HomeMy WebLinkAbout10 18 83 PC MinutesOctober 18, 1983
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on
Tuesday, October 18, 1983, Meeting Room 7, County Office Building,
Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were: Mr. David
Bowerman; Mr. Allen Kendrick; Ms. Norma Diehl; Mr. Tim Michel; Mr.
Richard Cogan and Mr. Jim Skove. Other officials present were: Ms.
MaryJoy Scala, Planner; Mr. Fred Payne, Deputy County Attorney; Mr.
Dan Roosevelt, Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation; and
Mr. Jeff Echols.
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. and established
that a quorum was present. The minutes of August 16, 1983 were
approved as submitted.
Boar's Head Inn Addition Site Plan (Amvest Office Building Site Plan) -
Located south of Route 250 West off Ednam Drive. Proposal to locate
a 23,329 square foot office/conference center on 2.92 acres. Samuel
Miller Magisterial District. (Tax Map 59D2, Parcel 2, 17).
Deferred from September 27.
Ms. Scala presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval of
Phase I only, subject to conditions.
The applicant was represented by Mr. Charles Ancona. He explained
that the main issue was related to the entrance. He stated the because
the applicant does not have the right of eminent domain, he cannot
amke the improvements recommended by the Highway Department. He asked
that the exsisting entrance be allowed to continue.
Mr. Gordon Winfield and Mr. Randy Holmes, also representative of the the
applicant, commented briefly.
The Chairman invited public comment. There being no public comment, the
matter was placed before the Commission.
Mr. Dan Roosevelt, representing the Highway Department, addressed the
Commission. He explained Highway Department recommendations.
There was a discussion about the Canadian geese which on one of the
lakes. Mr. Ancona stated nothing would be done to disrupt their habitat.
Mr. Bowerman asked if any Commissioners were inclinced not to require
the entrance improvements. (There was no response to his question.)
Ms. Diehl moved that the Boar's Head Inn Addition Site Plan be approved
subject to the following conditions:
1. A building permit will not be issued until the following conditions
have been met:
October 18, 1983 Page 2
a. County Engineer approval of:
1) Grading and drainage plans and computations;
2) Stormwater detention plans and computations;
3) Retaining walls and paved areas;
b. Staff approval of outdoor lighting;
c. Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation approval of
drainage channel design;
d. Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation approval of
entrance improvements (Ednam Drive at 250W);
e. Final Service Authority approval.
2. A certificate of occupancy will not be issued until the following
condition has been met:
a. Fire Officer approval of fireflow.
Mr. Skove seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
Pargo's Restaurant Site Plan - Located on the north side of Greenbrier
Drive, west of Route 29 North; proposal to locate a 5,744 square foot
building and 115 parking spaces on 4.34 acres. Charlottesville
Magisterial District. (Tax Map 61W, Parcel 01-A5).
The applicant was requesting deferral.
Mr. Skove moved, seconded by Ms. Diehl, that the item be deferred
indefinitely. The motion passed unanimously.
Fitzwood Final Plat - Located on the north side of Route 250 East just
east of its intersection with Route 744 and about six miles east of
Charlottesville; proposal to divide 10.572 acres into 4 lots with an
average size of 2.5 acres. Rivanna Magisterial District. (Tax Map 80,
Parcels 59B and part of 60A).
The applicant was requesting withdrawal.
Mr. Kendrick moved, seconded by Mr. Michel that the applicant's request
for withdrawal be accepted. The motion passed unanimously.
Joanne L.G. Moyer Final Plat - Located on the east side of Route 1209
Virginia Avenue) in the Community of Crozet; proposal to divide one
two -acre lot leaving 23.678 acres residue. White Hall Magisterial
District. (Tax Map 56, Parcel 11).
Ms. Scala presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval
with no conditions.
Im"D
October 18, 1983
Page 3
The applicant was represented by Mr. Ed Bain, attorney. (Ms. Moyer
was also present.) Mr. Bain explained the proposal briefly.
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission.
Mr. Kendrick moved that the Joanne L.G. Moyer Final Plat be approved.
Ms. Diehl seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
Jim Zauner Preliminary Plat - Located on the east side of Route 743
and on the south side of Fray Road, about 3/4 mile north of Advance
Mills in Advance Mills Village Subdivision; proposal to divide 13.18
acres into two parcels containing approximately 6.4 and 6.7 acres.
Rivanna Magisterial District. (Tax Map 20, Parcel 89).
The applicant was requesting withdrawal.
Mr. Kendrick moved, seconded by Mr. Cogan, that the applicant's request
for withdrawal be accepted. The motion passed unanimously.
Solomon Court Final Plat - Located on the west side of Route 743
(Hydraulic Road) just north of its intersection with Solomon Road;
proposal to convert to condominiums 86 existing apartment units on 3.42
acres. Jack Jouett Magisterial District. (Tax Map 61, Parcels 43 and
43D).
Ms. Scala presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval
subject to conditions. Ms. Scala also explained the history of the
site plan.
The applicant was represented first by Mr. Alec Hamilton. He explained
that he had no relationship with the Solomon Court Phase III development.
He expressed an interest in knowing when the Phase III site plan will
be approved.
Mr. Chuck Rotgin explained the future of the development and also
its history.
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission.
Mr. Davis Moved that the Solomon Court Final Plat be approved subject to
the following conditions:
1. The plat will not be signed until the following conditions have
been met:
a. Show existing fire hydrants on the plat;
b. Planning Commission approval of amended site plan for Solomon
Court Phase III;
c. County Attorney's approval of condominium regime documents;
d. Notarized owner's signature.
-SV
October 18, 1983 Page 4
Mr. Skove seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
Earlysville Green Phase I Site Plan - Located on the east side of Route
743, just north of its intersection with Route 660 in Earlysville;
proposal to locate a 12,432 square -foot grocery store and 63 parking
spaces on 3.Ot acres. Rivanna Magisterial District. (Tax Map 31A,
Parcel A, and Tax Map 31, part of Parcel 32).
Ms. Scala presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval subject
to conditions.
(See Attachment A for remainder of this item.)
W. Donald and Agnes C. Clark Preliminary Plat - Located off the end of
Route 684 near Mint Springs Park in Crozet; proposal to divide 66.66
acres into five parcels with an average size of 13.33 acres. White
Hall Magisterial District. (Tax Map 39, Parcels 13C and 5).
Ms. Scala presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval subject
to conditions.
The applicant was represented by Mr. Morris Foster. He stated the applicant
had no problems with staff's suggested conditions of approval, with the
exception of the request for a waiver of the requirement for prime and
double seal.
Mr. Clark also requested that the waiver be granted.
The Chairman invited public comment. There being none, the matter was placed
before the Commission.
There was a brief discussion about the number of parcels and the layout of
the parcels.
Mr. Bowerman expressed confusion about at what point in the process
Health Department approval is required. Ms. Scala explained that
the Health Department will not give even a preliminary approval without
a soil scientist's report, and staff has not required a soil scientist's
report until the final plat is submitted. Ms. Diehl was under the impression
that in order for staff to be granted administrative approval of the final,
Health Department approval would have to be granted at the time of the
preliminary.
Mr. Davis indicated he understood Ms. Diehl's concern, but noted that in
this case he did not feel there would any problem getting Health Department
approval because the lots were large.
Mr. Bowerman stated he wanted staff to be clear of the Commission's intent
in this regard for future applications, i.e. that Health Department approval
be secured at the time of the preliminary review.
5a
ATTACHMENT A
From Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting, October 18, 1983.
Earlysville Green Phase I Site Plan
Ms. Scala presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval subject
to conditions.
The applicant was represented by Mr. Roger Ray. Referring to condition
(e)--Recordation of parking and access easements --he stated: "We would
like not to change the Tax Map and Parcel designations and to do the easement
plat." (Note: Mr. Payne responded: "Either one is all right.") Referring
to condition (f)--Recordation of access easement from TM 31A, parcel A, to
Earlysville Forest Drive --he stated: "It is not sure yet whether or not
that road will need to be built in the future addition and to place that
easement on there would put an undue burden on this parcel of land and
it is not in his best interest to have it on that piece of land at this
time. In the future, when we submit for development of Phase II ... if it
is determined that that access easement is definitely needed and if it
is tying in and the traffic generation is such that the people anticipate
may happen, we will deal with that at that time, but we would like for
that not to be a requirement of this approval." Mr. Ray objected to the
placement of a 6-foot wooden or opaque fence. He explained that a
barrier of trees 40 to 45 feet wide already exists and will be left as
screening. He explained landscape plans in some detail. He felt that
leaving the existing vegetation would fulfill the need for screening.
The Chairman invited public comment.
Mr. Richard Panke, a resident of Earlysville Heights, addressed the
Commission. He was interested in knowing the exact location of the proposed
entrance from Earlysville Forest Drive. (Mr. Bowerman explained that the
Commission had not yet addressed that issue, but staff was requesting
that the easement be shown and the applicant was requesting that it not
be shown. Ms. Scala pointed out the proposed location of the entrance
in question, i.e. 280 feet back, approximately the center of the property.)
Mr. Panke stated that if that description were correct, it did not appear
to be "in his back door and not on his property line (Lot 7)" and therefore
he found it to be a reasonable request. He asked for an explanation as
to how traffic counts are taken. Both Ms. Scala and Mr. Roosevelt responded
and explained how traffic counts are determined and roads are classified.
Ms. MaryEllen Sullivan, an adjacent property owner, expressed concern
about screening. She noted that the branches on the existing white
pines were well above the ground (above her head) and would offer
little screening. She was particularly concerned because the dumpster
would be very close to her back yard.
There being no further public comment, the matter was placed before the
Commission.
Addressing the issue of the access easement, Mr. Roosevelt, representing
the Highway Department, explained that his department supported the access
to Earlysville Forest Drive because it would allow one of the entrances
from Rt. 743 to be closed. He added that his department had not approved
the details for the entrance.
October 18, 1983
Page 2
of Attachment A
There was considerable discussion about screening and whether existing
vegetation would provide adequate screening. Mr. Davis questioned the
purpose of the suggested fence. Mr. Cogan stated he would prefer
additional plantings. Ms. Diehl stated she felt a fence might be appropriate
in the back of the store. Mr. Cogan agreed there should be some form
for screening from the dumpster.
There was discussion as to whether or not the easement should be shown.
In relation to this, Mr. Cogan indicated he understood Mr. Whyte's
reluctance to show the easement at this time because it might be determined
at some future time that it is in the wrong place. (Mr. Whyte indicated
he did not know when future development might take place.) Mr. Davis
expressed some problems with "future" development being shown because there
that some many unknowns. (Mr. Ray explained that he had advised Mr.
Whyte to show future development possibilities because his experience with
the Commission had led himto believe that was what the Commission desired.
However, he stated he was now wondering whether he had advised Mr.
Whyte incorrectly.)
Referring to condition (i)--"When future additions and parking are submitted
for approval, an entrance may be required on Earlysville Forest Drive,
and white pine screening may be required across the rear of the parking
lot." --Mr. Bowerman suggested that "we can request an easement now, leave
the specific location to a later time and, at a later time, depending upon
how the rest of the property develops, either utilize it or not utilize."
(Ms. Scala confirmed this was staff's intent, but added: "We would prefer
that the entrance be located opposite the entrance to the other commercial
area." She felt a 30 foot easement was adequate.) It was determined
condition (i) could remain as stated in the staff report.
Ms. Scala asked for a clarification of screening. Mr. Bowerman responded:
"There's general agreement that along the back of the property, that
being the top, that any additional live screening that can be placed
adjacent to or mixed in with the existing screening would be appropriate.
If the staff feels that the addition of some opaque -type screening fence...
at the back of the store would further that, that would be their discretion
to put in because it would be their approval of a plan. Along the other
side of the property, I am unclear myself as to what is being recommended."
Mr. Cogan interjected: "I think we discussed additional live screening
in the vicinity of the northeast side --the rear side." Ms. Diehl added
that she felt a permanent screen was called for in the dumpster and loading
area.
Mr. Skove moved that the Earlysville Green Phase I Site Plan be approved
subject to the following conditions:
1. A building permit will not be issued until the following conditions have
been met:
October 18, 1983 Page 3
of Attachment A
a. Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation approval of the
relocated entrance;
b. Staff approval of a screening/landscape plan (with special attention
to the dumpster area), and internal parking layout;
c. County Engineer approval of:
1. Grading and storm sewer plans and computations;
2. Drainage plans and computations for off -site easement to
culvert at Viewmont Road; or other measures to provide an
adequate drainage channel;
3. A new erosion control permit;
d. Fire Official final approval of building design;
e. Recordation of parking and access easements;
f. Recordation of 30-foot access easement from TM 31A, Parcel A to
Earlysville Forest Drive;
g. Recordation of a drainage easement from Rt. 743 across the property;
h. When future additional and parking are submitted for approval, an
entrance may be required on Earlysville Forest Drive, and white
pine screening may be required across the rear of the parking lot.
Mr. Cogan seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
05
October 18, 1983 Page 5
There was further discussion as to how the7�roocess was envisioned to work
in relation to Health Department approval.
Mr. Cogan indicated he did not feel he could support the recommendation for
prime and double seal.
Mr. Davis stated he would only be willing to waive that requirement subject
to County Engineer approval.
Ms. Diehl stated she was comfortable with the condition as written, i.e.
"Compliance with all private road provisions, including County Engineer
approval of road and drainage plans from Rt. 684 to parcel 4."
Both Commissioners Cogan and Bowerman agreed.
Ms. Diehl moved that the W. Donald and Agnes C. Clark Preliminary Plat be
approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The final plat will not be signed until the following conditions have
been met:
a. Health Department written approval based on a soil scientist
report;
b. Compliance with all private road provisions, including County
Engineer approval of road and drainage plans from Rt. 684 to
parcel 4;
C. Issuance of an erosion control permit;
d. County Attorney's approval of homeowners' documents;
e. Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation issuance of a
private street commercial entrance.
Mr. Skove seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
(It was determined staff was granted administrative approval of the final.)
Brook Hollow Preliminary Plat - Located on the south side of Route 676
just west of its intersection with Route 677 (Old Ballard Road); proposal
to divide 35.3 acres into five parcels with an average size of 7.0
acres. Samuel Miller Magisterial District. (Tax Map 58, Parcel 74C).
Ms. Scala presented the staff report. The report concluded: "If the
Commission chooses to approve the requested density waiver, then staff
recommends approval of the preliminary plat, and administrative approval
of the final plat, subject to ... conditions."
The applicant was represented by Mr. Morris Foster. He explained
that the applicant had no disagreement with the suggested conditions of
approval and asked that the waiver be granted. He explained the reasons
for the waiver request and explained that if a public road were
proposed the waiver wouldnot be necessary.
Mr. Beltrone spoke briefly and explained the reason for the proposed
size of the lots.
October 18, 1983
Page 6
The Chairman invited public comment.
Ms. Rosemary Rolinston addressed the Commission. She asked about the
plans for the existing fence and the pasture it borders. Mr.
Beltrone responded that the fence would remain and that area would
continued to be used for pasture.
There being no further public comment, the matter was placed before
the Commission.
Ms. Diehl felt this was a reasonable use.
Mr. Michel moved that the Brook Hollow Preliminary Plat be approved
subject to the following conditions, and including a waiver of Section
18-36(b)(5) of the Subdivision Ordinance, and staff approval of the
final plat:
1. The final plat will not be signed until the following conditions
have been met:
a. Health Department written approval based on a soil scientist
report;
b. Compliance with all private road provisions, including County
Engineer approval of final road and drainage plans;
C. Issuance of an erosion control permit;
d. Note on plat: "Only one dwelling per lot;"
e. County Attorney approval of homeowners' documents;
f. Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation issuance of
a private street commercial entrance permit.
Ms. Diehl seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
(Note: Mr. Davis did not take part in the review of the Brook Hollow
item due to a conflict of interest. He returned to the meeting
after the item was complete.)
Ashcroft Storage and Maintenance Building - Request to locate in Ashcroft
open space.
Ms. Scala presented the staff report. She explained the development needed
a building to house its snow removal equipment. He stated the building
had been approved by both the Board of Directors and the Architectural
Review Committee. The dimensions of the building were 42' x 52'.
The applicant was represented by Mr. Cooper.
Mr. Skove moved that the Ashcroft request to locate a storage building
in the open space be approved. Mr. Kendrick seconded the motion which
passed unanimously.
There being no further business, the me,Jing'adjourned ^l� 10:32 p.m.
V. Wayn climber e ary
Recorded by: Janice Wills
Transcribed by: Deloris Sessoms 4-90
$51