HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB200500292 Staff Report 2005-12-20COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE: SDP 05 -292 Allan Family Subdivision -
Critical slopes waiver request
SUBJECT /PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request for waiver of
Sec. 4.2 building site requirements in order to construct a
drainfield on critical slopes to accommodate one lot through
family division on 11.448 acres. The property is zoned RA,
Rural Areas. The property, described as Tax Map 55, Parcel
26 is located in the Whitehall Magisterial District on Blair Park
Road [Rte. #707] approximately 0.44 miles from its intersection
with Jarmads Gap Road [Rte. #691]. The Comprehensive Plan
designates this property as Rural Area in RA -3.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
David Pennock, Glenn Brooks
AGENDA DATE: December 20, 2005
ITEM NUMBER:
CONSENT AGENDA: No
ACTION: Yes INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY: WDF
BACKGROUND: This property has previously been approved for one other family subdivision, which has not
yet been recorded. Approval of this waiver by the Planning Commission will allow the construction of a septic
drainfield on critical slopes, which will facilitate the administrative approval of an additional family subdivision.
DISCUSSION:
Critical Slopes Waiver:
Section 4.2.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance restricts earth - disturbing activity on critical slopes, while Section
4.2.5.b(2) allows the Planning Commission to waive this restriction. The applicant has submitted a request and
justification for the waiver (Attachment C), and staff has analyzed this request to address the provisions of the
ordinance.
Critical slopes are assumed to cover approximately 1. 86 acres, or 71 percent, of the 2.611 acres included in this
request. This request is to disturb 0.08 acres, or four (4) percent, of these critical slopes. The critical slopes in
the area of this request do not appear to be man -made. Staff has reviewed this waiver request with consideration
for the concerns that are set forth in Section 4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance, entitled "Critical Slopes." These
concerns have been addressed directly through the analysis provided herein, which is presented in two parts,
based on the Section of the Ordinance each pertains to.
Section 4.2.5(a):
Below, each of the concerns of Zoning Ordinance section 18- 4.2.5(a) is addressed by County engineering:
1. "movement of soil and rock ": This would not be a concern for drainfield trenches
2. "excessive stormwater run -off': This does not appear to be a concern.
3. "siltation of natural and man -made bodies of water ": With proper installation this would not be a
concern.
4. "loss of aesthetic resource ": The area of this disturbance is currently grass. The Open Space and
Critical Resource plan does not identify this site as a critical resource.
5. "septic effluent ": This is a natural concern for placing a drainfield on slopes; the increased risk of
failure and septic effluent seeping out of the ground and running downhill. However, the Health
Department has previously approved this location for a drainfield.
It appears to be the intent of the ordinance to prohibit this sort of use on critical slopes. Based on the above
review, Approval cannot be recommended by the Engineering review.
Section 4.2.5(b):
Staff has included the provisions of Section 4.2.5b here (in italics), along with staff comment on the various
provisions:
b. The commission may modify or waive any requirement of section 4.2 in a particular case upon finding that:
(Amended 11- 15 -89)
Strict application of the requirements of section 4.2 would not forward the purposes of this chapter or
otherwise serve the public health, safety or welfare, or that alternatives proposed by the developer
would satisfy the purposes of section 4.2 to at least an equivalent degree; or (Added 11- 15 -89)
Based on the Engineering analysis provided above, it is staff's opinion that a strict application of the
requirements set forth in Section 4.2 would act to forward the purposes of the chapter and otherwise
serve the public health, safety or welfare in this case.
2. Due to its unusual size, topography, shape of the property, location of the property or other unusual
conditions, excluding the proprietary interest of the developer, the requirements of section 4.2 would
effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property or would result in significant
degradation of the site or adjacent properties. Such modification or waiver shall not be detrimental to
the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, or to adjacent properties, or
be contrary to sound engineering practices; or (Added 11- 15 -89)
A dwelling currently exists on the property and a family division was recently approved. This proposal
would serve to create a third lot from the parent parcel. Thus, the requirements of the Ordinance do not
unreasonably restrict the use of the property.
3. Granting such modification or waiver would serve a public purpose of greater import than would be
served by strict application of section 4.2. (Added 11- 15 -89)
There is an existing storage building near the proposed drainfield site. At the time the building was
constructed, this drainfield was reviewed and approved by the Health Department on the assumption that
the building might one day be converted to a dwelling. It would be difficult to find another building site
on the property, due to the large percentage of critical slope.
In addition, it is worth noting that the Commonwealth of Virginia has consistently tried to simplify the
family subdivision procedures in order to support families.
Based on the above, granting this waiver would arguably serve the greater purpose of allowing a family
subdivision.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request with consideration for the required criteria and cannot
recommend Planning Commission approval of the requested critical slopes waiver based on the findings provided
herein. Should the Commission decide to approve the waiver, no conditions are suggested.
Attachments:
A - Site Plan Reduction
B - Tax Map/Location Map
C - Applicant's Request and Justification
2