Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10 28 86 PC MinutesOctober 28, 1986 The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on Tuesday, October 28, 1986, Meeting Room 7, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were: Mr. David Bowerman, Chairman; Mr. Richard Cogan, Vice Chairman; Mr. Harry Wilkerson; Ms.Norma Diehl; Mr. Richard Gould; Mr. Tim Michel; and Mr. Peter Stark. Other officials present were: Mr. John Horne, Director of Planning and Community Development; Mr. Ronald Keeler, Chief of Planning; Ms. Amelia Patterson, Planner; Mr. David Benish, Planner; and Mr. Frederick Payne, Deputy County Attorney. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. and established that a quorum was present. The minutes of the October 14, 1986 meeting were approved as submitted. Mill Creek Final Plat - This is a proposal to create 39 lots to be served by inter- nal public roads. The property is zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development (Mill Creek PUD). The property is located on the west side of Avon Street Extended (Route 742), just south of I-64. Tax Map 90, Parcel 36A. Scottsville Magisterial District. Mr. Benish gave the staff report. Referring to condition No. 2 (Grades on driveways not to exceed 20%. All drive- ways with slopes in excess of 7% shall be paved), Ms. Diehl asked if the parking pad for the driveways was included in the County Engineer's review. She was concerned that 20% grade for the parking pad was quite steep. Mr. Benish replied that he was sure the County Engineer would take that into account in his review. Mr. Armm, the County Engineer, added that 3-4% grade would be the maximum allowed for the parking pad. He explained that the 20% is the maximum allowed for the "approach" or the travel area to the parking pad. Mr. Gould questioned why condition No. 6 (Building permits will not be issued on those lots so delineated on the final plat until the County Fire Official gives approval to adequacy of fire protection.) was not more specific, i.e. why is 750 gpm not stated? Mr. Benish replied that while the figure could be stated, the Fire Official would not approve the application unless it reaches that fire flow. It was determined the condition would be left as originally stated since there were other factors which would determine the Fire Official's final requirement. The Chairman invited applicant comment. Mr. Gilliam, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission. He requested "that the 7% language be left as it is but that there be an addition to it which would say 'unless otherwise permitted by the County Engineer' which would let the engineer exercise some independent engineering judgment." He stressed that the applicant has no objection to the theory or objective of the condition but feels that the 7% is not the only issue to be considered when determining which driveways are to be paved. October 28, 1986 Page 2 There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. The Chairman invited comment from Mr_. Armm, the County Engineer. Mr. Armm stated he was in agreement with the applicant in relation to the 7% issue. He asked that the condition be worded in such a way so as to leave the option open to the Engineering Department to determine which driveways must be paved after all factors have been considered. He also asked that the condition be worded in such a way so as to give his department the discretion to inspect the driveways, once constructed, but prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. In response to Mr. Stark's question, Mr. Armm confirmed that grades on driveways would not exceed 20%. Mr. Benish suggested the following be added at the end of condition No. 2: unless otherwise approved by the County Engineer prior to the issuanceofa certificate of occupancy on these lots. It was determined it was not necessary to add a condition addressing the issue of maximum grade for the parking pad. Both Mr. Armm and Mr. Gilliam were in agreement regarding the construction of the parking pads, i.e. a maximum of 5% grade, and construction of the driveways, i.e. a maximum of 20% grade. Mr. Payne confirmed that an amendment to the condition was not necessary. Mr. Stark moved that the Mill Creek Final Plat be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat will not be signed until the following conditions are met: a. County Engineer approval of public road and drainage plans and compu- tations. (All roads in this phase to be built as rural cross section); b. County Engineer approval of final detention basin calculations and details; C. Issuance of an erosion control permit; d. County Engineer and staff review of final plat for technical items; e. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of road and drainage plans and computations; f. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of final water and sewer plan; g. Fire Officer final approval; h. The following note to be added to final plat: "All driveways to be constructed to accommodate two cars parked side -by -side; i. County Attorney approval of homeowner's documents. J7u r7 October 28, 1986 Page 3 irr✓ 2. Grades on driveways not to exceed 20%. All driveways with slopes in excess of 7% shall be paved, unless otherwise approved by the County Engineer prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on these lots. 3. Drainage ditches along roads to be constructed to Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation standards. 4. Maximum slope of 4 to 1 for drainage easement on lots 30 through 34. 5. Public roads in this phase of development shall be dedicated and brought into the public road system when 80% of the certificate of occupancy permits are issued for phase 1, or prior to the signing of a final plat for a third phase of development, whichever shall occur first. 6. Building permits will not be issued on those lots so delineated on the final plat until the County Fire Official gives approval to adequacy of fire protection. Mr. Wilkerson seconded the motion which passed unanimously. All Saints Anglican Church Site Plan - To locate a 4,034 square foot church with 80 fixed seats served by 30 parking spaces. Zoned RA, Rural Areas. SP-85-100 and SP-86-43 All Saints Anglican Church. Property is located on the south side of Route 250 West, east and adjacent to the Greencroft Country club near Ivy. Tax Map 58, Parcel 91E. Samuel Miller Magisterial District. Ms. Patterson gave the staff report. The report stated that the County Engineer had approved a runoff control application and plan and also that the County Engineer was satisfied that the "plan adequately addresses the questions raised by the Engineering Department at the site review meeting." The report pointed out that there was disagreement between the Highway Department and the applicant on the issue of the Highway Department's recommendation for construction of a 200-foot long, 12-foot wide right turn lane with a 200-foot taper lane on Rt. 250 to serve the site. The Highway Department based their recommendation in the speed of traffic on Rt. 250 and the percent of grade for the eastbound traffic. The applicant felt the requirement of a turn lane to serve eastbound traffic was excessive since currently only 1 member of the congregation would appropach from this direction. Ms. Patterson confirmed that staff was in agreement with the applicant regarding the right turn lane. It was determined the church currently has 40 members with hopes of doubling membership in the future. The Chairman invited applicant comment. Mr. Jim Boyd, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission. He presented sketches of the church depicting the elevation. October 28, 1986 Page 4 Regarding the Highway Department's recommendation, Mr. Boyd pointed out that this was a very small group and at those time when traffic volumes might be increased (funerals or weddings), a police officer is engaged to direct traffic. He also pointed out that this is a scenic highway and the applicant is trying to preserve the character of the area. There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. The Chairman invited comment from Mr. Echols, representing the Highway Department. Mr. Echols stated the Highway Department was recommending a right turn lane and a left turn lane (which could be accomplished by re -marking the existing road). He stated the recommendation for a right turn lane was based on the speed and volume of traffic on the road. He stated the Highway Department could not require a right turn lane at this time, but could have if the volume of traffic on Rt. 250, or from this site, were greater. He indicated he did not have a definitive answer as to how large the church would have to be before the Highway Department could require the turn lane. Based on Mr. Echols comments, Mr. Michel stated he felt a right turn lane was not justified and installation at this time would cause a hardship to the applicant. Ms. Diehl moved that the All Saints Anglican Church 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. Issuance of an erosion control permit; b. Issuance of a runoff control permit; C. County Engineer approval of grading and drainage plans; d. County Engineer approval of guardrail to be installed along a protion of the access drive in accordance with August 28, 1986 memo from Michael Armm; e. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water plans; f. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of commer- cial entrance and restriping the center lane; g. Fire Official approval. 2. A certificate of occupancy will not be issued until the following condition has been met: a. Final Fire Official approval. 3. Compliance with SP-85-100 and SP-86-43. October 28, 1986 Page 5 Mr. Wilkerson seconded the motion which passed unanimously. WORK SESSION Site Development Plan - Mr. Keeler led a discussion of the proposed Site Development Plan Ordinance. His report addressed primarily the content of the preliminary plan and the final plan, and, specifically, Section 32.7 MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR IMPROVEMENTS. Mr. Keeler's report included an outline of individual sections which indicated provisions which are new, revised, or the same as in the current ordinance. Staff requested that the Commission adopt a resolution of intent so that the ordinance could be advertised for public hearing. It was determined the County Attorney was very satisfied with the proposed ordinance. Mr. Cogan moved that a Resolution of Intent be adopted to schedule for public hearing the proposed Site Development Plan Ordinance. Ms. Diehl seconded the motion which passed unanimously. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Keeler briefly reviewed upcoming agendas. The Commission indicated they found the aerial photographs, like the one used in the discussions of the Rio/Hilton Connector Road, very helpful. Mr. Horne stated he would purchase a set of these photographs for future use. Mr. Hornecalled the Commission's attention to the current construction activity at the airport. He explained that the extensive excavation which is taking place was originally intended to be a parking garage, but has now been changed to a parking lot. He pointed out that a formal site plan was never executed for the airport (probably through error) and no subsequent site plans have been approved for any of their projects. He explained that when he had administratively approved the site plan for the parking lot, he had advised them that a site plan would be required for any future improvements. However, subsequently, they neglected to submit a site plan for a small extension ramp. He stated that after speaking with Mr. Bowerman and Mr. Gould he had granted administrative approval for this minor project. He stated he has advised the airport director (Mr. Boggs) that any future construction will require a full site plan. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. John Horne; Secretary DS " 19