Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 19 80 PC MinutesFebruary 19, 1980 The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a meeting on Tuesday, February 19, 1980, 7:30 p.m., Courthouse, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were Col. William Washington, Chairman; Mrs. Norma Diehl, Vice -Chairman; Mr. James Skove; Mr. Kurt Gloeckner; Mr. David Bowerman; Mr. Corwith Davis, Jr.; and Mr. Charles Vest. Absent were Mr. Layton McCann and Mr. Tim Lindstrom, ex-Officio. Other officials present were Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Director of Planning; Mr. Ronald S. Keeler, Assistant Director of Planning; Miss Mason Caperton, Planner; Mr. Frederick Payne, Deputy County Attorney. Also present was Miss Ellen Nash, member of the Board of Supervisors. Col. Washington called the meeting to order after establishing that a quorum was present. Mountain Hollow Subdivision Plat - Lots 36-57 ( Final Plat ) - located off the east side of Route 690, north of Route 250 West. Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. H. H. Tiffany, owner of the property, stated that this is the balance of the Mountain Hollow Farm, and approval of this subdivision will complete the subdivision of the farm. He described the plans for the road and noted that the division is in conformance with existing development. There was no public comment, and Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Mr. Gloeckner said that the plat should show the individual dimensions on the frontage of each lot. Miss Caperton replied that is addressed in the "technical requirements" condition. Mr. Skove moved approval of the plat subject to the following conditions, as recommended by the staff: 1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions have been met: a. Fee of $74.00 due; b. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of commercial entrance; C. Compliance with the private road provisions, including: 1. County Engineer approval of road plans; 2. County Attorney approval of maintenance agreement; d. Written Health Department approval; e. Any lots proposed to be connected to the central well system will require the appropriate approvals; f. Compliance with the Soil Erosion and Runoff Control Ordinances; g. Technical information as required by the Subdivision Ordinance. Mr. Davis seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. 9-1 Redbud Final Plat: Mrs. Diehl moved deferral of this item until the soil scientist report is available. Mr. Bowerman seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 6-0-1, with Mr. Gloeckner abstaining. Stevenson -Martin Final Plat - located on southbound lane of 29 North, a half mile north of Rio Road: Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. Ed Bain, attorney, was present on behalf of the applicants to answer questions. There was no public comment and Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Miss Caperton explained the proposed exit from the property. Mr. Vest moved approval of the plat subject to the following conditions, as recommended by the staff: 1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions have been met: a. Health Department approval; b. Parcel shall be served by public water; C. Change the name of Rio -Mar Blvd. 19 Mrs. Diehl seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. Townwood, Section One Final Plat - located on the south side of Route 743 and Route 631 junction, near the Rock Store: Mr. Gloeckner disqualified himself from the discussion and vote of leaving the room. Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. Tom Lincoln, surveyor, was present on behalf of the applicant to answer any questions. He noted that the applicant is agreeable to all the conditions recommended by the staff. There was no public comment, and Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Mr. Tucker explained to the Commission that the staff has been working with the applicant and the Highway Department on the eventual acceptance of the roads into the state highway system. He said that the problem is the ultimate design - a four -lane facility - since in this case only a 24 foot travelway is necessary to meet the demands of the proposed development. Mr. Bowerman ascertained that the road design as proposed will handle all 140 units. He questioned if there will be a traffic light in the vicinity, specifically at the Rock Store intersection. Mr. Byron Coburn, Assistant Resident Engineer of Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation , explained that there are scheduled plans for improvements to Rio and Hydraulic Roads. He discussed these plans at length with the Commission, and noted that initally no traffic light is planned at the intersection, though signalization may be necessary at a later date, based on need. Mr. Bowerman questioned if a traffic light could be required after construction of the 38 units. Mr. Coburn replied that 38 units will not justify the need for the traffic light because there will be insufficient side friction. Mrs. Diehl questioned if the road would not be accepted by the state until it is a four -lane facility. Mr. Coburn said that assumption is not entirely accurate. Mrs. Diehl then established that the 50 foot right-of-way will not be a constraint on road improvements in the future. Mr. Bowerman questioned if the road plans will make for a safe situation from the beginning of the project. Mr. Coburn said that it will be safe with the traffic from this development alone. Mr. Bowerman then pointed out that under the guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan, safety for pedestrians and vehicles is necessary. He felt there are too many "if's" since the county itself cannot contribute any funds for the road improvements. Mr. Coburn pointed out that the Board of Supervisors had approved the rezoning of this property a few weeks ago, and noted that the proposed access is the only safe access onto state roads. He pointed out the fact that this intersection is a low -accident intersection, and there will indeed be improvements to the intersection at a later date. Mr. Vest moved approval of the plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions have been met: a. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer plans; b. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of commercial entrance; C. Compliance with the private road provisions, including: 1. County Engineer approval of road plans, including curbing and drainage; 2. County Attorney approval of maintenance agreements; d. Homeowners' agreements shall include the maintenance of open space, the playground and other structures; e. Compliance with the Stormwater Detention requirements and Soil Erosion Ordinance; f. Fire Official approval of hydrant locations; g. Staff approval of play area equipment in areas shown on the "Townwood" site plan; h. Landscaping shall be provided as per the approved site plan; i. Provide description of dedication of Route 743; j. Street signs shall be provided; k. Greenbrier Drive shall be constructed to a standard to be approved by the County Engineer, Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation, and Planning Staff; it shall be maintained by the homeowners until such time the State accepts the ultimate design; 2. Granting of the following waiver: a. Waiver of Section 18-36(b) 2 and 3 of the Subdivision Ordinance. Mr. Davis seconded the motion: Discussion: Mr. Skove established from Mr. Payne that in the future it may be necessary for the county to bring this road up to standards as setforth in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Tucker agreed that it is possible this might happen. Mr. Skove remarked that he is reluctant to vote in support of something that will eventually get the county in the road building business. The motion carried by a vote of 6-1, with Mr. Skove dissenting. Mr. Gloeckner re-entered the meeting. Ivy Farm, Lots 52 and 30 Final Plat - located in the Ivy Farm Subdivision on Wingfield Road: Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. Tom Sinclair was present on behalf of the contract/purchaser to answer questions. Mr. Bill Gildea, an adjoining property owner, said that he is especially concerned about the stream crossing the access road, and the creek that separates his land from the proposed lot 30. He said that he is also concerned about the placement of the house and noted he hopes it is away from the steam. Thirdly, he expressed concern with the easement, suggesting that it be moved at least 15 feet from the property line. Mrs. Beverly Larson objected in principle to the further subdivision of Ivy Farm. Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Mr. Davis pointed out that under the current A-1 restrictions there is no way the Commission can deny this subdivision request. Mr. Skove pointed out that the 100' setback from the stream is shown on the plat. 9 0 Col. Washington questioned if there are conditions available for addressing the un-interrupted passage of a stream. Mr. Payne noted that the County Engineer will review the stream crossing. Mr. Gloeckner said that the access easement should be reduced to 20 feet, noting it should be shown to follow the centerline of the driveway. Mr. Skove moved approval of the plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions have been met: a. Written Health Department approval; b. County Engineer approval of specifications of the easement, to include adequate sizing of the drainage facilities crossing the stream; C. Note the building and stream setbacks on the plat; 2. Waiver of Section 18-36(d) granted; 3. A 20-foot easement shall be shown to follow the centerline of the driveway. Mr. Vest seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. Westfield, Lots 1L - 24R Final Plat - located off the east side of Hydraulic Road on the new section of Commonwealth Drive adjacent to Sperry Rand Corporation: Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. Hill, on behalf of the owner, said that he is asking for 7-8 entrances, however he felt this could be worked out at a later date. Mr. W. A. Fenley, addressing the property adjacent to Sperry, said that he has no objection to the development of the area, but is concerned with the surface water run-off. He asked this be addressed so there is no erosion on the back of the Sperry property. Col. Washington closed the public discussion. Mr. Tucker advised the Commission that this property is covered by the Stormwater Detention Ordinance. Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of the plat subject to the conditions recommended by the staff: 1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions are met: a. County Engineer approval of entrances to meet Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation standards and recommendations; b. Compliance with the Soil Erosion Ordinance and Stormwater Detention requirements; C. County Engineer and Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of road plans for Commonwealth Drive for acceptance into the State system; including sidewalks; also the bond should include the provision of street signs; d. Fire Official approval of hydrant locations. -f� Mrs. Diehl seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. University Firestone Site Plan - located on Rio Road next to Hardee's Restaurant: Miss Caperton presented the staff report. Mr. Frank Inscoe, representing University Firestone, said that both entrances in the front of the property are needed, though they could be moved down somewhat for traffic flow purposes. Mr. Bowerman established that there will be no new entrances onto Rio Road. There was no public comment and Col. Washington closed the public discussion. At this point the Commission briefly discussed the traffic flow within the site. Col. Washington said that an operation that requires only nine parking spaces should not need two entrances. Mr. Gloeckner pointed out that the handicapped space creates the problem, since one has to back the entire length of the property from that space if one of the entrances is deleted. He said that he supports the two entrances if two spaces in front of the sales office were deleted. Mr. Bowerman moved approval of the site plan subject to the conditions recommended by the staff. Mrs. Diehl seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Davis; said that he has problems telling this property owner he can have only one entrance when Hardee's entrance is there also. He said that if parking spaces are eliminated, the back-up problem is eliminated. The motion failed by a vote of 3-4, with Messrs. Davis, Skove, Vest, and Gloeckner dissenting. Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of the site plan subject to the following conditions: 1. A building permit will be issued when the following conditions have been met: a. Fire Official approval of hydrant location and dumpster location; b. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer plans; C. County Engineer approval of pavement specifications, curbing and drainage facilities; pavement specifications should be noted on the plan. d. Staff approval of landscape plan, including the area along Rio Road, in the islands and around the building; e. Compliance with the Stormwate.r Detention requirements and Soil Erosion Ordinance; f. Correct tax map and parcel number to tax map 61, parcel 120N; g. Eliminate the two parking spaces in front of the office and align the curve radius to the edge of the sidewalk in front of the building. Mr. Vest seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 4-3, with Messrs. Bowerman and Washington, and Mrs. Diehl dissenting. The Commission took a ten minute recess. Birdwood Site Plan - located on the south side of Route 250 West, between Bellair and Ednam: Col. Washington began by questioning the County Attorney's Office if the matter were properly before the Planning Commission. Mr. Payne replied that it is properly before the Commission. Miss Caperton presented the staff report, assisted by a map presentation. present . Col. Washington questioned if there were a representative from the University Mr. Bill Preston questioned if the University of Virginia falls within the compulsory or non -compulsory provisions of Section 15.1-456. Mr. Chuch Rotgin expressed concern that there was no representative from the University of Virginia present. He said he had understood there would be public meeting with input from the University, interested citizens and property owners and the county government. He stated that he had learned at 6:45 p.m. that evening that whatever is said has no legal bearing, since the University falls within the non -compulsory provisions. Mr. Payne advised the Commission and public that the issue of compliance with the County's Comprehensive Plan is still unsettled - that it is an arguable point, and noted that Mr. St. John has requested an opinion from the State Attorney General. Mr. Chuck Rotgin, representing Blue Ridge Homebuilders, said that he had no comment to make at this point. Mr. Don Heyne, President of the Ednam Forest Homeowners' Association, also had no comment to make. Mr. Edmund Berkeley, Secretary of the Bellair Homeowner's Association, also had no comment at that time. Mr. Fritz Berry said that he is concerned with the traffic impact on Route 250 and between this development and the proposed old folks home that will be constructed on the EDNAM tract. Mr. Frank Featherston, a resident of Liberty Hill, noted the massive student opposition to the Birdwood proposal. Mr. Irving Cox questioned who submitted this site plan. Mr. Tucker responded that Dr. Catlin had called the Planning Department twice that day and had said someone would be present for the meeting. He said that the University of Virginia had submitted this to the county for review and comment. Mr. Rotgin said that absence of the University's representative seems to indicate that the University feels exempt from county rules and regulations. He asked that the item be continued until a date when the University would have a representative present. Dr. James Twyman questioned if there has been an acquisition submitted to the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation for funding of Route 250 road improvements. Mr. Byron, Assistant Resident Engineer for VDH&T, responded that such a resolution could be passed by the Board of Supervisors at any time. Mr. Bill Porter of Liberty Hill said that he is concerned about the impact on roads, specifically Deerpath Road. Mr. Richard Good of Liberty Hill noted that he has letters from Dr. Hereford stating -that Deerpath Road will not be used at this time, though it probably will be used in the future. He said that he is unable to get any sort of firm committment from the University regarding its plans for Birdwood. Mrs. Barbara Higbee questioned the absence of a University representative. Mr. Tucker replied that the University was notified. Mr. William Stevenson said that he is advised that the plan before the Commission is subject to change. He felt the golf course should be along the edge of the property, with a proper buffer. He noted there is a petition of 130 signatures of opposition from property owners in Ednam Forest. The Commission then decided to discuss how it would handle the review of the Birdwood Preliminary Site Plan. Mr. Gloeckner noted for the record that he has checked with the County Attorney's office and feels he has no conflict of interest, however stated he would abstain from comment at this point. Mr. Skove said that he encourages bicycle traffic between this residential college and the main grounds. Mr. Davis felt the density should be lowered to conform with the existing development in surrounding subdivisions. Mrs. Diehl said that she agrees with all the staff comments; she expressed concern about the parking garage, and felt this facility should not be at the back of the site if a transit system will be used. Mr. Payne advised the Commission at this point that regardless of the University's need to conform to the code, the public can still express its opinion on the plan, and the University is in turn obligated to react to its plans within the guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan. q3 Mr. Bowerman then established that the Univeristy must consider the planning Commission's recommendations. Mr. Heyne established that the Univeristy has stated it will supply the county with a final site plan. Mr. Davis felt the Commission has a responsibility to review and comment on the plan. Col. Washington felt the main technical problem is the density concept. He could see nothing wrong with giving to the University the concerns addressed by the staff report. Mrs. Diehl felt the Commission was at a disadvantage because it could from the University. not direct questions to a representative The Commission members agreed that having a representative present would be useful. Mrs. Diehl moved that the Commission Universityany representataveccouldnbenpresent action to a work session in order that to address concerns of the Commission and public. Mr. Skove seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 6-0-.1, with Mr. Gloeckner abstaining. Pq Members of the public who had written comments then presented these comments to Col. Washington for future distribution to the Commission members. With no additional business, the Commission adjourned at 10:45 p.m. rt W. Tucker, Jr: - SeTetar HI