Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09 20 88 PC MinutesSeptember 20, 1988 The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on Tuesday, September 20, 1988, Auditorium, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were: Mr. David Bowerman, Chairman; Ms. Norma Diehl, Vice Chairman; Mr. Keith Rittenhouse; Mr. Tom Jenkins; Mr. Harry Wilkerson; Mr. Tim Michel; and Mr. Peter Stark. Other officials present were: Mr. John Horne, Director of Planning and Community Development; Mr. Wayne Cilimberg, Chief of Community Development; --Mr. David Benish, Senior Planner; Ms. MaryJoy Scala, Senior Planner; Mr. John Pullen, Planner; Mr. Ronald Keeler, Chief of Planning; Mr. Bill Fritz, Planner; and Mr. Jim Bowlin., Deputy County Attorney. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. and established that a quorum was present. The Chairman announced that the recording equipment was not working and asked that all speakers state their names clearly and talk as clearly as possible. CONSENT AGENDA - Ivy Creek Agricultural/Forestal District - The Commission was asked to take action to refer this district to the Advisory Committee. Mr. Stark moved, seconded by Ms. Diehl, -that the Consent Agenda be adopted. The motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan The Chairman introduced the members,.of the Commission and staff and described how the hearing would be conducted. He explained that the action taken by the Commission would be advisory to the Board of Supervisors, i.e. the Commission did not make the final decision to adopt the plan, but rather would make a recommendation to the Board as to whether or not it should be adopted. Mr. Cilimberg read an introduction to the Plan. Mr. Horne then gave a brief outline of the various chapters and topics in the Plan. The Chairman invited public comment. Mr. George Gilliam, representing Towers Ltd. Partnership and Land Trust, addressed the Commission. He asked that 250 acres to the northeast of the Hollymead community be included in Hollymead with a commercial designation. He felt much of the land.designated for residential land use currently would not be developed. He pointed out that the area was adjacent to the growth area and partially served by water and sewer. He also felt that locating shopping facilities in this area would alleviate some of the traffic problems farther south on Rt. 29. Mr. Lucius Bracey, Jr., representing Genie Worrell and related companies in the Pantops area, addressed the Commission. His comments addressed property located north of U.S. 250/I64 interchange. He felt the proposed designation of this property for low density residential or neighborhood */1 September 20., 1988 Page 2 service was inappropriate because (1) Too close to 1-64; (2) Non-residential development is directly across the highway; and (3) Not economically feasible. He felt that the market was changing and asked that the property be designated as.Regional Service or that there be a change of office service allowances. Ms. Lois Rochester, representing the League of Women Voters of Charlottesville and Albemarle County, addressed the Commission. She read a statement which is attached to these minutes as Attachment A. The League supported the the recommendations for changes in lot size which they felt would: "(1) Increase current minimum residue lot size to 40 acres; (2) Allow a maximum of ten acres on development -right lots; and (3) Permit the option for additional development right lots under certain conditions:'The League also supported "an annual evaluation to determine how effectively the Planis achieving its goals and an annual report." Ms. Virginia Rovnya'k. addressed the Commission. She was in favor of development rights being reduced to 3 instead of 5 in watershed areas. She was .very concerned about protection of groundwater. Ms. Victoria Moore addressed the Commission. She was particularly concerned about the J.W. Sieg development southwest of I-64/US 29 Interchange and clearcutting that is taking place on the property. She stated that residents had not been notified that the 38-acre parcel would be developed. She expressed concern about expansion of the urban area further south along Rt. 29. She was opposed to a large project on this regional service area. Mr. James Butler, representing the alliance for Justice and Equity, addressed the Commission. Mr. Butler's comments are attached to these minutes as Attachment B. Ms. Ellen Craddock addressed the Commission. She suggested the development of a map showing potential development of Albemarle County based on existing development rights. She felt this would alert the County to how the County could grow if agricultural growth is not controlled. Mr. Gary Bibb addressed the Commission. He was opposed to the 40-acre building site and felt it would fill up growth areas and would result in lots being spread all over the County. He felt a 5-acre lot was more appropriate. ,ir. Richard Marshall addressed the. Commission. He expressed concern about growth in the North Garden area and spoke in favor of support facilities for that area. Ms. Tamera Vance, representing the Piedmont Environmental Council, addressed the Commission. She asked for a show of hands from the audience of those persons who were in favor -of "morerural area growth controls." She felt rural development restrictions were critical. She favored: (1) Reducing development rights from 5 to 3 in water supply.watersheds; (2) 10 acre maximum lot for development right lots should be reduced to 6; (3) Identifying critical environmental areas and subtracting from tract before determining development potential of rural areas; (4) A 1 unit/10 acres density for rural areas; (5) Retaining a list of scenic rivers and roads in the Plan. 7.9 September 20, 1988 page 3 Ms. Denise Zito expressed her support for the plan. Ms. Babs Huckle expressed her support for the Plan, particularly the increase to 40 acres and the open space easements. Ms. Page Massey expressed her opposition to the 40-acre tract or even 21-acre tracts. Mr. Francis Fife addressed the Commission. He felt it was essential that the water supply be protected. He was in favor of offering services in growth areas and restricting development in other areas. He also expressed support for low-income housing and felt the County might need to help subsidize this. housing and place it in the growth areas. Mr. Charles Hurt expressed his opposition to the 40-acre division in the rural area. He felt it would force people to own more land than they can maintain and will not produce the desired results. Mr. Rubin Hitchcock addressed the Commission. He spoke to three areas: (1) Rural areas; (2) Developed areas; and (3) Fringe areas. He stated he would like to see planned unit developments given for intermediate developments in fringe areas. There being no further public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. Referring to Ms. Vance's suggestion, Ms. Diehl stated she too would like to see the list of scenic rivers and roads reinstated in .the plan. Referring to those requests for changing the designation of property in the Pantops and Hollymead areas, Mr. Stark stated those issues had been considered by the Commission thoroughly and he felt the Commission should stick by their decisions. Mr. Michel indicated he liked the idea of an annual review of how the Plan was working. Staff supported this also and suggested adding a ."Status of the Plan" Report to the Action Agenda. Regarding the issue which had generated the most comment, that of the 40-acre tract, Mr. Wilkerson pointed out that he had not supported the concept because he felt 40 acres was too small for a farm and too large for an individual to maintain. He asked that the Board be made aware of his feelings on this issue. Mr. Stark felt there still existed enough by -right division to take care of the majority of the people and the issue must be addressed with long-range planning. Ms. Diehl stated she supported the 40-acres and she also supported a reduction in density in the watershed areas to 3 acres. Mr. Michel pointed out that there had been a tremendous amount of discussion about the 40-a6re issue and it was felt that what was decided upon represented the best compromise. Mr. Bowerman agreed and pointed out that it was not contemplated that the 40 acres would be used as a lot, but rather for IV September 20, 1988 Page 4 density determination. He felt it was a balancing act. Mr. Rittenhouse felt the Commission was reacting to rural area growth and, therefore, 40 acres was appropriate. There being no further discussion, Xr. Stark moved that the Comprehensive Plan be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval with the following additions: (1) Add to the Action Agenda an annual "Status of the Plan" report; (2) Reinstate a list of scenic rivers and roads; (3) List the crossovers to remain open in the Hollymead area on Rt. 29. Mr. !Michel seconded the motion which passed unanimously. There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 9:22 p.m. DS Sohn Horne, ecretary 0- 17ia