HomeMy WebLinkAbout08 19 80 PC MinutesAugust 19, 1980
The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a meeting on Tuesday, August 19,
1980, 7:30 p.m., in the Board Room of the County Office Building, Charlottesville,
Virginia. Those members present were: Col. William Washington, Chairman; Mr.
David Bowerman, Mr. Charles Vest, Mr. Layton McCann, and Mr. James Skove. Those
members absent were: Mrs. Norma Diehl, Mr. Kurt Gloeckner, and Mr. Corwith Davis,Jr.
Other officials present were: Mr. Frederick W. Payne, Deputy County Attorney, and
Miss Mason Caperton, Senior Planner.
The chairman called the meeting to order after establishing that a quorum was
present.
The public hearing for SP-80-43 Walter L. Brownlee was withdrawn before the
meeting. The application was able to be processed administratively.
DEFERRED ITEM:
HOLLYMEAD INN AMENDED SITE PLAN
Staff report was given by Miss Caperton.
Col. Washington questioned the difference in this plan and the original plan.
Miss Caperton replied that the building has been shifted and does not infringe
on the residential area.
Mr. Ed Eichman, speaking for the applicant, stated that initially the plan was for
the rooms to have a different orientation. Now the building has been shifted and
would connect to the existing building by a structure containing new toilet facilities
for the inn. Visually the new structure will be in keeping with the present one.
They are striving for the old Virginia atmosphere. This addition will not disturb
the existing trees. For the six rooms they wish to add, the present parking lot
will be used with adjustments.
Col. Washington stated that there was considerable opposition when this item was
considered before.
Mr. Eichman stated that the new structure will be about 1000 to 1200 feet away from
concerned residential property owners.
Mr. McCann said he felt that this plan answered the concern of the Commission when
it was considered before. Mr. McCann made a motion for approval, subject to the
following conditions:
1. A building permit will not be issued until the following conditions have
been met:
a. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of commercial
entrance;
b. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer plans;
c. Compliance with the Stormwater Detention requirements.
Mr. Bowerman seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimous for approval. �}
FRIENDLYS ICE CREAM CORPORATION SITE PLAN
Located at the corner of Rio Road and Route 29 North (southbound lane); proposed
location for a restaurant and a 40,590 square foot parcel. Charlottesville District.
The applicant had requested deferral of this item.
Mr. Vest made a motion for deferral until August 26th.
Mr. Bowerman seconded the motion.
The vote for deferral was unanimous.
H. D. STEPHENS FINAL PLAT
Located on the west side of Route 682, south of I-64; part of parcel 16A, Tax Map 73;
proposed division of one lot of 10.601 acres leaving a residue of 23.926 acres.
Samuel Miller District.
The staff report was presented by Miss Caperton.
Mr. Stephens, the applicant, stated that he did not agree with the upgrading of the
road recommended by the Highway Department.
Mr. Bowerman asked for an explanation of the waiver of Section 18-36(d) in the
staff recommended conditions.
Miss Caperton explained that this dealt with the existing driveways on both parcels
shown and she showed this on the plat. She explained further that the ordinance says
"any lot that fronts on a private road has to use that road and no other." If the
request for a waiver of this section was granted,a third entrance would be allowed.
Col. Washington ascertained that this site is near the intersection of Route 637.
There was no public comment and the meeting was closed to public discussion_
Miss Caperton explained to Mr. Bowerman on further questioning that if this were
approved as conditioned, that the 20 foot easement would be used for the residue.
She further explained that there was not any public right of way now, but. that
50 feet will be dedicated on the applicant's property and 25 feet on the adjacent
property.
Mr. Skove made a motion for 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 private road provisions, including:
(1) County Attorney approval of a maintenance agreement;
(2) County Engineer approval of road specifications;
2. Waiver of Section 18-36(d).
Mr. McCann seconded the motion.
Unanimous approvalwas the vote on the plat.
Dan Roosevelt, Resident Engineer, Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation,
entered the room.
Mrs. Idette Kimsey, Planner, entered the meeting.
DAVID AND JOSEPH WOOD SITE PLAN
Located at the corner of Dominion Drive and Route 29 North, (southbound lane);
property described as Tax Map 61M, Parcel 1D in Charlottesville District. A request
to locate a restaurant with 4,140 square feet of gross building area.
Mrs. Kimsey gave the staff report.
The applicant, David Wood, stated that in 1977 when the Pizza Inn Site Plan was before
the Commission, they were refused Route 29 or Dominion Drive entrances. Twenty or
thirty developers have lost interest in this location when they found there was no
access to the Highway, but only through Shopper's World. A trade had been worked out
for more parking spaces and the rights -of -way have been released through the
shopping center. There was a question about the exercising of the right to have
access through the shopping center and cause the shopping center to violate the
zoning ordinance. Also, the grade of an access through the shopping center is too
great (about 16 feet). The applicant stated that they are requesting access on
Dominion Drive.
Mr. James Cosby, representing Berkley Community Association, gave an overview of
the history of this property and the adjoining property:
June, 1973 - a site plan in Shopper's World area showed access on Dominion Drive
and the plan was approved in July by the Planning Commission, without the access.
This plan was considered by the Board of Supervisors in August, 1973 and was
approved, but access on Dominion Drive was denied. Shopper's World and Mr. Wood
carried parcels Bl and B2 to court, filing suit on the Board of Supervisor's action.
The Berkley Association petitioned the court and the judge upheld the Board of
Supervisor's action. The procedure used by the developers - a site plan was filed
before the subdivision plat, then the property was subsequently subdivided into
Bl-Shopper's World and B2 (the parcel under consideration). Parcel B2 held an
easement. A deed of exchange to change the parking location was recorded in
Deed Book 586, pages 516 and 517. The plat was not approved by the Planning
Commission and the Board of Supervisors. The instrument that was recorded was
not properly approved, but this is not the fault of Berkley and Four Seasons.
Mr. Cosby requested that the Commission not let this instrument prejudice them
against Berkley and Four Seasons. He showed pictures of the area and the entranceway
to Berkley and Four Seasons on Dominion Drive. In 1977 the applicant filed a
petition for the Pizza Inn property. December 21, 1977, the Board of Supervisors
considered four diagrams of access: 1-Shopper's World only; 2-Dominion Drive and
Shopper's World access; 3-Route 29 entrance and entrance and exit on Dominion Drive;
4-Dominion Drive only with no entrance through Shopper'<s World. The residents
chose number 1 and were very opposed to numbers 2 and 4. The Virginia Department
of Highways and Transportation chose number 1. The Board of Supervisors voted
for number 1, in a 5-1 vote. Mr. Cosby cited the objections to an access on
Dominion Drive: 1-the safety factor: the only way for residents of Berkley and Four
Seasons to get into the area is wait for the traffic light at Shopper's World and
rush across; 2-access on Dominion Drive would create more traffic; 3-also create
a bottleneck situation on the road and cross traffic would be a hazard; 4-the
asthetics involved are another consideration. This will be common property and
the applicant does not own the strip of land dedicated to public use. The community
has planted trees and dedicated the entrance. Only one fifth of this is the applicant's
property. The final consideration is the Comprehensive Plan and one intent of this
Plan is to keep residential areas looking residential and separated from the
commercial area with a buffer zone.
Mrs. Graves, president of the Berkley Community Association, stated that she was
afraid of the traffic, also the median strip was lessened by a third lane for the
bank. Drivers wait for traffic and finally commit themselves to crossing over,
and then there is more traffic there. Pizza Inn is on the opposite corner, and
their lot is not filled with cars. Now another business is proposed on the
location they were denied. Mrs. Graves cited correspondence in the files from
Mary Joy Scala and from Ben Dick. She felt the benefit should be given to the
people who have to use Dominion Drive.
Mr. Wood stated that the first plats of Berkley had the area involved marked on the
plat "reserved for commercial development," and this was zoned for commercial use,
and this included Dominion Drive.
Mr. Dan Roosevelt, Resident Engineer, Virginia Department of Highways and Transport-
ation, at Col. Washington's questioning, stated: The Highway Department supports the
plan as presented. There have been changes in the last two years, property has been
developed across the street, the Route 29 corridor is developing and is to be
protected from roadways entering. The applicant has agreed to additional items:
1. a right turn lane from Route 29, and 2. Widening on his side of the road and
giving a left turn lane into the Pizza Hut area. The problem of getting out of
Dominion Drive is bad also. The Highway Department supports this plan if approved
as recommended by the staff.
Mr. Cosby questioned Mr. Roosevelt on which access provided the greater impact -
through Shopper's World or through Dominion Drive.
Mr. Roosevelt stated that the Highway Department felt that the right turn lane and
widening of Dominion Drive would lessen any impact.
Mr. Cosby said he felt mistakes were made in 1973 on the decisions on the
intersections. He also differed with Mr. Roosevelt on the impact being lessened.
The meeting was closed to public discussion.
In reply to Col. Washington's questioning, Mr. Roosevelt stated that the width of the
pavement was the only problem and Mr. Wood has agreed to give 48 feet of roadway plus
curb and gutter.
Col. Washington said it had been common to have a condition referring to a letter
from Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation, rather than notes on the
site plan.
Mr. Wood stated that he would be willing to complete the 48 feet of pavement or
whatever the Highway Department required.
Col. Washington inquired about the drainage and water problems.
Mr. Roosevelt suggested that the problem was probably back up water and he said
there is a pipe behind Pizza Inn. He said, to his knowledge, the 72 inch. pipe
did not have a capacity problem. He felt it was probably a highway pipe problem.
Mrs. Graves said the open gutter puts water into the street, which needs to be
diverted, and that there is no pipe.
At Mr. Skove's request, Mr. Roosevelt explained the two improvements to the highway:
a third lane on Route 29 beginning north of Shopper';s World, which will pick up on
curb and gutter and run all the way down into the property in the plan; the left
turn lanes will be extra lanes about 130 feet long.
a �1/
Mr. Skove said that people will go through Berkley to Rio Road and this will increase
the traffic also.
Mr. Bowerman felt that the addition of curb and gutter and a left turn lane did not
address the problem of left turns for northbound traffic. Traffic would be backed up
on the median from Dominion Drive.
Mr. Roosevelt said the proposed improvements would at least give room for seven or
eight cars rather than two or three cars. A traffic light is not recommended at
Dominion Drive because it would be too close to the other traffic lights. However,
he felt the negative aspect is far outweighed by the advantages of the right and
left turn lanes, since the Highway Department has no funds for these improvements.
Actually, this is a trade. Mr. Roosevelt further stated, in answer to Col.
Washington's questioning, that the Highway Department had opposed a direct entrance
off of Route 29 when the site plans for Pizza Hut were presented. There is an emphasis
on the Route 29 Corridor Study and the protection of this to the detriment of side
streets.
Mr. McCann said that the site plan shows what the Highway Department would like to
have seen on the other site plans, so the Department supports it.
Mr. Skove said he had trouble with the site plan and the access and it was hard to
decide.
Mr. Bowerman said he could see the benefits, but he did not feel this addressed the
problem of the traffic going north. He said the use of Dominion Drive would aggravate
the traffic situation and Shopper's World access would use the traffic signal. He
felt it was the intention of the Board in 1977 to restrict entrances on Dominion
7 Drive. He did not feel the grade of an access through Shopper's World was any problem,
since there is access by easement other than on Dominion Drive, it ought to be
considered.
Mr. Skove questioned if there are other alternatives to the site plan.
Mrs. Kimsey said there is an easement in through Shopper's World in the deed.
Mr. Skove said that it is definite that they have access to Shoppers' World
Mr. McCann reminded the Commission of the fact that this is a trade-off and would
improve conditions on Route 29 at this site.
Mr. Skove said that even with the trade off, the Commission needed to remember the
rights of the people who live in Berkley.
Mr. McCann felt that Route 29 was developing into a city and would itself need a
bypass eventually.
Mr. Vest stated that even with the improvements that would be added, he did not feel
that the benefit that would be derived would be significant enough to warrent allowing
this access. He felt that the traffic should go through the light at Shopper's
World and that the safety factor would be greater doing this.
Mr. McCann made a motion for approval subject to the following conditions:
1. No building permit will be issued until the following conditions are met:
a. Compliance with the Stormwater Detention ordinance;
b. Grading Permit;
c. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of the
commercial entrance;
d. Fire Official approval of the marking of fire lane and fire flow of
1000 gpm and hydrant location;
e. County Attorney approval of the maintenance agreement of stormwater
detention facilities;
f. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of extending the water line
for relocation of fire hydrant, if needed;
g. Show width of Dominion Drive at 48 feet plus curb and gutter.
The motion was not seconded.
Mr. Bowerman made a substitute motion for deferral with the recommendation that the
site should only have access through Shopper's World.
Mr. Skove seconded the motion.
Mr. Wood stated that no developer would accept another site plan with an entrance only
through Shopper's World. He said he would not be back with another plan.
Mr. Bowerman made a motion for denial.
Mr. Bowerman said he felt the denial was based primarily on the hazard of the
additional traffic on Dominion Drive, and the lack of a traffic signal there, so
it really is a safety factor. He could vote for it if the access is limited to
Shopper's World.
Mr. Skove seconded the motion.
The vote for denial was 3-2, with Col. Washington and Mr. McCann dissenting.
BEATRICE C. WOOD FINAL PLAT
Located on the south side of Route 614 between the Mechums River and Route 676, in
the Samuel Miller District; Parcels 50 and 50C on Tax Map 42; proposed to divide the
lots in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance.
The staff report was given by Miss Caperton.
Mr. Bolton, the applicant, stated they had built a house on the center section of the
2' acre lot. They had a highway entrance permit, the septic permit, building permit,
and that they had built the house, and an occupancy permit had been issued. When
they went to the closing on the house, they found they had built on an "u.napproved"
lot. The 3.2 acre lot was originally a part of this parcel. They have asked Dr.
Hurt to join it with Whippoorwill Hollow and this was shown on the plat. These three
parcels are listed separately on the tax map.
After questioning, Miss Caperton showed the location of these parcels on the map.
Mr. Bolton said the plat was recorded in essentially this format.
Col. Washington ascertained that the Highway Department owns the land between Route
614 and the proposed parcels.
Mr. Robert Fahse questioned if a house can not be built on the 2.2 acres, does this
prohibit any other purpose such as livestock.
Col. Washington told Mr. Fahse that the zoning is A-1, agricultural, and there is
nothing to prevent it being used for agricultural purposes.
Mrs. Barbara Fahse expressed the idea that since this area drains into the creek,
` she questioned if there are environmental protection laws to prevent runoff,
particularly from animals in the creek.
Col. Washington commented that the Zoning Ordinance requires a special permit for
certain agricultural activities, but most agricultural activities are not restricted.
Mrs. Fahse remarked that part of the area to the left of Whippoorwill Road is in the
flood plain and she questioned if this area involved in the plat is in the flood
plain also.
Col. Washington told her that there is considerable flood plain in this 2.2 acre
area. The 2.5 acres has a small area of flood plain.
Col. Washington cited that the purpose of this plat is to correct a subdivision that
was incorrectly put on the deed books.
Mrs. Graves asked what section 18-23a deals with.
Mr. Payne said it is the requirement for a septic system.
Col. Washington replied to Mrs. Graves questioning that a septic system is not
required because there is no building site on the lot.
The meeting was closed to public discussion.
Mr. Payne told Col. Washington that there was a prior approval with this stipulation
about being unbuildable on the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir and it was developed for
nursery purposes. He further stated that the no building requirement can be enforced
since the owner can not get a building permit without a septic system permit and with
a note on the plat, no one would buy the lot for building.
Mr. Skove made a motion for approval subject to the following conditions:
1. The plat will be signed when the following condition has been met:
a. Note on the 2.2 acre parcel: "This 2.2 acre lot is unsuitable for
building and no building permit shall be issued (Parcel 50, Tax Map 42);"
2. Waiver of Section 18-23(a) granted.
Mr. Vest seconded the motion.
Unanimous vote was given by the Commission.
EVERGREEN HOLLOW, LOTS 1-39 FINAL PLAT
Located on the east side of Route 678 and south side of Route 676, north of Ivy,
Parcel 73, Tax Map 58, Samuel Miller District; proposal to divide the 103+ acres
into 39 lots.
Miss Caperton gave the staff report.
Mr. Tom Lincoln, speaking for the applicant, stated the following differences between
the preliminary and the final plat. The preliminary plat showed one major road which
had problems with the grade. Now there are three private roads: one follows the
side of the hill with building sites on the top of the ridge and the cul-de-sac has
building sites on the farm road bed and the road below has several lots. He explained
how the roads and lots were arranged and pointed these out on the plat. He further
stated that the existing streams are not affected by the building or septic locations.
Mr. Harry Marshall of the Blue Ridge Swim Club expressed concern over the water
situation, that the subdivision would be on individual wells. He said they felt that
this would jeopardize the water for the spring fed pool and for downstream users.
The pool has been there for many years and has used the pure water and the members
of the club do not want this changed. The experience at Westwoods could be repeated.
The Club asked that this plat be required to connect to public water.
Miss Eleanor May asserted that she was pleased with the lot lines, but was very
concerned about 39 individual wells and felt this could be disastrous.
Mr. Fred Landes, representing the applicant, said they would like to have public
water but the lines in Westwoods are not adequate. The connection would have to come
from Lewis Hill III.
Dr. Johns said this plat is located in the Merriwether Lewis School District and the
school facility is overcrowded already. He expressed concern since there are no plans
for further expansion.
The meeting was closed to public discussion.
There was a brief discussion of the water situation and the availability from the
Lewis Hill III subdivision. The fire protection seemed to be the chief concern. The
plat is on the fringe of public water service.
Mr. Lincoln showed how public water would be provided through the subdivision, when
the service was available. Mr. Lincoln stated that the Service Authority would cost
share a 12 inch line to get the line run through the subdivision and join together
with the Westwoods area when the public water was available. He replied to Mr.
Bowerman's question that the Service Authority was required to have 20 p.s.i., and
they have an average of 40 p.s.i.
Mr. Landes said it really is a question of the water being available and the ordinance
says reasonably available. The cost of the public water would be a little over $4,000
per lot and a well is about $1,500 per lot.
Mr. Vest remarked that a well would have no real fire protection, if that were a concern.
Mr. Skove made a motion for 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 the private road provisions, including:
(1) County Engineer approval of the road plans;
(2) County Attorney approval of maintenance agreements;
b. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of commercial
entrances; joint entrances for lots with access off of Route 678 subject
to the approval of the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation;
c. Compliance with the Soil Erosion and Runoff Control Ordinances;
d. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water plans;
e. Street signs shall be provided;
2. Waiver of double frontage required for lots 15, 16, 29, and 30.
7,J
Mr. Vest seconded the motion.
Mr. Bowerman felt this was a good plan and that all the concerns of the Commission
had been addressed.
Col. Washington mentioned that the roads and lots were done well with the land.
The vote was unanimous for approval.
NORTH FORK FARMS, LOTS 3A-6A FINAL PLAT
Located on Parcels 49-52, Tax Map 20, Rivanna District; on the west side of Route 743,
north of Advance Mills; proposal to redivide lots 3, 4, 5, and 6 into 6 lots with an
average size of 7.03 acres.
The staff report was given by Miss Caperton. Miss Caperton then read a letter from
Mrs. Beverly Smith Wooding having to do with the deed restrictions on North Fork
Farms that no changes may be made without the unanimous agreement of the property
owners.
The applicant, Mrs. Margaret Honn said she and her husband will be living at North
Fork Farms in November. Mrs. Beverly Smith Wooding was given permission to divide
her property by North Fork Farms.
Mr. Bill Wooding asserted that in June, 1978 they had purchased a lot in North Fork
Farms and had agreed to the restrictions. Their house was built and then they had
gotten permission to divide their lot, but they did not do it then.
Mr. Bowerman questioned whether this redivision needed approval of the property
owners.
Mr. Payne told him that according to the Attorney General, it would need approval,
or the Board of Supervisors would have to vacate the original plat. The Commission
could not require the property owners to abide by the private deed restrictions.
Mr. Wooding told the Commission that he just wanted to let his voice be heard in
protest.
The meeting was closed to public discussion.
Mr. Skove cited that whatever the deed says is still legal, and he made a motion for
approval, subject to the following condition:
1. The plat will be signed when the following condition has been met:
a. County Attorney approval of the addition of two lots in the maintenance
agreement.
The motion was seconded by Mr. McCann, who said it is a shame for the property owners
to have to go to court.
The vote was unanimous for approval.
MR
IVY FARM, LOT 20A, B, & C, FINAL PLAT
Located on Parcel 56, Tax Map 44, Jack Jouett District; on the end of Stillhouse
Road, in Phase One of Ivy Farms; proposal to divide lot 20 into 3 parcels.
The staff report was given by Miss Caperton. After the staff report, Miss Caperton
read a letter by Mr. Lyall, which requested deferral of the plat, until he could
be in town.
Mr. Alan Brill, the applicant, stated that he did not set the date for the Planning
Commission meeting. He said he was one of the original purchasers in Ivy Farms,
April, 1976, and was given deed permission for subsequent division. He explained
how he divided the lots and showed this on the plat.
Mr. Daryl Ferguson, an adjacent property owner, one lot lower, remarked that he lives
next door to Mr. Lyall and Mr. Davis who are both out of town. He said the original
intent of Ivy Farms was for a country atmosphere, with trails, horse trails, dispersed
building, etc. He said this plat shows three houses very close together. He said
the dam of the adjacent lake is a safety problem. He said Route 658 has no shoulder
and will not handle any more traffic, it was really meant for one parcel.
Mr. Brill asserted that he defined the lot he wanted and this would be as attractive,
if not more attractive than any other lot and the houses were several hundred feet
apart and it was in keeping with the original plan.
The public discussion was closed.
Mr. McCann said this plat meets the requirements of the ordinance and the Commission
could not deny it.
Mr. Skove felt that the Commission had deferred an item when the applicant had not been
present, but not for an adjacent owner.
Mr. McCann made a motion for approval as submitted, since the County Engineer's approval
of the road specifications was accomplished prior to the meeting.
Mr. Vest seconded the motion.
Mr. Skove said he was against deferral, and would vote for the approval.
Mr. Bowerman felt the adjacent owners had ]zad ample time to be represented.
The vote for approval was unanimous.
The adjacent owners were told they had ten calendar days to appeal to the Board
of Supervisors.
MILKEY TRACT, LOTS 1-5 FINAL PLAT
Located on Parcel 32 (portion) on Tax Map 44, Jack Jouett District; on the south side
of Ivy Farm Drive, east of the intersection with Route 658; a proposal to divide the
10+ acres into 5 lots with an average size of 2.04 acres, leaving 29+ acres residue.
The staff report was given by Miss Caperton.
Tom Sinclair, speaking for the applicant, said the applicant had decided he would like
to have a private road, and requested a change in the staff recommended conditions.
Mr. William Gildea, of the Ivy Farm Homeowners Association, asserted that this is a
group of 28 dues -paying families who are joined together and concerned about their
area and to try to offer help to the Board, the Commission and to themselves, to
protect their property, rights, and interests. He stated that the Ivy Farm area
consists of larger lots, with an average size of over 4+ acres. Dr. Hurt had an intent
in the original plan for larger lots with road frontages over 400 feet. These smaller
lots have less frontage of about 240 feet and are smaller lots. They will change the
tonality of the area. He requested that the Commission require a plat of the entire
site be presented for the development of this area, so the residents and the Commission
can see how this area is proposed to be developed and determine the impact on the area.
Mr. Sinclair said they could get more lots than this if they wanted to do so.
The meeting was closed to public discussion.
Mr. Skove said he would like to see the plan for the whole area, also the soil
scientist's report.
It was questioned by several members of the public if the Commission has the
authority to request an overall development site plan.
It was agreed that the Commission would like to see this overall development, but
can not require it.
Mr. Ferguson said that after guaranteeing lots of 5 to 10 acres, it is almost a
verbal contract that has been broken by Dr. Hurt.
1 ry
Mr. Bowerman said he too would like to see the entire subdivision, but the Commission
could only deal with the area that was presented to them.
Mrs. Cooper said that Route 658 is the only access to all of the homes around that
area and also there is some commercial development along there.
Mr. Bowerman expressed concern about the road, but he said most roads in the county
are substandard, but a developer has a right to develop his land, and the County does
not have the money to improve the roads and the developer can not be required to
improve the roads.
Mr. Ferguson urged the Commission to consider the flow of traffic and the safety
of the area.
Mr. Gildea cited the fact that this is recommended as a five acre density area.
Mr. Ferguson also mentioned the difficulty with the water supply.
Mr. Bill Edgerton noted the Health Department approval is required.
Miss Caperton said the soil scientist will be needed to check the soils.
Mr. Bowerman suggested that in a denial a reason would have to be given and the
developer told how the plat can comply.
Mr. Skove mentioned that he would like to see a preliminary plan for the whole area,
but since it could not be required, he was reluctant to vote for this plat.
Mr. Bowerman agreed with Mr. Skove's comments.
Col. Washington remarked that this was not really in the interest of the people
in that area, since there was a shift from 4 acres down to 2 acres. He would
rather see development in a manner more compatible with the rest of the area. 14M
Mr. Skove made a motion for approval, with the following conditions:
1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions are met:
a. County Engineer and Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval
of road plans for Willis Road for acceptance into the State secondary road
system;
b. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of the commercial
entrance and the entrance to Lot 1;
C. Health Department approval;
d. Compliance with the Runoff Control and Soil Erosion Ordinances.
Mr. Bowerman seconded the motion.
Mr. McCann said he agreed with Col. Washington in the fact that this was a down shifting
in the area, but because it would meet the requirements of the ordinance, he felt the
Commission should pass it.
The vote was 3-1, with Col. Washington dissenting, and Mr. Bowerman abstaining.
OLD BUSINESS:
Parks and Recreation Plan
Col. Washington remarked that he felt that the accessibility should be the primary
criteria for the location of parks and the utilization of the school facilities. He did
not feel that Mr. Echol's plan put enough emphasis on accessibility, but located parks
where the density was the highest.
Mr. McCann asserted that most people are living in the county because they like the
country. He said he did not hear much from people about parks.
Mr. Skove commented that maybe people were not sure of the overall objective of the plan.
Col. Washington felt the Board of Supervisors should be the one to work out the problem
with politics and finance.
Mr. McCann stated that this was given to the Commission because there was a vague
mention in the Comprehensive Plan, but he felt this was a big item to pass.
Mr. Skove said he would rather have the parks put where they are needed.
Mr. McCann felt that the County has planned so much, they can not afford it.
Mr. Skove remarked that they would not have to be built until the County could
afford the parks.
Mr. McCann commented that this has gone from a vague to a planning stage, but it still
needs to be scaled down.
Mr. Skove felt the Commission needed to tell the Staff the type of parks plan they
wanted.
Col. Washington suggested the County could provide the basic facilities and then get
sponsors, such as the Fire Department or volunteer organizations.
Mr. Vest said the Comprehensive Plan is a guide and if the Commission and the people
do not want parks, then either the Comprehensive Plan would have to be done away
with or it would have to be changed. He said the Comprehensive Plan is what the
Staff is charged to work by.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 P.M.
W. Tucker, Jr., Secteta
n