Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB200700257 Correspondence 2007-11-08r r ^, - < ,. October 2I, 2007 (Revised November 21, 2007) Megan Yaniglos, Planner Albemarle County Dept. of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, VA 229024596 RE: SUB 2007 -257 PJ Land Trust (TMP 43 -18D) Private Street request and waiver submittal — Yellowwood Drive Dear Megan On behalf of my client, PJ Land Trust, I hereby request that Albemarle County approve Far Hills Way and Yellowwood Drive as Private Streets for the benefit of Parcel Z -2, a division of Tax Map 43, Parcel 18D, to access the state highway system at State Route 677 (Old Ballard Road). We also request that the Planning Commission waive the private street standards delineated in Section 14 -412 of the County Code, to allow us to keep Yellowwood Drive as is with no improvements to construction. To aid with these requests please see the attached plan and profile drawings of the existing Far Hills Way and Yellowwood Drive roadways, an area map of the Parcel 18D vicinity, and my subdivision plat of Parcels Z-1, Z -2 and Z-3 dated November 20, 2007. Far Hills Way and Yellowwood Drive are existing roadways located off of State Route 677 between Ivy and Owensville. For the first 1800 feet of their combined length the roads move through Far Hills subdivision. Far Hills Way then continues east into the major portion of the subdivision, and Yellowwood Drive heads north between a couple of lots and then into Tax Map 59, Parcel 27X, also known as Rural Preservation Tract 1 of Far Hills subdivision. The road then continues north and into Tax Map 43, Parcel 18D (Parcel Z -2) and up to the border of Tax Map 43, Parcel 18G. The roadway continues on through Parcel 18G and into Parcel Z-3, but our Pm °ate Street request ends at the common border of Z -2 and Parcel 18G. As a named and platted road Yellowwood ends at the border of Parcels 27X and 18D, but for this discussion I will say that it continues all of the way through Parcel Z-2. Our justification for requesting that Far Hills Way and Yellowwood Drive be approved as private streets is based on Section 14- 232.A.3. "General Welfare." Similarly, we request that the private street standards delineated in Section 14-412 be waived for Yellowwood Drive to promote the general welfare. Our reasons and justifications are as follows: 1) Far Hills Way and Yellowwood Drive up to station 284-00 are existing private streets (for road stationing please refer to the Plan and Profile drawings of Yellowwood Drive submitted with this letter). They were built in the early 1990's according to approved site and subdivision plans, and have sufficient right -of -way and improvements to accommodate twenty or more lots. Yellowwood K k ` Drive from station 28 +00 to the bridge at station 36 +70 is asphalt and gravel, with approximately 12 feet of travelway, 1 to 3 foot shoulders and 2 foot ditches. The bridge is of concrete and I -beam construction, 22 feet long by 17 feet wide with 15 feet of travelway, and with railroad tie guardrails and concrete wingwalls. From the bridge to the road intersection at station 64 +00 Yellowwood Drive is a gravel roadway with 13 to 15 feet of travelway and 3 foot or wider shoulders. Where ditches are necessary in cut sections they tend to be 3 to 5 feet from the edge of the shoulder to the centerline of the ditch. Beyond station 64 +00 and to the border of Tax Map 43, Parcel 18G Yellowwood remains gravel with a variable 10 foot to 16 foot width, and with occasional ditches and shoulders. From the Route 677 intersection Far Hills Way and Yellowwood Drive up to station 28 +00 are public - quality roads as they exist now. Far Hills Way was designed and then approved as a public street on August 9, 1989 when the county signed the original Far Hills subdivision plat The road was built, and then the developer decided to reconfigure the subdivision as a Rural Preservation Development and make all the roads private, including existing Far Hills Way. The Planning Commission approved this on October 6, 1992. The roads are now maintained by the Far Hills Owners Association, Inc. per the Far Hills Declaration of Restrictions, Covenants and Conditions dated May 15, 1997 and recorded in Deed Book 1618, page 618. The subdivision plat of Far Hills (June 29, 1993 and recorded in Deed Book 1372, page 312) states that "all roads are private. ..the owner reserves from public dedication all roads and access easements shown on this plat, which are to remain private rights -of -way for the use of the owner and its assigns." Given this it would be impractical to construct a public street or, at the minimum, dedicate the remainder of Yellowwood Drive when it would be separated from Route 677 by private streets. Beyond station 28 +00 and the Far Hills lots Yellowwood Drive would be serving, at most, three lots. Parcels 27X, Z -2, and 18G. Parcel 27X is a rural preservation tract with an open space easement held by the Public Recreational Facilities Authority of Albemarle County per a deed dated September 26, 2003 and recorded in Deed Book 2608, page 580. This deed explicitly states that rural preservation development is for the purposes of "preservation of agricultural and forestal lands and activities, water supply protection, and/or conservation of natural, scenic or historic resources" and it restricts grading or other earth- moving activities, prohibits diminishing the size of the parcel, and prohibits the construction or maintenance of structures other than farm buildings. The 1993 subdivision plat of Far Hills further states that "no dwellings shall be permitted on the rural preservation tracts" Thus, no residence can be built on Parcel 27X nor can it be substantially developed, and its use of Yellowwood Drive is and will be limited to the occasional vehicles necessary to maintain the tree farm that currently exists there. Yellowwood Drive ends at the border of Tax Map 43, Parcel 186. Currently Parcel I8G accesses the state highway system via Catlin Road, and it has no rights to use Yellowwood Drive as an access per a restriction imposed in a deed dated October 9, 1981 and recorded in Deed Book 728, page 276. This is a private agreement, but it is my client's desire that Parcel 18G never have rights of access over Yellowwood. He is amenable to vacating the existing 30' access easement through Parcel 186 reserved in that deed for the benefit of the lands of PJ land Trust, and /or imposing a permanent restriction that any possible future grant of rights of access down Yellowwood for the benefit of Parcel 18G be dependant on county approval. I can add a note to the face of the plat stating such, if that would be sufficient, or we can produce a document. The issues stated in points 3 and 4 above make it clear that, with the creation of Parcel Z -2, Yellowwood Drive would serve two or possibly three lots, one of which is restricted by an open space easement. This is a minimal use. The existing condition of the road as stated in point 1 above is at or comes very close to satisfying the standards for private streets serving three to five lots delineated in Section 14- 412.A.2. of the code. The roadway, shoulders and ditches are narrow in the KgA first section between station 28 +00 and the bridge, but to widen them would entail cutting into the embankment on the right side of the road. This would cause the loss of trees and promote erosion that could pollute the stream at the bottom. A strict application of the road standards here would threaten the open space easement area and would be overkill for a road with minimal traffic. While the private road standards discourage bridges, the existing structure at station 36 +70 is solidly built and of sufficient width. Between the bridge and station 64 +00 Yellowwood is in good condition and is at or near the road standards except for one short steep section between stations 40 +50 and 42 +50. Should Parcel 18G be excluded from using Yellowwood, as is our desire, then beyond Tax Map 54, Parcel 27C (Lot 1, Far Hills) the road would be under the standards for streets serving two lots as stated in Section 14- 412.A.1, This would be at approximate station 30 +35 (the rear of Parcel 27C), given that Lot 2 (Parcel 27D) cannot access Yellowwood Drive per a restriction stated in the Far Hills subdivision plat. From station 30+35 to its end Yellowwood currently satisfies those street requirements. To summarize, our contention is that Far Hills Way and Yellowwood Drive are adequate access roads in their current condition and that strictly imposing public or private street standards on them would not further the general welfare. Public streets on these aligmnents are unnecessary given the existing private street easement on Far Hills Way and the low traffic volume to be expected on Yellowwood Drive, Improving Yellowwood Drive to strictly adhere to the private street standards for three to five lots would threaten the landscape and stream quality in the open space easement, and, again, given the low potential traffic volume, would be a road quality beyond that which is necessary to adequately serve the adjoining parcels. Finally, it is our desire to have only two lots utilize Yellowwood Drive, and the roadway quality as it is and the easement width proposed through Parcel Z -2 are adequate. To go along with the above justification, below please find my address on the five points outlined in Section 14- 234.C.: I "The private street will be adequate to carry the traffic volume which may be reasonably expected to be generated by the subdivision" — Far Hills Way is adequate to handle the traffic from twenty or more lots, as it was built to public road standards. Yellowwood Drive as it exists is adequate to carry the traffic from one or two developed tots and the rural preservation tract. 2} "The Comprehensive Plan does not provide for a public street in the approximate location of the proposed private street " - It does not. 3) "The fee of the private street will be owned by the owner of each lot abutting the right -of -way thereof or by an association composed of the owners of all lots in the subdivision, subject in either case to any easement for the benefit of all lots served by the street" — Far Hills Way has a 40 foot access easement and Yellowwood Drive a 50 foot access easement for the benefit of the Far Hills lot owners and other Lands of P7 Land Trust, Where Yellowwood travels through Lots 1 and 2 of Far Hills the property line is down the centerline of the road. Otherwise the roads go through Tax Map 59, Parcel 27Y (Rural Preservation Tract 2) and Parcels 27X and I 8 with the fee of the road bed under the ownership of the parcel owners. 4) "Except where required by the commission to serve a specific public purpose, the private street will not serve through traffic nor intersect the state highway system in more than one location" -- It is not my client's intention to extend Yellowwood Drive beyond Parcel Z -2 or to connect it with Garth Gate Lane and thus out to Route 601. 5) "If applicable, the private street has been approved in accordance with section 30.3, flood hazard overlay district, of the zoning ordinance and other applicable law" — Yellowwood Drive crosses a stream at station 36 +70 and thus is within a stream buffer easement. This would be 200 feet wide given that the stream is within the South Fork Rig =arena Reservoir watershed- At this point Yellowwood Drive also is at the far upstream end of a Zone A flood plain per FEM A map number 51003CO255D with effective date of February 4, 2005. This section of the road therefore is within the flood hazard overlay district. I do not find where other districts, ordinances, or Laws adversely impact this potential private street. Per Section 14- 234.A, L(a) you require documentation explaining how the perpetual maintenance of the private street will be funded and who will be responsible for the actual maintenance, Far Hills Way and Yel lowwood Drive up to the border of Parcel 27X (Rural Preservation Tract 1) are maintained by the Far Hills Owners Association, Inc, The remainder of Yellowwood Drive passes through lands of PJ Land Trust, who will be solely responsible for its maintenance. As stated above my client desires that Parcel 18G never have access rights to Yellowwood Drive, so the owner of that parcel (Edward C. Carrington Jr. Trust) will not be responsible for sharing in the road's maintenance. Should you require any additional maintenance agreements please let me know. Also per this section of the code you require field -run profiles and cross - sections, but the county engineer may waive that for existing streets or in other circumstances. I ask that he do waive that requirement. Should I need to write a formal letter to the county engineer making the request I can. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or require further information. SincerclV, I All" Jeff Dise, L. S. Project Manager Attachments: Plan and Profile sheets of Yeilowwood Drive (5 copies) Tax Map 43, Parcel 18D area -wide site exhibit (17 copies) Subdivision plat of Parcels Z -1, Z -2 and Z -3 (8 copies) xc: file