Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 15 80 PC MinutesJanuary 15, 1980 The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on Tuesday, January 15, 1980, 7:30 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were Col. William Washington, Chairman; Mrs. Norma Diehl, Vice - Chairman; Mr. Layton McCann; Mr. Charles Vest; Mr. James Skove; Mr. Corwith Davis and Mr. Timothy Lindstrom, ex-Officio. Other officials present were Mr. Frederick Payne, Deputy County Attorney; Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Director of Planning; Mr. Ronald S. Keeler, Assistant Director of Planning; and Mr. Douglas Eckel, Senior Planner. Commission members who were absent were Mr. Kurt Gloeckner and Mr. David Bowerman. Col. Washington called the meeting to order after establishing that a quorum was present. The minutes of December 18, 1979 were approved as submitted. SP-79-74. Noah E. Wood, Sr. has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to locate a mobile home on 3.800 acres zoned A-1. Property is located on the south side of Route 676, approximately two miles west of the intersection of Routes 676 and 678. County Tax Map 58, Parcel 3D, Samuel Miller District. Mr. Eckel presented the staff report mentioning that the applicant will be occupying the mobile home himself. Mr. William J. Leonard, not understanding that Col. Washington had called on the applicant or applicant's representative, spoke out in protest. He mentioned that there is another mobile home there in the area. Mr. and Mrs. Noah Wood, Jr. both spoke as representatives for the applicant, Noah Wood, Sr. They established that the parcel of land between Mr. Wood, Sr. and Mr. William Leonard belonged to them, not Mr. Wood, Sr. That is where the present mobile home is located. Mrs. Wood continued, saying that the Woods had lived in the Ivy area for 47 years as caretakers of Locust Hill and they had been led to believe they both had a lifetime home at Locust Hill. However, Locust Hill was sold two years ago and they lost their positions as caretakers. They are 76 and 74 years old and have no place to live and they both feel the mobile home is the best answer as they cannot get a bank to lend them money to build due to their advanced age. (Mr. Lindstrom entered the meeting.) Mrs. Wood then stated that there was no zoning ordinance when the first mobile home was located and they have spoken with the occupants of the mobile home and a date has been set for the mobile home to be removed. Mr. Skove established with Mr. Wood, Jr. that it was the applicant's suggestion that the mobile home they wish to live in be removed when the applicant and his wife no longer occupy it. Mr. Wood, Jr. also said that his father wishes to be independent as long as possible and neither his father or mother wish to come and live with their children. Mr. Leonard spoke up and said as a result of all this, he no longer has any objection so long as the mobile home is removed after both Mr. and Mrs. Wood, Sr. vacate it. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. M Mrs. Diehl reported she went out to the site that afternoon and the site for the mobile home is visible only briefly from the road. She said she had no problem with the staff's recommendations and moved approval subject to those recommendations as follows: 1. Compliance with Section 11-14-2 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The mobile home Special Permit is personal to Mr. and/or Mrs. Noah Wood, Sr. and the mobile home will be removed when both shall cease to occupy it. Mr. Vest seconded the motion. Col. Washington asked Mr. Payne is the second condition is acceptable legally. Mr. Payne answered yes. The vote was unanimous for approval. ZMA-79-46. MPM Partnership has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to rezone 6.0 acres from A-1 Agriculture to M-1 Industrial. Property is located on the north side of Route 649, approximately 1200 feet east of the intersection of Routes 649 and 606. County Tax Map 32, Parcel 17E, Rivanna District. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Mr. Pietsch, the applicant, stated the present buildings are set back 300 feet which is very pretty but he doesn't want to build his warehouse in front. His previous site plan in the industrial park was not used as he ran out of time. He said he can use the buildings on this site for the office but he requests the rezoning so he can build the warehouse in the rear. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mrs. Diehl asked how much acreage was approved for the former site plan. Mr. Pietsch answered one acre. Mrs. Diehl asked how much is needed now. Mr. Pietsch said he is planning.a 4,000 to 5,000 square -foot warehouse but that for the past 5 to 6 years, his firm has been adding that much every 2 years so they don't know exactly what the future will bring. Mrs. Diehl commented she is reluctant to put the slope area in the stream area. Mr. McCann said he questioned the A-1 zoning around the property but could understand why the applicant would like to get the entire parcel rezoned at one time so he wouldn't have to keep coming back every time he expanded. Mr. Skove said he feels the area is suitable for industrial development and is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and moved for approval. Mr. McCann said he agreed with Mr. Skove and seconded the motion. Discussion: .57 Mrs. Diehl said she couldn't support the motion due to the steep slopes when the property is not needed at this time. Mr. Davis commented that he has heard of so much land zoned "X" which is not useable for the purpose for which it was zoned and so he has no objections to this application. Col. Washington said he would rather see the property cut to fit the need rather than go whole hog. He pointed out there is a precedent for rezoning part of a parcel. Mrs. Diehl stated she would like to offer a substitute motion that the remaining portion of the parcel that is zoned A-1 be zoned M-1 to the beginning of the 15 to 25% slope area. plans. Mr. Davis seconded the motion. Mr. Skove said he felt the way to handle the slope problem is at Site Review. Mr. Vest commented he didn't feel he could dictate an individual's business The vote was 3 to 3 with Messrs. McCann, Vest and Skove dissenting. Col. Washington then called for a vote on the original motion. The vote on the original motion was 4 to 2 with Mrs. Diehl and Col. Washington dissenting. ZTA-79-03. Charles W. Hurt has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to amend Section 8-1-34 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Mr. Jim Hill, representing the applicant, commented that after conferring with several engineers, the applicant feels that applications should be approved subject to regulations of O.S.H.A. on sound and vibration. Christopher Murray spoke saying that he lives on M-1 property and needs it also for business. He said he feels 15 to 50 horsepower is excessive but the point is what the motor is driving. He feels limiting horsepower instead of use misses the point. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mr. McCann stated he feels what is needed are standards for insulating to kill the noise. Col. Washington established with Mr. Hill that the applicant no longer has anyone interested in purchasing property that would need this amendment. Mr. Hill went on to say that the applicant's client did not want to go through the rigmarole of rezoning a piece of land when they had 40 horsepower motors that were going to be used -in the operation. He said most industries that are going to be coming into the area are going to have more than 15 horsepower motors because things are geared 6 a little bigger than that now and a little faster and it really is what they are driving that counts. He said the applicant feels there should be a special permit that allows a review of what the industry is going to be doing. Mrs. Diehl said she is not mechanical but it seems a jump from 15 horsepower to 200 horsepower is an excessive jump and she would like it explained. Mr. Davis said he feels the proper vehicle should be a special use permit and he would keep the wording as it is in the original and have these as accessory uses rather than primary with some relation to decibel level according to the neighboring zoning; for instance M-1 next to property would be different than residential next to property. Mr. Tucker explained that by employing the special use permit you can apply a condition that would set the decibel rating if you felt it should be taken into consideration or you could apply the performance standards that are in the RTM zoning until the new ordinance is adopted with the performance standards that cover all the industrial zones. Mr. Skove established that a decibel meter will have to be purchased in order for the County to determine decibel levels. Mrs. Diehl asked if the staff felt that 200 horsepower written as a special permit is excessive. Mr. Tucker said he didn't think so because it is under special permit and also because it depends on what is actually being driven. He said it would be very difficult to determine exactly what kind of machinery of every type that would be covered and be sure to cover everything. Mr. McCann said OSHA is relatively stiff on working conditions for employees in buildings and he had his serious doubts that they would approve anything that is really going to be objectionable on the outside that is taking place on the inside be- cause people can only stand so much noise on the inside and that is where it is all going to be. Mr. Davis said it might go on all night. He said he was also in favor of raising the horsepower as long as it was under special use permit. Mr. McCann moved that Section 8-1-34 be left as it is now worded in the present Ordinance and moved approval of 8-1-27(15) which reads as follows: Section 8-1-27(15) Engineering, engineering design, light manufacturing, assembly, and fabrication of machinery and components, including such on - site uses, accessory or otherwise, as machining, threading, babbitting, welding, and sheet metal work employing machinery not exceeding 200 horse- power per unit and excluding such uses as drop hammering and foundry. Mr. Vest seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous for approval. SP-79-76. Jefferson Cable has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to locate a receiving tower on 234.165 acres zoned A-1. Property is located on Carter's Mountain on an access road off Route 53. County Tax Map 91, Parcel 28, Scottsville District. 7 Im Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Mr. Joe Price, representing Jefferson Cable Company, said his company has had equipment on Carter's Mountain since 1963. However, he said that since that time some technical improvements have been made which lessen the requirement of going to the top of the mountain. He said the installation will not be lighted and will not be painted orange, and therefore it will not be an eyesore. Also, due to the same technical improvements, less trips will have to be made to the mountain. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Col. Washington asked about the vehicle trips being reduced and whether Mr. Coburn had any comment. Mr. Keeler answered that Mr. Coburn told him the Highway Department would not require widening of the entrance. Mr. Vest moved for approval subject to the one recommendation made by the staff: 1. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of access. Mrs. Diehl seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. McCann said he just hopes Mr. Coburn won't change his mind. The vote was unanimous for approval. The Albemarle County Planning Commission has adopted a resolution of intent to amend the Comprehensive Plan to include the Camelot area as a community. Mr. Tucker presented a summary of the Piney Mountain Community Land Use Committee recommendations. Mr. Robert Silcott, a member of the Piney Mountain Committee, said he was honored to be on the committee. He said the committee came to a basic disagreement on the growth size of the area. He reported the people living in the area wanted to see the area reduced to a village instead of a large community. Mr. Skove asked if the people would like to eliminate the area on the east side of Route 29. Mr. Silcott answered yes. Mr. Skove then asked if the people in the Camelot area will go along with the area on the west side of Route 29. Mr. Silcott answered the people would prefer about 3,000 residents as opposed to 5,000 residents. Mr. Robert McKee spoke saying he doesn't see a contiguous community on both sides of Route 29. He said one area does not offer the other anything except for the school. Mrs. Diehl pointed out that highways are used as barriers of one neighborhood 5 to another. Mr. Wendell Wood pointed out that General Electric is a 2,000-employee facility and the company wants employees living nearby. He said the utilities are there and the sewer plant has been approved for a 60,000-gallon extension. Mr. Davis asked why Hollymead was not large enough for these people. Mr. Tucker answered that Hollymead is large enough and is planned for a population of 12,000. Mrs. Diehl asked if the school committee had looked at other sites. Mr. Tucker said the school board's architect pointed out the limitations of the present site but there was some reluctance in pointing out a better site. Mr. Skove established that the school board had not ruled out the present site but they had said they preferred level ground. Mr. McCann commented that if we are going to show growth areas, this is the way to do it as land south of the river is going to be swallowed up by the Hollymead community anyway. Mrs. Diehl established that the 14-inch water line that is already in would accommodate all the area shown on the map and including the industrial area. Mr. Tucker explained that the Comprehensive Plan was used as a guide for growth before the 14-inch water line was installed. Mr. Skove suggested some of the questions such as the questions about the boundaries should be settled before moving on to new topics. Mr. McCann said he preferred the boundaries where they are on the plan. Col. Washington commented that he supported development on the west side of Route 29 only. He said that if in five or ten or twenty years the east side of Route 29 needs to be developed, there will still be a Planning Commission, there will still be a Board and it still can be done. Mr. Skove moved that the Commission establish the boundaries as that part shown on the map to the west of Route 29 and north of the river. Mr. Davis seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous for approval. Mr. Tucker pointed out that one particular member of the Piney Mountain Committee, who lived in Camelot, felt that as many access points as can be should be provided as people will need access to and from the area in case of an accident or emergency. (Mr. Lindstrom left the meeting.) Mr. Skove suggested to the Commission that perhaps all comments have not been heard on the school site. He said it may not be the best site but if the school board can't come up with any other recommendation, the Commission may have to go along with the present site. Mr. Tucker explained that the school board may not want to be put in the position of favorinq the development by selecting the school site. He said that inasmuch as he does not have experts on school sites on his staff, he asked for suqqestions from the school board since they have retained architects. Mr. McCann moved that the school site be left as shown on the plan. Mr. Vest seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous to leave the site as shown. Mr. Wood informed the Commission that if the school site proves to be a problem, it is not a big item and there will be no problem in moving it to a more acceptable location. New Business: Mr. Skove said he wished to bring up the subject to Site Review and asked if any Commission members had any comments they wished to make about the Site Review Committee or what they wanted out of the Site Review process. Mr. McCann said he thought the purpose of the Site Review was to gather technical information and most technical information could be gathered by letter to the staff. Mrs. Diehl commented she thought the Commission member was there as a sort of liaison, someone to be aware of the problems. Col. Washington said he has not felt it was appropriate to make comments at Site Review but he said he has picked up, by being there, some of the comments from the Highway Department and other agencies as to the problems with some cases. In other words, he said it is advance warning. Mr. Skove said maybe the Commission could be thinking about what they want to get out of Site Review. Col. Washington said it could be carried further, but off the top of his head he thinks one Commission member would be enough for Site Review. He went on to say that he had attended the Board of Supervisors meeting the night before to see how the Board accepted the presentation of the Zoning Ordinance and the Board said they are going to hold a series of work shops over the next several months in all the Magisterial Districts with a view toward taking action before summer vacation. He said he is sure the Board expects the Commissioners to be present in their districts and so the Commission is still involved even though they have completed their writing. He said he was making this announcement so everyone would be informed as to what was discussed. Col. Washington mentioned his meeting with the Board of Supervisors and discussed with the Commission some of the points made at the meeting relating to length of time spent, comments made by members of the Commission and other matters of concern to the Commission. /o With no further business to discuss, the Commission adjourned at 10:40 p.m. 9 c