Loading...
1979-08-15A August 15, 1979 (Afternoon) (Adjourned from August 8, 1979) An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, sch for August 15, 1979, at 2:00 P.M. in the County Executive's Conference Room, County Off~ Building, Charlottesville, Virginia, was called to order at 2:26 P.M.; said meeting bein adjourned from August 8, 1979. Present: Messrs Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., (Arriving at 2:48 P.M.), Gerald E. Fisher J. T. Henley, Jr., F. Anthony Iachetta, C. Timothy Lindstrom and W. S. Roudabush (Arrivi~ at 2:55 P.M.). Absent: None. Officers present: County Executive, Guy B. Agnor, Jr.; County Attorney, George R. St. John (Arriving at 5:12 P.M.); and County Planner, Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 2:26 P.M. by the Chairman. Agenda Item No. 2A. Work Session: Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan - Hollymead 'community. The Board began by discussing the Planning Commission's recommendation #3 (land soutl a line drawn across the community from the western border to the east, below the existing mobile home park and along the edge of the southern boundary of Phase I of the Hollymead development; the Commission wished to exclude this land from the community and provide ad( tional buffer space between the Urban Area Neighborhoods 1 and 2 and Hollymead. In effec~ this moves the southern border to the north approximately 3000 feet.) Dr. Iachetta said ~ shift in the boundary does a number of things which he questions. It shifts a large area north of Route 649. It places an additional traffic burden on Route 649; much larger that originally anticipated. The area proposed in the 1971 Plan was large enough for the popu- lation anticipated. This shift also leaves out a strip along the highway which has na~urs boundaries and this will cause stripping of the highway. This shift puts almost all of th land in the Hollymead community into the hands of one developer. Dr. Iachetta said he is satisfied that there are any good planning reasons for this shift northward. Mr. Tucker said this expansion of the Hollymead Community plan was requested by the Citizens Committee. There were members on the committee from Terrybrook and Airport Acres who felt their subdivisions should be a part of the Hollymead plan. Mr Tucker said he vie~ what the Planning Commission did as a dropping off of area, and he is concerned about what provisions should be made for the density that was dropped. Mr. Henley said he felt no provisions should be made for the density that was lost in this shift of boUndaries. Dr. Iachetta felt the Route 649/Route 643 roadway was a logical boundary line and recommended that the boundary not be shifted, but that the densities shown be changed. Mr. Fisher suggested that the Board discuss the part of the Community located on the east side of Route 29. He asked if Dr. Iachetta were recommending that the community bound on the north be drawn at Route 649. Dr. Iachetta said he felt the origina!~boundary should be preserved and that as the Board holds these work sessions, the staff make recommendation as to whether some of the facilities included in the plan should be removed because of the lower density. Mr. Tucker said the school site lost by the redrawing of the boundary was recommended for that location because it would serve not only the Hollymead. Community, but also the northern part of the Urban Area. Dr. Iachetta said the natural boundary which had been recommended for residential development seemed to be keyed to the County's ability to provide utilities. If part of the Community is shifted north of Route 649, the County will have to go to pumped utilities for part of that land and ~his shift will also generate road problems more quickly. Mr. Fisher agreed that sewage servic~ should be a part of the con- siderations. Dr. Iachetta did not think that the area north of Route 649 should be includec in the Community in this five-year revision of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Tucker asked if the Board would be amenable to providing densities north of Route 649 which could be suppor~ by one utility, recognizing Terrybrook Subdivision and some other lands because the waterli~ presently runs down Route 649. Mr. Fisher said if the lowest density on this plan is one to four dwelling units/acre, and an area cannot be served by sewage facilities, the density designation should have a na~ other than "low density" Mr. Tucker said the category "low density" was used to give some flexibility in land use, but the area would be zoned for a one acre density. Mr. Tucker sai another reason for considering this density is the Route 29 eastern bypass which will tie into Route 649. It will be advantageous to have some higher densities on the north side of Route 649. Dr. Iachetta agreed that the area can be serviced by gravity sewage. The inte~,~ ceptor is already under construction so sewage disposal will be available in the Hollymead Community within three years. Dr. Iachetta said the Hollymead Community will develop long before the eastern bypass is constructed and he did not think there should be any planning for anything north of Route 649 at this time. Mr. Roudabush said the Board should co~~ ~ ..... August 15, 1979 (Afternoon) (A~journed from August~8, 1979) Mr. Lindstrom asked why higher densities were shown on the portion of the Hollymead PUD he side farthest from Route 29 with lower densities on the front of the property. Mr. ~er said the Planning Commission felt that when the Hollymead Phase I PUD plan was developed, ~as developed backwards. That was the reason for their recommendation #4 reversing the ~ities on this portion of the plan. Mr. Lindstrom asked about the commercial area along ~e 29. Mr. Tucker said most of that commercial is recognized on the Phase I plan and sady exists. Mr. Lindstrom disagreed with having any commercial area near a school. Mr. Fisher asked if the southern boundary of this community should be changed as recom- ded by the Planning Commission. Dr. Iachetta felt Route 643 is a logical boundary. Mr. ley said he had no problem with using the road for a boundary. Mr. Roudabush said there a good natural boundary off of Route 649 using the stream banks slightly inside of what is ,wn on the map. Dr. Iachetta said if the northern boundary is to be extended, recommendati¢ ' changes in the densities for the entire community should be made. Mr. Roudabush said ~re was no need to designate all of the areas, but there could be a density range for up to ~ unit per acre where sewage disposal is available. Mr. Lindstrom said if the idea is to have a community where there are no major roadways aning through it, there will be a small amount of land north of what could be a bypass road ~ that does not make any sense. Mr. Fisher said the area identified for the Hollymead ~munity is almost five square miles. The original Hollymead PUD plan contained about 1800 res and the Hollymead Community contains about 3100 acres. Dr. Iachetta said the 1971 mprehensive Plan called for 16,000 people in the Hollymead Community (formerly North Rivann~ mmunity) and this plan calls for only 10-12,000. If the boundaries being discussed today ~e adopted, during work on the zoning map the Board should reconsider the densities for this 'ea. Mr. Lindstrom said he felt it would be a mistake to show this whole area as available ~r immediate development. If this is done, he feels people will start to develop this area ~ a less dense fashion than the County wishes, thus using up land in the Urban Area and ~rcing development into rural areas. He did not think the densities should necessarily be ~justed~ Instead, he suggested that the Board establish a timetable that the Planning ~mmission could use ~h~m recommending rezoings that would keep the area which already has ~ilities available from being developed at a lower density. Mr. Lindstrom said he had no roblem with the size of the area recommended for future growth, but was not in favor of aving a highway go through part of the community. Dr. Iachetta said the issue of the easter~ ypass will come back to the Board at a later time because the Board will have to vote on the ATS study and incorporate same into the Comprehensive Plan as the Comnty's officia~ ransportation plan. Mr. Henley said he liked the idea of having a boundary that camld be Pinpointed, and ~ould favor the road as a boundary, however, he feels that both sides of the road will be ~hought of as part of the community. Mr. Fisher said he could vote either way but if the ~oundary goes beyond Route 649, the density should be no higher than one dwelling unit per ~cre. Mr. Lindstrom did not agree with designating the land north of Route 649 for low ~ensity when it is more feasible to serve some of those parcels with public sewage disposal. ~e said this is essentially wasting density. Mr. Roudabush suggested putting in another soundary which would show the area which can be served by sewer. Mr. Fisher said that ~esignating only a few lots on Route 649, or a strip 400 or so feet deep, seemed arbitrary. ~r.~Roudabush said he feels too many of these plans are putting the developable area into the hands of only one or two people. Mr. Fisher said Dr. Hurt came to all of the meetings in 1971 before the original Comprehensive Plan was adopted and then bought the land after the County had designated this area a community. Dr. Iachetta felt the Hollymead PUD was pro- posed before the Comprehensive Plan was adopted. Mr. Fisher felt there was fairly strong support among Board members to d~a~ the northern boundary of the community at Route 649. Mr. Henley felt that at some time in the f~ture, this area will be taken into the community. Dr. Iachetta said that between the five-year revisions of the Comprehensive Plan, growth should be encouraged where it can be served. Mr. Dorrier asked what the density will be north of Route ~49. Mr. Tucker said there is already some R-1 zoning in the area. Dr. Iachetta suggested that the staff make some further recom- mendations about the densities shown on the plan for the area between Route 643 and Route 649 Discussion then centered on proposed school sites. Mr. Tucker said when the Planning Commissio~ moved the southern boundary, they made recommendation #5 that land along the southern side of Route 649 east of Route 29 be redesignated institutional land in order to supply land for the high and middle school complex. Mr. Tucker said he did not think the residents'of Jefferson Village are happy with this change. Mr. Fisher asked if there is any possibility of getting a secondary/middle school closer to the center of the Hollymead Community. He did not think that with the traffic load on Route 29 there will be any way to get to this school by bicycle or pedestrian path, and by being centrally located the school should minimize transportation problems for p~ople in the community. ~Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission felt the northern part of the Urban Area would need to use this school and that is the reason for ~the recommended location. Mr. Henley said he felt it was advantag ~- ~^~*~ ~ber. Dr. Zachetta said he thought the reason there was ...... ~ ~u~d some day be a ns ~ous August 15, 1979 (Afternoon) . (Adjourned from August 8,~1979) study recommends that' the bypass begin south of the river. Some industrial land shown not be useful for industrial purposes without adequate roads, Mr. LindStrom said that be taken into consideration~ Mr. FiSher said he did not want to designate areas which be readily developed, nor identify more land than the Board knows Will be used for indus purposes. Mr. Roudabush said he would like to see the west side of Route 29 used for in pUrposes instead of residential. It might he'possible to isolate the industrial parcels on the ridges so there would not be a lot of grading for buildings and parking~ lots. A1 it would be better if the areas were shrunk because the main trunk line for sewage dispo ~will go through the stream valley. Areas on the tops of the ridges on each side of the stream valley could then be served by this one trunk line. Mr. Lindstrom said there is a budget for industrial zonings in the Comprehensive Pit This whole area west of Route 29 which has been designated for industrial uses is far in excess of that bUdget. Mr. Fisher /said the Planning Commission has recommended that the Planned Industrial Park north of Route 649 be recognized and he asked if the other Board members felt it needed to be recognized as part of the Hollymead Community. Mr. Roudabu~ suggested that the Northside Industrial Park, which is already existing and partially de~ .also be recognized. Mr. Fisher then asked about recreational areas. Dr. Iachetta said there is'no one s large location for a park on this plan. Mr. Tucker said there is one recommended in the flood plain. Also, there are a lot of playgrounds scattered throUgh the plan. Mr. Fishe~ suggested that all community facilities be centrally located. Mr. Fisher asked that under "Timing-the five year perspective" in the first line, th~ word "used" be changed to "encouraged" thus making the first sentence read: "The private sector should be encouraged where possible to both design and implement the necessary inf~ structure for the area in conformity to the plan." Mr, Fisher then noted a sentence in that same section which reads: "Industrial and residential growth will eventually necessitate a grade separation interchange at the bypas intersection." He asked if this reference'to a bypass should remain in the plan until act is taken by the CATS committee. Dr. Iachetta said because of action recently taken by the CATS committee in adopting Alternative #4, he would recommend that this bypass intersectio~ be deleted until the final decision by the CATS committee. Mr. Agnor noted that the easte~ bypass runs through the community into the Urban Area. If the intersection is deleted, th~ whole road should be deleted. Mr. Fisher asked if the Board should take such action in advance of the CATS committee recommendations being received. Mr. Agnor said when the CAT~ report is received, it will necessitate an amendment to the Compreheneisve Plan and it is probably better to leave it alone at this time.~ Dr. Iachetta said the Board has already taken action on the Route 29 North Corridor Study and he would incorporate that study into this plan, but leave the rest until something further is received.~ Mr. Fisher suggested that where there are keys on maps relating to densities, that the specific densities be noted. He asked for more information on the terrain on the west side of Route 29 and that the northern border of the community on the west side of Route 29 be drawn above the PID so the Board can see what the map would then look like. Mr. Fisher suggested that the school sites and public facilities be located closer to the center of th community. Agenda Items No. 2B, Earlysville Village Plan, and 2C~, Nix Village Plan. Mr. Lindstro~ said he would like'to make a statement before the Board proceeded. He has been struggling with the concept of village plans. Where he can see a distinction between Ivy and Scottsvi] which presently have, or will have in the foreseeable future, water and sewer facilities, h~ can see nothing to distinguish the other villages from surrounding County areas. If the State Water Control Board could be Convinced to consider something other than the AWT plant for sewage disposal, there might be some meaningful designation for the villages. Without that justification, he could not see spending time to formulate village p!ans.' Mrs. Roudabus said he agreed to some extent. He thought it would be a waste of time to picM actual tocati for densities within the village boundaries, and favored just designating boundaries within which certain uses would be allowed that are not agricultural uses. Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Lindstrom what he was proposing. Mr. Lindstrom said if there is no capability for public utilities in an area, it should not be designated as anything. Mr. Dorrier said he shared some of Mr. Lindstrom's concerns. He has been looking at the Nix Village Plan and he does not believe this area has ever been considered a village by the people in the area. The are~ has no attributes as a village except for the fact that it is located on a secondary highway Mr. Roudabush said Milton would be a more appropriate location for a village. Mr. Dorrier also suggested that Woodridge would be a more appropriate location. Mr. Dorrier said he feels it would be misleading the citizens to ~ut ~,~ the ar~ .... August 15, 1979 (AfternoOn) (Adjourned from August 8, 1979) s for doing so without public utilities. Mr. Roudabush said he did not think any of the ages, with the exception of Ivy, will get public utilities within the next few revisions ods of the Plax. Mr. Dorrier said he had argued this 'point when the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1977. He feels there should be different types of village designations ~nding on their capacity to furnish utilties. Mr. Tucker said the Plan envisions the .ages as more of a rural satellite to the Urban Area. If water and sewer utilities were _l-able to the villages, it would change the character of the area entirely. Mr. Fisher t he is really worried about what will happen in Ivy when the interceptor is constructed ~ugh that area. Mr. Lindstrom said he is still interested in making a formal inquiry to State Water Control Board as to their reactions to something other than the interceptor. ~greed that the Board could look at the recommendations of the consultants to see if there a good basis for doing anything on the village plans. Dr. Iachetta said Earlysville is a viable village for a number of reasons; the main one ng that the people in the area already identify it as a sort of village. Mr. Roudabush .d he is Satisfied with the boundaries of the village recommended by the citizens committee. is only bothered by the densities and would prefer that there be a blanket one-acre lsity for the whole area. Mr. Tucker said the area would be so designated on the zoning ~. The areas shown as sensitive on the map are shown that way because the land is open ~ it is visually sensitive. Mr. Fisher asked about the boundaries. Mr. Tucker said in ne places the guidelines of 1/2 mile from the viIlage center or 1/4 mile from existing ~elopment had to be used to establish boundaries. (Mr. St. John arrived at 5:12 P.M.) Mr. Fisher said this is a fairly well-formed area at already includes some development, existing commercial, roads and a school. Mr. Roudabus id he had no problems with the recommended village of Earlysville. He has personally lked to all of the people on the committee and they did a fairly good job. Also, he knows no one in Earlysville who objects to the plan. Agenda Item No. 5. Mr. Dorrier asked that Mr. Tucker take the Scottsville Village plan ~d show it to the Scottsville Town Council as a courtesy and ask for their comments. Mr. Fisher then suggested that the remaining items on the afternoon agenda be deferred atil the night meeting. At 5:22 P.M., the meeting was adjourned.~