HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 20 81 PC MinutesJanuary 20, 1981
The Albemarle County Planning Commission conducted a meeting on Tuesday, January 20,
1981, in the Board Room, Third Floor, County Office Building, Court Square,
Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were: Mr. James Skove, Mr. Allan
Kindrick, Mr. Kurt Gloeckner, Mrs. Norma Diehl, Chairman; Mr. Corwith Davis, Jr., and
Mr. David Bowerman, Vice -Chairman. Other officials present were: Mr. Frederick
W. Payne, Deputy County Attorney; and Miss N. Mason Caperton, Senior Planner.
Mr. C. Timothy Lindstrom, ex-officio, was not present.
The Chairman called the meeting to order, after establishing a quorum.
The minutes of December 16 and December 18, 1980, were approved.
DEFERRED ITEMS:
Wetsel Final Plat
The applicant had requested deferral until February 24, 1981.
Mr. Bowerman made a motion for deferral.
Mr. Kindrick seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimous for deferral.
ERIC SWIFT FINAL PLAT
Located off the north side of Route 810, east of Boonesville; a proposal to divide a
26.840 acre parcel, leaving +23 acres in residue. White Hall District. (Tax Map 7,
a portion of Parcel 56).
The staff report was given by Miss Caperton. Miss Caperton added the statement that
Mr. Swift was going to have difficulty constructing a 14 foot roadway in several places
along the private road.
Mr. Swift, the applicant, stated that he could not meet the County Engineer's
specifications for the 14 foot width necessary for the entire length of the road. He
said that originally this was supposed to be necessary only about half way. He had
supplied the bond money, but he had just found out about the 14 foot distance being
required for the entire length of the road, which would be difficult to do. He had
no problem with the other conditions of staff.
Miss Caperton commented that the maintenance agreement had been signed by everyone
and the Health Department approval had been obtained.
The meeting was closed to public discussion.
Mr. Payne replied in answer to Mr. Kindrick's question, that he had not approved the
final maintenance agreement.
Mr. Skove said he remembered that when this plat had been considered before that the
maintenance agreement was the principal concern.
(lp
Miss Caperton noted that Mr. Scarpa can assign some of his development rights or keep them.
Mr. Swift said that Mr. Scarpa intended to keep three of these development rights
and give three with this plat.
Mr. Payne stated that the mere fact of the assignment did not prohibit further use,
but the Commission had the ability to prohibit future use beyond the rights.
Mrs. Diehl ascertained that the technical information required when the preliminary
plat was considered had been met.
Mr. Gloeckner 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. County Attorney approval of the maintenance agreement;
b. County Engineer approval of the road specifications from the southern edge
of the Scarpa property out to Route 810 for a 14 foot roadway where feasible,
but in any case, not less than 12 feet;;
2. Waiver of the 30 foot right-of-way width from the southern edge of parcel 56,
tax map 7 out to Route 810 was granted;
3. Waiver of commercial entrance requirements was granted.
Mr. Kindrick seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimous for approval.
Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Director of Planning, entered the meeting.
FRANCIS DAMMANN FINAL PLAT
Located off the east side of Route 20 North, sough of Route 649 and north of Route
610; a proposal to divide one 6.27 acre parcel leaving 11.59 acres in residue.
Rivanna District. (Tax Map 63, a portion of Parcel 30D).
Miss Caperton gave the staff report. She added the fact that the applicant would have
difficulty meeting the requirements of the private street commercial entrance because
of the sight distance. The Commission does have discretion on requiring this.
Mrs. Diehl inquired about the topography on either side of the entrance.
Miss Caperton stated that it was sloping with a bank on either side, with a stream.
Mr. Harry Bales was representing the applicant and he stated that the surrounding
parcels were owned by the applicant's family and had been in the family for a number
of years. The rest of the family had access to Route 20. He suggested improving
the landing at the entrance to the property. He said that the Highway Department's
requirements on the entrance were unreasonable.
Mr.Charles Dammann noted the fact that there had been no accidents in that area of
Route 20.
Miss Caperton said that assignment of property rights should be noted on the plat.
There was further discussion of the entrance to the property.
Close public discussion.
Mr. Gloeckner felt that the requirement for the commercial private street entrance
could be taken out, since this is a family division and has existed for some years.
/7
Mr. Gloeckner made a motion for approval, 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 specifications;
(2) County Attorney approval of a maintenance agreement;
b. Written Health Department approval;
C. Staff approval of the final revisions to the plat;
d. Note the assignment of development rights.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Kindrick.
Mr. Bowerman said he could not support the motion without the private street
commercial entrance.
Mrs. Diehl said she could not support the motion without a change in the entrance
since this was a high traffic area.
The vote on the motion was 4-2, with Mrs. Diehl and Mr. Bowerman opposing.
MIDDLEBRANCH FARM; REVISED LOTS 2 & 3 and LOT 8, PHASE 2, FINAL PLAT
Located on the north side of Route 697, west of Route 710 and north of Route 29 North;
a redivision of 51.64 acres into three lots ranging in size from 6.00 acres to 33.0
acres. Samuel Miller District. (Tax Map 87, portion of Parcel 19 R & Q).
Miss Caperton gave the staff report. She said that the Health Department has approved
the location for the septic drainfields.
Mr. O'Neill, representing the applicant, had no comment.
The meeting was closed to public discussion.
In answer to Mr. Skove's question, Miss Caperton stated that the ordinance says that
any lot that fronts on the private road has to use this road and that Lot 8 did not want
to use this road and therefore, requires a waiver.
Mr. O'Neill stated, in reply to Mrs. Diehl's question, that a farmer adjacent to the
property wanted to fence in this proposed area and use it as part of his farm for
grazing.
Mrs. Diehl said that the development rights were noted on the side of the plat.
Mr. Skove made a motion for approval, subject to the following conditions:
1. The plat will be signed when the following conditions have been met:
a. Written Health Department approval;
b. Locate all streams and floodplain information and note it on the plat;
2. Waiver of Section 18-36(d) of the Subdivision Ordinance granted for lot 8.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Kindrick.
Mr. Payne stated that as long as the applicant was included in the maintenance
agreement for the road, lot 8 would help maintain the road and if it were developed
further, then they could be required to use the road.
Mr. Bowerman said he was in favor of the waiver for farm use, but not if the lot were
developed further.
It
Mr. Bowerman was concerned about the further division and the use of the private road.
The vote was 5-1, with Mr. Bowerman opposing.
FIELDBROOK PRELIMINARY PLAT
Located on Route 652, north of Route 631, east of Route 29 North and south of the South
Fork of the Rivanna River; a proposal to divide 89.9 acres into 83 lots with a gross
density of 1.9 dwelling per acre and 46.9 acres in residue. Rivanna District.
(Tax Map 46, Parcel 20; Tax Map 61, a portion of Parcel 126).
Mr. Bowerman stated that he was an adjacent property owner and disqualified himself
from consideration on this plat, and he left the room.
The staff report was given by Miss Caperton. She added that the County Engineer had
recommended curb and gutter on the interior roads.
Mr. Roudabush, speaking for the applicant, Mr. Claude Cotten, made a presentation.
He showed the area and the roads on a plan, and stated that the land was owned by
Mr. Michaels and Mr. Byer. He further stated that the developer had plans to bring
Route 652 up to higher state standards and the road would be developed to the same
cross section and width as Westmoreland (Category 3 road), all the way to Rio Road.
The applicant prefers not to put in the curb and gutter on the interior roads since
this is a heavily wooded area and they wanted to disturb the landscape as little as
possible. He said the plan was to provide for large open space owned by the property
owners and they were preserving the trees on the lots and would disturb the area only
as necessary for excavation for buildings. Each lot had a building site and they had
obtained an on -site profile for several lots with steeper slope. There is an 18% grade
on some and 20-21% grade on others, however, no lot exceeds 25%. There would be a
greater area than required by the zoning ordinance in open space. They have chosen
a density of 1.9 dwelling units per acre, though the zoning would permit as many as
3 units. There will be stormwater detention facilities.
When Mr. Skove commented on the small lots, Miss Caperton stated that the minimum
is 9700 square feet.
Mr. Davis ascertained that State Route 652 would be connected to Westmoreland.
Mr. Greene showed the stormwater drainage areas proposed on the plan. There are
six drainage sheds and also erosion controls that were required by the ordinance.
Mr. Charles Dunkle, an adjacent owner, was concerned about the water supply and
felt that this was inadequate for Westmoreland and this new development.
Mr. Greene said that Woodbrook and Carrsbrook are both on the South Rivanna Water
Treatment Plant and both yield 978 gallons at 20 psi.
Mr. Dunkle said the Fire Marshall had told him that this development could not
connect into Westmoreland. He felt that a report was needed from the Fire Marshall.
He also questioned if a buffer was planned for this development for Westmoreland.
He said Westmoreland was only 30 or 40 feet from these houses.
Mr. Roudabush stated that the ordinance requires a minimum for 25 feet from the front
yard, 10 feet from the side yard, and 20 feet from the back. The buffer strip would
be 20 feet wide and the setback for the house would be 40 feet.
I9
Mr. Dunkle said he supports the staff requirements for roads built to state standards.
Mrs. Grayson, an adjacent owner, questioned the sewer lines into the property. She
said that Westmoreland had septic lines, but where would these new ones connect.
Mr. Roudabush said the line would run across to Woodbrook and that the Service Authority
would connect Westmoreland into this line.
Mrs. Grayson further questioned the adequacy of the sewers for this.
Mr. Roudabush stated that he could not speak for the Service Authority, but that he was
sure this was designed for the whole drainage area.
Mrs. Grayson asked that the hydrant situation be investigated, both the distribution
of these and the adequacy of the water pressure.
Mrs. Diehl asked what the Site Review Committee noted about this connection.
Miss Caperton said that Brian Smith of the Service Authority had said that the flow
calculations were riot accurate now. The South Rivanna Plant is pumping extra
pressure for Observatory Mountain Plant. He does not anticipate any problem with
the fire flow of 750 gallons at 20 psi required. She said that a letter was to go to
residents of Westmoreland about the provision of public sewer.
Mrs. Grayson said that the residents of Westmoreland were paying for part of the sewer.
Mr. Tucker said Westmoreland would not have to pay for the developers' share, only each
one would pay for his share.
Mr. Greene said they were aware of the condition of the pumps on the line rather than 140)
the tank and they did not use the flow calculations or the flow measurements made
now, but that these had been done by the County Engineer prior to this difficulty.
He further stated that the sewage would go through a trunk line between Carrsbrook
and Westmoreland and then go back to Rio Road to a collector. All of the
development would flow into this collector.
Mrs. Polly Withrow, an adjacent owner, asked if these would be wooden cluster homes
and was concerned about her fire insurance rates. Also she wanted to be assured that
the homes would be finished and not left half done.
Mr. Roudabush said the material used in the housing was not up to them.
Mr. Harvey Estes, an adjacent owner, said his main concern was the traffic in this
congested area. He was concerned that the traffic would be directed off of Rio
Road and through Westmoreland, Carrsbrook or Northfields.
Mrs. Joan Graves said there was a problem with the sizing of the water lines. She
also said that thes lots were a minimum size for a cluster.
Mr. Roudabush said the minimum was 9700 square feet and the standard was 13,000
square feet. He said they were clustering, but not increasing the density.
Mrs. Graves said she was concerned with the way the ordinance worked, providing for
boneses but not for smaller lots.
Mr. Roudabush said the Zoning Ordinance provided for density increases using the
bonus factors. This plat complies with three of the bonus factors in the R-2 zone,
Mr. Dwight Cragun, an adjacent owner, said his lot has a tendency to flood and he was
not sure if he would have a problem.
Mr. Lester Grayson of Berwick Court, stated that he felt they would have a water,
sewer, and traffic problem. He said there was conflicting information. He said they
had sewer lines, but they still have septic tanks and were not able to use the county
sewer lines. He was concerned about the traffic on Westmoreland Road and said there
were many ways to use this as a shortcut to avoid using Route 29 North, if Route
652 were connected all the way through. He said that each subdivision was all right,
but the cumulative effect had to be considered.
Mrs. Emily Goodwin of Berwick Court, said she had a water problem and had to construct
a well to take care of this. She was not only concerned about the water problem but
also when the trees were taken down for this subdivision, she was also concerned about
the buffer. She stated that she had three children in school, and the schools were
already overcrowded.
Mr. Cotten, the applicant, made a statement. This development is the proper design
that has been approved by the Board of Supervisors for this type of development.
They are making a minimum application to develop and are not using the potential they
are allowed. Clustering is covered in the zoning ordinance and is permitted. This type
of development used to be called a planned neighborhood. This will be a continuation
of the type of housing in Westmoreland and the surrounding area. Cul-de-sac roads will
be used to have a quiet, village type atmosphere. There will be a larger traffic flow
in the future, so the roads will be built to secondary state road standards and will
be maintained that way, however, they did not want to use curb and gutter to cause
more disruption of the land. The sewer system will not connect to another subdivision,
but will go to the main collector. He said the plan will be compatible with the rest
of the neighborhood.
The meeting was closed to public discussion.
Mr. Davis said that he was willing to eliminate the requirement for curb and gutter.
He ascertained that the stormwater detention requirement and the soil erosion ordinance
would take care of the drainage.
Mr. Skove said that the stormwater detention requirements required that the rate of
runoff has to be the same as prior to the development of the land.
Mrs. Diehl said she would like to see more about the stormwater detention plan for
this plat.
There was a discussion of the bonuses allowed under the zoning ordinance.
Mr. Tucker said the applicant had applied for the bonus, but had not used this for a
higher density. They are providing more open space, but smaller lots.
Mr. Skove ascertained that the sidewalks would be a pathway system.
Miss Caperton said there would be a sidewalk on the west side, which was included in
the conditions.
Mrs. Diehl ascertained that Route 652 was to have a Category III standard.
Mr. Skove said Route 652 to Rio Road should be 50 feet right-of-way, but Merrydale
School might not grant this right-of-way, then the road could not be improved.
2/
Mr. Tucker said the State and County could require the school to grant this right-of-way,
if the road were developed.
Mr. Skove said the traffic from this development would go through Westmoreland
until Route 652 was developed.
Mr. Gloeckner said he had no problem with this subdivision, since it was sensitive
to the adjacent subdivisions and the water, sewer, stormwater detention and drainage
were problems that the County needed to address. He said the preliminary plat with
the recommendations would meet these problems.
Mrs. Diehl said the question of the curb and gutter needed to be addressed by the
Commission.
Miss Caperton said this was a recommendation of the Assistant County Engineer who had said
that since it could be approved with or without curb and gutter, he would recommend
the curb and gutter. Westmoreland and Woodbrook have curb and gutter.
Mr. Skove said he agreed with Mr. Gloeckner that the preliminary plat would meet
most of the problems under the conditions recommended.
Mr. Gloeckner noted that curb and gutter was needed to control drainage.
Mr. Greene said they might be needed in some places, but that sometimes curb and
gutter channeled more water to one place and caused more water problems.
Mrs. Diehl said there might be a condition to see if it is possible to get the 50
foot right-of-way for the road.
Mr. Payne said that the staff and the applicant could explore the possibility, but
if they came back and said they could not get the right-of-way, then the Commission
might have a problem.
There was further discussion of the curb and gutter and road.
Mr. Skove made a motion for 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 road plans for acceptance into the State system (this includes
internal roads and Route 652 as shown on the plat dated January 15, 1981);
b. County Attorney approval of homeowners' agreements to include the maintenance
of common open space, stormwater drainage and appurtenant structures;
C. Compliance with the stormwater detention. requirements to include the provision
of fencing if deemed necessary by the County Engineer and Zoning Administrator,
prior to Planning Commission review of the final plat;
d. Compliance with the Soil Erosion Ordinance;
e. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of commercial
and private entrances;
f. Fire Official approval of hydrant locations and fire flow;
g. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer plans;
h. Street signs shall be provided;
i. A sidewalk shall be provided on the west. side of Route 652;
j. No buildings shall be located on slopes of 25% or greater;
k. Only those areas where structures, roads, utilities, drainage structures;
etc, are :Located shall be disturbed; all other land shall remain in its
natural state;
22
1. Structure on lot 42 must be removed;
M. Not more than 30% of the open space may be in 25% or greater slopes, flood
plain, drainage structures, etc.;
n. Dedication of 60 foot right-of-way shall be shown on Lot 1, Block A and
Lot 37, Block B;
o. Investigate the availability of a 50 foot right-of-way to Route 631 prior
to Planning Commission review of the final plat.
Mr. Gloeckner seconded the motion.
The vote for approval was unanimous.
FRUIT GROWERS COMPLEX SITE PLAN
The applicant had requested deferral until February 24, 1981.
Mr. Davis made a motion for deferral.
Mr. Skove seconded the motion.
The vote was 5-0-1, with Mr. Gloeckner abstaining, since he had a conflict of interest.
MOUNTAINWOOD APARTMENT SITE PLAN
The applicant had requested indefinite deferral.
Mr. Skove made a motion for the deferral.
Mr. Davis seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimous for deferral.
NEW BUSINESS:
Work Session Schedule
The dates of January 22, 26, or •29 had been suggested for the work session.
The Commission favored January 22nd (Thursday), at 4 p.m. for the work session and
this was agreed upon as the date and time.
Mrs. Diehl requested that Commissioners visit the sites of the site plans and
subdivisions in their respective districts to be considered and be prepared to
report to the Planning Commission when these were considered.
OLD BUSINESS:
Status Report on Briarwood RPN
It was suggested that the Planning Commission needed to go into Executive Session
because of the nature of the status report.
26
Mr. Skove made a motion that the Planning Commission go into Executive Session.
Mr. Davis seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimous for the Executive Session.,
The room was cleared of all people except the Commissioners and the Director of
Planning.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Commission returned to open session at 11:20 p.m.
Motion was made by Mr. Skove and seconded by Mr. Kindrick to appoint a committee to
work as a liasion with the Board of Supervisors, including the County Executive, to
review ways and methods to improve the enforcement of zoning and other related
ordinances.
Mrs. Diehl appointed a committee made up of Mr. Bowerman, to serve as Chairman, and
Mr. Gloeckner and she will serve as ex-officio member of the Committee.
Mr. Skove moved to adjourn and was seconded by Mr. Kindrick at 11:25 p.m.
Abert W. Tucker, Jr., Sec eta y
The tape recorder was malfunctioning and there is no tape on file for this meeting.
FE
Zy