HomeMy WebLinkAbout04 30 1991 PC MinutesApril 30, 1991
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public
hearing on Tuesday, April 30, 1991, Meeting Room 7, County
Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members
present were: Mr. Keith Rittenhouse, Chairman; Mr. Harry
Wilkerson, vice Chairman; Mr. Tom Jenkins; Mr. Phil Grimm;
Ms. Ellen Andersen; Mr. Walter Johnson; and Ms. Babs Huckle.
Other officials present were: Mr. Wayne Cilimberg, Director
of Planning and Community Development; Mr. Bill Fritz,
Senior Planner; 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 April
16, 1991 were approved as submitted.
CONSENT AGENDA
SDP-91-029 Adelphia Cable Final Site Plan - The applicant is
proposing to construct a 720 square foot equipment building
(24 x 30 feet, total building area on site will be 900
square feet) on 0.63 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property,
described as Tax Map 45, Parcel 16A, is located on the west
side of Rt. 743, 1,000 feet north of Rt. 631 in the Jack
Jouett Magisterial District. This property is not located
in a designated growth area.
Ms. Andersen moved, seconded by Mr. Grimm, that the Consent
Agenda be approved. The motion passed unanimously.
SP-91-10 Crossroads Waldorf School - Request for a private
school [14.2.2(5)] on 8.72 acres zoned R-2, Residential.
Property described as Tax Map 56, Parcels 61 and 62, is the
location of the old Crozet Elementary School. White Hall
Magisterial District. This site is not located within a
designated growth area (Rural Area I).
Mr. Fritz presented the staff report. Staff recommended
approval of the request.
Mr. Rittenhouse asked if the restriction against student
drivers was based on traffic concerns. Mr. Fritz explained
this restriction was related more to parking concerns. He
noted, however, that since this is a grades 1-8 school, this
should not be a serious problem.
Mr. Rittenhouse noted that public sewer was located on the
adjacent property. He asked: "What is our thinking in not
requiring connection to public sewer?" Mr. Fritz explained
that the County had used the facility as a public school
with private septic system for many years. He noted that
the proposed use is the same, with no greater level of
April 30, 1991 Page 2
intensity of that use. It was determined the public sewer
was put in place in 1988 or 1989 and the public school had
been closed by the County in 1990. Mr. Rittenhouse
concluded that the public school had had no choice but to
use a private septic system for most all of its years of
use. Mr. Fritz stated that an analysis of the cost of
connection to public sewer had not been performed. He noted
that off -site easements would be required.
Ms. Huckle brought up the issue of possible traffic
conflicts at the entrance to the school since it is located
directly across the street from the entrance to the new
public school. Mr Fritz stated that the Virginia Department
of Transportation confirmed that "the new improvements won't
have an effect on the functional capabilities of either
entrance."
Ms. Huckle asked if there was any plan for the use of police
officers to direct traffic. (Mr. Cilimberg noted that the
section of Rt. 250 serving Western Albemarle High School and
Henley Middle School has a much higher traffic volume than
at this location. He also pointed out that there are two
left turn lanes, one for the new school and one for this old
facility.)
Mr. Fritz explained that the staff was not supporting VDOT's
recommendation for a right turn lane (for traffic arriving
from the north) because staff feels that the majority of
traffic to the school will be arriving from the south. He
explained also that the staff did not support the
recommendation for upgrading the entrance because that was
also "a matter of convenience" and not a safety issue.
Referring to Condition No. 3 requiring the vacation of the
public right-of-way prior to the commencement of the private
school, Mr. Johnson questioned if this was the applicant's
responsibility or the County's. Mr. Fritz stated the County
Engineer was currently working on this matter. Mr.
Cilimberg added: "The condition is to allow for the
appropriate opening of the school. The condition can only
go to the application. What it does is spur the applicant
to work with the County to make sure that the vacation of
this right-of-way is accomplished. ... It's to make sure
that it's vacated before the school opens." Mr. Johnson did
not feel the condition was worded correctly. He did not
think the responsibility for abandonment of the right-of-way
should be placed on the applicant. Mr. Cilimberg noted
that the Commission might want to advise the Board, through
it's action, that the Commission feels the County should be
aprticipating in this abandonment process.
Mr. Johnson also questioned the restriction on enrollment.
-4 q
April 301 1991
Page 3
Mr. Fritz explained the intent was to keep the use of the
septic system at the same level as it had been when used as
a public school. He stated the restriction had not been
based on the capacity of the school building itself.
Ms. Huckle asked about the applicant's legal arrangements
with the County for the use of the building. The applicant
later explained that the building would be leased for three
years with two 1-year renewable options and with the right
of first refusal. He stated the applicant currently has no
definitive plans for purchase of the building.*
The applicant was represented by Mr. Bill Loredo. He
answered questions about the lease arrangement and current
enrollment figures. He stated that 271 was an acceptable
number for the "foreseeable future." He noted that he had
been informed by Mr. Ray Jones (Albemarle County) that the
271 enrollment figure had been exceeded at the public school
in most years. He confirmed that the school would no longer
be using Camp Holiday Trails.
The Chairman invited public comment.
Ms. Eleanor Santic, representing Citizens for Albemarle,
addressed the Commission. Her statement neither supported
not opposed the request, but raised several questions. See
Attachment A to these minutes.
There being no further applicant or public comment the
matter was placed before the Commission.
Ms. Huckle expressed support for the use of the building in
the proposed way. She did, however, express concern about
the issue of public vs. private sewer.
Mr. Rittenhouse also was uncomfortable with the question of
connection to public sewer. He questioned whether the
situation had been analyzed thoroughly. He felt not
requiring connection based only on the fact that an adequate
septic system exists, was "risky ground to trod upon as far
as requiring connection to public sewer without some more
rigorous analysis of why we're not requiring it in this
instance." He noted that he did not see any evidence that
the connection to public sewer was "not reasonably
available." He stated he was reluctant to support the
application at this point because of concern about
precedent.
Mr. Cilimberg noted that historically the Commission's
requirement for connection to public utilities has been
associated with new development under a site plan. He
stated this request will not be subject to a site plan
review because there are no proposed changes to the building
or parking area. He felt this distinguished the decision
*Ms. Huckle expressed the hope that the County would not sell the building.
April 300 1991
Page 4
about public utility connection from past decisions. He
also noted that not requiring connection in this instance
would not require a waiver.
Mr. Johnson stated he strongly supported the request. He
felt the County's support of private schools was very cost
effective. He also felt this was an excellent use of the
property. He vouched for the integrity of the school. He
again expressed the desire that the restriction on the
number of students be relaxed. He noted that the Education
Department's records show that the building has an
"effective" capacity of 315 and a "maximum" capacity of 378.
(Mr. Rittenhouse later noted that Albemarle County Schools
almost never go above the effective capacity.)
Mr. Cilimberg noted that the Health Department had verified
the septic system's adequacy for 271 students (nothing
higher). He stated the applicant could request an increase
in enrollment at a later time if needed and the issue of
connection to public utilities could be addressed at that
time.
Ms. Andersen noted she was in agreement Mr. Johnson and
stated she would support the request. She stated the issue
of public utilities could be addressed if the school ever
expands.
Ms. Andersen moved that SP-91-10 for Crossroads Waldorf
School be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for
approval subject to the following conditions:
1. Total enrollment shall be limited to 271 students. No
students shall be permitted to drive to school.
2. Use shall not commence without approvals from the
appropriate state, local and federal agencies.
3. Public right-of-way on site shall be vacated prior to
the start of the private school.
Mr. Johnson seconded the motion.
Discussion:
Mr. Rittenhouse noted that he had no reservations about the
use, but he remained reluctant to support the proposal
without a greater analysis of the issue of public sewer
availability. He did not think the fact that the building
"already happened to be there is a justification for not
considering the connection to public sewer." He was in
favor of deferral.
Ms. Huckle agreed with Mr. Rittenhouse.
LI
April 30, 1991 Page 5
Mr. Grimm noted that this is an existing site and the septic
system has already been approved by the Health Department_
Mr. Wilkerson indicated he understood Mr. Rittenhouse's
position but he felt this proposal was unique.
Mr. Johnson stated he was not aware of any policy which
requires review of a septic system which is in place and
functioning properly.
The motion for approval passed'(5:2) with Commissioners
Huckle and Rittenhouse casting the dissenting votes.
SP-91-13 Mount Calvary Baptist Church - Request to locate a
cemetery (12.2.2(14) and (15)], on 1.8 acres zoned VR,
Village Residential. Property, described as Tax Map 58A1,
Parcels 19, 20, and 21, is located on the south side of Rt.
738 approximately 0.4 miles west of Rt. 250 in the Samuel
Miller Magisterial district. This site is not located
within a designated growth area (Rural Area I).
Mr. Fritz presented the staff report. Staff recommended
approval subject to conditions.
Mr. Johnson asked for staff to explain the Virginia
Department of Transportation comments in relation to the
entrance improvements. Mr. Fritz explained that some
clearing would be required to the east. He confirmed that a
tree which needed to be removed was either on the
applicant's property or in the VDOT right-of-way. Mr. Fritz
suggested that condition No. 3 might be amended to clarify
that the improvements to the entrance were only those
related to sight distance (and not commercial entrance
improvements), if that was the Commission's intent.
The applicant was represented by Mr. Henry Walker. He
confirmed that removal of the trees would not present a
problem.
There being no public comment, the matter was placed before
the Commission.
It was agreed condition No. 3 would be amended as suggested
by Mr. Fritz (and stated below).
Mr. Johnson moved that SP-91-13 for Mount Calvary Baptist
Church be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for
approval subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with all Health Deaprtment regulations.
2. Easement on adjacent property shall be obtained prior to
the establishment of the cemetery.
April 30, 1991 Page 6
3. Entrance shall be improved in order to meet minimum
sight distance requirements in accordance with Virginia
Department of Transportation comments dated April 22, 1991
prior to the establishment of the cemetary.
Ms. Andersen seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
SP-91-09 Carl & Rosie Evans - Petition to locate a single
wide mobile home on five (5) acres zoned RA, Rural Areas.
Property, described as Tax Map 132, Parcel 10 is located on
the west side of Rt. 602 approximately 0.15 miles north of
the intersection of Route 602 and 617 in the Scottsville
Magisterial District.' This site is not located within a
designated growth area (RA III).
Mr. Fritz presented the staff report. The report explained
that the mobile home was intended to be used as a vacation
and weekend home for the applicant's children. The report
also noted that "historically, mobile homes have been
approved where there is a need for permanent housing as
opposed to a part-time use."
The applicant, Mr. Carl Evans, addressed the Commission. He
explained the structure would be used by his children who
often visit on the weekend. He noted that it would not be
visible from other dwellings.
The Chairman invited public comment.
Ms. Eleanor Santic, representing Citizens for Albemarle,
addressed the Commission. She expressed concern about the
issue of policy. See Attachment B.
There being no further applicant or public comment the
matter was placed before the Commission.
Mr. Rittenhouse stated that traditionally the Commission has
looked at mobile homes in terms of "affordable housing",
i.e. "an application by someone who needed a mobile home to
have a home." He felt that to consider a mobile home for
something other than permanent housing needs would be to
"stray away" from the tradition.
The staff report cited one similar application (SP-89-20 for
John Hart) which had been denied (unanimously) by the
Commission, but approved by the Board.
Rittenhouse
Both Commissioners/and Wilkerson indicated they would be
consistent in their review of this type of request.
Mr. Johnson felt that in the event the request was approved,
the site of the mobile home should be defined by a condition
MW
April 30, 1991 Page 7
referencing Attachment C. He also suggested that condition
No. 6 be changed to read: "Mobile home is not to be
occupied except by the applicant or members of his immediate
family." He also felt that the applicant might have
described his request as being for a "permanent mobile home
but occupied on an occasional basis" had he been aware of
the permanent vs. temporary issue.
Mr. Rittenhouse stated that it was more a matter of County
policy in his mind. He was uncertain as to whether or not a
definite policy existed, other than how they have been dealt
with "historically."
There was a discussion about the difference in a "permanent"
vs. a "temporary" permit.
Mr. Johnson noted that this was an application for a
permanent mobile home. He questioned whether the fact that
it was only going to be occupied occasionally was relevant.
Mr. Rittenhouse felt that it was indeed relevant because the
County considers mobile homes differently than other
dwellings, thus the requirement for a special permit.
Mr. Wilkerson noted that they are looked at as being "owner
occupied." Mr. Fritz noted also that the County has,
historically, not approved mobile homes as rental units.
Mr. Cilimberg noted that certain types of manufactured
housing are now exempt (by State Code) from the requirement
for a special permit in the RA zone. This exemption is
based on size and structural requirements. He confirmed
that if this proposal had been for a double -wide mobile
home, regardless of usage, a special permit would not have
been required.
Based on this information, Mr. Wilkerson stated he could
find no reason not to support the application. Mr. Johnson
agreed.
There was a discussion about the differences in a
double -wide and a single -wide mobile home and whether or not
the two are perceived differently. Mr. Rittenhouse noted
that the Ordinance perceives that the two are different,
thus the requirement for a special permit. He again stated
that such requests have consistently been reviewed in terms
of whether or not they are needed for permanent housing. He
felt there was a difference in "permanent affordable housing
vs. a convenience use.11
Ms. Huckle expressed concern about the Ordinance being
"slowly eroded" by exemptions.
N
April 30, 1991
Page 8
Mr. Rittenhouse concluded he could not support the
application. He felt there was a definable difference
between needed housing and convenience housing.
Ms. Andersen agreed. She felt the traditional policy should
be upheld.
Mr. Grimm agreed and moved that SP-91-09 for Carl and Rosie
Evans be denied.
Ms. Huckle seconded the motion.
The motion for denial passed (4:3) with Commissioners Grimm,
Andersen, Huckle and Rittenhouse voting for the motion and
Commissioners Jenkins, Wilkerson and Johnson voting against.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at
8:30 p.m.
DB
ADDITION TO MINUTES OF APRIL 30. 1991.
(At Commissioner Johnson's request)
Under Old Business, Mr. Johnson commented on the Crossroads
Waldorf School use of the old Crozet Elementary building.
He noted that a private enterprise has seen fit to make use
of this building at the same level of participation as it
was being used when it was a public school. He pointed out
that the replacement school for Crozet Elementary has an
increased capacity of 45 students "on an effective basis "
He stated: "As a taxpayer, I look at this and wonder if the
appropriate and complete consideration was given at that
time relative to the cost of improving and expanding, as
appropriate, the existing structure vs. building an entirely
new structure. I have a concern about that, but I admit
that I do not have the benefit of the discussions and
considerations that were given at the time the decision was
made."
Mr. Rittenhouse responded that he had served on the School
Oversite Committee which is currently examining the Lung
Range Plan. He noted that classrooms can be added to
existing structures up to a point, but beyond that point all
the other facilities must also be expanded, e.g. the
cafeteria., the gymnasium, etc. He explained there are
considerations other than just seating capacity and it is a
complex issue.
Mr. Cilimberg added that a study for expansion of the
existing facility had been performed. He noted that there
are also structural issues (e.g. asbestos presence) which
must be considered when making these decisions.
Mr. Johnson indicated he was familiar with the reputation of
the Crossroads Waldorf School and he was certain there would
be no compromise in academic accomplishment at a student
level by taking over this old business.