HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB200400302 Staff Report 2004-11-30STAFF PERSON: Yadira Amarante
PLANNING COMMISSION: November 30, 2004
SUB 04 -302: CHESTNUT RIDGE RURAL PRESERVATION DEVELOPMENT &
PRELIMINARY PLAT
Applicant's Proposal
Create a Rural Preservation Development of 20 lots consisting of 19 development lots and 1 (one)
preservation tract.
Project Description and Location: Request for preliminary plat approval to create a Rural
Preservation Development on three parcels with a total area of 204.47 acres. The proposal includes 19
development lots ranging from 2.40 acres to 12.48 acres in size and one preservation tract of 114.70
acres. All lots are to be served by the proposed public roads. The property is zoned RA, Rural Areas.
The property, described as Tax Map 19, Parcels 20 (68.97 acres), 20B (7.25 acres), and 24 (128.25
acres) is located in the White Hall Magisterial District on Buck Mountain Road [State Route #663]
just south of its intersection with Simmons Gap Road [State Route # 663]. The Comprehensive Plan
designates this property as Rural Area in Rural Area 1. See Attachments A & B.
The property under review is a mixture of pastureland and sparse woodlands. The wooded areas and
critical slopes are mostly associated with streams located on the property. There are 3 dwelling units
and several farm structures on the site all of which are proposed to remain.
History:
1. ZMA 72 -248 Carlton Wood on TMP 19 -20: Request to rezone 77 acres from A -1 to RS -1. This
application was withdrawn on 11/22/72.
2. SUB -175 Carleton on TMP 19 -20: PC approved a 21 lot subdivision on 12/20/73. This plat was
never put to record.
3. SP 93 -026 Kermit & Ellen Roberts on TMP 19 -24: Request for a Home Occupation permit for
a barber shop. Approved by the BOS on 12/8/93 and still in use.
Reason for Planning Commission Review
Approval of the rural preservation development aspect of this proposal is discretionary.
Staff presents discussion related to this proposal in 2 parts: 1.) Rural Preservation Development and
2.) Preliminary Plat.
Discussion
1.) Rural Preservation Development
Section 10.3.3.2 Rural Preservation Development Intent and Design Standards
The rural preservation development option is intended to encourage more effective land usage in terms
of the goals and objectives for the rural areas as set forth in the comprehensive plan than can be
achieved under conventional development. To this end, application for rural preservation
development shall be reviewed for:
a. Preservation of agricultural and forestal lands and activities;
This project protects 114.7 acre of land for potential agricultural, forestal, or conservation use,
although one dwelling would be permitted. This area could be increased through reduction of
the development lot acreages.
b. Water supply protection; andlor
This project is in the Chris Greene Lake watershed, a backup public water supply. The property
is largely open land, with buffers along the streams. Because of what appears to be previous
agricultural and/or grazing activity some of the stream buffers are completely devoid of trees.
The applicant has offered to replant these areas in lieu of a stormwater management plan
through a stream buffer mitigation plan.
C. Conservation of natural, scenic or historic resources.
See historic resources discussion below.
More specifically, in accordance with design standards of the comprehensive plan and where deemed
reasonably practical by the commission:
d. Development lots shall not encroach into prime, important or unique agricultural or forestal
soils as the same shall be shown on the most recent published maps of the United States
Department of Agricultural Soil Conservation Service or other source deemed of equivalent
reliability by the Soil Conservation Service;
Prime, locally important, and unique soils are prevalent throughout the site, (Attachment C) and
so not all the soils can be avoided. Staff has determined that the configuration of the proposed
RPD does not significantly increase the impact to prime and locally important soils since the
greatest areas of these soils are shown on the proposed preservation tract. All of the unique
soils are located on the preservation tract. More of these soils could be protected by reducing
the sizes of the development lots as most of them are greater than 2 acres.
e. Development lots shall not encroach into areas of critical slope or flood plain and shall be
situated as far as possible from public drinking water supply tributaries and public drinking
water supply impoundments;
There are 5 development lots proposed which have critical slopes within them. However, most
of these slopes will be protected because they are located within stream buffer areas. While this
property is located within the watershed of Chris Greene Lake, the lots are located at the
upstream end of the lake tributaries.
f. Development lots shall be so situated and arranged as to preserve historic and scenic settings
deemed to be of importance to the general public and natural resource areas whether such
features are on the parcel to be developed or adjacent to such parcel;
(The following statements are from the County's Historic Resources Planner)
2
The Virginia Department of Historic Resources' (DHR) Data Sharing System (DSS) has
identified the Perkins House, located on Tax Map 19, Parcel 24, as historic; however, not
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. No other historic architectural or
archaeological resources have been surveyed within the project area. Note: The absence of
historic resources in DHR records does not necessarily mean that no historic resources
are present. It is possible that the area in question has not been systematically surveyed
for resources, which would be necessary to determine historic significance of buildings or
features located on the site.
Within a one mile radius of the project area are fourteen individual historic resources. These
resources have not been evaluated for eligibility for listing on the Virginia Landmarks Register
and/or the National Register of Historic Places.
The project area lies less than two miles outside of the Advance Mills Historic District (002-
5024), which is composed of buildings constructed in the Federal and Colonial Revival Styles
between 1810 and 1948. This historic district is listed on the Virginia Landmarks Register and
the National Register of Historic Places based upon Criterion A (Associated with broad pattern
of events) and Criterion C (Distinctive characteristics of type, period, or method of
construction) under the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties.
Although Chestnut Ridge is located within close proximity to the Advance Mills Historic
District and other historic resources, the application of the Rural Preservation Development
(RPD) option should help minimize the visual impact of this subdivision. Therefore, I have no
objection to this proposal.
This project is adjacent to the Jacob's Run agricultural/forestal district but because this is a "by-
right project ", no extra review on the impact to the district is required. It is fortunate that the
section of the project adjacent to the district is the preservation tract.
g. Development lots shall be confined to one area of the parcel and shall be situated so that no
portion of the rural preservation tract shall intrude between any development lots;
This design standard has been met.
h. All development lots shall have access restricted to an internal street in accordance with
Chapter 14 of the Code of Albemarle; and
This design standard has been met. All lots shall be served by proposed public roads.
Nothing stated herein shall be deemed to obligate the commission to approve a rural
preservation development upon finding in a particular case that such proposal does not
forward the purposes of rural preservation development as set forth herein above and that the
public purpose to be served would be equally or better served by conventional development.
Section 10.3.3.3 Special Provisions:
In addition to design standards as set forth in section 10.3.3.2 and other regulation, the following
special provisions shall apply to any rural preservation development:
a. The maximum number of lots within a rural preservation development shall be the same as may be
achievable pursuant to section 10.3.1 and section 10. 3.2 and other applicable law. Each rural
preservation tract shall count as one (1) lot. In the case of any parcel of land which, prior to
application for rural preservation development, has been made subject to a conservation, open
space or other similar easement which restricts development on the parcel, the total number of lots
available for rural preservation development shall not exceed the number available for
conventional development as limited by any such previously imposed easement or easements;
The maximum number of lots achievable is 21, the proposal is for 20 lots (19 development lots and
1 (one) preservation tract). The applicant has provided a conventional lot layout, (Attachment D)
which has allowed staff to determine that no more lots are being proposed under the Rural
Preservation Development than could be approved with a conventional development. Since not all
"rights" are being utilized the extra right to develop must be allocated to one of the development
lots.
b. Section 10.3.3.3.a notwithstanding, no rural preservation development shall contain more than
twenty (20) development lots;
This criterion has been met.
c. Provisions of section 10.3.3, rural preservation development, shall be applied to the entire parcel.
Combination of conventional and rural preservation development within the parcel shall not be
permitted, provided that the total number of lots achievable under section 10.3.1 and section 10. 3.2
shall be permitted by authorization of more than one (1) rural preservation tract. Nothing
contained herein shall be deemed to preclude the director of current development and zoning from
approving a rural preservation development for multiple tracts of adjoining land, or on land
divided or otherwise altered prior to the effective date of this provision; provided that, in either
case, the provisions of section 10. 3.3 shall be applicable.
This criterion has been met.
d. The area devoted to development lots together with the area of roadway necessary to provide
access to such lots shall not exceed the number of development lots multiplied by a factor of six (6)
expressed in acres;
The area devoted to development lots is 89.77 acres. The area devoted to roadways is 6.00 acres.
The combined developed area of 95.77 acres does not exceed the total number of development lots,
19, multiplied by a factor of six (6), which is 114.
e. No rural preservation development shall contain less than one (1) rural preservation tract. The
director of current development and zoning may authorize more than one (1) rural preservation
tract in a particular case pursuant to the various purposes of rural preservation development as set
forth in section 10.3.3.2 or in accord with section 10.3.3.3.c, as the case may be;
The applicant proposes one rural preservation tract.
f. No rural preservation tract shall consist of less than forty (40) acres. Except as specifically
permitted by the director of current development and zoning at time of establishment, not more
4
than one (1) dwelling unit shall be located on any rural preservation tract or development lot. No
rural preservation tract shall be diminished in area. These restrictions shall be guaranteed by
perpetual easement accruable to the County of Albemarle and the public recreational facility
authority of Albemarle County in a form acceptable to the board. In accordance with Chapter 14
of the Code of Albemarle, the director of planning and community development shall serve as
agent for the board of supervisors to accept such easement. Thereafter, such easement may be
modified or abandoned only by mutual agreement of the grantees to the original agreement;
The proposed rural preservation tract is 114.70 acres. If this proposal is approved the land will be
placed in perpetual easement with the public recreational facility authority.
g. Each application for a rural preservation development is subject to the review and approval of the
director of current development and zoning.
The director of current development and zoning recommends approval of this rural preservation
development.
2.) Preliminary Plat
The Site Review Committee has reviewed the preliminary plat for this proposal and fords it in
compliance with the provisions of the subdivision and zoning ordinances and recommends approval,
with conditions.
One outstanding issue is that a condition of approval for SP 93 -026 (Attachment E) on TMP 19 -24
states that the property can not be further divided. Staff is of the opinion that this condition was
imposed due to the fact that the only access to the property at that time was via Rocky Hill Farm — an
unimproved private road. The owner of TMP 19 -24 and applicant of the SP for the Barber Shop, Mr.
Kermit Roberts, has verbally indicated that his intentions are to have the BOS either vacate the Special
Use Permit or amend that SP condition once the preliminary plat for the RPD is approved. He has
indicated that the sale of the property is contingent on approval of this RPD request. The Commission
will notice that a recommended condition of approval will require Mr. Roberts to either amend or
vacate the SP before the County signs the final plat.
Recommended Action with Conditions of Approval
Staff finds the proposal in compliance with the intent, design standards and special provisions of
Section 10.3 for rural preservation developments in that it preserves 114.70 acres for agricultural and
forestal activities. Staff recommends approval of the Chestnut Ridge Rural Preservation Development.
Staff also finds the Preliminary Plat to be in compliance with the regulations set forth in the
Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances and recommends approval of the Chestnut Ridge Rural
Preservation Development Preliminary Subdivision Plat, SUB 04 -302, with the following conditions:
The Division of Zoning and Current Development shall not sign the final subdivision plat until the
following conditions have been met:
1. A completed application and fee for erosion control and stormwater management. [17- 203, 17-
303]
2. A stormwater management /BMP plan, computations, and maintenance agreement. [17 -203, 17-
303, 17 -304, 18- 32.7.4]
3. An erosion and sediment control plan, narrative and computations. [14 -311, 17 -203, 18- 32.7.4.3]
4. Road plans, pavement design sheets, and drainage computations. VDOT approval will be required
for the public roads. [ 14- 512,14- 304,Policy]
5. [14.302.0] All existing development rights are not being utilized by this proposal. Allocate the
additional development right to one of the development lots by placing a note on the plat to that
effect.
6. [14.303.m] Note #5 must be revised to state "Roberts Lane and Cleopatra Court... "\
7. [14.309 & 310] Written approval from the Health Department for all drainfield locations.
8. [10.3.3.3.f] Approval and recordation of a preservation easement by the Public Recreational
Facilities Authority for the Preservation Tract.
9. SP 93 -26, a Home Occupation Special Permit for a barber shop granted by the Board of
Supervisors on 12/8/93 must be vacated or amended by the Board of Supervisors, through the
normal SP application process, prior to final plat approval.
Attachments
A - Vicinity Map
B - Rural Preservation Development Preliminary Subdivision Plat
C - Soils Map
D - Conventional Development Proposal
E - SP 93 -026 Approval Letter