Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200800125 Legacy Document 2010-03-10ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: SDP2008000125- Pavilions at Staff. Elizabeth M. Marotta Pantops- Phase 3 Final Site Plan Planning Commission Public Hearing: March 16, Board of Supervisors Hearing: 2010 (consent agenda) Not applicable Owners: North Pantops Townhouses, LLC Applicant: Keith Lancaster, Southern Development Acreage: Phase 3- 16.07 acres Rezone from: Not applicable Special Use Permit for: Not applicable TMP: Tax Map 78 Parcel 12 By -right use: Residential (R -6)- Cluster Location: Verona Drive [Route #1771] approximately Designation 500 feet east of its intersection with Rolkin Road [Private] . Magisterial District: Rivanna Proffers /Conditions: Conditions of preliminary approval, letter dated 10 -20- 2006. [Attachment B] Requested # of Dwelling Units: 81 DA— X RA — Proposal: Townhouse development pursuant to Comp. Plan Designation: Neighborhood conditionally approved preliminary plan (approved by Density in Urban Area 3 Planning Commission 10 -10- 2006); 81 units, 9.34 acres of open s ace Character of Property: Phase 3 is currently Use of Surrounding Properties: undeveloped, but part of a larger residential Residential development under construction Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable: 1. Applicant obtained endorsement of 1. None identified previously- objecting neighbors [Attachment A] RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of final site plan, pursuant to Condition #9 of Preliminary Approval letter dated 10 -20 -2006. STAFF PERSON: Elizabeth M. Marotta PLANNING COMMISSION: March 16, 2010 (consent agenda) AGENDA TITLE: Pavilions at Pantops- Phase 3 Final Site Plan APPLICANT: Keith Lancaster, Southern Development PROPERTY OWNER(S): North Pantops Townhouses LLC APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: This is a proposal for final site plan approval of Phase 3 of the Pavilions at Pantops townhouse development. This phase is 16.07 acres and contains 81 townhouse units and 9.34 acres of Open Space. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Neighborhood Density in Urban Area 3. HISTORY AND REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: On October 10, 2006 the Planning Commission approved a preliminary site plan for this property. A total of nine conditions were attached. Condition #9 reads: The final site plan shall return to for review and approval by the Planning Commission. This condition was implemented in direct response to a request by a member of the public, the Chairman of the Resident's Association at Westminster Canterbury. According to the official meeting minutes [Attachment D]: "... they (Westminster Canterbury) request that the final site plan be reviewed by the Planning Commission so that they have the opportunity to be sure that those items in the final plan are reflected of the precise items in the (private) agreement, which they (Southern Development) has agreed to. " "It was the consensus of the Commission that the conditions of the agreement between the applicant and the Westminster Canterbury residents should be incorporated into the final site plan. " Therefore, pursuant to obtaining final site plan approval the applicant has satisfied the requirements of the private agreement, has obtained the support of Westminster Canterbury as evidenced by the letter dated 2 -24 -10 [Please see Attachment A], and is hereby presenting the final site plan to the Planning Commission for approval. Staff has reviewed the final site plan and found it meets all applicable codes and regulations. Please note: when the Planning Commission approved the preliminary plan it approved it under the title Pavilions at Pantops Phase 2. Since that time the developer has broken Phase 2 into two phases, Phase 2 and Phase 3. Phase 2 and Phase 3 were submitted as separate final site plans; the Phase 2 final site plan was approved in May 2008. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that final site plan meets the requirements of all applicable codes and ordinances (pending ACSA approval), and that as evidenced by the letter of support from Westminster Canterbury, the applicant has satisfactorily fulfilled the terms of their private agreement. Staff recommends approval of the final site plan. ATTACHMENTS: A. Letter from Westminster Canterbury, dated 2 -24 -10 B. Conditions of preliminary approval, dated 10 -20 -06 C. Excerpts from the final site plan- sheets 1, 4A, 5, 25, and 27 D. Official meeting minutes, Planning Commission 10 -10 -2006 Gary B. Selmeczi President and Chief Executive Officer February 24, 2010 Albemarle County Planning Commission Community Development Office 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Re: South Development and North Pantops Townhouses — Phase 3 Pavilions at Pantops Site Plan Approval Dear Sirs: Please accept this letter of support on behalf of Westminster - Canterbury of the Blue Ridge and its Resident's Association. We are satisfied with the plans submitted to the County as they impact the west side of our property. We have worked closely with the developer and feel confident that the impacts of the development are mitigated with the amended agreement dated January 26, 2009. Accordingly, we encourage the County to approve the developer's plans so that they may be permitted to proceed with the development of Phase 3 of Pavilions at Pantops. Sincerelv, Gary . Selmeczi President & CEO ONrINU1NG `ARE ° 111i 1� William H. Collier Chair, Residents' Association MISSION Meeting the dynamic needs of aging by providing high quality services, programs and residents through a faith -based organization fostered by the Presbyterian and Episcopal chur Attachment XA 250 PANTOPS MOUNTAIN ROAD, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22911 TELEPHONE (434) 972 -3100 FAX(434)972-3173 www.westrninstercanterbury.org � of AL M tIRGIta COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 October 20, 2006 David Jensen W W Associates 1402 Greenbrier Place Charlottesville VA 22901 RE: SDP - 2006 -00042 SDP - 2006 -0043 Pavilions at Pantops Phase 2 Preliminary Site Plan Dear Sir: The Planning Commission, at its October 10, 2006 meeting, granted approval of your request for the following waivers and the preliminary site plan. Section 4.2.3 for disturbance of critical slopes and Section 4.7 for the Appropriateness of the Open Space with the following conditions: [ 13.4.1 ] Prior to final approval a Conservation Plan as specified in section 32.7.9, must be approved by the Zoning & Current Development Division of the Department of Community Development with a copy of the original Conservation Plan and all subsequent revisions to be submitted to the Zoning & Current Development Division. [14 -317, 18 -4.7] Prior to final approval the applicant must submit covenants or other such instrument, which evidences the establishment of an owners' association and provides for ownership and maintenance of proposed open space. Such document shall be subject to County Attorney review and approval and shall be in accordance with Section 14 -317 of the Subdivision Ordinance - Instrument evidencing maintenance of certain improvements. 3. Zoning & Current Development Planning approval. 4. Zoning & Current Development Engineering approval. 5. Albemarle County Fire Rescue approval. 6. Albemarle County Service Authority approval. 7. Virginia Department of Transportation approval. 8. The final site plan shall show the "Potential Tree Save Areas" identified in paragraphs 2a and 2b of the agreement between North Pantops Townhouses LLC, Southern Development, Westminster- Canterbury of the Blue Ridge and the Westminster- Canterbury of the Blue Ridge Residents' Association dated October 3, 2006 (hereinafter, the "Agreement "). A tree conservation plan for the Potential Tree Save Areas shall be submitted to the Zoning & Current Development Division for approval. The number of parking spaces shall be reduced as provided in paragraph 2c of the Agreement to the extent that such reduction complies with the minimum parking requirements of section 18 -4.12. The landscaping plan shall include all of the planting required by paragraph 2e of the Agreement. 9. The final site plan shall return for review and approval by the Planning Commission. Attachment 110-8 The approval of the preliminary site plan is valid for (1) one year in accordance with Section 32.4.3.1 of (D Chapter 18 of the Albemarle County Code. Therefore, the preliminary approval shall expire on October 20, 2007. If the preliminary site plan approval expires, a new application must be filed and processed. Please address all of the requirements and conditions listed below and submit eight (8) tentative plan copies to the Department of Community Development. This letter must be submitted with the tentative plans, as a checklist, to document that you have addressed all requirements or conditions, or the tentative plan will be denied. Erosion and Sediment Control, BMP Stormwater Management, and road plans with the associated applications and fees must also be submitted with the eight (8) tentative Plans. Once the tentative plan is submitted and reviewed you will receive comments from all departments /divisions /agencies that have made comment on the tentative plan. Any further responses must be made directly to each department /division/agency that has further comment. After all aforementioned departments /divisions /agencies have granted tentative approval, you must verify with the Planner that you may submit the final mylars (1 set), paper copies (2 sets), the final site plan application, and final site plan fee to the Department of Community Development. Signing of the plans will occur within one week once it is determined that the final site plan mylars reflect all tentative approvals. The final site plan will be subject to all final site plan requirements (Zoning Ordinance Section 32.6), in addition to the following conditions. The Department of Community Development shall not accept submittal of the final site plan for signature until tentative approvals for the following conditions have been obtained: Zoning & Current Development approval to include: ❑ All conditions of the preliminary plan reviewed by the Planning Commission on October 10, 2006. ❑ [32.6.3] Approval of a landscape plan in compliance with Section 32.7.9. The landscape schedule will need to show the canopy calculations; and ❑ [32.6.60)] Submit a description and photograph or diagram and show the location of each type of outdoor luminaire that emits 3,000 or more initial lumens. Please be aware that installation of such luminaires in the future that are not shown on this plan shall require an amendment to this plan. ❑ [32.6.60)] [4.17.4(b)] Submittal of a photometric plan on the site plan demonstrating that luminaires are in compliance with 4.17.4 b. ❑ [32.6.4.1] The final plan approval is subject to the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Architectural Review Board. Please contact Francis MacCall at 296 -5832 if you have questions or require additional information. Engineering approval to include: ❑ All applicable items as specified in the Design Standards Manual, Section 902 B. Please contact Max Greene at 296 -5832 if you have questions or require additional information. Albemarle County Fire Rescue approval to include: ❑ Review and approval of fire flow and fire hydrant locations. Please contact James Barber at 296 -5833 if you have questions or require additional information. I Albemarle County Service Authority approval to include: ❑ Review and approval of all final water and sewer plans. Please contact Gary Whelan at 977 -4511 if you have questions or require additional information. Virginia Department of Transportation approval to include: ❑ Review and approval of all final road plans including drainage computations. Please contact Joel DeNunzio at 293 -0011 Ext. 120 if you have questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Francis H MacCall Senior Planner Zoning & Current Development File: SDP - 2006 -00042 Cc. NORTH PPANTOPS LLC PO BOX 8147 CHARLOTTESVILLE VA 22906 SOUTHERN DEVELOPMENT 170 South Pantops Drive CHARLOTTESVILLE VA 22911 0 N YJ o dn� y a y< IE-�y�� g iC `g is 8y I d Pi�'� o¢ N EEO VL we ®vi � ` � � y � � � � � �� � 1�1 I a � � gg$ ea a ii ♦ S� f a y 3 G�� �_ n n ♦ d d � d O ag rn mill HIM MOM F F F F F G F G F G G G G G F G G G F F G G G G aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ��� ��� a lilt - n..s..�. — 4 e.o,� �oo-��w�b.o��nen � .0 oo���o�� vd •m,,, e w �Yw ara�®ona C a� { O i35 B � 3 0 a� a a a n �ys Q� ' .. ' -'�' ice, '— -= =, % ✓: �- _ -,; \ 1 ® I 5 - -, l.t t ) l ?< a r. LL if LLJ CL 10 No ENO f 'tip,; - � r""Y�"�� lm�q �� y� ■�,�, �r � e, l £ 117mr �r� 5�..,, F ��xw' ! xis �' emn,tie�at .,.+�� � ir• I Y�IIIl7�F "N�IR , AW � � •�N g11.H�/ Y � jf s 1\ � �111t ' rr 4[ a c _, • �.� a ��. - -' � u4:!7c: 1m +nnir�sMe ►ly' "j��` —`�`� c a M. �,� 105,1Z((�� ' � �,..I�i�'�J � III �wuD�ll�l /�r,,•�.,� a� l� �� i ��,P! nr Of ! 11111110 r 5 11111110 Hill _ 5 C�1�0111® r r � rr �• iiS'i i 4�P0•� . • t.•w ✓cba•6. A •.�•i • ' •••• Rer � ♦�• ®�O �i.Ss .• +: Pii`•b•+r •:SJdd•i P s J dOi ,••J4S RbJ4 p�bd�t•• •9did•�PS: i s L9�•Pti�. i ^.� �S•.��S�s •�g �S� +i W U11 di,••i• °••idd:• �• •�.e•S•riit s•�:d9cP�O�. FS - . ,ii••Jipd._JJ ds•••s S�S•J•.J + •• •t. • .. •:•� SSP•i , b P • •S••J field `7J s•J'M1�tib • Pb•1:S�i.�'•S�Pi S!P t�tiP •i•P 1 � +r' r ��'• iiPA• �d• O•• iJ�. JJ�• �,.�• si°�P`iet`•.,�S.YJ:iyJ�•+�t� %. � '. .. •14f �•• S•• S•i •J • P • P� P •�sdi -•it • PJSr�. _ • ,._ j' • ♦ i`�iJJ • SSS�• :isPdd�•�i s � b s O S •• ♦ � s ; mil /I •� +� �+� . �% J • ••diil' S•,i. • J J. Ji• •y4�o••�• S•. i �•,,• • •.�. � 1i � � J••b S• •Pb bP • d s• w•SS ti bd ♦ � / \�' � � '�Ji S• •y iii` �J tsi��• d••�•� J•t••i'IS •O +�i• •t / �i 6 SS•••J O• y .p•� • P S�i • PsSV� • PtS� �t d�iS• .. fr` / I `:` �• J•S`•di '. J::9'PJ:ttP•SP� •: stP`°j'�i� tJ� 1b•• •j�• •i'P•i� ���� '� �y� /� �.69.::J•11:.S4SSi �•i'•s i• � ?i • SS�Po � . • o V �► '/ ' :• : tt O. SOb A..... ..•S7i4 ?� 4d:.'JJo •P a. J Oa•io , / . / 1- MR- :3 V 1 I �� �• I � ilk �rl`�.'� \' /► �IA�Ii II`� �\s PON - i Im V _ / •( P h 3$ _� � � / /• /ice .� � '\ \ �' \ " \' \ \' y„`. / \ , "\ \� \ � � -- _ .-1 � - �_..._.1/ � �� / ,, '1111' +v \ \� \�I I\ 1\�1 �•�� ./ � ��r�� aka � .._ 12 En Wo. it A Il �1�' 1 tai f 1`/ 11 IT i ; ! "� 11 � - ° 11 1 1 w I , � ` � `, \ \ \ v \ \ \ ,,,� \. \ • -``, \_I i III I ,\ 1 \ �a � � � 1 '- - - � V•yA�vA A ]�? .. 1 'fir( \ v �• ter- , � _ _ y: �,: r � - � _ � � ' i , � 11� I I 1 I I I 1 �1 � ,f $ An - g No'xaxvl in- �ooa,ov \6�p \aWwupud to � OOVIOPoZ\C Yd b'+pAl Y HMV tlHl�i4T 13 Albemarle County Planning Commission SUS October 10, 2006 The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a meeting and a public h ring on Tuesday, October 10, 2006, at 6:00 p.m., at the County Office Building, Room 241, Second Floor, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. Members attending were Eric Strucko, Calvin Morris, Vice - Chairman; Jon Cannon, Pete Craddock, Duane Zobrist and Bill Edgerton. Absent was Marcia Joseph, Chairman. Julia Monteith, Senior Land Use Planner for the University of Virginia, representative for David J. Neuman, FAIA, Architect for University of Virginia was absent. Other officials present were Wayne Cilimberg, Planning Director; David Benish, Chief of Planning; Francis MacCall, Senior Planner; Amy Arnold, Planner, Claudette Grant, Senior Planner; Bill Fritz, Chief of Current Development and Greg Kamptner, Deputy County Attorney. Call to Order and Establish Quorum: Mr. Morris called the regular meeting to order at 6:00 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. Jack Marshall, an 18 year resident of Free Union, said that he was speaking to the Commission this evening as President for Advocates of a Sustainable Albemarle Population (ASAP). (Attachment A — Jack Marshall's remarks at Press Conference for CPA — Albemarle County Office Building, September 13, 2006) In the four years since ASAP was founded they have been trying to raise awareness about the pace and consequences of local population growth and urging that our community take more responsible steps to manage it. They have observed that our decision makers may not be sufficiently aware of the cumulative impacts of the individual developments that are being approved at a relentless rate. They have- argued that smart growth is necessary, but not sufficient. In addition to planning where and how growth occurs, our community is seeking a sustainable future and must acknowledge the limits of growth. As they well know limitless growth is simply not feasible. In an effort to help translate that truth into public policy, last month ASAP joined by the Sierra Club and Citizens for Albemarle asked the Board of Supervisors to adopt a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This evening he was here simply to let the Commission know about their request. They would be pleased, of course, if the Commission would support us. Their request to the supervisors was: "As a step toward defining more clearly a vision for our community that residents want, ASAP requests that Albemarle County amend its Comprehensive Plan to require identification of a sustainable optimal population size (or range) for the Charlottesville - Albemarle community. This ideal population size would be democratically defined and would be consistent with the sustained existence of surrounding natural systems and our community. It would provide an explicit vision of the scale and size desired by current residents, and would guide future county planning that involves land -use and development decisions. Given the current demand on planning staff, we urge that Albemarle County hire outside consultants to oversee this initiative. Further, given the massive potential impacts of already proposed developments, we request that the County make no changes to existing zoning until a Comprehensive Plan Amendment is established that sets forth an optimal population range." ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — OCTOBER 10, 2006 Attachment D J Their monthly open meeting will be held on Wednesday, October 18 and will be devoted to the topic. They will have a critical discussion about the motion and possible tools to define it. They would be delighted if the Commissioners could join them at the meeting. There being no further comments on items not listed on the agenda, the meeting moved on to the next item. Review of Board of Supervisors Meeting — October 4, 2006. Mr. Cilimberg summarized the actions taken by the Board of Supervisors on October 4, 2006. Consent Agenda: SDP 2006 -091 Mountfair Vineyards — Site Plan Waiver: Request for a site plan waiver to allow the establishment of a farm winery in an existing structure on 40 acres. The property is zoned RA, Rural Areas. The property, described as Tax Map 15 Parcel 18, is located in the Whitehall Magisterial District on the south side of Fox Mountain Road (Route 668) approximately 0.4 miles east of its intersection with Browns Gap Turnpike (Route 629). The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Area in Rural Area 1. (Bill Fritz) - Tax Map 15, Parcel 18 b. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes — June 27, 2006; September 12, 2006. Mr. Craddock asked staff if there were any other cases regarding vineyards where the County has a time limitation imposed like Monday through Sunday from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Mr. Fritz replied no, that they have never placed any sort of condition like that on vineyards. There is nothing referenced in the ordinance. He was unaware of any ABC requirements that regulate that. Motion: Mr. Craddock moved, Mr. Cannon seconded, that the consent agenda be approved. The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Commissioner Joseph was absent.) Mr. Morris stated that the consent agenda has been approved. Reguiar Items: SDP 2006 -042 Pavilions at Pantops Phase II — Critical Slopes Waiver and Open Space Waiver Requests: Request for preliminary site plan approval for a 129 unit residential townhouse development on 25.8 acres. The property, described as Tax Map 78, Parcel 12, is zoned R -6, Residential and is located in the Rivanna Magisterial District on Richmond Road [Route # 250E] approximately 0.25 miles west of its intersection with State Farm Blvd, immediately behind the Aunt Sarah's and Eckerd on 250E. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Neighborhood Density in Neighborhood 3. (Francis MacCall) Mr. MacCall distributed copies of the new plan noting that the proposal has changed since the June 20 meeting. He summarized the staff report. ■ Proposal: Request to approve a preliminary site plan which includes approval of open space in accordance with Section 4.7.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and request for a waiver to disturb critical slopes in accordance with Section 4.2.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. ■ This plan was reviewed by the Planning Commission on June 20, 2006 for the open space appropriateness and the critical slopes waiver. It was also called up by an adjacent property owner. The amount of critical slopes being disturbed and the amount of trees being removed were the issues that were raised at the meeting that concerned the Commission. The applicant requested deferral of the project and has now brought back to staff a revised plan that addresses those issues. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — OCTOBER 10, 2006 2 11�) ■ At the June 20, 2006 Planning Commission meeting the applicant requested that the decision by the Commission on this plan be deferred until they were able to work on a plan that addressed the concerns of the Westminster Canterbury residents that at the meeting voiced their concerns with the plan. Staff believes that the applicant has addressed those concerns. Staff has reviewed the revised plan and has noted on page 7 of the staff report the significant changes that were made in the comparison. The revised site plan that the applicant has provided has changed considerably from the previous proposal. The main changes are as follows: 1. Two areas of tree preservation have been provided. 2. The amount of open space has increased from 8.83 acres to 14.85 acres, a 68% increase. 3. The number of dwelling units has changed from 137 to 129, a 5.8 % reduction. 4. The travel ways have been rearranged. This allowed the two areas of tree preservation. 5. The amount of critical slopes disturbances has been reduced. ■ Staff believes that these changes have appropriately addressed the concerns raised at the June 20, 2006 Planning Commission meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends the following: The Commission finds that the open space is appropriate for the proposed development and the Commission approves the waiver of Section 4.2.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance, to allow the disturbance of critical slopes. With a positive finding of the appropriateness of the open space and approval of the critical slopes waiver request, the preliminary site plan may be approved with conditions. Mr. Morris asked if there were any questions for staff. Mr. Edgerton asked to see the critical slopes map. Mr. MacCall posted a larger representation of the critical slopes on the board for review. Mr. Morris opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to address the Commission Keith Lancaster, representative for the developer, made the following comments. • This plan was brought before the Commission on June 20, 2006. Since then they have taken the feedback that was given during that meeting and from the adjacent neighbors to work with the adjacent neighbors to try to put together a plan that would work for everyone and protect more slopes and trees on the site. The major concerns on June 20 from listening to the audio was the tree area and in trying to save more trees and maintain more green area existing on the site. Other concerns were to lessen the disturbance of the critical slopes on the site and provide more of a buffer between the proposed development and Westminster Canterbury, the adjacent property owner. With the new plan viewed against the old plan the Commission will see that they were able to save the most important tree area on that site, which was the knoll of trees visible from 250. It also preserved some of the natural critical slopes in that area. • A majority of this site has been disturbed. In talking with the Soil Erosion Control Officer with the County the first dump or waste permit was issued in 1983 on the site. Since then it has been ongoing. When Free Bridge was rebuilt some of that came up to that site. Working with the new layout they have actually reduced the density and had to remove dwellings to make it fit the site. They removed the two roads running cross that knoll in that tree area and tried to cluster off a section that will be referred to as Phase 2 West on its own. They also eliminated the road system that would go on the outside of the development and brought them inside the townhouses and will compact it more and move it further away from the Westminster site. The first go around there was not any critical slopes that were not going to be disturbed. With the redesign they are now only disturbing 62 percent and not 100 percent of the slopes. If they get to final they are also looking at adjusting the last two rows of townhouses in Phase 2 West, which would be adjacent to the power line with Fontana. It would slide the townhouses an additional 20' out to the west to allow that stand of trees against Westminster site and to allow more trees there and to also help eliminate some retaining walls in that area. They are also looking at removing some additional ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — OCTOBER 10, 2006 3 t0 guest parking to limit the impervious areas on the site as well that they have worked with the adjacent owners on in an agreement. The Commission should have received a copy of that agreement. This is a collaborative effort between the developer and the adjacent neighbors. They listened to the concerns of the Commission on June 20 and went back to address them with the adjacent property owners. Their engineer Dave Johnson, with WW Associates, is present to answer questions in regards to the critical slopes and engineering aspect. They thank the adjacent property owners for working with them. They reduced eight units out of the site to address their concerns. Mr. Morris asked if there were any questions for the applicant. Mr. Cannon asked what density has resulted from the removal of eight units Mr. Lancaster replied that there are five units per acre at this point. For the overall density tied into Phase 1 they are at 5.85 dwelling units when looking at both phases. Mr. Cannon asked if the Comp Plan calls for 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre, and Mr. Lancaster replied that was correct. Mr. Morris asked how many total parking spaces they have. Mr. Lancaster replied that there are 297 spaces provided with 2 spaces per dwelling. They are meeting the ordinance with a minimum of 1 space per 4 units for guest parking. There being no further questions, Mr. Morris invited public comment. Joe Knotts, Chairman of the Resident's Association of Westminster Canterbury, said that they have indeed worked out favorably agreement that gives substantially more open space and reduces the steep slopes disturbance. What Mr. Lancaster has indicated is all correct. The Commission received a copy of the written agreement with exhibits attached. Except for the large area of saved trees in the center, which Mr. Lancaster mentioned, those trees to the south and to the left of the pond area provide substantially more open space toward their boundary line and much less steep slope disturbance. Except for that none of the other items of the agreement are included on the plans reviewed by staff. Hence the applicant understands that they have to submit another plan or more plans to reflect on the final plan those items that have been agreed to with us. Accordingly, they request that the final plan be reviewed by the Planning Commission so that they all have the opportunity to be sure that those items in the final plan are reflected of the precise items in the agreement, which they have agreed to. Likewise he understands that those conditions according to the staff report have to be reflected in the final plan of a necessary covenant that the homeowner's association assumes the obligations to maintain existing trees and to plant new ones and replace trees that die. Those are the items that ultimately when the developer leaves the home owner's association will have to assume that obligation. They want to make sure that those things are in place in the final documents. Hence, they request that the Planning Commission review the final plans. If there are any questions about the agreement, he would be happy to answer them. Mr. Morris asked if there are any questions for Mr. Knox. Mr. Edgerton said that the agreement is between the Westminster residents and the developer. On page 2 paragraph 4 it references the County. It says that this agreement may be enforced by the Albemarle County administratively or by any party thereto in the Circuit Court. He questioned if that is appropriate for the Commission to be a party to the agreement if they are not listed as parties of this agreement. Mr. Kamptner replied that there is nothing that they can do to stop private parties from putting provisions like that into an agreement. One way that can be resolved is if the final site plan reflects the areas that are going to be preserved and conserved. If the areas are disturbed then the County can participate and enforce the final site plan rather than the agreement itself. The County would end up in the same place. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — OCTOBER 10, 2006 4 Mr. Edgerton asked if the Commission should condition any approval this evening or in the future conditioning this agreement as part of the conditions. Mr. Knotts pointed out that they intend that this agreement be incorporated. Mr. Kamptner preferred that the County be in the position of only enforcing the final site plan. The final site plan can reflect the areas that are not to be disturbed. The County can enforce that through zoning enforcement action. Mr. Edgerton said that Mr. Knox's request is for an adjustment of this plan to fully integrate whatever has been agreed and would solve that problem. Mr. Kamptner replied yes. Mr. Cannon said that if they were to proceed with staff's recommendation for approval the Commission could approve it subject to the condition that these elements of the agreement be included in the site plan. Mr. Kamptner said that they would be approving the request subject to a condition requiring that all of the tree preservation and conservation areas reflected in that agreement are shown on the final site plan. The fact that they are shown and identified as such means that the areas would not be allowed to be disturbed, and if they are it would be a zoning violation. Mr. Cannon asked if that would include a requirement that if the trees died that they would be replaced or does it take additional measures to ensure that. Mr. Fritz noted that is part of a preservation plan. Mr. Knotts asked that it be repeated because he did not understand it. Mr. Cannon said that this was a discussion about instruments. The question is how they get Mr. Knox's understanding into a document that the County can approve. They understand that the appropriate vehicle is the site plan. The question is if the Commission has to do anything tonight, assuming they give an approval, to ensure that these conditions do get into the site plan in the appropriate form that can be enforced to the extent that they had in mind. Mr. Knotts noted that is one of the reasons they were requesting that the final plan showing all the changes be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Mr. Kamptner noted that the Planning Commission can request a final site plan review. This is the time to do it. Mr. Fritz pointed out that on all site plans whenever there are trees to remain on a site plan they require a conservation plan. Whenever there are trees shown to be replanted or retained on a site plan there is a provision in the ordinance that says those trees shall be maintained in a healthy condition and replaced as they die. There is no need to take a special action because that is standard on all site plans. Mr. Craddock has the same question he did. He could understand trees and things like that on a site plan, but not for the County to be held responsible for $3,000 of cleaning off cars and buildings and other such things as noted in 3a, b and c. Mr. Knotts agreed that the County was not involved in those conditions. Mr. Craddock noted that it should be for everything that is on the site plan. Mr. Edgerton noted that there were smaller details, but trees were the big issue. There were some attachments to this agreement showing relocation of parking spaces and hopeful relocation of the units closest to the west. It needs to be done the right way whether it means seeing a revised preliminary plat ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — OCTOBER 10, 2006 5 IN or final plat. He was not sure which way to go Mr. Knotts said that under the agreement they withdraw all of our objections to the plan approval including the open space approval and the handling of the steep slopes so long as these items that they have agreed to with the developer are reflected in the final approval. Jean Davis, resident of Westminster Canterbury, said she had no further comment because all of the concerns have been handled. There being no further public comment, the public hearing was closed and the matter before the Commission. Mr. Zobrist favored pushing development into the development area. It was the consensus of the Commission that the conditions of the agreement between the applicant and the Westminster Canterbury residents should be incorporated into the final site plan. Mr. Kamptner pointed out that the additional conditions includes paragraphs 2a, 2b, 2c and 2e and that conditions 2a and 2b would also require a tree conservation plan. Paragraph 2e would also require that the landscaping plan incorporate the plantings that are required by that paragraph. An additional part of the action would be that the Commission wants the final site plan to return for their review and approval. Mr. Morris asked if separate actions need to be taken on the critical slopes and open space. Mr. Kamptner replied that a single action that staff has identified in the "Recommended Action ", with the additional provisions as mentioned should be sufficient. He reiterated the motion for the benefit of the audience: "The Commission finds that the open space is appropriate for the proposed development and the Commission approves the waiver of Section 4.2.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the disturbance of critical slopes with the 7 conditions recommended by staff and the additional condition incorporating the terms of the agreement, and to request that the final site plan come back for Planning Commission review." Motion: Mr. Craddock moved, Mr. Cannon seconded, to approve SDP - 2006 -0042, Pavilions at Pantops Phase II Preliminary Site Plan, Open Space Waiver and Critical Slopes Waiver Requests subject to the conditions staff recommended in the report, as amended, with the finding that that open space is appropriate and the critical slopes waive additional condition. [16.4.1] Prior to final approval a Conservation Plan as specified in section 32.7.9, must be approved by the Zoning & Current Development Division of the Department of Community Development with a copy of the original Conservation Plan and all subsequent revisions to be submitted to the Zoning & Current Development Division. [14 -317, 18 -4.7] Prior to final approval the applicant must submit covenants or other such instrument, which evidences the establishment of an owners' association and provides for ownership and maintenance of proposed open space. Such document shall be subject to County Attorney review and approval and shall be in accordance with Section 14 -317 of the Subdivision Ordinance - Instrument evidencing maintenance of certain improvements. Zoning & Current Development Planning approval. Zoning & Current Development Engineering approval. Albemarle County Fire Rescue approval. Albemarle County Service Authority approval. Virginia Department of Transportation approval. The final site plan shall show the "Potential Tree Save Areas" identified in paragraphs 2a and 2b of the agreement between North Pantops Townhouses LLC, Southern Development, Westminster - Canterbury of the Blue Ridge and the Westminster- Canterbury of the Blue Ridge Residents' Association dated October 3, 2006 (hereinafter, the "Agreement "). A tree conservation plan for the Potential Tree Save Areas shall be submitted to the Zoning & Current Development Division for approval. The number of parking spaces shall be reduced as provided in paragraph 2c of the Agreement to the extent that such reduction complies with the minimum parking requirements of ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — OCTOBER 10, 2006 6 )q section 18 -4.12. The landscaping plan shall include all of the planting required by paragraph 2e of the Agreement. 9. The final site plan shall return for review and approval by the Planning Commission. The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Commissioner Joseph was absent.) Mr. Morris stated that SDP - 2006 -042, Pavilions at Pantops Phase II — Critical Slopes Waiver and Open Space Waiver Requests were approved. Public Hearing Items: SP 2006 -024 Charlottesville - Albemarle Airport — Pleasant Grove Baptist Church (Sign #391: PROPOSAL: New church building. ZONING CATEGORY /GENERAL USAGE: LI - Light Industrial - industrial, office, and limited commercial uses (no residential use); Airport Impact Area. SECTION: 10.2.2 (35) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE /DENSITY: Rural Areas - preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/ density (0.5 unit/ acre). ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No. LOCATION: Earlysville Road between Route 606 (Dickerson Road), Walnut Hills Subdivision. TAX MAP /PARCEL: Tax Map 31, parcel 27A (2.00 acre portion). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall. STAFF: Amy Arnold AND ZMA 2006 -010 Charlottesville - Albemarle Airport — Pleasant Grove Baptist Church (Sign #39): PROPOSAL: Rezone 2.00 acre portion of 11.451 parcel from LI - Light Industrial zoning district which allows industrial, office, and limited commercial (no residential) uses to RA - Rural Areas zoning district which allows agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses and residential density of 0.5 units per acre to allow new church under Special Use Permit. PROFFERS: No. EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE /DENSITY: Rural Areas - preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/ density (0.5 unit/ acre). ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No. LOCATION: Earlysville Road between Route 606 (Dickerson Road), Walnut Hills Subdivision. TAX MAP /PARCEL: Tax Map 31, parcel 27A (2.00 acre portion). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall. STAFF: Amy Arnold Mr. Zobrist said that although he had never represented nor provided services to Pleasant Grove Baptist Church, another member of his firm has represented the Church on these transactions. Therefore, he was disqualifying himself from participating in this proceeding. He left the meeting room at 6:47 p.m. (Attachment B — State and Local Government Conflict of Interest Act Transactional Disclosure Statement dated October 10, 2006 from Duane Zobrist.) Ms. Arnold summarized the staff report. The Charlottesville - Albemarle Airport Authority is requesting the rezoning of a 2 acre portion of an approximately 11.5 acre parcel, which is tax map 31, parcel 27 from the existing Light Industrial designation that allows industrial offices and limited commercial uses, to Rural Areas zoning, which allows agricultural /forestry and fishery uses. Under this proposal the remaining approximately 9.5 acres remains zoned Light Industrial and is included in the Airport Master Plan with a facility access road planned through the parcel residue. The Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed 2 acre church site as Rural Areas emphasizing the preservation and protection of agricultural /forestall, open space, natural historic and scenic resources as land use options. The remaining 9.5 acre residue is located within the development areas with a Comprehensive Land Use designation of institutional. The rezoning of this 2 acre portion of tax map 31, parcel 27A to Rural ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — OCTOBER 10, 2006 Z0