Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB200300017 Minutes 2003-04-08 Old Business • Mr. Rieley asked that they go back to discuss SUB-02-017, Indian Springs (Herring) Preliminary Plat. Mr. Benish stated that they were 55 days into the review of this request taking out the State review for this. He pointed out that it was between 54 to 56 days. Therefore, he was not sure if they had enough time to defer the request for a week and meet the 60-day review period. Mr. Rieley asked if there was anything in the file that relates to the use. Mr. Benish stated that there was nothing that he could identify specifically of what those buildings were. He noted that what Ms. Doherty indicated was probably a pretty good clue. One thing that he knew her staff looks at pretty carefully is traffic generation. He stated that he felt pretty confident that there were two residences. Ms. Doherty stated that the request was specifically for a two-lot subdivision. Private road requirements are by lots and not by dwelling units. You are allowed to have up to two dwelling ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION —APRIL 8, 2003 9 DRAFT MINUTES — SUBMITTED APRIL 15, 2003 units on a parcel if you have the division rights and the acreage. How that works is that when you apply for a building permit the Permit Department checks your private road status and it only goes up if you increase the lots. Mr. Rieley noted that it was interesting that it did not go up if you increase the number of dwelling units. Ms. Doherty stated that was correct unless you have a private covenant. Mr. Edgerton asked if he understood staff correctly that it does not matter if the actual future building site that was shown here had to cross streams and critical slopes to get to it. Ms. Doherty stated that if you built a road that had to be approved by the County and you tried to cross the stream, then you would have to go through the special permit process. For a driveway to serve a single unit, unless you are going through the E & S process, staff would not even know about it. She suggested that they look at the plat to see if there was any division rights being given to this parcel because she did not know if they could put another unit on this parcel. Again, they were just showing the building site to meet that Zoning requirement. She stated that the note on the plat stated that only one dwelling unit per lot was permitted. There is no reason to believe that they will be using that building site at all. Mr. Davis stated that seemed to be consistent with Attachment C that says that there will be no increased use of those lots from the existing usage. Mr. Loewenstein moved for approval of SUB-03-017, Indian Springs (Herring) Preliminary Plat, with the recommended conditions of approval. 1. The private road shall be the sole means of access to the Residue and Tax Map 18, Parcel 33A. 2. The subdivider shall submit a maintenance agreement that satisfies the requirements of section 14-313. 3. The final plat shall contain the statement required by section 14-303(N). 4. The surveyor shall certify on the plat that the existing and/or proposed right-of-way is of adequate width and horizontal and vertical alignment to accommodate a travelway passable by ordinary passenger vehicles in all but temporary extreme weather conditions, together with area adequate for maintenance of such travelway. Such certification may be accomplished by the following wording on the plat: "This private road will provide reasonable access by motor vehicle as required by§ 14-514 of the Albemarle County Code." [14-514 (table A)] Mr. Thomas seconded the motion. The motion carried (6:1)with the recommended conditions. (Edgerton — No) SUB-03-017 Indian Springs (Herring) Preliminary Plat— Request for authorization to allow a private road. (Yadira Amarante) Mr. Rieley asked if any Commissioner would like to pull any item off of the consent agenda for discussion. Mr. Edgerton asked to pull both items from the consent agenda in order to have some questions answered. Mr. Rieley stated that both SDP-02-084 and SUB-03-017 were pulled off of the consent agenda for further clarification. . Mr. Edgerton stated that the only reason SDP-02-84 was before the Commission was for the critical slope waiver. He pointed out that when he drove by the property that it appeared that all of the grading has already been done. He questioned if there was any reason they should be having a hearing on this. Bob Cantrell, representative for C.W. Hurt, stated that the completed grading work was the result of the fill dirt that was placed on that slope when the Giant commercial project was done. He noted that area had been filled back in and graded out. He pointed out that the critical slope waiver that they were discussing this evening was to the rear and to the west of that location, and that they have not done any grading within that area. Mr. Thomas asked if it was the area that went down towards Dennis Enterprises. Mr. Cantrell pointed out that the area that they were requesting approval on tonight was the area that borders the Spooner property. Mr. Craddock stated that on the front was a storm water basin that they filled in, and Mr. Cantrell agreed. Mr. Benish stated that staff c, uld go out and check the site, but he was under the impression that portion had not been done. Mr. Edgerton stated that from cooking at the map where the critical slopes are shown that it appeared that they had finished this grading. He noted that he would appreciate staff looking into this matter. Mr. Rieley asked if staff has anythii to add for the staff report that the Commission has already received. Mr. Benish stated that he did not have ar°ything to add. Mr. Rieley stated that they would allow t;-Ie applicant to provide any information that he would like to add. Mr. Cantrell stated that the applicant is rE ?risting the preliminary plan approval for two office buildings of 12,200 S.F. and 6,000 S.F. and a-rsociated parking. He noted that location was used as a sediment basin for the construction of tl'e 'livanna Ridge Shops. He referred to Attachment C from Timothy Miller, President of Rivann<: 'Igineering & Surveying, PLC, who made some comments that would help enlightened some ,f ti,ese issues. The total acreage disturbed would be no greater than one acre. He asked that the -•)mmission move for acceptance based on that minimal area that will have to be graded. He i.; .;,,,d out that the fill dirt that results from this would be placed over on Dennis Enterprises. He ted that they would do their best to stabilize ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION! ,V'RIL 8, 2003 2 DRAFT MINUTES— SUBMITTED APRIL 15, 2003 the area with trees and proper vegetation. He pointed out that the ARB has already given their approval, and that the Engineering Department does not have any problems with this proposal. Mr. Thomas asked if there was any joint effort being proposed between your client and the Spooner property. Mr. Cantrell stated that he was not aware of any project that Dr. Hurt has with the Spooner property. He pointed out that Dr. Hurt was waiting for approval for an expansion of the rear of Dennis Enterprises for a parking lot. Hopefully, if they receive approval for this site they can take some of the dirt and fill in Dennis' property and make the whole area look better. Mr. Rieley asked if anyone else would like to speak to this application. There being none, he closed the public hearing to bring the matter back to the Commission for discussion and possible action. Ms. Hopper moved for the approval of SDP-02-84, South Pantops Office, for the critical slope waiver. Mr. Loewenstein seconded the motion. The motion carried (6:1). (Edgerton — No) Mr. Rieley stated that SDP-02-084, South Pantops Office Critical Slopes Waiver, was approved. He stated that the second item was SUB-03-017, Indian Springs (Herring) Preliminary. He asked if staff had anything to add. Mr. Benish stated that he would answer any questions that the Commission might want. Mr. Rieley asked if there was anyone present for the applicant that would like to address this • issue. He asked if anyone else would like to address this issue. There being none, he closed the public hearing to bring the matter back to the Commission for discussion and action. Mr. Edgerton stated that he had a question on the last Attachment D, where it shows the existing gravel road that they are proposing to use as access to the 25 plus acreage residue. There appears to be several buildings on that property and he wondered if they could have some understanding on what those buildings were. The buildings appear to be substantial in size. Mr. Rieley stated that he was not sure if staff would be able to help them because he did not have advance notice to ask the staff planner about that issue. Mr. Rieley asked where the time stood for this project. He asked if they had the opportunity to defer this matter. Mr. Benish stated that he did not bring the files because he was not aware of any questions that were going to be raised on it. He stated that he did not recall on this one and would have to go back to the office to get the file. Ms. Doherty stated that there might be a clue to this on page 2 of the staff report. Under criteria # 1, the private road will be adequate to carry the traffic volume. Ms. Amarante says that the existing driveway will be adequate to carry the traffic volume expected to be generated by the two existing single-family dwelling units on the properties. The other buildings there would have to be something other than dwelling units. She stated that staff would expect that the buildings were outbuildings, which was what she summarized from the staff report. Mr. Benish noted that the large buildings could possibly be used for agricultural purposes. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION —APRIL 8, 2003 3 DRAFT MINUTES — SUBMITTED APRIL 15, 2003 Mr. Edgerton stated that the other concern that he had was that it appeared that the proposed building site on that same parcel is located in such a way that if they use that existing road they would have to cross a stream. He noted that it had been pointed out that they were avoiding one stream buffer, but that it appears that a stream buffer was missing on the stream up on the hill. Ms. Doherty pointed out that building site was only for demonstration purposes since you have to show that a building site exists on the parcel. You don't have to abandon existing buildings and use the building site or build within the building site. She expected that the road was to serve the existing buildings and the building site was to show that the lot has a building site. Mr. Rieley asked where the time stood for this project. He asked if they had the opportunity to defer this matter. Mr. Benish asked that the Commission defer action in order for staff to pull the file and get some additional information and then they can decide whether they need to reschedule for a week. nor RiPip',i ctatPri that the Commission would table this issue until later in the meeting.