Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11 23 1993 PC Minutes11-23-93 OR NOVEMBER 23, 1993 The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on Tuesday, November 23, 1993, Meeting Room 7, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were: Mr. Phil Grimm, Chairman; Mr. Walter Johnson, Vice Chairman; Mr. William Nitchmann; Mr. Tom Jenkins; Mr. Tom Blue; Ms. Ellen Andersen; and Ms. Babs Huckle. Other officials present were: Mr. David Benish, Chief of Community Development; Mr. Bill Fritz, Senior Planner; Mr. Ron Keeler, Chief of Planning; and Mr. Jim Bowling, Deputy County Attorney. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and established that a quorum was present. The minutes of October 19 were approved as submitted. Mr. Blue suggested that copies be sent to the press. The minutes of October 26 were approved as submitted. Referring to page 3 of the October 26 minutes, Mr. Johnson asked that it be noted that though reported accurately, Mr. Cilimberg later indicated to him that the procedure he had described for a zoning amendment had been inaccurate, i.e. "a resolution of intent for a zoning text amendment does not have to go to the Board prior to public hearing by the Commission." Mr. Johnson added that staff is currently in the process of identifying "those sections of the Zoning Ordinance which would be effected with a change in the responsibilities of the ARB to cover reconstruction aspects.', Mr. Johnson asked that Mr. Keeler prepare an explanation which would be attached as an addendum to the October 26 minutes. Mr. Keeler briefly reviewed actions taken at the November 17, 1993 Board of Supervisors meeting. ZMA-93-08 Feldma n's Inc. a licant Mark & L nnle Thornton owner - The applicant petitions the Board of Supervisors to rezone approximately 1.9 acres from R-6, Residential to HC, Highway Commercial. Property, described as Tax Map 45, Parcel 95 is located on the east side of Rt. 659 (SPCA Road) approximately 500 feet north of Rio Road in the Charlottesville Magisterial District. This site is located in a designated Growth Area (Urban Neighborhood 1) and is on the boundary of areas recommended for medium density residential (4.01 - 10 dwelling units per acre), and high density residential (10.01 - 34 dwelling units per acre). Deferred from the October 29, 1993 Planning Commission Meeting. The applicant was requesting withdrawal without prejudice. The applicant preferred to wait until after the Comprehensive Plan Review process before pursuing the ZMA. 11-23-93 2 MOTION: Mr. Blue moved, seconded by Mr. Jenkins, that the applicant's request for withdrawal without prejudice be approved. The motion passed unanimously. S -93-28 Hydraulic Road P tnershi - Petition to issue a special use permit for an indoor athletic facility to allow expansion of an existing racquet facility on 4.113 acres 927.2.2(15)]. Zoned LI, Light Industry. Property, described as Tax Map 61, Parcel 5A, is located on the west side of Route 743 approximately 500 feet north of Route 657 in the Charlottesville Magisterial District. The site is not located in a designated growth area (Rural Area 1). Mr. Fritz presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions. In response to Mr. Blue's inquiry, Mr. Fritz confirmed that the use is presently served by a septic system and there is no planned expansion of sewer usage. The applicant was represented by Mr. George McCallum. He briefly recalled the history of the application. He described the existing uses on the property. He explained that the current request is to accommodate the changing needs of the squash court. He explained how the construction of the additional court will effect the remainder of the site. Regarding landscaping, he stated: The site plan submitted, because of the scale, does not show much in the way of landscaping, but there is a desire to do some landscaping, in conjunction with this expansion." (Mr. Johnson later acknowledged this offer, saying: "We accept that there will be some landscaping done in front with appreciation.") He noted that the site plan shows 82 parking spaces, though only 32 are currently needed. He expressed no opposition to the suggested conditions of approval. Mr. Johnson asked the applicant if there might be a need for additional courts in the future. Mr. McCallum responded that the applicant feels this expansion will cover present and future needs. There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. In response to Mr. Blue's question, Mr. Fritz explained that ARB approval is not required since the site is not on an entry corridor, and the plan has already been submitted to various members of the Site Review Committee. No concerns were raised. There will probably be no additional landscaping required since no additional parking and no 1 11-23-93 3 additional frontage will be disturbed. VDOT offered no comments. MOTION: Mr. Blue moved that SP-93-28 for Hydraulic Road Partnership be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Use is limited to the existing building and building expansion shown on a plan for R.E. Lee and Son, Inc. showing proposed A.R.C. addition and initialled WDF 11/10/93. The motion passed unanimously. (Mr. Bowling left the meeting at this point.) Status Report from AHIP Director on AHIP Activities Ms. Teresa Tapscott was available to answer Commission questions. She described the rehabilitation and contract -letting process. It was her feeling that the program is in a stronger position than in previous years. The goal for number of rehabilitations for this fiscal year is 40 units; 25 per year has been typical for previous years. In response to Mr. Nitchmann's question, she described the status of several units in Schuyler which had drainfield problems. Four of those units have now been approved for septic systems. Currently, there are 241 units on the waiting list for rehabilitation. Mr. Johnson asked Ms. Tapscott list of changes in the process controls) which cost efficient. Ms. Tapscott. MISCELLANEOUS would allow the He asked that if her office could prepare a (i.e. regulations and operation to become more staff set a date to meet with Mr. Jenkins suggested that the recently hired Housing Coordinator be introduced to the Commission in the near future. He felt this would also serve as an opportunity for her to meet the press. Mr. Jenkins expressed the opinion that there are a lot of persons in the private sector who would be willing to offer financial support to the housing effort and that an effort should be made to identify those persons. Mr. Benish explained that there are already mechanisms in place which could accept private donations (e.g. Charlottesville Housing Foundation). Mr. Benish agreed that publicity and "getting the movers and shakers of the community" behind the effort is what is needed. 11-23-93 4 Mr. Johnson expressed the feeling that the Commission must accept the responsibility for getting things done and not always expect others to do the job. He disagreed that it was a matter of funding, as suggested by Mr. Nitchmann. He stated: "It doesn't take any money to go ahead and study the Code and start getting it revised so it (housing) doesn't cost so much." He noted that, thus far, there have been no recommendations related to changes in the Building Code. Mr. Grimm supported Mr. Jenkins' suggestion to invite the Housing Coordinator to appear before the Commission. He felt that would be an opportunity to discuss some of the concerns of the Commission. Mr. Nitchmann inquired as to the status of the Commission's request for a report on noise regulations. Mr. Keeler explained that the Zoning Department was working on this request. Mr. Johnson called attention to a Daily Progress article related to technical training in schools. He recalled the discussions which the Commission had had related to the Education Department's CIP requests. He suggested that for future CIP's the Commission recommend to the Board that school requests come to the Commission "over the signature of the School Board," showing that they have "sanctioned" the request. Mr. Nitchmann recalled that the Commission had already recommended that those CIP requests related to education issues should be forwarded directly to the Board. The Commission felt it had neither the expertise nor the knowledge required to evaluate these requests. He asked if the Board had commented on that recommendation. Mr. Benish explained that the Board is still holding CIP work sessions and has not yet made final recommendations. In response to Mr. Nitchmann's question regarding the status of the Comp Plan review schedule, Mr. Benish explained that it appeared the survey will be completed and information compiled from the survey in January or February. It appears the community -wide visioning process will begin in January and will be a January through February process. Staff will "compile all those inputs" and bring a status report to a joint meeting of the Board and Commission in April or May. 11-23-93 5 Mr. Nitchmann asked for an updated Work Program. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. DB .25F