HomeMy WebLinkAbout12 03 1996 PC Minutes12-3-96-
December 3, 1996
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on Tuesday,
December 3, 1996, in the County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those
members present were: Ms. Babs Huckle; Mr. Bruce Dotson, Vice Chairman; Ms. Hilda
Lee -Washington; Mr. Jared Loewenstein; and Mr. David Tice. Other officials present
were: Mr. Ron Keeler, Chief of Planning; Mr. Eric Morissette, Planner; Mr. John
Shepherd, Planner; Ms. Claudia Paine, Senior Planner; Mr. Pete Anderson, UVA
Representative; and Mr. Greg Kamptner, Assistant County Attorney. Absent:
Commissioners Nitchmann and Finley.
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. and a quorum was established. The
minutes of November 19,1996, were unanimously approved as submitted.
SP-96-041 Forest Springs Mobile Home Sales Lot - Petition to amend SP-95-31 to
allow Mobile Homes Sales in addition to existing auto sales. Property, described as
Tax Map 32, Parcel 43, zoned RA, Rural Areas, HC, Highway Commercial, and EC,
Entrance Corridor, and Parcel 43A, zoned HC, Highway Commercial and EC, Entrance
Corridor Overlay District, is located approximately 1/4 mile (.5 km) south of Rt. 649 on
the west side of Rt. 29 North in the Rivanna Magisterial District. This site is
recommended for Regional Service in the Hollymead Community.
The applicant had requested deferral to January 7, 1997.
Public comment was invited. None was offered.
MOTION: Mr. Tice moved, Ms. Huckle seconded, that SP 96-041 be deferred to
January 7, 1997. The motion passed unanimously.
ZMA 96-18 William A. Marshall, Jr. - Petition to rezone approximately 1.63 acres from
R-1 Residential, to HC, Highway Commercial. Property, described as Tax Map 32,
Parcels 20D and 20E, is located on the north side of Rt. 649 approximately .2 mile west
of Rt. 29 in the Rivanna Magisterial District. This site is recommended for Regional
Service in the Community of Hollymead.
Ms. Paine presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval subject to
acceptance of the applicant's proffers and subject to the County Attorney's and Zoning
Administrator's approval of the proffers. [Ms. Paine said the proffers were received
very recently so the County Attorney and the Zoning Administrator have not had time to
review them thoroughly.]
Staff also recommended approval of a modification of Section 4.12.3.2 to allow off -site
parking.
12-3-96- 2
' Mr. Dotson summarized there were two actions before the Commission --the zoning
map amendment request and a request for a modification of Section 4.12.3.2. On the
issue of the status of Airport Road, Mr. Dotson described it as a "moving target which
the applicant has addressed through his proffers."
In response to Mr. Tice's request, Ms. Paine again reviewed the requirements for
buffering between properties. She said buffering is required between commercial
districts and residential or rural area districts. A 20-foot undisturbed buffer is required.
Also, between commercial and industrial uses adjacent to residential or rural area uses,
screening is required. Often a 20-foot vegetated strip is required, but fencing or some
type of opaque barrier can also be required.
Ms. Huckle asked about screening between this use and the road. Ms. Paine said the
applicant will be required to meet certain landscape requirements at the time of site
plan review. However, screening, such as a fence, is not required along the road side
of the property. Ms. Paine said she thought such screening might be more appropriate
in the rural areas.
Ms. Huckle said she understood this road is going to be designated as an Entrance
Corridor. She wondered when this designation is going to take place. Ms. Paine said a
Resolution of Intent could be adopted by the Planning Commission which would enable
staff to begin researching this possibility to determine if Rt. 649 (Airport Road) is
eligible for Entrance Corridor status. Ms. Paine said after the improvements to the road
are complete, it might be that the road will be able to meet the Entrance Corridor
criteria at that time. Mr. Keeler added that the ultimate design for Airport Road is not
final at this time, but construction is supposed to begin in 1998. Ms. Paine said right-
of-way has been reserved on this property to accommodate road improvements. (Mr.
Keeler later suggested that the Commission may wish to go ahead and adopt a
Resolution of Intent. If, after the design of the road has been finalized, it is determined
that it will not meet Entrance Corridor criteria, then the Resolution can be withdrawn.)
Ms. Huckle expressed concern about the fact that the entrance for this property is so
close to Rt. 29. She envisioned much greater usage of this road after the Mobile Home
Park is compete and the UREF Research Park is underway. She feared it would
become a similar situation to what presently exists at the intersection of Rt. 29 and
Hydraulic Road (in the City) where cars are backed up into the intersection as cars are
turning into the Blockbuster Video store on Hydraulic Road. She said she did not want
to be responsible for creating another such hazard. She wondered if any turn lanes are
planned. Mr. Keeler responded: "When VDOT improves a road they will not install
turn lanes on entrances that don't have turn lanes, at least I've never seen a project
where they've done that." Ms. Huckle asked if that means property owners must install
the turn lanes themselves. Mr. Keeler explained how businesses on Rt. 29 installed full
frontage improvements along their properties, and then VDOT, when improving Rt. 29
had "connected" these turn lanes to form a continuous outer lane which serves as a
Id
12-3-96- 3
turn lane. If, in the road improvement process, VDOT "extinguishes" a turn lane, they
may reconstruct a new one.
Mr. Keeler said the existing entrance is over 500 feet from Rt. 29, which is "generally
adequate for a median break." He said he thinks traffic backs up if cars are trying to
make a left turn (across oncoming traffic). That will not happen at this property
because the traffic coming from Rt. 29 will be turning right into this site. (Ms. Huckle
noted that traffic backs up at Hydraulic Road even though cars are making a right turn
into the Blockbuster site.)
On the question of screening, Mr. Keeler said there are provisions in the Ordinance
which allow features which the Commission finds objectionable to be screened from
public roads. (Section 32.9.7.8 refers to "storage yards.") Mr. Kamptner quoted from
the Ordinance: "A screen shall consist of a planting strip, existing vegetation, a slightly
opaque wall or fence, or a combination thereof." He pointed out that screening would
be addressed at the site plan stage.)
Mr. Dotson pointed out that the proffers limit this use to automobile, truck and repair
shops," which, in general, are low traffic generators. He also noted that another proffer
limits the entrance to the existing entrance, so no new entrances can be created. Ms.
Paine confirmed the accuracy of both these statements.
Mr. Kamptner said he and the Zoning Administrator have looked at the proffers and
offer the following suggestions:
Proffer 1 - Typographical error needs to be corrected.
Proffer 2 - Substance is acceptable, but the language needs to be clarified. He
proposed: "Access to the property for commercial use will be only through the
entrances on adjacent parcel 40 as shown on the attached drawing. The words
"current" and "existing" should be deleted so the access points are more clearly fixed.
This also clarifies these will be the only entrance or access points for the commercial
usage.
The applicant was represented by Mr. William Marshall. He said he had no objection to
the wording changes proposed by Mr. Kamptner. On the question of entrances, he
said he has approached VDOT to try to move the entrances farther away from Rt. 29
(to the west), "to serve both these pieces of property." On the issue of constructing a
fence between the road and the property, he said he did not think there would be a
need for a fence because "they can beautify it without hiding it." (Ms. Huckle indicated
she found the visibility of many cars on the site objectionable.)
Ms. Huckle asked whether the site will be graded. Mr. Marshall said the existing
dwelling on the site will be removed and the site will be leveled.
Public comment was invited.
09
/fe"Z
12-3-96-
4
Mr. Osterhill, owner of adjoining properties (in Airport Acres), addressed the
Commission. He did not object to the rezoning, but he asked that a substantial tree
buffer and fence be required between his properties and the applicant's property.
There being no further comment, the matter was placed before the Commission.
Ms. Huckle asked if any body work takes place at this location. Mr. Marshall said no
body work (or painting) takes place at this facility. He has no plans to ever do body
work. Also, no work is performed on large trucks. (Mr. Kamptner said body shops are
defined separately in the Ordinance. )
Responding to Mr. Osterhill's comments, Mr. Marshall said he will satisfy Mr.Osterhill's
concerns, including a fence between the properties. (He noted, however, he was not
offering to put a fence along the road.)
Ms. Huckle said she did not feel it was necessary to put a fence between the building
and the road, but she did think a fence should be used everywhere automobiles can be
seen.
In addition to the two actions described at the beginning of the hearing, Mr. Dotson
added the following two possible actions which were identified during discussion:
--The requirement for a buffer at the time of site plan review.
--A Resolution of Intent to consider Entrance Corridor designation for Airport
Road.
MOTION: Mr. Tice moved, Mr. Loewenstein seconded, that ZMA 96-18 for William A.
Marshall be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to
acceptance of the applicant's proffers, with the understanding the proffers will be
clarified, as proposed by Mr. Kamptner and agreed to by the applicant, prior to Board
hearing.
The motion passed unanimously.
MOTION: Ms. Huckle moved, Mr. Tice seconded, that a modification of Section
4.12.3.2, to allow off -site parking, be granted for William A. Marshall, in connection with
ZMA 96-18.
The motion passed unanimously.
MOTION: Mr. Tice moved, Ms. Huckle seconded, that buffering be required between
the subject property and residential properties and also along Airport Road, at the time
of site plan review, and that the Planning Commission review the site plan.
The motion passed unanimously.
OR
12-3-96-
5
(The issue of Airport Road was addressed at the end of the meeting.)
SUB 96-083 Little Alps Corporation Preliminary Plat - Proposal to create a total of 5
lots averaging 4.058 acres. Property, described as Tax Map 58, Parcels 64H and 3813,
located in the Ivy area on the west side of Turner Mountain Road at its intersection with
Rt. 250 West. This property, containing 20.29 acres, is zoned Rural Areas in the Ivy
Magisterial District and is not located in a designated development area (Rural Area
III). The lots will be served by Turner Mountain Road, an existing private road.
Mr. Shepherd presented the staff report. The report said neither the County
Engineering Department nor VDOT have any concerns about the existing private road.
Staff recommended approval subject to conditions.
Mr. Shepherd identified another "side issue," which is shown on this plat, though not
actually a part of this subdivision. He explained: "The Turner Mountain Road right-of-
way decreases to 30 feet at the entrance of Turner Mountain Road at Rt. 250, at the
eastern corner of parcel 388. Though not a part of this subdivision, the same person
owns both this parcel as well as 38B and will transfer a 20 foot section to the Turner
Mountain Road Association, the result of which will be Turner Mountain Road will have
a full 50 ft. right-of-way all the way through. So if that community elects to upgrade the
road to bring it into the State system, there will be the opportunity to do so."
Mr. Shepherd confirmed there are no outstanding issues related to this request.
Ms. Huckle asked Mr. Jack Kelsey, Chief of Engineering, to comment on drainage
plans, particularly what kind of buffering will be required to protect the stream. Noting
that the road is already in existence, Mr. Kelsey there are two existing release ditches.
This plat provides for drainage easements over those release ditches. (Drainage
easements did not exist previously.) He said he does not anticipate any runoff
problems from the lots or the construction of the dwellings. He said the Runoff Control
Ordinance does not apply if the volume of runoff is less than 5%. He said a section of
a stream does run through this property and there are 100 foot buffers associated with
the Water Resources Protection Areas regulations, and there is a 100 foot septic
setback required. He said the Water Resources Manager has looked at the other water
that flows through the property and has determined those are not streams.
The applicant was represented by David Collins (Roudabush & Gale). He offered to
answer questions. Ms. Huckle asked if "spec" houses were planned for this property.
Mr. Collins was unsure. He knew only that single family residential units are planned.
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission.
No further discussion occurred.
on
pq
12-3-96- 6
MOTION: Mr. Tice moved, Ms. Washington seconded, that the Little Alps Corporation
Preliminary Plat, be approved subject to the following conditions:
The final plat shall not be submitted for signature, nor shall it be signed until the
following conditions are satisfied.
1. Engineering Department approval of an erosion control permit if land disturbance is
to exceed 10,000 square feet. This applies to road and drainage improvements, not to
individual lot builders with erosion control agreements.
2. Engineering Department issuance of a runoff control permit. A computation of the
impervious cover (including roads and typical lot coverage) for the entire subdivision
may show that impervious cover area is less than 5% of the total area. In this case,
runoff measures will not be necessary.
The statement, "A 5,000 square foot house with a 200' x 12' driveway is below the 5%
impervious cover threshold" (given in the November 7, 1996 letter from David Collins of
Roudabush, Gale & Associates, Inc.) does not suffice for the computations mentioned
above. The computation of impervious cover for these four new lots must include the
initial portion of Turner Mountain Road which is adjacent to these lots.
3. Water Resources Manager approval of a Water Quality Impact Assessment
outlining mitigation measures for any encroachment into the WRPA Buffer limits.
4. Health Department approval.
5. Planning staff approval of final plat.
The motion passed unanimously.
-------------------------------
OLD BUSINESS
Appointment of Planning Commission representatives to Development Area
Initiatives Steering Committee
MOTION: Ms. Huckle moved, Mr. Loewenstein seconded, that Commissioners Dotson
and Tice represent the Commission on this committee, and that Mr. Andersen continue
to represent UVA on the committee. The motion passed (4:0:1), with Commissioner
Dotson abstaining from the action.
NEW BUSINESS
Resolution of Intent - Entrance Corridor Designation for Airport Road
)iS
12-3-96- 7
Being a resident of the northern part of the County, and being familiar with how the
transportation network in this area has changed in recent years, and is destined to
continue changing in years to come, Mr. Loewenstein said he feels this is the right time
to consider designating Airport Road as an Entrance Corridor.
Ms. Huckle felt the road should be considered as an entrance corridor because it is the
first road which is used by people arriving in the County via the airport.
There was a brief discussion as to the exact wording of the motion.
MOTION: Ms. Huckle moved that the Commission adopt a Resolution of Intent to direct
staff to investigate the feasibility of designating Airport Road (a segment of Rt. 649 from
Rt. 29 North, westward to the Airport) as an Entrance Corridor and to report to the
Commission on the results of their investigation. Mr. Loewenstein seconded the
motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
------------------------------------
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:08 p.m.
09
9:
cm
NJ fil.� � WW-W
V. Wayn
Ycilim• •