The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSDP201800083 Correspondence 2019-05-01 Christopher Perez From: Diantha McKeel Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2019 1:29 PM To: Amelia McCulley;Ann Mallek; Claudette Borgersen; Greg Kamptner;Jeff Richardson; Liz Palmer; Ned Gallaway; Norman Dill; Rick Randolph;Travis Morris Cc: Doug Walker; Mark Graham; Christopher Perez; David Benish; Bart Svoboda;Andy Herrick; Francis MacCall Subject: RE: Briarwood phase 8 and Camelot Drive Thank you Amelia. I appreciate the notice and information. I will review and get back to you with any questions I have. In general, I believe interconnectivity is a good thing! • Diantha From:Amelia McCulley Sent:Wednesday, May 1, 2019 12:52 PM To:Ann Mallek<amallek@albemarle.org>;Claudette Borgersen<cborgersen@albemarle.org>; Diantha McKeel <dmckeel@albemarle.org>; Greg Kamptner<GKamptne@albemarle.org>;Jeff Richardson <jrichardson3@albemarle.org>; Liz Palmer<Ipalmer@albemarle.org>; Ned Gallaway<ngallaway@albemarle.org>; Norman Dill<ndill@albemarle.org>; Rick Randolph<rrandolph@albemarle.org>;Travis Morris - <tmorris2@albemarle.org> Cc: Doug Walker<dwalker3@albemarle.org>; Mark Graham<mgraham@albemarle.org>; Christopher Perez <cperez@albemarle.org>; David Benish<DBENISH@albemarle.org>; Bart Svoboda<bsvoboda@albemarle.org>;Andy Herrick<aherrick@albemarle.org>; Francis MacCall<FMACCALL@albemarle.org> Subject: Briarwood phase 8 and Camelot Drive Members of the Board, I'm writing to inform you of a land use decision relating to an interconnection from Briarwood onto Camelot'Drive. The County has approved additional townhouse development along Elm Tree Court for Briarwood phase 8. During review of a minor amendment to those approved applications, Planning staff discovered that we previously approved access onto Camelot Drive from Elm Tree Court contrary to the Briarwood rezoning(ZMA 2005-009). These previous approvals include 4 separate site plan applications and 1 water protection application. The first of these was in March, 2010 and the more recent site plan amendment is pending action. Virginia Code 15.2-2311 (c) allows someone to count on a decision of an administrative officer if they have materially changed his/her position in good faith reliance on that decision. In this case,the decisions by staff to approve the 4 site plan applications constitute a decision allowing an interconnection on Camelot Drive. Actions in which the owner materially changed his position in good faith reliance on the approvals includes the following: • The road interconnection up to but not connecting to Camelot Drive is rough graded. There is gravel base down on about the first half of the road segment. • Water and sewer lines have been installed. • Drainage pipes and inlets are installed per the approved WPO plan to outfall at the existing sediment basin. This work has been done within portions of the required 20' vegetative buffer adjacent to Camelot Drive. 1 1 • An estimated total cost by the developer of$1.2 million for all efforts to advance the development of Briarwood phase 8. This includes engineering, grading,utilities and the like. The estimate is not solely related to work on the interconnection itself. It also doesn't include the rental of equipment. In considering this decision,Planning and Zoning staff consulted with the County Attorney's office. Our decision in summary is that the interconnection to Camelot Drive from Elm Tree Court is allowed as a final decision or as a"thing decided." This interconnection will provide Camelot residents access to a signalized intersection at Briarwood Drive and Route 29 (see the attached maps). An interconnection is also consistent with good planning and engineering practice. I'm informing you about this decision as a courtesy and realize it may be'a complex topic. If you have any questions or comments, please let me.know. • • Christopher Perez From: Amelia McCulley ,1 1.—feA44n•i.71-ifwt Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2019 12:52 PM To: Ann Mallek;Claudette Borgersen; Diantha McKeel; Greg Kamptner;Jeff Richardson; Liz Palmer; Ned Gallaway; Norman Dill; Rick Randolph;Travis Morris Cc: Doug Walker; Mark Graham; Christopher Perez; David Benish; Bart Svoboda;Andy Herrick; Francis MacCall Subject: Briarwood phase 8 and Camelot Drive Attachments: Briarwood Phase 8 Letter edited.docx;Increased access to 29 map jpg; Existing access to 29 jpg; Existing access to 29 map (002)jpg Members of the Board, I'm writing to inform you of a land use decision relating to an interconnection from Briarwood onto Camelot Drive. The County has approved additional townhouse development along Elm Tree Court for Briarwood phase 8. During review of a minor amendment to those approved applications, Planning staff discovered that we previously approved access onto Camelot Drive from Elm Tree Court contrary to the Briarwood rezoning(ZMA 2005-009). These previous approvals include 4 separate site plan applications and 1 water protection application. The first of these was in March, 2010 and the more recent site plan amendment is pending action. Virginia Code 15.2-2311 (c) allows someone to count on a decision of an administrative officer if they have materially changed his/her position in good faith reliance on that decision. In this case,the decisions by staff to approve the 4 site plan applications constitute a decision allowing an interconnection on Camelot Drive. Actions in which the owner materially changed his position in good faith reliance on the approvals includes the following: • The road interconnection up to but not connecting to Camelot Drive is rough graded. There is gravel base down on about the first half of the road segment. • Water and sewer lines have been installed. • Drainage pipes and inlets are installed per the approved WPO plan to outfall at the existing sediment basin. This work has been done within portions of the required 20' vegetative buffer adjacent to Camelot Drive. • An estimated total cost by the developer of$1.2 million for all efforts to advance the development of Briarwood phase 8. This includes engineering, grading,utilities and the like. The estimate is not solely related to work on the interconnection itself. It also doesn't include the rental of equipment. In considering this decision, Planning and Zoning staff consulted with the County Attorney's office. Our decision in summary is that the interconnection to Camelot Drive from Elm Tree Court is allowed as a final decision or as a"thing decided." This interconnection will provide Camelot residents access to a signalized intersection at Briarwood Drive and Route 29(see the attached maps). An interconnection is also consistent with good planning and engineering practice. I'm informing you about this decision as a courtesy and realize it may be a complex topic. If you have any questions or comments, please let me know. 1 Re: SDP201800083 Briarwood phase 8-Minor Amendment and SUB201900039 Briarwood phase 8—Final Subdivision Plat) It is my opinion that the property owner/developer,Woodbriar Associates,has materially changed his position in good faith reliance on approvals allowing an interconnection to Camelot Drive from Elm Tree Court. This decision is based on the provisions of VA Code 15.2-2311(c). There is no evidence that any of these decisions were obtained through malfeasance or fraud. The decisions from these approvals constitute a"thing decided"and they are final and unappealable. The relevant rezoning for Briarwood phase 8,ZMA 2005-09 approved on July 13,2005 does not include explicit proffer language relating to this interconnection. Sheet 2 of 2 of the approved plan depicts the former ZMA91-13 layout with lots in phase 8 fronting Camelot Drive and other lots in phase 8 being served by 3 cul-de-sac streets solely accessing Camelot Drive. Sheet 1 of 2 of the approved plan depicts the revised layout of the subdivision with lots in phase 8 being served by internal streets and not served or accessed by Camelot Drive. Elm Tree Court is the main street within phase 8 that serves the majority of the lots in this phase and the application plan shows it stopping just short of connecting to Camelot Drive.Research of the prior rezoning,ZMA 2004-14 approved by the Board on February 2nd 2005, fmds the interconnection was discussed in the rezoning action but was intentionally not approved.The application plan provides a note that requires a 20' vegetative buffer for screening purposes to be provided adjacent to Camelot Drive. Decisions by administrative officers were made through a series of development applications. Summary of approvals showing interconnection with Camelot Drive with associated disturbance of buffer along Camelot Drive to permit the connection: • SDP2006-41 Final site plan approved on March 1,2010 which remains valid • SDP2006-41 Road plan associated with site plan approved on March 1,2010 • SDP2006-41 Minor road plan amendment associated with site plan approved on May 27, 2011 • SDP2010-84 Minor site plan amendment approved on May 31,2011 • WPO2006-66 E&S and stormwater plans were approved on May 11,2011 and bonded. Actions in which the owner materially changed his position in good faith reliance on approvals includes the following: • The road interconnection up to but not connecting to Camelot Drive is rough graded. There is gravel base down on about the first half of the road segment. • Water and sewer lines have been installed. • Drainage pipes and inlets are installed per the approved WPO plan to outfall at the existing sediment basin. This work has been done within portions of the required 20' vegetative buffer adjacent to Camelot Drive. • An estimated total cost by the developer of$1.2 million for all efforts to advance the development of Briarwood phase 8. This includes engineering,grading,utilities and the like. The estimate is not solely related to work on the interconnection itself. It also doesn't include the rental of equipment. In summary,the interconnection to Camelot Drive from Elm Tree Court is allowed as a"thing decided." Disturbance of the vegetative buffer is allowed in association with construction of this road interconnection and the sidewalk. Jersey 9.0 0 11� m rp T 1508 7- I � 1° 0,1 le O 2. w 7-Eleven ' 4 II is. y�a\�� a Shell9 . ,`�c 3 z I sr/yes e00, Rd ' 04, co * (3.39 .4.! 47.1 0) t .. 41, 4c Seraphic Group kco 9 > . Clayton Homes *' r 411111,.„ 41: ' 1 • • t , ;; ' • �, its V • • • gra . -41...161... , Jur 4:, lite *is • ' - fr •• . . i 14 .1111/ - . II° Ar tip., • ' •..S,.. -cilia .- •o .A. • _ • , , 41.4 . .0,, \Iv . ` -, )1, iii- - • a ft, , 4• i •'• ,. --1 -,4 ‘. °I- i 1101411 ibi A .4 IL . 4111114 t ^ strif I f 46 JA - , t.-1 -•• A AV. 4- - . 1 ir I ill *hi. • •44. / ''' • eityidir, , ,_ i 1 I t #+•'a 4 •I r_ . • ~"fit-t _ / p. ..lxc '. j * t r tr �, r = Fj� Elm Tree Knoll 04; - - — -41,„„'4. .11° 41111111• ittft,, • , 11144.1.‘A ,14--..4.W... ll.1111111 ' i=t--., . ip . ,,ram �I i ir• 'if iT ji ./.........1.14:4.), 4 #-Li It tiit 111111 . 41 r • *tor / -- OulrfP�� i, « ♦ 7 Ele've e, r /�� Jets pe 0 ki t508 r 0 Tr ism! `� .4% b � � 7-Eleven9 v�,f � A. 9 �� ..,„ ` Shell •� 111 to `� c) s `� 1 0 ixtrilii * 0 ft,' 0 0 d t 9 .., ,.... .fi° Seraphic Group szt 9 Clayton Homes