HomeMy WebLinkAbout07 09 2002 PC MinutesAlbemarle County Planning Commission
July 9, 2002
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a meeting and a public hearing on Tuesday,
July 9, 2002 at 6:00 p.m. at the County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville,
Virginia. Members attending were William Rieley, Vice -Chairman; Rodney Thomas; Tracey
Hopper; William Finley; Pete Craddock; and Bill Edgerton. Absent from the meeting was Jared
Loewenstein.
Other officials present were David Benish, Chief of Planning & Community Development; Greg
Kamptner, Assistant County Attorney; Francis MacCall, Planner; and Steven Biel; Planner.
Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public:
Mr. Rieley invited comment from the public on other matters not listed on the agenda. There
being none, the meeting proceeded.
Consent Agenda:
Approval of Planning Commission Minutes — May 20, 2002, June 4, 2002 and June 6, 2002.
APPLICANT REQUESTED TO BE REMOVED FROM AGENDA.
SDP 2002-062 Josh Terry Major Amendment — One-way circulation & Angled Parking
modifications - Request to allow for one-way circulation per Section 4.12.6.2 and a Request to
allow angled parking per Section 4.12.6.5. (Francis MacCall)
SDP-2002-073 All Saints Anglican Church Minor Amendment Critical Slope Waiver -
Request, pursuant to Section 4.2.5.2, to allow for the disturbance of critical slope. (Francis
MacCall)
Mr. Thomas moved for approval of the consent agenda as presented.
Mr. Edgerton seconded the motion, which carried unanimously (6:0).
Items Requesting Deferral:
SP-02-12 4749 Plank Road Driveway (Sign #32) - Request for special use permit to allow
construction of a driveway in the floodway fringe in accordance with Section 30.3.05.2.2 of the
Zoning Ordinance which allows for landfill in the floodway fringe. The property, described as Tax
Map 99 Parcel 10, contains 3.65 acres, and is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District on
Plank Road (Route 692) approximately 0.4 miles from the intersection of what Route 692 and US
29. The property is zoned RA Rural Area. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as
Rural Area. (Scott Clark) DEFERRED FROM THE JUNE 4, 2002 PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING. APPLICANT REQUESTS DEFERRAL TO SEPTEMBER 18, 2002.
Ms. Hopper moved to accept the applicant's request for deferral of SP-02-12, 4749 Plank Road
Driveway, to September 18, 2002.
Mr. Thomas seconded the motion, which carried unanimously (4:0).
Mr. Rieley asked Mr. Kamptner if they needed to open the public hearing, and Mr. Kamptner
stated yes, because that would avoid the need for readvertising.
Albemarle County Planning Commission — July 9, 2002 315
. Ms. Rieley stated that they would leave the motions on the floor and open the public hearing on
SP-02-12, Plank Road Driveway, with the stipulation that this will come back before the
Commission on September 18th and they will again have a public hearing. There being none, he
closed the public hearing and asked for a role call vote on the motion.
The motion to defer the request to September 18th carried unanimously (6:0).
SP-2002-022 20 South Kitchen (Sign # 85, 861 - Request for special use permit to allow a
Home Occupation Class B for a catering business, in accordance with Section 10.2.2(31) of the
Zoning Ordinance which allows for Home Occupations Class B. The property, described as Tax
Map 102, Parcel 17E contains 65 acres, and is located in the Scottsville Magisterial District on the
east side of Route 20 north of its intersection with Route 708 at 1138 Roundtop Farm. The
property is zoned RA Rural Area. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property Rural Area.
(Steven Biel) APPLICANT REQUESTS DEFERRAL TO AUGUST 6, 2002.
Mr. Rieley opened the public hearing and invited comment from the public. There being none,
the public hearing was closed for action by the Commission.
Mr. Thomas moved to accept the applicant's request for deferral of SP-2002-022, 20 South
Kitchen, to August 6, 2002.
Mr. Edgerton seconded the motion, which carried unanimously (6:0).
Public Hearing Item:
'%Aw SP-2002-024 Wal-Mart Outdoor Storage & Display — Amendment (Sian #48, 49, 50) -
Request for an amendment to an existing special use permit, in accord with the provisions of
Section 30.6.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance, to expand the outdoor storage and display within the
EC Entrance Corridor overlay district on 13.284 acres. The proposal is for the addition of ten (10)
outdoor storage containers on the south side and ten (10) outdoor storage containers on the
north side of the existing Walmart Store building, the expansion of the outdoor garden center, the
use of the sidewalk as display area, the use of the sidewalk for community events on weekends,
and the use of a portion of the parking lot for special events. The property, described as Tax Map
45, Parcel 68D5, zoned HC Highway Commercial, is situated on U.S. Route 29 North in the Rio
Magisterial District. This property is located in a designated growth area (Neighborhood 1) and is
recommended for Regional Service. (Francis MacCall)
Mr. MacCall presented the staff report. (See the attached copy of the staff report.) He stated that
the Wal-Mart Store was requesting approval to amend multiple special use permits. The
applicant is proposing the following:
• to use an additional 26 spaces for expansion of the outdoor garden center;
• to use a portion of the sidewalk for display of lawn and garden merchandise;
• to use another portion of the sidewalk near the main exit to the store for weekend events;
• a portion of the parking lot for temporary events; and
• the addition of 19 temporary storage containers.
He stated that the review of this request is mainly focused on the impact to the Entrance Corridor.
The Architectural Review Board has reviewed this request and has provided conditions that
would minimize the impact that the requested activities would have on the Entrance Corridor.
The circulation of pedestrians and vehicles was also assessed concerning the location of the
multiple events and the location of the garden center expansion and container locations. Those
were found to be acceptable. Staff would like to note that what is shown on this concept plan is
incorrect with regard to some of the physical improvements. The tree wells that are shown on the
Albemarle County Planning Commission — July 9, 2002 316
sidewalk are actually right up against the building as opposed to being closer to the travel way as
;k4w shown. Also, the indoor garden center is shown incorrectly. It is to the right of the building and
there is an internal garden center. These improvements should be corrected with the site plan
amendment. Staff has reviewed this request with full compliance with the principles of the
Neighborhood Model and the Zoning Ordinance, and recommends approval of the special use
permit with conditions 1 through 8 listed in the staff report. Condition # 1 would be the
submission of a site plan amendment to reflect all of the existing and proposed special use permit
conditions and accurately represent all physical improvements to the site.
Mr. Rieley asked if there were any questions for Mr. MacCall. There being none, he opened the
public hearing and invited the applicant to address the Commission.
SPEAKER FOR REQUEST:
Jay White, manager of Wal-Mart, stated that Mr. MacCall did an excellent job of covering what he
was asking for. He noted that if there were any questions or explanations that he would be happy
to answer them.
Mr. Thomas asked what color the storage buildings would be, and Mr. White stated that they
would be blue to gray, which was the same as the ones they currently have.
Mr. Craddock asked how long temporary was, and Mr. White stated that it would be for the month
of August through Christmas.
Mr. Craddock asked if these containers would actually leave the site, and Mr. White stated that
they would.
Mr. MacCall stated that they have actually stipulated that in condition number 5, for all of the
temporary storage containers shall be defined as August 15th through January 15cn
Mr. Craddock asked if the existing containers were temporary, and Mr. MacCall stated that they
were actually permanent containers that were approved through other permits and site plan
amendments.
Mr. Edgerton asked if they would have to come back next year too.
Mr. White stated that they would have to come back every year because they had an unique
problem due to the rapid growth of the business and the fact that the existing store could not be
enlarged. He noted that they had to do little extra things to warehouse the merchandise since it
was bought one year in advance.
Mr. Rieley reiterated that there would be no additional paved areas since they would just be
utilizing the ones that are there differently.
Mr. Rieley asked for public comment. There being none, the public hearing was closed for action
by the Commission.
Mr. Craddock asked why the building could not be expanded.
Mr. Thomas stated that the last group of containers was placed on the property about two years
ago.
Mr. MacCall stated that with the approvals of the original outdoor display at the garden center and
some of the other locations of display that it was stated in some of the history that there was an
original 30,000 square foot addition that had been proposed to the south side of building, but they
would not have enough parking for the proposed addition after taking into consideration the
various areas taken up as display in the parking lot.
Albemarle County Planning Commission — July 9, 2002 317
cm
Mr. Rieley stated that was under the current parking ordinance, which was being revised, and the
numbers might go down.
Mr. Benish noted that staff has not evaluated the parking for that impact, but that could be a
possible scenario for the future.
Mr. Rieley stated that this increases the retail capacity for the months of August through
Christmas while at the same time decreasing the amount of parking which is not altogether
inconsistent with what we've been advocating. He noted that the Architectural Review Board's
review was very thorough.
Mr. Finley moved for approval of SP-2002-024, Wal-Mart Outdoor Storage & Display, with the
conditions recommended by staff.
Ms. Hopper seconded the motion, which carried unanimously (6:0).
The Planning Commission unanimously (6:0) recommended approval of SP-2002-024, Wal-Mart
Outdoor Storage & Display, to the Board of Supervisors with the following conditions:
1. A site plan shall be submitted for approval to clearly show all existing onsite improvements,
all of the conditions for this proposal, including required landscaping, all previously approved
special use permits. All conditions shall be shown in a manner acceptable to the Zoning
Administrator.
2. Sidewalk display of lawn and garden merchandise shall be limited to the sidewalk areas
between the 5' X 5' tree wells, merchandise shall be limited to 4' in height, and shall be on
the sidewalk from February 15 through September 15 only. No new signage associated with
this use shall be permitted. Pricing information shall not be displayed higher than three (3)
feet.
3. Regarding the expansion of the lawn/garden area in the parking lot, landscaping shall be
added along the EC frontage to minimize visibility as follows:
• Plant Pin Oaks, at 3%2' caliper minimum, spaced 35' on center, to complete the row of trees
along the Entrance Corridor.
• Plant Chanticleer Pears, at 2%z" caliper minimum, spaced 40' on center, on the east side of
the eastern travelway, that runs parallel to the Route 29 Entrance Corridor, to provide a
continuous row along this travelway.
• Add ornamental trees or large ornamental shrubs, such as Shadblow Serviceberry, in the
open area between the Pin Oaks and Pears identified above.
4. The expansion of the outdoor lawn and garden center shall be limited to twenty-six (26)
additional spaces, for a total of sixty-three (63) spaces used for the outdoor lawn and garden
center display. The period for the outdoor lawn and garden center shall remain the same as
previously approved February 15 through September 15 only.
5. For the south side of the building, nine (9) additional temporary storage containers shall be
located within the existing enclosed storage area, for a total of 29 temporary storage
containers. For the north side of the building, nine (9) additional temporary storage
containers shall be located at the northwest corner of the loading area, one (1) additional
temporary storage container immediately alongside the three (3) permanent containers
perpendicular to the building. All containers shall not exceed 9'6" in height, and shall not be
stacked. For all of the storage containers, "temporary" shall be defined as August 15 through
January 15. All containers shall be located as shown on the concept plan.
Albemarle County Planning Commission — July 9, 2002 318
Em
6. There shall be no new fenced area to the north side of the building. The existing fenced area
may be used when the temporary containers are not in place.
7. The weekend community events on the sidewalk to the north of the main exit to the building
shall be limited as follows: Only one organization shall be allowed at any one time during the
weekend, one table may be used, that table shall be located in the area shown on the
concept plan, and there shall be a maximum of three persons running the event at one time.
8. The area to the east of the outdoor lawn and garden center shall be designated as a
permanent location for parking lot events. The events shall not use more that 16 parking
space, as shown on the concept plan. No one event shall be longer than three (3) days.
Each event proposed shall obtain a zoning compliance clearance from the Department of
Building Code & Zoning Services.
Mr. Rieley noted that the Board of Supervisors would hear the special use permit on August 7m
SP-2002-025 Time Disposal Services (Sign # 51) - Request for a special use permit to allow for
the outdoor storage of portable toilets in accordance with Section 10.2.2(31) and Section 5.2 of
the Zoning Ordinance which allows for a Home Occupation, Class B. The property described as
Tax Map 33, Parcel 47A2, contains 4.051 acres, and is located in the Rivanna Magisterial District
on the west side of Route 640, approximately 1.5 miles northwest from the intersection of Route
640 and Route 784. The property is zoned RA, Rural Area. The Comprehensive Plan
designates this property as Rural Area. (Steven Biel)
Mr. Biel presented the staff report. (See the attached copy of the staff report.) He stated that Mr.
McCauley uses a flatbed truck to transport portable toilets from his property to a temporary site.
Typically there are 15 to 20 portable toilets on the applicant's property at a given time. Mr.
McCauley received a notice of violation on September 25, 2001 for an unauthorized business,
which may not have been permitted without the appropriate clearance, issued by the Zoning
Administrator. Also cited were multiple inoperable vehicles, discarded construction material and
trash accumulated on the property that conditioned a junkyard according to the Zoning
Department. Then on November 29, 2001 Mr. McCauley did obtain a Home Occupation, Class A
permit for a portable toilet business with a condition that there would be no storage of portable
toilets on the site. A second notice of violation was issued to Mr. McCauley on February 26, 2002
for storage of multiple portable toilets on the property in direct violation of the conditions of the
Class A permit. All portable toilets on the site were to be moved by March 21, 2002 and as of
today there are numerous portable toilets being stored on the property. Staff is concerned that
the use is not supportive of agricultural uses in the Rural Area and would be more consistent with
more intensive commercial/industrial uses of the development areas. Staff feels that this use
would be detrimental to the adjoining properties. While there is some screening provided by trees
on the southern boundary of the property, it is still visible from Route 640 and parcels 47A1 and
47A5. He pointed out that some of the photographs were taken from the adjoining properties.
The Department of Engineering has expressed concerns with the methods of toilet waste
disposal as well as any chemicals stored on the site. If the request were approved, the applicant
would be required to submit a certified engineer's report detailing how the standards of 4.14
would be met. Staff recommends this request to be denied due to the use not being supportive of
agricultural uses and for the potential to have a negative impact on the adjoining property owners.
However, if the Planning Commission decides to approve the request, staff recommends the
conditions listed in the staff report which includes condition # 7 that they would have to abate the
violation before the issuance of the clearance will be approved. He pointed out that John Jones,
Zoning Inspector, was present.
Mr. Finley asked what it meant that he received the class A permit, but then they revoked it.
Albemarle County Planning Commission — July 9, 2002
319
Mr. Biel stated that the class A permit is in the staff report and states the conditions on it.
1*W Apparently they approved the actual business, but not the storage. He noted that the class A
permit was so they could operate the business until the special use permit could be applied for
and approved.
Ms. Hopper asked if the site has been cleaned up.
Mr. John Jones, Zoning Inspector, stated that they were cited for an unauthorized business at the
location. He wrote up the notice of violation, but subsequent to that they came in and received a
class A, Home Occupation and in effect violated that approval. Subsequent to that on the class A
permit it says under condition of approval that there shall be no storage on site while working on
the special use permit. He stated that he went out directly after that and the storage of the toilets
was going on which filtered through a new violation of their class A, Home Occupation. The
condition of approval stated no storage on the site. He stated that a new violation was found after
they received the class A, Home Occupation. He presented photographs taken yesterday
showing storage of various port -a -toilets. Adjoining the property is a large truck and trailer and a
backhoe. Some of the pictures were taken from the adjoining property just to give the
Commission a view of what is visible by the neighbors.
Ms. Hopper asked if it was a sewage container in one of the photographs, and Mr. Jones stated
that he was not sure, but thought it was a container used to carry fluids for cleaning.
Mr. Rieley asked if there were any other questions.
Mr. Finley asked if there was some discussion of where he would store the toilets when he got
the Class A, Home Occupation. He could not have a business without any toilets.
Mr. Kamptner stated that the Class A, Home Occupation allows him to run his business from his
home with all the paperwork. He pointed out that the permit says "no storage on the site at this
time."
Mr. Rieley opened the public hearing and asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission.
SPEAKER FOR REQUEST:
Boyd McCauley stated that he has been in business for 17 years and in the port -a -toilet business
for 4 years at the same location. He stated that he had one truck and one Mustang. All the
vehicles were licensed and are driven. He stated that he only had one 1966 Mustang that he was
restoring for his son that does not have a license. He noted that he had one other truck that he
kept that does not have a license on it. He noted that all of the other vehicles were licensed and
tagged. He pointed out that he had two trucks that used for his portable toilet business. He stated
that he did not know what they were talking about for construction materials except for the chain
length fence that he took down. Other than that, he did not know what they were talking about.
He stated that the trucks are brought in empty every day. The chemicals that they use to clean
them are biodegradable. The toilets are cleaned and brought in daily. He presented pictures of
the site that he took today from the road in various locations. He stated that he has a batting
cage for his little league team. He took some of the pictures in the road in the front of his house.
Within five miles, he stated that there are five dumptrucks that have more than two trucks that
come home daily. Also there is a trash company business located near his house. In addition,
there are plenty of people in the area that have cars that are not tagged or licensed that are within
five miles of his home. He stated that he was a man trying to make an honest living. He pointed
out that he had been in business a long time and would like to stay in business.
Mr. Thomas asked if there would be another property that he could store the toilets?
Albemarle County Planning Commission — July 9, 2002 320
Mr. McCauley stated that he owned 12.9 acres that were in three difference parcels. He noted
that he would be happy to move it anywhere they wanted him to on that land.
Mr. Finley asked when he picks up a toilet that has been used, where does he dispose of the
waste?
Mr. McCauley stated that they take a tankard hose from the truck and pump the waste out of the
tank. Then, they clean the toilet, deodorize it, sanitize it, and carry it in. Everyday they go by the
Rivanna Solid Waste Plant and dump the waste. He stated that they don't bring any waste to his
home.
Mr. Finley stated that he mentioned biodegradable chemicals. He asked if they were for cleaning
the tanks.
Mr. McCauley stated that they were the biodegradable chemicals for cleaning the toilets and
keeping the odor down.
Mr. Finley asked if all of that was discharged when you discharge the private waste at Rivanna
Solid Waste.
Mr. McCauley stated that yes it was. He noted that other than that, they use plan Lysol and 409
which you can find in any home.
Mr. Edgerton asked when he received his Class A, Home Occupation permit if it says that there
shall be no storage of toilets on the site. He asked if the staff held any discussion about that.
Mr. McCauley stated that yes there was some discussion. He stated that he told them that he
had no other place to put the toilets and was told that they would work with him. He noted that
was what he did.
Mr. Finley asked how many toilets he would have stored on the property?
Mr. McCauley stated that he would go down as low as 3 and get up to as many as 20 in his yard
at any one time.
Mr. Rieley asked if there were any other questions for Mr. McCauley. He asked if there was
anyone else who would want to speak. There being none, the matter was brought before the
Commission for possible action.
Mr. Thomas asked for an explanation on the determination that his property constitutes a
junkyard.
Mr. Biel stated that it was all the stuff that is being stored that was cited such as construction
vehicles, debris, trash.
Mr. Benish stated that the junkyard determination was made by the Zoning Department. He
stated that they were looking specifically at the request for the Class B, Home Occupation. This
request is not addressing that particular issue and it won't be resolved with the special use
permit.
Ms. Hopper asked if the Zoning Department would be following up on these violations.
Mr. Kamptner stated that if the violations are not abated, Zoning staff would pursue civil penalties
to encourage compliance; and, if that fails they would seek an injunction.
Albemarle County Planning Commission — July 9, 2002 321
Mr. Rieley asked if the violation was brought to the attention of the Zoning Department by the
neighbors.
Mr. Biel stated that he did not know.
Mr. Rieley stated that Mr. McCauley had been in business for 3 or 4 years before he was caught
Mr. Jones stated that he talked with Mr. McCauley when he went out on the property. He stated
that the first violation concerning the junkyard was one of the revenues they had to seek civil
penalties. He noted that a junkyard was defined as more than one inoperable vehicle and the
three that he knew were out there was taken care of. He stated that part of the violation was
taken care of and the property was cleaned up as far as the junkyard situation.The investigation
pursuant to this was because we also received a complaint from the public about Time Disposal
or a property that had Time Disposal equipment at it. When he went and investigated the
property, he found a significant amount of debris, old trucks and trailers and a serious junkyard
with Time Disposal written all over it. He noted that was a different property. He checked into the
property further and found that there was another property with the same last name and went and
checked there and found the portable toilets and a couple of discarded garbage trucks at this
property and that precipitated this violation.
Mr. Rieley reiterated that it was generated by a neighbor's complaint.
Ms. Hopper asked if he had explored options of creating some type of building in which he could
store these portable toilets?
Mr. McCauley stated that he had, but that he has not had the time since his father was dying of
cancer, he coached little league and was still trying to run his business. He pointed out that his
backhoe was only used for personal use and he did not hire it out.
Mr. McCauley stated that he had an 8-foot fence with slates that he could put up in the yard until
he could get a permit to build a building.
Mr. Thomas asked if he would be in compliance if he built a storage building or put up fencing to
store these portable toilets on the property.
Mr. Kamptner stated staff's recommended condition # 1: "all outdoor storage shall be screened in
accordance with the landscaping provision of the Zoning Ordinance and all outdoor storage shall
not be visible from the adjoining properties and from Route 640." He stated that if they wanted to
add some clarification on how they would screen it from the adjoining property and the road, then
they could specify the fence, the height, the slatts, the color, the landscaping and all of those
kinds of things to go along with that
Mr. Benish stated that if they are dealing with a building, there is a square footage requirement of
1,500 square feet.
Mr. Thomas suggested that the height of the fence should be tall enough to hide the toilets since
he thought they were about 8 foot tall.
Ms. Hopper suggested that they explore the option of putting these inside of a building and
placing some type of time frame on it as an option.
Mr. Rieley stated that he was sympathetic to the idea. He noted that his reaction on reading the
staff report was pretty clear that this is a use that is more appropriate for other areas that are not
zoned Rural Areas. Then secondly, there has been a long record of noncompliance and
violations that aggravate that situation. Clearly there are mitigating circumstances here and one
of the big ones is that this is a wooded site and Mr. McCauley was doing business without the
Albemarle County Planning Commission — July 9, 2002 322
proper permits, but that has happened to a lot of people inadvertently as well. He was
sympathetic to trying to figure out a way that this could be worked out. He was influenced by the
fact that this has not come to us because of aggrieved neighbors who are the people who would
be most affected by it.
Mr. Rieley asked what kind of time frame Ms. Hopper had in mind, and Ms. Hopper stated that
she was actually thinking of a year.
Mr. Thomas questioned if there would be ramifications of storing portable toilets inside of a
building.
Mr. Rieley asked if the building has to be completely closed or could it be opened on the front. He
noted that they were operating on the assumption that the portable toilets were completely empty
when they are on stored on his property.
Mr. Finley asked about the certified engineering report.
Mr. Biel stated that the Engineering Department wanted to see some kind of report on the
performance standards which was in Section 4.14 of the Zoning Ordinance that deals with more
industrial type of uses.
Ms. Hopper pointed out that they would need to change condition # 1.
Mr. Rieley stated that they should consider stipulating that only empty ones could be stored on
property as well.
Mr. Craddock stated that condition number 6 talks about the possibility of construction equipment.
He stated that if this gets passed for toilets, then the construction equipment would be in violation.
Ms. Hopper asked if someone could have his or her own personal backhoe without being in
violation.
Mr. Biel stated that he would think so if it were a farm type of equipment. He stated that Zoning
was concerned about the fact that there were several pieces of equipment in addition to the
debris.
Mr. Finley pointed out that they had stated that violation had been taken care of.
Ms. Hopper asked about the construction materials and the one backhoe.
Mr. Jones stated that at his first inspection there was a lot of fencing which included construction
materials like torn up boards and a lot of other things. Also there was an old garbage truck. He
stated that the construction material was gone. There were some cars that were not tagged or
properly inspected which has been taken care of. He stated that there was still a garbage truck
there yesterday when he took the photographs.
Mr. Edgerton noted that he sensed a lot of desire from the other Commissioners to work with Mr.
McCauley, but he was a bit insecure if he will perform. He pointed out that Mr. McCauley has
quite a history of nonperformance here. He was told when got his Class A, Home Occupation
permit back in November that he could not store his toilets there, and he ignored that and did not
do anything about it. Then later he was cited in violation. Then after being cited of the violation,
he applied for a special use permit. It appears that he only applied for that after he was
threatened with legal action. And yet as recently as yesterday, he has not done anything to
screen the toilets. He noted his concerns. He stated that he did not mind trying to work with the
man, but he felt that they needed to have some way to make sure that if they are willing to work
with him that he will be required to perform to a certain standard. He noted that he was not sure
Albemarle County Planning Commission — July 9, 2002 323
that he was inclined to ask for more than appropriate screening. He was not sure that a building
makes sense, but he would defer to the other Commissioners on that. He thought that a year
was too generous and he should have to perform a little sooner than that. He noted that it has
been eight months since he was told that he was not in compliance.
Ms. Hopper agreed with his comments. She felt it was an enforcement issue. Saying that you
have to have a building in which to store something gave it a pretty good chance that something
would be screened. She noted that she had seen sites where they have required screening and
there is no screening. She stated that she was not sure if that was the solution, but that was the
motivation.
Mr. Edgerton stated that he was not comfortable just hoping that it would happen. He asked that
a plan be brought back for their review with a specific proposal that will comply with the Zoning
Ordinance section on screening. 32.7.9.8
Mr. Kamptner stated that the screening could either be done with landscaping, or a wall, fence or
a combination.
Mr. Rieley stated that there were two approaches to the nature of screening from adjacent
properties and Route 640. What happens outside of that is Mr. McCauley's business. He stated
that they could try to get a deferral to get more specific information and the other was to give a
clear message to staff and trust them with the specifics.
Mr. Edgerton stated that considering Mr. McCauley's nonperformance in recent months, he would
recommend a deferral until Mr. McCauley could come back to us with some proposed screening
that would reassure them of that before they grant the permit that they know what they are
approving.
Mr. Rieley asked if they were in the situation that the time limit has expired.
Mr. Kamptner stated that the application date was April 22nd the Commission needs to make its
recommendation within 90 days.
Mr. Craddock stated that unless it was a voluntary deferral.
Mr. Rieley asked Mr. McCauley stated that some of the Commissioners would like to see the
specific screening proposal worked out between you and staff and brought back before the
Commission. He asked if he would be agreeable to taking a deferral to work that out.
Mr. McCauley stated yes, that he would be glad to do anything that he could to stay in business.
He stated that he did have 8-foot fencing that he could put up.
Mr. Rieley asked staff if they have a date to put on the table.
Mr. Benish stated that the date would be predicated with Mr. McCauley can work with staff to get
the plan. He suggested August 20tn
Mr. Biel stated that he would contact Mr. McCauley tomorrow.
After discussion of the proposed conditions of approval, the Commission would anticipate to have
more specific information and a screening plan for condition # 1, and an addition to condition # 8
that only empty portable toilets be stored on the property.
Mr. Benish suggested that they pursue with Mr. McCauley what is the normal equipment that is
stored on site and have that conditioned. He noted that if he had one dump truck and one
backhoe, then they could consider that and make that part of the storage requirement. He stated
Albemarle County Planning Commission — July 9, 2002 324
that they could set a limit for those type of vehicles so that it was clear what is a normal part of his
activity that could be construed as construction materials at different times by inspectors or home
owners.
Mr. Edgerton moved to approve the applicant's request for deferral of SP-02-025, Time Disposal
Services, to August 20th to allow the applicant time to work with staff on a plan to provide
screening from the adjacent property and Route 640.
Mr. Finley seconded the motion, which carried unanimously (6:0).
There being none, the meeting proceeded.
New Business:
Mr. Thomas asked what the status was on the Hollymead Town Center.
Mr. Benish stated staff has provided a response to the developer group articulating what the
specific issues are that we would like for them to concentrate on as we interpret the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The applicant has, based on your work session, resubmitted a
planned development. He stated that they don't know if that plan has sufficiently addressed all
the issues that were raised by the Commission and staff before. They are also working towards
the completion of a traffic study that was submitted to VDOT. He noted that the Planning &
Engineering staff have raised a number of concerns. He stated that there were additional issues
that needed to be addressed in that report. The applicants have initially asked for a second work
session with the Commission. Staff has indicated to them if that is their desire, then they will
bring that back to the Commission. Staff has asked that certain things be completed so that we
have some new information for you to consider.
Adjournment:
There being no further business, the meeting closed at 7:15 p.m.
(Recorded and transcribed by Sharon C. Taylor,
Albemarle County Planning Commission — July 9, 2002 325