Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09 07 82 PC MinutesSEPTEMBER 7, 1982 The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on Tuesday, September 7, 1982, Meeting Room 7, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Va. Those members present were: Mr. David Bowerman; Mr. Allen Kendrick; Mr. Mike Davis; Mr. Tim Michel; Mr. Jim Bkove; and Mr. Richard Cogan. Staff members present were: Mr. Ronald Keeler, Mr. Ira Cortez, Fire Official; Mr. Byron Coburn (VDH&T); and Mr. Fred Payne, Deputy County Attorney. Absent: Commissioner Diehl. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. and established that a quorum was present. The minutes of March 23, 1982 and June 24, 1982, were approved as corrected. The following items had been WITHDRAWN by the applicants: SP-82-49 William H. White, III SP-82-50 Bally's Aladdin's Castle, Inc. - Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance regarding building separation and side yard requirements as � pertaining to fire protection. Deferred from August 3, 1982. "%W Mr. Keeler requested that these items be deferred to October 12th. Staff''s request for deferral was unanimously approved. SP-82-48 J. Christopher Middleton and Albert E. Smith - Request in accordance with Section 24.2.2 of the Zoning ordinance to locate a veterinary office on 2.23 acres zoned HC Highway Commercial. Property is located on east side of Berkmer Drive, about 1"000 feet south of Route 631 (Rio Road), adjacent to Gercke Construction Company, County Tax Map 61U, Section 2, Lots 6 and 7, Charlottesville Magisterial District. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions. The applicant was present but offered no additional comment. (Note: The applicant did not identify himself/herself.) There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. Regarding the issue of future expansion, Mr. Keeler explained that the Special Permit was for the entire 2.2 acres and unless otherwise specified, an expansion would not require Board *Ar* approval. There being no concerns, Mr. Skove moved that SP-82-48 for J. Christopher Middleton and Albert E. Smith be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the following conditions: 9-7-82 2 1. Building Official review to insure compliance with the noise limitations of 5.1.11 of Supplementary Regulations. 2. No outside kennels or runs shall be permitted. Only animals requiring hospitalization may be boarded. Mr. Cogan seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Mobile Home Procedures - Because the meeting was running ahead of agenda time, the Commission discussed briefly policies related to mobile home applications in regard to application procedures. Mr. Keeler explained proposed changes. There was no Commission comment. Resolution of Intent / Definition of Amusement Games - Request by staff for a Resolution of Intent to amend the Zoning Ordinance, Section 3.0 DEFINITIONS by addition of "amusement game/device" and "amusement center." ' ~ Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Commission discussion was related to the appropriate cut-off number, i.e. the number at which a special permit would be needed--3 games, 4 games, etc. It was noted that the City uses the number 3 and thus staff had proposed 3 to be consistent. No change was made to the staff's recommendation of 3 at this time but further explanation of the number was requested at the time of public hearing. Mr. Davis moved, seconded by Mr. Kendrick, that a Resolution of Intent to amend the Zoning Ordinance, Section 3.0 DEFINITONS as related to amusement game/device, be adopted. The motion passed unanimously. ZMA-82-10 P.H. Faulconer Estate WITH PROFFER - Request to rezone 28.29 acres from R-1 to CO Commercial Office with proffer to limit further development rights on said parcels until Route 601 is improved, provided that the proposed rezoning is approved allowing for the construction of a 30,000 square -foot corporate headquarters. Property is located off Old Ivy Road, adjacent to northbound ramp of Route 250 and Route 29 Bypass, County Tax Map 60, part of Parcel 24, Parcel 50, Jack Jouett Magisterial District. *0- (Mr. Michel excused himself due to a conflict of interests.) Mr. Keeler presented the staff report and also described the history of Old Ivy Road. -:5AO 9-7-82 3 Mr. Ira Cortez, Fire Official, addressed the issue of adequacy of fire flow. He explained that it was not possible to determine the needed fire flow at this time because there were no specific plans to review. He needed approximations of items such as type of occupancy expected, density, and type of construction. (Mr. Keeler explained that these issues are normally addressed at site review.) He noted, however, that the fire flow referred to by staff (approximately 800 gpm) was not adequate. He described expected response times. He stated that the entire development would be in a "void area" , i.e. an area further than 4 miles from a fire station and insurance rates would be very high. Mr. Coburn, representing the Highway Department, addressed the Commission. He stated that his department would not be in favor of any development which would increase traffic over current zoning. The Chairman invited applicant comment. The applicant was presented by Mr. Mack Wilcox. He explained that the proffer had addressed the concerns about the road by limiting development to a 35,000 square foot building until such time as the road is improved. Regarding fire flow, he stated that the applicant was willing to work with the Fire Marshall to determine what was needed. Mr. Cortez explained that the fire flow would be determined by a formula which took into consideration such factors as number of stories of the building, square footage, whether or not non- combustible materials are used and whether or not sprinklered. He stated that under the best of circumstances (with sprinklers, non-combustible materials, fire walls, 30 foot separation, etc.) he could not conceive that any less than 1,2500 gpm would be required and possibly 3,000 gpm could be required. Mr. Cortez stated that such flow was achievable though a pumping station might be required which would be very expensive and could be unsightly. There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. Items discussed by the Commission included the following: --Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. --Traffic generation and formula used in arriving at figures. (Mr. Keeler explained.) --Inadequacy of the road. (It was noted that the County could not require the applicant to upgrade the road as a condition of the rezoning.) --Adequacy of fire flow. --Problems with inadequacy of the proffer. (Mr. Payne felt it was not specific enough in terms of the meaning of the road improvements.) A2/ 9-7-B2 4 Mr. Bowerman expressed concern about rezoning 28 acres when only a 30,000 square foot building is proposed at this time. Thus the vast majority of the property would be reserved for future development and tied to the upgrading of the road, for which there are no current plans. Mr. Davis and Mr. Cogan expressed similar concerns. Mr. Bowerman was not satisfied with the wording of the proffer because the road improvements were not well defined. Mr. Wilcox offered to amend the proffer to delete reference to Rt. 601. Mr. Payne expressed other concerns about the proffer including: (1) Ambiguity about the 30,000 square foot "headquarters,"" i.e. is that the only thing intended to be developed? and (2) It is unwise to rezone property that may not potentially be realized. Mr. Bowerman noted that the applicant had heard the Commission's concerns and would have the opportunity to amend the proffer, if he so chose, before the Board hearing. Mr. Skove, Mr. Cogan and Mr. Kendrick noted that they were not opposed to rezoning to CO, but they, too, had concerns about the wording of the proffer. Mr. Davis felt the application could be approved with smaller acreage. Mr. Davis moved, seconded by Mr. Skove, that ZMA-82-10 for Faulconer Estate be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for denial. The Commission's concerns included: --Acreage too large for one 30,000 square foot building. --Wording in proffer too vague in relation to the road improvements. The motion for denial passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned for 10 minutes. ZMA-82-11 Elite Associates, Inc. WITH PROFFER Construction Company, - Request to rezone approximately 33,549 acres from R-1 to R-10 with proffer not to exceed 8 dwelling units per acre in establishing a continuing -care . retirement facility. Property is located off Old Ivy Road, in between Ivy Gardens/Old Ivy Apartments and Huntington Village, County Tax Map 60, Parcel 53, Jack Jouett Magisterial District. EM SP-82-52 Elite Construction Company, Inc., and Harkins 9-7-82 5 the Zoning Ordinance to establish a nursing home in conjunction with a 260-unit continuing care retirement facility, on 33.549 + acres currently zoned R-1 Residential and requested to be rezoned R-10 Residential under separate petition ZMA-82-11. Property is located on the north side of Route 601 (Old Ivy Road), County Tax Map 60, Parcel 53, Jack Jouett Magisterial District. Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Mr. Cortez explained fire flow requirements. Mr. Coburn (VDH&T) addressed the issue of traffic generation and stated that it would be no greater than with residential development. The applicant was represented by Mr. Lee Middleditch. He explained the background of the property including history, current owners, surrounding property, etc. He briefly described the proposal. He was assisted in his presentation by Mr. Ron Crawford, architect for the project. He described the facility in more detail. Mr. Paul Royer, Jr., P.E. with the VDH&T, spoke on the issue of traffic generation and vehicle counts on Old Ivy Road. He also spoke specifically on existing problems on Old Ivy Road. There are no current plans for improvements. The Chairman invited public comment. The following persons expressed opposition to the request: Mr. Thomas J. Robinson, President of Huntington Village Homeowners' Association; and Mr. John Rudolph, representing Huntington Village A. Their reasons for objection included the following: --Increased traffic problems and accident potential on an already dangerous road; --Increased response time for emergency vehicles; --Decreased property values. Mr. James D. Cole expressed support for the proposal. Mr. Roger Davis presented a petition of support containing approximately 100 signatures. There being no further comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. The following issues were discussed by the Commission: --Fire protection. Mr. Cortez explained, as he had with the previous agenda item, that it was uncertain at this time how adequate fire flow would be achieved. He estimated that approximately 1,250 gpm would be required. .Sa3 9-7-82 6 --Mr. Cogan questioned whether approval could be granted until the fire flow issue has been resolved. Mr. Payne advised that the special permit could be approved, but would be conditioned upon the ultimate approval of the Fire official. Mr. Skove felt a condition should be added to address this concern. It was later decided condition No. 4 would be added as follows: "Fire official approval of site plan prior to Planning Commission review of site plan." --Mr. Davis and Mr. Skove felt the applicant had addressed the concern regarding traffic flow, particularly since peak hour flows would be less than could be expected with R-1 development. --Licensing: Mr. Cortez stated that unless the facility is licensed as a Home for Adults, then it will be considered an institution and sprinklering will be required. --Type of medical care envisioned. The applicant (Mr. Crawford) explained that no type of medical care would be provided beyond usual nursing care. It was determined that the request was for a total of 260 units. (This was confirmed by the applicant. Mr. Payne determined that applicant's proffer and intent was clear.) 1%W Mr. Davis moved, seconded by Mr. Kendrick, that ZMA-82-11 be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to acceptance of the applicant's proffer. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Skove moved, seconded by Mr. Kendrick, that SP-82-52 for Elite Construction Company and Harkins Associates be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Support uses shall be limited to such uses as: housekeeping and laundry services; nursing and hospital facilities reasonably necessary to serve the residents; retail stores and shops, professional offices, and food services, all of which are designed and intended to serve the residents of the development; and common areas where residents may engage in recreational, educational, and cultural activities. 2. Approval of all appropriate State, local, and Federal agencies prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy. 3. Site plan approval. 4. Fire Official approval of site plan prior to Planning Commission review of site plan. Discussion: Regarding the issue of fire flow, Mr. Cogan stated he would be opposed to a solution such as a 50-foot high water tower. A211 9-7-82 7 The motion for approval passed unanimously. Thomas Jefferson -Planning District/Solid Waste Plan _ Presentation by Ms. Wayne Harbaugh Ms. Harbaugh presented copies of the plan to the Commission. She was seeking their comment on the proposal. There was very little discussion. NEW BUSINESS County Fair - Amusement Ride Safety - Mr. Bowerman expressed concern about the fact that there is no means of requiring a local safety inspection of these rides. He asked staff to look into this issue. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m. Recorded by: Stuart Richard Transcribed by: Deloris Bradshaw 1-92