Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07 13 1999 PC MinutesAlbemarle County Planning Commission July 13,1999 The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a meeting and public hearing on Tuesday, July 13, 1999 in the County Office Building. Members attending were: Mr. William Finley, Chairman; Mr. Jared Loewenstein; Mr. Dennis Rooker; Mr. William Rieley; Mr. William Nitchmann; Mr. Rodney Thomas. Other officials present were: Mr. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning & Community Development; Ms. Elaine Echols, Senior Planner; Mr. Bill Fritz, Senior Planner; Mr. Juandiego Wade, Transportation Planner; Mr. Greg Kamptner, Assistant County Attorney. Absent: Ms. Hilda Lee -Washington, Vice -Chairman. Review of Board of Supervisors Meeting — July 7,1999 Mr. Cilimberg reported that the Board discussed the Brass, Inc. Comprehensive Plan Amendment in their worksession, and heard a presentation from the applicant as well as some information from Mr. Rooker regarding the Planning Commissions recommendations. The applicant provided some additional proposals which would reduce the total square footage one user will have at the center to 160,000 square feet, while making the building appear internally and externally to be separate buildings. The Board will hold a public hearing on the item on July 101, 1999; however, Mr. Cilimberg indicated that they will probably not take action at that time because they plan to hold some follow-up worksessions on the item. Mr. Rooker added that the applicant said that with the reduction to 160,000 square feet, they will not pursue the idea of a superstore — which usually consists of 190,000 square feet. "I think their proposal at this point, in a lot of details, is in line with what we approved. There are still a few differences. Mr. Thomas asked fellow Commissioners if they were aware of the intent of Grand Piano &Furniture to allow the stormwater to drain back to their site. Mr. Cilimberg said he was unclear on that detail, and most of those issues would be dealt with at the zoning and planning process regarding specific site development. Mr. Rieley added that the recommendation from the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors stipulated that the stormwater be dealt with on -site. Mr. Rooker clarified that the applicant did not specifically propose to acquire the property behind Grand Piano so it would become part of the site. Mr. Rooker added that the major departure from the Commission -endorsed proposal was that the applicant wants the language to say that multi -story development would be encouraged, but did not want to have square foot minimum and maximums imposed. Mr. Cilimberg said that the Board had discussed the Advance Mills Bridge, which needs repair; VDOT has asked for the extent of what needs to be done, and the option of replacement. He added that the bridge is considered to be historically significant in an eligible historic village. The Board decided that they wanted to have the necessary maintenance on the bridge to give it another 10 to 15 years of life; and they would like the county and the community to pursue the historic village designation for Advance Mills and begin looking at how replacement might occur. Matters not listed on the agenda None were offered, and the meeting proceeded. Consent Agenda 21 Wilton Country Homes Phase II Preliminary Subdivision Plat: Approval of Private Road — Request w for private road in conjunction with a preliminary plat to create 21 lots on approx. 3.5 acres. Mr. Rieley noted that sidewalks have been required on both sides in similar densities with urban cross - sections, and asked why staff only recommended them for one side. Mr. Cilimberg noted that Wilton Farm Road does not have sidewalk on either side, as it is a rural cross-section, established earlier in the 1990's when it was accessing the apartments. Mr. Cilimberg said that there is also a question of continuation of sidewalks coming off of Wilton Farm Road, and will eventually continue over to Fontana. Mr. Rieley said, "With these tiny little lots, I think we owe people sidewalks." Agreeing with Mr. Rieley, Mr. Rooker said, "We're trying to approach a development pattern in the county where we have sidewalks on both sides... here you've got lots on both sides of the roads." Mr. Rooker then asked what the appropriate time would be to raise the sidewalk issue. Mr. Cilimberg replied that with an older development, there was not as much concern for sidewalks; in the Fontana development (with less density), a pathway system was developed which ultimately the new development may connect into. "We're trying to do the best job of bringing on some of the concepts of today where we have concepts of prior development that were different. We're not dealing with a clean slate out here." Mr. Rieley added that when there is a VDOT rural section, curb and gutter and then six feet of sidewalk, it's an enormous area of pavement from one side to the other. "I want to push hard for sidewalks on both sides of streets — and they are streets when they get to this density; but I'd feel a lot more comfortable pushing on it if we had a... better cross section." Mr. Loewenstein asked about the schedule for getting sidewalks placed on Route 20, beginning at Wilton Farm. Mr. Cilimberg replied that it is the highest priority sidewalk in the CIP, and its cost alone is more than the CIP dollars available to do it. Mr. Cilimberg noted that it is being looked at as a path, not a sidewalk because Route 20 is rural cross section, and is not scheduled for improvements that incorporate sidewalks, so the county will have to fund it with CIP monies. He said that the county requested that the sidewalk fund receive additional monies through an enhancement grant by the state, but the request was not approved. Mr. Loewenstein expressed concern about the large numbers of pedestrians, including young children, along Route 20. "It's really a disaster waiting to happen, and as we keep increasing the density in that area, we're going to add to the pedestrian traffic." SP 99-37 East Glenmore — Western Ridge Phase 5 Critical Slopes Waiver Request for waiver to grade critical slopes on eight lots within the proposed Phase 5 of Western Ridge. The preliminary subdivision plat creates a total of 34 lots on 14.35 acres. The property is zoned R-4, Residential. Mr. Rieley asked if the rural cross-section with small lots is on the plan because it is a continuation of the same cross section elsewhere. Mr. Cilimberg confirmed that that is the case, adding that there is another ,II section of Western Ridge in a different section that was zoned last year to be urban cross-section with 22 sidewalk. He said that the Phase 5 section is a continuation near the Lickinghole Basin of sections that have already been platted. MOTION: Mr. Loewenstein moved, Mr. Rooker seconded approval of the Consent Agenda. The motion passed unanimously. Public Hearin Items SP 99-33 N.G.I.C. Access Road — Proposal to fill in the flood plain of Herring Branch in association with road construction providing access to the proposed National Ground Intelligence Center (NGIC). Property is located on the eastern side of Route 29 North, approximately '/Z mile north of the North Fork Rivanna River. Property is described as Tax Map 32, Parcel 5C1, and consists of 28.9 acres and is zoned LI, Light Industrial. The property is recommended for Industrial Service in the Piney Mountain Community. Applicant requests deferral to July 27, 1999. Public comment was invited. None was offered, and the matter was placed before the Commission. MOTION: Mr. Rooker moved, Mr. Rieley seconded approval of deferral of SP 99-33 to July 27, 1999. The motion passed unanimously. SP 99-38 Covesville — CV 141— Request for special use permit to amend the antenna type on an existing telecommunications facility in accordance with Section [10.2.2.6] of the Zoning Ordinance which allows for radiowave transmission towers. The property, described as Tax Map 109 Parcel 9C, contains 56.6 acres, and is located in the Scottsville Magisterial District at the end of Lackey Lane [Route #838] just east of Monocan Trail Road [Route 29]. The property is zoned RA, Rural Areas. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Area 3. Staff requests deferral to July 27, 1999. Public comment was invited. None was offered, and the matter was placed before the Commission. MOTION: Mr. Rooker moved, Mr. Loewenstein seconded approval of deferral of SP 99-38 to July 27, 1999. The motion passed unanimously. SP 99-41 Cook Mountain — CV 144 — Request for special use permit to amend the antenna type on an existing telecommunications facility in accordance with Section [10.2.2.6] of the Zoning Ordinance which allows for radiowave transmission towers. The property, described as Tax Map 98 Parcel 22, contains 49 acres, and is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District on the east side of Thackers Lane [Route 8041 just east of Monocan Trail Road [Route 29]. The property is zoned RA, Rural Areas. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Area 3. Staff requests deferral to July 27, 1999. Public comment was invited. None was offered, and the matter was placed before the Commission. MOTION: Mr. Rieley moved, Mr. Thomas seconded approval of deferral of SP 99-41 to July 27, 1999. The motion passed unanimously. SP 99-45 Britts Mountain — CV 147 — Request for special use permit to amend the antenna type on an existing telecommunications facility in accordance with Section [ 10.2.2.61 of the Zoning Ordinance that 23 EWA allows for radiowave transmission towers. The property, described as Tax Map 75 Parcel 22, contains 34.7 acres, and is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District on the east side of Monocan Trail Road [Route 29] 1.9 miles south of I-64. The property is zoned RA, Rural Areas and EC, Entrance Corridor Overlay District, The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Area 4. Staff requests deferral to July 27, 1999. Public comment was invited. None was offered, and the matter was placed before the Commission. MOTION: Mr. Rooker moved, Mr. Rieley seconded approval of deferral of SP 9945 to July 27, 1999. The motion passed unanimously. SP 99-32 Hawksbill Pottery Request for special use permit to allow a home occupation for a pottery -making business in accordance with Section [10.2.2.31] of the Zoning Ordinance which allows for home occupations. The property, described as Tax Map 62 B 1 Block C, Parcel 12 in the Key West Subdivision, contains 1.918 acres and is located in the Rivanna Magisterial District at 346 Key West Drive (State Route 1445). The property is zoned RA, Rural Areas. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural. Mr. Wade presented the staff report, indicating that the proposal is for a home -based pottery business with two employees. He said the applicant currently has a Class A Home Occupation without employees; the special use permit will allow two employees and will allow him to conduct open houses. Mr. Wade explained that the two employees will be apprentices who will travel to the house each weekday; deliveries to the site will take place approximately four times per year in a regular size van. He added that the applicant is requesting to hold three one -day open houses each year where items will be displayed and sold; however, the majority of the applicant's items will be sold at arts & craft shows outside the home. Mr. Wade said that the home occupation will take place in the basement of the applicant's home; the size of the basement is 1,614 square feet, and the Planning Commission must grant a waiver for any size over 1,500 square feet. He concluded that staff has not identified any component of the proposal that is inconsistent with the public safety, and general welfare of the public. He added that an electric kiln will be used, and there will be no fumes or chemicals associated with the use. Staff recommends approval of the Hawksbill Pottery with conditions as outlined in the staff report. Mr. Wade indicated that there have been many calls both in favor and against the SP. He presented several letters in opposition to the permit (Attachments "A" and "B"), and stated that others have been included in the staff report. Mr. Thomas asked Mr. Wade to clarify the potential arrangement for two employees. Mr. Wade explained that the applicant can have no more than two people who don't live on site (ie. Family) working there. Noting a petition signed by over 100 residents objecting to the application for a Class B permit, Mr. Rooker asked if there was anything similar supporting the proposal. Mr. Wade responded that there is no petition supporting the matter, but some support was expressed in letters as mentioned. 24 Mr. Rooker asked if staff was aware of any similar cases where the Commission has granted waivers of square footage requirements for home occupations. Mr. Kamptner mentioned the John Buscarino guitar -making home occupation. The applicant, Mr. Scott Supraner, addressed the Commission, stating that his business is not a large commercial venture and describing himself as an artist who works at home. He said that over the years he has had several assistants come into his shop to help him with studio work and apprentice in his shop. Mr. Supraner added the conditions set forth by staff are specific to his request, and anything he would choose to do beyond those conditions would require an additional application. He stated, "I have no such intentions," adding that there has been some confusion as to what the permit allows. W. Supraner acknowledged that any other application would be reviewed according to its own merits so that his current application stands independently. He explained his selection process for hiring students during which he interviews them and assesses their skills. Mr. Supraner said his studio is not an impersonal, large place, but an "intimate place" where there is constant supervision and sharing. He continued that all the work that goes on in the studio is handmade work, and is not facilitated by industrial equipment or manufacturing. Mr. Supraner added that most of his sales occur outside his home, in arts & crafts shows around the country. He said the three open houses are primarily an opportunity for customers to visit the studio, where attendance is comparable to that of a yard sale. Mr. Nitchmann asked how many visitors would be expected for an open house. Mr. Supraner replied that he has no way of predicting attendance, but said he would send out 300 invitations and expect possibly 20% of those invited to attend. Mr. Nitchmann asked if Mr. Supraner had to rent a building that would cost $10,000 per year what it would do to his business. Mr. Supraner replied, "It would not have positive repercussions." Mr. Nitchmann asked if it would have a significant impact on his ability to support his family. Mr. Supraner replied that "it would be a difficult position for me to assume, and that's why I have searched for a long time to find a house that accommodates me in the way that I need." Mr. Nitchmann asked the applicant to explain his dust -collection process. Mr. Supraner explained that he does not have a lot of dust, and said the basement is composed of three garage spaces and three small interior rooms so that the garage doors can be opened, but "generally there isn't a lot of dust." He added that it is not toxic and is not inordinate to having a dusty basement, adding that his only work is hand -thrown or built. Mr. Finley asked if he were the applicant's neighbor, if he would notice any difference if the permit were switched from a Class "A" to Class `B" status. Mr. Supraner responded, "You wouldn't. The studio is really quiet. The potter's wheels don't make noise. The kilns don't make noise .... aside from the two assistants that would arrive at my house and leave each day, there wouldn't be any other traffic, and I myself would not be leaving to work and returning, so in a sense their traveling supplants the traveling that my wife and I would do to work each day. It's a very quiet studio, and I personally can't see how it would impact my neighbors. It's very private the way the house is situated. The shop faces out the back of the building and the 25 driveway circles down to a lower level, so really everything is out of view of the street, and all the work is done inside." Mr. Thomas asked if the apprentices would add to a significant amount to Mr. Supraner's income. Mr. Supraner said that he has the employees, in part, to expand his income. Mr. Thomas commented, "You're in a neighborhood that is strictly a neighborhood actually." Mr. Supraner replied that his neighborhood is zoned rural and when he purchased the house, he researched the zoning because it was important to find a place where he could work in his home. "The rural zoning is very permissive. In fact, in the zoning ordinances, it doesn't encouraged residential development of the rural areas for the reasons of services that the county provides not being as readily accessible. I felt that the rural zoning really was the most appropriate zoning I could find." In response to Mr. Rooker's question about his intention to make retail sales beyond the open house dates, Mr. Supraner responded that within the Class A license there is provision for sales of handmade items for the home, noting that if a customer called him needing a gift, he would allow them to come to his house. Mr. Supraner explained that the Class B does not indicate sales from the home except for the open houses. Mr. Rooker asked him if it would be acceptable for the Commission to consider a condition that there would not be any retail sales at the site except pursuant to open houses. Mr. Rooker expressed concern that the house is in a densely populated neighborhood, and is not a rural area where the houses are apart. He added that if every house had people coming and going for retail sales, then the neighborhood might not accommodate the traffic. "We have to consider that we would treat you the same way we would treat anybody else in Key West [or a similar neighborhood] who might come in for an application. In my mind, three open houses a year is probably not that significant because people have yard sales... and it doesn't appear to me that having two employees come to your house a day and work in the basement is going to impose a significant burden on the neighborhood. But I think [it could be problematic] if you open the door to what could amount to daily retail sales....1 would have difficulty supporting this application unless there is a limitation on retail sales." Mr. Supraner noted that there is currently a limit in the ordinance of 5 to 10 customer visits per week, adding that the problem with imposing limitation of no sales other than the open houses is those sales don't fall under the provisions of the Class B, but already exist under the provisions of the Class A. "Every resident in Key West has the right at this moment to operate a Class "A" business which allows him or her 5 to 10 customer visits per week. Restricting the Class B will not accurately address the question that you've raised to me." Mr. Kamptner noted that the reason for the Class `B" application is the size of the space requested and the addition of employees. Mr. Rooker commented that when you expand the size of the use and bring employees in, the opportunity for retail sales get multiplied. 26 In Mr. Supraner noted that the Class B as his application is written does not request any change in the customer visits as described in Class A. The Class B has only been submitted to enhance the Class A activities in very specific ways: the two employees and the allotted size of the studio and open houses. "There's no requested change on the daily sales activities or limitations placed on those. That already exists in the Class A." Mr. Cilimberg said that he assumes that there may have been some determination in the zoning department as to what constituted permissible sales. Mr. Kamptner said that supplementary regulations stipulate that no traffic shall be generated by such home occupations in greater volumes than what would normally be expected in a residential neighborhood, adding that the zoning administrator would have to determine whether a certain set of facts has increased the traffic volume. He added that both Class A and Class B permits allow sales on the premises, but sales are limited to items that are handcrafted on the premises. He confirmed that the Commission does have the capacity to establish a condition in any application that would provide further limitations, emphasizing that each home occupation permit would be considered independently. Mr. Rieley asked for the applicant to describe the sizes of the pieces of pottery. Mr. Supraner replied that they are small table service items such as bowls, plates, etc. Mr. Rieley asked if the number of pottery wheels and kilns would change with the addition of the two apprentices. Mr. Supraner replied, "Not at all." He said he has four kilns, each operating on 40 to 45 amps, that do not run continuously, and added that it is helpful to have a back-up kiln; generally there are periods when no kilns are running. Mr. Supraner added that he uses non -toxic, lead-free glazes. Mr. Finley asked him what percentage of sales occur from his home. Mr. Supraner replied, "None," adding that he really doesn't use his home as a place to make sales, and hasn't presented it that way to his customers. He said that most of his sales are made at shows, and his time at home is needed for work in making pottery, not selling it. "It's really more of a by appointment only sort of thing, that I would make sales at the house... but I don't advertise my studio as a retail shop by any means." Mr. Loewenstein asked how many cars could be parked in his driveway. Mr. Supraner replied that he could probably fit 5 or 6 at the bottom of the driveway. Public comment was invited. Ms. Ina Kuzeman addressed the Commission, explaining that when she and her husband built their home over 25 years ago, Key West was a single-family residential subdivision zoned R-l. She said today Key West is still an entirely residential single-family subdivision, zoned RA, a change which happened through an inadvertent mistake. Ms. Kuzeman said the change was made without the input or knowledge of the residents, and was never rectified. She reported that about 10 years ago, the first application for a Class B permit in the neighborhood came before the Commission; Planning recommended approval, but the Board recommended denial. Ms. Kuzeman added that a lot of families have moved in, many of which are retirees and families with children. 27 She said that residents moved into Key West for safety and quality of life; children can walk to pool, ride bikes, and play and adults can walk and visit neighbors. "We are still a community where people know one another and care for one another, watch out for one another. Now how can that change with a Class B business license? I appreciate his intention, but the facts are family members plus two employees in a 1600 square foot space can produce a lot of pottery. And what about the next business .... once customer knows where to find the products and they like them, how can you police them not coming?" Ms. Khaki Pearson, who lives with her husband with 2 children — ages 7 and 9 — across the street and down the road from the applicant, said she also applied for a Class B permit for her small plant business. Ms. Pearson reported that before she moved in to the neighborhood, she sent letters to her future neighbors, met with them at Key West board meetings and "was amazed at the opposition." She said that she withdrew her application because of respect for the neighborhood, adding that the Supraners live on very dangerous curve, where one young Key West resident was hit by a car several years ago. Ms. Pearson said that cars parked on the road near the curve could present a problem for oncoming traffic, especially numerous children on bikes, She added that the Supraners want to use over half of their house for business, which should be conducted in area zoned for business. Ms. Pearson said the permit would set a precedent for more intrusive and incompatible businesses within the residential area. "How could we keep out a palm reader with a neon sign?" She reported that she found out from the planning office that there had been almost 100 Class B requests in the past 30 years, of those 6 were in or very close to planned residential communities and all 6 had withdrawn their requests. Ms. Pearson concluded that county staff told her that the county does not have time to monitor Class B permits, and someone could "spoil it for all of us". She asked other Key West residents opposed to the permit to stand. Mr. Peter Lobo, next door neighbor to the Supraners, addressed the Commission. He said he is unhappy with the situation, pointing out that the Supraner's four cats are bothering him. Mr. Lobo said that even if the Class B is granted, the county has no way of monitoring situation. He said that apprentices are unreliable and inconsistent, and added that allowing one cottage industry will make it difficult to stop other requests. Mr. Lobo also expressed concern about the possibility of a sign. Robert Bossie of Key West spoke to the Commission, stating that no one has addressed where the cars would be parked during the open houses. Monica Lobo, next -door neighbor of the Supraners, addressed the Commission. She said that residents are not in a position to know extent of business because the Supraners are new to the neighborhood. Ms. Lobo said, "It is strange to me why someone whose entire livelihood depends on this business chooses to buy into a neighborhood which is totally residential, and then expects neighborhood to change to support this industry." She added that if both the Plant Lady and Hawksbill Pottery permits were granted now, with 10 people permitted to buy retail from each business, and additional employees on each site, quite a bit of traffic would be generated. Ms. Lobo added that apprentice positions are not permanent jobs, have no benefits, and have a constant turnover, bringing more and more "strangers" into the neighborhood. She concluded that the houses are close together in the neighborhood, adding that subdivisions constructed today have more restrictions. 28 cm Mrs. Kretzinger, who has lived in subdivision for 30 years, addressed the Commission. She suggested that the Supraners be given a permit on a trial bases; if there are dire consequences as the neighbors have purported, then there could be another hearing to address the problems. Ms. Kretzinger said she would not mind traffic as others might. Mr. Richard Bradley, who lives four doors down from the Supraners, said he is opposed to this application because it will be a "precedent -setting thing," adding that "once somebody gets their foot in the door... you're going to be pretty hard-pressed to deny any application." Mr. Bradley said that there should not be a great deal of sympathy for the Supraners because they knew when they moved in that there were 240 residences there and no businesses. "We love the neighborhood as it is, and we implore you to keep it that way." Key West resident Elizabeth Shupe told Commissioners that a lot of the speakers are using speculation, and don't know the Supraner family when assessing the situation. Ms. Shupe says she has known the family for a long time, and everything Mr. Supraner has said about the nature of their business is true. Ms. Shupe says she encouraged the Supraners to move to the neighborhood because the zoning would allow them to work out of their home. She emphasized that their request is just for 100 square feet additional usage in their basement, and three open houses would be nothing more than having a yard sale. Ms. Shupe added that her next door neighbors have had three parties in their home with cars parked on both sides of the street. "I think you need to stick to the issue, and not base [your decision] on speculation and paranoia." Mr. Jason Lobo, who has grown up in the neighborhood, addressed the Commission, stating that there are not that many neighborhoods for middle class families. Mr. Lobo cautioned that if other houses became a business there would not be the same openness and sense of community. "I hope this situation won't change where I can feel at home in all my neighbors' houses." There being no further public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. Mr. Rooker asked about potential signs that would be permitted to be placed on the property. Mr. Wade responded, "They are permitted to have a small sign, but they have said that they will not put up a sign." He noted that Condition #6 states they will be able to put up a sign only for the open houses. Mr. Rooker asked what the sign limitation is under a Class A permit. "Is there any difference between the sign restriction on a Class A and the sign restriction on a Class B." He noted that if the Commission did not approve the application for a Class B, the applicant would still operate under a Class A. Mr. Rieley said he would like to know also. He asked the applicant to return for follow-up. Mr. Thomas asked if Key West has deed restrictions. Mr. Loewenstein responded that there probably are none because of the time period during which that subdivision was approved. 29 Mr. Rooker noted that there were probably covenants and restrictions that were recorded when the W neighborhood was originally planned. He added, "Even if we were to grant a special use permit, if there covenants and restrictions that say single-family homes only, then perhaps there would be a violation of covenants and restrictions in the recorded document." Mr. Nitchmann asked staff if they looked into the covenants and restrictions on properties during the special use permit process. An audience member interjected that the covenants and restrictions for Key West have expired. Mr. Wade said that it is not routinely done as staff does not have the resources to do the research. Mr. Loewenstein asked if the permit were approved, and deed restrictions banning commercial activity were discovered prior to the item going to the board, would that impact the item. Mr. Cilimberg said, "That's a private matter, and it's enforceable by the homeowner's association... with the owner. The reason we don't do that research is that that sits separately in law from land use decisions .... it's not supposed to be a matter of consideration." The applicant re -addressed the Commission to answer questions and give his rebuttal. Mr. Rieley said, "It seems to me that most of the concerns focus around traffic, which it seems to me is pretty much a net wash, with two people staying home and two people coming in. The retail sales... are a potential generator of additional traffic. It does not seem to be an important part of your *40, business and your operation, and I'd like to get a better sense of how important that is to you." Mr. Supraner answered, "It's not very important... the open houses would be appreciated. Retail sales on a daily basis are not that important to how my business operates." He added that "it is important to think in terms of actualities," stating that even if there were three home occupations on the street, that only amounts to one extra car coming once a day to one location, staying for a short period of time and leaving. Mr. Supraner emphasized that that does not constitute any more traffic than a friend visiting. "This is not a lot of traffic we're talking about, even should there be a number of such home occupations on the street." He added that he is disturbed that there are "images filling people's mind at this point that are not based in real perceptions." Mr. Supraner concluded that he understands the apprehension, but stressed the importance of keeping an eye on the realities of the situation. In response to Mr. Loewenstein's question, the applicant confirmed that he is currently using most of the basement space now. Mr. Supraner presented a summary statement, emphasizing that his business is not a large scale commercial operation, and according to the zoning ordinances, commercial zoning is very specific and very separate from home occupations. "There is not an area in this county where I could go and get a Class B permit by right." He said he moved to Charlottesville with his family because he liked the schools, neighborhoods, and shopping. Mr. Supraner said the situation has arisen because he V, lives and works in his own home, and any place he chose to live, he would only be granted a Class a 30 99 home occupation permit by right, and would have to apply for a Class B in any situation. He added, "if the zoning was misleading than I was misled because that's the way the property read to me when I went to purchase it." He added that there are a lot of misconceptions about Khaki Pearson's Class B application; Mr. Supraner said it wasn't denied, but was never presented to the board. He said that he spoke before the Key West homeowner's association, and was told that they were afraid of the Class B. He said they told him that he could operate his business as desired provided he would not go before the county and request the Class B. Mr. Supraner emphasized that it is not the intention of the ordinance to transform a residential community into a commercial environment. "There's only one way to get a Class B permit, and that's what I'm doing right now. I believe whoever wrote the ordinance feels that home occupations are entitled on some level to the permission that I'm requesting, or else why would the ordinance be in place in all?" He concluded that the Planning Department has done an excellent job of considering the needs of the community. "I really hope that we can find some area of agreement here." There being no further discussion, the matter was placed before the Commission. Mr. Kamptner reported that zoning regulations allow for "a sign," but the sign ordinance does not have criteria that apply to home occupation signs, although they define the term "home occupation sign." He said there is a 24 square foot limitation in the ordinance, but the Commission can place restrictions on the specific proposal. Mr. Cilimberg said that they have not been able to determine from the ordinance what the applicable standard for the sign is. "Class A and Class B can both have one sign; they're both covered by the same supplementary regulation." Mr. Rooker said he cannot support the application, but said that the applicant has a "very sympathetic" and well -presented case. "In my mind, we've got a neighborhood with 250 homes in a relatively tightly -packed area. The roads, I don't think, are VDOT standard roads. They're small, fairly narrow roads with no sidewalks, there are no streetlights in the neighborhood." Mr. Rooker added that the Commission would be "starting down a slippery slope if we start permitting Class B home occupation permits in neighborhoods of this kind." Mr. Rooker noted there would be a difference if the property were in a very rural areas where the houses are far apart, where there aren't substantial objections from neighbors, adding that there have been a number of home occupations come before the Commission in the past, and have rarely had substantial neighborhood opposition. "One of the reasons for that is typically they're in more rural areas, not people seeking to... create business situations where they hire and bring employees into their homes in neighborhoods." Mr. Loewenstein agreed. "There's a place for everything. In this subdivision, certainly a Class A home occupation is [not] something that would impact in a negative way the character of the neighborhood. But I think a Class B home occupation is enough of an escalation in some areas including this one, which is quite densely populated, that I would have a great deal of difficulty with this." He added that when the Commission makes decisions, it needs to do so for the benefit of the many rather than the few. "Given the physical conditions of the neighborhood, and given the 31 cm opinions of what appears to be a very clear majority of the members of that community, I would have to say I can't support it either." Mr. Thomas agreed. "I feel that a person should be allowed to make a living, but this is really a well -established neighborhood, and I'm a firm believer in protecting our neighborhoods from commercial infestation, and it should stay a neighborhood.... Mr. Supraner should look for commercial space if he want's to enlarge his business and attempt to be a little more congenial with his neighborhood." Mr. Rieley said, "I appreciate a community that is happy with itself to the extent that they are reluctant to entertain change." He added that a good deal of the concern regarding the Class B permit is exaggerated, citing the example of his own fears about heavy traffic when he moved'/4 mile from a church — which turned out to be unfounded. "I think that probably a retail sales restriction is reasonable... the applicant has volunteered a sign restriction, which also limits him beyond what the Class A license would. I think in general home occupation is laudable, also the issue of traffic is basically a wash... if two people are staying home and not making trips and two people are coming in, and there are no retail sales, I don't see where the hoards of traffic are coming from that are going to, as one person said, `tear our neighborhood asunder.' Mr. Rieley said he would support the application, because it is a modest increase and does not set a precedent. Mr. Finley said he spent 20 years of his life in five different countries, some of which had per capita incomes less than some Key West residents would make per hour. "Cottage industries were primary... philosophically and in good conscience I could never vote against this application... If I were a next door neighbor, I don't think I would mind it at all. Mr. Nitchmann said he could also support the application, if the retail sales portion is eliminated and a sign restriction is attached. He added that he is surprised that Key West is still designated in the Rural Area, and said that a larger discussion of rural areas needs to take place to prevent this conflict in the future. Mr. Nitchmann said that the applicant did everything right and did his research on what zoning would permit him to have a home occupation, just to find out that the opposition was great. He said that the nature of Mr. Supraner's business is not one that generates a lot of traffic, and yard sales probably generate more traffic. Mr. Nitchmann suggested making a resolution of intent to look at these issues, so that subdivisions with greater density will not allow Class B. Mr. Cilimberg said that the county is planning to look at uses associated with rural areas when the Commission meets with Board of Supervisors in the near future, when both groups meet to discuss rural area use and the future of rural areas for development rights and for the types of uses that are supportive of the rural area. He noted that Key West in the 1989 Land Use Plan had been proposed to be included urban area, as it is a natural boundary out from where the current boundary is. "When that was proposed, it was met with opposition by some people in Key West ... I think we have a situation here where we have a neighborhood — a residential area — that was established back before what we now have in zoning in our land use plan that likes its residential nature but also thinks of itself as being out of the rural area." Mr. Cilimberg added that occasionally there is a "fringe" situation with residential developments that are adjacent to the areas that are designated for development and are being called rural, but are not truly rural, and don't want to be called urban. 32 n Mr. Nitchmann moved, Mr. Rieley seconded approval of SP 99-32 with modifications to the conditions as follows: (6) No permanent signs shall be posted on the property. Temporary signs are allowed to advertise the three open houses on the day of the event. (8) Retail sales shall only be permitted on the day of the aforementioned open houses. In a 3-3 vote, with Mr. Nitchmann, Mr. Rieley and Mr. Finley voting in favor and Mr. Rooker, Mr. Thomas, and Mr. Loewenstein voting against, the Commission failed to make a recommendation for SP 99-32. SP 99-29 Michie Tavern Request to amend a special use permit conditions, in accordance with Section [10.2.2.36] of the Zoning Ordinance, which allows for gift and antique stores in the Rural Areas. Specifically, the request is to allow for the sale of products in the individual craft shops in addition to the Country Store and to allow for more than 50% of the items to be displayed and sold to be non -handcrafted. The property, described as Tax Map 77 Parcel 27, contains 6.709 acres, and is located in the Scottsville Magisterial District at 683 Thomas Jefferson Parkway [Route 53] across the street from the intersection of Route 53 and Route 1102. The property is zoned RA Rural Areas. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Area. Prior to the discussion, Mr. Rieley said that he has worked closely with the applicant on some projects, and would prefer not to participate in the discussion and vote. Ms. Echols presented the staff report, referencing a map of the Michie Tavern site. She indicated that this SP request is to amend conditions to a previous SP that relates to where and how sales can occur on the site. Ms. Echols reported that in the 1970's, there was a site plan and special use permit approved that would add more buildings to the site. She said that there has been a plan for a number of years to add buildings, and when Michie Tavern was first envisioned, it was to be a Williamsburg -style attraction with a lot of open exhibits, including houses exhibiting colonial crafts and trades. Ms. Echols said the houses have not been built yet, but the plan is to bring existing buildings from other places and reconstruct them on site with demonstrations of colonial trades within and just outside of them. She continued that the applicant wants to remove the restriction of sales being just at the country store, and also eliminate the condition of handcrafted items being 50% of what's sold on site. Ms. Echols added that the applicant also wants to extend the time period of exhibits to include colonial through Civil War eras. She said that the future buildings will require site plan approval because the site plan has expired and was last reviewed in 1993. Mr. Loewenstein asked if the buildings proposed correspond to the original concept at the time the 1993 site plan was approved. Ms. Echols said yes, and they also correspond to the original concept back in the 1970's with the original special use permit. Mr. Finley asked if there were crafts and demonstrations to be carried out in the additional buildings. Ms. Echols responded that that was the original idea, and that is what is being planned now. 33 Mr. Loewenstein asked if the kinds of sales and things to be sold in the buildings would correspond to the crafts being demonstrated, whether or not they are actually made there. Mr. Rooker asked, "If we were to adopt a proposal with the change in conditions requested, it would permit sales in all of these buildings, correct?" Ms. Echols replied, "Yes... if you were to adopt the amendments that were requested, they would allow sales in all those buildings." Mr. Finley noted that what staff is recommended is something slightly different than what the applicant is requesting. Ms. Echols confirmed this. Ms. Echols said that Michie Tavern is not strictly historic, and is not strictly gifts and crafts, but is an interesting combination of both. She said that the tavern has been a tourist destination since 1928, but the restaurant has only been in operation since 1969. Ms. Echols said that currently, gifts are sold in the small area outside of the restaurant and also in the grist mill. She noted that the critical issue that staff was concerned with had to do with the rural area aspect of increasing the commercial sales area. "In our rural areas, we limit commercial activities, so that we aren't expanding commercial activities into the rural areas. It doesn't really relate to generally the agricultural uses there. Michie Tavern being a unique site made this analysis a little more difficult." Ms. Echols reported that when staff measured the square footage of the existing and proposed buildings in addition to the country store area, they deduced that that was 2/3 more than what is allowed in a country store. She added that it concerned staff because it could constitute an expansion of commercial activity in the rural area that didn't really support the rural areas populations. She continued that the issue of crafts is interesting because it was originally designed to be handcrafts on -site like soap, candles, and blacksmith items; originally it was to be on -site, but the permit stipulated that 50% could be produced elsewhere. Ms. Echols noted that now none of the items sold are handcrafted on -site because there have not been facilities to produce them, and there are a fair number of non -handcrafted items also — many of which do not relate to the colonial period. She said that while this violates the current condition, it doesn't seem to be problematic in terms of how it affects the rural areas. Ms. Echols said that staff recommends approval of eliminating the condition that 50% of the inventory be handcrafted and handcrafted on site, and also recommends that the condition relating to the structures having an 18'' century appearance be modified to include the 19ffi century as well. However, staff does not recommend approval of the request to extend sales out to all of the other craft shops. Mr. Nitchmann asked, "Why didn't you do that. That seems very strange to me. It's all self- contained here, it's all on the property. It's like a Williamsburg thing where you can buy things in the different shops in Williamsburg that are built there, and even some things that aren't even made in those particular shops that are associated with those shops. What's your concern about that?" Ms. Echols responded that there are two levels of concern: the rural areas policy of not increasing commercial area, as country stores are one gauge of sales, and they are restricted to 4,000 square 34 feet. She added that she could not uncover whether that same criteria was used when then special use permit was originally issued for the gristmill area. Mr. Nitchmann said, "We're not really talking about a general store here. We're talking about something that is a tourist attraction. And that's why people stop there on the way to or from Monticello. I think your argument about it increasing the commercial aspects in the rural area may be applicable if it was an auto store or a trading post or the store down at Buck Island for instance, but I think in this concept, we have to view this thing from a while different direction... I would love it to increase the commercial area because it will draw more tourists here." Mr. Rooker said, "I don't see anything in this that would prevent virtually any kind of commercial activity.... if you expand this and allow commercial activity in each of those stores, what have you done but created a small commercial area on the top of Monticello Mountain in a rural area? There's nothing that prevents it from selling Nikes." Mr. Nitchmann said his only concern would be if it changed hands down the road that things could change drastically. Mr. Rooker said his concern is what happens in the future because once you attach conditions to properties, they get transferred. In response to Mr. Thomas' questions about the similarity of this application to the business special use permit recently considered for Adwel systems, Ms. Echols responded that the special use permit granted for Michie Tavern was gifts, crafts and antiques, and did not have a restriction of 4,000 square feet; however, when the gristmill was put in and the site plan was approved it was 4,000 square feet. "I can't uncover if that relationship is happenstance or on purpose." Mr. Cilimberg said, "There's two different situations. On Rio Road, that was a proposal for retail commercial activity in a residential zoning district by special use permit. In this case, we're talking about rural area— gifts, crafts, antiques. It just so happens that the square footage comes in for both as a maximum of 4,000, but the limitation in the rural areas is actually on country store square footage. Ms. Echols noted that the original SP did not say that sales would be restricted to an area of 4,000 square feet or less, but it did say it would be restricted to that particular location, and there wouldn't be any sales in the craft stores. "That is why they've come and asked for this change." Noting that the country store limitation is 4,000 square feet, Mr. Rooker asked if a parcel of property with two country stores on it has a limitation that applies to the building, or to the site. Mr. Cilimberg said it applies to the use, which is approved by the Board of Supervisors — established by the Commission's process of special use permits as to what's acceptable. Ms. Echols noted that the limitation of 4,000 square feet is in the definition and cannot be modified; Mr. Cilimberg said that two stores could be approved for one site. 35 Mr. Finley said that he has some reservations, noting that the Michie Tavern building use to be down the road from his farm in Free Union, and was picked up and rebuilt on the mountain. He asked what would happen if he wanted to build five shops and have retail sales in an RA district. Staff said, "You would need a special use permit." Mr. Finley said, "I don't believe it would even be 3-Y' Mr. Rooker asked if there had been any comments from the general public. Ms. Echols indicated there had not been any. Representing the applicant, Michie Tavern, Mr. Richard Carter addressed the Commission. He introduced Greg McDonald, Director of Michie Tavern. Mr. Carter explained the concept for the craft shops: one may be a blacksmith shop, one may be a candle shop, one may be a basket shop, etc. Each shop will have someone making items; each craft but can only sell what is made in that shop, or reproductions of items that could be made by each crafter. Mr. Carter said there is nothing to be sold that is not already sold in the general store, but this allows a larger variety. Mr. Rooker asked Mr. Carter if he would be willing to indicate by condition that the items sold in the other buildings would be limited to things which were related the demonstrated craft. Mr. Carter said that he would. Mr. Carter emphasized that Michie Tavern is different from other businesses, as the mission is to educate persons about 18`t' century life, particularly in colonial Virginia. "The focus of Michie Tavern is on the common person, the common people and how they lived. The focus is on a tavern where the common people went." Mr. Carter said that Michie Tavern provides education through tours and exhibits, noting that tours are free to all residents of Albemarle County. He said that the tavern also sends docents out to the public schools to further educate children on 17'h century life in this area. "We think the changes here are only going to enhance the mission that Michie Tavern has. The buildings will reflect the trades, showing how people made their living, and by selling items in these trade structures, people can take home items which they saw made with their own eyes, and they can see them right there as they are being made." Mr. Carter stressed that they would not be selling items that reflect trades not already featured, only a larger variety of the items. He said that he couldn't afford a full-time basket or candle maker, but could afford a full-time "docent" to explain what is in the buildings and what is made there, and sometimes things would be made in the buildings. Mr. Carter said that the requirement in 1976 to have half the items be hand- crafted there sounded good at the time, but the industry has changed such that a craftsman can't make enough horseshoes or candles to meet the demand. Mr. Rooker asked him if he would agree to a limitation that said the items being sold throughout the property would be items that are exemplary of crafts that are being made on that property, or items exemplary of those in the 18ffi century. Mr. Carter agreed, but Mr. McDonald did not. Mr. Carter noted that the general store has things that are not sold in the craft houses, although most items sold there reference colonial times. He said that the sales within the trade structures "would allow the education of visitors by actually seeing the products made." He said that the "intensification of sales 36 activity" as noted by staff is an overstatement, noting that the outbuildings will comprise a total of &,, 2,700 square feet. Mr. Carter said that most of the traffic concerns are unwarranted because most visitors come in motorcoaches, which let visitors out at the tavern then park across the street. He said that before the application was filed, Monticello was contacted and no objections. Mr. Carter described this as a "modest request," adding that "what we're trying to do is to get what was approved in 1976... brought up to 2000 marketing techniques." He noted that the restaurant and general store are far away from the proposed craft houses, making it difficult to purchase. Mr. Finley commented that the real thrust of the expansion here is to increase profits. Mr. Carter replied, "It's not a non-profit business, but... sales are not the only thing that Michie Tavern does, and sales is not the only thing that will be happening in the buildings. A docent will be there full time to explain and educate the public." He acknowledged that adding the craft houses has the potential to increase sales, but emphasized that Michie Tavern is not the same type of commercial establishment as a K-Mart and Wal-Mart. Mr. McDonald addressed the Commission, reporting that the project was conceived in 1969 and stating that they want to bring it up to today's standards. He noted that the Sol House already on site, which cost Michie Tavern $300,000, would serve as the educational hub for the other six proposed buildings, which will be small trade buildings with sales limited to just the trades demonstrated. Mr. McDonald said that each would have either "living history" or a docent there, and there will also be permanent exhibit material there to reinforce what is being taught. He continued that the student tours business is booming, and by letting them buy in the buildings is an important part of making it work. Mr. McDonald said museums depend on retail sales for profit and to help their educational mission. "If they're quality reproductions, that enhances what we're trying to teach people." He noted that these types of sales are heavily influenced by interaction with artisans and knowledgeable people. "If they don't have that interaction, that's going to be a tough sell, especially if they've got to do it thirty minutes later down at a building after they've visited six or seven other trade buildings. Mr. McDonald said it is difficult for some people to move around on the site because it is so hilly, especially seniors and the disabled. Mr. Thomas asked if the items to be sold are similar to the catalog, which are colonial reproductions. Mr. McDonald said they don't do the catalog any longer, but the items will only be limited to the trade that's being demonstrated. Public comment was invited. None was offered, and the matter was placed before the Commission. Mr. Thomas commented that he is concerned that the Commission is focusing too much on the commercial aspects of the proposal. "I think it's going to be really nice to have those extra stores there with the whole layout." Mr. Loewenstein expressed concern that on the one hand the applicant is saying the primary mission of Michie Tavern is educational, and on the other hand, the motive is profit. He said he is having some trouble with the "mixed message." Mr. Loewenstein said that he doesn't agree that the inability to sell products representing the trades that will be displayed in the buildings necessarily 37 diminishes the educational mission of Michie Tavern. He added that it does restrict sales, and doesn't have any opposition to Michie Tavern selling, but doesn't know if it's going to increase tourism to the area, regardless of what and how much is sold. Mr. Loewenstein said he is somewhat concerned about the dispersal of sales around the site, although he said it could be done successfully with careful planning. "I just want to be clear that whatever we do we understand what it is that we're allowing .... if we're going to modify these conditions along the lines we've been talking about, I think that may make some difference." Mr. Rooker noted that the applicant said he would be willing to have a condition imposed that would limit sales in the additional buildings to those that would be exemplary of crafts being demonstrated there. "With that kind of limitation, it would prevent the kind of subsequent user concerns that we would possibly have." He added that the site is seven acres, and he could envision certain situations where two 4,000 foot country stores are approved within a six or seven acre site. Mr. Rooker noted that at Michie Tavern, the additional buildings will only add 2,700 feet. "If we limit the sales to what the applicant has indicated to me would be a reasonable use of the property. We don't have surrounding property owners coming in and complaining about this... and I think that's important. Mr. Loewenstein said with that limitation, he would feel better about the proposal. Mr. Nitchmann said that having sales does enhance the visit and the educational part of it. He added that when he went with his son to Williamsburg, it made it more important to him that he could buy something from the blacksmith, and he kept it for a long time. "I think the sales from these items is what's going to make it possible to continue this process. If it's not profitable and there's no sales, he's not going to be able to afford the guy to educate the people on what the blacksmith did... " Mr. Nitchmann added, "If in any way this extends the time that a visitor spends at Michie Tavern and Monticello, it may not bring more visitors, but it may make them spend one more night here because the day's gotten longer of the things to see, and those are dollars that come here and get dropped off here [without adding any burden to the county]." Mr. Finley said he is concerned with consistency in the rural areas. "What's different about this area that they can have five little gift shops scattered about in a rural area?" He expressed support for staff s condition that items be sold in the country store only. Mr. Nitchmann said he did not view the structures as gift shops, but as demonstration areas. Mr. Rooker said that the limiting of use to the crafts being demonstrated in the buildings is a pretty significant limitation. "That doesn't mean every farm has the right to put up a store. This is a fairly significant limitation in an area in which historic significance is important and people are up at Monticello for that purpose." He stated his support for allowing sales in the small craft houses subject to the limitations that the sales are related to the crafts being demonstrated in those buildings. MOTION: Mr. Rooker moved, Mr. Nitchmann seconded approval of SP 99-29 with conditions modified as follows: (6) Sales in the craft shops shall be restricted to the trades which are being demonstrated in the craft shops [replaces original language]. The motion passed unanimously. 38 ZMA 99-07 Victoria Burton — Request to rezone 23.62 acres from RA, Rural Areas to R-4, Residential to allow residential development. The property, described as Tax Map 32C Section 3, Parcel 2 is located in the Rivanna Magisterial District on the south side of Airport Road [Route 649] behind the existing Deerwood Subdivision. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Neighborhood Density Residential (3 to 6 dwelling units per acre) in the Hollymead Community. Mr. Fritz presented the staff report, noting that the proposal is a request to rezone 23+ acres at the rear of Deerwood Subdivision on Airport Road from RA to R4; in 1993, the county reviewed the same request and noted some unfavorable factors. Since that time, the factors have been addressed by changes that occurred — the Comprehensive Plan has been changed and now recommends the area for residential use, Airport Road is now scheduled for improvements in the year 2000, previously the entire area was located within the Airport Road noise impact area. The master plan has been revised, and no portion of Deerwood or the area under review is in the impact area. Mr. Fritz said the only remaining negative factor from the initial review is that the proposal increases the number of lots and no second point of access is provided as called for in the zoning ordinance. He stated that this is not unlike other developments such as Dunlora, Mill Creek south and Renovia; a second point of access may be achieved as adjoining properties are developed. Mr. Fritz said all the favorable factors remain from the original review, and staff recommends approval without recommendation of proffers. Mr. Rooker asked if all the roads have been accepted into the secondary road system. Mr. Fritz replied that they have, and improvements are likely to be required, which can be handled in the subdivision review process as part of the entrance permit that's issued by VDOT. The applicant's son, Earl Burton, addressed the Commission. He said that the initial intent when the property was acquired in the 1960's was to develop the entire parcel, and presented a plat that showed the planned development. Mr. Burton said that in the 1960's, it was decided that no more septic systems should be installed there because the county was going to put in a sewer line. He said they put in a system that handled 10 lots that got approved by the county and then stopped; there were 10 lots left, which have been developed since the sewer went in. Mr. Burton said it has always been his plan to develop the entire parcel. He said that Lupine Lane stops, and has the potential for connecting to Route 606. Mr. Rieley asked if there is any mechanism during the subdivision review level to ensure that there will be connectivity. Mr. Fritz responded that internally the "fifty lot rule" would be used to get two points of access, at least internally, to minimize the number of cul-de-sacs. Mr. Cilimberg noted that the subdivision ordinance has also required provided connections to subsequent development areas, although it is not always utilized. Mr. Rooker asked about sidewalks, noting that the front part of Deerwood does not have sidewalks. He asked when the appropriate time would be to raise the sidewalk issue. Staff said that it could be raised during the subdivision review process. sm 39 Mr. Cilimberg said that one consideration when reviewing a subdivision is what the walkway system will do and how it will relate, noting that there is a plan to have sidewalks on Airport Road, but there are not sidewalks at Deerwood now. Mr. Rooker asked if there was sufficient right-of-way on Deerwood Drive for a sidewalk or walking path. Staff indicated that they did not know, and Mr. Cilimberg pointed out that off -site improvements would have to be proffered. Mr. Rieley commented, "I think this is one of those situations in which it would be better to have sidewalks to one side of the street that connect all the way up then to have them on both sides in an isolated island that then doesn't have any connection back to the rest of the community." Mr. Cilimberg said that the Commission should ask the applicant if that was possible to make the connection along Deerwood Drive. Mr. Burton asked the Commission to clarify what they wanted for sidewalks. Mr. Rooker replied that sidewalks within the area of ZMA 99-07 will be required, and asked if the applicant would consider a proffer for a sidewalk or pedestrian path based upon the availability of right-of-way to 649 on Deerwood Drive. Mr. Burton said that if there is an availability of right-of-way, that might be possible. Mr. Fritz noted that the right of way is different widths through the parcel, stating that the applicant seems to agree with the suggestion of placing sidewalks if the right-of-way is adequate. Commissioners noted that the language would have to be crafted prior to the item going to the Board. Mr. Cilimberg noted while there may be adequate right-of-way, there may be some property owner issues along Deerwood. Public comment was invited. None was offered, and the matter was placed before the Commission. MOTION: Mr. Rooker moved, Mr. Loewenstein seconded recommendation of approval of ZMA 99-07 The Commission moved, seconded and unanimously approved ZMA 99-07 with an understanding that the applicant will proffer a sidewalk or pedestrian path along Deerwood Drive to access Route 649 from the rezoned areas, provided there is adequate right-of-way. The motion passed unanimously. SP 99-37 East Glenmore CV226 — Request for special use permit to allow for a telecommunications facility in accordance with Section [ 10.2.2.6] of the Zoning Ordinance which allows radiowave transmission towers. The property, described as Tax Map 79 Parcel 16, contains 13.5 acres, and is located in the Rivanna Magisterial District on Richmond Road [Route 250] approximately 0.3 miles west of Louisa Road [Route22]. The property is zoned RA, Rural Areas and EC, Entrance Corridor Overlay District. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Area 4. s Mr. Fritz presented the staff report, noting that the request is similar to CFW's other requests — a wooden pole at the tree line with minimal amount of disturbance required in the field to access the site. He added that staff has gone through the review, and is recommending approval, noting that the conditions are virtually identical to all the other CFW applications, with the exception of one that allows three flush -mount antenna to be placed on the pole instead of two — a full sectored site. He noted that it allows them to transmit from this site to other sites more efficiently. Mr. Rieley noted that previously the height of the tower has been limited to seven feet total above the height of the nearest tree within 25 feet, and this tower now has seven plus three feet. Mr. Fritz and fellow Commissioners confirmed that structures with a pole of seven feet and antennae of 3 feet have been approved. The applicant's representative, Mr. Dick Shearer of CFW addressed the Commission. He presented aerial photos of the proposed location. Mr. Loewenstein commented that the item seems pretty simple, noting that the location would be very difficult to spot visually. MOTION: Mr. Loewenstein moved, Mr. Nitchmann seconded approval of SP 99-37 with conditions as presented by staff. The motion passed unanimously. Old Business Commissioners expressed concern that Boudreau's on Rio Road is operating a "nightclub" in the back room despite the Board's denial of the special use permit. Mr. Rooker requested that that be reviewed by the zoning administrator. In response to Mr. Rooker's question, Mr. Cilimberg reported that the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), which the NTO must pass, is going to public hearing August 17th; the NTO will then meet on August 31 st to take their action on the TIP. Mr. Rieley commented that he would like to have copies of the topographical maps the applicants present in smaller format. Mr. Fritz agreed. Mr. Rooker commented that it would be helpful to have copies of the parts of the zoning ordinance that pertain to specific applications, such as the Home Occupation guidelines. Mr. Loewenstein said that would also help expedite the meetings. Mr. Cilimberg said sometimes staff will quote a portion of the ordinance in the staff report, and if it's more than a few paragraphs, staff will attach it to the report. Mr. Cilimberg said in cases where there are supplementary regulations, staff would try to provide copies. New Business Request for a resolution of intent to amend the zoning ordinance to define the terms "transmission lines" and "lines for distribution of local service." Mr. Kamptner said the County Attorney's office is asking that the Commission adopt the resolution so they can do the CTA; the request arises from an appeal to the BZA by the city regarding their proposal to discuss a 12" pipeline extending approximately 10 miles across rural areas of wetlands. The city contends that the pipeline is for distribution of local service, and the BZA determined that it is a transmission line. Mr. Kamptner said the Zoning Administrator has had a long standing clear and consistent interpretation of what a transmission line is, and what is put into the ZTA will 41 reflect that interpretation by codifying the meaning of "transmission lines" and "lines for distribution of local service" and define them in the zoning ordinance. MOTION: Mr. Loewenstein moved, Mr. Thomas seconded approval of the request for a resolution of intent as described. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. V. Wayne Cilir Secretary -T <<C RESOLUTION OF INTENT WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance establishes the regulations applicable to the several zoning districts in Albemarle County and those zoning regulations allow "lines for distribution of local service" as a matter of right and "transmission lines" by special use permit; and WHEREAS, it is desired to amend Section 3.0 by adding definitions of the terms "lines for distribution of local service" and "transmission lines," and to define those terms consistent with the longstanding meaning given those terms by the Albemarle County Zoning Administrator. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT for purposes of public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practices, the Albemarle County Planning Commission hereby adopts a resolution of intent to amend Section 3.0, Definitions, of the Zoning Ordinance as described herein; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on this zoning text amendment and will present its recommendations to the Board of Supervisors at the earliest possible date.