Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 25 80 PC MinutesMarch 25, 1980 The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on Tuesday, March 25, 1980, 7:30 p.m., in the Board Room of the County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were: Colonel William Washington, Mr. Layton McCann, Mr. Charles Vest, Mrs. Norma Diehl, Mr. Corwith Davis, Jr., Mr. Kurt Gloeckner, Mr. David Bowerman. Other officials present were Mr. Frederick Payne, Deputy County Attorney, and Miss Mason Caperton, Planner. Chairman Col. William Washington called the meeting to order after establishing a quorum was present. The minutes of March 181 1980 were approved as written. MUSSELMAN FINAL PLAT Property described as a portion of Parcel 11 on Tax Map 81, Rivanna District; located off the east side of Route 616, north of I-64. Proposal to divide the 22+ acre parcel leaving a total of 564+ acres residue. Parcel served by easement. Miss Caperton presented the staff report. The applicants - Mr. & Mrs. Musselman, their attorney Ed Bain, and Mr. & Mrs. Berman, the purchasers, all were present. Mr. Bain made a statement for the applicants - the property involved is a large tract and has been in the Musselman family for years. It has been sold off in increments. In each deed there is a 20 foot easement. Mr. Musselman has provided the conditions for the pertinent easement (quoting from deed) ,that the normal and routine expenses of the maintenance of the said roadway shall be divided from time to time between such parties as use said road in proportion to their then normal use of the same, with any party damaging the said road by abnormal use being required to bear the full expense of remedying the damage. This has been the process over the years and there have been no complaints. Gravel has been added from time to time; the foundation is solid, a couple of spots need repairs at the moment. The applicant requests approval without the recommendation of the staff for the County Engineer approval adding the 3" of stone. The hearing was closed to public comment, since the public had no further comments. Mrs. Diehl requested that Mr. Bain speak to the sixty foot right--of--way. Mr. Bain replied that the purchaser would like to reserve this right--of-way. Col. Washington commented that this leads to a presumption of looking forward to intensified development. Mr. Bain said that the Bermans were not intending this. Col. Washington asked the reason for the two sixty foot rights -of -way. Mr. Bain said that one is for the Bermans, and Mr. Musselman is reserving the other. 75 9 9 Mrs. Diehl asked if there is a road now, what is the reason for reserving a sixty foot right-of-way. Mr. Bain said this could be used as access road later on. After more questions and answers on the plat, Mr. Gloeckner asked if the applicant just wanted relief from the stone requirement. Mr. Bain said that this is the request, since the users have maintained the road and since it is provided for in the deed. Mr. Gloeckner then asked the Deputy County Attorney if he had any objections to this. Mr. Payne said that he really couldn't react without looking at the agreement. Whenever you have that kind of agreement that covers property not subject to the Commissionerslapproval, he tends to be more lenient. It is better to have something that covers everybody, which may not be optimal, than to have something that covers a few which is optimal. So there is a good probability that it would be acceptable. Col. Washington commented when he looked at the requirement of the County Engineer, he is reluctant to say 3' of stone, or l-24or lV of stone. The County Engineer is qualified to determine what is appropriate and he would be inclined to put a period after the word "improvement." But on a maintenance agreement, when you enter a ball game that has been going on a long time - after all, the county private road ordinance is only about two years old. If what is in the deed is ample, this should be approved; no harm is done to ask the County for waiver, if it is not ample, then it should be corrected now. Nothing is wrong with the staff recommendation. The Commissioners had more comments on this point. Mr. McCann felt that when you go into an existing private road that it is almost impossible to force everyone into a maintenance agreement. You wind up with two or three signing. Mr. Payne said that was the way he had been handling this thing. If you can get something for all people, then get it. Otherwise you will have only the purchaser and the one retaining property signing, and the rest of them get a ride, so to speak. Mr. Bowerman asked if this condition was only for the 6/10 of a mile or for just the private road. Miss Caperton pointed this out on the plat - just the private road, 6/10 of a mile. After more discussion, Mr. Gloeckner moved for the approval of the plat subject to Compliance with the private road requirements including: County Attorney approval of a maintenance agreement. The motion was seconded by Mr. McCann. After question, Miss Caperton said this has a non-exclusive right of way. The motion carried with 6-1, Col. Washington dissenting,because he would like for the County Engineer to participate in the approval alsoP-as called for in Staff Recommendations. HALL RESIDENTIAL SITE PLAN Parcel 43 on Tax Map 7, White Hall District, located on the south side of Route 687 about one mile south of Boonesville. Proposal - the addition of a mobile home requires approval of a site plan. There are currently 3 existing houses on this site. The staff report was given by Miss Caperton. The applicant was not present. A mobile home needs a site plan and Miss Caperton did the plan for them, since they did not have time to have it done. There being no public comment, the chairman closed the hearing to public discussion. Mrs. Diehl asked for the conditions on the special permit. Miss Caperton didn't know. Mr. Davis said that the mobile home should only be occupied by family members or agricultural employees. Mrs. Diehl suggested that use should be designated. Miss Caperton commented that the mobile home is visible from the road. Health department approval has already been obtained. Mr. Vest moved for the approval of the site plan subject to compliance with Article 11-14-2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The motion was seconded by Mr. McCann The vote for approval was unanimous. 19 Mr. Gloeckner, because of a conflict of interest, left the room for the next two cases and did not participate in the discussion or vote on either. TOWNWOOD, SECTION TWO FINAL PLAT Portions of parCels 9 and 12 on Tax Map 61, Charlottesville District; located south of the intersection of Hydraulic Road and Rio Road, south of the Rock Store. Staff report presented by Miss Caperton. The applicant and Tom Lincoln representing the applicant, were present. Mr. Lincoln stated that the applicant had no problem with the conditions. There was no public discussion; then the chairman closed the hearing to public discussion. Col. Washington asked the implications on the waiver. Mr. Payne stated that because of the way the land lies, the road can't be built so that the system will accept it. It is only a halfway measure, but the best that: can be done under the circumstances. Mr. Bowerman was concerned about the increase in traffic on a road that is already heavily graveled and non -tolerable. He felt that adequate safety measures should be insured. 77 Mr. McCann moved for the approval of the plat subject to: a. Albemarle County County Service Authority approval of water and sewer plans; b. 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; C. Homeowners' agreements shall include the maintenance of open space, the playground and other structures; d. Compliance with the Stormwater Detention requirements and Soil Erosion Ordinance; e. Fire Official approval of hydrant locations; f. Staff approval of play area equipment in areas shown on the "Townwood" site plan; g. Landscaping shall be provided as per the approved site plan; h. Street signs shall be provided; i. 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. Also the following waiver is granted: a. Waiver of Section 18-36(b) 2 and 3 of the Subdivision Ordinance. Mrs. Diehl seconded the motion. The Commission voted unanimously for approval. BIRNAM WOODS SITE PLAN Parcels 18A and 20 on Tax Map 61, Charlottesville District, located on the southeast side of Hydraulic Road, north of Lambs Road. Miss Caperton presented the staff report. The applicant, James Gercke was present and had no objection to the conditions. When there was no further comment, the hearing was closed to public discussion. Mr. Bowerman asked why the turn lane had been dropped from the requirements. Miss Caperton said there was a grading problem. Mr. Bowerman expressed opposition to dropping the turn lane because of traffic. Mr.Gercke said that completion of the project would be five to seven years; also it is set back far enough from the road to permit space for cars to get off the paved road to turn. Col. Washington asked when the project would be begun. Mr.Gercke indicated that some units would be started this spring. Mr. Vest moved for the approval of the Commission, subject to: 1. Building Permits will be issued when the following conditions are met: a. County Engineer approval of the road plans and drainage structures; b. Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation approval of a commercial entrance as recommended in their letter of March 12, 1980; C. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer plans; d. Compliance with the Stormwater Detention requirements and Soil Erosion Ordinance; 79 e. Fire Official approval of hydrant locations if required; f. Vacation of property line between Parcels 20 2. A certificate of occupancy will be issued when has been met: a. Staff approval of play area equipment. Mr. Bowerman seconded the motion. The Commission voted unanimous approval. Mr. Gloeckner reentered the room. and handicapped facilities, and 18A. the following condition RIO COURT TOWNHOUSES SITE PLAN AND FINAL PLATS Parcels 139A and 139 and 18 foot strip on Tax Map 61, Charlottesville District, located on the west side of Rio Road East, south of Wakefield Road. Miss Caperton presented the staff report. The applicant, Mr.. Randolph Wade, was present and accepted the conditions, with the exception of the sidewalk along the frontage. Mr. Wade also commented that it was not his desire to change the entrance, that a nice building was in that area now that he had intended to leave there; also he did not consider the change practical. There is also a fire hydrant. within 400 feet of the proposed site. The adjacent owners made their opinions known: Mrs. Shari Aylor voiced opposition to the entrance on Wakefield as a dangerous location and felt. the site plan on Rio Road was better. She also said that the water pressure is low, really minimul, and voiced objection to hooking onto the water line since this would affect the pressure. She was also worried about the maintenance and landscaping - would rather have shrubs than gall trees. Mr. Jim Aylor said that the hydrant down the road had pressure of 596 gpm, which is sub -standard. Mr. Ron Clark said that this is a school bus stop area and that Wakefield Road is on an incline and it is difficult to see going up and you are looking into the sun going down. Mr. Bob Deed said that the sidewalk ends along the existing housing area, there is no connecting sidewalk; also any sidewalk put in around the Rio Court Townhouses would be torn up to widen the road. Mrs. Shari Aylor told the Commission that a petition opposing the water line hook-up and the entrance on Wakefield is attached to the staff report; that every person in the area signed the petition. Mrs. June Clark was opposed to the sidewalk being built, that it would go no place and serve no purpose. Mr. Wade said that regarding the water question - according to the authorities with the exception of requiring the fire hydrant, there is sufficient water. Mr. Cortez commented that the water was inadequate for multifamily; he would recommend 1000 gallons. This would drop the families below the development to twenty pounds of pressure. 19 There was no further public comment, and the hearing was closed to public discussion. Mr. Bowerman questionedwhen Rio Road is re -done are adjacent property owners assessed or is the County responsible for the expense. Mr.Payne said that there is a statue for assessments; but he didn't think it had ever been used. Miss Caperton commented that if it is not there and is in the plans, the County and State share the cost. There was further discussion of the road and the sidewalk, also the entrance and the water system. Mr. Bowerman moved for approval of the plat with the following requirements: 1. The plats will be signed when the following conditions are met: a. Prior to signing sheet 1 of 2 showing Lot A the following conditions shall be met: (1) Note that Lot A has access over the easement only; (2) Note that Lot A shall connect to public water and sewer; (3) Compliance with the private road provisions, including County Engineer approval of the road and County Attorney approval of maintenance agreements; (4) A waiver of double frontage is required for Lot A. b. Prior to signing sheet 2 of 2 showing Lots 1-5, the following conditions shall be met: (1) Note that the fee of the road shall be owned by the homeowners' association; (2) County Attorney approval of homeowners' agreements for maintenance of the road, open space, playground equipment, and other structures; (3) Staff approval of playground equipment; (4) Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation approval of the commercial entrance; (5) Compliance with the Stormwater Detention requirements; (6) Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer plans; (7) Fire Official approval of required fire flow of the hydrant (1000 gpm); (8) Landscaping shall be provided as approved on the site plan. Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion. The vote for approval was unanimous. Mr. McCann moved for approval of the site plan with the following conditions: 1. Building permits will be issued for the site plan when the following conditions have been met: a. Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation approval of the commercial entrance; b. Staff approval of the landscape plan including screening from adjacent residential properties and the material of the fence; C. Note on the plan: "Rio Court, open space, and playground equipment will be maintained by the homeowners' association;" d. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer plans; e. Fire Official approval of handicapped facilities and required fire flow of the hydrant (1000gpm) f. Compliance with the Stormwater Detention requirements; 2. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the following condition shall be met: a. Staff approval of playground equipment. 9.0 Mr. Vest seconded the motion for approval. The vote for approval was unanimous. OLD BUSINESS LeBeau Sol Subdivision Plat Staff report by Miss Caperton Request for the Commission to give permission to the Director of Planning Mr. Robert Tucker to approve the plat administratively, with an entrance on 750. The consensus of the Commission was to grant the request for administrative approval from Mr. Tucker. Shipp Final Plat The Commission agreed to reconsider the plat. Mr. Norford and the contract purchasers of the property were present. The requirements were discussed. It was agreed that the frontage improvements would cost more than the.value of the land. The soil erosion work and the cutting down of the bank is a major undertaking. Mr. McCann suggested that the condition should not have been imposed in the first place. The applicants stated: The gravel road is already twenty feet wide. To move the bank would add another twenty feet. The road goes to Arco Hollow. There are about 54 vehicles trips per day. Mr. Gloeckner moved that the Commission reconsider the conditions. Mr. Vest seconded the motion. The Commission voted unanimously to reconsider. Mr. Gloeckner moved to remove the condition regarding frontage improvements. due to the remoteness of the road and the expense involved. Mr. McCann seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. The meeting adjourned at 9:45 P.M. Robert W. Tucker, Jr�-S ,re Vy Y/