Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09 13 2005a PC MinutesAlbemarle County Planning Commission ,, September 13, 2005 Verbatim Transcript for SDP-2004-074 Gazebo Plaza The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a meeting and a public hearing on Tuesday, September 13, 2005 at 6:00 p.m., at the County Office Building, Room 241, Second Floor, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. Members attending were Bill Edgerton, Chairman; Rodney Thomas, Calvin Morris, Jo Higgins; Pete Craddock; and Marcia Joseph, Vice -Chair. Absent were William Rieley and David J. Neuman, FAIA, Architect for University of Virginia. Other officials present were Wayne Cilimberg, Planning Director; David Benish, Chief of Planning; Elaine Echols, Principal Planner; David Pennock, Senior Planner; Scott Clark, Senior Planner; Rebecca Ragsdale, Senior Planner; Bill Fritz, Development Review Manager; Amelia McCulley, Zoning and Current Development Director/Zoning Administrator; Jack Kelsey, County Engineer and Greg Kamptner, Deputy County Attorney. Call to Order and Establish Quorum: Mr. Edgerton called the regular meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and established a quorum. Old Business: Mr. Edgerton: Okay, the next item is a closed session. Mr. Craddock: I move that the Commission go into closed session pursuant to Section 2.2-3711(A) of the Code of Virginia under Subsection (7) to discuss with legal counsel and staff specific legal issues regarding pending litigation relating to the denial of a site plan. That is my motion. Mr. Edgerton: Do I hear a second. Mr. Thomas: Second. Mr. Edgerton: All in favor. Mr. Craddock Ms. Higgins Mr. Edgerton, Ms. Joseph, Mr. Morris, Mr. Thomas: Aye The motion passed unanimously by a vote of 6:0. Commissioner Rieley was absent. The Planning Commission moved to Room #235 at 9:50 p.m. for a closed session. The Planning Commission returned to Room #241 at 10:21 p.m. Mr. Craddock: I move that the Commission certify by a recorded vote that to the best of each Commission member's knowledge only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the motion authorizing the closed session were heard, discussed or considered in the closed session. Mr. Morris: Second. Mr. Edgerton: We have a motion and a second on the table. Is there any further discussion? Could we have a roll call vote, please? Ms. Taylor: Mr. Thomas. Mr. Thomas: Aye. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT FOR SDP-2004-074 GAZEBO PLAZA Ms. Tavlor: Ms. Joseph. Ms. Joseph: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Mr. Morris. Mr. Morris: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Mr. Edgerton. Mr. Edgerton: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Ms. Higgins. Ms. Higgins: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Mr. Craddock. Mr. Craddock: Aye. The motion passed unanimously by a vote of 6:0. Commissioner Rieley was absent. Mr. Edgerton: Okay. We are now under old business and are going to reconsider SDP-2004-074, Gazebo Plaza Preliminary Site Plan. Could we have the staff report, please? Mr. Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a, included in your packet is an executive summary, as well as the action letter from your prior hearing of this, and the prior staff report is included with you `fir information. The proposal is for a shopping center of approximately 180,000 square feet located on Hansens Mountain Road at the intersection with Route 250, The Planning Commission denied the site plan on this property with the associated waivers by a vote of 4:0 at its meeting on October 19, 2004. That action letter and the justification is included in your packet. Previously staff had identified sections significant in the review of this proposal. One of those sections dealt with structures located on critical slopes. We provided for you some additional information on critical slopes. The critical slopes covered an area of approximately 900 square feet that was on the building that was on the western portion of the site. It is significant to note that the 1980 ordinance regulated development on critical slopes only for the building. The lighting was not subject to a limitation of activity on critical slopes. So there are other critical slopes on the property, but only this 900 square feet is subject to review. It is interesting to note also that the site plan was prepared with a contour of 2 feet. The ordinance allows you to prepare a site plan at a 5 foot contour interval. If they had chosen to choose the 5 foot contour interval as opposed to the 2 foot contour interval the two small areas of critical slopes that is a single contour width wide would not have appeared as critical slopes. And it is probable that the one area where it is two contour widths wide would probably also not be shown as critical slopes. But, because the applicant chose to provide it at this level of detail we picked those up as critical slopes. With the limited area and the limited amount of disturbance that is involved, we are not able to support based on this additional analysis. We are able to support the modification on critical slopes. Parking is also located on site more than 500 feet from the building which it serves. Staff had previously recommended approval of that modification and continues to do so. There were four sections that dealt with access. Staff has those sections provided for you in the executive summary. Things that we recommended that the site did not satisfy these provisions based on VDOT statements that it would not issue an entrance permit. Staff opinion is that the preliminary site plan may be approved and ultimately VDOT would be involved in the review process of the final site plan and the actual construction of the property to ensure the design standards are met for a commercial entrance. We are not able to recommend approval of the two modifications and recommend approval of the site plan subject to the conditions that are in your executive summary. I would be happy to answer any ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 2 VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT FOR SDP-2004-074 GAZEBO PLAZA questions that you may have. Mr. Edgerton: Are there any questions from the Commission for Mr. Fritz. Ms. Joseph: I guess with the current ordinance we would expect to see some sort of, oh, the applicant to give us something concerning the modification of regulations. Mr. Fritz: The modification for parking beyond 500 feet was routinely modified and ultimately done away with in the ordinance because it was modified so frequently that seldom something was submitted on that. The critical slopes modification, yes, under current ordinance and current provisions we would get more information than we are currently getting in this application. But, this is again, it is a very limited area and with this small area we may actually deal with it in this manner exactly the same if we had a current application. Ms. Higgins: But, it would definitely be handled in the E and S plan. Mr. Fritz: Yes. It gets. Ms. Higgins: Final site plan stage it is routinely handled in the E and S plan. Mr. Fritz: Yes, and I believe and, as we stated in here, that I believe that all of the issues regarding siltation, run off and other issues will be addressed during the normal erosion and sediment control review process, which it is subject to. Ms. Joseph: Right, and normally we speak to things that it is in the growth area. That it is in the development area. And we feel that it is not damaging any adjacent streams. That is it not going to do any undue damage because of movement of rock and all of that other stuff because this is such a small area. IVAW Mr. Fritz: This is a very small area. It is not shown as, it has not identified resources. Ms. Joseph: Okay, thank you. Mr. Edgerton: Are there any other questions of staff. Sorry. There being none, do we open this open this for a public hearing. Mr. Kamptner: It is not a public hearing, but we routinely allow public comment. Mr. Edgerton: Okay. Okay. Would the applicant like to address the Commission on this application? (Inaudible comment from audience.) You would need to come up and identify yourself. Ms. Higgins: You would need to speak into the microphone. Mr. Will Tanner: I am Will Tanner of Payne and Hordous, (inaudible) and represent Mr. Spurzem in the case that is pending in Circuit Court. And the applicant does not have anything at all to add at this point. So we will not be making any further statements. Thank you. Mr. Edgerton: Thank you. Does anybody else want to speak to this matter? Mr. Ron Denburg: Thank you very much. My name is Ron Denburg and I live adjacent to this plan. I am probably; this is the third time that I have addressed a public hearing on this particular development, Gazebo Plaza. I may well be and I am probably am the only person in the room who was present at the creation two and a half decades ago. I am confident that nothing I can say here this evening regardless of how passionately I say it is going to have an affect on your vote. I would simply remind you that this plan will have an enormous affect on what I am quite certain is the oldest residential neighborhood in the Pantops area, that is Glenorchy. A dramatic effect particularly on the family, the families, the lives of properties adjacent to this particular planned shopping center. I ask you to encourage the developer to ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 3 VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT FOR SDP-2004-074 GAZEBO PLAZA minimize that affect, particularly the affect on the families that live adjacent to the plan of Gazebo Plaza. That is all that I have to say at this point. Thank you very much. Mr. Edgerton: Thank you very much. Is there anybody else that would like to address the Commission on this application? There being none, I will now close the public hearing and bring the matter back before the Commission. Ms. Higgins: I have a question that based on the public comment that we just had. This plan was rezoned in 1980, but then the site plan expired at the time. So the site plan that is before us will it be reviewed under the ordinance, the site plan ordinance in effect in 1980 or the current ordinance. Mr. Fritz: The site plan is reviewed under the 1980 zoning ordinance. Mr. Thomas: But, I thought that it had expired. Mr. Fritz: It said, the, the provision is a provision in the ordinance under the planned development section, section 8.5.5.5, which states that the, at the applicant's choice they can be reviewed under either the ordinance in effect today or the ordinance in effect at the time the planned development was established. And this property was rezoned from B-1 to PD-SC ... Ms. Higgins: In 1979. Mr. Fritz:... when the ordinance was adopted on December 10, 1980. Ms. Higgins: Okay. Does that mean that it is excluded from ARB review? Mr. Fritz: The site plan is excluded from ARB review, but the building permits are not. Ms. Hiqqins: Okay. When you say the site plan, then the level of landscaping is not subject to the ARB. Mr. Fritz: It is subject to the 1980 ordinance and not subject to the ARB, except as may be related to the building permit if they use that as a mitigating factor on the building permit. But, I can't answer that question. Ms. Higgins: And that hasn't gone to ARB yet? Mr. Fritz: It has not gone. Ms. Higgins: And then the other question as it relates to the adjacent property owners, I am looking at one of the sheets, sheet 20 or 25 depending on the circle of 25, is the requirement for buffering between the PD-MC and the residential zoning been met on this preliminary plan. Mr. Fritz: That is a different buffering because of the way the application plan was approved. There was a plan that was approved in October of 1980, which is the application plan. So that is the plan that this is all reviewed against, and yes, it does meet the requirements of the ordinance. Ms. Higgins: Okay, so if I am understanding this correctly, the site plan that expired ... Mr. Fritz: Yes. Ms. Hiqqins:... was not vested. It was not graded. It was not built. Mr. Fritz: Correct. Ms. Hiqqins: Showed some landscaping. `err Mr. Fritz: Yes. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 4 VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT FOR SDP-2004-074 GAZEBO PLAZA Ms. Higgins: And that instead of using the landscaping buffer requirements that exists now you could go back and say that there is a minimal amount of trees based on that plan and just have them meet that as a standard. Does that set a standard even though it expired? Mr. Fritz: The site plan that was approved in October of 1980 became the application plan for this planned development. Just like today when you get an application plan and you approve the rezoning and the Board approves the rezoning. Ms. Higgins: So there is no landscape, the buffer requirements that are in existence between the PD-MC and residential are not going to be met. Mr. Fritz: The application plan or the site plan that was done had certain limits of grading and so forth and they are allowed to meet those. The landscaping that was shown on that plan was probably, and I am doing this from memory without looking at both of the plans, was, does not meet the ordinance that was adopted in 1980. They have to meet that landscape standard still. So we have not reviewed and approved the landscape plan component of what you have before you. Ms. Higgins: Well, but it needs a landscape plan in here. And if we are approving the preliminary plan is that in our, where is the location of the. Mr. Fritz: And we've recommended a condition which is Current Development approval of landscape plans. We've not approved that component of it. We are not saying that the plan that is included in your packet today is approved. Ms. Hiqqins: Okay. And then when you say Current Development approval of the landscape plan what standard does that staff person use? r Mr. Fritz: The 1980 zoning ordinance. Ms. Higgins: Okay. Which does have buffering between? Mr. Fritz: It does have buffering and it has, yes, and that is what they have to meet. Mr. Thomas: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Fritz this is the site plan that is dated 8-23-04. Is this the one that we are passing? Mr. Fritz: Yes. Mr. Thomas: But, by the 1980 standards. Ms. Joseph: Yes. Mr. Fritz: Yes. Ms. Joseph: Yes, so all of these recommendations for conditions will be met by looking at the 1980 zoning ordinance. Mr. Fritz: With the exception of conditions 4 and 5 and 6, which are met by the Service Authority's reviewing it, being it was the current design standards. They are not subject to the zoning ordinance. The Fire Official is looking at it for current Building Code requirements. And road names are handled by a provision that is outside of the zoning ordinance. Ms. Joseph: Okay. What about 2? Mr. Fritz: Oh, yes and E and S is a State mandated component. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 5 VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT FOR SDP-2004-074 GAZEBO PLAZA Ms. Joseph: Okay. Ms. Hig-gins: Is it, is it worth the ones 1, 2 and 3 adding to that per standards in the ordinance in 1980. Should those conditions say that to differentiate them from the ones that are current standards? We want to be very clear that this is a different case than we would normally be handling. Mr. Craddock: Two has to meet current, doesn't it? Ms. Higgins: Oh, okay so two would be current State standards. Ms. Joseph: Right. Ms. Hig-gins: One and three. Mr. Craddock: 1980. Ms. Hig-gins: Would say the 1980 zoning ordinance. Mr. Fritz: You could add it, but we, it's, it's obvious to us. Mr. Edgerton: I would like to add it. Ms. Joseph: I think that we should. Ms. Hiqqins: I think we should. Mr. Morris: Absolutely. Mr. Edgerton: I would like to add it because this is, this is there. Ms. Higgins: Because the staff person, it needs to be clear so that the applicant and the staff person knows which, which page they are going to turn to and they might have to dig that book up. Mr. Edgerton: Okay. Mr. Kamptner: Bill, does storm water management fall under current or former regulations? Mr. Fritz: Just a second, the storm water management. Ms. Higgins: That would be under current. Mr. Fritz: That is under current, I believe. Let me just take a quick look and make sure that is the right section. Actually, I don't need to look. It is under current. I say that (inaudible). Ms. Higgins: So then we don't need to put 1980. Mr. Fritz: I can't remember if that comes out of 17 off the top of my head or if it is coming out of 32. 1 think that it is coming out of 17 and not 32. Ms. Higgins: So that means that it would be current. Ms. McCulley: So you said it did come out of Chapter 17 because I remember that there was a separate site plan ordinance at that time. But, I did not bring that ordinance so I don't know. Mr. Fritz: I believe the only one of those three, the only one of those six conditions that would be **Awl reviewed based on the ordinance provisions as it exists on December 10, 1980 is condition number 3. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 6 VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT FOR SDP-2004-074 GAZEBO PLAZA Ms. Higgins: Okay, well now I would like to add that it would be the 1980 zoning ordinance standards and that 1 and 2 would be under current ordinance standards. Mr. Craddock: So number 3 wouldn't have current in it at all. Ms. Higgins: No, the Current Development approval of landscape plans per 1980 ordinance requirements. Current and that is their title that I think that is what they are called, Current Development. It is more of a title. Even though it does not state specifically and even though the critical slopes would not have been identified except for the level of detail being increased so that there are some minor noticeable standards, are we considering that it will take a separate action for a waiver of critical slopes? Mr. Fritz: I would recommend that you take section actions on the critical slopes and parking. Ms. Joseph: And the parking. Mr. Edgerton: Okay. What is your pleasure? Ms. Higgins: Mr. Chairman, I will make a motion that on SDP-2004-074 that we waive 4.12.3.3.b; parking located more than 500 feet from the building. Mr. Edgerton: We have a motion. Do we have a second? Mr. Thomas: Second. Mr. Edgerton: We have motion and a second on the floor. Any further discussion? Can we have a roll call vote, please? Ms. Taylor: Mr. Thomas. Mr. Thomas: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Ms. Joseph. Ms. Joseph: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Mr. Morris. Mr. Morris: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Mr. Edgerton. Mr. Edgerton: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Ms. Higgins. Ms. Higgins: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Mr. Craddock. Mr. Craddock: Aye. Ms. Higgins: Mr. Chairman, I will make a motion that SDP-2004-074 due to the reasoning that Ms. Joseph stated that the critical slopes waiver be granted. Mr. Edgerton: We have a motion. Mr. Thomas: Second. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 7 VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT FOR SDP-2004-074 GAZEBO PLAZA Mr. Edgerton: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion. Can we have a roll call vote, please? Ms. Taylor: Mr. Craddock. Mr. Craddock: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Ms. Higgins. Ms. Higgins: Aye. Ms. Tavlor: Mr. Edgerton. Mr. Edgerton: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Mr. Morris. Mr. Morris: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Ms. Joseph. Ms. Joseph: Aye. Ms. Tavlor: Mr. Thomas. Mr. Thomas: Aye. '`%W Ms. Joseph: I just wanted to say that a lot of things have changed since this was approved and we are looking at this with our old ordinance. We are allowed to do some things and not allowed to do some other things. And sometimes it is hard because they were dealing with a current ordinance and there are certain things that they think that they are able to do and are able to do in our current ordinance that the 1980 ordinance did not allow us to do. One read very, very carefully. So that is what they are dealing with tonight. And she just wanted to make sure when any current plans come in that everyone is aware that we are looking at the current ordinance standards and not 1980 standards. Mr. Morris: Bill, if you are in charge when these folks if it moves forward at all, I will please encourage the applicant to work very, very closely with the neighbors not only of Glenorchy but in Ashcroft. They will be definitely affected by anything. Ms. Joseph: And they might be customers. Mr. Morris: Yes. Ms. Higgins.: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that SDP-2004-07 be approved. Mr. Kamptner: 074. Ms. Higgins: 074 be approved with the conditions 1 — 6 as modified for 1 and 2 to say under current ordinance requirements, number 3 to say approval of landscape plans per 1980 ordinance requirements with those modifications and the six conditions. Mr. Edgerton: We have a motion. Do we have a second? Mr. Thomas: Second. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 8 VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT FOR SDP-2004-074 GAZEBO PLAZA Mr. Edgerton: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Can we have a roll call vote, please? Ms. Tavlor: Mr. Craddock. Mr. Craddock: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Ms. Higgins. Ms. Higgins: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Mr. Edgerton. Mr. Edgerton: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Mr. Morris. Mr. Morris: Nay. Ms. Taylor: Ms. Joseph. Ms. Joseph: Aye. Ms. Taylor: Mr. Thomas. Mr. Thomas: Aye. (Recorded and transcribed by Sharon Claytor Taylor, Recording Secretary.) Note: The following actions were taken by the Planning Commission on September 13, 2005 for SDP- 2004-074, Gazebo Plaza Preliminary Site Plan: Motion on Waiver on Parking: Motion: Ms. Higgins moved, Mr. Thomas seconded, that SDP-2004-074, Gazebo Plaza be waived under Section 4.12.3.3.b, for parking located more than 500 feet from the building. The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. Commissioner Rieley was absent. Motion on Waiver on Critical Slopes: Motion: Ms. Higgins moved, Mr. Thomas seconded, that SDP-2004-074, Gazebo Plaza, due to the reasoning stated by Ms. Joseph, that the critical slopes waiver be granted. The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. Commissioner Rieley was absent. Mr. Morris asked staff to encourage the applicant to work very closely with the neighbors not only in Glenorchy, but in Ashcroft, since they will definitely be affected by the development. Motion on SDP-2004-074: Motion: Ms. Higgins moved, Mr. Thomas seconded, that SDP-2004-074, Gazebo Plaza be approved with the six conditions as modified for #1 & 2 to say under current ordinance requirements and #3 to say approval of landscape plans per 1980 ordinance requirements. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 9 VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT FOR SDP-2004-074 GAZEBO PLAZA The Community Development Department shall not accept submittal of the final site plan for signature until tentative final approvals for the following conditions have been obtained. The final site plan shall not be signed until the following conditions have been met: 1. Current Development Engineer Approval of Storm water Management plans and calculations under current ordinance requirements. 2. Current Development Engineer Approval of Erosion and Sediment Control Plan under current ordinance standards. 3. Current Development approval of landscape plans per the 1980 ordinance requirements. 4. Albemarle County Service Authority Approval of water and sewer plans. 5. Fire Official Approval. 6. Approval of road name for access to the site. The motion passed by a vote of 5:1. Commissioner Morris voted nay. Commissioner Rieley was absent. Mr. Edgerton stated that SDP-2004-074, Gazebo Plaza was approved. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 10 VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT FOR SDP-2004-074 GAZEBO PLAZA