Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 18 1997 PC Minutes2-18-97 FEBRUARY 18, 1997 The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on Tuesday, February 18, 1997, in the County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were: Mr. Jared Loewenstein, Chairman; Mr. David Tice, Vice Chairman; Mr. William Nitchmann; Ms. Babs Huckle; and Mr. Bruce Dotson. Other officials present were: Mr. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Community Development; Mr. John Shepherd, Planner; Mr. Ron Keeler, Chief of Planning; Mr. Bill Fritz, Senior Planner; Ms. MaryJoy Scala, Senior Planner; and Mr. Greg Kamptner, Assistant County Attorney. Absent: Commissioners Washington and Finley. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. and a quorum was established. The minutes of February 4, 1997 were approved (4:0:1) as submitted. Mr. Dotson abstained from the vote on the minutes because he was not present at the February 4th meeting. Mr. Cilimberg briefly summarized actions taken at the February 12th Board of Supervisors meeting. ZMA 96-22 RHH Development Corporation - Petition to rezone approximately 1.691 acres from R-4, Residential to CO, Commercial Office and approximately 2.774 acres from C-1 Commercial to CO, Commercial Office. Property, described as Tax Map 61 W2, Parcels 45, 46 and 47 are located on the north side of Whitewood Road/Greenbrier Drive adjacent to Wynridge and Minor Hill subdivisions in the Rio Magisterial District. This site is recommended for Neighborhood Density Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) in Neighborhood One. Deferred from January 28, 1997 Commission meeting. Staff requested deferral to February 25 to allow completion of review of proffers. MOTION: Mr. Dotson moved, Mr. Nitchmann seconded, that ZMA 96-22 be deferred to February 25th. The motion passed unanimously. Peabody School Preliminary Site Plan - Proposal to construct 10 modular classroom units, totaling 12,540 square feet, on a 5-acre parcel in the Mill Creek Industrial Park. Property, described as Tax Map 76M 1, Parcel 15, is on Stony Ridge Road on the north side of Southern Parkway, adjacent to Carolina Builders, in the Scottsville Magisterial District. The property is zoned PUD-LI (planned for light industrial use), with proffers and is designated for Industrial Service development in Urban Neighborhood 4. Deferred from the January 7, 1997 Commission meeting. Mr. Fritz presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions. OR 2-18-97 2 There being neither applicant nor public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. MOTION: Mr. Nitchmann moved, Ms. Huckle seconded, that the Peabody School Preliminary Site Plan be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The Planning Department shall not accept submittal of the final site plan for signature until tentative approvals for the following conditions have been obtained. The final site plan shall not be signed until the following conditions are met: a. Engineering Department approval to include: 1. Approval of grading plans and drainage computations to include approval of off -site easements if required. 2. Approval of detention plans and computations. 3. Approval of an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. 4. Approval of all necessary off -site easements. b. Planning Department approval to include: 1. Approval of landscape plan. c. Albemarle County Service Authority approval of water and sewer plans. d. Fire Official Approval. e. Building Code and Zoning Services approval to include: 1. Building Official approval. 2. Approval of the location of barrier free parking spaces. f. Virginia Department of Transportation approval of plans and improvements within the existing right-of-way. The motion passed unanimously. SP 96-54 St. Paul's Church - Proposal to renovate an existing structure for use as administrative offices on 15.315 acres zoned VR, Village Residential [12.2.2(15)]. Property, described as Tax Map 58A2, Parcels 17, 18 and 19, in the location of St. Paul's Church which is located on the north side of Route 250 (Ivy Road) at its intersection with Route 678 (Owensville Road) in the Samuel Miller District. This site is not located in a designated development area (Rural Area 3). Ms. Scala presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions. The applicant was represented by Mr. Enoch Snyder. In response to Ms. Huckle's question about utilities, he said the church is served by county water and a private septic system. Public comment was invited. None was offered. Mr. Dotson raised the question of whether or not condition No. 1-- [This special use permit addresses the relocation of church offices only. Any future expansion of the church or church activities will require an amendment to this special use permit.]-- is in /YV 2-18-97 conflict with the Zoning Administrator's statement about allowing the existing non- conforming church to become conforming, "which seems to go beyond the offices." He suggested the omission of the first sentence would eliminate any confusion. After a brief discussion of the issue identified by Mr. Dotson, it was decided the first sentence would be dropped and the following sentence would replace it: This special use permit is for the existing church and church offices to be located in the Kirklea structure. Mr. Loewenstein commended the applicant (the church) for its voluntary protection of Kirklea. MOTION: Mr. Nitchmann moved, Mr. Dotson seconded, that SP 96-54 for St. Paul's Church be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. This special use permit is for the existing church and church offices to be located in the Kirklea structure. Any future expansion of the church or church activities will require an amendment to this special use permit. 2. New exterior finish materials will closely match existing materials. The motion passed unanimously. ZTA 96-04 Page Williams - Petition to amend the setback provision of the R-4, Residential (Section 15.3), R-6, Residential (Section 16.3), R-10, Residential (Section 17.3) and R-15, Residential (Section 18.3) to permit "zero lot lines." Mr. Fritz presented the staff report, explained the proposed amendment in detail, and answered Commission questions. Staff supported the proposed amendment and the staff report listed the following favorable aspects of zero lot line development: --Will allow for the reduction in minimum lot size, resulting in increased amounts of open space available within the development. This can increase the preservation of resources such as wooded areas, floodplain, steep slopes and wildlife habitat. --Will allow for increased flexibility in the siting of a dwelling on the property. --Will allow for development of greater density to be constructed which may reduce housing costs and consumption of land. --Zero lot line development is generally consistent with the infill policy of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Nitchmann suggested that at some later time a consideration of changes to rear lot lines might also be considered. (Ms. Huckle later said "some variation in the front and back might result in more privacy.) Ms. Huckle asked if any other Commissioners felt the consideration of this amendment should be postponed until discussions of development area initiatives have taken place. Mr. Dotson said it might be a year before the committee has completed its jy_5- 2-18-97 4 work. He saw no problem with making this change at this time. If additional improvements are needed to the amendment, they can be made later. Mr. Tice agreed. The applicant, Mr. Page Williams, addressed the Commission. He said this amendment is "market driven" and he views this as an alternative to attached homes. Public comment was invited. None was offered. Staff confirmed that this amendment will result in more open space in developments. Ms. Huckle said it is usually, however, the "unusable" land that is placed in open space. Mr. Fritz said the Ordinance limits the amount of "unusable" land which can be counted as open space to 80%. Mr. Dotson questioned the accuracy of the term "zero" lot line, if the line is not actually all the way to the lot line. Mr. Fritz said staff decided to stick with the term because it is commonly used all across the United States, but it is actually a "zero setback." Mr. Cilimberg added that "anything less than the standard side yard is falling under the zero lot line provision." Staff agreed "reduced" might be a more accurate term. Mr. Dotson asked how the proposed language addresses the drip -line from the roof. Mr. Fritz said the eve can overhang into the adjacent lot easement area (a maximum of 24 inches), but it must be designed so the water is funneled away from the . easement area. Mr. Tice thought the proposed language was unclear on this issue. Mr. Cilimberg suggested the following improved language: "The roof shall be designed so that the water runoff from the dwelling placed on the lot line would occur on the lot of that dwelling or within the easement area." OR Mr. Nitchmann said he thinks this is an excellent first step in reducing the costs of housing. Mr. Fritz said this will allow for more density, using less land. MOTION: Mr. Nitchmann moved, Mr. Tice seconded, that ZTA 96-04 for Page Williams be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval, as set forth in the staff report and with the alternative language related to rooftop runoff as suggested by Mr. Cilimberg. The motion passed unanimously. SUB 96-101 Bentivar Phase II Rural Preservation Development Final Plat - Proposal to create a 51-lot Rural Preservation Development on 154.441 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property, described as Tax Map 46, Parcels 139, 140, 143, 144, 145, 147, 130, 129, 141, 146, 92H and Tax Map 62, Parcels 50A and 50G, is located east of and adjacent to the Bentivar Subdivision in the Rivanna Magisterial District. This site is not located in a designated development area (Rural Area 2). /,Y� cm 2-18-97 Mr. Shepherd presented the staff report. He explained the preliminary plat approval expired and because this is a Rural Preservation Development the proposal cannot be approved administratively. Planning Commission approval is required. The staff report concluded: "Staff opinion is that no changes in circumstances have occurred since the original review. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this final plat, which will be signed when all conditions are met." Ms. Huckle expressed concern that more of the conditions which were attached to the preliminary approval have not been completed. She was particularly concerned about conditions (5) and (12). Mr. Cilimberg explained those conditions could not be met until after the plat has been signed. Mr. Shepherd, by re -stating these conditions, is just insuring that the applicant is well aware that these items still must be done. The applicant was represented by Mr. Katurah Roell. Addressing the issue of the time period, he described some aspects of the procedure and stressed how "extensively laborious" it is to get through the process and satisfy all the conditions. There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. MOTION: Mr. Nitchmann moved, Mr. Dotson seconded, that the Bentivar Phase II Rural Preservation Development Final Plat be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) approval of final public road plans and drainage computations. 2. Engineering Department approval of final public road plans and drainage computations. 3. Engineering Department approval of an erosion control plan. 4. Permanent drainage easements will be required over all drainage ditches and natural watercourses. The placement of drainage ditches, drainage structures and drainage easements will be coordinated with road plans. 5. Provide an easement for the farm road which continues past the cul-de-sac at the end of Bentivar Farm Road (if it is to remain in use), and for access to Tax Map 62, Parcel 50G. 6. The roads must be built or bonded in accordance with the approved road plans. 7. Route 1033 will be required to be improved to accommodate the additional 51 lots from Route 643 through the intersection of Bentivar Farm Road. Previous approvals for Bentivar Drive allowed for a maximum of 71 lots. Improvements will need to be made in accordance with current Subdivision Street Requirements. 8. Indicate ultimate traffic generation that may occur through Parcel X 11U 2-18-97 6 9. Parcel W shall be combined with an adjacent parcel or dedicated to Homeowner's Association as open space. If it is to be open space, add note, "Parcel W is not a residential building lot and has no development right. It may no be sold or transferred as a separate parcel unless combined with an adjacent parcel." 10. Recreation Facilities Authority approval of Preservation Tract easement. 11. All owners of parcels shown must sign the final plat. 12. The plat showing revised Lot 20, which combines Parcels 129, 130, and a portion of 147, dated October 15, 1996, must be recorded. The motion passed unanimously. SDP 96-113 Blue Ridge HC Area Final Site Plan - Proposal to construct 48,869 square feet of retail service uses (a reduction of 2,941 square feet from the preliminary plan) on 6.189 acres, zoned HC, Highway Commercial and EC, Entrance Corridor overlay District. Property, described as Tax Map 56, Parcel 110, 110A (part) and 109B (part) is located on the south side of U.S. Rt. 250W (Rockfish Gap Turnpike) approximately 0.9 miles east of the Rt. 250W/Rt 240 (Crozet Avenue)/Rt. 635 (Miller School Road) intersection in the White Hall Magisterial District. This property is located in the Community of Crozet and is recommended for Neighborhood ,,. Service. En Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. He briefly reviewed the history of this project and described how this present plan differs from the preliminary plan. He said all conditions of the preliminary site plan have been met and all members of the Site Review Committee are prepared to sign this final site plan. The report noted that the Engineering Department imposed conditions related to construction and staff recommended that the Commission, in its action, endorse those conditions. The applicant was represented by Mr. Don Wagner. He offered to answer Commission questions. He described the process (sub -surface testing) which is taking place to determine whether or not hazardous materials were buried on the site many years ago. He explained how this plan differs from the preliminary plan. Public comment was invited. Mr. Richard Bremman (?), a Crozet resident, expressed opposition to the proposal. He expressed concerns about additional traffic in an already congested area. There being no further comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. i �g OR 2-18-97 7 MOTION: Mr. Nitchmann moved, Mr. Tice seconded, that the Blue Ridge HC Area Final Site Plan be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with conditions of approval of the Environmental Assessment is required (Reference Engineering Department memo of 21 November 1995 approving the Environmental Study). This is an ongoing process which will continue through the construction phase. The conditions of approval are: a. Engineering Department receipt of proof of compliance with all requirements of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ). b. Copy the Engineering Department on all correspondence with VDEQ to ensure that Albemarle County is kept informed of proceedings at this site. 2. Engineering Department receipt of a copy of the certificate of operation from the State Health Department for the sewage pumping station is required prior to granting a Certificate of Occupancy. The motion passed unanimously. MISCELLANEOUS Mr. Nitchmann asked if staff could get information on Greene County's planned water and sewer line on Rt. 29. It was suggested that staff try to arrange for a joint meeting with Greene's Planning Commission. As he has many times in the past, Mr. Nitchmann again asked about the status of planned improvements to Rt. 250 East (from the intersection with the Louisa Road, east to Fluvanna County). It was agreed the best way to approach this issue might be through PSC. (Plannl"-1577Q10-T (-200Imrs6,0") There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m. -0. Lk� �� d 1,,, — V. Wayn Cili r7tary /,Y1