Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 04 80 PC MinutesM March 4, 1980 The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a meeting on Tuesday, March 4, 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. Kurt Gloeckner; Mr. Corwith Davis, Jr.; Mr. David Bowerman; and Mr. James Skove. Absent were Mr. Tim Lindstrom, ex-Officio; and Mr. Frederick W. Payne, Deputy County Attorney. Mr. Ronald Keeler, Assitant Director of Planning was also present. Col. Washington called the meeting to order after establishing that a quorum was present. SP-80-02. Shenandoah Valley Television Systems, Inc. has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to replace an existing 200 foot television tower on Carter's Mountain with a 186-foot tower. County Tax Map 91, Parcel 28, part thereof, Scottsville Magisterial District. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Mr. Dennis Rooker, on behalf of the applicant, said that the purpose of the application is to provide a stronger tower that will blend better with the surrounding area. He said the applicant is prepared to meeting the two recommended conditions. hearing. There was no public comment, and Col. Washington closed the public Mrs. Diehl established that there will be no lights on the tower. Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of the petition subject to the following conditions, as recommended by the staff: 1. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of access; 2. Removal of existing tower within 30 days of location of new tower. Mr. Davis seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. SP-80-06. William C. Sutherland has petitioned the Board of Supervisors for a two-family dwelling on 2.773 acres zoned A-1. Property is located on the west side of Route 29 South, approximately 500 feet north of the intersection of Routes 692 and 29 South. County Tax Map 87, Parcel 4, Samuel Miller Magisterial District. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report, noting the applicant already seems to have adequate space for the parking requirement. Mr. Sutherland was present to answer questions. hearing. There was no public comment, and Col. Washington closed the public '5-3 Mrs. Diehl questioned if Mr. Sutherland has secured Health Department approval. Mr. Keeler replied that is part of the building permit process. Mr. McCann moved approval of the petition subject to the following condition: 1. Provision of four off-street parking spaces. Mr. Skove seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. SP-80-04A. Vepco has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to amend SP-78-05 to provide for four additional "dish" antennae on 0.5165 acres zoned A-1. Property is on top of Bear Den Mountain, approximately 0.2 miles southwest of the State Police tower. Augusta County Tax Map 78, Parcel 32, part thereof. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Col. Washington established that the only change is the dish type antennae. Mr. Phil Lucas was present on behalf of Vepco to answer any questions. Col. Washington asked if the access is from the west side of the mountain. Mr. Lucas replied that it is. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mr. Skove moved approval of the petition subject to the following conditions: 1. Tower shall be removed within 90 days of abandonment, if such shall occur; 2. Enlargement shall require amendment of this special permit; 3. Tower and equipment shall not be located within Virginia State Parks Scenic easement; 4. Tower to be limited to 60 feet with ten dish type antennae. Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. ZMA-80-05. Meredith and Lillian Y. Bickers have petitioned the Board of Supervisors to rezone 8.25 acres from B-1 to A-l. Property is located south of I-64, and just north of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway and approximately 1 mile south of Glenorchy, County Tax Map 78, Parcel 33, part thereof. Rivanna Magisterial District. S� Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. There were no comments from Mr. Bickers or the public. Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Col. Washington was advised by Mr. Bickers that a single family dwelling will be built on the property for the owner. Mrs. Diehl moved approval of the rezoning. Mr. Vest seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion. SP-80-07. McClenahan Braodcasting Corporation has petitioned the Board of Supevisors for an FM radio transmission tower and equipment building on'53.950 acres zoned A-1. Property is located on the southwest corner of Little Yellow Mountain, north of the C and O Railroad, and approximately 2.25 miles west of Crozet. County Tax Map 55, Parcel 25, White Hall Magisterial District. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. He noted the petition of 1,041 signatures in support of the petition. Mr. McClenahan was present to answer any questions. two Mr. Thurston questioned if this tower will have an adverse oh local television reception. He also asked if an engineering study had been done on this. Mr. McClenahan did not think so, noting that the radio station must follow the guidelines of the FAA in the location of the tower. If the FAA had been concerned about this, he felt an engineering study would have been required. Mr. Thurston expressed concern about the effect this would have on property values in the area, noting that it will be quite visible for many miles. Mr. Warren Sprouse also expressed concern about the location of the tower. Mrs. Thurston questioned the availability of the site mentioned in the staff report. Mr. McClenahan said that of privately owned properties, this is the only location that will work. Mr. McClenahan then told Mr. Sprouse that the utilities will be underground from the Crown Orchard Packing Shed. He stated that access to the property will be from Route 707. Mr. Keeler said that the Board of Supervisors can discuss the possibility of location of the tower within Mint Springs, since it is county -owned property. ss Col. Washington closed the public hearing. Mr. Gloeckner questioned if the FAA and other agencies would approve the tower if it Were located on land owned by the Board of Supervisors. Mr. McClenahan said that would, but it would take approximately 90 days to secure one of the approvals, since an amendment on the location would have to be filed with the proper authorities. Mr. Skove established that the Parks and Recreation Department is aware of this situation.. Mr. Keeler pointed out that the Parks Department has had no comment, because they are waiting to know the position of the Board of Supervisors on the Mint Springs location. Mr. Bowerman said that if the tower would not impact the park, the Mint Springs location is certainly the better solution. Mr. McCann ascertained that the FCC will grant an extension. He then moved that the .Commission recommend to the Board that the Mint Spring Park be considered for the location of the tower, and moved that if this is not possible that SP-80-07 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Only those trees necessary for the erection and guying of the tower and location of the equipment building and fence shall be removed. 2. Staff approval of fencing around the tower to discourage tresspass; 3. Tower shall be removed within 90 days of abandonment, if such shall occur; 4. Tower shall be limited to a height of 298 feet; 5. Utilities serving the installation shall be located underground. Mrs. Diehl felt the special permit will have an impact on the whole area. Mr. McCann pointed out that the public wants services, and must therefore put up with some of the inconveniences these services bring with them. Mr. Skove said that he feels the good to the general public outweighs the impact on a few property owners. Col. Washington noted that the tower within Crozet is 325 feet. He did say that he favors an alternate location to the one proposed in SP-80-0'7. Mr. Skove seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Davis said that he does not know the Mint Springs property well enough to make a recommendation that it is the proper location. He said that he prefers to ask that the Board consider it as an alternate location. The motion carried by a vote of 7-1, with Mrs. Diehl dissenting. Col. Washington asked that prior to the Board of Supervisors public hearing that members of the Planning and Parks staff visit Mint Springs to discuss a possible site. 56 SP-80-01. Renata Tosti-Noc has petitioned the Board of Supervisors for a commercial kennel on 4.0 acres zoned A-1. Property is located south of I-64 and approximately 600 feet north of the Southern Railway and Route 29. County Tax Map 75, Parcel 53A, Samuel Miller Magisterial District. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Mr. Ed Jackson was present on behalf of the applicant, noting that this application will be used only for Mrs. Tosti-Noc. The adjoining property owners do not object, to his knowledge. Mr. Gloeckner said he could support the petition if there is a condition stating that the applicant will certify on a yearly basis that she is still the owner. Mrs. Diehl stated that she will reluctantly support the petition. She was skeptical the facilities could meet the requirements for a commercial kennel license. Mr. Keeler said that unfortunately the county has no procedures for curtailing this. Mr. McCann said that he did not support the rezoning request a few months ago, but will support the special permit because of the rezoning. Mr. McCann then moved approval of the special permit subject to the following conditions: 1. Site plan approval; 2. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of a commercial entrance; 3. County business license, if required; 4. Boarding limited to not more than six (6) dogs; 5. This special use permit and all authority granted hereunder is issued to the applicant and is non-transferrable. 6. Applicant to certify on a yearly basis that she remains the owner. Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no further discussion. The Commission took a 10 minute break. Mrs. Diehl did not return to the meeting. ZMA-80-04. CVR, Inc. has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to rezone 3.469 acres from A-1 to B-1 with a proffer. Property is located on the west side of Route 29 North, just north of the inter- section of Routes 763 and 29 North. County Tax Map 21, Parcel 15, Rivanna District. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. 5-7- Mr. Ed Bain, on behalf of the owner, noted the proffer and pointed out that this is a North Carolina company that has had a furniture outlet on Route 29 North, beside Real Estate III offices, and has had to relocate because that property was sold. The area is a commercially zoned area, but he pointed out that much of the land in the area is too expensive for the owners to purchase. He said that the company would like to be closer to town, but the prices are prohibitive. He did not feel this to be an excessive use for this property. Mr. John Shifflett, an adjoining property owner, did not object to the rezoning. Nir. Gloeckner said his first reaction is to be opposed to the rezoning because of the distance from other commercial uses. However with the threats of annexation out to Rio Road, the county's commercial tax base is threatened and for that reason he is inclined to support the request. Mr. Davis said that because the property is near General Electric and that particular intersection, he did not feel the property is appropriate for anything but commercial use. Mr. Bowerman said that considering requests on a case -by -case basis could mean that almost any commercial rezoning request would be approved. He felt this perpetuates the problems of growth that have been addressed in the comprehensive plan. Mr. Skove felt that growth should be confined to the designated growth areas of the plan, however he noted he sympathizes with the applicants. Mr. Davis questioned if the entire acreage is necessary for the proposed operation. He pointed out that the operation was small when it was near Real Estate III. Mr. Bain said that the operation will remain about the same, but the depth of the property is the problem. He said it cannot be subdivided at this time because of the A-1 zoning. Mr. Gloeckner questioned if there is a stream on the property. Mr. Bain replied that it is a low point in the property that would need some grading. Mr. Gloeckner suggested that there could be commercial zoning on the corner only; he pointed out there is water available for commercial development. Mr. McCann said that the pattern for growth was certainly set when water lines were laid straight down Route 29. Mr. Davis did not feel the road is the appropriate place for the stopping point, rather both sides of the road should be considered for commercial designation. Mr. Gloeckner suggested that the stream line be the stopping point. Vj Mr. Davis agreed, however said that there should be a 2-acre residue for residential use. 5< j Mr. McCann agreed that the back area is really inappropriate for commercial use. Mr. Bowerman said that he does not want to be unreasonable but growth should be limited to the designated growth areas. He said that he has trouble justifying this in view of all the work that has been done on the comprehensive plan and the new zoning ordinance. Mr. McCann said that property is near an industrial intersection and near an industrial use; therefore it is a good place for a business. He felt the uses in the area should be mixed. Mr. Bowerman agreed that probably a residential use will not be on the property, regardless. Mr. Skove moved denial of the request. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bowerman, and failed by a vote of 2-5, with Messrs. Washington, Vest, McCann, Davis, and Gloeckner dissenting. Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of the rezoning from A-1 to B-1 of 1.469 acres located on the southernmost portion, leaving a 2 acre residue for A-1 residential use. Mr. McCann seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 5-2, with Messrs. Bowerman and Skove dissenting. Old Business: Col. Washington briefly discussed the withholding of funds by the General Assembly on the Birdwood project. He said that he has told Mr. Tucker the Commission has an obligation to express to the University the density that will be acceptable to the county. He also pointed out that at the end of March a University representative will be present to discuss the golf course. Mr. Davis said that in the long run the future of the project will likely be made by a judge, who has the ability to determine if the University has more power than individuals. Mr. Bowerman felt that a golf course will dictate where any future housing facilities, and what type, will be permitted. Mr. Skove felt the University will listen to the Planning Commission recommendations. Mr. Gloeckner said that he is not sure the real planning for the project has been done, since only recently were the targets set for an aerial topo. Mr. Davis said that it has been his understanding that the economics of the situation for the Univeristy demanded the density that was shown on the preliminary, in order to build roads, etc. Col. Washington felt the density issue should be settled before anything else. Mr. Skove said in his opinion the site plan layout is even more important than the density. 57 Mr. Gloeckner felt that the density will certainly have an effect on land coverage, unless high rise units are considered. Col. Washington also felt it is important to discuss traffic generation with the University before too much planning is done. He noted the Commission will consider the golf course site plan at the last meeting in March. There was no additional business, and the meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. i� �V r Ro ert W. Tucker, Jr. - Se et . 19 9