Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09 07 89 PC MinutesSeptember 7, 1989 The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on Thursday, September 7, 1989, Meeting Room 7, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those m6mbers present were: Mr. David Bowerman, Chairman; Mr. Keith Rittenhouse, Vice Chairman; Mr. Tom Jenkins; Mr. Harry Wilkerson; Ms. Norma Diehl; Mr. Tim Michel; and Mr. Peter Stark. Other officials present were: Mr. V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Community Development; Mr. Ronald Keeler, Chief of Planning; Mr. Bill Fritz, Planner; Mr. Rich Tarbell, Planner; Mr. Jim Bosworth, Senior Planner; and Mr. Jim Bowling, Deputy County Attorney. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. and established that a quorum was -present. The minutes of August 22, 1989 were approved as submitted. SP-89-69 Robert Hatcher - Request in accordance with Section 30.3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow for the construction of a stream crossing through the 100--year floodway fringe. Property, described as Tax Map 48, Parcels 30 and 49 is located on the southwest side of Rt. 600, approximately 1.25 miles south of its intersection with Rt. 20 near Stony Point. Rivanna Magisterial District. Staff was requesting deferral to September 12, 1989. Mr. Michel moved, seconded by Mr. Wilkerson, that SP-89-69 for Robert Hatcher be deferred to September 12, 1989. The motion passed unanimously. SP-89-58 Wanda Brake - Request in accordance with Section 5.6 of the Zoning Ordinance for the issuance of a special use permit to locate a single wide mobile -home on property zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property, described as Tax Map 100, Parcel 20B, is located on the northwest side of Rt. 631, approximately one mile southwest of the intersection of Rt. 708 and Rt. 631. Samuel Miller Magisterial District. Mr. Fritz presented the staff report. The Chairman invited applicant comment. Mr. Charles Hudson, the owner of the property, addressed the Commission. Regarding the letter of objection which had raised the issue of road maintenance, Mr. Hudson explained that none of the property owners on the road had ever been involved in.a maintenance agreement and none were willing to become involved in such an agreement at this time. Mrs. Hudson presented a letter signed by neighboring property owners which expressed support for the request. September 7, 1989 Page 2 There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. It was determined the letter of opposition had been written by the applicant's former husband. Mr. Jenkins moved that SP-89-58 for Wanda Brake be recommended to the Board of Supervisors of approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Albemarle County Building Official approval; 2. Conformance to all area, bulk and other applicable requirements for district .in which it is located; 3. Skirting around mobile home from ground level to base of the mobile home to be completed within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the certificate of occupancy; 4. Provision of potable water supply and sewerage facilities to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator and approval by the local office of the Virginia Department of Health; 5. maintenance of existing vegetation. Landscaping and/or screening to be provided to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator. Required screening shall be maintained in good condition and replaced if it should die; 6. :Mobile home is not to be rented; 7. Special use permit is issued for the use of Wanda H. Brake's family only. M-s. Diehl seconded the motion which passed unanimously. SP-89-66 Broadus :Memorial Baptist Church - Request in accordance with Section 30.3.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance for the issuance of a special use permit to allow for fill and culvert in the floodway fringe of an unnamed stream of the Rivanna River. Property, described as Tax Map 62, Parcel 25, is located on the east side of Rt. 20 North approximately 600' south of Franklin Drive. Rivanna Magisterial District. Mr. Fritz presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions. The applicant was represented by fir. F.A. Iachetta. He offered no significant additional comment. There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. mr. Wilkerson moved that SP-89-66 for Broadus Memorial Baptist Church be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the following conditions: //7 September 7, 1989 Page 3 1. Department of Engineering approval of final design of the stream crossing; 2. Department of Engineering issuance of an erosion control permit as applicable; 3. Compliance with all Federal. State, and local permit requirements pertaining to construction, reconstruction or alteration of any perennial streams, creeks or rivers. Mr. Rittenhouse seconded the motion which passed unanimously. SP-89-63 Broadus Memorial Baptist Church - Request in accordance with Section 10.2.2(35)of the Zoning Ordinance for the issuance of a special use permit to allow a church facility to be located on a vacant 9.269 acre parcel zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property, described as Tax Map 62, Parcel 25 is located on the east side of Rt. 20 north approximately 600' south of Franklin Drive. Rivanna Magisterial District. Mr. Fritz presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions. The applicant was represented by Mr. F.A. Iachetta. There was a very brief discussion as to the reasonable availability of water and sewer. He stated the applicant would prefer to use public utilities if it is determined they are reasonably available. There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. Mr. Michel moved that SP-89-63 for Broadus Memorial Baptist Church be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Planning Commission approval of site plan. 2. Any future uses, to include day care, shall require an additional special use permit. Mr. Rittenhouse seconded the motion which passed unanimously. SP-89-67 Bethel Baptist Church - Request in accordance with Section 31.2.4.5 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow for the issuance of a special use permit to add a social room onto an existing church facility. Property, described as Tax Map 89, Parcel 5A is located on the west side of Rt. 745 adjacent to the Southern Railroad tracks; approximately one-half mile south of intersection with U.S. Rt. 29. Samuel Miller Magisterial District. Mr. Bosworth presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions. //8 September 7, 1989 Page 4 The applicant was represented by Mr. Harlan Marshall. He offered little comment. There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. Because of Mr. Michel's concern about the vagueness of the term "social gatherings" in condition No. 3, it was agreeable to the applicant that those words be deleted. . Mr.. Marshall confirmed there were no plans to rent the structure to any other organizations, i.e. it is intended for church use only. Mr. Stark moved that SP-89-67 for Bethel Baptist Church (AKA Bethany Baptist Church) be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Board of Zoning Appeals approval of variance for reduced setback. Approval of this petition shall not be deemed to influence Board of Zoning Appeals deliberations in any manner; 2. Social hall not to exceed 24' x 32' or equivalent area; 3. Approval is for worship services and other church -related activities only. Such uses as day care, private school, and the like shall require amendment to this special use permit. Mr. Wilkerson seconded the motion which passed unanimously. _SP-89-61 David W. Cunningham - Request in accordance with Section 5.2 of the Zoning Ordinance for the issuance of a special use permit for a photography studio and office to be located in the basement of an existing house (Home Occupation, Class B). Property, described as Tax 'iap 32F, Parcel 01-B26, is located in the Terrybrook Subdivision, Lot 26, Block B. Rivanna Magisterial District. Mr. Bosworth presented the staff report. It was determined the applicant had just purchased the property and would reside in the dwelling. There was a brief discussion as towhether or not the permit would be transferable. It was determined later in the meeting that the following condition would be added: i Special permit is issued to the applicant only and is non -transferable. Mr. David Cunningham, the applicant, addressed the Commission. He explained the nature of his business. He presented a letter signed by neighboring property owners which states there is no objection to the request. He noted that the two persons objecting were rental property owners. He stated he had no intention of displaying an outdoor sign, and that September 7, 1989 Page 5 most -of his work was performed off site. He stressed that no film processing would ever take place on the premises. The Chairman invited public comment. Mr. Dick Shepard, representing two neighboring property owners --Mr. Oppen and the Cendellas--addressed the Commission. He asked that several conditions, addressing the following concerns, be added to the conditions of approval:(1)signage; (2) film processing; (3) Number of employees; and (4) Number of customers per day. There was considerable discussion by the Commission as tohow to handle Mr. Shepard's request. W. Stark noted that the Ordinance already addresses two of those concerns, i.e. signage and number of employees. Mr. Wilkerson expressed some skepticism as to the controlability of limiting the number of family employees-. (Mr. Keeler felt this was not reasonably enforceable by the Zoning Administrator.) Mr. Keeler suggested the possibility of making the agreement between the applicant and the neighboring property owners a part of this approval, "provided the document is enforceable by those parties." Mr. Rittenhouse questioned the advis- ability of making such an agreement a condition of approval because that -could potentially give the objectors the latitude to void the special permit by withholding their agreement. Mr. Michel suggested -that with two added conditions, Mr. Shepard's clients would be well protected, i.e. (1) limit the permit to the applicant only; and (2) prohibit film processing. Mr. Shepard felt there should also be a limit on the number of customers. Ms. Diehl pointed out that there is already some latitude built.into a residential neighborhood in relation to traffic generation because of the differences in number of family members, age of family members, etc. She felt condition No. 4, as suggested by staff, addressed Mr. Shepard's concerns, i.e. "No traffic shall be generated by such home occupation in greater volumes than would normally be expected in a residential neighborhood, and any need for parking generated by the conduct of such home occupation shall be accommodated on -site." There being no further public comment the matter was placed before the Commission. It was agreed by the Commission that with the addition of the following two conditions, Mr. Shepard's clients' concerns would be addressed: • Special permit is issued to the applicant only and is non -transferable. • No film processing or developing shall take place on the premises. Mr. Wilkerson moved that SP-89-61 for David W. Cunningham be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Such occupation may be conducted within the dwelling, provided that no more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the floor area of the dwelling shall be used in the conduct of the home occupation; /46 September 7, 1989 Page 6 2. There shall be no change in the outward appearance of the building or premises or other visible evidence of such home occupation; 3. There shall be no sales transactions on the.premises except those involving professional photography; 4. No traffic shall be generated by such hone occupation in greater volumes than would normally be expected in a residential neighborhood, and any need for parking generated by the conduct of such home occupation shall be accommodated on -site; 5. The home occupation shall comply with performance standards as set forth in Section 4.14 of the Zoning Ordinance; 6. Special permit is issued to the applicant only and is non-transferrable; 7. No film processing or developing shall take .place on the premises. Mr. Stark seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Note: Mr. Michel asked staff to develop.some guidelines for review of home occupations. He noted that these are often "emotional" requests and felt the Commission was dealing with such items somewhat "arbitrarily." Mr. Cunningham also asked the Commission about the possibility of operating with a Class A permit, which can be administratively approved, until such time as final approval has been granted for the special permit. ',%L1r. Cilimberg stated he would confer with the Zoning Administrator and make her aware of the CoLxaission's approval which might persuade her to issue a temporary Class A .permit. ZMA-89--14 university Corporate Centre - Request to rezone approximately 12.77 acres from PHD, Planned Unit Development to LI, Light Industrial with proffers. Property, described as Tax Map 76M(1), Parcels 1 and 2A is located on the east side of Fifth Street Extended (Rt. 631) in the Willoughby Corporate Park. Scottsville Magisterial District. :1r. Tarbell presented the staff report. The report concluded: "Staff opinion is chat the requested rezoning is highly reflective of Comprehensive Plan standards of development and the proposal is com- patible with adjacent property. Staff recommends approval of ZMA-89-14." The applicant was.represented by Mr. Claude Cotton. He explained that this was additional property which the applicant had not been able to acquire in the original proposal. He explained that the request was to make this property conform with the other property, including the proffer that was attached to the original. In response to Mr. Michel's question about a buffer, Mr. Cotton confirmed there would be a 50-foot tree buffer. September 7, 1989 Page 7 There being no public comment the matter was placed before the Commission. Ms. Diehl expressed concern because the buffer was not clearly defined. She stressed she felt this was very importent and stated it was "something that (she) would be looking at very closely." Mr. Keeler pointed out on the sketch that the applicant will need to extend the 50-foot planted buffer along the length of the property. Ms. Diehl asked that every effort be made to keep the "tall existing trees.'" Mr. Jenkins moved that ZMA-89-14 for University Corporate Centre be recom- mended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the applicant's proffer. Mr. Wilkerson seconded the motion which passed unanimously. SP-89--50 University Corporate Centre - Request in accordance with Section 30.3.5.2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance for the issuance of a special use permit to allow for a pond in the floodplain of Moores Creek. Property, described as Tax Map 76M(1), Parcel 2B is located on, the east side of Fifth Street Extended (Rt. 631) in the Willoughby Corporate Park. Scottsville Magisterial District. Mr. Tarbell presented the staff report. The report concluded: "Based on the recommendations of the Engineering Department, staff recommends denial of SP-89-50. However, should the applicant agree to pursue the construction of the upper pond only, staff recommends approval of SP-89-50 with that revision." Staff offered conditions of approval in the event the Commission chose to act favorably on the request. Mr. Tarbell called the Commission's attention to a letter from the applicant, dated September 7, 1989, in which the applicant amended the proposal and requested.that the lower pond be deleted, per the recommendation of the Engineering Department. To clarify the record, Mr. Tarbell confirmed, that only the upper pond is being pursued by the applicant at this time. The applicant was represented by Mr. Claude Cotton. He compared this project to the Innsbrook Industrial Park in Richmond. He felt this would make the property very desirable. There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. Ms. Diehl moved that SP-89-50 for University Corporate Centre be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Department of Engineering approval of dam and construction activity in floodplain in accordance with Section 30.3 Flood Hazard Overlay District and Zoning Ordinance; /?2 September 7, 1989 Page 8 2.. Approval of appropriate local, State and Federal agencies; 3. County Attorney approval of maintenance agreements for the ponds; 4. Department of Engineering issuance of an erosion control permit; 5. Permit is for upper pond only as per Mr. Cotton's letter of September 7, 1989. mr. Stark seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Mountainwood - Request for Temporary Parkin - :Ir. Fritz explained that this was being presented to thesCemission for informational purposes only. He stated the applicantM relocate some parking temporarily while the ultimate parking facilities are being re -done. He explained that the zoning Administrator is concerned about restoration of the temporary parking area and therefore will require a bony' to insure that restoration takes place. -Mr. Fritz stated that no trees have been removed, nor are there any plans to remove existing trees.. The Commission expressed no objections to the request. Mr. Rittenhouse stressed that overt action should be taken to protect existing trees. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. DS V. Wayne Cilimberg, Secretary 1.75