HomeMy WebLinkAbout04 15 80 PC MinutesApril 15, 1980
The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a meeting on Tuesday,
April 15, 1980, 7:30 p.m., Board Room, County Office Building, Charlottesville,
Virginia. Those members present were Col. William R. Washington, Chairman;
Mrs. Norma A. Diehl, Vice -Chairman; Mr. Layton McCann; Mr. James R. Skove;
Mr. Charles Vest; Mr. Kurt M. Gloeckner; Mr. Corwith Davis, Jr.; Mr. David
Bowerman. Absent was Mr. Tim Lindstrom, ex-Officio. Other officials present
were Miss Mason Caperton, Planner; Mrs. Idette Kimsey, Planner; and Mr. Frederick
Payne, Deputy County Attorney.
After establishing that a quorum was present, Col. Washington called the
meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
SP-80-13. Linda M. Brown has petitioned the Board of Supervisors to
locate a mobile home on 6.00 acres zoned A-1. Property is located
approximately one mile west of Route 743 across from the Crouse -Hinds
Incorporated industrial plant. County Tax Map 31, Parcel 10F,
Rivanna Magisterial District.
Miss Caperton presented the staff report.
After determining that the applicant was not present, Col. Washington
tabled the petition under later in the meeting.
Turner Forest Preliminary Plat:
Upon the motion of Mrs. Diehl, and second of Mr. Vest, the Commission
unanimously voted to defer this plat until May 27, 1980.
Northwest Ltd. Townhouse Site Plan:
At the request of the staff, the Commission unanimously voted to
indefinitely defer this item. The motion for deferral was made by Mr. Vest,
and seconded by Mr. Davis.
Kingdon Hall of Jehovah's Witness Site Plan - located on the east
side of Route 631 (Old Lynchburg Road) just past Route 781;
proposed location for an Assembly Hall and Meeting Place building
on 3.83 acres:
Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff reporting, noting that the applicant has
reserved an appropriate area, as recommended by the Highway Department, for future
relaignment of Route 631.
Mr. James McCauley, on behalf of the applicant, stated that landscaping is
m
planned, however at this time the size and kind of shrubbery is not known.
Col. Washington suggested that this could be worked out between the
church and the staff.
There was no public comment, and Col. Washington closed the public
discussion.
Mr. Skove moved approval of the site plan subject to the following
conditions:
1. No building permit will be issued until the following conditions are met:
a. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of the
commercial entrance;
b. Grading permit;
C. Staff approval of landscape plans;
d. Dedicate 25 feet from the centerline of Route 631 for road improvement purposes.
Mr. Davis seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion.
SP-80-13. Linda M. Brown - request for a mobile home:
This item was discussed at this point, in view of the presence of the applicant.
Mrs. Diehl established from a location sketch that the modular units are
on the adjoining property.
Ms. Brown stated her understanding of the conditions and felt they are
agreeable.
Mr. McCann moved approval of the special permit subject to the following
condition:
1. Compliance with Section 11-14-2 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with
no discussion.
Huntwood Apartments Phase I and Townhouse Phase II Site Plans - Located on
north side of Barracks Road, just west of Georgetown Road on
6.35 acres.
Mrs. Kimsey presented the staff report.
Mr. Bob Cooper, an adjoining property owner, noted his concern about
proper buffering between lots 9-18 and his property. He stated that construction
of these units will represent a solid wall of units for approximately 200 feet
along his property.
Mr. Skove established that staff approval of the landscaping/buffering
is agreeable to Mr. Cooper.
Mrs. Mary Masloff requested that there be adequate screening between this
development and the neighboring R-1 properties.
all
Mr. Davis established that the Cooper property is zoned R-1.
Mr. Tom Sinclair, on behalf of the applicants, stated his opposition
to sidewalk requirements, noting that there are no sidewalks in the area. He
said he would not know where to put them.
There were no additional comments from the public at this time, and
Col. Washington closed the public discussion.
Col. Washington stated that sidewalks are generally required for developments
where the density is more than two units per acre. He felt that they would
certainly be appropriate for this development.
Mrs. Diehl felt they were necessary, as well, because the area is
dangerous for walking.
Mr. McCann suggested a trail or gravel walkway, as opposed to concrete
walkways with curb and gutter.
Mr. Davis felt this could be handled through a staff approval.
Mr. Gloeckner stated that in his opinion it is extremely dangerous to
have walkways along a shoulder of the road, and noted this road is heavily
traveled.
Mrs. Diehl established that all the conditions of the original approval
are shown on the new plan except for the tot lot requirement, which has been
carried over into the recommended conditions of approval.
Col. Washington suggested putting a time limit of five years on the
sidewalk requirement in order to determine if that road will be re -aligned in
the future.
Mr. Payne did not favor that approach because of the bonding problem.
Mr. McCann suggested requiring sidewalks only if the alignment of any
road improvements can be determined by the Highway Department.
Mr. McCann then moved approval of Huntwood Apartments Phase I subject
to the following conditions:
1. No building permit will be issued until the following conditions are met:
a. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of specifications
for a commercial entrance with curb and gutter; and a 200 foot right turn
lane and taper with curb and gutter along the turn lane portion;
b. Show approved alignment of connection between Phase I and Phase II;
C. Albemarle County Service Authority approval;
d. Provide an easement from Phase I to Phase II;
e. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of sidewalks
along Route 654 along the existing alignment or in accordance with
proposed alignment, if possible;
f. Compliance with runoff control ordinance;
g. Fire Official approval.
2. A certificate of occupancy will not be issued until the following condition
is met:
a. Tot lot equipment approval by the Planning Staff.
91
Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion.
Discussion: Mrs. Diehl noted that the only recreational area in Phase I
is the tot lot, and there is no adult recreational area provided.
The motion carried unanimously, with no additional discussion.
Townhouse Phase II was then discussed.
Mr. Bowerman questioned what protection Mr. Cooper has if the staff approves
the screening, if: he happens not to be satisfied with the decision.
Mr. Payne said that he has not been confronted with this before. He
felt the staff would be reasonable about this.
Mrs. Diehl suggested the landscaping plan could come to the Planning
Commission after the staff works with Messrs. Carter and Cooper.
Mr. Gloeckner suggested that the Commission direct the staff to pay
particular attention to the concerns of the adjoining property owners when
reviewing and approving the landscape plan.
Mrs. Diehl said that the problem will be the appeal process for the
neighbors.
Mr. Bowerman said that he wants the neighbors to have the opportunity
to come back to the Commission if they feel they are dissatisfied.
Mr. Payne said it is not possible to delegate a sovereign responsibility
to adjoining property owners. He suggested that the Commission could ratify
what the staff works out.
Mr. Davis said that he does not think the staff can be accused of being
too lenient with developers.
Mr. Bowerman said that in view of the discussion, the staff is fully
aware of the Planning Commission's concerns. He said that he is happy with the
condition as it is written.
Mrs. Diehl then said that she cannot support recreational facilities in
a drainage basin.
Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of Phase II subject to the following
conditions:
1. No building permit will be issued until the following conditions are met:
a. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of the
specifications for commercial entrance with curb and gutter; and
a 200 foot right turn lane and taper with curb and gutter along the
turn lane portion;
b. Albemarle County Service Authority approval;
C. Compliance with the Runoff Control Ordinance;
d. Fire Official approval;
e. Grading permit;
f. Delineate tot lot and define the equipment to be used for staff_ approval;
g. Provide easement from Phase I to Phase II;
h. Staff approval of screening behind lots 9-19, paying particular attention
92
k to preserving the existing character of the neighborhood behind lots
9-18, and paying particular attention to the concerns of the adjoining
property owners.
Mr. Vest seconded the motion.
Discussion: Mrs. Diehl said that this is the first time she has seen
recreational area in the wet weather drainage area and feels this violates the
intent of the ordinance. Therefore she stated her opposition to the site plan.
Mr. Davis pointed out that this is a concrete basketball area.
The motion carried by a vote of 7-1, with Mrs. Diehl dissenting.
Bishop Hill Revised Final Plat - located on the north side of
Route 734, south of Ash Lawn:
Miss Caperton presented the staff report.
Mr. Morris Foster, one of the owners, stated that he has no problem
with the recommended conditions of approval. He said that the houses will be
financed by the Farmers Home Administration and financing with this organization
depends on state road frontage. He said that hopefully the county will be
the contract purchaser of the property.
There was no public comment, and Col. Washington closed the public
discussion.
There was a brief discussion about the two -acre lots being in violation
of the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. It was also pointed out that
low and moderate income housing is also a goal of the Comprehensive Plan, as well
as large lot size.
Mr. Gloeckner moved approval of the plat subject to the following conditions:
1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions have been met:
a. County Engineer and Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation
approval of the road plans and bond posted;
b. Health Department approval of the revised lots;
C. Complaince with Section 15.1.482 of the Code.
Mr. Vest seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion.
Minor Townhouses Final Plat - property located off the northwest side
of Westfield Road ( extended ), just west of Commonwealth Drive:
Miss Caperton presented the staff report.
Mr. Jim Hill, on behalf of the owners, stated his agreement to the
recommended conditions of approval.
93
There was no public comment and Col. Washington closed the public
discussion.
14�-
Mr. McCann moved approval of the plat subject to the following
conditions:
1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions are met:
a. Compliance with the Soil Erosion Ordinance;
b. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer plans;
C. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of drainage
structures as they tie in to those on Commonwealth Drive;
d. Fire Official approval of hydrant locations and flow of 1000 gpm and
dumpster locations;
e. Landscaping and recreational equipment shall be provided as conditioned
in the approved site plan;
f. Street signs shall be provided;
g. County Attorney approval of homeowners' agreements including the maintenance
of recreational areas, sidewalks, roads, parking areas, stormwater drainage,
and appurtenant structures;
h. During construction, reasonable action shall be taken to protect and
maintain buffer areas between this development and residential lots in
the Berkeley Subdivision; A 30 foot buffer shall be maintained or an 8
foot opaque fence, subject to the approval of the staff shall be provided;
i. County Engineer approval of storm drainage system;
j. Westfield Road shall be completed or bonded for acceptance into the
State Highway systme;
k. Compliance with section 15.1.482 of the Code;
1. Compliance with Stormwater Detention requirements.
Mr. Bowerman seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no
additional discussion.
Mr. Gloeckner disqualified himself from the discussion and vote on the
following four items.
Daniel Josephthal Final Plat - located at the northeast corner of the
intersection of Routes 614 and 678, just west of Owensville:
Miss Caperton presented the staff report, noting that Health Department
approval has been received.
Mr. Tom Lincoln was present on behalf of the owner to answer questions.
He noted that Health Department approval was based on a soil scientist report
locating two septic fields on each lot. He had no objections to the recommended
conditions of approval.
There was no public comment, and Col. Wasington closed the public
discussion.
Mrs. Diehl. established that lot 4 cannot enter onto Route 614 based on
Condition 1B. She moved approval of the plat subject to the following conditions:
94
1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions are met:
�4w a. Compliance with the private road provisions for lots 1 and 2, including:
(1) County Engineer approval of the road specifications; and
(2) County Attorney approval of the maintenance agreement.
b. Virginia Department of Hgiwhays and Transportation approval of entrance
locations with lot 4 having access on Route 678 at least 250 feet from
the intersection with Route 614.
Mr. Skove seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no discussion.
Townwood, Section Three Final Plat - located south of the intersection
of Hydraulic Road and Rio Road, south of the Rock Store:
Miss Caperton presented the staff report.
Mr. Tom Lincoln, on behalf of the developer, did not object to the recommended
conditions of approval.
There was no public comment, and Col. Washington closed the public
discussion.
Mr. Bowerman moved approval 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. 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;
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. Compliance with the Soil Erosion Ordinance.
Mr. McCann seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, with no
discussion.
Clay M. Peyton Preliminary Plat - located on the east side of the
intersection of Rotues 676 and 678 across from Meriwether Lewis
School, north of Ivy:
Miss Caperton presented the staff report.
Mr. Tom Lincoln was present on behalf of the owners. He said that an
attempt to avoid road stripping had been done through the provision of an
interior circular road. Public water is proposed. A request for waiver of
95
double frontage lots is made because of the interior road. Development will be
phased to lessen the developmental impact, especially on the Blue. Ridge Pool.
He noted that the development will not be sold to one contractor, rather the
current owners will develop the property. Each house will be sited according to
a soil scientist report. He said that he feels this is a good plan, however he
is willing to discuss the RPN alternative at a later point in the meeting, if
the Commission so wishes.
Mr. Harry Marshall, attorney and agent for Blue Ridge Pool, expressed
concern for the water from the stream during and after construction. He said
that the owners of the pool do not want the groundwater supply depleted. He
also expressed concern for the drainage fields on the stream.
Mr. Lincoln said that the owners of the property are firmly committed to
public water.
Mrs. Eleanor May said that the pool depends on the water from the stream. The
only problem in recent years with the pool was during construction of the VEPCO
lines.
Mr. Fred Jeneau was present on behalf of. the Ivy Citizens Association
and expressed concern about the trash on the property in the past. He said that
he hopes this property will be properly cared for from the beginning, and noted
the long running problem area residents have had with the current owner.
Mrs. Baker, owner of the pool for the past 46 years, said that she has
received no cooperation from the Peytons in the past.
Mr. Lincoln said that the idea is to phase the development to lessen the
problems on the stream. There will be proper soil erosion preventive measures
exercised during construction.
Mrs. Rose Whitehill expressed concern about the additional traffic on
Owensville Road.
Mr. Murray Whitehill noted the school bus accidents on the corner of the
road during the past three years - one per year.
Col. Washington closed the public discussion.
Mr. Skove hypothesized that the retention measures failed during construction.
Would the pool be able to recoup its loss!
Mr. Payne said that under certain circumstances they would have recourse. He
noted that failure would be a violation of the soil erosion ordinance.
Mr. Bowerman questioned if the pool is entitled to continue using the stream
as it has in the :past.
Mr. Payne replied that they are, as along as the quality and flow are maintained.
The Commission then discussed a possible RPN on the property.
Miss Caperton used the proposed plat to show areas that could be used for
buffering, and the steep slopes that could be preserved under an RPN concept.
She felt that the staff would be more likely to consider a couple of entrances
onto the state highway if the RPN approach were adopted.
Mr. Lincoln explained that the applicant had preferred to be able to
do something by right a standard subdivision -,than an RPN, which would require
the public hearing process. rather
Mr. Payne noted that there is a long bit of frontage that could be utilized
for lots of driveways.
Mr. Davis said that the primary concern is the stream.
Mr. McCann noted that regardless of what kind of soil erosion methods are
used, heavy rains will make the water red from the clay particles.
Mrs. Diehl said that her concern is the steep slopes on certain portions
of the property. She noted that septic fields can pass materials ( bacteria, pesticides,
and fertilizer ) downstream.
Mr. Lincoln said that a soil scientist will approve the location of the
septic fields, and these fields will have to meet the 100 foot setback from the
stream.
Col. Washington expressed concern about the road, noting that he feels
it could be planned differently. He supported housing near schools.
Mr. McCann felt that an RPN would mean smaller lot size and therefore
the possibility of two septic field sites might be eliminated.
IL
Mr. Lincoln said that with an RPN, there would be fewer lots than with
a straight A-1 subdivision. He suggested that the area of the transmission lines
could be used for open space.as it had been done in Westview.
At the request of Mrs. Diehl, Miss Caperton read into the record the
comments from the Highway Department.
Mr. McCann said that the entire Commission had expressed its concern for
runoff on downstream properties. He moved approval of the preliminary plat subject
to the following conditions:
1. The following conditions will be recommended for final approval:
a. County Engineer and Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation
approval of the road plans;
b. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of the commercial
entrance;
C. Health Department approval prior to Planning Commission review of the
final plat;
d. Provision for street signs;
e. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water plans;
f. Fire Official approval of hydrant locations;
g. Compliance with the Soil Erosion and Runoff Control Ordinances;
h. A pedestrian access to the Meriwether Lewis School shall be provided
subject to staff approval;
2. Waiver of double frontage required for lots 2-6 and 16-26;
3. Fee of $51.00 due.
97
Mr. Skove seconded the motion.
Mrs. Diehl said that she could not support the motion because of the
possible hazard to the health, safety, and general welfare of the pool.
Mr. Bowerman agreed, stating that he feels a better plan can be drawn
to protect the stream and the steep slopes.
Mr. McCann. said that the preliminary plat meets the requirements of the
law, and if the Soil Erosion Ordinance cannot be met, the project cannot move
forward. He said that the big asset of the preliminary is the internal road.
Mr. Skove said that he is not convinced that an RPN will change his concerns.
Mr. Vest agreed with Mr. McCann that the preliminary meets the requirements
of the ordinance.
Mrs. Diehl said that any protection of the stream is better than no
protection, and the RPN could address that protection.
Mr. Vest said that the Soil Erosion Ordinance would address her concerns.
Mrs. Deihl said that the stream will lose quality even after the construction
of homes. She expressed concern about maintaining the steep slopes.
Mr. Davis said that this plat does not address the special problem of this
case.
Mr. McCann felt that only the soil erosion and runoff control ordinance
could address runoff.
Mr. Bowerman established that denial of the preliminary must specify
what will make the plat "approvable."
Mrs. Diehl said that bacteria moving downstream would be harmful to
swimmers.
Mr. Payne said that there is a state statute to address Mrs. Diehl's
concerns.
Mr. McCann called the question.
The motion carried by a vote of 5-2, with Mrs. Diehl and Col. Washington
dissenting.
Col. Washington stated that erosion can be minimized by re -arranging the
road and the entire scheme of the lot layout.
Edward C. Wingfield Final Plat - located off the south side of Route
676, southeast of the intersection with Route 660:
Miss Caperton presented the staff report.
9..3
She noted that Health Department approval has been received.
Col. Washington questioned the use of the road, noting that at the time
of approval it was stated for farm use only.
Mr. Tom Lincoln, on behalf of the owner, stated that the right-of-way
has existed all along, but it could not be classified as a road. He said that
the previous plat did not plat the pipestem - it has always been there. Furthermore,
he said the right-of-way is more like two carriage wheel trails.
Miss Caperton read the conditions of approval on the original plat.
Mr. McCann moved approval of the plat subject to the following conditions:
1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions have been met:
a. Compliance with Section 15.1.482 of the Code;
b. These three lots shall be included in the existing maintenance agreement
and approved by the County Attorney;
C. The specifications for the road serving these three lots shall be
approved by the County Engineer and a waiver of the bonding requirement
is granted;
d. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of frontage
improvements when an entrance permit is applied for.
Mr. Davis did not favor waiving the bonding.
Mr. Lincoln pointed out that the bond would be approximately $38,000 for the
1900 feet of roadway.
Mr. Vest seconded the motion for approval, which carried by a vote of 4-3,
with Mrs. Diehl, and Messrs. Skove and Davis dissenting.
Mr. Gloeckner re-entered the meeting.
New Business:
Mr. Payne discussed Section 15.1-482 of the code, noting that it is
an Attorney General's opinion which states that revision of any approved and
recorded subdivision plat would require vacation of the plat if there is any
change in the original plat. He said that if all lots in the subdivision have
remained under the same ownership, this would pose no problem ( he cited the
Bishop Hill Final Plat, considered that evening by the Commission as an
example ). He said there would be no problem if all the lots have been sold
and the owners, including the holders of the deeds of trust, agree. However,
if all owners do not agree, vacation of the plat would have to be accomplished
through an ordinance, passed by the Board of Supervisors. He said that he feels
the Attorney General's opinion is wrong, however until the matter is reconciled,
the Commission will have to deal with it in the same fashion that it has that
evening.
Mr. Gloeckner said that since the Commission has voted on the
Wingfield plat, he would like the Commission to know that he should have
submitted this plat under "family divisions" since this property will be
given to Mr. Wingfield's three daughters.
There was no additional business or discussion, and the Commission
adjourned at 11:20 p.m.
1,
rt W. Tucker, Jr.. SecrAtary
PI
/d0