning Commission as a group had the
right to do anything about the decision of the B. of Z. A.. Mr.
Humphrey informed him that they could appeal the decision of the
Board of Zoning Appeals, but the proper thing to do would be to request
the Board of Supervisors to appeal it.
Mr. Roudabush, who is also a member of the Board of Zoning Appeals,
said he did not know why the variance was granted and that he voted
against it since he could see no hardship involved. He further said
the owners admitted they had several different other signs they could
use.
Mr. McClure made a motion that the Board of Supervisors be re-
quested to appeal the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals. The
motion was seconded by Dr. Sams.
Mr. Carr wondered if the Commission desired to give the Board
of Supervisors any reasons for their decision. Mr. McClure was of the
opinion that the reasoning should come from the Planning office.
Dr. Catlin instructed Mr. Humphrey to write up the reasons and pre-
sent them to the Board.
The above motion carried unanimously.
6. Milton Hills Subdivision, Section II, Route 729.
Mr. Humphrey gave a short presentation of this subdivision, which
had been deferred from the previous meeting. He showed to the Commission
the roads that were requested to be restricted roads.
At this time Mr. Roudabush excused himself from the discussion and
voting and requested the Chairman to wait until 8:00 to take up this
matter so Mr. Gary Kirksey could be present to represent his plat. The
Chairman did so.
Page ?q/
-3-.
7. Robert McCauley- a request for a restricted road with 20 feet
of width. One parcel. Property is described as Tax Map 29,
Parcel 35B, and located on Route 665.
Mr. Humphrey informed the Commission that this property was the
subject of a rezoning a few months ago. At that time it was thought
that this 20 ft. easement was already on record, but it was discovered
recently that it was not. Therefore, Mr. McCauley was asking for a
waiver from the 50 ft. requirement to 20 feet, and that the road be
dedicated and not made a part of the 0.961 acre tract.
Mr. Carr questioned whether the applicant told the Commission
that this ROW existed when the property was rezoned.
Mr. Roudabush did not think the road should be dedicated as this
would make it a public road. He also thought the road should be
rearranged so that it would not cut the corner off the front lot.
Mr. McClure was of the opinion that granting this easement would
be setting a precedent. He felt the ROW should be denied and a pipe
stem lot be the recourse.
Dr. Catlin commented that the Planning Commission is put in a
difficult situation when they are given false information like this --
since this property was rezoned with the Commissioners thinking this
easement already existed.
Mr. Roudabush commented that the side )rardsetbacks could not be
met if a pipe stem lot were required. Mr. McClure was of the opinion
that he could obtain a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals.
There was further discussion with thoughts of purchasing more land
to make a 50 ft. ROW, also possibly postponing their decision until
the next meeting to see if a pipe stem could be made. Mr. McClure
wondered if this might not be a prescriptive easement (one that has been
used for 20 years can legally be theirs).
-4-
Page 71{2-
Mr.
Roudabush made
a motion to defer the
matter until
the next
regular
meeting and have
Mr. Humphrey advise
the owner and
engineer of
the questions that the Planning Commission raised and invite them to the
meeting so that a decision can be made. This motion was seconded by
Mr. Rinehart and carried unanimously.
At this time, Milton Hills Subdivision was taken up as Mr. Kirksey
was now present.
Dr. Catlin was of the opinion that it made good sense to make
restricted roads of the spurs but felt the longer roads should not be
restricted, especially since there did not seem to be a problem with
topography.
Mr. Rinehart felt that the people owning lots on the restricted
roads should be forced to come off on them instead of the State main-
tained road. He further felt that these roads should not be cul-de-sacs
but form a ring, so there could be trees in the center of the circle.
Mr. McClure said a deed restriction could be placed on the lots
stating that the owners would have to make their driveway come in off
the restricted roads.
Mrs. Craddock, in expressing her opinion of these restricted
roads, said that they were an excellent idea.
Mr. Carr agreed that the spurs could appropriately be restricted,
but he wanted to make it clear to the applicant, and the minutes should
show, that the Commission did not say they would approve the last
section of the roads to be restricted. Therefore, it was extablished
that the State manintained road would run to Lot 24 as indicated on
drawing 3585. Dr. Catlin added that this would involve four spurs to
be restricted and that the access to the lots should be off the restricted
roads.
?age 793
-5-
Mr. McClure said he did not know if they could legally force lot
owners to come in off the spur but was of the opinion they should try.
He pointed out that the house could front on the State maintained road
if the owner so desired.
Mr. McClure made a motion to approve the plat subject to (1)
State maintained road running to lot 24 as indicated on Drawing 3585,
(2) four spurs only to be restricted roads, and (3) access to lots on
these spurs must be from spurs and not from State maintained road.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Rinehart and carried unanimously with
Mr. Roudabush abstaining.
8. Discussion of Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Hunphrey informed the Commission that the work package was
almost finished and that the staff had drafted a copy of the proposed
10-acre zone. He said, too, that he had obtained a copy of Loudoun
County's 10-acre zone.
Dr. Catlin said he had done more thinking on the matter and had
talked with some of the Supervisors and he now felt that maybe the
answer would be to keep the present A-1 zone and break it into three
categories: (1) agricultural, (2) conservation and (3) holding. His
thoughts on this was that land in the agriculture or conservation zone
would not change in the immediate future.
Dr. Sams was of the opinion perhaps the ordinance could be worded
so that one subdivision approval for a specific property could be
issued every 24 months or have no restrictions placed in the conservation
zone at all, since a conservation zone should not have subdivisions in
it anyway.
Dr. Catlin said his opinion of a conservation zone would be that
which was developed sparsely. But Mr. Humphrey said they would run into
Page '79q
I Me
the problem of the exclusionary ruling. Mr. Fisher felt though that
this ruling would not apply if you had other types of zoning within a
reasonable distance.
Mr. McClure mentioned that according to the State statute a man
could divide his property into five acre lots but under the 10 acre zone
he would have to have two five -acre lots to build a house.
Dr. Catlin said that what he had in mind would be to take the
present A-1 zone and allow three uses in it (1) agriculture - to be left
for farming, (2) conservation - sparsely developed, (3) General or holding.
He felt the Supervisors would be in a better position as far as the tax
situation is concerned.
Mr. Fisher commented that something to this affect was happening
in New York where farmers were giving up their right to subdivide so
their taxes would be lowered.
There was further discussion on property being in a state of
transition and discussion on land use taxes.
Dr. Catlin commented that the Statement of Intent should be done
first and that the present A-1 zone already has two uses in it, holding
and farming.
Mr. Lloyd Wood was of the opinion that the Commission should do
things from a planning point of view and leave taxes out of it as this
is something that the Board of Supervisors takes care of.
Mrs. Craddock asked if Planning District 10 would have any juris-
diction over the Commission. Mr. Humphrey informed her that they would
not have any jurisdiction over this Commission.
Mr. McClure felt that some land should be developed off main
roads by allowing more restricted roads.
Page i45
-7-
Mr. Wood said he had never seen such a change. Before, the Commission
would not allow restricted roads, and now they want them. He pointed out
that he hoped they did not change so much that they would go back and
start the same problems all over again.
Mr. Carr commented that if the Commission went that far they would
have good guidelines for the restricted roads.
Mr. McClure said that 8-12 lots on one road would be too many to
have on a restricted road.
Mr. Lloyd Wood stated that he thought the red flag should be raised
right now in order to find something more restrictive than a deed restrict-
ion because so many people do not know what is in their deeds. Therefore,
when it comes time for the restricted road to be repaired, the lot owner
does not know that he has to share the costs.
A representative of the League of Women Voters asked it it were
up to the Board of Supervisors to adopt a prototype. She was informed
that this was part of the Subdivision Ordinance which would have to be
adopted by the Board of Supervisors. This representative also pointed
out there would be difficulty with the restricted roads because of them
being in little pockets with no continuation of roads.
Mr. Roudabush pointed out, too, that the Commission had been
permitted to approve restricted roads in the past without any conditions
and that at least now, they would be sure the roads were good ones.
9. Committee Report: Mawyer Property (Mr. Roudabush and
Mr. McClure) .
Mr. Roudabush asked that this matter be deferred until the next
meeting at which time he would have the information that he needs from
Mr. Frank Gregg.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
ecretar;z
Page 796
FEBRUARY 12, 1973
This was a work session of the Planning Commission of the Albemarle
County Planning Commission held on February 12, 1973 at 7:30 p.m.
in the Board Room of the County Office Building.
Present were: Vice -Chairman M. Clifton McClure, Mr. David W. Carr,
Dr. James Sams, Mr. William S. Roudabush, Mr. Louis C. Staley,
Mr. Wilbur C. Tinsley, Mr. M. Jack Rinehart, and Mrs. Ellen Craddock.
Dr. Avery Catlin, Chairman was absent.
The meeting was called to order and a quorum established.
The minutes presented were deferred until February 26, 1973.
At this time, the Chairman called for the scheduled items.
1. Robert McCauley- a request for a restricted road with 20 feet
of width to serve one parcel. Deferred item.
Mr. Aubrey Huffman, Engineer, presented facts with reference to
the request stating that the proposed alignment followed an existing
driveway. Said driveway being so established by reason of topograph.
He further stated that to get 50 feet of right-of-way would be
impossible because of the location of the existing dwellings and the
minimum side yard requirements.
The Commission discussed the matter from a different approach;
one being as a pipe stem lot.
Upon conclusion of the discussion, Roudabush motioned that the
request for a restricted road be denied and that the applicant consider
a pipe stem approach to facilitate proper frontage on a road. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Rinehart and approved unanimously by those
members present.
2. George Barrett - a request for a restricted road on property
known as "Willoughby" . Said road to service one large parcel,
already recorded located east of Route 631 (Old Lynchburg Road).
Mr. Barrett, attorney representing parties involed in the O'Neill
Page '?q'7
Bankruptcy request the request the restricted road in lieu of a
pipe stem access to facilitate the sale of the subject parcel of
land. A lengthy discussion was held on the merits of the request
and alternative approach to solve what appears to be a problem in
establishing a restricted road on this property since all roads
in Willoughby are to be levied to state standards under the approach
of a Special Permit for a Planned Community.
After the discussion, Mr. Carr motioned to deferr action to
permit consultation regarding the matter, between Mr. Humphrey,
County Attorney, and the attorney involved in the bankruptcy to
ascertain whether other alternatives existed. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Rinehart and unanimously approved by those members present.
3. John Embree - Request for an extension of a restricted road to
serve additional lots for property located north of Route 676.
Mr. Embree was not in attendance and after a short discussion
on the merits, Mr. Roudabush motioned to deferr action until
February 26, 1973, The motion was seconded by Mr. Rinehart. The motion
carried unanimously. Mr. Embree is to be notified and informed to attend
the meeting.
Site Plans
4. Crozet Village Shoppe. A plan for the utilization of any
existing structure for the purpose of establishing a
"Craft Shop".
The staff reported that the plans had been reviewed and approved by
the Site Plan Technical Review Committee. However, the staff informed
the Commission that the facility would be utilizing a pit privy.
The Commission being concerned relative to the sanitary facility plan
and approved by the Health Department, approved the Site Plan
upon motion by Mr. Carr, seconded by Mr. Staley and approved
unanimously by members present. Approval was subject to periodic
Page 1.1
review of the pit privy relative of adequacy and health conditions.
I�Iwel 5. Salem Carpet Store - Route 250 East adjacent to Porche
Audi
Mr. Roudabush at this time disqualified himself from review and
vote on this matter.
The staff reported that the site committe had reviewed the plan as
presented and recommended approval subject to final Health Department
approval for septic tank system.
Mr. Jim Wilson, applicant, presented the plan indicating the nature
of the business and the appearance of the building.
Mr. S. L. Wynne, adjacent property owner spoke to the Commission
with reference to property lines and the existing row of trees on the
east property line. He asked that all trees be saved.
Mr. Wilson stated that six trees had to be removed for proper
sight distance. Mr. Wynne agreed that this was necessary.
Upon termination of the discussion, Mr. Tinsley motioned for
approval, Mr. Staley seconded the motion, and was unanimously approved
by those members present, with the following conditions:
A. Investigation of alternate parking to ascertain whether the
building can be moved off of the eastern property line to save the
trees and provide a reasonable side yard. r
B. That the first six (6) trees be removed along theme=n
property line. All others to be saved to provide a buffer or screen.
C. Subject to final Health Department approval.
Mr. Roudabush returned to the Commission at this time.
6. White/Weeks Furniture Store - Route 29 North adjacent to
Cavalier Furniture Store across from "Carrsbrook" entrance.
The staff stated that the site plan had been reviewed by the
Committee and based upon their review, recommend approval subject to
Page
Health Department approval for septic tank system. Mr. Barnes
Sample represented the applicant.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the site plan subject to the
condition of Health Department approval which was seconded by
Mr. Tinsley, and unanimously approved by those members present.
7. Lester Terry Property - Subdivision of land involving 50 lots
on Route 649 across from "Jefferson Village" preliminary approval.
Mr. Roudabush excused himself at this time from the review on
this item and the following two items.
The staff reported that the subdivision had been reviewed by the
committee and that the staff recommends approval subject to perculation
test on all lots, highway approval of road plans and profiles.
The Commission approved the preliminary plan subject to the
staff recommendation and including the condition that the restricted
road/easement to serve lots 16, 17 and 18 was not a part of the
approval.
8. Meriwether Hills Subdivision - Phase 4 containing 35 lots
on Route 678 north of "Ivy". Preliminary.
The Commission approved the preliminary subject to perculation
test on each lot, additional water storage to be provided in keeping
with Health Department requirements and the conditions of the granting
of a Special Permit for the Central Well, and that acess to and from
lots 27 and 1 be restricted to Kimborough Drive.
9. Four Seasons Phase II - Site Plan for townhouse and garden
apartments and a preliminary concept for 80 acres of R-3 zoned land.
Located at the intersection of Route 743 and 631.
Mr. Craig presented the plans stating he planned to develop
approximately 1600 units as oppposed to 2400 units as provided for
under the R-3 zoning.
Mr. James Flemming appeared as adjacent property owner and was
9
Page"<' ...
desirous in having proper vehicle circulation in the area. No roads
were indicated to be extended beyond the property lines.
After a discussion, Mr. Carr motioned for approval of Section I
of Phase II subject to the following, which was seconded by Dr. Sams
and unanimously approved by thosem?mbers present:
1. Meeting minimum zoning setback requirements.
-2. Showing sewage connections.
3. Finalized erosion control approvals.
f4. The design of all water and sewer lines,to be deed to the
Albemarle County Service Authority must be re*sewed and have written
approval by the County Engineer prior to installation.
i
—5. The developer shall install and deed to the Albemarle County
Service Authority all water and sewer lines on site and all water and
sewer lines off -site owned by the developer necessary to serve this
phase of Four Seasons from the site to existing lines owned by the
Authority a-- no expense to the Authority prior to connection to any
water and sewerline in which the Authority is expected to provide water
and sewer. The service lines from the buildings to the water meter and
the sewer service line to the trunk shall remain the property and
responsiblity of the owner.
6. The County Engineer shall inspect the installation of all water
and sewer facilities during the construction and order in writing all
deficiencies which must be corrected by the developer. A final
inspection shall precede the acceptance of the facilities by the
Authority.
-7F`. The developer shall deed an easement with a minimum width of
(tr 15 feet for all water and sewer lines to the Albemarle County Service
Authority for the maintenance of all lines deeded to the Authority,
in-0 above at no expense to the Authority.
Page,
s-
-8. The developer must pay all existing fees and charges for
water and sewer prior to issuance of an occupancy permit on the
�r structure or facilitJ, to be served.
!0
--.9. The developer shall pay for the cost of acquisition of all
IQ off -site easements and right-of-ways.
�U
10. The Albemarle County Service Authority shall not be responsible
for providing sewer service to Phase II -Cluster A until such time
that overloading conditions at the Berkeley Sewer Plant have been
resolved.
J
The preliminary approval of the concept of Phase II was deferred
L �
and a field. trip set by the Commission for Wednesday, February 14, 1973,
at 1:00 p.m. at the site.
10. Ednam Village - Request for restricted roads with the existing
rental development of Ednam Village.
(Mr. Roudabush returned to the Commission at this time).
Mr. Max Evans, representing the applicant presented the request
stating that it was the desire of the owner to sell the units off. Mr.
Humphrey reported that variances had been granted by the Board of
Zoning Appeals with reference to setback subject, however, to the
Commission approving the subdivision. Mr. Evans reported that the
maintenance of the roads would be under a Maintenance Homeowners
Association.
After a discussion, Mr. Carr motioned for approval of the plat
invoked with the first section of Ednam Village, involving variances
subject to an appropriate homeowners maintenance association approved
by the County Attorney, which was seconded by Mr. Roudabush and
unanimously approved by those members present.
With reference to Phase II of Ednam Vilalge and a request
for the extension of an existing private/restricted road, the
9-
Page »;c
deferred action to provide for an inspection of the site. It was
the consensus of the Commission regarding this new development that
it was a new situation and not related to the existing situation
in Ednam Village. The field trip was set for Wednesday, February 12,
1973 at 2:00 p.m.
Mr. Ives Coty was in attendance.
11. At this time the Commission received for review and informa-
tion the University of Virginia proposal for housing on "Lambeth Field".
After review and dicussion on the inadequacy of parking on
University Grounds, the Commission was not sure where access to the
property would be. The Commission instructed the secretary to inform
the University of Virginia that it was their desire to see access
located at the traffic light at Emmett and Massie Road.
12. Committee Report
A) I.W. Mawyer rezoning request. Mr. Roudabush and Mr. McClure
reported after further discussion regarding the request to rezone
land from A-1 to R-1. Mr. Carr motioned to deny the request because
of no compliance with the adopted plan and not be in the best interest
of the general public relative to setting a precedent, which was
seconded by Mrs. Craddock and unanimously approved by those members
present.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Secretary
M
Page
FEBRUARY 26, 1973
M
This was a work session of the Albemarle County Planning Commission held
on February 26, 1973 at 7:30 P.M. in the Board Room of the County Office Building.
Those present were Messrs David W. Carr, Wilbur C. Tinsley, M. Jack Rinehart,
Louis C. Staley, James Sams and Mrs. Ellen B. Craddock.
Messrs Avery Catlin, Chairman; Mr. Clifton McClure, Vice-Chariman; and
William S. Roudabush were absent.
Since the Chairman and Vice -Chairman were both absent, Mr. Rinehart nominated
Mr. Carr to serve as Chairman. The nomination was seconded by Mr. Tinsley and
approved.
Mr. Carr called the meeting to order and a quorum was established. Mr. Carr
suggested that the items of Old Business be taken up first.
1. John Embree- Restricted Road request - deferred matter from Feb. 12.
Existing restricted road serving three lots and Mr. Carr's property
off Route 676 to be approved to serve 6 lots and Mr. Carr's property
with agreement between adjacent owners to maintain such road.
It was noted that Mr. John Humphrey, Secretary to the Planning
Commission, was absent, but he had sent a memorandum to the Comm-
issioners dealing with the items on the agenda. Therefore, Miss
White, assistant to Mr. Humphrey, was requested to read that part
of the memorandum having to do with Item 1, John Embree. In short,
Mr. Humphrey informed the Commission that the Board of Supervisors
had declared a moratorium on the approval of restricted roads for
30 to 60 days pending a committee report with reference to future
policy regarding restricted roads, therefore he recommended that
they defer action on this request until such time as the committee
reports its findings.
M
Page
Mr. Carr informed the Commission that they could hear the request
now and defer action or wait until the report was completed to hear
the request.
Mr. Tinsley was of the opinion that they should wait.
Mr. Rinehart said that last week the Commission has discussed
revising Mr. Embree's layout and he felt they should find out tonight
from Mr. Embree whether this would be feasible.
F!
Mr. Embree said he had revised his plans according to the Commission's
desires and that their suggestions would probably work better as more
people would be responsible for the maintenance of the road.
There was a short discussion with Mr. Rinehart saying that any
further subdividing along that road might necessitate that it be brought
up to State standards, since the Planning Commission usually would not
allow more than 7 lots on a road not in the State system.
Mr. Embree said that when he made a statement to the committee on
restricted roads, he would recommend that they approve up to 10 parcels
of not less than 5 acres each to be allowed. He felt this would really
help farmers take care of the yearly expenses by selling 5 acre tracts.
Mr. Embree informed the Commission that approval of this road was an
urgent matter to him.
Dr. Sams made a motion to defer the request. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Tinsley and approved unanimously.
2. Ednam Village - Restricted Road request - deferred matter from Feb. 12.
Request to extend existing private road and request for 25' restricted
road to serve 8 parcels.
There was no one present to represent or speak on this request.
Since this, too, involved a restricted road, Mr. Rinehart made a motion
for deferral, which was seconded by Mr. Tinsley and approved unanimousl+
Page '7,
Mr. Carr made note, thought, that a field trip should be scheduled
to view this request after the Restricted Road Committee had made their
decision.
3. Four Seasons - Phase II - Site plan approval - deferred matter from
Feb. 12. Townhouse and garden apartment rental unit development on
89 acres located at intersection of Routes 743 and 631.
It was noted that in Mr. Humphrey's memorandum, he recommended
that this request be deferred because of (1) rezonings that must take
place, (2) additional information that was required and (3) the field
trip that was scheduled on Feb. 14 was only attended by two Commissioners.
Mr. Tinsley made a motion to defer the request until after a field
trip and until more data has been obtained. Mrs. Craddock seconded
the motion and it carried unanimously.
Mr. Carr said a field trip date should be set for this and he asked
Miss White if she knew when additional data would be obtained. Miss
White did not have this information, therefore, Mr. Carr said the
Planning Dept. would have to re -schedule the hearing.
Dr. Sams was of the opinion that a field trip should not be scheduled
until next Monday when more of the Commissioners would be present. He
felt that they should also discuss field trips a little more with all
members because frequently there are not enough members present for them.
Mr. Rinehart stated that he thought a representative should be on
the site when they view property to define boundaries and tell them
exactly what they plan to do and where.
Mr. Carr was of the opinion that the way they used to do it, (appoint
a committee) was the best way. But he agreed that they should wait until
next Monday to discuss the matter.
Mrs. Martin questioned whether they had ever considered having members
of the public accompany them on the trips. Mr. Carr said that was some-
thing else that could be discussed along with the field trip discussion.
Page -
Miss White informed the Commission that a draft of the
10-acre zone included in Mr. Humphrey's memo was for their
review over the next week.
Mr. Carr asked Miss White to try and have the minutes of
January 8, 1S, 22 and 29, 1973 ready for approval next Monday.
The meeting was adjourned.
Secretary
9