HomeMy WebLinkAbout10 05 82 PC MinutesOCTO8ER 5, 1982
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on
Tuesday, October 5, 1982, Meeting Room 7^ County Office Building,
Charlottesville, Va. Those members present were: Mr. Allen
Kendrick; Mr. Mike Davis; Mr. Jim Skove; and Ms. Norma Diehl.
Staff members present were: Mr. Ronald Keeler and Mr. Fred
Payne, Deputy County Attorney. Absent: Commissioners Bowerman,
Cogan and Michel. (Also present: Ellen Nash, Ex-Officio)
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. and
established that a quorum was present. The minutes of September
14, 1982 were approved as submitted.
The Commission unanimously accepted requests for Withdrawal of
the following items:
SP-82-54 Blue Ridge Fellowship Baptist__Church
- Request, in accordance with Section
25.2.2(1) of the Zoning Ordinance, to locate a family amusement
center in Store Space A-4 of the Charlottesville Fashion Square
Mall, 18.094 acres zoned PD-SC, 1701 square feet of store area,
located on Route 29 North. County Tax Map 61, Parcel 131,
Charlottesville Magisterial District.
Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Staff recommended
approval subject to conditions.
The applicant was represented by Mr. Thomas Poplar. He offered
no significant additional comment.
The Chairman invited public comment.
Mr. Michael Bendner^ representing the adjacent church, addressed
the Commission. He expressed concerns about possible problems
with vandalism and light spillover.
There being no further public comment, the matter was placed
before the Commission.
It was determined there was no roadway connection between Fashion
Square and the church. It was also determined the proposed
establishment would be subject to the same rules and hours of the
Mall. Mr. Davis commented that a mall setting was one of the
most acceptable locations for this type of business.
Mr. Davis moved that SP-82-56 for Fun-N-Games Associates be
recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to
the following conditions:
10-5-82
r
1. Amusement center use restricted to Space A-4.
2. Fire Official approval including circulation provisions
and occupancy load limitation.
3. An adult attendant shall be on duty at all times during
operation.
Mr. Skove seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
SP-82-57 Robert D. Blachly and Kurt A. Henshen - Request, in
accordance with Section 10.2.2.22, 10.2.2.36 and 10.2.2.37, to
locate a country store, gifts/crafts/antiques, and a public
garage on 5.55 acres zoned Rural Areas. Property is located at
the L.C. Parrish store, on the north side of State Route 810, 0.2
mile west of its intersection with Route 664 at Nortonsville.
County Tax Map 8, Parcel 31 and part of Parcel 32, White Hall
Magisterial District.
Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Staff recommended
approval subject to conditions.
The applicant was represented by Mr. McCallum. (Mr. Blachly and
Mr. Henschen were also present.) He explained the reasons behind
the request and some of the history of previous uses of the
property. He expressed concerns about the following: prohibition
of outdoor display (He asked that outdoor display of items be
allowed if they are brought back into the building each night.);
prohibition of body work (spray painting) of vehicles (He noted
that this type of work has been in process for years and asked
that it be allowed to continue.); limitation on hours of
operation (He asked that weekly time be extended to 6 p.m.); and
limitation on number of vehicles (He asked that 6 or 7 be
allowed).
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the
Commission.
The following issues were discussed:
--Parking areas: Ms. Diehl felt that store parking should
be separated from vehicles awaiting service at the garage. It
was decided 6 vehicles "awaiting repair" would be allowed.
--Noise levels from this type of facility in relation to its
location in a rural area.
--Whether or not to allow body work and spray painting. Mr.
Kendrick expressed concern about "taking away part of someone's
livelihood." Mr. Payne noted that if the Commission so
desired, the body work could be allowed as a "non -conforming"
use. He suggested the following change to the second sentence of
�_I'o
3
condition No. 2(a): "Body work and/or spray painting of vehicles
shall be permitted as a non -conforming use and shall be
unaffected by this special use permit." He noted that if these
two activites should cease, then they would "die."
The Commission had no objections to increasing the number of
vehicles, allowing some non -permanent, temporary -type of outdoor
display, and extending the hours of operation.
Mr. Skove moved that SP-83-57 for Robert D. Blachly and Kurt A.
Henschen be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval
subject to the following conditions:
1. All uses shall be limited to the existing floor area of the
buildings in which such uses are to be located. The
gift/craft/antique shop shall be located in the dwelling which is
physically connected to the store. The country store shall be
located in the store building and the garage shall be located in
the garage building.
2. The public garage use, in addition to other conditions
contained here, shall be subject to the following:
a. The public garage use shall be limited to the
repairing and equipping of vehicles. Body work and/or spray
w�~ painting of vehicles shall be permitted only as a
nonconforming use and shall be unaffected by this special
use permit.
b. All work shall be conducted within the garage
building.
C. No outside storage of parts including junk parts or
junk cars. Refuse awaiting disposal shall be stored in
appropriate containers.
d. Not more than 6 (six) vehicles, awaiting repair,
shall be parked on the property outdoors at any time.
e. Hours of operation shall be limited from 7 a.m. to
6 p.m. and no operation of the garage on Sunday.
3. Reinstallation of gas pumps shall require Fire Official
approval and may require site plan approval.
4. Fire and Building Official approval and Health Department
approval for all uses.
5. No auctions and no permanent outdoor display of merchandise.
6. Should sale of gasoline not occur, the Fire Official may
require the removal, filling or other safety measure for the
underground storage tanks.
Mr. Kendrick seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
J51
10-5-B2 4
STA-82-2- Amendment to Section 18-36(c)(6) of the Albemarle
County Subdivision Ordinance to permit registered landscape
architects to certify completion of private roads according to
approved plans. (Petition by Mr. Max Evans)
Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. Based on the the Code of
Virginia [Sec. 54-17.1(4)(b)] which states "no landscape
architect, unless he shall also hold an appropriate license as a
land surveyor, shall provide boundary surveys, plats or
descriptions for any purpose...," it was staff's position that
the proposed amendment "would likely be of limited utility."
The applicant, Mr. Max Evans, addressed the Commission.
He explained that the amendment was two -fold; to allow Certified
Landscape Architects to certify roads which they have designed
and also to allow County Engineer the responsibility of
certifying private roads.
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the
Commission.
Mr. Evans answered Commission questions related to his
profession's training and education. There was also discussion
about what duties Mr. Evans envisioned would result from the
proposed amendment.
Mr. Davis expressed concern about a provision which would not be
in compliance with the Code of Virginia. He felt this could be
"a tough knot to untie."
Mr. Payne expressed uncertainty about the meaning of the Code
provision in relation to landscape architects and felt that there
was a lack of a definitive definition. He felt it was the Code's
intent that roads be primarily the responsibility of engineers
and, under limited circumstances, land surveyors. He concluded
that he agreed with staff's interpretation of the Code, based on
his reading of the Statute.
There was a brief discussion of the County Engineer's letter of
September 24, 1982 (from Mr. Elrod to Mr. Keeler). Mr. Evans
agreed there was merit to Mr. Elrod's comments.
In response to Mr. Evans' request, Mr. Payne quoted from Section
[15-17.1(4)(b)] (Code of Virginia) related to "exclusions from
what landscape architects are permitted to do."
There was discussion about the differences in functions between
surveyors and landscape architects. It was noted that engineers,
surveyors and landscape architects all receive their licensing
from the same Board.
10-5-B2 5
It was the consensus of the Commission that the County Engineer
have the ultimate responsibility of certification (as suggested
by staff). (The proposed amendment did not reflect this
position.) It was determined staff would need to meet with the
County Engineer (and private professionals) to develop new
language and then bring the matter back to the Commission.
Mr. Evans asked that the Commission act on his request
separately, i.e. to include landscape architects in the group of
other professionals. Mr. Payne advised the Commission that such
an action would be inappropriate. (Mr. Evans disagreed with Mr.
Payne's statement.)
Based on his understanding (from discussion) that "the County
Engineer would be the one to certify these roads", Mr. Evans
asked that STA-82-2 be withdrawn. (Ms. Diehl noted that was the
Commission's and staff's preferred approach.)
Mr. Skove moved, seconded by Mr. Kendrick, that the applicant's
request for withdrawal of STA-82-2 be accepted. The motion
passed unanimously.
Home for Homeless Alcoholics - Review for compliance with
Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan, in accordance with Section
31.2.5 of the Zoning Ordinance* of a public use building, an
` existing structure. Property is located west of Route 20 South,
north and adjacent to I-64, part of the Blue Ridge Sanitorium
Complex* approximately 17 acres zoned Rural Areas. County Tax
Map 77, Part of Parcel 25, Scottsville Magisterial District.
Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. The report noted that the
site would be a temporary location while renovations are being
completed at an East Market Street site. (Staff was concerned
that because of the investment involved, political pressures
could result in requests for permanent usage of the Blue Ridge
site.) The report also noted that the proposal was inconsistent
with the textual recommendations of the Land Use recommendations
of the Comprehensive Plan regarding development at certain
interstate interchanges.
The applicant, the City of Charlottesville, was represented by
Mr. Huja, Director of Planning for the City. He raised the
following questions: (1) Does the proposed use require a
finding that it is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan? and
(2) Is it a by -right use? [Mr. Payne addressed the questions
and stated: (1) A finding of compliance is required by the
Statutes; and (2) Mr. Vaughn (County Zoning Administrator)
determined that it is a use by -right as a public facility. Mr.
Payne disagreed with this determination.]
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the
Commission.
1D-5-B2 6
There was a discussion about the status of the existing facility
��Ime on Pantops Mountain. Mr. Huja explained that problems have been
cited in relation to fire protection and therefore the County has
made the determination that the site is to be vacated by November
1, 1982. Mr. Huja stated that approximately $2,000 to $3,000
would be needed to address the fire safety issue at the Pantops
site. (Ms. Diehl noted this was the same as anticipated
renovations to the Blue Ridge site.) Mr. Huja stated there were
other improvements which would also be needed to make the fourth
floor usable. He agreed with Commissioners that it would make
more sense to stay at the Pantops site, rather than make two
moves.
This appeared to be the consensus of the Commission.
It was noted, however, that this was not the issue before the
Commission.
Regarding the issue of compliance with the Plan, Mr. Davis felt
the proposal was clearly NOT in compliance with the Comprehensive
Plan. Ms. Diehl agreed and felt that it also was not in
compliance with future plans for that area. Concern was
expressed about having no control over the time factor of the
proposed use of the Blue Ridge site.
Mr. Davis moved, seconded by Mr. Shove, that the Home for
Homeless Alcoholics be found NOT to be in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan. The motion passed unanimously.
Ms. Diehl expressed the hope that "something could be worked out"
to maintain shelter until the East Market Street site is
completed.
OLD BUSINESS
River Heights - Mr. Keeler reported the status of two issues:
(1) A soil erosion plan has been submitted to the County
Engineer and appears to be a substantial improvement though some
revisions will still be necessary; (2) The letter of credit
related to the bond (to be posted by Mr. Wood) has been deemed to
be acceptable by the County Attorney.
Ms. Diehl noted that it appeared that both those conditions had
been "substantially met."
09
10-5-82
NEW BUSINESS
VA
It was determined no meeting would be held on November 2nd
(Election Day). The next scheduled public hearing was set for
November 9th.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10:00
p.m.
~'
V. WaynVCil'berc
Recorded by: Stuart Richard
Transcribed by: Deloris Bradshaw 12-91