Loading...
1980-03-19~ion be calculated on the basis of population. The revised request of $5,212 ~s Albemarle County's share based on population. .on was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to approve the amount of $2,286 as requested. ~n was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom. Mr. Fisher said this will not solve their .f the other localities appropriate an amount based on population. Dr. Edlich ~he Board could see the kind of information that is required on Federal grants, .zed that the Council is dealing with 18 rescue squads, five hosPitals, and is in planning for the 911 system, they would know it is unrealistic to think this ~an be fur on a voluntary basis. Dr. Iachetta' said due to the uncertainty of the ~quired, he would like to amend his motion to approve $5,212 on'the~theory~that ~t can always be cut down. The amended motion was seconded by Miss Nash. Mr. ,id he would support the motion. Roll was then called, and the motion carried by wing recorded vote: 'isher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush. ne. Fisher thanked Dr. Edlich and the other members of the Emergency Services Council utstanding work they perform in the area. Mr. Fisher said the location of the public hearing on the budget must be and this Board order the advertisement. The Clerk noted that Jack J0uett School reserved for April 2, 1980 at 7:30 P.M. Mr. Fisher asked if that was acceptable members. There was no objection to the location. Mr. Fisher asked about the ment; response was given t-hat this was handled in the previous motion. Motion offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Miss Nash, to set the public hearing for 1980, at 7:30 P.M. at Jack Jouett School. Roll was called and the motion carried llowing recorded vote: ssrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush. Re. da Item No. 19. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. Mr. Agnor requested the reserve March 27, 1980, from 4 to 6:00 P.M., to attend a reception at the Bi- 1 Center, given by the Visitors Bureau for a State meeting of travel agents ere in Charlottesville. This reception will serve to introduce those travel the Thomas Jefferson Visitors Bureau, and to show local governing bodi.es the operations of the Visitors Bureau. aa Item No. 20. The meeting was adjourned at 4:47 P.M. March 19, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting) ~lar meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held 1980 at 7:30 P.M.~ in the Albemarle County Cou~ho~. ~h~~~ ~~ March 19, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting) of the requests except for the annual reevaluation of the sponsor. The Council was that this responsibility would be assumed and then JAUNT would find another sponsor City Council did vote, in principle, to sponsor JAUNT pending the agreement of the t Supervisors. She also noted that JAUNT does not intend to decrease the services to County. In conclusion, Ms. Wilson stated that because of JAUNT's current financial the Board of Directors had no other alternative except to seek another sponsor sinc~ County has not made a decision on signing the labor warranty for the Section 18 gra~ Mr. Fisher said he understands the City has made attempts to keep JAUNT from b~ the County's Route 29 North transportation project. He had assumed that all person: transportation business would be permitted to bid. He understands that Ms. Wilson President Of ~AU~T's BOard are Under considerable pressure about this and they have the JAUNT Board to rescind its decision on Monday to submit a separate proposal. M: said that was correct. The City feels that only a joint proposal by the City and J~ acceptable. Mr. Fisher said he was present at the JAUNT Board meeting on Monday and he did oppose the decision of the JAUNT Board to choose another sponsor because he feels tl transportation issue is critical for the citizens of the County. He did feel that should be permitted the autonomy to operate no matter who the sponsor is. Dr. Iach the City is entitled to do as it pleases and he could not understand anyone signing labor warranty, if it is in fact illegal. Mr. Fisher said based on JAUNT's decision and request, Charlottesville will be JAUNT's sponsor, will sign the Section 18 grant and the appropriation approved by t on March 12 for JAUNT will not be requested. Ms. Wilson said that was correct. Mr felt the County should still pursue the legality of the labor warranty. Ms. Wilson Agenda Item No. 2. SP-80-03. Dewey L. Hicks. Locate a mobile home on 5.0 ac A-1. Property located approximately 3/4 mile northwest of Route 630 at Bingletown. Tax Map 119, Parcel 50A(1). Scottsville Magisterial District. (Advertised in the Progress on February 8, 1980.) Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Director of Planning, presented the following staff "Request: Mobile Home ACreage:~ 5,u~aCres ....... Zoning: A-i, Agricultural Location: Approximately 3/4 mile off Route 630 near the intersection of Route and 717 near Alberene. Character of the Area: The proposed site is located on a low, level hilltop t been cleared of evergreen deciduous, and low brush for the purpose of far and residential construction. There is adjacent to the location an activ and several two-acre residential sites. Staff Comment: The applicant proposes to locate a mobile home near the edge o clearing running over onto a portion of his property. This site is visibl :'f::::~ ~'o~ad~a~en~b~esi:~e~c~s, neither of ~om has opposed the application. Besi~ia~td~e~mpmen~:in~lhe area is primarily in modular home construc similar in appearance to mobile homes. If the Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors should decide to appro petition, staff recommends the following condition: 1. Compliance with Section 11-14-2 of the Zoning Ordinance." March 1~1 8~R~ular Ni~.ht Me~ Ia Item No. 3. ZMA-80-03. Liberty Land Company, Ltd. Petition to rezone 38.74 1A-1 to RPN/A-1 as an addition to AShcroft ~PN; to relocate access to Ashcroft [oute 250 East to a frontage road at the northwest quadrant of the Shadwell interchan~ ~-64; and to amend certain other conditions of approval of ZMA-79-06. Property is ~rtheast of Glenorchy Subdivision. County Tax Map 78, Parcel 51, part thereof and Rivanna Magisterial District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 5, [arch 12, 1980.) ~oudabush abstained because the firm he is associated with did the surveying and ~g for this project. ~obert W. Tucker, Jr., Director of Planning then presented the following staff ~est: Amend Ashcroft RPN (ZMA-79-06) by addition of 38.74 acres and 20 additional units; additional access to property; and amendment of certain conditions of original approval. ion: Property, described as Tax Map 78, Parcels 51 (part), 52, 55C and 55; and Tax Map 79, Parcels 1 and 2 (part), is located north of Route 250 East behind 'Ski.-~Land.~-~ 'Comment: This request has been made due to problems of road design and phasing of development. Design: Under ZMA-79-06, the main entrance road (North Pantops Drive) from Route 250 East was to be relocated and constructed to Virginia Department of Highways standards. The Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation has denied requested grade waivers. Alternatives were discussed with VDH&T and the planning staff, including conversion of North Pantops Drive to a private road. The planning staff indicated that a development of this scale should be served by at least one state road. The proposal under this petition is to: (1) construct Lego Drive as a state road from the frontage road at the 1-64 interchange into the site; (2) construct North Pantops Drive as a private road; and (3) maintain the off-site portion of North Pantops Drive in its current location. Lego Drive and Frontage Road F-179: At this writing it appears that Lego Drive can be developed within the maximum grade limitations of VDH&T. Comments from VDH&T on Lego Drive and the frontage road'are as follows (letter of February 7, 1980): 'Road plans and profiles for the 60 foot right-of-way from the frontage road into the site proposed as a state road have been submitted to the Department for our review as well as plan and profile improvements to the frontage road necessary to obtain sight distance and construct a left turn ~tane into the..sit~,-..~he Department has, however, much concern over placing this additional traffic on the frontage road .... The frontage road is a 16 foot wide paved surface of a Category II strength design. The entrance road to the site is proposed as a Category IV width and strength design (22 feet wide). Accordingly, we would recommend the frontage road be improved out to Route 250 to the appropriate standard, as well as intersection improvements, that is, right turn lane to the frontage road and extend the left turn lane in the median. The Department can require only the actual entrance requirements at the March 19_19_~11980 (Regular Night Meetin_._ _ . -~- $) Phasing of Development: Only requests by the applicant are discussed here. recommendations for phasing are found in the conditions of approval. Dedication of Open Space: ZMA-79-06 required dedication of open space in pro~ to the number of lots approved in a final plat. Because of financing an¢ remoteness of some open space areas, the applicant is seeking modificati¢ condition #1. As currently proposed, about 30% of the total site is in ¢ space (excludes Hansen and Lego houses). The R?N designation requires a~ 25% of the site in open space. Staff would recommend that as the proper~ in phases, not less than 25% of the area cumulatively platted be in commc space. This would accomplish the minimum RPN requirements during phasin~ the applicant added flexibility since he could plat more or less than 25~ given section provided the cumulative total is not less than 25%. Designation of clubhouse facilities: The proposed addition to Ashcroft inclu~ House which may be more desirable than the Hansen House for use as a spo~ At this time, the applicant wishes further study of the matter prior to ~ determination. Both buildings are more or less centrally located within d~velopment and either would be satisfactory for the proposed use. Staf~ objection to a determination at a later date provided facilities develop~ comparable to those proposed in the original plan? Staff would urge the rehabilitation of the Hansen House for an appropriate usage. During interim period of determining the clubhouse location, the applicant desi~ use the Lego House as a sales office. Central Water: The applicant is studying the possibility of serving the deve with public water. Since this would involve expansion of the Albemarle. Service Authority's jurisdictional area, the Board of Supervisors would i opportunity to further review this matter. At this time, the applicant flexible wording of conditions to permit use of either central or public Since 'central system' is defined as including both private and public S staff opinion is that the existing wording of Condition #4 provides adeq flexibility. ~Sa~ff has recommended additional wording outlining require~ if a public system is employed. Recommended Conditions of Approval: (Note: Ail conditions of ZMA-79-06 have included whether or not modification Or deletion is recommended. Condit been reorganized and renumbered for clarity. Staff proposals for new wo are underlined.) A. General No final site plan or subdivision approvals shall be given until th copi~es of a revised preliminary plan for the entire development~ re conditions of approval contained herein~ have been submitted to the of .Planning. Such plans shall be submitted within sixty (60) days approvaZ of this petition; Approval is for a maximum of ~$ 228 dwellings subject to condition herein. Locations and acreages of various land uses shall comply w Approved Plan. --~e~$~-~?-~-~-~. In the final site plan and s process, open space shall be dedicated in proportion to the number approved. The Commission may permit dedication of a lesser acreage space in a particular case due to the remoteness of open space area that section platted; provided that'in no event, shall open space c less than 25% of the cumulative area platted; and provided further the cumulative total of 170 acres of open space shall be dedicated March 19, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting Roads No grading or clearing for street construction shall occur within any area unti the final stormwater detention and drainage plans for the subject sub-drainage basin have been approved for concurrent construction; Private road "X" (Sheet 2 of approved plan for ZMA-79-06) shall not serve more than 28 dwelling units, owners of said dwelling units shall become members of the Homeowners Association of ~e~&~Ee Ashcroft property~ association and subject to all regulations governing said association. This condition shall not be construed as approval of any subdivision or plat; Aeeeee-~e-Re~e-~-Ea~-~a~-~e-~e~eea~e~-ae~eee-~em-~e-e~a~ee-~e-We~e~ ~ewe~a~e~e-ae-~e~-~&~&~&a-~e~a~me~-e¢-~A~hwa~e-a~-~a~e~e~a~&e~-~e~e~-e¢- ~a~-2~-~¢~¢~ Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation commercial entrance approval for North Pantops Drive and County Attorney approval of agreements restricting usage of North Pantops Drive to Ashcroft and the Odyss.a.y Supper Club shall be obtained prior to any finaI approval; ~&~&~&a-De~a~me~-e~-M&~h~a~e-a~-~&~e~e~e~-a~e~a~-e~-aeeeee-~e-~e~e 2~e-Eae~--Rea~e-ehew~-ae-~&e-~ea~e-e~-~he-A~e~e~-~a~---2hee~-~-- Lego Drive from frontage road F-179 to its cul-de-sac near the center of the property shall be designed and constructed to Virginia Department of Highways add TransPortation specifibations and dedicated for acceptance into the State Secondary Road System; all other roads shall be in accordance with the private roads provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. No final approvals shal be given until all road plans and profiles have been approved in accordance with this conditio~ Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of plans for improvements outlined in its letter of February 7, 1980 for: (1) the inter- section of Lego Drive and Frontage Road F-179; (2') improvements of Frontage Road F-179 and Lego Drive to U.S. Route 250 East; and (3) the intersection of Frontage Road F-179 and U.S. Route 250 East. Construction and/or bonding of these improvements and Lego Drive shall be accomplished prior to any Phase 2 approvals; Eego Drive shall be designed to Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation~s Category IV standards; North ?antops Drive shall be des.igned to Category IV standards as modified by the Subdivision Ordinance." 'ucker said on February 26, 1980, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended ubject to the conditions of the staff with the following changes: tion A5, second sentence, add the words "Clubhouse renovation" at the beginning ~tence; tion B3, add "Homeowners' Agreements shall include provision for use of open septic drainfields, if necessary." at the end of the paragraph; tion C3, add at the end of the sentence, "or North Pantops Drive shall be realigned 11 Newspaper entrance, prior to any final approval. In the alternative, North ~ive may be terminated nort~ of the southern property line with sole access to .PN to be via Lego Drive and Frontage Road;" tion C6, add at the end of the sentence: "if connected to U.S. Route 250, or to e standard of the Subdivision Ordinance if terminated." ~ucker said the Planning Commission gave the applicant three alternatives regarding 1) Use the existing North Pantops Drive, which is next to the Odyssey Supper maintenance of the road being the sole responsibility of the Odyssey Supper Club March 19, 1980 (R~gu~ar Night Meeting) said the Highway Department was concerned that a commercial use would develop in th between Ashcroft and Route 250 and use this access. Mr. Cooper said he feels the P Commission can control use of this access in the site plan stage. Mr. Cooper said is a legal right-of-way for him, as well as for the other property owner, and he do have any control over others who might use the road. The purpose of buying the add 38+ acres of land was to have another access because the grade did not meet Highway He noted that he could not afford to build both North Pantops Drive and Lego Drive standards. Mr. Fisher asked if that meant he did not care for any of the Planning alternatives. Mr. Cooper said he would prefer that the Planning Commission control commercial traffic when a site plan is filed. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the grade for entrances off of Route 250 is acceptable to the Highway Department. Mr. Cooper sai but there is a grade problem for the first nine hundred feet as you enter the devel on North Pantops Drive. Mr. Lindstrom asked if that meant there was no way for the be state maintained. Mr. Cooper said no, North Pantops Drive will be maintained pr but will be built to state specifications. Mr. Tucker said it will be built to sta specifications but will not meet grade requirements. Mr. Cooper said there is a si distance problem on the Frontage Road, but he felt it can be corrected. Mr. Cooper has agreed to upgrade the Frontage Road, and construct a cul-de-sac past his entran provided he does not have to give up access from North Pantops Drive. Mr. Cooper flexibility is needed on the health department requirements in condition B3. He ag the need for two septic drainfield locations on each lot but suggested that instead saying "won't encroach on any slope exceeding 25%" to say something like "not encro by more than 50% on any slope over 25%". Mr. Fisher then questioned the addition o twenty lots to this plan. Mr. Cooper said some lots were reshaped and some lots we deleted both on the front of the property and internally. Additional acreage was a but the sports club house was only thirty-seven feet from the property line. There had to give up some prime lot area to get protection around the house so it could b He also noted that the twenty additional lots will pay for the cost of the road imp and the sports club. Mr. Cooper then noted that a profile on all the roads as requ condition C4 is very difficult and costly since the roads will not be c~n~.~~ fc or four years. His engineer had studied the contour maps of the roads when the dec was made to cul~e~ac Lego Drive in the middle of the property and a complete road s made at that time. Mr. Cooper said there are no problems with meeting requirements private road provisions in the Subdivision Ordinance and he would like to have the relaxed. With no one else present to speak for or against the petition, the public hea~ closed. Dr. Iachetta asked the rationale for putting a cul-de-sac on Lego Drive in th~ of the property and then the remainder of Lego being private instead of continuing a state road to the cul-de-sac at the property line. Mr. Cooper said the section middle of the property cannot meet state requirements relative to grade, since it 15%. The grade of the private roads will be under the limitations in the private provisions. Mr. Tucker suggested there not be any final approval of the plan until plans and profiles for State roads have been approved. Mr. Lindstrom said the additional road makes him feel that the extra lots and paving of the road are not necessary. He could not support adding Lego Drive beca~ felt this would open land for more development. He did not feel a cul-de-sac on Nc Pantops Drive was of any benefit because he did not think such would affect the fur of the road. He did support the North Pantops Drive entrance. Mr. Lindstrom also not support the request for relaxing Health Department requirements. He felt the ~requirement is not excessive and noted most jurisdictions deal with a 15% grade. March 1~198Q (Regular Night Meeting) 'isher said he felt the Board is in general agreement with all of the Planning conditions except the question of where to terminate Lego Drive. Dr. Iachetta go Drive being constructed as a State Road with the cul-de-sac being placed at 'ty line. Dr. Iachetta asked if there was a possibility of North Pantops Drive state road at some time in the future. Mr. Fred Landess, attorney for the was present and did not think this would be possible since Mr. Cooper's use of ops Drive is over a deeded right-of-way. He said regardless of whether this es North Pantops Drive or not, the road is an approved commercial entrance and property owner can still use North Pantops Drive. It. John said in order not to become embroiled in a Hylton type case condition C5 lude the words "by the developer" in the first sentence between the words "improveme~ .ned" and in the last sentence, insert the words "by the deYeloper" between "Construc~ ~r". Dr. Iachetta said no improvement of the Frontage Road is required until the 'hase 2 is presented. Mr. Fisher felt if Lego Drive is to be the only access, ~hasing language should be deleted. Dr. Iachetta said the alternative would be to use Of North Pantops Drive until such time as phase 2 develops. Mr. Fisher felt just one little part and the applicant could go to other phases before starting Mr. Cooper said he has volunteered to cut off North Pantops Drive, if it can be Lego Drive is constructed. Mr. Fisher asked if North Pantops Drive would be while construction of Phase 1 is in progress and then closed for all subsequent Ir. Cooper said yes. If the alignment of North Pantops Drive is ever changed or .y new road built, he would like to reserve the right to open the new road as a ~tained road. ~indstrom then offered motion to substitute the following language for condition of Odyssey Supper Club entrance road only until construction of Lego Drive, at said entrance road shall be terminated north of the southern property line." md condition C5 to read as follows: "Virginia Department of Highways and Transporta if plans for improvements, by the developer, outlined in its letter of February 7, (1) the intersection of Lego Drive and Frontage Road F-179; (2) improvements of ~oad F-179 from Lego Drive to U.S. Route 250 East; and (3) the intersection of ~oad F-179 and U.S. Route 250 East. Construction by developer and/or bonding of 'ovements and Lego Drive shall be accomplished prior to any approvals of any phase Lse 1." Dr. Iachetta seconded the foregoing motion. Mr. Fisher then requested .tion C4 include the words "State roads" in the last sentence between "profiles" been" and in Condition C6, to strike all language from "North Pantops Drive shall end of that sentence. Mr. Lindstrom then amended his motion to include the ~f Mr. Fisher. Dr. Iachetta accepted the amendment to his second. Roll was the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: ~srs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash. le. Mr. Roudabush. :achetta then offered motion to approve ZMA-80-03, Liberty Land Company, Ltd., ?lanning Commission conditions and the foregoing amendments. Miss Nash seconded and same carried by the following recorded vote: ;srs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash. le .: Mr. Roudabush. :23 P.M., the Board recessed and reconvened at 9:26 P.M. Mr. Roudabush returned March 19,~ 1980 (Regular N~i_g~ht Meetin~g~_ Mr, Tucker said on March 4, 1980, the Planning Commission unanimously recommen~ approval of SP-80-02 with the above conditions. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Dennis Rucker, representing Shenandoah Val Television, was present. He noted that Shenandoah'¥alley Television is the Channel station in Harrisonburg which is the primary ABC station serving Charlottesville an~ County. The purpose of this application is to aIlow the installation of equipment mountain for a better signal to the area. Mr. Rucker pointed out that the replacem, tower will be smaller and not require a light. Miss Nash asked if the building can be seen. Mr. Tucker said no, unless you a~ top of the mountain. Miss Nash then asked if service will be better for the people Carters Mountain. Mr. Buddy Lowe, director of engineering for the station, was pre He said the primary area served will be toward Ruckersville. There will be very ii improvement in the service for those living east and south of Carters Mountain. With no one else present to speak for or against the petition, the public hear closed. Mr. Roudabush then offered motion to approve SP-80-02 with the conditions of t Planning Commission. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same carried by the foll recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush None. Agenda Item No. 6. SP-80-06. William C. Sutherland. Petition for a two-fami dwelling on 2.773 acres zoned A-1. Property is located on the west of Route 29 Sou approximately 500 feet north of the intersection of Routes 692 and 29 South. Count Map 87, Parcel 4. Samuel Miller District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on Ma and March 12, 1980.) Mr. Tucker presented the following staff report: "Request: Two-family dwelling under Section 2-1-25(34) Acreage: 2.773 acres Zoning: A-1 Location: Property, dsecribed as Tax Map 87, parcel 4, is located on the west of Route 29 South approximately 500 feet north of its intersection with R Character of the Area: This area has a ruPal village character with some smal development, commercial and institutional uses. Staff Comment: The applicant is seeking to convert a single-family dwelling t two-family dwelling. The Comprehensive Plan recommends North Garden as a 1 Village with appropriate uses including two-family dwellings. Staff opinion is that this request complies with the Comprehensive Plan a recommends approval subject to: 1. Provision of four off-street parking spaces." Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval on Ma 1980, with the one condition. The public hearing was opened. Mr. William Sutherland was present. He stated intent to convert the basement in his single-family dwelling into an apartments. Dr March 19, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting) !ucker said the Planning Commission, on March 4, 1980, recommended by a vote of to, that the 1.469 acres located on the southernmost portion of the property be 'om A-1 to B-1 subject to the following proffer: 1) There shall be no commercial o U.S. Route 29 North along the entire frontage of the property to be rezoned. ~ery along the frontage of the property along Route 29 for the beautification of hall be provided at time of site development to the reasonable satisfaction of .rle County Planning Commission for the purpose of beautification and not for the 'the screening of any legitimate business uses. 'isher asked how the Planning Commission dealt with the fact that this land .is ~ the area designated for Piney Mountain village. Mr. Tucker said the actual 'or the village is Route 763. The Commission did no~ feel this parcel is conducive idential use since it is located so close to the General Electric plant. Therefore, sion recommended that only the southern portion of the property be rezoned .ough land, basically two acres, for a residence. Mr. Fisher said there was quite when the Board decided on the village boundaries and now this request is for eyond those boundaries. ublic hearing was opened. Mr. Edward H. Bain, Jr., agent for CVR, Inc., was He noted that the Planning Commission was not sure how this parcel would develop ore recommended only the 1.469 acres for rezoning. He then distributed a letter h 19, 1980, in response to the Planning Commission's concern and as an additional the petition: part of the rezoning application for 3.469 acres from A-1 to B-1 on Route 29N, Tax Map 21, Parcel 15, the contract purchaser, C.V.R., Inc., by me as agent for ~rporation, hereby proffers an additional condition to be applied to the property to ~p~.~a~d.~parcel of the rezoning application'in addition to the proffer contained r letter of 29 January 1980 to Mr. Robert W. Tucker. shall be no commercial use permitted on this property as contained in the B-1 zone the current Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance in effect as of this date other than peration of a retail furniture store and any use accessory to said retail furniture operation. rely, ED BY ) ., Inc. Edward H. Bain, Jr., Agent" ain said he is aware that this land is outside of the village boundaries and that lenty of commercial property along Route 29 North, However, when the applicant land on Route 29 North, the price of raw land was too high. He noted the advantage~ cation such as the close proximity to an intersection, next to the major entrance Electric, across the road from industrial property and an electrical substation this property. The applicant preferred locating closer to town but with the nd .cannot afford to. He then noted the applicant has been in business for some e old Moose Lodge on Route 29 North. Mr. Bain said in light of what the Planning has recommended, the applicant would rather have the entire parcel rezoned with proffer as noted above placed on the approval. isher interpreted the law to be that a proffer had to be submitted before the m was called. Mr. St. John said if a Proffer has been made before the meeting, in this case, then the proffer can be amended. Mr. Bain said the proffer is for hal condition. March 19, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting) Mr. Lindstrom agreed with Mr. Fisher and could not support the Planning Commit recommendation. Miss Nash asked what would happen when the applicant either sold ~ property or went out of business. Mr. Tucker said the proffer would go with the 1~ regardless. Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, tc ZMA-80-04. Roll was .called on the foregoing motion and same carried by the follow~ recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush aye with reservation.)lf,~¥S: ~?~Aa~ NAYS: None. ~ Agenda Item No. 8. Resolution of intent to amend the A-1 District of the Alb~ County Zoning Ordinance with respect to setbacks. (Advertised in the Daily, Progre: March 5 and March 12, 1980.) Mr. Tucker said this has been deferred indefinitely by the Planning Commissiol Planning Commission feels that the new Zoning Ordinance will take care of any conc~ regarding setbacks. Mr. Fisher then asked if anyone was present to speak. No one present. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, to take ti of intent off of the agenda with no action. Roll was called on the motion and sam, by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. RoUdabush NAYS: None. Agenda Item No. 9. SP-80-04A. VEPCO. Petition to amend SP-78-05 to provide additional "dish" antennae on 0.5165 acres zoned A-1. Property on top of Bear Den approximately 0.2 miles southwest of the State Police tower. AugustaaCounty Tax M. parcel 32, part thereof. (Adjacent to. the White Hall District border in Albemarle (Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 5 and March 12, 1980.) Mr. Tucker presented the following staff report: "Request: Amend SP-78-05 to permit four additional antennae on microwave tow Acreage: 0.5165 acres Zoning: A-1 Location: Property, described as Augusta County Tax Map 78, Parcel 32, is lo on Bear Den Mountain west of Skyline Drive, Staff Comment: The applicant is seeking relief from Condition #7 of SP-78-05 to locate a total of 10 antennae on the tower as opposed to six. This w three additional locations to the communications network. These areas w as "future" installations under SP-78-05 and would complete usage of thi originally described. ~ecommended Conditions of Approval: t. Tower shall be removed within 90 days of-abandonment, if such shall 2. Enlargement shall require amendment of this special permit; 3. Tower and equipment shall not be located within Virginia State Park easement; 4. Tower to be limited to 60 feet with ten dish type antennae." Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of S on March 4, 1980, with the above conditions. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Phil Lucas, representing VEPCO, was prese ~a~ ~ ~ ~w~ ~ ~~t~ fo~ th~ ~.dd~t~on~.~ ~_ntennae and the height of th March 19, 1980 (Regular Night Me~_g~ ested zoning: A-1 ge: 8.25 acres ing ZOning: B-1 ion: Property, described as Tax Map 78, parcel 33 part thereof, is located in the southwest quadrant gt the Shadwell interchange of 1-64. cter of the Area: Properties in this quadrant are undeveloped and Wooded. A building was recently constructed on this property. ehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan recommends this area for a rural designation. Comment: While this property is bordered by commercial and industrial zoning, the requested A-1 zoning complies with the Comprehensive Plan and reflects proposed zoni~ for the area. Staff recommends approval." ucker Said the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of this March 4, 1980. ublic hearing was opened. Mr. Meredith Bickers, the applicant, was present. Mr. ed the type of building recently constructed on the property. Mr. Bickers said orage building and measures about 24 feet by 48 feet. Mr. Fisher asked if Mr. tended to use the property for residential purposes. Mr. Bickers said he planned home here. Mr. Roudabush said Mr. Bickers used to live on this property and the took his house. He could understand his desire to build again. no one else present to speak for or against the petition, the public hearing was n was then offered by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, to approve ZMA-80-05 d by the Planning Commission. Roll was called on the motion and same carried by ing recorded vote: srs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush. e. a Item No. 11. SP-80-07. McClenahan Broadcasting Corporation. Petition for an ransmission tower and equipment building on 53.950 acres zoned A-1. Property is the southwest corner of Little Yellow Mountain north of the C and 0 Railroad, imately 2.25 miles west of Crozet,. County Tax Map 55, Parcel 25. White Hall (Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 5 and March 12, 1980.) ucker presented the following staff report: est: Radio transmission tower and equipment building under Section 2-1-25(27) of the Zoning Ordinance. ge: On one leaSed acre of 53.95 acre tract. ~: A-1 ion: Property described as Tax Map 55, Parcel 25, is located on the southwest slope of Little Yellow Mountain approximately 2000 feet north of the Route 707 crossing of the C and 0 Railroad. ter of the Area: This site is in a hardwood stand located above an orchard area. Properties in the immediate area are of comparable acreage to the site. Mint Springs Park is adjacent' to the north. While residential development in the area is sparse, the tower would be visible from various distant areas. Comment: A summary of major points from the applicant's written presentation is as follows: March 19~,~ 1980 (Regular Night Meeting) The public hearing was opened. 'Mr. Ed McClenahan was present. He noted that a extensive survey, the Federal Communications Commission stated that there is a need additional communication facilities to serve the public in this area. Mr. McClenaha the AM coverage of his station WPED does not allow anyone west of Ivy to have any c¢ after sunset and before sunrise. He noted that there are school systems in the west part of the County needing this service, particularly on snowy days. He also noted WPED is the basic source of communications in the area. He said due to the federal rules and regulations, WPED is prohibited from signing on before local sunrise whick to be 7:30 A.M. in January. Therefore, there is a great difficulty in sending out s closings or whatever prior to this hour. He also noted that WPED is the only moderr music station in the area. Mr. McClenahan noted that the majority of the populatior this area has expressed support of this-request. Mr. Henley asked if Mr. McClenahan had any problems with the recommended condi~ Mr. McClenahan said yes. He had volunteered to put the utilities underground, but ~ examination of the area it was found that the terrain is very rocky and this may no~ possible. He would like permission to use other methods to get power to the instalZ if the underground method is not possible. Mr. Harold Whitlow, a resident in close proximity to the site, was present in c He felt that if the tower is placed on the site requested by the applicant, the tow~ be an eyesore. If an alternate site can be used, he felt this would be better to a~ having a flashing light in the back window of his house at all times. Mrs. Linda Thurston, adjacent property owner, was present in opposition. She the tower as proposed could be seen from Mint Springs Park. Mr. Bob Crickenberger, present, and said yes. Mrs. Thurston felt the people signing the petition signed it of the radio station and not for the location of the tower. Since she did not know was a possibility of placing this tower in an alternate location until the Planning meeting, she was curious as to how many people knew there may be an alternate site. felt the alternate site would be less costly, less obtrusive, and less damaging to countryside. Therefore, she supported the tower being located in Mint Springs Park Mrs. Frances Thurston, adjacent property owner, was present in opposition. Sh~ that she had signed the petition but was not aware at that time where the tower was located. The tower will be close to her back yard as well as her side yard. Mr. F~ asked how far the base of the towerwould be from her house. Mrs. Thurston asked h land would have to be cleared at the alternative site as opposed to the requested s Mr. McClenahan said the guy wires would be located 150 feet from the base of the to~ The only clearing would be around the base of the tower and the anchors for the guy Therefore~ there would be minimum clearing. He noted that the~building would be a ~ of 12 by 14 feet and smaller, if possible. Mr. Bob Cri~kenberger said if he had to make a choice between the site request the applicant and a site in the park, he would recommend the applicant's request. Henley asked if the tower would be seen from the Park at the proposed site on Littl Mountain. Mr. Crickenberger said yes; approaching the parking lot. Mr. Henley fel person would have to have good eyes to see that far away and since the parks are no at night, he did not feel it would bother anyone. Mr. Crickenberger said his major was the impact of the tower on the nature trails if it were located in the park. M Henley said there is a tower in the middle of Crozet and no one has commented on th tower. He asked the height of that tower. Mr. McClenahan said the tower in Crozet feat. Mr. Henley also noted that he has not received any complaints about the site by the applicant. With no one else present to speak for or against the matter, the public hearin