Wednesday, May 22,
2002
Present: Mr. Brush, Mr. Harlow, Mr. Drumheller, Ms. Proulx, Mr. Giles
Staff Present: Mr. Boger
SITE PLAN FOR NICHOLAS R. NUZZI, JR. – Commissioners reviewed a new site plan to construct a Bed & Breakfast, cottage and antique store/residence showing changes to the parking area. Previous plans had shown parking areas that allowed vehicles to back out into Chapel Hollow Road. Commissioners voted 5-0 on Ms. Proulx’s motion to approve the site plan with two stipulations: 1) that the applicant submit a lighting plan with Mr. Boger authorized to approve the plan, and 2) that any significant changes to the site plan be brought back to the Planning Commission.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CATHERINE L. BLACKWELL – The applicant requested a Permit to allow placement of a 1970 singlewide manufactured home on her property on Tucson Lane in the Arrizona Subdivision. Mr. Boger noted that the manufactured home is currently in Fluvanna County and that Ms. Blackwell’s father has done a lot of work on the unit. Mr. Boger also stated that the unit was manufactured prior to 1974 and was not built to any state or federal standards. In addition, the work that was done on the inside, if inspected by a Building Official in Fluvanna County, may or may not pass inspection in Nelson County. Based on these concerns and the Planning Commissions’ recent denial of other pre-1974 units, Staff recommended denial of the application. Mr. Brush said that he had voted to allow pre-1974 units in the past. He said that based on the photos of the work done on the inside, he would be in favor of approving the permit. He said that Ms. Blackwell bought the property and could take the chance of moving the unit here and it not passing inspection. Mr. Giles asked if the work on the unit had been inspected in Fluvanna and the applicant said that it had not. Mr. Boger said that there were no standards before 1974 and that approval would put our Building Official in the position of deciding whether a unit was safe or not when he could not see the inside construction of the unit. Ms. Proulx said that she could not recommend approval when others had been turned down with very similar applications. Commissioners voted 4-1 (Mr. Brush no) to recommend denial of the application based on the age of the manufactured home.
REORGANIZATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION – Ms. Proulx noted that the Board of Supervisors has proposed changing the makeup of the Commission to 6 – one member from each voting district and one representative from the Board of Supervisors. She said that during the Commissioners’ past discussions, there had been consensus that the Planning Commission should remain at 9 members. Noting that a Public Hearing would be required to change the Ordinance, Ms. Proulx said that she would be sending written comments to the Supervisors. Mr. Brush said that he had expressed his pleasure at the current makeup of the Commission. He noted that prior to the 9-member Commission, he remembered difficulty in consistently getting a quorum for meetings. He said he did not feel strongly enough about the proposed change to raise a lot of noise however. He said that he would like to hear the Board’s rationale though. Ms. Proulx said that she would also like to hear the reasons and said that she felt that there was better representation with 9 members than with 6. She said that she really enjoyed the diversity on the Commission even when she didn’t agree with all the opinions. Mr. Giles asked Mr. Boger if the Board was interested in what the Commissioners’ had to say and Mr. Boger said that he was sure the Supervisors would consider comments.