Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08 20 82 PC Minutes�r April 20, 1982 qM The Albemarle County Planning CcnT fission conducted a public hearing on Tuesday, April 20, 1982, 7:30 p.m., Meeting Room 5/6, Second Floor, County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were Mrs. Norma Diehl, Chairman, Mr. David Bowerman, Vice -Chairman, Mr. Allen Kindrick, lair. Corwith Davis, Jr., 14r. Richard Cogan, k1r. Carl Williams and Mr. James R. Skove. Other officials present were Pairs. Ellen flash, Ex-officio, Mr. Frederick W. Payne Deputy County Attorney, Mr. Ronald S. Keeler, Assistant Director of Planning, 14S. Mason Caperton, Senior Planner, and Ms. Katherine L. Imhoff Planner. After establishing that a quorum was present, Mrs. Diehl called the meeting to order. The minutes of September 8, 1981 and September 22, 1981 were approved as submitted. SP-82-5 - Horace G. Brooks - Request to locate a mobile home on 1.01 acres Rural Areas, County Tax Map 80, Parcel 131A, Rivanna Magisterial District. Property is located east of Route 616, north of the C & O Railroad, near Keswick. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Mrs. Diehl asked if the applicant had any carment. Forbes Reback, representing the applicant, read the following frown Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance "such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the district will not be changed thereby and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance." He stated that he felt the decision of the Commission should be based upon these three criteria. He stated that this is a residential area and that there are mobile homes in the area at this time and their proposal will not change the character of the area. He also pointed out that this mobile hcn7e would not be visible from Black Cat Road (RT. 616). Mr. Reback presented to the Commission pictures showing the following: • entrance road from Rt. 616; • view of the Quarrels property; • backyard of the Quarrels property; and • back of Mr. Craig's property. lair. Reback stated that they would respond to any questions or concerns the Conanission may have. firs. Diehl asked if there was any public camment concerning this special use permit. //0 S Martin Quarles, an adjacent owner, stated Mr. Brooks has a deeded right -of -sway through his property, noting that he allowed the road to be moved to the west at the junction of Rt. 616 in order to save a large tree. He stated that he felt this request should be denied for the following reasons: • the precident of one mobile home paves the way for others in the area; • a mobile home on this property would restrict the use of his property, noting that the trees would have to remain as a permanent barrier. Arthur Brown, an adjacent owner, stated he is opposed to this mobile home because he feels it is not in keeping with the character of the area. Mr. Reback stated that he could understand that Mr. Quarles .would prefer this to be a vacant lot, but noted that this would not be in the best interest of Mr. Brooks. He stated that the Board of Supervise 'huws reserved the right to grant these special use permits, but neither the Board of Supervisors or the Planning Commission should take away a mans right to develop his land if he is in compliance with the law. With no further comment from the public, ears. Diehl stated this matter was before the Commission. Mrs. Diehl ascertained that the kennel referred to in the staff report is on Mr. Brown's property. :1r. Keeler pointed out that this is a private kennel. Mrs. Diehl noted the acreage requirement of 30,000 square feet per lot and asked if this requirement would have to be met for a mobile home. Mr. Keeler stated that this requirement is not necessary as these are two non -conforming lots which can be developed individually. 1r. Payne stated that in his opinion, a lot which is non -conforming as to size, should be considered to be the same as the minimium conforming lot. He explained that if the Commission considered the acreage to be an important question as to this particular application, the issuance of a special use permit could be conditioned as follows: • no further development on the other lot where the mobile home is not located. Mrs. Diehl ascertained that if this is not addressed another dwelling could be built on this property. Mr. Davis ascertained that this will not be the permanent residence of Mr. Brooks. 2r. Payne that this could be considered as two lots,each meeting the minimum requirements, noting that the ordinance speaks to mobile hm es on two acre lots. Mrs. Diehl asked what requirements are necessary for public water and sewer on a 60,000 square foot parcel. / 6v 6 I7r. Payne stated if there is no public water or sewer then there must be 60,000 square feet per dwelling unit. He noted that in the case of a non -conforming lot as long as it meets the setback requirements, etc, it should be treated as a conforming lot. Mr. Skove asked if there are any problems with septic fields in this location. Mr. Quarles stated that he had the health department examine his lot which is adjacent to j,4r. Brooks, noting that the soil was bad and that they required 1500' of drainfield for a two bedroom home. Mr. Payne explained to Mr. Reback that if this special use permit was denied or withdrawn, etc., then Mr. Brook,; has the right to apply for building permits for conventional homes. 14r. Davis moved for denial of this special use permit. Mr. Cogan seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 6-1 with J.ir. Skove dissenting. Bennington Terrace Final Plat - Requests deferral until May 25, 1982. Mr. Bowerman moved for deferral of this final plat until May 25, 1982. Mr. Kindrick seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Romer Property, Tract Four, Final Plat - located off the southeast side of Route 631, south of the Route 706 intersection; a proposal to create a 23.168 parcel leaving +292 acres in residue. Scottsville Magisterial District. (Tax Map 89, Parcel 85A, Tax Map 90, Parcel 9A). Ms. Imhoff presented the staff report. Mrs. Diehl asked if the applicant had any convent. Mr. Tom Lasley, contract purchaser, noted that lot #4 has: an exclusive easement, and asked if this would prevent him from subdividing this property in the future. Ms. Imhoff noted that if three or more dwellings use this easement there could be a problem obtaining adequate sight distance. With no continent from the public, Mrs. Diehl stated that this matter was before the Commission. iIr. Payne explained that an exclusive easement could be used only by person(s) designated on the deed. M ice-. Bowerman ascertained that the topography of the area is gently rolling. Mr. Bowerman ascertained that there would be no problem getting a road plan approved by the County Engineer for this property. Mrs. Nash questioned the amount of residue. Ms. Imhoff explained that this is two recorded parcels combined together making three hundred and ninety-three (393) acres of residue, noting that there is a note on the plat which states the amount of residue for each parcel. The Commission discussed the assignment of development rights for the Roder property. Mr. Payne offered his interpretation of assignment of development rights. Ms. Imhoff presented the Staff's interpretation of assignment of development rights -for this property. The Commission noted that the Staff and the County Attorney should meet to work out assignment of development rights and interpretation of these development rights. Mr. Lasley stated that in order to facilitate his dealings he would like the Ccnmission to approve this plat. Mr. Cogan moved for approval of this plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat can be signed when the following conditions have been met: a. Note on plat that the 40' access easement is for the exclusive use of Tract Four; b. Written Health Department approval; c. Compliance with the Soil Erosion & Sedimentation Control Ordinance. ,Mr. Kindrick seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. John Bosely Final Plat - located off the north side of Route 743, east of the intersection with Route 660 at Earlysville; proposal to divide 16.84 acres into 4 lots with an average size of 4.21 acres. Rivanna Magisterial District. (Tax 14ap 31, Parcel 30) . Ms. Caperton presented the staff report. i�irs. Diehl asked if the applicant had any comment. John Bosely noted that the comprehensive plan recommends ten acre density for this area. He pointed out the size of the lots in Deer Run and Earlysville Forest Subdivisions and stated that he felt the ten acre density was inappropriate. With no comment from the public, Mrs. Diehl stated that this matter was before the Commission. 161 M AZr. Kindrick ascertained that lot #C has no access to the road shown on the plat, noting that this road serves lot 0A only. i4r. Davis stated that he felt the right-of-way width should be increased, pointing out that lots #B and #C could be joined to make one lot. For this reason, Mr. Davis stated that he did not feel the waivers should be granted. Mr. Skove also stated that he did not feel the waivers of Sections 18-36C(1), Table 1, and 18-36C(2) should be granted. He noted that this division could be approved for five (5) lots only. IMs. Caperton stated that if this was approved for five lots the regarded conditions of approval are adequate noting that the County Engineer has approved the road specifications and right-of-way for five lots. Mr. Payne stated that a condition could be added to read: • approval is for three (3) lots, lots B & C are to be joined and become one lot. mr. Skove moved for approval of this plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat will be signed when the applicant has: met the following conditions: a. Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation approval of the commercial entrance permit for the additional lots; b. Compliance with the Soil Erosion Ordinance; c. Compliance with the private road provisions, including: a. County Attorney approval of the addition of these lots in the maintenance agreement for the existing road and extension and approval of an agreement between lots B & C, if necessary; b. County Engineer approval of the road specifications and right-of- way width in compliance with Sections 18-36C(1) and 18-36C(2). 2. Approval is for three (3) new parcels with parcels B & C to be conbined into one parcel. 14r. Williams seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 7-Eleven Store Site Plane- located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Route 29 North (NBL) and Route 649 (Proffit Road); proposal to locate a one-story, 2,460 square foot convenience store on a 22,110 square foot parcel. Rivanna Magisterial District (Tax Map 32A, Parcel 1 part of). REQUESTS DEFERRAL TO MAY 18, 1982. Mr. Skove moved to accept the request for deferral until May 18, 1982. Mr. Kindrick seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. /b q Frances A. Shifflett Final Plat - located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Routes 671 and 664, about one mile south of Nortonsville; proposal to divide two lots of 2.0 acres each, leaving 3.66 acres residue. White Hall Magisterial District (Tax T7ap 8, Parcel 46). Ms. Imhoff presented the staff report. Mrs. Diehl asked'if the applicant had any comment. Mr. George Knight, representing the applicant, stated that they would respond to any questions or concerns the Cormission may have. With no ccn rent from the public, Mrs. Diehl stated that this matter was before the Commission. Mr. Davis stated that he felt the driveway should exit on the private easement rather than the highway. Mr. Knigizt noted that Mrs. Shifflett, the owner, would like to keep her private driveway, pointing out that she is granting a thirty (30) foot right-of-way to serve the lots in the rear of the property. Mrs. Diehl ascertained that the highway department requires a twenty-five (25) foot separation between driveways. Mr. Cogan noted that only two lots will be served by the private easement and that the property could not be further subdivided. 11r. Kindrick moved for approval of this plat with the following conditions. He also included in his motion to grant the waiver requested by the applicant, (Waiver of Section 18-36(d) of the Subdivision Ordinance.) 1. The plat can be signed when the following conditions have been met: a. Remove setback notations from the residue parcel; b. Label the centerline of the easement as such and provide metes and bounds description for easement; c. Note that residue is located on both sides of easement; d. Note side and rear setbacks; e. Compliance with the Soil Erosion & Sedimentation Control Ordinance; f. County Attorney approval of a maintenance agreement; g. Construction of the private road as per plans approved by the County Engineer; h. Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation approval of a private entrance. Mr. Cogan seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. McKinley Final Plat - located on the north side of Route 635, just east of the intersection with Route 636, southwest of Batesville; proposal to divide one 5.21 acre lot, leaving 42.90 acres in residue. Samuel Miller Magisterial District (Tax Aap 85, Parcel 22). 1004 Ms. Caperton presented the staff report. /70 Mrs. Diehl asked if the applicant had any comment. tor. Bob McKinley, the applicant, stated that he would respond to any questions or concerns the CamBmission may have. With no comment from the public, Pairs. Diehl stated that this matter was before the Commission. Hr. Skove moved for approval of this plat subject to the following condition: 1. The plat will be signed when the following condition has been met by the applicant: a. County Attorney approval of a maintenance agreement. Mr. Kindrick seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. W. W. W. Electronics Site Plan - located at the northern corner of the inter- section of Route 631 (Rio Read) and Greenfields Court, west of Route 29 North and east of Route 659; proposal to relocate the entrance to the site to Greenfields Court and redesign the parking area. Charlottesville Magisterial District (Tax Map 45, Parcel 163). REQUESTS INDEFINITE DEFERRAL. Mr. Kindrick moved to accept the request for indefinite deferral of this site plan. Mr. Cogan secoded the motion, which carried unanimously. Talbott's Gasoline Sales and Automobile Laundry Site Plan — located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Route 29 North (SBL) and Berkman Drive; north of the Shopper's World Shopping Center; proposal to locate a retail gasoline sales station with automobile laundry facilities. Charlottesville Magisterial District. (Tax Map 61U, Parcels 01-15 and 01-16). Ms. Imhoff presented the staff report. Mrs. Diehl asked if the applicant had any comment. mr. Bill Roudabush, representing the applicant, stated that these two lots wem originally part of Berkar Subdivision which was created in the early "60's" m three lots of which had access on Rt. 29.Fie pointed out that these lots were never part of the Shopper's World tract, which when established obtained an easement across the rear of these lots. He pointed out that there was no agreement that these lots would give up access onto Rt.29. He stated that the access road is for the use of Shopper's World only. Mr. Roudabush noted that the highway department recommended that the entrance be moved as far away from the intersection with Berkmar Drive as possible and that a joint entrance be established with lot 17A if possible. He noted that they have moved the entrance to the middle of lot 15 and 16 to the common boundary with lot 17. He also noted that the highway department recommended / 7/ that another entrance be installed on Berkmar Drive to handle the flow of traffic. He noted that they have made this adjustment and nut in a common entrance to serve lot 16AA. Mr. Roudabush stated that they would respond to any questions or concerns the Commission may have. With no comment from the public, Mrs. Diehl stated that this matter was before the Can-nission. Mr. Davis ascertained that both lots will use the entrance off of Berlanar Drive. Mr. Roudabush stated that he felt the applicant would consider granting an easement to lot #17 from Berkmar Drive, noting that this would enable traffic to cross without having to go into Rt. 29. Mr. Davis asked if these lots would have access to the private service drive. Mr. Roudabush noted that the service drive crosses the rear of the property but access is not adequate for commercial use. He noted that this access may be used as secondary access to lot 16 but primarily access will be from Berkmar Drive. ir. Roudabush noted that the frontage improvements would include the addition of a third lane across the property, continuation of curb and gutter in front of the Shoppers World property (approximately 1041). He noted that the applicant would build the 104' of curb and gutter to the corner of lot #17 and hook up to the curb and gutter on Berkmar Drive. too Mr. Bowerman ascertained that the curb and gutter would be improved in front of lot 3#17 and the entire entrance would be built at this time. T'Irs. Diehl questioned the location of the acceleration lane in relationship to Berkmar Drive. Mr. Roudabush stated that the acceleration lane is one hundred and four (104) feet from the corner of lot #17 and approximately two hundred and six (206) feet from the corner of Talbott's property. 11r. Payne noted that Section 32.5.8.01 of the Zoning Ordinance prohibits building entrances on Rt. 29 within five hundred (500) feet of a crossover. Ar. Williams ascertained that the Planning Department does not recommend entrances on Rt. 29 because they are trying to minimize the number of entrances for traffic and safety purposes. Mr. Roudabush stated that he felt this proposal would minimize the number of entrances on Rt. 29 by establishing a joint entrance for two lots plus giving the third lot an access easement. Mrs. Diehl stated that she felt all of these parcels have access to Berlmnar Drive and for this reason she does not feel that access to Rt. 29 is necessary. /7;. Mr. Payne stated that it should be determined if this entrance is within five hundred feet of the crossover, pointing out that if it is within five hundred feet the ordinance will not allow it to be built at this location. As. Imhoff established that the entrance is five hundred and twenty (520) feet from the crossover. Mr. Bowerman stated that he felt this was a logical use of the property and land and meets the necessary requirements. For this reason he stated that he does not oppose having access on Rt. 29. Mr. Bowerman noted that tiie traffic flaw suggested by the County Engineer_ is more feasible because it allows room for cars to turn around. (Diagram presented). Mr. Kindrick stated that he has no problem with the entrances on Rt. 29. Mr. Skove stated that he felt entrances on Rt. 29 would lead to traffic congestion noting that he felt that Rt. 29 would eventually be a three lane highway. I1rs. Diehl noted that this is an intensive use and if these two lots are restricted to entrances on Berkmar Drive there would still be one lot entering from Rt. 29. Mrs. Diehl stated that she could not suppport this proposal again noting her concern regarding the entrances. Mr. Davis ascertained that the applicant has legal access to the private service drive. Mr. Davis stated since the applicant has legal access to the private service drive he cannot support this proposal. Mr. Roudabush reiterated that these lots originally had access onto Rt. 29 not the service road. Mr. Kindrick moved for approval of this site plan subject to the following conditions: 1. A building permit can be processed when the applicant has met the following conditions: a. Planning Staff approval of landscape plan as per Staff coimients; b. Installation of pavement and curbing as per plans approved by the County Engineer; c. County Engineer approval of drainage plans and installation of all required improvements; d. Compliance with the Soil Erosion & Sedimentation Control Ordinance; e. Fire Official approval as per memo dated March 24, 1982; f. Fire Official approval of gasoline pump permits; g. Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation approval of ccnmercial entrances and turn lane; h. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer plans; i. County Attorney approval of maintenance agreement for joint entrances; j. County Engineer approval of internal traffic flow. i73 2. A certificate of occupancy will be issued when the following condition has been met: a. Fire Official approval of fire flow. P-Ir. Williams seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 5-2. Mrs. Diehl and 14r. Strove voted against the motion. Berkmar, Lots 15A and 16AA, Revised Final Plat - located at the southwest corner of tie intersection of Route 29 North (SBL) and Berlanar Drive; north of the Shopper's World Shopping Center; proposal toredivide lots 15A and 16A so that both lots have frontage on Berkmar Drive rather than Route 29 North. Charlottesville Magisterial District (Tax Map 61U, Parcels 01-15 and 01-16). Ms. Imhoff presented the staff report. Mrs. Diehl asked if the applicant had any comment. :sir. Roudabush stated fiat they would respond to any questions or concerns the Commission may have. As. Imhoff noted that the applicant is proposing to divide lots 15A and 16A in order for these lots to have frontage on Berkmar Drive rather than Rt. 29. She also noted that this lot configuration is necessary in order for the .41 previously approved site plan to be effective (Talbott's Gasoline & Sales Autcmbile Laundry Site Plan). Mr. Roudabush stated that this division will enable them to move the entrance as far away from Berkmar as possible and will also create a lot in the rear which can be used for a secondary use. 21r. Davis stated that the use on these lots must be the same. Ar. Payne explained that the applicant could develop another site plan on the on part of this lot but he would not be able to sell. Mrs. Diehl noted that lot 16AA would in effect have access onto Rt. 29, therefore there are three lots entering from Rt. 29. Its. Imhoff pointed out that it would not be feasible for this lot to access from Rt. 29 noting the manuvering that would be required through the gasoline pumps etc. Mr. Kindrick moved for approval of this plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat can be signed when the following conditions have been met: a. Note side and rear_ setback lines; b. Note joint access easements and provide metes and bounds descriptions; c. County Attorney approval of maintenance agreements for joint access easements. Mr. Cogan seconded the motion, v#dch carried by a vote of 5-2. Mrs. Diehl and Mr. Skove voted against the motion. /7-/1 Real Estate III, West, Office Building "Z" Site Plan - located on the south side of Route 250 West, adjacent to the Ednam PRD and Ednam Village; proposal to locate a 14,400 square foot professional office building on the 3.37 acre parcel. Samuel Miller Magisterial District. (Tax Map 59D2, parcel 10B). Ms. Caperton presented the staff report. Pairs. Diehl asked if the applicant had any comment. John Greene, representing the applicant, notehd that they have submitted a cooperative parking and access agreement to the County Attorney for his approval. He stated that they would respond to any questions or concerns the Commission may have. With no comment from the public, Mrs. Diehl stated that this matter was before the Commission. mrs. Diehl ascertained that this area is connected to public sewer. sir. Williams moved for approval of this site plan subject to the following conditions: 1. A building permit will be processed when the following conditions have been met by the applicant: a. County Attorney approval of the cooperative parking and access agreement to include maintenance of such common easements; b. Staff approval of landscaping revisions to the site plan for the replacement of the four dogwood trees at each corner of the building with pin oaks or other acceptable hardwood trees. 2. The construction of Building "Y" must be substantially completed (and/or bonded) prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for Building "Z" to ensure that it has adequate parking and access. Mr. Skove seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Real Estate III, West Final Plat - located on the south side of Rbute 250 West adjacent to the Ednam PRD and Ednam Village; proposal to divide 3.37 acres into 3 parcels. Samuel Miller Magisterial District. (Tax Map 59D2, parcel 10B). Ms. Caperton presented the staff report. idrs. Diehl asked if the applicant had any Comment. John Greene, representing the applicant, stated that they have submitted a cooperative parking and access agreement to the County Attorney for his approval. he stated that they would respond to any questions or concerns the Commission may have. With no comment from the public, Pairs. Diehl stated that this matter was before the Commission. s- Mr. Skove moved for approval of this plat subject to the following condition 1. The plat will be signed when the following condition has been met by the applicant: a. County Attorney approval of a cooperative parking and access agreement to include maintenance of such easements. Mr. Kindrick seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. OLD BUSINESS: Monticello Home Builders Model Home Site Plan Amendment: Ms. Caperton stated that this is a request to move the model home approved for this site to the north. She pointed out that the 7-Eleven Store is planning to build on the corner of Rt. 29 and Rt. 649 near Proffit, noting that the parking lot would cover where the model home is at this time. Ms. Caperton pointed out that this could be approved administratively, but Staff felt the Commission should be aware of this change. Ms. Caperton pointed out that the applicant is not proposing to change the entrance, but is proposing to shift the parking lot away from the building. Letter from Waller S. Hunt, Jr. - University of Virginia: Ms. Caperton. noted for the Commission's information that a letter has been received from Mr. Hunt informing the Staff that they plan to renovate the old Gus' Steak House. She read the following from this letter: "the University is developing plans to renovate the Old Gus' Steak House building on Route 250 West, near the University's Children's Rehabilitation Center. The purpose of this totally interior renovation is to accommodate the needs of the University Police Department Headquarters." Psis. Caperton noted that Staff has not received a site plan for this proposal. NEW BUSINESS: Executive Session: Mr. Skove moved that the Commission hold an executive session to discuss the potential litigation relating to the Town of Scottsville. Mr. Bowerman seconded the motion. /7�, The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. RcTrt W. Tucker, Jr. - cre 76 A--