HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP200600001 MinutesAlbemarle County Planning Commission
February 26, 2008
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a meeting and public hearing on Tuesday, February
26, 2008, at 6:00 p.m., at the County Office Building, Lane Auditorium, Second Floor, 401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, Virginia.
Members attending were Thomas Loach; Bill Edgerton; Jon Cannon, Vice Chairman; Linda Porterfield,
Marcia Joseph and Calvin Morris, Chairman. Eric Strucko was absent. Julia Monteith, AICP, non-voting
representative for the University of Virginia was absent.
Other officials present were Bill Fritz, Chief of Current Development; Tamara Ambler, Natural Resource
Manager; Joan McDowell, Principal Planner; Gerald Gatobu, Senior Planner; Glenn Brooks, County
Engineer; Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Greg Kamptner, Deputy County Attorney.
Call to Order and Establish Quorum:
Mr. Morris called the regular meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. and established a quorum.
Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public:
Mr. Morris invited comment from the public on other matters not listed on the agenda.
Regular Items:
SDP -2007-00079 Forsberq (Verizon) Tier II PWSF - Final
Request for approval of a treetop personal wireless service facility with a steel monopole that would be
approximately 88 feet tall (10 feet AMSL above the height of the tallest tree within 25 feet), with a 6 -foot
high 360 square foot shelter/equipment cabinet. This application is being made in accordance with
Section 10.1.22 of the Zoning Ordinance, which allows for Tier II wireless facilities by right in the Rural
Areas. The property is 4.815 acres, described as Tax Map 92, Parcel 36E, and is zoned RA, Rural Areas
and EC, Entrance Corridor. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property as Rural Area in Rural
Area 4. (Gerald Gatobu)
Motion: Ms. Joseph moved, Mr. Loach seconded to approve SDP -2007-00079, Forsberg (Verizon) Tier II
PWSF - Final at the proposed height of 10' above the reference tree.
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Mr. Strucko was absent.)
Mr. Morris said that SDP -2007-00079, Forsberg (Verizon) Tier II PWSF - Final was approved
Public Hearing Items:
SP -2005-00028 Biscuit Run Stream Crossing (Middle) - Sign # 3
PROPOSED: Allow stream crossing #2 (Mid), which is currently vacant to have a road crossing. There
are no residential units proposed with special use permit.
ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: R-1 Residential (1 unit/acre) and RA -Rural Area: agricultural,
forestall, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre).
SECTION: 18-30.3.05.2.1 Fill in the floodplain for crossing
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Neighborhood Density Residential -residential (3-6
units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-
residential uses.
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes_X _
LOCATION: Tax Map and Parcels 90-5, 90-6D. 981 Old Lynchburg Road, 951 Forest Lodge Lane.
Between the east side of Old Lynchburg Road and the west side of Route 20; adjacent and to the south
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — FEBRUARY 26, 2008
FINAL ACTION MEMO
of the Mill Creek subdivision, adjacent and to the west of the intersection of Avon Street, Extended and
Route 20.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville
(Tamara Ambler)
AND
SP -2006-00001 Biscuit Run Stream Crossing (Southern) — Sign # 3
PROPOSED: Allow stream crossing #3 (Southern), which is currently vacant to have a road crossing.
There are no residential units proposed with special use permit.
ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: R-1 Residential (1 unit/acre) and RA -Rural Area: agricultural,
forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre).
SECTION: 18-30.3.05.2.1 Fill in the floodplain for crossing
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Neighborhood Density Residential -residential (3-6
units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-
residential uses.
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No X
LOCATION: Tax Map and Parcel 90-6D. 951 Forest Lodge Lane. Between the east side of Old
Lynchburg Road and the west side of Route 20; adjacent and to the south of the Mill Creek subdivision,
adjacent and to the west of the intersection of Avon Street, Extended and Route 20.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville
(Tamara Ambler)
AND
SP -2006-00002 Biscuit Run Stream Crossing (Northern) — Sign # 3
PROPOSED: Allow stream crossing #1 (Northern), which is currently vacant to have a road crossing.
There are no residential units proposed with special use permit.
ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: R-2 Residential (2 units/acre).
SECTION: 18-30.3.05.2.1 Fill in the floodplain for crossing
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Neighborhood Density Residential -residential (3-6
units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-
residential uses.
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No_X_
LOCATION: Tax Map and Parcel 90-A-3 and 90-A1-1. Oak Hill Drive. Between the east side of Old
Lynchburg Road and the west side of Route 20; adjacent and to the south of the Mill Creek subdivision,
adjacent and to the west of the intersection of Avon Street, Extended and Route 20.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville
(Tamara Ambler)
Action on SP -2005-28 Biscuit Run Stream Crossing (Middle):
Motion: Mr. Edgerton moved, Ms. Porterfield seconded to approve SP -2005-00028, Biscuit Run Stream
Crossing (Middle) with staff's recommended conditions, as adjusted and modified.
1. The applicant must obtain a map revision, letter of revision, or letter of amendment as required from
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and copy the County Engineer on all
correspondence.
2. Army Corp of Engineers, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and other necessary state
and federal agency approvals must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits for construction
of the new stream crossing and approaches.
3. County approval of road and bridge plans for the crossing to be in accord with the application plan, as
determined by the County Engineer.
4. County approval of a grading and an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a
grading permit for construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
5. County approval of a stream buffer mitigation plan prior to the issuance of a grading permit for
construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — FEBRUARY 26, 2008 2
FINAL ACTION MEMO
6. Grading within floodplain shall be confined to the minimum necessary to construct the bridge.
Changes in final design of the bridge, such as use of a longer span, are acceptable if the changes
reduce impacts to the floodplain, in the opinion of the County Engineer.
7. Construction of the new crossing shall commence on or before April 9, 2013, or this special
use permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted hereunder shall thereupon
terminate.
8. VDOT approval shall be required for the stream crossing to ensure that the roads and the bridges
meet VDOT standards.
9. The approval of this special use permit does not supersede or modify any proffer or provision of the
Code of Development related to ZMA-2005-00017 or any subsequent amendments thereto.
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Mr. Strucko was absent.)
Mr. Morris said that SP -2005-00028, Biscuit Run Stream Crossing (Middle) would go to the Board of
Supervisors on April 9 with a recommendation for approval.
Action on SP -2006-00001 Biscuit Run Stream Crossing (Southern):
Motion: Ms. Joseph moved, Mr. Edgerton seconded to approve SP -2006-00001, Biscuit Run Stream
Crossing (Southern) with staff's recommended conditions, as adjusted and modified.
1. The applicant must obtain a map revision, letter of revision, or letter of amendment as required from
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and copy the County Engineer on all
correspondence.
2. Army Corp of Engineers, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and other necessary state
and federal agency approvals must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits for construction
of the new stream crossing and approaches.
3. County approval of road and bridge plans for the crossing to be in accord with the application plan, as
determined by the County Engineer.
4. County approval of a grading and an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a
grading permit for construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
5. County approval of a stream buffer mitigation plan prior to the issuance of a grading permit for
construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
6. Grading within floodplain shall be confined to the minimum necessary to construct the bridge.
Changes in final design of the bridge, such as use of a longer span, are acceptable if the changes
reduce impacts to the floodplain, in the opinion of the County Engineer.
7. Construction of the new crossing shall commence on or before April 9, 2013, or this special use
permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted hereunder shall thereupon terminate.
8. VDOT approval shall be required for the stream crossing to ensure that the roads and the bridges
meet VDOT standards.
9. The approval of this special use permit does not supersede or modify any proffer or provision of the
Code of Development related to ZMA-2005-00017 or any subsequent amendments thereto.
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Mr. Strucko was absent.)
Mr. Morris said that SP -2006-00001, Biscuit Run Stream Crossing (Southern) would go to the Board of
Supervisors on April 9 with a recommendation for approval.
Action on SP -2006-00002 Biscuit Run Stream Crossing (Northern):
Motion: Mr. Edgerton moved, Mr. Cannon seconded to approve SP -2006-00002, Biscuit Run Stream
Crossing (Northern) with staff's recommended conditions, as modified.
1. The applicant must obtain a map revision, letter of revision, or letter of amendment as required from
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and copy the County Engineer on all
correspondence.
2. Army Corp of Engineers, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and other necessary state
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — FEBRUARY 26, 2008 3
FINAL ACTION MEMO
and federal agency approvals must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits for construction
of the new stream crossing and approaches.
3. County approval of road and bridge plans for the crossing to be in accord with the application plan, as
determined by the County Engineer.
4. County approval of a grading and an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a
grading permit for construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
5. County approval of a stream buffer mitigation plan prior to the issuance of a grading permit for
construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
6. Grading within floodplain shall be confined to the minimum necessary to construct the bridge.
Changes in final design of the bridge, such as use of a longer span, are acceptable if the changes
reduce impacts to the floodplain, in the opinion of the County Engineer.
7. Construction of the new crossing shall commence on or before April 9, 2013, or this special
use permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted hereunder shall thereupon
terminate.
8. VDOT approval shall be required for the stream crossing to ensure that the roads and the bridges
meet VDOT standards.
9. The approval of this special use permit does not supersede or modify any proffer or provision of the
Code of Development related to ZMA-2005-00017 or any subsequent amendments thereto.
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Mr. Strucko was absent.)
Mr. Morris said that SP -2006-00002, Biscuit Run Stream Crossing (Northern) would go to the Board of
Supervisors on April 9 with a recommendation for approval.
Old Business
Mr. Morris asked if there was any old business.
SP -2008-00027 Emmanuel Episcopal Church — Waiver for disturbance of critical slopes (Joan
McDowell)
Action on Critical Slopes Waiver:
Motion: Mr. Loach moved, Mr. Edgerton seconded to approve the waiver of Section 4.2 for critical slopes
with regards to SP -2008-00027, Emmanuel Episcopal Church.
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Mr. Strucko was absent.)
Mr. Morris said that the critical slopes waiver for SP -2008-00027, Emmanuel Episcopal Church was
approved.
Planning Commissioner Certification Training:
Mr. Cilimberg sent an email last week to the Commissioners regarding the Certified Planning
Commissioner Training. No response was received by the end of the week. Therefore, he assumed no
one has decided to enroll. He asked if anyone was interested. There being none, he noted that there will
be other opportunities during the next year.
There being no further old business, the meeting proceeded.
New Business
Mr. Morris asked if there was any new business.
Ms. Porterfield asked that the staff report have one page at the end with all of the recommended actions
separate from the report so that they did not miss any actions.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — FEBRUARY 26, 2008 4
FINAL ACTION MEMO
Mr. Cilimberg replied that staff needs to make sure that the recommendation section has everything in it.
Staff has been asked to try to save paper from environmental purposes. He suggested that staff make
sure that within the recommendation section they spell everything out rather than going to a separate
page. That section must point out every action that the Commission needs to take very specifically.
Mr. Morris suggested that the recommendation all be on one page so that they are not missing
something.
Development Review Task Force and Scheduling
Ms. Joseph noted that she received the information on the Development Review Task Force and this
year's ZMA and SP scheduling in the mail. She thought that this schedule would stop what happened in
Biscuit Run where the applicant wanted to come sooner than information was given to staff. She
assumed that the time built into this is adequate time to get the information and then review it and get it
back to the Commission and Board. That is why she was very interested in this.
Mr. Cilimberg said that the scheduling itself gives staff enough time to review and then go back to the
applicant and let the applicant know what the issues are. Then the applicant can understand the issues,
and decide whether or not they want to go to public hearing. If the applicant decides to go to public
hearing, the applicant does not submit anything else. The Commission gets a staff report based on just
what the applicant originally submitted and staff reviewed. However, staff is hoping that if the applicant
sees the staff's issues they will choose to resubmit instead of coming to the Planning Commission for
public hearing. Then, with a new submittal and staff review the issues will have been addressed and the
project can be brought to the Commission clean. Staff is also working on the scheduling of applications
for the Board after the Commission has acted. The Board has been in the situation where new
information is provided by the applicant after their initial submittal is made, the item is scheduled for the
public hearing and the staff report has been forwarded to the Board. Staff is working with the Clerk's
Office to not schedule or advertise applications for public hearings until the applicant has provided all
submittal material in its final form "signed, sealed and delivered".
Mr. Edgerton requested that staff schedule a discussion with the Commission on this item so that they
could understand the process. He questioned item #5 that says if neither a work session nor a
resubmittal is needed a project will come to the Commission approximately 12 weeks from the initial
application. This time period is 1 week earlier than the 2007 schedule. He felt that 12 weeks still leaves
no opportunity for a deferral by the County if the state mandates action within 90 days.
Mr. Edgerton asked if the applicant decided to resubmit does the clock start over for 90 days.
Mr. Kamptner replied that they have never interpreted or applied it that way.
Mr. Edgerton asked staff to work on a resolution on this issue regarding the clock starting over.
Mr. Cilimberg noted that staff can work further on this, but the best way to deal with the issue is for the
Commission to simply recommend denial rather than asking the applicant to defer if they feel an
application is inadequate.
Ms. Joseph said that one of the things she did not see in here was the rezoning in a 2 step process, too.
She wondered how that fits in it and whether Mr. Graham and Mr. Cilimberg could address that.
Mr. Cilimberg noted that this would require formally amending the ordinance, but, in lieu in lieu of that, we
have been giving the applicant the choice of a work session with the Planning Commission first. But this
is not mandatory.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — FEBRUARY 26, 2008 5
FINAL ACTION MEMO
Mr. Edgerton noted that many of the emails about cell towers the Commission has received from David
Booth and others have valid points. He asked that the Planning Commission have a work session to
discuss these points.
Mr. Cilimberg pointed out that the Commission has a work session scheduled to discuss cell tower
policies and the big picture.
Mr. Kamptner noted that it has been ten to twelve years since they looked at this issue. After the 1996
Telecommunications Act came into being they were trying to figure out how to implement it. During those
first couple of years staff tried to get information from the wireless providers on the cumulative towers
needed and they said that it was proprietary information. He did not know if the times have changed or
not, but they could look at that.
Mr. Cannon noted that the build out process is not over yet. There seems to be continuing competition
for good sites and some potential for massing at sites.
Ms. Joseph asked staff to provide a graphic to show the Commission where all of these facilities are in
the county.
Mr. Cannon also asked for some follow up on the particular tower visibility concern expressed by some
adjacent owners at a prior Planning Commission meeting.
Ms. Porterfield pointed out that the work session was scheduled on April 22
Regarding the Historic Preservation Meeting, Ms. Porterfield said that they need some new people on the
committee. If anyone knows of someone interested, please let Margaret Maliszewski know.
Mr. Cilimberg pointed out that the Board of Supervisors will advertise for the positions.
Mr. Edgerton said that he would probably be absent on March 11.
Ms. Joseph said that she would be late on the March 11.
Ms. Porterfield will be absent on March 18. She asked to get a copy of the presentation made at
that meeting.
There will be no Planning Commission meeting on March 4, 2008. The Planning Commission's
next meeting will be Tuesday March 11, 2008.
There being no further items, the meeting proceeded.
Adjournment
With no further items, the meeting adjourned at 7:21 p.m. to the Tuesday, March 11, 2008 meeting at
6:00 p.m. at the County Office Building, Lane Auditorium, Second Floor, Auditorium, 401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, Virginia.
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Secretary
(Recorded and transcribed by Sharon C. Taylor, Clerk to Planning Commission & Planning Boards)
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — FEBRUARY 26, 2008 6
FINAL ACTION MEMO