HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB200700037 Staff Report 2007-05-29nor :ar,�
�C `fir
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING
STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: Westhall Section V - Critical
Slopes Waiver and Private Streets Design
Standards Waiver (SDP 2007 - 0037)
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
April 3, 2007
Staff: Patrick Lawrence, Senior Planner
Board of Supervisors Hearing:
N/A
Owners: Shifflett Farms, LLC I Applicant: Stonehaus Development, Inc.
Acreage: 8.96 acres Rezone from: Not applicable
TMP: Tax Map 56H, Parcel A
Location: Along both sides of proposed
Treemont Road and the east side of Park
Road [Rte# 1204]
Special Use Permit for: Not applicable
By -right use: PRD (Planned Residential
Development) in accord with ZMA 06 -002,
with proffers
Magisterial District: Whitehall Proffers /Conditions: Yes
Requested # of Dwelling Units /Lots: 33 DA - X RA
Proposals:
1. Waiver of 4.2.3.2 to allow activity on
critical slopes.
2. Request for private streets with
waivers to street standards in
accordance with Section 14 -234.
3. Waiver of Subdivision Ordinance
Section 14 -409 street extension
requirements.
Character of Property: Undeveloped area
adjacent to recent residential development.
Factors Favorable:
See Report
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Comp. Plan Designation:
Crozet Community - CT1 - Development
Area Preserve, CT4 - Urban General, & CT5
- Urban Core
Use of Surrounding Properties: Residential
and rural
Factors Unfavorable:
See Report
1. Chapter 18, Section 4.2.5 Critical Slopes Waiver - Approval
2. Chapter 14, Section 14 - 234 Private Street Waiver - Approval
3. Chapter 14, Section 14 - 234(D) Private Street Design Standards - Denial
4. Chapter 14, Section 14 - 409(B) Street Extension - Denial
STAFF CONTACT:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
AGENDA TITLE:
PROPERTY OWNER:
APPLICANT:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
Patrick Lawrence, Senior Planner
April 3, 2007
SUB 2007 — 037 Westhall V (Lots 93 — 125)
Shifflett Farms, LLC
Stonehaus Development, Inc.
The Crozet Master Plan designates this area Crozet Community — CT — Development Area Preserve, CT4 — Urban
General, & CT5 — Urban Core.
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL:
On September 13, 2006, the Board of Supervisors approved ZMA 2006 —001, which amended the zoning of the subject
property from Residential, R -1 and R -6 to, Residential Planned Development, RPD. This action allows thirty-six (3 6)
dwelling units with an additional six (6) affordable housing units. Proffers were included to be completed as
development ensues. (Attachment A and Attachment C). The preliminary subdivision plat for the majority of this
development is currently under review. The preliminary plat includes twenty -seven (27) lots with public street access
and six (6) lots served by internal private streets on 8.96 acres of land with open space. The property is described as Tax
Map 56H, Parcel A. The parcel is located in the Whitehall Magisterial District, along both sides of proposed Treemont
Road and the east side of Park road [Rt. 1204] (Attachment B) In order for the plan to be developed as shown, several
waivers are necessary. The applicant has submitted requests for four waivers.
REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:
The applicant has requested several waivers of ordinance requirements. Therefore, the commission must act on each of
the waivers as listed below:
The applicant seeks relief from the critical slopes requirement found in Section 4.2.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. The
applicant indicates that some disturbance of critical slopes is necessary to minimize overall grading and earthwork for
the entire site. The applicant also notes that the overall area to be disturbed is relatively small. This disturbance area is
shown on the attached plan dated February 26, 2007.
The applicant has also submitted a private street request, dated January 22, 2007, for the roadway within the affordable
housing section. In addition to the private street request, the applicant requests a waiver of the standards for road
construction of the private street. Section 14 -234 of the Subdivision Ordinance allows the design standards to be
waived or modified as part of the consideration of the private street waiver.
Section 14 -409 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that "all public streets within a subdivision shall be extended and
constructed to the abutting property lines... ". The applicant is requesting a waiver of this section for three street
segments within this development.
DISCUSSION:
This staff report is organized to address each issue separately. The items to be addressed are:
Zoning Ordinance
1. Waiver of Section 4.2.3 — disturbance of critical slopes Subdivision Ordinance
2. Waiver of Section 14- 233(A)(3) — private street in development areas
3. Waiver of Section 14- 234(D) — standards for private streets specified in Section 14- 412(A)(2)(b)
4. Waiver of Section 14- 409(D) — public street extension.
2
1. CRITICAL SLOPES WAIVER
A modification to allow critical slopes disturbance is necessary before the final site plan can be approved. The request
for a modification has been reviewed for both the Engineering and Planning aspects of the critical slopes regulations.
Section 4.2.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance restricts earth - disturbing activity on critical slopes, while Section 4.2.5(b)
allows the Planning Commission to waive this restriction. On February 26, 2007, the applicant submitted a request and
justification for the waiver to allow land disturbance on critical slopes. Staff has analyzed this request to address the
provisions of the ordinance.
The Open Space Plan is the primary tool used by staff to identify aesthetic resources. The maps in the Open Space Plan
include inventory maps, which show all resources. The composite map indicates those resources that are of the highest
significance or are part of a system forming a significant resource, such as a stream valley or mountain range. The
Open Space Plan shows "slopes > 25 %" on this property on the "Inventory Map 1 ". "Inventory map 2" indicates
wooded areas in this vicinity. However, the area of critical slopes proposed for disturbance are not located within any
"Major or Locally Important Stream Valleys ", or "Mountains ". Therefore, staff feels there is no significant loss of
aesthetic resources in this case.
The critical slope waiver request has been reviewed by engineering staff. The engineering analysis of the request
follows:
Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance:
The critical slope area within TMP 56H -AO appears to be both natural slopes and man -made slopes created with the
improvements for Westhall Subdivision Phases 1 -4. The critical slope disturbances are in the form of subdivision
construction for single family residences, roads, stormwater facilities, and water and sanitary sewer lines.
Areas
Acres
Total site in subdivision
8.956
Critical slopes (man -made &
natural)
Man -made = 0.247
Natural = 0.156
2.76% of development
1.74% of development
Critical slopes disturbed
0.03
Approx. 8.19% of total
critical slopes
Below, each of the concerns of Zoning Ordinance section 18 -4.2 is addressed:
1. "movement of soil and rock": Proper slope construction, control of drainage, and vegetative stabilization
with approved erosion control measures constructed within the standards of Virginia Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Regulations will prevent any movement of soil.
2. "excessive stormwater run- off": Stormwater runoff will be controlled by the drainage / stormwater
management plan required for this site.
3. "siltation of natural and man -made bodies of water ": There is an existing stream located on the western
half of the property. Some areas of critical slope disturbance are located to the east of the stream and
outside of the stream banks. Engineering staff recognizes the proposed design as sufficient to provide
access to the site with minimal disturbance to the critical slope areas and no proposed disturbance to the
existing stream. Inspection and bonding by the County will ensure siltation control during construction.
Proper stabilization and maintenance will ensure long term stability.
4. "loss of aesthetic resource": This site is visible from the other previously approved sections of the
Westhall Subdivision. It is also visible from other neighboring properties. It appears that some loss of some
3
aesthetic resources will be necessary with the proposed plan.
5. "septic effluent ": No septic systems or drainfields are proposed in this project. This site is accessible to
the public sanitary sewer system.
This site drains into a waterway that is a public drinking water supply for Albemarle County. No portion of this
site plan is located inside the 100 -year flood plain area according to FEMA Maps, dated 04 February 2005.
Based on the above review, there are no engineering concerns which prohibit the disturbance of the critical slopes
as shown on the plans.
Review of the request by Current Development Planning staff:
Summary of review of modification of Section 4.2:
Section 4.2.5 establishes the review process and criteria for granting a waiver of Section 4.2.3. The preceding
comments by staff address the provisions of Section 4.2.5(a). Staff has included the provisions of Section 4.2.5(b)
here, along with staff comment on the various provisions.
The commission may modify or waive any requirement of section 4.2 in a particular case upon finding that:
1. 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)
There is no reason that a waiver of these requirements better serves the public health, safety, or welfare.
2. Due to its unusual size, topography, shape of theproperty, location of theproperty or other unusual conditions,
excluding the proprietary interest of the developer, the requirements ofsection 4.2 would effectivelyprohibit 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- I5 -89)
Denial of this waiver would not unreasonably restrict the use of the property. Some redesign would be
necessary. However, given the relatively small area of critical slopes involved in the waiver, the reduction in
scope would not be significant.
3. Granting such modification or waiver would serve apublicpurpose ofgreater import than would be served by
strict application of section 4.2. (Added 11- 15 -89)
This site is in the Planned Residential Development zoning district, and represents a project in an area
designated in the Comprehensive Plan for a use and density similar to that proposed by this plan. As such, the
previous change in zoning of the property with ZMA 2006 - 002 has more effectively provided for the level of
development recommended by the Comprehensive Plan.
RECOMMENDATION: There are no major engineering concerns regarding the disturbance of critical slopes
shown on this plan. In addition, staff has made a positive finding that this proposal effectively corresponds with
the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. Generally, staff finds that this request is consistent with the
criteria of Section 4.2.5(A) for granting a waiver and is therefore able to recommend approval to the Commission
of a waiver of Section 4.2.3.
0
2. PRIVATE STREETS WAIVER
The proposed subdivision includes 33 lots to be served by extensions of existing public streets. However, six (6) of the
lots, which are also designated as affordable housing, will be served by a street that extends from Brookwood Road.
The street segment serving these lots includes perpendicular parking directly off of the street. These six (6) lots were
shown in approximately this configuration on the application plan approved with ZMA 06 -002. The applicant has
submitted a written private street request, dated January 22, 2007, in accordance with County Code Section 14 -234. An
engineering review is provided below, followed by analysis of the findings required by Section 14 -234 for approval of a
private street request.
Engineering Review:
Discussion:
The applicant requests that the waiver be granted through the circumstance stated in County Code section 14- 233(A)(3),
General Welfare. This section states: "The general welfare, as opposed to the proprietary interest of the subdivider,
would be better served by the construction of one or more private streets than by the construction of public streets ".
There are no engineering issues that support approval or denial of the private street waiver based on this criterion.
Based upon the engineering report and analysis of the private street for the area proposed as affordable housing,
engineering staff cannot recommend approval as proposed. However, engineering staff has reviewed this plan and
provides the following recommendations:
1. The private streets need to have curb and gutter and other improvements for drainage control.
2. The minimum width from curb face to curb face should be twenty feet (20').
3. The proposed access easement needs to be wide enough to construct items #1 & 2.
4. Curb and gutter and other drainage control items are needed to get the street runoff into the SWM facilities.
Section 14 -234:
Staff has included the provisions of Section 14- 234(C) here, along with staff comment on the various provisions.
The agent and 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 or 14 -233 exist and it determines that:
1. The private road will be adequate to carry the traffic volume which may be reasonably expected to be
generated by the subdivision.
The private street proposed for this section of the overall subdivision appears adequate to carry the anticipated
volume of traffic generated by these 6 lots.
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 road will not serve through traffic, nor intersect the state highway system in more than one location.
5
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.
This is not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION: There are engineering concerns regarding the construction of the private street as shown on
this plan. However, the general location and configuration of the street are in accord with the approved application plan
from ZMA 06 -002. In order to provide the required access, frontage, and parking for each of these lots, the street has
been shown with a sharp angle and with perpendicular parking accessing directly on to the street. Such a design is not
generally possible with a public street. Thus, with the necessary findings from Section 14 -234, staff is able to
recommend approval of this private street with the following conditions, as recommended through the engineering
analysis:
1. The private streets shall have curb and gutter and other improvements for drainage control.
2. The minimum width from curb face to curb face shall be twenty feet (20').
3. The proposed access easement must to be wide enough to construct items #1 & 2.
3. PRIVATE STREET STANDARDS IN DEVELOPMENT AREAS
This subdivision is located in a development area. The following criteria are applicable to these private streets in
development areas, as stated in Section 14- 412(A)(2)(b)of the Subdivision Ordinance:
1. An urban cross - section street design shall be provided, with a minimum width of 20' measured
from the curb faces or such alternative design, including a street easement or right -of -way
width, deemed adequate by the County Engineer to be equivalent to or greater than the
applicable in the design standards manual, so as adequately protect the health, safety or
welfare; additional widths shall be provided for gutters to control drainage at the discretion of
the County Engineer;
2. The entire street shall be surfaced as required by the Virginia Department of Transportation.
The applicant has requested a waiver in order to construct the street without the curb and gutter required by item 1
above. The main justification for this request is the overall cost of this section of street, which is intended to serve
affordable housing units. Section 14- 234(D) allows the Planning Commission to approve waiver or modification to the
standards listed in Section 14 -412 as part of the approval of a private street.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: There are engineering concerns regarding the construction of the
private street as shown on this plan. As discussed in Section 2 of this report, engineering staff has specified that curb
and gutter are necessary to adequately control the drainage from this segment of the proposed subdivision. Staff
recommends denial of the proposed waiver of the private street standards.
4. WAIVER REOUEST FOR THE EXTENSION OF PUBLIC STREETS
Section 14- 409(A) of the Subdivision Ordinance requires public streets within a subdivision to be extended to abutting
property lines. Section 14- 409(D) allows the Planning Commission to modify or waive the requirements. The
applicant has requested a waiver to partially construct Adele Street (as shown on these plans).
Engineering Analysis:
Extension of public streets within the development areas:
In accordance with County Code section 14- 409(D), the applicant has submitted a written waiver request for the
extension of streets. In the request, dated February 26, 2007, the applicant states that "engineering reasons only"
prohibit the extension of these streets to the abutting property lines.
0
The site is bordered directly to the east, TMP 56 -53, by the proposed Eastern Connector as shown on the Crozet Master
Plan. The site is bordered directly to the west, TMP 56 -48, by the existing trailer park. Engineering staff has requested
that the proposed Adele Street be extended to the eastern and westerly property lines and that existing Westhall Drive
be extended to the easterly property line.
The first extension is located at the northeasterly corner of the property. It is the eastward extension of Adele Street to
the easterly property line. This street will be extended to create an intersection with the Eastern Connector. At this
location, grades vary and an existing stream buffer is located along the northern property line. Engineering staff
recognizes that the design of the Eastern Connector at this location is complicated by the existing stream and critical
slopes at this location. However, to meet the Water Protection Ordinance requirements for this subdivision, a required
stormwater management facility `C' (as shown on the plat) will be constructed. This facility is designed to limit the
stream buffer disturbance to the first 50' of the buffer. To effectively design and build this facility, it is imperative to
incorporate the full design of this street to the property line. If Adele Street is not extended with the current plat, the
SWM facility may need to be revised several times to accommodate the future design/grading of Adele Street. It is
imperative to build Adele Street with the current plan to limit the proposed disturbance to the existing stream buffer and
to limit the number of times the facility needs to be amended.
The second extension is located at the northwest corner of the property. It is the extension of Adele Street to the
westerly property line. To build the western section of the required stormwater management facility `C' as shown on
the plat, it is imperative to build Adele Street to the western property line with the current plan to limit the proposed
disturbance to the existing stream buffer.
The third extension is located at the southeast corner of the property. It is the extension of the existing Westhall Drive
to the east property line. It appears that the right -of -way is already established. There are no engineering issues are
present to prevent the construction of Westhall Drive to the east property line.
It is the intent of the ordinance to extend all public streets to the property lines and connect to these streets as required
when future streets are built from adjacent properties. The Eastern Connector is only a proposed street at this time and a
timetable for the construction of the Eastern Connector has not been established at time of this review.
Engineering staff recommends that the applicant build Adele Street and Westhall Drive to the property lines as required
in accordance to County Code section, 14 -409. Based on the above reviews, engineering does not recommend approval
to this waiver request.
Section 14 -409:
Section 14- 409(D) allows the agent to waive the requirement to extend public streets to the adjoining property
lines. Many of the considerations (discussed further below) for such a waiver involve potential engineering
impacts. Without staff support, the applicant has requested the consideration of this request by the Planning
Commission. The specifications of Section 14 -409, as well as staff analysis, are provided below:
Section 14- 409(D) - Waiver by agent of extension requirement. The requirements of subsection (B) may be waived
by the agent as provided in section 14- 224.1. A request for a waiver may be made prior to or with submittal of a
preliminary plat or with an application to rezone the land, as follows:
2. Consideration and findings. In reviewing a waiver request, the agent shall consider whether:
(i) extending the street to the abutting property line would require offsite easements;
Based on the analysis above, the extension of these streets to abutting properties would not necessitate off -site
easements.
7
(ii) the need for the extension outweighs the impacts on environmental resources such as streams, stream buffers,
steep slopes, and floodplain;
As explained in the paragraph above regarding the "first extension" of Adele Street, the engineering review
indicates that the most effective way to provide protection for the stream and stream buffer is to correlate the
design and construction of the streets into the design and construction of the stormwater management facilities.
(iii) alternative connections to the abutting lands from a different location would provide a better connection;
There are no alternative locations that have been proposed.
(iv) the subdivider would contribute to the cost to complete the extension to the abutting property line when the
adjoining lands are developed, and how; and
(v) the street would be extended into the rural areas.
The streets in this subdivision will not extend into rural areas.
In approving a waiver, the agent shall find that requiring extension would not forward the purposes of this
chapter or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, to sound engineering practices, and to the land
adjacent thereto.
RECOMMENDATION: There are no engineering concerns that will prohibit the construction of the streets in this
subdivision to the abutting property line. In contrast, one of the sections of Adele Street would more effectively
protect the stream and stream buffers through design and construction at the same time as the adjacent stormwater
management facility. Staff recommends denial of the proposed waiver for extension of public streets to the
property line.
CONCLUSION:
The Planning Commission will need to act on several waiver requests. Staff recommendations are as follows:
Zoning Ordinance
1. Waiver of Section 4.2.5 — disturbance of critical slopes:
Generally staff finds that this request is consistent with the criteria of Section 4.2.5(A) for granting a waiver and
is therefore able to recommend approval to the Commission of a waiver of Section 4.2.3. of the Zoning
Ordinance
2. Waiver of Section 14- 233(A)(3) — private street in development areas:
Staff finds that a private street in this segment of the project will contribute to the general welfare by providing
access to a section of the subdivision that was approved on the application plan for ZMA 2006 -002 as an
affordable housing element. This design would not be possible with a public street in this area. Staff
recommends approval with the following conditions:
a. The private streets have curb and gutter and related improvements for drainage control.
b. The minimum width from curb face to curb face is twenty feet (20').
C. The proposed access easement is wide enough to construct and maintain the street and drainage
control items.
3. Waiver of Section 14- 234(D) — standards for private streets specified in Section 14- 412(A) (2 ) (b):
Staff finds the design of the private street inadequate and cannot support approval of this request.
4. Waiver of Section 14- 409(D) — inter - parcel connection:
No potential impacts on environmental resources have been identified. Approval of the waiver would not
forward the goals of the Neighborhood Model in staff's opinion. Therefore, staff recommends to the Planning
Commission the denial of the request to not complete Adele and Westhall Drives to the property lines based
upon the findings provided herein.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Approved Concept Plan of ZMA 2006 — 0001 Westhall V Rezoning
B. Staff Report for ZMA 2006 -0001
C. Proffers from ZMA 2006 — 0001 Westhall V Rezoning
D. Request for Critical Slopes Waiver
E. Engineering Report for Critical Slopes
F. Request for Private Streets and Waiver of Street Design Criteria
G. Engineering Report for Private Streets and Waiver of Street Design Criteria
E