HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB200600307 Staff Report 2007-08-17of aLg�
y
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING
STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: SUB 06 -307 — James Kettrick
Staff: David Pennock, Allan Schuck
— Private Street authorization request
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
Board of Supervisors Hearing:
August 21, 2007
N/A
Owners: James F. Kettrick, Jr.
Applicant: James F. Kettrick, Jr.
Acreage: 5.89 Acres
Rezone from: Not applicable
Special Use Permit for: Not applicable
TMP: Tax Map 98, Parcel 19A1
By -right use: RA, Rural Areas and EC,
Location: Monacan Trail Road [Route 29], 0.3
Entrance Corridor
miles south of Toco Hill [Private]
Magisterial District: Samuel Miller
Proffers /Conditions: Yes
Requested # of Dwelling Units /Lots: 2
DA RA - X
Proposal: Request for approval of a
Comp. Plan Designation: Rural Areas in
private street in the Rural Areas, with
Rural Area 3
waivers of street standards, in
accordance with Sections 14 -232 and 14-
234
Character of Property: This lot is partially
Use of Surrounding Properties: Single -
wooded and contains one existing dwelling.
family Residential
The property and existing drive serving it are
moderately sloped throughout.
Factors Favorable: (see report)
Factors Unfavorable: (see report)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the private street request as submitted. Should the Planning
Commission approve the requested waiver, staff recommends the following conditions:
1. The private street must be designed as represented on sheet 4 of the plans last
revised July 27, 2007 and prepared by Bent Tree Design.
2. A maintenance agreement must be approved, as specified in Section 14 -317 of the
Subdivision Ordinance.
STAFF CONTACT:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
AGENDA TITLE:
PROPERTY OWNER:
APPLICANT:
David E. Pennock, AICP; Allan Schuck, EIT;
August 21, 2007
SUB 06 -307 — James Kettrick — Private Street authorization request
James F. Kettrick, Jr.
James F. Kettrick, Jr.
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL:
The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to create two (2) lots on 5.89 acres. The property is zoned
Rural Areas, RA with EC, Entrance Corridor overlay. The property, described as Tax Map 98, Parcel 19A1, is
located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District on Monacan Trail Road [Route 29], 0.3 miles south of Toco
Hill [Private]. This proposal includes a request for a waiver to authorize a private street to serve these two lots.
A portion of this street will also serve a third lot. The applicant has also requested a waiver of the private street
design requirements to allow a steeper grade than typically allowed and to use gravel instead of a hard - surface.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
None.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Areas in Rural Area 3.
REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:
The proposed street serving the two lots in this subdivision is in the general alignment of the existing driveway
to the dwelling on the property. This driveway also serves an additional dwelling on an adjacent lot. As such,
approval of this application requires Planning Commission approval in accordance with Section 14 -234 of the
Subdivision Ordinance. If approved, the required standard for private streets is based on the total number of lots
that the street will serve, as specified in Section 14 -412. The applicant is also requesting to waive some of these
standards to allow a grade steeper than 16% and gravel instead of hard - surface. Section 14- 234(D) allows the
Planning Commission to waive these standards during the review of a private street waiver.
ANALYSIS OF SECTION 14- 232(A)(1):
ENGINEERING REVIEW:
DISCUSSION:
The request for a private street in the Kettrick Subdivision has been reviewed by engineering staff. The
applicant's justification for waiver is based on Section 14- 232(A)(1), "to alleviate significant degradation to
the environment ". Engineering staff has analyzed the request based on this standard, as follows.
The existing parcels are serviced by an existing driveway. This driveway is an approximately 10 feet wide
gravel surfaced access that contains significant vertical grades. The applicant has submitted profiles
demonstrating the potential characteristics of the street into this subdivision under various design scenarios.
The tables on the following page compare the standards of the existing driveway and standards of a public
street in the same location, and show the difference between two design options for private streets:
2
Description of Public Street Standards and existing driveway:
Description of private streets:
VDOT Design
VDOT Design
Existing Conditions of the
0.398
Standards for Public
Standards for Public
Driveway
Sta. 10 +00- 13 +50: 13 +3 +3 = 19'
Sta. 13 +50 to END: 2 -Lot Standard
Streets at Rolling
Streets at Mountainous
30'
Maximum Grade
Terrain
Terrain
Side slope (horizontal:vertical)
Length in miles
0.398
0.398
0.35
Width of section (feet)
Min. pavement = 18 ft.
Min. pavement = 18 ft.
Gravel width varies from
Pavement
Min. shoulder = 4 ft.
Min. shoulder = 4 ft.
10 -11 ft.
+shoulder +shoulder
Total width = 26 feet
Total width = 26 feet
Shoulder width = 0 -2'
9,500
% increase in earthwork
531%
Total width = 10 -15 ft.
Right -of -way or
Min. R/W = 40 feet
Min. R/W = 40 feet
30' wide easement as shown
easement width
on the plans
Maximum grade
Max. grade = 10%
Max. grade = 16%
Station 10 +50: 9%
Station 11 +25: 12%
Station 11 +75: 14%
Station 12 +50: 15%
Station 13 +25: 7%
Minimum CL radius
Min. Radius = 120 ft
Min. Radius = 120 ft
Min. Radius = 120 ft
Minimum Clear Zone
Min. Length = 6 ft.
Min. Length = 6 ft.
Length varies from 0 to 4 ft.
(measured from
(measured from
pavement edge)
pavement edge)
Description of private streets:
These figures are based on the applicant's computations, as required by section 14- 234(A)(1). The applicant has
not supplied field run profiles for this analysis. The applicant has not submitted the actual computations. The
applicant supplied only final values for the amount of construction to occur.
Private Street 3 -5 Lot
Design
Private Street 3 -5 Lot Design then
2 -Lot Design
Length in miles
0.398
0.398
Width of section (ft)
pavement +shoulder+shoulder
13 +3 +3= 19'
Sta. 10 +00- 13 +50: 13 +3 +3 = 19'
Sta. 13 +50 to END: 2 -Lot Standard
Right -of -way or easement width
30'
30'
Maximum Grade
17.0%
17.0%
Side slope (horizontal:vertical)
Not supplied by applicant
Not supplied by applicant
Maximum fill height (ft)
2'
3'
Maximum cut height (ft)
12'
11'
Volume of fill (cubic yards)
Not supplied by applicant
Not supplied by applicant
Volume of cut (cy)
51,000
9,500
Volume of Earthwork (cy)
51,000
9,500
% increase in earthwork
531%
-1.0%
These figures are based on the applicant's computations, as required by section 14- 234(A)(1). The applicant has
not supplied field run profiles for this analysis. The applicant has not submitted the actual computations. The
applicant supplied only final values for the amount of construction to occur.
The provisions in Section 14- 232(A)(1) are listed below (in italics), with engineering staff comments
immediately following:
14.242(A)(1) To alleviate significant degradation to the environment. One or more private streets may
be authorized if
(i) property in the Rural Areas or Village Residential zoning district;
The property is zoned Rural Areas.
(ii)the private streets will alleviate a clearly demonstrable danger of significant degradation to the
environment of the property or any land adjacent thereto resulting from the construction of a public street
in the same alignment;
The applicant has stated that the proposed public street design results in approximately 531 % more
grading than the private street design for a street serving three to five lots in the rural areas.
(iii) no alternative public street alignment is available which would alleviate significant degradation of
the environment;
The existing driveway currently serves the subject property and an adjacent parcel. It appears that no
alternative public /private street alignment is available to serve this subdivision without modifying the
existing lot lines of the subdivision.
(iv) no more lots are proposed on the private street than could be created on a public street due to right -
of -way dedication;
It appears that the difference in right -of -way width and vertical alignment does not affect the lot yield in this
subdivision.
(v)the proposed private streets demonstrably promote sensitivity toward the natural characteristics of the
land and encourages the subdivision of land in a manner that is consistent and harmonious with
surrounding development. The term "significant degradation " means either:
(a) the total volume of grading for construction of a public street would be thirty (30) percent or more
than that of a private road in the same alignment; or
The applicant has demonstrated that a public road along the same alignment would increase earthwork by
more than 30 %. The applicant is not using field run topography. The earthwork difference is achieved
mainly through differences in vertical grades required for cut areas to facilitate the construction of a public
vs. private street. The earthwork differences are exaggerated. The earthwork difference would not be as
great if field run topography was used, but it appears that it will still exceed 30% increase.
(b)Environmental impacts including, but not limited to, erosion and sedimentation, stormwater runoff,
surface water pollution, loss of tree cover and /or the loss of indigenous vegetation resulting from a
public street, which would be substantially greater than that of a private street in the same alignment,
based upon evidence submitted by the subdivider and reviewed by the County Engineer and other
qualified staff.
In this case, environmental impacts, other than volume of earthwork, will not be significantly different
between a public street and private street along the same alignment. Critical slope disturbances would be
roughly the same and loss of vegetation would be limited to that necessary for grading.
Based on the information above, the amount of environmental degradation may be limited by a different design.
In addition, a higher standard may limit future maintenance concerns. Engineering staff recommends that the
street be designed to be VDOT Rolling Terrain standards, and constructed as a public street.
2
SECTION 14 -234:
Per Section 14- 234(c), the Commission may authorize one or more private roads to be constructed in a
subdivision if it finds that one or more of the circumstances described in section 14 -232 exists and that
(ordinance language presented in italics followed by staff comment):
The private road will be adequate to carry the traffic volume which may be reasonably expected to be
generated by the subdivision.
The applicant's preferred option is to meet the standards in the Ordinance that apply to streets serving three
to five lots, then taper down to the standard for streets serving two lots. These standards adequately serve
the proposed number of lots in this subdivision.
2. The comprehensive plan does not provide for a public street in the approximate location of* the proposed
private road,
The Comprehensive Plan does not provide for a public street in the location of this private road.
3. The fee of the private road 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 road,
Section 14 -317 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that a maintenance agreement be submitted for review
by Planning Staff and the County Attorney in all situations where improvements are required to be
maintained. If this request is approved, a road maintenance agreement will be required for approval prior to
final plat recordation.
4. Except where required by the commission to serve a specific public purpose, the private road will not
serve through traffic nor intersect the state highway system in more than one location; and
The private street will not serve through traffic, nor intersect the state highway system in more than one
location.
S. If applicable, the private road has been approved in accordance with section 30.3, flood hazard overlay
district, of the zoning ordinance and other applicable law.
Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION:
Generally staff finds that this request is not consistent with the required criteria of Section 14- 232(A)(1). Based on
the engineering analysis, staff cannot make the findings necessary for granting a modification to allow private streets
in the rural areas. Thus, Staff recommends denial of the private street request as submitted. Should the Planning
Commission approve the requested waiver, staff recommends the following conditions:
1. The private street must be designed as represented on sheet 4 of the plans last revised July 27, 2007 and
prepared by Bent Tree Design.
2. A maintenance agreement must be approved, as specified in Section 14 -317 of the Subdivision
Ordinance.
Attachments:
A - Tax Map/Location Map
B - Preliminary Subdivision Plat
C - Applicant's Request and Justification
5