HomeMy WebLinkAbout06 11 85 PC MinutesJune 11, 1985
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing
on Tuesday, June 11, 1985, Meeting Room 7, County Office
Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present
were: Mr. David Bowerman, Chairman; Mr. Richard Cogan, Vice -
Chairman; Ms. Norma Diehl; Mr. Richard Gould; Mr. Tim Michel;
and Mr. James Skove. Other officials present were: Mr.
Ronald Keeler, Chief of Planning; Ms. Amelia Patterson, Planner;
Ms. Katherine Imhoff, Chief of Community Development; and
Mr. Frederick Payne, Deputy County Attorney. Absent: Mr.
Harry Wilkerson and Ms. Patricia Cooke, Ex-Officio.
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. after
establishing that a quorum was present.
The minutes of the May 28, 1985 meeting were approved as
written.
(Note: Mr. Skove left the meeting due to a conflict of interests.)
Antique Automobile Restoration Shop Site Plan - Located on the west
side of Rt. 29 North about .5 miles north of its intersection with
Rt. 649. Proposal to locate a 11,400 square feet building served
by 7 parking spaces and 2 loading spaces on a 2.077 acre site.
Zoned HI, Heavy Industrial. Tax Map 32, parcels Cl and C2.
Rivanna Magisterial District.
Ms. Patterson gave the staff report. She added that staff is
recommending deletion of condition (l.g)--In the event that both
drain fields fail or the well becomes inadequate, or that the
Zoning Administrator deems it reasonably available, this site
must connect to public sewer. Mr. Keeler explained he was
not comfortable with this condition since it leaves it up
to the Zoning Administrator to determine whether or not
public sewer is "reasonably available."
The applicant, Mr. Larry Hall, was present but offered no
additional comments.
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the
Commission.
Regarding the public sewer issue, Mr. Payne explained that
this case is different from the Greene Gardens situation since
in that case public sewer was determined to be reasonably
available, but in this current application the issue of
whether or not public sewer is reasonably available still
must be resolved.
In response to Ms. Diehl's inquiry, the applicant indicated
that this would be a "clean" operation and no oils or
anti -freeze would be used. He explained the operation was
only for the assembly of automobiles and no repair work
or painting would take place.
Re
June 11, 1985
Page 2
Mr. Payne confirmed that condition (l.a)--Each future
occupant of an industrial character shall submit a certified
engineer's report for County Engineer review to comply with
Section 4.14 of the Zoning Ordinance --was included for the
County's protection.
Ms. Diehl moved that the Antique Automobile Restoration Shop
Site Plan be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. A building permit can be issued when the following
conditions have been met:
a) Each future occupant of an industrial character shall
submit a certified engineer's report for County
Engineer review to comply with Section 4.14 of the
Zoning Ordinance.
b) Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation
approval of entrance.
c) County Engineer approval of grading and drainage
plans and computations.
d) Issuance of erosion control permit.
e) Planning Staff approval of landscape plan and
technical items.
f) Recordation of new plat to combine parcels 69 and 70.
g) Site to be served by public water.
2. A certificate of occupancy will be issued when the
following conditions have been met:
a) Fire official final approval of hydrant location and
fire flow.
Mr. Cogan seconded the motion which was unanimously approved.
(Mr. Skove returned to the meeting.)
Hollymead Section 3 - Parcel G - Final Plat - Located on the west
side of Powell Creek wrive adjacent to the lake in Hollymead
Planned Unit Development (PUD). Proposal to create 8 lots
with an average size of .19 acres on a 1.48 acre site. Zoned PUD,
Planned Unit Development. Tax Map 46B2, parcel 03-F. Rivanna
Magisterial District.
and
Hollymead Section 3, Parcel E, Final Plat - Located on the south
side of Powell Creek Drive just east of its intersection with
Hollymead Road, the main entrance to Hollymead from Rt. 29N.
Proposal to locate 36 lots with an average size of .17 acres on a
FYI
June 11, 1985
Page 3
6.03 acre site. Zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development. Tax Map
46B2, parcel 03-E. Rivanna Magisterial District.
Ms. Patterson gave the staff report.
It was determined the current proposal is for 18 duplexes
on Parcel E (36 dwelling units).
The Chairman invited applicant comment.
Mr. Edwards, representing the applicant, addressed the
Commission. He indicated the applicant had no objections to
staff's conditions of approval. Regarding condition (f.)--
VDH&T approval of Powell Creek Road to serve Lots 157L, 157R,
158L 158R or redesigning of Parcel G to use Tinker's Cove Road
as means of access --he asked that staff be granted administrative
approval of whichever option was chosen. Regarding the pond
that is causing problems for the residents of Tinker's Cove
Road, he stated it had been put in at the beginning of
the Hollymead development and belongs to the Hollymead
Homeowners' Association. He stated the removal of the pond
had been proposed at one time, but had been opposed by the
Homeowners' Association, primarily because of its use as
an iceskating pond in the winter.
The Chairman asked for comment from Mr. Pack, representing the
County Engineer's office. He stated the property owners are
"%✓ concerned about the pond backing up in their yards. He
stated the County Engineer has recommended that the pond be
removed. He emphasized that drainage plans for the development
have not yet been submitted. He indicated he felt the
drainage could be dealt with probably by enlarging the
channels if they are not adequate. In the event the channels
cannot be upgraded or the drainage cannot be handled in some
way, the development will not be able to proceed.
The Chairman invited public comment.
Mr. Dean Peterson, a resident of Tinker's Cove Road, acted
as spokesman for several Hollymead residents, and addressed
the Commission. He offered the following comments:
--Parcel E does drain across Tinker's Cove Road to the
holding pond which is currently causing problems.
--Regarding the proposed removal of the pond, he pointed
out that those residents who are directly effected
by the pond's overflow were in favor of the removal, but it
was those residents of Hollymead who are not effected
by the pond's negative aspects who were opposed.
--Duplex units on Tinker's Cove Road are incompatible
with single-family residences.
June 11, 1985
Page 4
The following residents of Hollymead addressed the Commission: *480
Mr. Bobby Fox, Ms. Daniella Fulton, Mr. Conrad Jenkins, Ms.
Robin Taylor and Mr. Mike Duvall. They were concerned about
the following issues:
--The lack of privacy which would result with the
erection of the duplex units which would back up
to Tinkers Cove Road.
--The closeness of the parking lot to existing
residences.
--The worsening of already existing drainage problems.
Ms. Taylor expressed some disagreement with Mr. Edwards as
to the location of the wooded areas.
It was emphasized that Dr. Hurt is the president of the Hollymead
Homeowners' Association and is a voting member.
There being no further public comment, the matter was placed
before the Commission.
In response to Mr. Bowerman's question, Mr. Pack confirmed that
no drainage plans have yet been received by the County Engineer.
Regarding the current problems with the pond, Mr. Payne confirmed
the Commission had the authority to require whatever is necessary
to alleviate the problems. Mr. Payne also pointed out that
the Homeowners' Association is potentially liable to individual
homeowners.
Ms. Diehl stated she was uncomfortable with all the unanswered
drainage problems, particularly since this development would
impact a lots of homes, and she felt more information is needed
before action can be taken. She indicated she was in favor
of deferral.
Regarding the concerns about the four proposed units that would
back up to Tinker's Cove Road, Mr. Keeler indicated staff will
study this situation further.
Regarding the road issues, Mr. Echols,of the Highway Department,
indicated he could foresee no problems and stated that staff's
conditions of approval would meet any concerns.
There was some discussion about the fees that Hollymead
residents are required to pay for use of the pool. Though
it had been indicated that this facility was free (it being
included in the Homeowners' Association fee), Mr. Peterson
explained that Hollymead residents must pay an additional
$75/family. The pool is operated by the YMCA. A higher
fee is charged to other county residents.
Though Mr. Keeler stated this did not seem to be consistent with 4000
similar facilities in the county, Mr. Payne indicated he did
not feel it was out of line.
W
June 11, 1985
Page 5
It was the consensus of the Commission that further information
was needed on the following issues:
--The 4 duplex units which will back up to Tinker's Cove
Road in regard to more buffering and possibly a different
siting which would be more considerate to adjacent properties.
--Unanswered drainage questions.
Ms. Diehl moved that the Hollymead Section 3, Parcels G and E
Final Plat, be deferred until June 25, 1985.
Mr. Michel seconded the motion which was unanimously approved.
Whippoorwill Hollow Final Plat - Located on the north side of
Thrush Road, north of Rt. 676 and its intersection with Rt. 839.
Proposal to create 4 lots with an average size of ±2 acres
from a 9.5476 acre parcel. Zoned RA, Rural Areas. Tax Map 42,
parcel 75. Samuel Miller Magisterial District.
Ms. Patterson gave the staff report.
The Chairman invited applicant comment.
Mr. Edwards, representing the applicant, stated the applicant
has no objections to the conditions of approval.
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the
Commission.
It was determined that there has been very little revision to
the lot lines and this is the last phase of the Whippoorwill
development.
Regarding the significance of the recetangular line shown
on the plat, Mr. Edwards explained this was a old lot line.
Ms. Diehl moved that the Whippoorwill Hollow Final Plat be approved
subject to the following conditions:
1. The final plat will not be signed until the following
conditions have been met:
a. Issuance of an erosion control permit;
b. Dimension and tie down all drainage easements;
C. Bonding on construction of Skylark Court;
Mr. Cogan seconded the motion which was unanimously approved.
Frank Quayle Preliminary Plat - Located between Flordon and
Farmington off Windsor Road (private). Proposal to locate a 2.6
acre lot leaving 101.932 acres in residue, served by a private
road. Zoned RA, Rural Areas. Tax Map 59, parcel 59A. Samuel
Miller Magisterial District.
Ms. Patterson gave the staff report.
Ev"
June 11, 1985
Page 6
Responding to Ms. Diehl's inquiry about the development rights,
Ms. Patterson explained that this parent parcel retains 4 develop-
ment rights and a potential of 4 additional parcels 21 acres or
greater.
Mr. Cogan brought the applicant's attention to the restrictive
nature of the Farmington Covenants and pointed out that the
Commission has no control over these covenants.
The Chairman invited applicant comment.
Mr. Ralph Feil, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission.
He made the following comments:
--A 2.6 acre lot is being requested rather than a 5.0
acre lot in an effort to preserve as much of the pasture-
land as possible.
--The application should be dealt with on its own merits.
--He feels the proposal meets the goals of the Comprehensive
Plan.
--Farmington Board approval is not required for this proposal
since this particular piece of land is unencumbered by the
Farmington restrictions. However, the applicant has met
with the Farmington Board and they do approve the 2.6 acre
lot.
The Chairman invited public comment.
Dr. H.Y. Charbonnier, a resident of Farmington, addressed the
Commission. His main concern was that this lot not be allowed
to have access onto Brook Road.
Mr. Feil stated the lot would not access Brook Road and indicated
he would have no objections to such a condition being added to
the conditions of approval.
Mr. Niel Harner, a resident of Farmington, addressed the
Commission. He stated he felt the lot should be at least 5
acres, as is currently required of lots in Farmington.
Mr. Mark Keller, representing the applicant, presented some
information to the Commission which indicated that many of
the lots in Farmington are under 5 acres.
Ms. Wittnebel, a resident of Farmington, addressed the Commission
and asked that the access be limited to Windsor Road.
Responding to Mr. Kellerb remarks about lot size, Mr. Harner
stated that the 2.6 acre lots do not comply with the most recent
ordinance.
There being no further public comment, the matter was placed
before the Commission.
n
R%
June 11, 1985
Page 7
Mr. Cogan suggested that a condition be added stating "No
11-4w direct access onto Brook Road." Mr. Payne indicated this
was not necessary since it would not change anything, though
it would do no harm to include it if the Commission so desired.
Mr. Skove stated he could not support the waiver (i.e. to allow
a lot of this size to be served by a private road).
It was determined that of the three alternatives suggested by
staff (I. Planning Commission grants approval under Section
18-36c of the Subdivision Ordinance; II. The access road must be
a public road; or III. The proposed lot must be re -designed to
be a minimum of 5 acres) the first two were for the applicant's
convenience.
Mr. Cogan stated he felt the issue is "Would we be serving the
intent of the Ordinance?"
Mr. Skove stated he could see no reason to change the rule in
this case and moved that the Frank Quayle Preliminary Plat
be approved with the condition that the proposed lot must be re-
designed to be a minimum of 5.0 acres, with staff approval of
the final plat and subject to the following conditions:
1. The final plat will not be signed until the following
conditions have been met:
a. County Attorney approval of: maintenance agreement
for driveway, and inclusion of this lot into
maintenance agreement for Farmington private roads
(if not presently included);
b. Planning staff approval of driveway name;
C. Issuance of an erosion control permit for driveway
and house construction areas;
d. County Engineer approval of stream crossing design;
e. County Engineer approval of driveway profile;
f. Planning staff approval of building site study and
technical notes.
g. No direct access onto Brook Road.
Mr. Gould seconded the motion which was approved (5:1) with
Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Diehl, Mr. Gould, Mr. Michel and Mr. Skove
voting in favor and Mr. Cogan voting against.
The meetina recessed at 9:20; reconvened at 9:35
Greenbrier Park Site Plan - Located on the north side of Greenbrier
Drive just west of its intersection with Rt. 29N. Proposal to
locate an 8,000 square foot office, a 30,000 square foot
warehouse and a 2,000 square foot retail space served by 96 parking
spaces on a 4.34 acre lot. Zoned, HC, Highway Commercial. Tax
Map 61W, Section 01, parcel A5. Charlottesville Magisterial
District.
Ms. Patterson gave the staff report. She added the following
comments:
June 11, 1985
Page 8
--Condition l.a--County Attorney and County Engineer approval
of grading easement on Flowers Bakery site --has been met IMO
and can thus be deleted.
--The applicant will be submitting a subdivision plat and is
requesting that staff be allowed to approve that
administratively.
--The applicant needs to amend his original proffer to allow
for a motel. That amendment will need both Commission
and Board review.
--The applicant has asked that the process be expedited since
he has a tenant (motel) anxious to begin, and is asking
that the May 28 submittal deadline be waived.
The Chairman invited applicant comment.
Mr. Rick Richmond, attorney for the applicant, addressed the
Commission. He explained that after the rezoning had been
approved, with the proffer, the applicant had discovered the
interest in the motel. He stated the current site plan approval
is for an office warehouse and the applicant has no objections
to staff's conditions. He stated there would be a common
entrance for both sites.
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the
Commission.
It was determined a new drainage system was proposed which would
take the drainage underground rather than into detention ponds.
This was thought to be a much preferable plan.
It was determined the issue of the current site plan and the
question of expediting the hearing process should be dealt with
seperately.
Ms. Diehl moved that the Greenbrier Park Site Plan be approved
with administrative approval of the subdivision plat and subject
to the following conditions:
1. A building permit will not be issued until the following
conditions have been met:
a. County Engineer approval of stormwater detention plans
and computations.
b. County Engineer approval of grading and drainage
plans and computations.
C. Issuance of an erosion control permit.
d. Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation approval
of commercial entrances and drainage plans.
e. Fire Official approval.
f. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of final
water and sewer plans.
g. Approval from gas company for construction and
planting proximity to gas lines.
St9
June 11, 1985
Page 9
2. A certificate of occupancy will not be issued until the
following conditions have been met:
a. Fire Official final approval.
b. Staff approval of landscape plan.
3. Compliance with ZMA-84-32.
Mr. Michel seconded the motion which was unanimously approved.
Discussion followed regarding the request to expedite the
approval process for the review of the motel site plan.
Mr. Bowerman indicated he would have no problem with waiving the
scheduling requirement. However, Ms. Diehl indicated she
was opposed to reviewing a site plan and possibly giving
approval before the rezoning (with the amended proffer) is heard.
She indicated she would have no objections to hearing both
items at the same meeting.
Mr. Keeler indicated it might be possible to get both the rezoning
and the site plan on the July 23 agenda.
Mr. Bowerman explained to the applicant that though he was
not opposed to hearing the proposal out of schedule, he was
unsure as to the circumstances and he was not willing to
set a date.
Princeton Homes Corporation Site Plan - Located on the west side
of Rt. 29N about .75 miles from its intersection with Rt. 649.
Proposal to locate a contractor's office, storage yard and
sales office in a 1976 square foot building on a 1.00 acre site.
Zoned H-1, Heavy Industrial. Tax Map 32, parcel 741 Rivanna
Magisterial District.
Ms. Patterson gave the staff report. Mr. Keeler added that the
applicant has not caused the soil erosion problem that currently
exists.
The Chairman invited applicant comment.
Mr. Roger Ray, representing the applicant, addressed the
Commission. He stated that adequate planning would alleviate
the soil erosion problem. He indicated the applicant has no
objections to the conditions of approval.
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before
the Commission.
It was determined the building will be used to store building
materials and will be an "open" storage area. White pines
*"'` are proposed to screen the structure from Rt. 29 and the
residential area. A security fence can be added later if it
is found to be necessary.
C-7*7
June 11, 1985
Page 10
Mr. Keeler pointed out that staff has not yet approved the
proposed landscaping and it is likely that 4-6 foot white pines
will be required. It was determined condition (2.b.)--Planning
staff approval of landscape plan, to include ground cover which
reduces erosion --would address the landscape and screening concerns.
Mr. Cogan moved that the Princeton Homes Corporation Site Plan
be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. A building permit will not be issued until the following
conditions have been met:
a. County Engineer approval of drainage plans and com-
putations.
b. Each future occupant of an industrial character shall
submit to the County Engineer a certified engineer's
report to comply with Section 4.14 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
C. Issuance of an erosion control permit.
d. Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation
approval of commercial entrance, and drainage plans
and computations.
e. Fire Official approval of dumpster location and
screening, and handicapped facilities.
2. A certificate of occupancy will not be issued until the
following conditions have been met:
a. Fire Official final approval.
b. Planning staff approval of landscape plan, to include
ground cover which reduces erosion.
Mr. Gould seconded the motion which was unanimously approved.
Colston Lots 2-7 Final Plat - Located south of Interstate 64,
at the intersection of Routes 708 and 637. Proposal to divide
66 acres into 6 lots ranging from 8 to 16 acres for an average 11
acres. The proposed lots access off Rt. 708. Tax Map 73, parcel
33. Samuel Miller Magisterial District.
Ms. Patterson gave the staff report.
Regarding the possibility that the road may have to be realigned
(because of the disputed strip of land over which the road travels
to serve the lots south of Ivy Creek) Mr. Keeler stated that if
the road is re -located the application will not necessarily have
to be reviewed again.
The Chairman invited applicant comment.
Mr. Mark Osborne, representing the applicant, addressed the
Commission. He indicated there were no objections to the
conditions of approval.
D-Z
June 11, 1985 Page 11
Mr. Edgar Robb, the applicant, addressed the Commission. He
indicated he still was not sure of how the process works and
stated he did not understand why the final approval of
this plat is conditioned upon "Submittal of preliminary
plat showing certified building and septic sites south of Ivy
Creek, and road system" (Condition (3.e.). He indicated
if 5 building sites could not be located south of Ivy Creek,
then only what is located will be developed. He added that
he had not been aware of the 16 foot strip of land in question
until recently and if the matter could not be settled, a
different road alignment is possible.
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before
the Commission.
Mr. Michel moved that Colston Lots 2-7 Final Plat be approved
subject to the following conditions:
1. Waiver of Section 18-34 of the Subdivision Ordinance, to
allow double frontage for lots 3 and 4.
2. Compliance with SP 85-7 Edgar Robb.
3. The final plat will not be signed until the following
conditions have been met:
a. Issuance of an erosion control permit;
b. County Engineer approval of public road and
drainage plans;
C. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation
approval of public road and drainage plans;
d. County Attorney approval of homeowners'
association documents;
e. Submittal of preliminary plat showing certified
building and septic sites south of Ivy Creek, and
road system.
f. Dimension and tie down 100' septic setback from stream.
Mr. Cogan seconded the motion which was unanimously approved.
NEW BUSINESS
Ms. Diehl asked if it would be possible to alert the Commissioners
ahead of time to items that were expected to take a lot of time
or were controversial.
Referring to a previous application (Javor) the Chairman asked
Mr. Keeler to draft a letter to the Highway Department requesting
that the possibility of changing the passing lane on Rt. 250 to a
left turn lane (for traffic coming from Charlottesville and wishing
to turn left into the Boar's Head area) be studied.
50
June 11, 1985
Page 12
OLD BUSINESS 14
Route 29 - Eastern Bypass Study - Presentation of additional
information and description of alternatives as prepared by the
Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation concerning
improvements to Rt. 29 and alternate routes.
Ms. Imhoff introduced Mr. Kenneth Lantz, a State highway planner,
to the Commission who gave a report of the study.
Mr. Lantz's comments included the following:
--The study had been made with two restrictions: (1) To
avoid the watershed; and (2) To avoid existing neighborhoods.
--None of the alternatives would provide the desired levels
of service by the year 2005.
--Most of the traffic on Rt. 29 is local traffic.
--Some of the alternatives would worsen the situation.
--An eastern bypass would not work because it was too far
east to pull traffic off Rt. 29.
--A western bypass could work because it would be closer in.
--The short-term recommendations for improving the situation
are:
1. A six -lane divided, grade seperated highway with
entrances at Hydraulic and Rio Roads.
2. Implement TSM measures, including: Raise parking
rates; Increase bus service; Offer ride -sharing
assistance; Encourage employers to stagger work shifts.
--The long-term recommendations are:
1. To examine the land use policies.
2. Reduce the amount of growth in that area.
--The money is currently available to begin preliminary
engineer on Rt. 29 now, but the state is waiting for the
go ahead from the city and county. It is feasible that
some work could be completed within 5 years. The plans
for a six -lane facility have not actually been drawn.
--The "go ahead" must come from the MPO Policy Board.
Regarding the recently recommended amendments dealing with
an auto -body shop use, Mr. Keeler stated the Board did not
act on the amendments and have requested further study.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10:50.
0�ft 14AR, OL-- -
James R. Donnell , cretary
DS
NOTE: The recording system failed during this meeting, thus
none of the meeting is recorded on tape.
n