HomeMy WebLinkAbout12 01 87 PC MinutesDecember 1, 1987
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on Tuesday,
December 1, 1987, Meeting Room 7, County Office Building, Charlottesville,
Virginia. Those members present were: Mr. Richard Cogan, Chairman;
Mr. Harry Wilkerson; Mr. David Bowerman; Mr. Tim Michel; and Mr. Peter
Stark. Other officials present were: Mr. Ronald Keeler, Chief of Planning;
Mr. David Benish, Planner; Mr. Laura Hill, Planner; Mr. John Pullen, Planner;
and Mr. George St. John, County Attorney. Absent: Commissioners Diehl and
Gould.
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 and established that a
quorum was present. The minutes of November 17, 1987, were approved as
submitted.
Phillips Building Supply Site Plan - Proposal to locate a 28,000 square foot
building to be used for building supply sales and warehousing. The building
will be served by 100 parking spaces and is located on 3.288 acres. Property,
located on the south side of Rio Road between the Daily Progress Newspaper
building and the existing Phillips Building Supply store. Tax Map 61,
Parcels 120I, 120K, 120R and 120V. Zoned HC, Highway Commercial. Charlottes-
ville Magisterial District.
Mr. Benish gave the staff report. The primary issue of discussion for this
application was that of access. The staff report explained that two entrances
were being proposed to serve the site. The eastern access is already in
existence and presently serves the existing store. An additional western
entrance, to be located approximately 45 feet from an entrance to the Daily
Progress site, was also proposed. The Planning staff, the County Engineer
and The Virginia Department of Transportation all agreed that the western
entrance sYould be eliminated. The reasons for this recommendation included:
(1) Close proximity to Daily Progress site could create traffic conflicts
between autos making opposing turning movements out of these entrances; and
(2) This would be the 13th entrance onto Rio Road between Berkmar Drive
and Rt. 29. The report concluded: "Staff is of the opinion that the existing
eastern entrance is adequate to serve this site and that access to the site
should be at this location only. ... Staff recommends approval of the request
only if the western entrance is eliminated pursuant to Section 32.7.2 and
32.7.2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance."
The Chairman invited applicant comment.
The applicant was represented by Mr. John Zunka. He stated the applicant
and staff are in disagreement only on the issue of the western entrance.
He stated the applicant feels the western entrance will: (1) Accommodate
tractor trailer and truck traffic more safely and efficiently; and (2) Separate
retail traffic from delivery and pick up traffic thus preventing retail
traffic from stacking up on Rio Road. The applicant felt that conflict with
the Daily Progress site was the "lesser of two evils." In response to Mr.
Michel's question, Mr. Zunka explained that the existing retail sales would
70
December 1, 1987
Page 2
be relocated to the new building and the existing building would be used for
storage.
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission.
Mr. Jeff Echols, representing the Virginia Department of Transportation,
stated his department was concerned with trying to reduce the number of
entrances onto Rio Road, which is very heavily travelled. He confirmed
that VDOT was concerned with both entering and exiting traffic.
Mr. Stark asked Mr. Echols if VDOT's position would change if the applicant
offered to close one of the existing entrances in exchange for the allowance
of the western entrance. (Mr. Keeler pointed out that the applicant has
not been willing to close any existing entrances. However, Mr. Zunka stated
this was not correct. He stated the applicant had offered to trade the
eastern entrance, the one closest to Hardee's, for the proposed western entrance.
Mr. Benish added that this was not his recollection of the issue. He pointed
out that because of a difference in grade level, it would not be possible
for tractor trailer's to access the existing building, which will be used for
storage, if the eastern entrance was closed.) In response to Mr. Stark's
original question, Mr. Echols stated his department would not be opposed
to even less entrances onto Rio Road, but the closing of the existing eastern
entrance would not change VDOT's recommendation that the proposed western
entrance be eliminated.
Mr. Bowerman stated he supported staff's and VDOT's position. He felt it was
important that the proposal be kept in "perspective." He noted that
Fashion Square Mall only has four entrances and a major competitor of this
business, approximately one mile north, only has two entrances. He noted
that this proposal is for four entrances (note: this included existing
entrances not shown on the plan). He felt three entrances care reasonable
for this operation.
Mr. Bowerman moved that the Phillips Building Supply Site Plan be approved
subject to the following conditions:
1. A building permit will not be issued until the following conditions
are met:
a. County Engineer approval of grading and drainage plans and calculations;
b. Virginia Department of Transportation approval of right-of-way
improvements as outlined in their letter to David Benish dated July 8,
1987, and issuance of a commercial entrance permit;
c. Issuance of an erosion control permit;
d. Contribution of $22,676 towards the construction of the Berkmar
regional detention based on a total site acreage of 3.288 acres;
e. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of sewer lateral connection;
f. Fire Officer approval of hydrant location and storage yard plan;
g. Planning staff approval of revised site plan including the elimination
of the western entrance to Rio Road and final approval of landscape plan;
h. Planning staff approval of plat combining existing parcel into one
parcel.
19
December 1, 1987
Page 3
2. A certificate of occupancy will not be issued until the following
condition is met:
a. Fire Officer final approval.
3. Access to this site shall be from existing eastern entrance only.
4. Administrative approval of the final plat.
Mr. Wilkerson seconded the motion.
Both Mr. Stark and Mr. Michel indicated they were a little uncertain as
to what was the best solution for the access concerns. Mr. Stark wondered
which of the two options (to disallow the western entrance and force
all traffic to use the eastern entrance, or to allow the western entrance
and risk the conflict with the Daily Progress) was most acceptable. Mr.
Michel asked if the applicant might be willing to close both of the existing
entrances in front of the existing building. Mr. Zunka responded that
the applicant could not close both entrances but would be willing to close
the one closest to Hardee's.
Based on Mr. Zunka's comments, Mr. Michel stated he would support Mr.
Bowerman's motion, which included elimination of the proposed western entrance.
Mr. Cogan stated he did not feel elimination of the western entrance would
create a severe problem, and therefore, he was not willing to go against
staff and VDOT recommendation.
Commissioners Wilkerson and Stark indicated they would support the motion.
The previously stated motion for approval passed unanimously.
SP-87-89 Merry VanCleve - Request in accordance with Section 10.2.2(7) of the
Zoning Ordinance for a special use permit to amend condition No. 4 of SP-86-07
Merry Van Cleve which limits enrollment to 15 children. Property, described
as Tax Map 94B, Parcel O1-B-18 is located on the west side of Rt. 623,
near Rt. 616 in the Woodsedge Subdivision. Zoned RA, Rural Areas. Rivanna
Magisterial District.
Mr. Keeler gave the staff report, which explained that the applicant was
requesting an increase from 15 to 22 children. The report concluded:
"Staff opinion is that an increase of seven children does not warrant additional
review under criteria for issuance of a special use permit." Staff recommended
that the original special permit, SP-87-08, be amended to allow 22 children.
Mr. Keeler stated no comments from adjacent property owners had been received.
Ms. VanCleve addressed the Commission. She stated that the neighborhood
has been very supportative of her operation.
The Chairman invited public comment.
/1*
December 1, 1987
Page 4
Ms. Donna Cummings addressed the Commission. She pointed out that this
subdivision is served by a centralySAA she expressed concern about the
possible additional water usage. *40
There being no further public comment, the matter was placed before the
Commission.
Mr. Michel stated that he felt the water issue was important, but he
knew of no history of inadequate water supplies in this area.
Mr. Michel moved that SP-87-89 for Merry VanCleve be recommended to the
Board of Supervisors for approval as follows:
Amend Condition 4 of SP-86-07 as follows:
4. Enrollment limited to 14 22 children.
Mr. Wilkerson seconded the motion.
Mr. Stark asked if staff had looked into the water supply issue. Mr. Keeler
stated he was not familiar with the specifics of the system but the area
has a history of good water supply.
Mr. Cogan pointed out that only 7 additional children are being added, so
the additional water usage would be minimal.
It was determined the Health Department could provide additional information
about the water supply before Board review.
The motion for approval passed unanimously.
The matter was to be heard by the Board on December 16, 1987.
SP-87-95 Top 100 - Request in accordance with Section 23.2.2(13) of the Zoning
Ordinance for a special use permit to allow a drive-in through window for
video rentals. Property, described as Tax Map 32, Parcel 41H, is located on
the south side of Rt. 649 (Airport Road) approximately 1/10 mile west of
Rt. 29. Zoned HC, Highway Commercial. Rivanna Magisterial District.
Mr. Keeler gave the staff report.
In response to Mr. Wilkerson's question about hours of operation, Mr.
Keeler stated that Mr. Horne did not feel it was necessary to address the
hours of operation in this particular location, so there are no conditions
attached limiting the hours of operation. Mr. Keeler stated the paragraph
referring to hours of operation in the staff report should have been deleted.
The applicant was represented by Mr. Burr who offered no additional comment.
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission.
December 1, 1987 Page 5
Mr. Cogan stated he had no problem with the application. He also stated he
was notopposed to administrative approval of the site plan.
Mr. Michel agreed and moved that SP-87-95 for Top 100 be recommended to the
Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the following condition, and
including administrative approval of the site plan:
1. Development in general accordance with the site plan dated October 26, 1987.
Mr. Bowerman seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
The Board was to hear the matter on December 16, 1987.
SP-87-92 Burger Busters, Inc. - Request in accordance with Section 24.2.2(4)
of the Zoning Ordinance for a special use permit to allow a fast food res-
taurant on a vacant parcel zoned PD-SC, Planned Development Shopping Center.
Property, described as Tax Map 61M-00-12-lD is located on the northwest
corner at the intersection of Seminole Trail (Rt. 29) and Dominion Drive
(Rt. 851). Charlottesville Magisterial District.
Ms. Hill gave the staff report. The report concluded: "The Virginia
Department of Transportation, County Engineer, and the County Planning staff,
do not recommend approval of this petition. Based on the design of the site
as submitted, with access to Dominion Drive, staff is of the opinion that
such a use would create safety and traffic hazards, and would excessively
increase traffic volumes in an area that already experiences peak hour
congestion. Staff recommends denial."
Regarding the issue of access, the staff report stated: "Staff has
recommended access to the site that could posture the design such as would be
acceptable to recommend approval of the Special Use Permit. This recommendation
restricts access to the site via the existing travelways of the Shopper's
World parking lot. This would control access to the site, and would con-
strain congestion on site, off the public roadways. While this access may
not be ideal for a fast food drive-in use, many other permitted uses are
available on this site."
Mr. Keeler pointed out two important aspects of the proposal: (1) Access
and circulation, which staff felt could be addressed through conditions of
approval; and (2) Increased traffic on Rt. 29, which could not be addressed
through conditions of approval.
Mr. Cogan stressed that the matter before the Commission was an application
for a special use permit, and not a site plan.
The Chairman invited applicant comment.
Mr. John Green, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission. He
stated that access to a public road is essential to the development of the
site. He stated the applicant has no plans to remove any trees other than
what might be required to obtain sight distance.
December 1, 1987 Page 6
There was a brief discussion about the existing buffer and there seemed
to be some confusion about the particulars of this buffer area.
Mr. Lee Garvin, also representing the applicant, addressed the Commission.
Mr. Garvin stated that the business would generate approximately 300 cars
per day, with 120 of those being between the hours of 12 noon and 1 p.m.
He stated 42% of the operation's business was drive -through. He did
not think the business would have dramatic impact on the traffic in the
area. Mr. Garvin stated that the proposal would not go forward if
the drive-in window was not allowed.
In response to Mr. Stark's question about headlights, Mr. Garvin did not
think this was a concern because of the topography of the property and
the setback requirements.
The Chairman invited public comment.
The following persons, all residents of the Berkeley Subdivision, primarily
Dominion Drive, expressed their opposition to the application. It was
generally pointed out that opposition was not to this particular applicant,
but rather to increased traffic on Dominion Drive and to a drive-in window.
Ms. Susan Crews: Ms. Crews also presented a petition of opposition
on which she had obtained signatures of other
residents of Dominion Drive.
Ms. Joan Graves, President of the Berkeley Homeowners' Association: Ms.
Graves distributed a statement to the Commission and
read this statement. Ms. Graves was concerned about
the method of development on this property. She
felt that access to the property was acceptable only
through Shopper's World. She stressed that her
organization was opposed only to access to Dominion
Drive and to traffic generated by a drive-in window.
Ms. Mary Young
Mr. Larry Petit
Ms. Roberta Colley
Ms. Rosemary Rotessick
It was clarified that the Berkeley residents would not be opposed to a
drive-in window that had access from Shopper's World.
There being no further public comment, the matter was placed before the
Commission.
Mr. Cogan asked Mr. Echols if VDOT could deny a commercial development
access to either Rt. 29 or to Dominion Drive and force access through
the Shopper's World property. Mr. Echols responded that he did not
think his department could deny access to a public road provided
the proposal could meet sight distance requirements, etc.
Mr. Cogan again pointed out that the current application is for a special
permit, specifically to allow for a drive-in window.
%-15
December 1, 1987 page 7
ER
Mr. Cogan stated he concurred with staff's position. He noted particularly
the following statement in the staff report: "In the past, the Planning
Commission has not recommended approval of plans that proposed access to
Dominion Drive for this particular site. Presently, staff cannot recommend
approval of a commercial access to Dominion Drive, especially for a commercial
use that is a high traffic generator, and is allowed only by special use permit.
In the past, the Planning Commission deemed access to Dominion Drive a
"safety hazard." Presently, staff concurs with this justification...."
Mr. Bowerman stated he concurred with Mr. Cogan, VDOT and staff. He added that
he could not support any special permit or rezoning on the site which would
increase traffic.
Mr. Bowerman moved that SP-87-92 for Burger Busters be recommended to the
Board of Supervisors for denial.
Mr. Stark seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
The matter was to be heard by the Board on December 16, 1987.
SP-87-93 Burger Busters, Inc - Request in accordance with Section 24.2.2(4) of
the Zoning Ordinance for a special use permit to allow a fast food restaurant
on a vacant parcel zoned PD-SC, Planned Development Shopping Center.
Property, described as Tax Map 78, Parcel 17D (part of) is located on the west
side of Riverbend Drive approximately 500' south of its intersection with
Rt. 250 in the Pantops Shopping Center. Rivanna Magisterial District.
Mr. Pullen gave the staff report. The report concluded: "It is staff's
opinion that this petition is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the
Zoning Ordinance and staff recommends approval ...."
The applicant was represented by Mr. John Green who offered no additional
comment.
The Chairman invited applicant comment.
Mr. Don Wagner spoke in favor of the proposal, stating that it was entirely
in agreement with the concept of the PD-SC.
There being no further public comment, the matter was placed before the
Commission.
Mr. Michel stated that the application was in order and moved that SP-87-93
for Burger Busters be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval
subject to the following condition:
1. The applicant shall submit a site plan which is in general accordance
with the attached conceptual design.
Mr. Wilkerson seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
The matter was to be heard by the Board on December 16, 1987.
%4v
December 1, 1987
Page 8
Miscellaneous:
Mr. Cogan reported that he had spoken with Mr. Osborne about his Nod
Beaver Creek watershed area proposal, and had advised Mr. Osborne that he
could make a presentation to the Commission at a suitable time, if he so
desired. He stressed that no commitment had been made to Mr. Osborne.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:30.
110
0 John Horne, Secretary
M
?rr