Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201000156 Correspondence 2011-04-05 Remarks — BD Land Properties LLC, April 5, 2011 Planning Commission You have heard from all sides of this question before you this evening, and there are a couple of points I would like to make. At the last PC meeting we were asked to work with the WL POA to find common ground. At that point we could have made the choice to simply accept the vote of the PC and if necessary appeal to the BOS. We chose not to do that, despite the probability that the CSW we are asking for and plat we submitted could well have been approved. The reason for that is that what is important here is not just the technical elements of any given plat and whether it meets the ordinance requirements and setbacks and the dozens of other criteria. What is important is community and how what we do affects the members of the community we live in. So we chose to listen carefully, makes changes based on our community's concerns and spent a great deal of time crafting what we believe is a far better solution than the one we walked in here with originally. We have spent countless hours, tens of thousands of dollars and made major efforts in meeting with the POA and reaching out to find mutual and reasonable solutions. For us this meant agreeing to every single condition that the POA asked for and incorporating it into the plat. We did this not because we were forced to but because we wanted to. Is there still opposition? Sure, we clearly heard in the POA meetings that many members will oppose whatever we do, that they don't want anyone to build on that property. That though they enjoy the many benefits of living in Willow Lake they don't want to extend that opportunity to others. We did everything we could to be reasonable community partners. I think you have heard that from enough people to agree that when we were charged by the PC to mediate the issues surrounding the division of these lots we did so, seriously and in good faith with excellent results, despite the fact that many of the issues raised had absolutely nothing to do with our application for a Critical Slope Waiver, which technically is the only issue before you this evening. Had we only focused on that, the most we would have done would have been to provide a grading plan and perhaps the locations of the houses. Instead we addressed the myriad of other concerns, the results of which you saw in the Power Point presentation. We would like to thank the Board of the Willow Lake POA. I know they have been subjected to unnecessarily abusive and inappropriate behavior from some of our neighbors in trying to represent the POA. They, too, have spent many hours working with us and we appreciate their hard work and efforts. We would also like to thank the County staff for their invaluable assistance and input. In closing we would like to ask the PC to approve our request for a CSW. f April 5, 2011 Mr. Duane Zobrist,Chairman and Members Albemarle County Planning Commission 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596 Dear Mr. Chairman and Members of the Albemarle County Planning Commission: Thank you for the opportunity to present a written response from the Board of Directors of Willow Lake Property Owners'Association(POA)in regard to the request before you to grant a waiver of the Albemarle County Critical Slope ordinance as submitted by the applicant,BD Land Properties,LLC. This response,while somewhat lengthy,will attempt to summarize the issues, concerns,and opinions shared with the Willow Lake POA Board by the Willow Lake property owners we are elected to represent and to request your assistance to the extent the scope of your review of this matter allows. Chronology of Meetings/POA Comment Following the Planning Commission Meeting and Public Hearing on January 25,2011 at which you initially heard, considered and deferred the request by the applicant,BD Land Properties, LLC,the Board of the Willow Lake POA, in response to your recommendation,called on February 9,2011 a Special Meeting of the membership of the Willow Lake POA(see attached) which was held on February 23,2011 to explore ways in which a mutually agreeable resolution could be devised. With 30 POA member households and a neighboring property owner in attendance,meeting participants had the opportunity to ask questions of the applicant and the Board about the proposed project. This discussion focused on the project's potential impact on Willow Lake and on Willow Lake subdivision property values, options for future lake access, implications of and potential to incorporate undeveloped lots into the Willow Lake POA,financial exposure for the Willow Lake POA, applicant,future lot owners and future homeowners in Willow Lake View and community safety. While no specific resolution was achieved,there was a valuable exchange of information. It was at this meeting that the applicant first presented to the Board a draft of Willow Lake View proposed covenants and restrictions(see attached)for the lots in question. The applicant also presented to the Board architectural renderings suggestive of the type of homes,road and parking access and home location on the building sites as would be permitted under the proposed covenants and restrictions. The applicant also noted that with construction concentrated on critical slopes,they will be providing a 100' buffer between the homes and roads and the western shore of Willow Lake. On March 16,2011,the Willow Lake Board of Directors held its quarterly meeting at which 16 Willow Lake POA member households were in attendance. Concerned members of the POA presented petitions to the Board(see attached)urging the Board to engage experts such as the Army Corps of Engineers and others as needed and to take aggressive action, including litigation if needed,to protect the financial and property interests of Willow Lake POA members. Willow Lake Board of Directors April 5,2011 Written Response At this meeting,Janet Matthews,a principal of BD Land Properties,LLC,made a follow-up presentation(to the February 23`d Special Meeting of the POA)during which she shared the preliminary site plan with an overlot-grading plan(providing a copy for the POA)and offered additional concessions(see attached email)for consideration by the members of the Willow Lake POA. Among the additional concessions was an offer to deed the Willow Lake POA a 15' pedestrian/vehicular easement on/near the same location as has been used historically,in exchange for the relinquishment by the POA of the existing easement located on a steeply sloping lot that has never been used for lake access. Ms. Matthews also informed the POA that she and Mr.Bonner had requested that their application to the Planning Commission be brought back before the Commission at the April 5,2011 meeting. On March 29,2011,the Willow Lake Board of Directors held a working session at which the Board discussed and attempted to identify opportunities for compromise and resolution among the divergent views,emotion-charged urgings and conflicting challenges for the POA that have resulted from the planned Willow Lake View development. The Board realized that there was insufficient time to pursue legal counsel for further clarification and schedule visits with experts whose availability has not meshed with that of Board members. The Board also recognized an overall lack of clarity on issues to be included in a meaningful member-wide survey that could be expected to provide instructive and decisive guidance for appropriate Board action. The Board plans to conduct such a survey to assess the wishes of the majority of POA members. Summary of POA Opinions and Concerns Therefore, in an effort to prepare and present an adequately representational response to share with the Planning Commission at the April 5th meeting,the Board decided to summarize the views,opinions and concerns of those members of the Willow Lake POA who have registered their preferences by email,petition and in person to date. Of those responding,the majority of Willow Lake POA members: 1. Oppose the Waiver of the Critical Slope ordinance; 2. Oppose the subdivision and development of the four undeveloped parcels; 3. Favor the inclusion of the subdivided lots within the existing Willow Lake POA BEFORE the land is sold by the applicant; 4. Favor enforceable measures by which to ensure continuing access to Willow Lake for POA members and its agents; 5. Oppose relinquishing the existing lake access easement; 6. Favor equally shared responsibility for lake, stream and watershed health, berm maintenance and strict erosion and sediment control measures. Historical Overview While the Willow Lake subdivision was developed during the mid-to late 80s and early 90s,the impoundment and lake it created pre-existed the subdivision by several decades. In 1990,Robert Hauser,Principal of Republic Homes and developer of the Willow Lake subdivision,obtained permission from Albemarle County to utilize Willow Lake for storm water detention for the Willow Lake subdivision in addition to its planned use as an aesthetic and recreational amenity for POA members. 2 • Willow Lake Board of Directors April 5,2011 Written Response Records show that Mr. Hauser completed two of the three phases of the planned build-out of the Willow Lake subdivision by 1991. Subsequently, for reasons that seem to have become obscured by incomplete or missing records,the third and final phase was never completed and four parcels remain undeveloped within the Willow Lake subdivision. These four parcels,as you now know, are located contiguous to or drain to Willow Lake itself and include the primary pedestrian, vehicular and visual access to/of the Lake which has been utilized and enjoyed as such for more than 20 years by Willow Lake property owners and by agents of the association authorized to maintain the lake and its impoundment. This overview provides valuable and hopefully relevant perspective on the emotionally-charged responses of Willow Lake homeowners to the recently realized prospect of having land developed that has been believed,albeit erroneously,to be undevelopable and to have been dedicated long- ago as common space for the Willow Lake POA by the original developer of the Willow Lake subdivision. In an effort to ascertain the terms under which this lake access has occurred,Mr.Jim Bowling, legal counsel for the Willow Lake POA,has been requested by the Board to contact Mr. Hauser,the original developer and owner of the four lots prior to foreclosure. Mr. Hauser has not returned phone calls and a letter is being prepared by counsel to request that Mr.Hauser substantiate the terms under which POA members and its agents were permitted use and access of the Lake, i.e.with or without his permission. This response would provide important direction for potential legal action to pursue a prescriptive easement or an easement by necessity in a court of law. However,estimated costs of legal action appear to be prohibitive(the funds available to the POA for legal fees for the year total $1,500, of which at least half already have been expended). In addition, legal counsel advises that the necessity of a lawsuit would be questionable when the applicant has proffered the desired easement/access. This Board acknowledges that despite the consistent presentation of new information at meetings—with no advance information provided the Board,the applicant principals,Janet Matthews and Jim Bonner,have attempted to listen and responded favorably to some of the concerns raised by neighbors and fellow Willow Lake property owners—incurring not insignificant cost to do so. Ms. Matthews has stated and evidenced on many occasions that the reason she found an investor and helped purchased the property at foreclosure was to use her skills in real estate to ensure that the property was developed in such a manner so as to reduce the density from that allowed by R-4 zoning,protect the lake,and likewise Willow Lake property values,as well as to ensure continuing access and enjoyment by current and future homeowners of Willow Lake and Willow Lake View. However,the reality exists that zoning and land use regulations allow for the development of this land,which is zoned R-4 Residential, included in the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan, designated"Neighborhood Density in Urban Area 4",and is located on a state-maintained road. This reality places the applicant,future builders and homeowners of Willow Lake View in direct conflict with neighbors and members of the Willow Lake POA and community over the following issues: 1. Protection of Willow Lake, Willow Lake impoundment,and potentially impacted creeks, rivers and watershed; 2. Access to,use of and future responsibility for Willow Lake; 3 r r Willow Lake Board of Directors April 5,2011 Written Response 3. Protection of Willow Lake entrance corridor and existing property values; 4. Legitimacy of development; and 5. Erosion of Willow Lake community and fiscal impact for Willow Lake POA. We are reminded that BD Land Properties,LLC,despite their laudable efforts,plan to sell the property in question for development to one or more developers. The future enforcement of the proposed Willow Lake View conditions,covenants and restrictions will depend on expensive private legal action,which could be required in 10 or more individual cases. This leaves the Willow Lake POA with little realistic recourse if developers or future homeowners refuse to comply. The Board is concerned that the impacts of development on these critical slopes will pose risks to Willow Lake and the Willow Lake POA that could erode ultimately more than merely the soils of Willow Lake. While understanding and appreciating the development rights of the new owner of these parcels,the Board is concerned with the prospect of the longer-term demise of what has become a stable and desirable community in which to reside and own property. During the first quarter of 2011, 10 homes in this subdivision have gone on the market,all or none of which may be the result of the proposed development, and community relations have become strained. The Board of Directors of the Willow Lake Property Owners'Association recognizes and acknowledges the specific scope of the application before you to rule on the request for a Waiver of the Albemarle County Critical Slope ordinance. In making your decision and recommendation to the Board of Supervisors,we respectfully request that your decision take into serious consideration the numerous concerns presented by the Willow Lake POA members to the Board at the meetings chronicled above that have occurred over the last two months,and via submitted attachments,as hereby reflected in this letter. The Board believes the number of POA members attending the aforementioned meetings, including the prior Planning Commission Public Hearing as well as this follow up hearing,speaks volumes as to their concern and discontent. If it is your decision to approve the applicant's waiver of the Critical Slope ordinance,then we respectfully request that your decision provide current and future Willow Lake POA members and its residents means by which to hold all parties whose actions will affect Willow Lake and the community built around it equally responsible by providing County oversight and/or enforcement assistance that does not rely exclusively on private legal action. We thank you for your time, service and thoughtful consideration of this matter. Yours sincerely, The Board of Directors Willow Lake Property Owners' Association Cathy Link,President Kim Olsen,Director Janet Mullaney, Secretary Amy Smith,Director Beth Williams,Treasurer 4 Charlotte Hisey (Willow Lake Resident) re Lake Buffer 4.5.2011 As we try to come to common ground around the proposed new development, there has been a great deal of discussion concerning the critical slope waiver. The good news is that it has produced productive dialogue. I would like to thank our Willow Lake board for not only scheduling a special meeting so we could meet with Janet and Jim, but for further discussion at our spring meeting, and then for holding an executive working session. Any meeting requires an announcement to the membership ten days in advance. As the revised plat was not available from the county until last week, we as a neighborhood have not begun to have time schedule a meeting much less study the proposed changes. Therefore, making a decision tonight about the waiver seems rushed and premature. Once a waiver is granted there is no turning back—sort of like Solomon proposing to cut the baby in half. We know that this critical slope is in a designated growth area and acknowledge it is has been zoned R4 since the 1980's. We also respect the "by rights" development of the land. These things are not at issue. There are still questions to be worked out before anything moves forward. There has been talk of a 100-foot setback from the lake. What is needed is a 100-foot buffer to protect the trees and vegetation between the lake and the "manicured grounds" Ms. Mathews envisions. (See photo A) The County understands the need for such a buffer, as explained on the Water Resources Management website. "Buffers must extend 100' from perennial streams and the ponds [added emphasis] and wetlands associated with those streams." Our pond is associated with Cow Branch—witness the heavy overflow into the creek in a rainstorm. We are not able to tell from the little plat (we were not allowed to copy the large one) if we still have a path on the west side of the lake in order to get to our island to fish and picnic (see photo B) We have been using this path for more than 20 years. And as far as the critical slope waiver goes,just because we are in a growth area does not mean it must be granted, considering all the concerns about erosion and runoff into the lake that Mr. Fritz kindly explained to me is going to happen, no matter how good the erosion controls are. So, as Ms. Mathew's told us in a property owners meeting, the critical slope is "just a sliver" of the proposed development. Development would still be possible without the waiver. Thank you for your time and hopefully your consideration. x ,r • .j•" as'p p N �� s "�+n+ram� .°" V vel '._. a �.may!' ' 1 ., c`a- ( k- __ ,'A 14 " -;4.,*i • 4Per' -I) ,/ 4«- -''' -;...T.4,V, 4* ":41' '''' - -, l',, 2 , ,,., 4, 4 V ' ly I . ' 4:''' elitiV. . ...,..l<P,k,: ::.,:,„..{4.,, ' , :s14 ., a xJ i ' '.y " '` ' `'h `` % ,T ` .et ; f" I ,� x it .i'+ 1 5z 1; , , - a;.r( ? 1% , r N mot) ...} y 7 'j ?-.:4. "w;4ti i +. 'ma rj ly.y ,, .t,r . .4" y gz " • fr a v- y h:vi y�i �y �+,1 4, •444 '"a 41 „i 7,4 • 4 {q xG 14 4 e max x : p �a i Y • a� •1C�41t jay ,- j�y)y( r• ;- i�,, "f it C.. T « t 1 !vr a t • '. ,, t dl r- * . •,-y, c. - . T. • .„...,? ..i.„.,,, ..,,, t.r * 4. •;r- v' w, t •...`' 4 °-r**'' r ffyi� , j ~tjy;`) t- .t. v ,...11,. `.C' ..ri�. .` ` _) .P4..,.s..,.A4.., • ..tt .. - -r� 1 +,.+4•• . j \ ► •''«y' ••. +•••••:'lam L. ": _1'� - l-,- ZT�'fir.. : .y 1e s • •+n L. v• . . .fit �` • r 4.41ri '.. rt -. 4. '„„• �,±�� v _ :►• ,Y's 'tr✓�_-.ter.�,ram / • ' yr�+ // r- t •< w �`S 1 ••. .. Ge • x• ' rid .r au A' ''"=:1::.4*.;"::: :Y!:,:,,t/N0;- si . / ' . -- .....,.4,..„; ..:-.. , : ! } ' •`'' • ? 'x,,� . ' ' s° If,t re•' -,q.4i-_,-.z'.,...a.F...,1...;,..,,,-••-.- .t_ Y .�,,,a,. :r;'! t., A. . •�.t: *A",+`, y'' r .. ^C-.+ . , r t i Y -.oy �S�� \ -� �'.. .,er A. ..''ili •+r2•t'M•�' YI•;'+'i tee; i•'3t,,"..fv s ,U "4' �wv �".r +�i• ' ,• • • t., -.... i J hiL �.,',�ii g a`y t M`•ire r a ....4«�,,,i.•�,.. 4....320,''N"' cfR� r�! .-?'`.... ' ~ •yr/ - ! ,[ 'fit yp••ri ,. ' +y,•o 'Afar' •--. /` . ._� -! • ,.�.vi ix d •- IX,. �. ice, tf :0fr -r- . ., i ii,.„1,r4.-_-,. -. - -.:,Li.. ,. , . ... . .. ..d. ,.. ,-.4:... !J I i `i � , t ►• • "� j2 '.., ar• ,. �?i ".s}ti may. try. '`'.''. , ` r*4..4'1y.y ' ,�� M -; • , r - W Y " Bill Fritz From: Anne Jolly[ajolly@hughes.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 11:26 AM To: Planning Commission Subject: Willow Lake View Dear Planning Commission, I am writing in support of Willow Lake View. I believe the plan to be environmentally thoughtful and sound. Although the surrounding property owners in Willow Lake would like this property to remain undeveloped so they may continue to use it for their personal enjoyment, that seems unfair and selfish. I believe strongly in the right of the owners of Willow Lake View to build. They did spend money on the land, they did hire an architect, they did run a topography to ensure correct data, and they did create an HOA with identical C & R to the neighborhood's, Willow Lake HOA, etc. I believe they have tired to work with the Willow Lake neighborhood in a responsible, cooperative, and collaborative manner. Seems to me Willow Lake View has the right to develop on land they own and they have done all the right things to create a positive development. Sincerely, Anne Anne 3olly Ph: (434) 293-7006 Fax: (434) 295-6663 a_j_ollv@hughes.net • Martha Ray Barger & John E. Barger 1168 Maple View Drive Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 martharavb@gmail.com Home 434-984-6040 Date: April 4, 2011 Email to: Bill Fritz, BFRITZ@albemarle.org and Sharon Taylor, STAYLOR@albemarle.org Re: April 5th Planning Commission issue/Willow Lake Concerns Dear Mr. Bill Fritz and Ms. Taylor, We have been residents of Willow Lake for the last 12 years and we are very concerned and disillusioned that land that is around our lake is progressing toward development which will disrupt our community and endanger our lake. As a community we have spent a great deal of money on the improvement and maintenance of the lake. The land around the lake has always been presented as part of our community and has been maintained by our HOA. In recent months we have attended meetings informing residents that due to a `paper' technicality, land at the lake thought to be in our home owners association was not. This land was acquired by BD, L.L.C. and is being groomed for sale for development. As residents we do not fully understand how this property acquisition will affect our community and we are concerned that this land should 1) belong to our current Homeowners Association, 2)that its development should not negatively impact our lake and 3) that our HOA and residents have adequate access to the lake for maintenance and enjoyment. Yesterday when we attempted to walk to the lake we realized that we don't really have a clear understanding of where our access path is now. The former route is on the land that has already been cleared in preparation for sale for development by BD, L.L.C. It is our understanding that the agents for BD, L.L.C. are asking for a separate subdivision to be named Willow Lake View be approved and that the critical slope waiver for the very steep land in the area be granted. We know there are many concerns from others in our community and neighboring properties still unanswered and as residents we wanted to express to you and the Planning Commission that we feel that these concerns have not been fully and adequately addressed. We are hoping that more time can be given to address the concerns and options between BD, L.L.C. rights and the rights and concerns of the residents of Willow Lake. Hopefully, John E. Barger and Martha Ray Barger Ps This afternoon we visited our Willow Lake and physically walked entirely around it as we prayed in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that God will protect, guide and bless everyone involved with our community. Sharon Taylor From: John Ottinger[jo@wolfackerman.com] Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 3:01 PM To: Planning Commission Subject: Willow Lake View Devlopment I am writing to express my full support for the Willow Lake View Development project that come before the Planning commission on the 5th of April. I believe that the owners of the development will provide an appropriate and sensitive addition to the existing community. They should be applauded for working together with the existing HOA to address their concerns! John Ottinger 1o(lwolfackerman.com wolf ackerman design, llc 110b second street NE charlottesville, va 22902 434.296.4848 1 • M NTICELLO April 4,2011 Bill Fritz County of Albemarle 401 Mclntire Road,Suite 222 Charlottesville,VA 22902-4596 Dear Mr. Fritz, I am writing in reference to the subdivision request(SUB 2010-00156)Willow Lake on behalf of the Thomas Jefferson Foundation(TJF).The Thomas Jefferson Foundation is the non-profit organization which owns and operates Monticello. TJF understands that the Planning Commission will review the request for a critical slopes waiver for the Willow Lake subdivision tomorrow at the April 5,2011 Planning Commission meeting.In view of the potential impact of this proposed development on the interests of Monticello,TJF requests some additional time to study this matter.This subdivision is in close proximity to the Thomas Jefferson Parkway and the Saunders-Monticello Trail.The Saunders-Monticello trail is the 2.2-mile pathway linking Kemper Park to the grounds of Monticello,one of the County's most popular parks receiving over 80,000 visitors each year.In consideration of the park's intrinsic value as a natural,scenic and recreational community resource,we ask the Commission to briefly postpone the hearing on the critical slope waiver. My colleague Natasha Sienitsky is available at nsienitskyi monticello.org or at 434-984-9809 and would be delighted to work with you to assess the impact of the proposed development on the entrance corridor to Monticello. Sincerely, Ann H.Taylor Executive Vice President Thomas Jefferson Foundation,Inc. 434-984-9802 Cc:Natasha Sienitsky THE INN AT MONTICELLO 1188 Scottsville Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434) 979-3593 April 4,2011 Commissioners Albemarle County Planning Commission Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road North Wing Charlottesville,VA 22902 Re: Application for Critical Slope Waiver Willow Lake View Preliminary Subdivision Plat SUB 2010-156 Dear Commissioners: We oppose BD Land Property, LLC's application for a critical slope waiver in connection with its proposal to create ten single family lots on Willow Lake Drive. This matter has been rescheduled for a hearing before you on Tuesday, April 5,2011. 1. Application of Water Protection Ordinance We begin with the issue of whether the proposed development is subject to the provisions of the Section 17-317 of the Albemarle County Water Protection Ordinance ("WPO"),which requires a minimum 100' stream buffer to protect perennial streams and contiguous non-tidal wetlands from excessive stormwater runoff, silt and sediment deposits, and other forms of pollution that harm the natural waterways and resources of the County and the Commonwealth. It is our position that under the clear and unambiguous terms of the WPO, Willow Lake must be deemed a"nontidal wetland" area that is "contiguous" to Cow Branch, a "perennial stream." If"contiguous nontidal wetland" status is conferred upon Willow I.ake, then the WPO provides heightened safeguards that serve to protect the environment and the public. By way of background, Mr.John Sinclair, a Willow Lake homeowner, first broached the subject of a minimum 100' stream buffer at the first hearing of this application on January 25, 2011 (which resulted in a deferral by the applicant). Mr. Sinclair asked the County Engineer, Mr. Glenn Brooks, whether Willow Take was part of the perennial stream Cow Branch that runs along the eastern side of the lake. Mr. Brooks responded that this was a "good question" but he did not provide Mr. Sinclair with an answer. At a February 23, 2011 meeting between the Willow Lake homeowners, their HOA Board, and Janet Matthews and Jim Bonner, principals of the applicant, BD Land Properties, LLC, I (Robert Goss) asked Ms. Matthews about wetlands status and proposed setbacks. Ms. Matthews responded that a 20' setback was all that was required, and that the County Engineer, Mr. Brooks, had already ruled that Willow Lake was not subject to a minimum 100'stream buffer. 2 • Mr. Sinclair, Ms. Charlotte Hisey (a Willow Lake homeowner) and I (Robert Goss) then met with Mr. Bill Fritz of the Planning Commission Staff on February 25,2011. We asked Mr. Fritz if he would provide us with a copy of the ruling referenced by Ms. Matthews. Mr. Fritz said he would review his records,check with Mr. Brooks and provide copies of any such documents. At that meeting, we also delivered a letter for Mr. Brooks arguing that the WPO requires that Willow Lake be deemed part of the "perennial stream" Cow Branch, and that the lake be considered "contiguous nontidal wetlands" of Cow Branch. Under either scenario, the WPO requires a minimum 100' stream buffer from the western shore of Willow Lake. On February 28th, Mr. Fritz responded by email that he had looked "at all of my email records" and that he could not find anything from Mr. Brooks addressing the buffer question. I (Robert Goss) responded that we wished to make some additional points about the application of the WPO,and were submitting another letter for Mr.Brooks. In the interest of brevity, we have not attached copies of our letters but will provide them if requested. On March 6, 2011, we received an email enclosing a copy of a decision by Mr. Brooks dated March 4th, stating that according to USGS and County tax maps, Willow Lake does not appear to be part of the "perennial stream" Cow Branch, and therefore is not subject a minimum 100' stream buffer. Mr. Brooks left open the possibility that an on-site inspection of the lake and its source of water might cause him to change his mind, but he did not offer to make, and has yet to conduct,such an inspection. Significantly, Mr. Brooks did not address the second part of our argument, that Willow Lake must be considered "contiguous nontidal wetlands" which would make a minimum 100' stream buffer required under the WPO. We enclose a copy of Mr. Brooks March 4,2011 letter. Last week we obtained a copy of a January 26,1999 memorandum prepared by Mr. Brooks, as a Senior Engineer, in connection with a previous development application for the same land around Willow Lake. We are attaching a copy of that Memorandum. In that Memorandum,Mr. Brooks wrote: "3. By definition in the Water Protection Ordinance,the lake is part of the `contiguous non-tidal wetlands' of Cow's Branch. The 100' stream buffer extends from the edge of the lake and wetland area at the head of the lake. There is an area of potential wetlands at the top of the lake." (Emphasis supplied). We then prepared another letter for Mr. Brooks, asking him to conduct an on-site inspection of the lake to verify that it is not part of the perennial stream. We also pointed out that he had failed to consider our argument about non-tidal wetlands, and we referenced his January 26, 1999 Memorandum. We were ready to deliver this letter to Mr. Brooks when we received an 3 email from Mr. Fritz dated March 30, 2011, stating that this hearing had been scheduled. So we decided to hold off on the third letter. We also obtained the Staff's 1 page "Executive Summary" which states "Staff has re-analyzed Willow Lake and verified that the lake is not subject to the buffers of the Water Protection Ordinance (WPO)". This alleged "reanalysis" by the Staff is misleading,since to our knowledge,it is not based on a site inspection or a review of conditions at this site. Based on these developments, we filed an appeal of Mr. Brooks and Staff's rulings with the Board of Supervisors,as authorized by Section 117-210 of the WPO. We then emailed Mr. Fritz and requested that this hearing be postponed due to the appeal, which has been scheduled for a hearing before the Supervisors on May 11th. We have not received a definitive answer on our request for a postponement. We believe that if the Commissioners issue a ruling on the application for a critical slope waiver, before a decision by the Supervisors, then this may result in confusing or conflicting outcomes. On the merits of the WPO issues, we believe that the ordinance clearly and unequivocally makes Willow Lake part of the "contiguous nontidal wetlands" of Cow Branch, just as Mr. Brooks concluded in January of 1999. Nothing significant has changed since that time, either in the Willow Lake area or with respect to the ordinance, and there is no reason for Mr. Brooks to reach a conclusion different in 2011 than he reached in 1999. The applicant must have recognized the problem with Mr. Brooks' and the Staff's determination that "the lake is not subject to the buffers of the Water Protection Ordinance (WPO)", because they have agreed "Dwellings and grading are [to be] located 100 feet or more from the edge of Willow Lake." (Point 5 in the Discussion Section of the "Executive Summary"). But there is a huge difference between what amounts to a 100' building and grading setback, and a 100' minimum stream buffer under the WPO. Obviously, the public and the County's natural resources (e.g., trees, vegetative cover, fish, wildlife, water) enjoy much greater protections under the WPO than under a zoning ordinance concerning setbacks. 2. Critical Slope Issues Mr. Brooks recognized in 1999 that this property is fraught with developmental difficulties, as he discusses on pages 2-4 of his memorandum. Many of these same problems remain today, and have not been adequately addressed by the applicant or the Staff in the revised plans. For example: • On the subject of "excessive stormwater runoff," Mr. Brooks commented "The . . . expected manner of grading behind and around the units [2:1 slopes] . . . makes the provisions for drainage problematic. This has been a problem in similar situations with steep hillsides in back of units." In this case, BD Land Properties is proposing to make cuts into the same steep hillsides, with no adequate explanation how excessive stormwater will be controlled and pollution by silt and sediment of Willow Lake prevented. • • On the subject of "siltation of . . . bodies of water, " Mr. Brooks wrote "Because this development is on the edge of the lake . . . , the siltation of Willow Lake during construction is unavoidable. The applicant realizes this, and has proposed to lower the water level of the lake and use it to collect sediment during the construction period. For this reason it is essential that proper easements or permission be obtained from the owners of the lake (see comment 5 above)." In this case, BD continues to believe that it or the actual developer of this property may allow silt and sediment to flow into Willow Lake with impunity, without any respect for the rights of the owners of the lake, the homeowners of the Willow Lake subdivision. Neither BD nor the Planning Commission staff has adequately addressed this issue. • On the subject of "loss of aesthetic resource", Mr. Brooks stated, "There is a well- maintained nature walk around the lake which takes advantage of the natural area. [T]he walk on [the southwest side] of the lake . . . will be lost [if development is allowed to proceed as proposed.]." Similarly, this issue isn't addressed in the new proposal — the Willow Lake homeowners' right to walk around their own lake isn't recognized. We believe that the fact that this property has to this day remained undeveloped, despite many attempts, is indicative that it can't be developed. There are too many problems with this tract that can't be solved without unduly fouling Willow Lake with silt, sediment and other pollutants; without causing huge increases in stormwater runoff; without spoiling the Willow Lake homeowners'view and enjoyment of, and access to, their own lake;and without causing a diminution in the value of existing property owners' homes and businesses. A larger problem is that when the law is interpreted and administered inconsistently, then the public begins to lose respect for its government. We don't want that to happen here. We respectfully request that the Planning Commission deny the applicant's request for a critical slope waiver. The rights of current members of the community (more than 100 households) should not be diminished by the desires of a few (2) developers. Sincerely, goikeet . an,[i eaeolyet, Jg. Ya 42-2 Robert B. Goss and Carolyn M. Patterson Owners and Innkeepers The Inn at Monticello VIA EMAIL Enclosures COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville,Virginia 22902 4 Mar 2011 Charlotte Hisey John Sinclair Robert B. Goss 1249 Maple View Drive 445 Maple View Court The Inn at Monticello 1188 Scottsville Road (emailed to stay@innatrnonticello.com) Re: Willow Lake stream buffer You have requested to be advised of my position on the building setbacks that will apply to a proposed development next to the pond referred to as Willow Lake. From your letter, I understand that a 20' building setback is being used by the developer of lots adjacent to the pond. I also understand that you believe a 100' setback should apply based on section 17-317 of the Water Protection Ordinance,and the assertion that this lake is a contiguous wetland to Cow Branch. Staff at the county make a clear distinction between the terms"building setback", and"stream buffer", and consider them two separate and distinct terms. A building setback is defined in the Zoning Ordinance based on the zoning of subject and abutting parcels. A stream buffer is defined in the Water Protection Ordinance and based on the nature and location of streams and bodies of water. In this letter I am clarify the stream buffer,as given in section 17-317. The enabling legislation for the County's Water Protection Ordinance sections on stream buffers is found in the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act. In administering the ordinance, I rely on the Chesapeake Bay guidance documents found on the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation web site. These documents speak to the placement of RPA (Resource Protection Area)buffers on contiguous non-tidal wetlands. Willow Lake is a unique circumstance not directly addressed in the guidance literature. It is a man made impoundment separated from a perennial stream by a berm. It is not known what existed in the area of the impoundment previously, or if the berm separating it from Cow Branch is natural or was built with the dam. The county's initial assessment, which is seen on the county's graphical information system, viewable on-line, shows no intermittent or perennial stream coming into or leaving the pond. This is shown below; Albemarle County Community Development County Engineer letter Page 2 Yit,„9-41 ;\co:,q ,,),,/ 14.4,-;4 „-;,.„, 4., - ,T, ,,,, IT,,, /1 r ,,.., , k. +x *� �, ,, ' ,Or.tt//14.„Ii ''' I* \ '""7,11;i' f,#) ''' .,,' r%y ,1 ' / ` M' fi J g. /q Y" A i 4, !i yy M y oaf '. ,tt ��`'1 /./r <. #! "� °4i+,�'4 , te ifir4a z` r �i1 yro-1 r a , ire t (�, T'�}T��' gip,, 4, ffi a;0. f I" fig, d ,: , ", y. ,5 `g1„.4, 1t y ,r_' This information comes from county aerial photography and from USGS mapping. The USGS maps for this area show a similar and less detailed picture; ll �i t rb,r( TIJJJ"[f ,f I ' j f 3 !^y4� J—) . 7 'f�1 ( 17r r f ,.1 `' i t r-c i P 3 3 '� i s f ,I I. jam.11 �, f r I f .� {{ ., f 9 t/j J li,. ,-„ , ',.,/f i rf � is (...>:, .rt _ >yr • .��� I -‘, i ,� .:, r` r, ,Y r h.. .. gyp. V 4S8 ' {~'S - .-�•",•; .: Given this information, it appeared that this pond was created on a low point in the topography with a drainage area adequate to keep it full,but not on a natural stream,and not dependent on Albemarle County Community Development County Engineer letter Page 3 the perennial flow in Cow Branch to keep it full or to keep any of the wetland vegetation which may surround it saturated. This means it was not considered contiguous in a hydrologic sense. Based on this information,and the language in 17-317A,which you quoted in your letter, the Water Protection Ordinance stream buffer was placed only on Cow Branch,the perennial stream. As with all county mapping,this is an initial assessment. If field conditions are found to differ from the maps, this assessment can change. This possibility was allowed for in 2008 when the Board of Supervisors adopted an amendment to the Water Protection Ordinance which changed the definition of a perennial stream for purposes of establishing stream buffers. Section 17- 104(32)states; "(32)Perennial stream.The term"perennial stream"means any stream that is depicted as a continuous blue line on the most recent United States Geological Survey 7.5•minute topographic quadrangle maps(scale 1:24,000)or which is determined by the program authority to be perennial following a site-specific evaluation using the guidance entitled"Determinations of Water Bodies with Perennial Flow,"dated September 2003,issued by the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department.This definition shall not apply to streams within a development area or area of infill and redevelopment that have been piped or converted legally and intentionally into stormwater conveyance channels such that the stream does not resemble or maintain the characteristics of a natural stream channel,as determined by the program authority." If the channel entering the pond was evaluated in detail and found to be perennial according to the above procedure,the stream buffer would include it and the pond through which it flows. The document referenced in the ordinance makes use of a protocol developed by Fairfax County, which when used by a competent professional,would be very adequate. Please contact me if you have questions. Sincerely, Glenn Brooks,P.E. County Engineer Copy: Bill Fritz,Chief of Current Development na A� s _ .Y yil v - � �T I.. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Engineering&Public Works MEMORANDUM TO: Elaine Echols. Senior Planner FROM: (Glenn E. Brooks) Senior Engineer GE73 DATE: 26 January 1999 RE: Willow Lake. preliminary plat Preliminary Plat Review: The preliminary plat received on 14 January 1998 has been reviewed. A site plan for townhouses was approved for this property in 1990. entitled-'Willow Lake, Lots S-Y" by Gloeckner �. Osborne. Inc. An erosion control plan was also approved, and is currently active, with a bond held by the County. The current proposed plat will necessitate that a new erosion control plant application and fee be submitted. and the bond amount will be revised when plans are approved. The Engineering Department will recommend approval of the new preliminary plat when the following items have been satisfactorily addressed. 1. Indicate the source of topography and the property line survey. Indicate the rest of the topography for the lake: the primary concrete spillway and rip-rap channel, the footbridge, and the rest of the berm, and the piers. Also, show all existing topographic features, such as the potential wetland areas at the inlet, the walking path around the lake, the footbridge to the island, trees and vegetation, the silt trap and berm below the existing Willow Lake Drive houses, the existing dirt road into the property.etc. 2. Indicate the size of existing storm drains on the plan,and show all existing pipes and channels, and streams. and erosion control measures left in place. The slope around the existing storm drain across from Maple Avenue is badly eroded and must be repaired. In addition, badly eroded channels lead down to the flat area on lots 4-9, and to a slope pipe drain from this area down to the lake. A spring and small stream channel is located on lots 12-13, which must be accommodated. 3. By definition in the Water Protection Ordinance,the lake is part of the"contiguous non- tidal wetlands" of Cow's Branch. The 100' stream buffer extends from the edge of the lake and wetland area at the head of the lake. There is an area of potential wetlands at the top of j the lake. Wetland impacts and any necessary permitting must be coordinated with the -W Army Corps of Engineers. It is preferable to move the road and cul-de-sac to avoid wetland and stream buffer impacts. If it can be demonstrated that there is not an alternative alignment that will avoid these impacts (W.P. Ord. 17-321.5), then a mitigation plan may be authorized for encroachment into the most landward 50' of the buffer. (W.P. Ord. 17- 321.2, Please contact David Hirschman and Jack Kelsey for concerns regarding this comment.) 4. Clarify the 100yr flood limits and approximate elevations on the plan. The lines in this area of the plan sheet run together and are not clear. A detailed study of the flood limits will be required for final road plans and final plats. This flood study will be required to demonstrate that all lots remain accessible during the 100 year storm, as well as demonstrate that the dam and emergency outlet structures for the lake will operate without damage. The study performed in 1989-1990. which was given to the applicant before submission of this plat, indicates only that the lake will serve to meet a l0yr storm detention requirement. The berm next to Cow Branch was built as a result of this study. to separate the lake from 10yr flows only. 5. The copy of deeded covenants submitted as proof of the developer's right to construct improvements on the lake property, and use the lake for sedimentation purposes. has been reviewed by the County Attorney's office. Since it is not the role of the County to determine whether an applicant may exercise a particular right under a document between private parties. we limit our review in these situations to determining whether the applicant has made a prima facie showing that it has the right it claims. and allow the applicant to proceed --subject to final resolution of any disputes between the private parties. There is insufficient information to make the preliminary determination in this case. Therefore. the developer must submit a written response to the following: 1. Is the developer a successor to, or assignee. of the Covenants: or. in the alternative, is the developer a licensee of the declarant or its successor or assignee? 2. Is the lake part of the "Lots, Parcels or Common Properties" referred to in Section 5.01 of the Covenants which are subject to the easement (the Common Properties are those identified in Section 4.01 of the Covenants)? 3. Is the developer's purpose for exercising the easement rights one of those listed in Section 5.01 of the Covenants? If it is determined that the developer has made a prima facie showing, the Willow Lake HOA will be advised, so that it may take measures to protect rights it believes it has with respect to the lake. Critical Slope Waiver Request: The request for a waiver to develop on areas of critical slopes received with the preliminary plat has also been reviewed. A critical slope waiver was granted with Planning Commission approval for the site plan approved in 1990. This plan and request does not substantially differ from that previous one. however6he disturbance has been extended slightly to the Bout? What does differ significantly is the surrounding property, in that there are now adjacent residences. and the lake does not belong to the developer. The areas of critical slopes are shown as shaded areas on the preliminary plat. Field measurements indicate slopes of 30%-42% behind the existing homes on Willow Lake Drive. Of the total 6.52 acres on the property. all of it is critical slopes. except for approximately 0.9 acres of flat area below the Willow Lake Drive slope on the northeast side of the property. This £pears to be a flat area Beaded out long ago for building pads. with some erosion control measures which are still in place) The applicant's justification, which is attached for reference. states only that design will minimize land disturbance. and provide a drainage system and erosion control plan. Below. each of the considerations from section 4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance is addressed: "movement of soil and rock" There is inadequate grading information and detail provided to make a proper assessment. de applicant is showing that the 2:1 slopes along Willow Lake Drive will remain, and 2:1 slopes will be cut into the hill behind the existing lots on Willow Lake Drive. This proposed grading does not look possible, as there are substantial rock outcroppings on the upper side of this hill. It should be noted that in similar situations where units are built into hillsides. building pads are carved out of the hill. with retaining walls in the back. Alternatively, basement retaining walls are used on the units, with fill placed between the units. The proposed density and this expected manner of grading behind and around the units makes the provisions for drainage problematic. In either case, the uniformly graded slopes shown on the preliminary plat do not • reflect the post-development conditions. "excessive stormwater runoff' There is inadequate grading information and detail provided to make a proper assessment. The proposed density and expected manner of grading behind and around the units (as discussed above) makes the provisions for drainage problematic. This has been a problem in similar situations with steep hillsides in back of units. The exposure of rock. and the spring on the hillside will increase drainage concerns. "siltation of...bodies of water" There is inadequate information to demonstrate that stable slopes and drainage above the lake can be reasonably designed and constructed. Because this development is on the edge of the lake. and into it, the siltation of Willow Lake during construction is unavoidable. The applicant realizes this, and has proposed to lower the water level of the lake and use it to collect sediment during,the construction period. For this reason it is essential that proper easements or permission be obtained from the owners of the lake (see comment 5 above). "loss of aesthetic resource" The slopes to the northeast are road embankments, with badly eroded pulleys and various trash and construction debris strewn about. There is thick underbrush and some small trees. To the southwest, behind the existing lots on Willow Lake Drive, larger trees and a more natural forested hillside remains. There is a well maintained nature walk around the lake which takes advantage of the natural area. Both the walk on this side of the lake, and the forested area will be lost. "greater travel distance of septic effluent" This site is services by public sewer, and septic effluent will not be a concern. Based on the review present above,the Engineering Department requires that grading plans be provided at a scale and level of detail equivalent to those required with a preliminary site plan (Sub. Ord. 14-304. 14-308.B). In addition. a final grading plan should be submitted with the road plans. Final Plat and Plan Conditions: Final plats will be subject to Albemarle County Engineering review of all relevant final plat requirements and the following conditions: a. Engineering Department approval of a revised erosion control plan. b. Engineering Department approval of stormwater management BMP plans. and stream buffer mitigation plans if required. This will include receipt of a completed facilities maintenance agreement. and a completed stormwater management plan application and fee. c. Engineering Department receipt of proof of compliance with State and Federal agencies regulating activities within jurisdictional streams and wetlands. d. Engineering Department approval of a flood limits study for Cow Branch and Willow Lake. e. VDOT approval of right-of-way improvements. f. Engineering Department approval of road plans and drainage computations. This must include final grading_ plans with building footprints. at a scale and level of detail equivalent to a final site plan. Q. Roads built or bonded in accordance with the approved road and grading plans. VDOT Review: The VDOT comments are attached. The route number and sight easement must be shown on the preliminary plat. The striping for a left turn lane on Willow Lake Drive is supported by the Engineering Department. Please contact me if you have questions or require additional information. attachment (VDOT comments) Copy: SUB-98-276 File:willow l.doc Bill Fritz From: Susan Byrd islowrybyrd@msn.com] Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 10:50 AM To: Bill Fritz Subject: Willowlake Dear Mr. Friz, I'm a friend of Willowlake and have gotten an historic property "West Cote" in Howardsville on the National Historic Registry. I obtained an historic easement because I believed in protecting the James and Rockvfish River, on which my property fronted. Willowlake also needs that same protection. It was originally created as a fishing lake in 1938 and now has over a hundred residents in homes and townshouses around it, who want to prevent an additional run off from going into the lake. I ask two questions in regard to the property around willowlake now owned by B.D. Who is B.D.? Yes I know Jim Bonner and Janet Matthews, but what does the D stand for? Why the mystery? Where's the clarity? Also Mr. Fritz, I ask the question where's the plan? There's no plan for a retention pond or acknowledgemnt of an easement allowing residents to improve and use the lake as they have for the last 15 years. So why are we having this meeting? Sincerely, Susan Byrd 1 Sharon Taylor From: rachael Reynolds [rachaelreynolds©hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 9:48 PM To: Planning Commission Subject: Willow Lake houses To whom it may concern, I will not be able to attend the meeting tomorrow night about the houses proposed for Willow Lake by Janet Mathews and Jim Bonner, but I wanted to convey my support. I live further south on rt. 20, and I would MUCH rather see more development happen in Willow Lake than see it scattered about the countryside. It seems like a really smart place to put growth. I have taken a look at the plans and it seems like the land will be developed in an extremely responsible way. I also know that Janet Mathews values the environment and open space, and her home is right next to the area in question, so she has a strong interest in keeping the area nice. Thank you, Rachael Reynolds 1 Bill Fritz From: Brooke Zoller[brookezz©hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 7:37 PM To: Bill Fritz Subject: Willow Lake Planning Commission Dear Mr. Fritz, I am a home owner in the Willow Lake subdivision and would like to express a few of my concerns regarding the critical slope waiver. I really want to fight the waiver. However, because there is no telling what can happen, I wanted to make a few of my own suggestions. If the waiver is to be granted, I believe BD LLC must agree in writing that they will join the HOA prior to the sale of land. This needs to be legally binding contract completed ASAP. In fact, this land was at once part of our HOA. I am happy BD LLC has changed their proposal to all single family homes, but believe there should be less homes built. Each new home should be built on the same amount of acreage consistent to what the current homes stand on. This is in keeping with the neighborhood. I also am concerned about our access to the lake. If I am correct, the legal passage is through a lot BD LLC owns. I believe the current access can be grand-fathered in due to use over the past 20 years. This would make two lots that BD LLC has up for sale that is technically part of Willow Lake. I may be incorrect here, but, how can land and a critical slope waiver be granted on property that is part of Willow Lake? Please feel free to let me know if I am incorrect on any accounts. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Brooke Zoller 1225 Maple View Dr. C'ville VA 22902 1 TO: The Albemarle Planning Commission RE: Sub201000156 Willow Lake, on agenda for April 5, 2011 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: We are residents of Willow Lake Subdivision and owner of 1210 Maple View Drive. We are concerned that you have placed on your April 5 agenda consideration of a "request for preliminary plat approval for the creation of ten single family lots, and one common space lot on 7.42 acres [together with...] a request to modify Section 4.2.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow activity on critical slopes." it appears that that the request is what is more commonly and openly described as a request for approval of a critical slope waiver and preliminary approval of a subdivision plat and development on that critical slope. It is our understanding and concern that if you act to waive or"modify"these critical slope considerations, there will be an implied"preliminary"approval of the accompanying plan for subdivision and development, and further,once there is a"preliminary plat approval,"the need for true, considered subdivision approval will be obviated as you will have placed the County Supervisors and Staff on a path of no-return,i.e.,having granted "preliminary approval" the only permissible next step would be "final" approval as no one would dare to retract steps which might require the Commission or Supervisors to re-evaluate the wisdom of one of its decisions. For these and other reasons we urge you to table consideration of the captioned request and application now on Agenda. We would remind you that at the January 25 meeting you voted 7-0 to defer action on development, subdivision and waiver plans for this area by sending out an Action Letter directing the applicant to try to work out issues with community. One would think you should not be acting until you received reports from both the applicant and the community evidencing good-faith attempts to address both critical slope and subdivision issues. It does not appear that this has occurred. It is true that the applicant has revised the proposed plan of subdivision.Yet the underlying issue of critical slope development has not been addressed. There remains unanswered the suggestion that proposed development is likely to impact underlying bedrock, which in turn may adversely affect existing roads, drives and infrastructure in Willow Lake Subdivision, thereby causing the Willow Lake residents and Property Owners Association to incur substantial costs -- all due to some one else's thoughtless and selfish actions. Where are the engineering and other professional and scientifically supported reports that would support the wisdom of waiver or enable a responsible projection of costs and liability? The problem is compounded by the presence of a lake at the bottom of the slope. It will be affected by any waiver and by development. Yet the lake is owned by the Willow Lake Property Owners Association,and it is this POA,not the Applicant,that is currently saddled with costs of maintenance and who,under all plans contemplated or proffered by Applicant, will bear full responsibility into the foreseeable future for financially,fiscally and physically maintaining and shoring up what is essentially a non-recreational body of water. Are the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors willing to waive the Willow Lake Property Owners Association's responsibility for the lake and any additional maintenance costs incurred as a result of a critical slope waiver and the planned development? Can you? Would the County like to assume ownership and full responsibility for the lake? 1 The Applicant could absorb or responsibly plan for these costs. But have they? No. They are proposing a development right in the middle of our existing Willow Lake Subdivision—yet they do not wish to be a part of the existing Property Owners Association. Only after pressure from the County have they agreed even to form a POA. They say their individual owners would become members of the existing POA but not until after all lots had been fully developed,sold,and occupied. That could be 10,20 years from now—or maybe never! The land they propose to carve out and develop was supposedly part of Willow Lake subdivision, the remainder of which has been subdivided, developed and occupied by tax-paying and voting residents for 20 years. Lots comprising the Applicant's land have been undeveloped and unoccupied for over 20 years -- one or more of the lots could remain undeveloped and unoccupied for another 20 years, in which case the existing residents and the Willow Lake Property Owners Association would be saddled totally and unfairly with all the costs of liability and maintenance of the lake on which Applicant's buildings sit, and also with all of the costs of problems flowing from the waiver you are being asked to grant. We and other Willow Lake residents and members of the Willow Lake Property Owners Association believed,with support from County documents,that we lived in and were surrounded by a fully integrated community of condominiums, townhomes, and detached single family homes. In the last year we have discovered this is not true. There is a donut hole in our midst which is about to become a black hole that will swallow our views,our lake, our natural resources and habitats,the cohesiveness of our development, and very possibly our pocketbooks. We beg you to act responsibly by making the process more equitable now and in the long run. • Defer all action on Applicant's request until the County or Applicant can produce professionally rendered written reports on the feasibility, practicality, and wisdom of developing the land designated as a"critical slope." • Acknowledge the historical intent behind the development of Willow Lake and the reasonable reliance and expectation of those who have purchased in Willow Lake. • Allow the Applicant the right to develop one or more lots, but • Make the Applicant responsible and liable for his planning and development costs,and • Make the issuance of any Occupancy Certificate or similar such documentation contingent upon fully paid membership in the Willow Lake Property Owners Association. Our hillside already has a subdivision and a responsible property owners association. We do not need the disruptions of a second POA suddenly emerging in our midst. It would be a sure prescription for constant dispute. W tha y fo,your_considerations. ep E. illar and)arc D.Millard .1210 Maple View Drive Charlottesville,VA 22902 April 1,2011 2 APR _ 12011 Ti) R.C NI DEVELOPMEN MAI C/l rriv Ar P IA!f -rz £/&c. SvinM AKy Aft OJ17-e fA►c Peg—Mix/MI6 Tb px.. ActIvoil r RIPR/L S; o a 1, Pm L 7 l SC'USSI oN — C L/x/t- ;2) " M 5 FOIZM IL I?ccPeNr( if I 01 LL - hl I -7D 0resi '/avt( Hit 2- Sileffi r 3 EW L OS OLer M YWWo 1770.4 l-51 Irrail r 1 kilo 7 /n — L__ ___%___ 6/4-u6 ov- JAc M D CTv Foc L o Rio flP21457g, Helping OUR. Heroes IMPORTANT HEARING C__ _'ERNING PROPOSED 2. The loss of -. .ietic resource"will be dramatic and extreme. DEVELOPMENT OF LAKEFRONT LOTS Many prohibitive practical issues exist as well. ON WILLOW LAKE DRIVE a) The development plan indicates inadequate access to the lake for Willow Lake residents—or for service vehicles to drive down A hearing to determine whether a critical slope waiver should and maintain it,as the County mandates.(The deeded easement is be issued to allow development of lakefront housing will be on a steep culvert to the far right[BD,LLC proposes to place a held .00 n m in the house there];the entrance current y and traditionally used by auditorium of the Albemarle County Office Buildm (corner residents would also be blocked by houses [BD,LLC proposes of c n re Rd.and Preston Ave.,downtown).It is critical that residents walk between two of the Iots for lake access.The that numerous Willow Lake residents and owners attend to plan offers no provision for lake maintenance vehicles]. voice their opinions on this matter. b) Residents on the first row of townhouses will have their view of the lake blocked and may suffer foundation damage if blasting Background takes place to break up large rocks.The project will also despoil At the September 15th quarterly meeting of the Willow Lake this signature resource for the rest of the subdivision and will HOA,homeowner Janet Matth- s announced that she and likely lower home values.(Even though the information was another partner(i.e., :D,LLC) ad closed on the purchase of four erroneous,many homeowners were under the impression that the parcels fronting the lake on WL Drive and adjoining her property, land could not be built on because of the critical slope.) and that their intentioa.was to sell them to developers.All of these c) A large number of blind driveways abutting this segment of unimproved parcels except one are not subject to Willow Lake WL Drive could pose a danger and a traffic hazard because of the HOA stric tares,including design. _ already large number of existing cars and service vehicles entering and exiting the subdivision.The plan stipulates 3 duplex BD,LLC is proposing to sell the lots to single or multiple and 6 single-family driveways.In addition,traffic is already a developers/investors to create mgle-family houses and du le problem at the stop sign on Rt.20 during peahours,as is the 45 on nine lots,four units per acre(see iagram o the preliminary mph speed limit. subdivision plan on reverse). d) Although their property will abut it,residents of the new houses wou use the lake;however,preventing Critical Slope them or eir associates from doing so is daunting.Cleanup of The most pressing issue atis juncture is that of"critical slope," unlawful misuse has been a problem in the past and would likely defined by Virginia state guidelines as follows: be even more so.Liability is also an issue(e.g.,toddlers falling "Critical slopes are included under natural resources into the lake). because they require protection in order to maintain the e) The natural habitats of birds(e.g.,blue heron)and animals existing balance between slope,soils,geology,and (e.g.,beavers)are likely to be disturbed or destroyed. vegetation.Critical slopes are defined as areas with a slope of percent or greater.Clearing,grading,building, Actions to Take cropping,and overgrazing of these lands can result in Large numbers of residents and owners weighing in are vitally extensive erosion and landslides or sloughing of soil and important.If you absolutely cannot make the hearing in rock;excessive storm water runoff,increased siltation and person.,please e-mail or call one of the individuals below: sedimentation; [and] loss of aesthetic resource.... SCOTTSVILLE DISTRICT:Jnda Porterfield.Keswick,VA •Adapt d o_pmen o he opog Thy and natural setting 434-979-0215(h) /porterfieldla@aol.com of the County rather than modifying the topography and WHITE HALL DISTRICT: homas Loac rozet,VA natural setting to accommodate development.Excessive 434-823-6254(h/w))/tloach@albemarle.org grading,cutting,and filling should be discouraged while Please let them know any concerns about how a waiver and imaginative and sensitive design should be encouraged. ensuing development would affect Willow Lake. If you believe that •As land slope increases,the rate of stormwater runoff this project adversely affects our environment, quality of life. and increases.Discourage applications of fertilizers,pesticides, property values, the time to act is now! herbicides and other chemicals in areas of steep slope where they may be ineffective and can increase Please cc one of the concerned resident owners below on any e- probabilities of surface and groundwater pollution." mails(or please advise that you called)so we'll know how many voices were heard besides those who attend the meeting.Also let Those familiar with the topography of the area in question will us know a)if you are planning to attend and b)if you would like note the following major factors indicating that the waiver should to carpool. be denied. As previous]announced in a recent mailing from CMC,the 1. rosion and nmo a already a problem,especially on the annual meeting of the WL HOA is on Wednesday,January 19 at 6 extre e y steep slope on the right side facing the Lake from pm at their new offices on 198-05 Spotnap Road(turn left in front Willow Lake Drive.Even rjp�ran created to deal with this issue of the old office and keep bearing to the left).Please be sure to has proven less than effective.Construction and fill-in operations give your proxy to another homeowner if you cannot attend. would inevitably damage the lake,as would runoff from fertilizer Sincerely, etc.from the new houses adjacent to and uphill from it(ergo, Janet Mullaney more fertilizer going into the Chesapeake Bay).It is unknown janet.mullaney@,gmail.com/984-2144/1243 Maple View Drive whether the proposed development meets with Department of Charlotte and David Hisey nvironmental Quality guidelines. cshisey@hotmail.com/293-4242/445 Maple View Drive Fe ruary 9,2011 Dear Fellow Willow Lake Property Owner, Please give this important notice and special request your time and attention. The Board of Willow Lake Property Owners'Association(also known as Willow Lake Homeowners' Association)is requesting your attendance and participation in the Willow Lake Property Owners'Association on Wednesday,February 23,2011 from 6:00-8:00 P at the Offices of Condominium Management of Charlottesville,198-05 Spotnap Road, Charlottesville. his Special Meetings being called pursuant to the January 25,2011 meeting of the Albemarle County Planning Commission at which the Commission recommended that the Willow Lake Property Owner's Association Board/Members meet with the principals and/or agents of BD Land Properties,LLC(Owners of Tax Map Parcel Numbers 77E1-01-00-01700,77E1-00-000B0,77E1- 00-00000,and 77E1-02-00-000A0)as quickly as possible. T ' was recommended and is being called to bring the respective parties together Q develop a tenable compromis on issues and conflicts raised by Willow Lake property owners, ide fi�Tiedby Albemarle County Planning and Zoning Staff and enumerated by Planning Commission members arising from the planned development of the aforementioned parcels of land. These parcels are located within the physical boundaries of the Willow Lake Subdivision,contiguous to Willow Lake and on s ciently sloping land to warrant concern about erosion,sedimentation and run-off into Willow Lake and the watershed and to trigger the protection afforded by the Albemarle County Critical Slope Zoning Ordinance on nine of the 10 sub-divided lots-slated for development. The smallest of the four parcels falls within the strictures of the Willow Lake Property Owners' Association. The other three parcels are not subject to Willow Lake POA guidelines. On January 25,2011,the Albemarle County Planning Commission met and considered a request submitted to them by BD Land Properties,LLC,to grant a waiver of Albemarle County's Critical Slope zoning/subdivision ordinances on the aforementioned parcels of land. These parcels are located on the eastern and southern boundaries of Willow Lake Drive,along the entrance corridor to the Willow Lake subdivision and adjacent or slope to Willow Lake and the Willow Lake impoundment. For those property owners not in attendance at this public meeting or who otherwise may be unfamiliar with this request and the proposed development of said parcels of land,detailed information on the request for a Critical Slope Waiver and Preliminary(Development) Site Plan can be reviewed at and/or obtained from the Albemarle County Community Development Department/Current Planning Office at 401 McIntire Road,North Wing,Charlottesville. To request an appointment,call 434-296-5832-and request to s with Ms.Summer Frederick.Senior Planner(ext.3565) at sfrederick@albemarle.org or .Bill Fritz.Chief of CurrsnLDevelopnied (ext.3242)or by email at bfritz@albemarle.org. Refer to project#/Name: SUB2010-0156 Willow Lake View-Critical Slopes Waiver. For an erview'of the meeting agenda and Critical Slope Waiver application,visit the Albemarle County Web site,click Online Services/Agendas/Planning Commission/2011 Agendas/January 25, 2011 A enda. iillow Lake Special Meeting Notice February 9,2011 Concerns raised by Albemarle County Planning Staff,Planning Commission members and Willow Lake property owners at this Public Meeting and in response to this request for a Critical Slope Waiver and the Preliminary(Development) Site Plan include(but are not limited to)the following: • f theJ.6esidentiaLlaplanned for single-family attached and single-family detached units,n,__e_cantain critical slopes with three having critical slopes over the maiori of the lot,with critical slopes covering approxi , 0 percent of the site; • Critical slopes make the development of conforming building sites and access to areas outside of critical slopes"impossible"without causing disturbance to critical slopes on nine of the proposed lots; • While erosion and sediment control measures would be required with any building permit issued for the development of the proposed lots,there is concern that such development would introduce additional runoff and siltation to the nearby lake,located on an immediately adjacent parcel directly below the critical slopes. The lake is on a parcel owned and maintained by the Willow Lake Homeowners'Association. E_Dfprcement could be n 'ci m P��irP porent�?lh A giencive and frequent legal action by the_W llow-Lake POA. �µ yf or'c • The applicant does not purport to be the developer of the lots and any plans proposed are v0' 0 no indin on future owners/developers and are preliminary; per , � • Three of the four parcels (7.15 of 7.42 acres) are not constrained by Willow Lake POA �cc°'a�1F strictures. Concerns exist that future residential development will not be required to be v) consistent with the appearance of other subdivision homes and landscaping and could block the scenic views enjoyed and valued by current property owners; • The parcels are located along the entrance corridor to the Willow Lake Subdivision and future development can be expected to have an impact on Willow Lake property values; • Owners and rentemof homes constructed on three of the four Willow Lake View parcels- will not have legal access to the lake and.enfnrc pessilale-to maintain; • Willow Lake and the Willow Lake impoundment remain the responsibility of Willow Lake POA; • Convenient pedestrian access to Willow Lake by Willow Lake Property Owners and by Willow Lake contractors for berm and lake maintenance are at issue; • Future development on these parcels is allowed by Albemarle County Land Use regulations. The land is zoned R-4 Residential and within the County Comprehensive Plan,its land use/density is defined as"Neighborhood Density in Urban Area 4. Please plan to attend this meeting. We respectfully invite all Willow Lake Property Owners and Renters,including the principals of BD Land Properties,LLC to attend. It is our sincere desire to develop a solution we can present to the Planning Commissior4nd to future developerof these parcels that fairly addresses these concerns and respects all property owners'rights. Yours sincerely, Cathy Link,President Janet Mullaney,Secretary Beth Williams,Treasurer Kim Olsen, Director let if,{.ife FEp Neal Plumb, Director ANI6sin atd ';qrt- a 6ti:14 3?, . .,A)A;'Ar Page 2 of 2 Received APR 0' 201 County of Albemarle Board of Supervisor's Office March 30,2011 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road 4th Floor Charlottesville,VA 22902 Re: Sub 2010-156 Willow Lake View Appeal from WPO decision by County Engineer/Planning Commission Staff Dear Supervisors: Pursuant to Section 17-210 of the Water Protection Ordinance ("WPO"), I am appealing the March 4, 2011 decision of the County Engineer, Mr. Glenn Brooks, to deny our request to designate the body of water known as Willow Lake as part of the perennial stream and the contiguous nontidal wetlands of Cow Branch, and to afford the stream and lake the protections of the WPO. We are also appealing the determination of the Planning Commission Staff as stated in the March 30,2011 Executive Summary that"the lake is not subject to the buffers of the Water Protection Ordinance (WPO)." Copies of these documents are attached for your reference. I am an adjoining property owner of the land parcel(s) identified above and have standing to bring this appeal. This appeal is timely as it is brought within the required thirty (30) days of the decisions of the Planning Commission and its authorized staff and employees. We would appreciate your advice as to when this matter will be scheduled for a hearing. Respectfully, Christian Ramsburg-Parcel 077E1-01-0Q-00400 441 Maple View CT Charlottesville,VA 22902 March 30,2011 Received Albemarle County Board of Supervisors APR 01 2011 401 McIntire Road 4th Floor Charlottesville,VA 22902 County of Albemarle C,o rd of Supervisor's Office Re: Sub 2010-156 Willow Lake View Appeal from WPO decision by County Engineer/Planning Commission Staff Dear Supervisors: With all due respect, Yes, we know that we are in a "growth area", yes we know it has been zoned for building for over twenty years,which is part of the problem. But neither of these are strong enough reasons to grant a critical slope waiver on a hill side going directly down to a lake that does not belong to the developers. The existing community should have some rights, but so far it does not look as though we do. There are many of us in the Willow Lake area who are strongly opposed to the development of Willow Lake View, which will be built on a critical slope right next to our lake. The lake is our lake not their lake and yet their silt will end up in our lake no matter how good the erosion control is planned,according to Bill Fritz,county engineer. Pursuant to Section 17-210 of the Water Protection Ordinance ("WPO"), we are appealing the March 4, 2011 decision of the County Engineer, Mr. Glenn Brooks, to deny our request to designate the body of water known as Willow Lake as part of the stream buffer afforded, Cow Branch Creek, and the protections of the WPO. We are also appealing the determination of the Planning Commission Staff as stated in the March 30, 2011 Executive Summary that"the lake is not subject to the buffers of the Water Protection Ordinance (WPO)." As Willow Lake drains into Cow Branch Creek it has a hydrologic connection with the creek, there by affecting the water shed of Chesapeake Bay, but more importantly Moore's Creek and the Rivanna which are known for their filth and how badly they need to be cleaned up. We are adjoining property owners of the land parcel(s) identified above and have standing to bring this appeal. This appeal is timely as it is brought within the required thirty (30) days of the decisions of the Planning Commission and its authorized staff and employees. We would appreciate your advice as to when this matter will be scheduled for a hearing. Respectfully, Charlotte and David Hisey 445 Maple View Court Charlottesville,Virginia 22902 ce/ Received APR 01 2011 County of Albemarle i:oard of Supervisor's Off,r:e March 30,2011 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road 4th Floor Charlottesville,VA 22902 Re: Sub 2010-156 Willow Lake View Appeal from WPO decision by County Engineer/Planning Commission Staff Dear Supervisors: Pursuant to Section 17-210 of the Water Protection Ordinance ("WPO"), we are appealing the March 4, 2011 decision of the County Engineer, Mr. Glenn Brooks, to deny our request to designate the body of water known as Willow Lake as part of the perennial stream and the contiguous nontidal wetlands of Cow Branch, and to afford the stream and lake the protections of the WPO. We are also appealing the determination of the Planning Commission Staff as stated in the March 30,2011 Executive Summary that"the lake is not subject to the buffers of the Water Protection Ordinance (WPO)." Copies of these documents are attached for your reference. We are adjoining property owners of the land parcel(s) identified above and have standing to bring this appeal. This appeal is timely as it is brought within the required thirty (30) days of the decisions of the Planning Commission and its authorized staff and employees. We would appreciate your advice as to when this matter will be scheduled for a hearing. Respectfully, 0 LAA, Janet P. M aney Secretary,Willow Lake Property Owners Association Board of Directors 1243 Maple View Dr Charlottesville,VA 22902 • Received Richard G. Piccolo 439 Maple View Court C 1 2011 Charlottesville VA 22902 Resident- County of Albemarle County of Albemarle Board of Supervisor's Office March 31,2011 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road 4th Floor Charlottesville,VA 22902 Re: Sub 2010-156 Willow Lake View Appeal from WPO decision by County Engineer/Planning Commission Staff Dear Supervisors: Pursuant to Section 17-210 of the Water Protection Ordinance ("WPO"), we are appealing the March 4, 2011 decision of the County Engineer, Mr. Glenn Brooks, to deny our request to designate the body of water known as Willow Lake as part of the perennial stream and the contiguous nontidal wetlands of Cow Branch, and to afford the stream and lake the protections of the WPO. We are also appealing the determination of the Planning Commission Staff as stated in the March 30,2011 Executive Summary that"the lake is not subject to the buffers of the Water Protection Ordinance (WPO)." Copies of these documents are attached for your reference. I am an adjoining property owner of the parcel(s) identified above and have standing to bring this appeal. This appeal is brought within the required thirty (30) days of the decisions of the Planning Commission and its authorized staff and employees. I will appreciate your advice as to when this matter will be scheduled for a hearing. Respectfully, <---- (..ti6A. CAkb • Ri and G.Piccolo o eived APR 01 2011 county of Albemarle Board of Supervisor's Office April 1,2011 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road 4th Floor Charlottesville,VA 22902 Re: Sub 2010-156 Willow Lake View Appeal from WPO decision by County Engineer/Planning Commission Staff Dear Supervisors: Pursuant to Section 17-210 of the Water Protection Ordinance ("WPO"), I wish to appeal the March 4, 2011 decision of the County Engineer, Mr. Glenn Brooks, to deny our request to designate the body of water known as Willow Lake as part of the perennial stream and the contiguous nontidal wetlands of Cow Branch, and to afford the stream and lake the protections of the WPO. We are also appealing the determination of the Planning Commission Staff as stated in the March 30,2011 Executive Summary that"the lake is not subject to the buffers of the Water Protection Ordinance (WPO)." Copies of these documents have previously been submitted by some of my neighbors who are already parties to this appeal. I understand that this matter has been scheduled for a hearing on May 11,2011. Respectfully, i J Sinclair 1249 Maple View Drive Charlottesville,VA 22902 t S t....4c! 4.41- ed lee t A- via; �: { l 3 01 111 1 MAR 6 U 2011 Sex- ra7, Countyo� c narle . 30.4 . of Supel .. ;r Office T.-. ig."6--() 7/v7f--Q/A- March 30,2011 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road 4th Floor Charlottesville,VA 22902 Re: Sub 2010-156 Willow Lake View Appeal from WPO decision by County Engineer/Planning Commission Staff Dear Supervisors: Pursuant to Section 17-210 of the Water Protection Ordinance ("WPO"), we are appealing the March 4, 2011 decision of the County Engineer, Mr. Glenn Brooks, to deny our request to designate the body of water known as Willow Lake as part of the perennial stream and the contiguous nontidal wetlands of Cow Branch, and to afford the stream and lake the protections of the WPO. We are also appealing the determination of the Planning Commission Staff as stated in the March 30,2011 Executive Summary that"the lake is not subject to the buffers of the Water Protection Ordinance (WPO)." Copies of these documents are attached for your reference. We are adjoining property owners of the land parcel(s) identified above and have standing to bring this appeal. This appeal is timely as it is brought within the required thirty (30) days of the decisions of the Planning Commission and its authorized staff and employees. We would appreciate your advice as to when this matter will be scheduled for a hearing. Respectfully, Robert B.'6oss and Carolyn M.Patterson The Inn at Monticello 1188 Scottsville Road Charlottesville,VA 22902 f.: Route 20 South. 1188 Scottsville Road•Charlottesville,Virginia 22902 a 434 979-3593•www.innatmunticello.com Bill Fritz From: Inn at Monticello [stay@innatmonticello.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 9:45 PM To: Bill Fritz Subject: Appeal of WPO decision to Board of Supervisors Attachments: 20110330 Date-stamped Notice of Appeal to Supervisors.pdf Mr. Fritz: Today we filed an appeal to the Board of Supervisors of the decision by County Engineer Glenn Brooks and the Planning Commission Staff,that "the lake is not subject to the buffers of the Water Protection Ordinance." We are attaching a date-stamped copy of the appeal for your reference. We anticipate that a number of our neighbors in the Willow Lake development will be joining in the appeal. The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors has given us a hearing date of May 11, 2011 for this appeal. We will submit written materials in support of our appeal by April 25th, as indicated by the Clerk. In view of this action, we respectfully request a postponement of the Planning Commission hearing on the critical slope waiver that is currently scheduled for the evening of Tuesday, April 5, 2011. We believe that a postponement, until after the Supervisors' ruling, will save time and money and will avoid the possibility of conflicting and/or confusing results. Please advise us as soon as possible of the decision on our request. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Robert B. Goss and Carolyn M. Patterson Owners and Innkeepers The Inn at Monticello Highway 20 South 1188 Scottsville Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Toll Free: 1-877-735-2982 stay@innatmonticello.com www.innatmonticello.com 1 From: Janet Matthews fmailto:bdlandDropertiesllc@gmail.coml Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 10:35 PM To: Carol McCauley Subject: Re: March 16 POA meeting Dear Carol, • I am sorry for the delay in sending this, I got back later than I anticipated from Washington and had quite a bit of work to do today. I wanted to update you in writing about the items we talked about last evening at the POA meeting. As you know our desire has been to work closely with Willow Lake POA and, in doing so, arrive at a solution that addresses all our concerns. I believe we have reached that point based on the feedback we received last night. Here, in brief outline form, are the changes we have made and the concessions we have granted: 1) We have reduced the curb cuts to three along Willow Lake Drive by combining parking areas and putting in one driveway at the existing curb cut that will serve two dwellings 2) We have eliminated the duplexes, all lots are now single family homes 3) We have kept the grading to a minimum, the distance from the lake is 100' 4) We have adjusted our lot lines to provide a legal 15' wide easement for pedestrian and equipment access to Willow Lake. In order to create that easement the members of the Willow Lake POA would need to vacate the present legal easement and accept the new one. 5) We have created an HOA with Covenenants and Restrictions that will serve as an interim until construction is complete, then the new homes will join the existing Willow Lake HOA. 6)We have invited a member of your Board to sit on the Architectural Review Committee of the Willow Lake View HOA. We have spent months listening to our neighbors and believe these changes are in keeping with the issues raised. Recognizing, before it was even stated by several property owners last night, some people's preference would be to have no building take place, we have done everything we can to make this an appropriate, environmentally sensitive, attractive addition to our neighborhood. Please feel free to contact me with any questions, comments or concerns. Kind regards, Janet Matthews kJ . I M /4, asarintteVaie, TA November 2,2010 Dear As a resident homeowner and member of the Willow Lake Homeowner's Association,I was surprised recently to see a For Sale sign right next to my home at 1425 Willow Lake Drive.As it turns out,(4)parcels of land were being offered for sale,lwrapping around the back of my property,and continuing behind your home,as well,extending to the lake).This tract of land is zoned for 27 townhornes to be built,which I found to be profoundly disturbing.Consequently,with the help of my partner I was able to purchase this property myself,and am in the process of planning a program for this property that is environmentally conscious and can be much less invasive of our privacy,and which would like to think could include doubling the sire of the lots along this street.In fact,I am writing you today to inform you of the current situation and to ask if you would consider the opportunity to increase the size of your existing lot,extending to the lake, so that you might open up the beautiful view of lake and mountains just behind your home.I will shortly expose a bit of that view from my own back deck and welcome you to come see what a dramatic difference it could make to your own property.If we all work together on this,I think we can greatly enhance the value of our properties and prevent a wall of new construction in our back yards. Please feel free to contact me at your convenience at to discuss the possibilities. Yours truly, /A DRAFT 2/22/2.011 Tax-Map Parcels: 77E1-01-00-01700, 77E1-01-00-000B0, 77E1-01-00-0000O3 77E1-02-00-000A0 WILLOW LAKE VIEW SUBDIVISION DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS AND CONDITIONS This DECLARATION is made this 22nd day of February, 2011, by BD Land Properties LLC (the "Declarants"). WITNESSETH: FACTUAL BACKGROUND. The Declarants are the owners of certain real estate situated in Albemarle County, Virginia, and desire to subject the properties shown on a subdivision plat of Brian P. Smith, Civil Engineer, Inc., dated November 11, 2010 attached hereto (hereinafter referred to as the "Plat"and "Properties") to the covenants, restrictions, conditions, and reservation hereinafter set forth, all of which are for the purpose of enhancing and protecting the value, desirability and attractiveness of said property. ARTICLE 1. DEFINITIONS The following words when used herein shall have the following meanings: Section 1.01 "Declaration" shall mean the covenants, restrictions, conditions, reservations and all other provisions herein set forth in this entire document, as same may from time to time be amended. Section 1.02 "Declarants" shall mean and refer to BD Land Properties LLC and their assigns,together with any successor to all and any portion of the Properties. Section 1.03 "Properties" shall mean and refer to the property shown and described on the Plat described in Factual Background above. Section 1.04 "Lot" shall mean and refer to any one of the plots of land designated as Lot on said Plat, and any subdivision thereof. Section 1.05 "Owner" shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one or more persons or entities, of the fee simple title to any Lot, including contract sellers, but excluding those having such interest merely as security for the performances of an obligation. 1 DRAFT 2/22/2011 Section 1.06 "Common Property" shall refer to all real property designated as "open space"on plat attached hereto, owned and administered for the common use and enjoyment of the owners and residents of willow Lake View. Section 1.07 "Architectural Control Board" shall mean and refer to the board established in Article II below for the purpose of controlling and regulating the development and the external design, appearance and use of the Lots and the structures and other improvements thereon. ARTICLE II. ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL BOARD Section 2.01 "Purpose" The Architectural Control Board, (hereinafter referred to as "ACB"), shall control and regulate the development and the external design appearance and use of the Lots and the structures and other improvements thereon. Section 2.02 "Formation of Architectural Control Board" So long as Declarants own any of the Lots shown on the Plat, the ACB shall contain three(3) members chosen by Declarants. The members will serve at the pleasure of Declarants and may be removed and replaced as Declarants desire. When Declarants no longer own any of the Lots shown on the Plat,the ACB shall be chosen by majority vote of the Owners. Section 2.03 "Architectural Review" No building, wall, or other structures, temporary or permanent, shall be erected, altered, added to, or placed on any Lot until the proposed plans and specifications for such building,wall,or other structure, including, but not limited to, final floor plans, building elevations, exterior color and finish plans, site plans and construction time schedule have been approved in writing by the ACB. Every effort shall be made by the Owner and his representatives to affect a safe,clean and expedient construction period. Once construction has commenced, the exterior must be completed within one (1) year. Each Owner shall be responsible to the ACB for the actions of his representatives,their employees or subcontractors. Any damage to or disturbances of other Lots or roads shall be repaired promptly at the expense of the Owner. This section is in no way meant to interfere with the Owner's ability to be indemnified by the person or firm causing such damage or disturbance. ARTICLE III. GENERAL USE RESTRICTION Section 3.01 "Permitted Buildings"No buildings other than one (1)permanent single family dwelling and accessory buildings thereto shall be erected per development right placed or permitted to remain on any Lot. The number and character of permissible accessory buildings on any particular Lot shall be determined by the ACB and may differ as between Lots depending on acreage,topography and other factors. Section 3.02 "Property Use" No retail outlet of any nature will be allowed. DRAFT 2/22/2011 Section 3.03 "Boundary Plans" The plans and specifications of all proposed buildings must be submitted and approved by the ACB prior to construction and every building shall be placed on the Property in the position approved by the ACB. Architectural continuity may be a consideration. Section 3.04 "Restriction" No incinerator or other refuse burning device shall be erected or maintained upon the property. Section 3.05 "No Temporary Structures,Mobile Homes, etc." No structure of temporary character, mobile home, trailer, tent, or shack may be erected,placed or permitted to remain on any Lot. The ACB shall determine whether a proposed structure is prohibited by this Section 3.05. No unlicensed or abandoned cars or trucks shall remain on any lot. Section 3.06 "Noxious or Offensive Activities" No nuisance shall be maintained upon the property by any Owner and it shall be left to the sole discretion of the ACB to determine if any nuisance exists after the registering of a signed, written complaint. No noxious or offensive activity shall be permitted within the Property. No unreasonably loud or annoying noises or noxious or offensive odors shall be emitted beyond the lot lines of any Lot. No animal may be kept within the Property in such a manner as to constitute a nuisance. The ACB is given full authority and power to abate any nuisance found to be existing after giving the Owner written notice and after the Owner has failed to act to abate such nuisance within a reasonable period. Section 3.07 "Signs" No sign of any kind, with the exception of a standard real estate"For Sale"sign, shall be displayed in the public view on any Lot without prior written consent of the ACB. Section 3.08 "Pets" No animals, livestock, or poultry of any kind shall be raised, bred or kept on any Lot other than common household pets. All animals must be kept within property lines. It shall be the responsibility of the owner to maintain the Property Lines. It shall be the responsibility of the owner to maintain the Property in such a manner so as not to be offensive. All pets must be on a leash and under the supervision of the Owner of the pet at all times when the pet is outside of the Owner's home or fenced yard. Barking dogs may not be left unattended. Pet droppings are the responsibility of the Owner of the pet, and must be promptly removed and cleaned up, whether in the Common Area or on any Lot. Section 3.11 "Exterior" The exterior of all buildings on the Property shall be wood, wood siding (or a Hardiplank type or equivalent quality material), brick or stone, and there shall be no use as exterior siding for any building on the property of metal, tar paper, asphalt, plywood, chipboard, fiberboard or other manufactured composite wood fiber siding. A good quality vinyl siding or other high quality material may be used if approved by the ACB. DRAFT 2/22/2011 Section 3.12 "Easement Reservation" Declarants reserve the right for the ACB, its successors and assigns, a perpetual, alienable and releasable easement on, over and under the Lots to.erect,maintain and use electric, community antennae television,cable television and telephone poles,wires, cables, conduits, drainage ways, sewers,water mains and other suitable equipment for the conveyance and use of electricity, telephone equipment, gas, sewer, water drainage or other public conveniences or utilities on, in, or over such Lot or Lots. These easements and rights expressly include the right to cut any trees, bushes or shrubbery to perform grading or to take any other similar action reasonably necessary to provide economical and safe utility installation and to maintain reasonable standards of health, safety and appearance. The ACB further reserves the right to locate well, pumping stations, siltation basins and tanks within the Lots and any open space or on any Lot designed for such use and shall be responsible for the maintenance of common property and said open space. Any actions taken under this section shall be solely for the benefit of the lot or Lots in Willow Lake View Subdivision. The ACB will appoint an agent for the purpose of executing any easements or other documents necessary to carry out the intent of this section. The initial agent is BD Land Properties LLC who shall serve until his resignation whether or not he owns a lot. Section 3.13 "Restrictions to Implement Effective Environmental Controls" In order to protect the natural beauty of the vegetation,topography and other natural features of all properties within Willow Lake View and the beauty and purity of the lake area in the adjoining Willow Lake properties the following environmental controls are hereby established: (a) Topographic and vegetation characteristics of properties within Willow Lake View shall not be altered by removal, reduction, cutting, excavation or any other means without the prior written approval of the Declarant. Written approval will be granted hereunder only after a plan designed to protect the lake from pollution resulting from erosion,pesticides or the seepage of fertilizer or other materials has been submitted to and accepted by the Declarant. (b) No trees, shrubs or other vegetation may be removed without the written approval of the Declarant. Approval for the removal of trees located within ten (10) feet of the main dwelling or accessory building or within ten (10)feet of the approved site for such building will be granted unless such removal will substantially decrease the beauty of the property. (c) In order to implement effective and adequate erosion control and protect the purity and beauty of the lake, the Declarant, its successors and assigns, and agents shall have the right to enter upon any property for the purpose of performing any grading or landscaping work of constructing and maintaining erosion prevention devices. Such entries shall, however, be made only after construction of improvements have commenced on such property or the soil thereof has been graded. Provided, however,that prior to exercising its right to enter upon the property for the purpose of performing any grading or landscaping work or constructing or maintaining erosion prevention devices, the Declarant, its successors and assigns, shall give the owner of the property the opportunity to take any corrective action required by giving the owner of DRAFT 2/22/2011 the property notice indicating what type or corrective action is required and specifying in that notice that immediate corrective action must be taken by the Owner. If the Owner of the property fails to take the specified corrective action immediately, the Declarant shall then exercise its right to enter upon the property in order to take the necessary corrective action. The cost of such erosion prevention measures when performed by the Declarant shall be kept as low as reasonably possible. The cost of such work,when performed by the Declarant, its successors or assigns shall be paid by the Owner thereof. (d) The lake in the adjoining property currently known as Willow Lake is an important resource to the community. In order to insure that, Declarant shall promulgate and may amend from time to time rules and regulations which shall govern such sensitive environmental activities as the application of fertilizers and pesticides and other chemicals, erosion control measures and any other activities as may materially affect the waters of the lake. Failure of any owner or tenant of property in Willow Lake View to comply with the requirements of such rules and regulations shall constitute a breach of these covenants. The Declarant hereby reserves unto itself a perpetual, alienable and releasable easement and right, on, over and under all property in Willow Lake View for the purposes of taking any action necessary to effect compliance with the environmental rules and regulations. The cost of such action by the Declarant shall be paid by the Owner(s) of the property upon • which the work is performed. The provisions of this paragraph shall not be construed to be an obligation of the Declarant to take any action to effect compliance with the environmental rules and regulations. Section 3.14 "Declarants/Modifications" The Declarants may alter, waive, or modify any of the foregoing building and other restrictions so long as their substantial character is maintained. Section 3.15 "Restrictions" These restrictions shall be binding upon all occupants, guests and tenants of the Owners of the Property. Section 3.16 "Restriction Duration" These restrictions shall ensure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Declarants and the Owners, their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns. Section 3.17 "Termination" This declaration may be terminated at any time by the recordation of an instrument in the Clerk's Office, Circuit Court,Albemarle County, Virginia, signed by all of the then Owners of the Lots, agreeing to such termination. Section 3.18 "Severability" The restrictions herein contained are severable and the invalidity or unenforceability of any restriction shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other restrictions. Section 3.19 "Enforcement" Enforcement of the provisions of this declaration shall be by proceedings at law or in equity against any person or persons violating or DRAFT 2/22/2011 attempting to violate the covenants either to restrain violation or recover damages or both. Such action may be brought by the Declarants, or its successors, as developer, or the Owner of any Lot. Any and all legal action(s) must be undertaken in the Albemarle County Court system. ARTICLE IV. OTHER PROVISIONS Section 4.0 "Notice" Any notice required to be sent to any Owner under the provisions of this Declaration shall be deemed to have been properly sent when mailed postage prepaid to the last known address of the Owner as appears on the real estate tax records of the County of Albemarle,Virginia. Section 4.1 "Amendments" this Declaration may be modified or amended in whole or in part by recorded instrument executed by the Declarant until such time as the Declarant has conveyed all Lots. After the Declarant has conveyed all of such Lots,this Declaration may be amended or modified by the Owner(s)of a majority of the Lots. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Declaration has been executed by BD Land Properties LLC. BD Land Properties LLC BD Land Properties LLC COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2011, by BD Land LLC. My commission expires: Notary Public r 4e- : fined ka.« ' t5 jrs Willow Lake Property Owners Association (POA) is responsible for maintenance and stewardship of Willow Lake and its dam. The POA has already invested significant funds to fulfill these duties. For more than 20 years, we have used an entrance to the lake and dam that will become inaccessible with the proposed development of"Willow Lake View" by BD Land Properties LLC. As a group of concerned homeowners, we want to establish a legal basis for the path we have used to access,maintain, and enhance Willow Lake for more than 20 years. Because the owners and residents of Willow Lake have been using this path to access the dam and lake for more than 20 years, we believe that specific statutes of the law give us legal rights to continue using this access. But to lawfully establish these rights, we have to take legal action. We are therefore requesting the POA to support the filing of a legal action to achieve this goal. NAME ADDRESS 1. 4<cam Sc.ka. , 12av0„ 4Het MaPli Via...) Ct sic 2. / $' % / (Z5YVS"\ / a 744- M`J3 I BesWin{� 3. • �l� Gam. 121 el ( � 4. 4 � , IQ86— 127 2- getcGaEfl- ca ibl s , 5. K r>trz 4 t z 5.4 r• 6. lcl2t.c. e I a5(, 7. (J'qI c rf (2 * a (1 9. C)ub‘-(-of 1"102GVtr--) 2 3 a 10. KeritbyL/C.)--yi,6ceeez. 12ZL-f' /lil* (ier c7 1. An° 00S otAAkdi Li37 J 7J,'tw 12. 13. 14. 1 of 2 The Willow Lake Homeowners'Association(HOA)is responsible for maintenance and stewardship of Willow Lake and its dam. The HOA has already invested significant funds to fulfill these duties. For more than 20 years, we have used an entrance to the lake and dam that will become inaccessible with the proposed development of"Willow Lake View"by BD Land Properties LLC. As a group of concerned homeowners,we want to establish a legal basis for the path we have used to access,maintain, and enhance Willow Lake for more than 20 years. Because the owners and residents of Willow Lake have been using this path to access the dam and lake for more than 20 years, we believe that specific statutes of the law give us legal rights to continue using this access. But to lawfully establish these rights, we have to take legal action. We are therefore requesting the HOA to support the filing of a legal action to achieve this goal. Name Address 1l �(l •(� �- Zv( - •°uwcAc.8q- tZ14 1�'�lkP�-E iR7� i Prot-6, i gdlZ 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 F e The Willow Lake Property Owners' Association(POA)is responsible for maintenance and stewardship of Willow Lake and its dam. The POA has already invested significant funds to fulfill these duties. For more than 20 years, we have used an entrance to the lake and dam that will become inaccessible with the proposed development of"Willow Lake View"by BD Land Properties LLC. As a group of concerned homeowners,we encourage the Board of the Willow Lake POA, as our representatives,to be proactive in protecting the value of our property, by protecting Willow Lake, the berm and our easement. We urge you to take any and all _ actions necessary to ensure our property values including but not limited to engaging experts such at the Army Corps of Engineers,VDOT, Southern Environmental Law Center or other environmental groups. Litigation would be a last resort,but we are bound by our covenants to care for and protect the lake. NAME ADDRESS g3s- 4) a 2. 1 2'4 Ar44cC.- v1( w pa,. 3. UAJlS•aA.R4 .44.S�W K"l m_ ke_ v ICcJ C� 4. /•^" ' fi-• 44 J, 41 L'7 Mitt- 5. @i2c.,,_y 3 Moil, 0/e CA- . C S: 6. U Akaiy 4-4-S nit atilt * 7 7 Lt6 so 1z � The Willow Lake Property Owners' Association (POA) is responsible for maintenance and stewardship of Willow Lake and its dam. The POA has already invested significant funds to fulfill these duties. For more than 20 years,we have used an entrance to the lake and dam that will become inaccessible with the proposed development of"Willow Lake View" by BD Land Properties LLC. As a group of concerned homeowners,we encourage the Board of the Willow Lake POA, as our representatives,to be proactive in protecting the value of our property, by protecting Willow Lake,the berm and our easement. We urge you to take any and all lawful actions necessary to ensure our property values including but not limited to engaging experts such at the Army Corps of Engineers,VDOT,Southern Environmental Law Center or other environmental groups. Litigation would be a last resort,but we are bound by our covenants to care for and protect the lake. Name Address 1. /3riZav0)64---- G qgc '" `/ 04://pCe__ 2. ev\u `^'3\ ) \ L\ Q 3. 4,— 4. N V5 LM low LLIke 5. > :tie (,J I t lvX�, Le 6. /V - �l oti '4g 5 III t t icr,„) , 7. 8. Willow Lake Property Owners Association, Inc. Condominium Management of Charlottesville, Inc. 198-05 Spotnap Road, Charlottesville, VA 22911 Telephone: 434-979-454.5 Fax: 434-293-0859 cmc(cicvillecondo.corn February 9, 2011 Dear Fellow Willow Lake Property Owner: Please give this important notice and special request your time and attention. The Board of Willow Lake Property Owners'Association (also known as Willow Lake Homeowners'Association) is requesting your attendance and participation in a Special Meeting of the Willow Lake Property Owners'Association on Wednesday, February 23,2011 from 6:00-8:00 p.m. at the Offices of Condominium Management of Charlottesville, 198-05 Spotnap Road, Charlottesville. This Special Meeting is being called pursuant to the January 25, 2011 meeting of the Albemarle County Planning Commission at which the Commission recommended that the Willow Lake Property Owner's Association Board/Members meet with the principals and/or agents of BD Land Properties, LLC (Owners of Tax Map Parcel Numbers 77E1-01-00-01700, 77E1-00-000B0, 77E1-00-00000, and 77E1-02-00-000A0) as quickly as possible. This meeting was recommended and is being called to bring the respective parties together to develop a tenable compromise on issues and conflicts raised by Willow Lake property owners, identified by Albemarle County Planning and Zoning Staff and enumerated by Planning Commission members arising from the planned development of the aforementioned parcels of land. These parcels are located within the physical boundaries of the Willow Lake Subdivision, contiguous to Willow Lake and on sufficiently sloping land to warrant concern about erosion, sedimentation and run-off into Willow Lake and the watershed and to trigger the protection afforded by the Albemarle County Critical Slope Zoning Ordinance on nine of the 10 sub-divided lots slated for development.The smallest of the four parcels falls within the strictures of the Willow Lake Property Owners' Association. The other three parcels are not subject to Willow Lake POA guidelines. On January 25, 2011, the Albemarle County Planning Commission met and considered a request submitted to them by BD Land Properties, LLC,to grant a waiver of Albemarle County's Critical Slope zoning/subdivision ordinances on the aforementioned parcels of land. These parcels are located on the eastern and southern boundaries of Willow Lake Drive, along the entrance corridor to the Willow Lake subdivision and adjacent or slope to Willow Lake and the Willow Lake impoundment. For those property owners not in attendance at this public meeting or who otherwise may be unfamiliar with this request and the proposed development of said parcels of land, detailed information on the request for a Critical Slope Waiver and Preliminary (Development)Site Plan can be reviewed at and/or obtained from the Albemarle County Community Development Department/Current Planning Office at 401 McIntire Road, North Wing, Charlottesville. To request an appointment, call 434-296-5832 and request to speak with Ms. Summer Frederick, Senior Planner(ext. 3565) at sfrederick@albemarle.org or Mr. Bill Fritz, Chief of Current Development (ext. 3242) or by email at bfritzPalbemarle.org. Refer to proiect#/Name: SUB2010-0156 Willow Lake View-Critical Slopes Waiver. Willow Lake Special Meeting Notice February 9, 2011 For an overview of the meeting agenda and Critical Slope Waiver application,visit the Albemarle County Web site, click Online Services/Agendas/Planning Commission/2011 Agendas/January 25, 2011 Agenda. Concerns raised by Albemarle County Planning Staff, Planning Commission members and Willow Lake property owners at this Public Meeting and in response to this request for a Critical Slope Waiver and the Preliminary (Development) Site Plan include (but are not limited to) the following: • Of the ten residential lots planned for single-family attached and single-family detached units, nine contain critical slopes with three having critical slopes over the majority of the lot, with critical slopes covering approximately 50 percent of the site; • Critical slopes make the development of conforming building sites and access to areas outside of critical slopes "impossible" without causing disturbance to critical slopes on nine of the proposed lots; • While erosion and sediment control measures would be required with any building permit issued for the development of the proposed lots, there is concern that such development would introduce additional runoff and siltation to the nearby lake, located on an immediately adjacent parcel directly below the critical slopes. The lake is on a parcel owned and maintained by the Willow Lake Homeowners'Association. Enforcement could be anticipated to require potentially expensive and frequent legal action by the Willow Lake POA; • The applicant does not purport to be the developer of the lots and any plans proposed are not binding on future owners/developers and are preliminary; • Three of the four parcels(7.15 of 7.42 acres) are not constrained by Willow Lake POA strictures. Concerns exist that future residential development will not be required to be consistent with the appearance of other subdivision homes and landscaping and could block the scenic views enjoyed and valued by current property owners; • The parcels are located along the entrance corridor to the Willow Lake Subdivision and future development can be expected to have an impact on Willow Lake property values; • Owners and renters of homes constructed on three of the four Willow Lake View parcels will not have legal access to the lake and enforcement will be difficult if not impossible to maintain; • Willow Lake and the Willow Lake impoundment remain the responsibility of Willow Lake POA; • Convenient pedestrian access to Willow Lake by Willow Lake Property Owners and by Willow Lake contractors for berm and lake maintenance are at issue; • Future development on these parcels is allowed by Albemarle County Land Use regulations. The land is zoned R- 4 Residential and within the County Comprehensive Plan, its land use/density is defined as"Neighborhood Density in Urban Area 4. Please plan to attend this meeting. We respectfully invite all Willow Lake Property Owners and Renters, including the principals of BD Land Properties, LLC to attend. It is our sincere desire to develop a solution we can present to the Planning Commission and to future developers of these parcels that fairly addresses these concerns and respects all property owners' rights. Yours sincerely, Cathy Link, President Janet Mullaney, Secretary Beth Williams, Treasurer Kim Olsen, Director Neal Plumb, Director EMAIL STRING WITH WILLOW LAKE POA MANAGING AGENT DETAILING THE COLLABORATIVE EFFORT WITH THE BOARD AND COMMUNITY dateFri, Jan 21 , 2011 at 10:25 AM subjectEngineering survey - Willow Lake View mailed--gmail.com by Dear Carol, Thanks for calling yesterday about the engineering study. There are many different types of engineering studies, so I was not clear what was needed. What we have submitted is a preliminary subdivision plan, which does not require a grading plan. The County is extremely careful regarding development and the effects on surrounding property, and a plan will be required before any final approval or building permits are granted. When the land was originally platted for development all the docs were submitted to the County and they remain there as part of the public record. We reviewed them to determine what had been allowed, and any interested party is welcome to do the same. The number to call is 296-5832 x 3565 for an appointment. Please feel free to contact me with any questions, I am happy to help. Kind regards, uanet Matthews Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 7:34 AM subjeciRE: Engineering survey - Willow Lake View Thank you very much. Carol D. McCauley Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:49 PM subjectWillow Lake View mailed-gmail.com by Dear Carol, I was away for the weekend, am just now catching up and wanted to send along the requested docs for you to forward to the Willow Lake HOA Board. Also, there is one copy of the plat at T & N Printing on Market Street that I had made that is marked Willow Lake HOA which can be picked up. Please let me know if there are any questions regarding our submittal or the plat. Best regards, Janet Matthews Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 8:18 AM subject RE: Willow Lake View Thank you. I have forwarded this to the BOD. Carol D. McCauley Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 7:48 AM subjec. Willow Lake Dear Ms. Matthews and Mr. Bonner, The Board of the Willow Lake Property Owners Association has asked Condominium Management of Charlottesville to send you this advance email to apprise you that a date has been set for the Special Meeting of the Willow Lake Property Owners' Association as recommended by the Albemarle County Planning Commission at their January 25, 2011 meeting. A notice to all Willow Lake property owners is in the mail. The date is Wednesday, February 23, 2011 from 6-8 pm at CMC's offices on Spotnap Road. The Willow Lake POA Board hopes you will be able to attend and participate as property owners and as the current owners of record of the parcels included in the project proposed for development for which you have applied for a waiver of the Albemarle County Critical Slope ordinance. The Board is committed to a mutually respectful and forthcoming dialogue The Board asked me to thank you for making available a copy of the Preliminary Subdivision Plat that you presented to the Planning Commission at the January 25, 2011 meeting. It is the hope of the Board that you also will be able to provide or make available to CMC a copy of all plans and correspondence submitted and/or shared with Albemarle County Planning Staff and Commission members at that meeting or subsequently relating to project number/name: SUB2010-0156 Willow Lake View- Critical Slopes Waiver. I, in my role as Managing Agent of CMC, will remain the point of contact and central clearinghouse for communications about this project. Thank you, Carol D. McCauley Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 3:02 PM subjectRe: Willow Lake mailed-bygmail.com Dear Carol, We will attend the meeting on February 23rd and look forward to participating in a collaborative and useful dialogue. We are happy to keep the Willow Lake Board apprised of any additional submittals to the County or changes to our plans. In order to do that we would ask that we be copied on any email, correspondence or communication that the POA or residents have with either the County or the Planning Commission as well. It has come to our attention that there has been ongoing dialogue with Commissioners that we are not privy to, which does not foster a mutual conversation based on addressing the concerns of both parties. I do feel it is incumbent to share concerns that I have. The flyer that was sent to the residents of Willow Lake (except for us) was initiated by a Board member, Janet Mullaney. As an elected representative to the Board, I think this was inappropriate and not in keeping with the role of a Board member to represent the interests of the entire POA, of which we are members. Additionally, the tone of the last two meetings we attended was less than cordial. I hope the Board will recognize this and also that we encourage participation from everyone. Kind regards, Janet n.AatthpwR,c Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 7:38 AM ;ibjectRE: Willow Lake We look forward to working with you. I will certainly inform the Board of your concerns. Please contact me if you have any questions. Carol D. McCauley Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 12:40 PM subjeu;Re: Willow Lake mailed-gmail.corn by Dear Carol, Thanks very much. As promised I am keeping you up to date on what we are doing. Our surveyors are presently taking topographic measurements to provide accurate data since the available topo maps are out of date and inaccurate. We have not changed our plans so please reassure the Board and residents that this was to fulfill County staffs request for a grading plan and not a new initiative. Kind regards, Janet Matthews Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 1 :03 PM subjectdocs for Willow Lake View presented at 2.23.11 POA meeting mailed-gmail.com by Dear Carol, Thanks for a good meeting last evening, we were happy to be there and felt like we made good progress toward a mutual understanding. I am attaching my remarks and a the renderings for your files and for the Board. Kind regards, iant Matthews Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:57 PM subject RE: docs for Willow Lake View presented at 2.23.11 POA meeting Thank you very much. We all appreciate your participation. We will be back in touch soon. Carol D. McCauley Tue, Mar 1 , 2011 at 10:47 AM subjectRe: docs for Willow Lake View presented at 2.23.11 POA meeting mailed-gmail.com by Dear Carol, We had a good meeting with County staff Friday, February 25th and apprised them of our progress. We are making some revisions to the plat, including moving the access easement over based on the concerns we heard at the HOA meeting. We look forward to sharing the new plat at the HOA meeting March 16th. Can you please let me know who is on the Architectural Review Committee for the Willow Lake HOA? It occurs to me that it may be a good idea to collaborate on the architectural review process for both Willow Lake and Willow Lake View in some way. Kind regards, Janet Tue, Mar 1 , 2011 at 11 :35 AM subjec RE: docs for Willow Lake View presented at 2.23.11 POA meeting Thank you for keeping us apprised of your progress. At the current time, the Architectural Review Committee is the Board of Directors. Carol D. McCauley Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 9:59 AM subjectMarch 16 POA meeting mailed-gmail.com by Dear Carol, We will be attending the POA meeting March 16th and would like to share the grading plan and the new lot configuration including the easement access we have provided based on our conversations at the Special Meeting in February. Please let us know if this can be included in the agenda and when. Also, are the HOA meetings open to the public? We may be bringing our engineer. Kind regards, Janet Matthews Mar 11 , 2011 at 11:13 AM subjL RE: March 16 POA meeting The Board of Directors meeting is closed to owners only. We will put this on the agenda at the beginning of the meeting and will allow for 30 minutes — 15 minutes for your presentation and 15 minutes for questions. Carol D. McCauley Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:35 PM uujee Re: March 16 POA meeting mailed-gmail.com by Dear Carol, I am sorry for the delay in sending this, I got back later than I anticipated from Washington and had quite a bit of work to do today. I wanted to update you in writing about the items we talked about last evening at the POA meeting. As you know our desire has been to work closely with Willow Lake POA and, in doing so, arrive at a solution that addresses all our concerns. I believe we have reached that point based on the feedback we received last night. Here, in brief outline form, are the changes we have made and the concessions we have granted: 1) We have reduced the curb cuts to three along Willow Lake Drive by combining parking areas and putting in one driveway at the existing curb cut that will serve two dwellings 2) We have eliminated the duplexes, all lots are now single family homes 3) We have kept the grading to a minimum, the distance from the lake is 100' 4) We have adjusted our lot lines to provide a legal 15' wide easement for pedestrian and equipment access to Willow Lake. In order to create that easement the members of the Willow Lake POA would need to vacate the present legal easement and accept the new one. 5) We have created an HOA with Covenenants and Restrictions that will serve as an interim until construction is complete, then the new homes will join the existing Willow Lake HOA. 6) We have invited a member of your Board to sit on the Architectural Review Committee of the Willow Lake View HOA. We have spent months listening to our neighbors and believe these changes are in keeping with the issues raised. Recognizing, before it was even stated by several property owners last night, some people's preference would be to have no building take place, we have done everything we can to make this an appropriate, environmentally sensitive, attractive addition to our neighborhood. Please feel free to contact me with any questions, comments or concerns. Janet Matthews Mon, Mar 21 , 2011 at 11 :08 AM RE: March 16 POA meeting Thank you. I have forwarded this to the Board. Carol D. McCauley Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 1 :19 PM RE: March 16 POA meeting hide details Mar 30 (6 days Dear Janet — The Willow Lake Board of Directors would like to know if you have an updated set of Covenants and Restrictions for Willow Lake View that incorporate the concessions you offered. If so, would you please provide us with a copy. Also, it was their understanding the you were going to submit to the County a request with conditions. If you did, could you please provide us with a copy of that also along with any additional material you submitted for the hearing that is scheduled for April 5. Thanks for your help. Carol D. McCauley Thu, Mar 31 , 2011 at 1 :18 PM subjectRe: March 16 POA meeting rnaile�' gmail.com hide deta Mar 31 (5 days ago Dear Carol, Please find attached the updated C & R's which, as we mentioned at the last POA meeting, are based on Willow Lake's own documents and include the same language in the section titled "Restrictions to Implement Effective Environmental Controls" We did submit the plat we gave you March 16th, complete with all the changes and conditions we have discussed over the last several months which we went over with County staff prior to submittal. Please let me know if you have any questions, we are, as always, happy to help. Kind regards, Janet Thu, Mar 31 , 2011 at 2:43 PM subject RE: March 16 POA meeting Mar 31 (5 days Thank you very much. However, I only see the one concession in these C & R's and that is the one that has one member of the Willow Lake Board to serve on the Architectural Review Board of Willow Lake View. No where do I see that as each house is built it becomes part of the Willow Lake Association and Willow Lake will cease to exist upon completion of all of the homes. Carol D. McCauley Thu, Mar 31 , 2011 at 2:44 PM subjectRe: March 16 POA meeting maile ' gmail.com uy Mar 31 (5 days Dear Carol, I had to check with our attorney to see if that needed to be deeded or could be included in the HOA docs. He said either way will work so I can amend the docs now, I thought it had to be deeded in. Do you have any language that you can send me that is typically used and legally binding? Otherwise I will need to wait until we meet with him on Monday about other matters to get the language and that will not give much time for review for Board members. Very best, Janet Fri, Apr 1 , 2011 at 10:32 AM subject RE: March 16 POA meeting Apr 1 (4 days Honestly, I don't. I think this should be done by the attorney. If you can get it done prior to the meeting, we would greatly appreciate it. Thanks for your cooperation and help. Carol D. McCauley Fri, Apr 1 , 2011 at 10:33 AM uujt;L_, Re: March 16 POA meeting mailed-gmail.com by hide details Apr 1 (4 days ag Dear Carol, Please find attached a letter of intent, reviewed by our attorney, that outlines what we discussed regarding the homes in Willow Lake View. We will incorporate these conditions into the C & R's prior to the Planning Commission meeting as requested. Please let me know if you need any additional information or if I can help in any way. Kind regards, u Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 11 :08 AM subjectRE: March 16 POA meeting hide detail Apr 1 (4 days Thank you very much. I appreciate your help. Carol D. McCauley Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 11 :51 AM subjeciRe: March 16 POA meeting mailed-gmail.com by hide detail. Apr 1 (4 days ag Dear Carol, Please find attached the amended C & R's incorporating the changes we agreed to at the last Willow Lake POA meeting, specifically sections 2.02 and 3.16. They have been added by our attorney, please let us know if there are any questions once the Board has reviewed them. Kind regards, Janet Matthews Bill Fritz From: Brian Smith [bpspe@embargmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 2:35 PM To: Bill Fritz Subject: Willow Lake View Attachments: C1.1 amended 04-04-2011.pdf Bill, I have been thinking about condition#1 on your staff report. How do you feel this? Can we group C3 with C4 and C5 with C6, rather than bunching all four of them together? I have re-graded this common area between C4 and C5 showing they can be constructed independently. Please refer to the attachment. Thanks! Brian P. Smith, PE Civil Engineering, Inc. 105 West High Street Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434) 296-3644 (w) (434) 296-2041 (f) bpspe@embargmail.com i Willow Lake View —NEW RETAINING WALL NEW RETAINING WALL i . ------- T.O.W.�48.0 ----- -- T.O.W.�442.0-- __—.Afllenriedgradin�RLart __—_ — -- --- ' April 4, 2011 —NEW RETAINING WALL ' -Ex. storm *I T.O.W. 442.0 STATE Inv 44 in=44 2.8 �Top=446FEywDO� WILLOW L n Inv out=442.1 DRIVEWAY 40 o-o (IYP.) / / / PO pp o O VY-YY-'YY"YYY�.Y-'0.-�Y_Y �� / 1. • _ i `� -a T._ .-- --11.' It— .1k 463. ■ ii *- • •: •• — — `4+A •`� i a �� • OP` l -'4ft -- ' `•--- • , . . — •2 449.4+ . f l,}--' •• • - rw-r- Trti — `•_ 0_ r+w9+ • • • — • f — • Nridirdid. .41% •• —-7 • . IIP_Pd"-- 1C010r14. . •. • 1 % '>-• _MF= 40 s'• 1=1;:; _ r — ' `�MF 433.33• ; M /. 1 • •�° — BF•423 • .4 • --- 1 MI ta/4 44 1• . . :._.::-!;41 tt..1 • ---1 ro • �,��'::.�:•�•��. '/ • 427.6 / /i r 1 422.2 / 422.2 —// 1/ )•'*** ' / 6. � • � I I tee / - _J-� I _ I-- '-' • I.:• TA*i - - -• ow. _ _ I-- � � .� _I- ,_LOT �3 _ _I- . I/ LOT maple _ . _1_ LQT -I I-single family'- - 1 -Singlet lryr —I - • Sln fe• Single__fnmNy — — I Atoms 1 g , � _ • -' t_ • walnut _ — • • r - ill ____, . _. , 011, --- •�' L Ex. rip rap4. ilk al) ill ••.�'' Ex. tree line , BRIAN P.SMITH,PE7.1 CVIL ENGINEERING,INC 105 WEST HIGH STREET CHARLOTTESVILLE,VA 22902-5018 PHONE (434)296-3644 FAx (434)296-2041 bpspe@embarqmail.com March 23, 2011 Mr. Bill Fritz County of Albemarle Zoning&Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville,VA 22902 RE: Willow Lake View Revise Preliminary Plat Dear Bill, Please find attached the revised preliminary plat for this project. Included are 14 full size sets and one 11 by 17 set.A PDF has been emailed to you. Please schedule this project for the next available PC meeting. Let me know if you need anything else. Thank you. Sincerely,/6R-114 11 Brian P. Smith,PE President Attachment Ec: James Bonner Janet Matthews Account ID:10-004-00Bill Fritz 1 GOLF COURSE DESIGN • ENGINEERING • SITE DESIGN • LAND PLANNING BRIAN P.SMITH,PE CML ENGINEERING,INC 105 WEST HIGH STREET CHARLOTTESVILLE,VA 22902-5018 PHONE (434)296-3644 FAx (434)296-2041 January 25, 2011 Good evening. My name is Brian Smith. I am a profession engineer licensed in Virginia. My work in our community began in the late 70's as an assistant county engineer working under J. Harvey Bailey; then onto the Albemarle County Service Authority for 7 %2 years; then switching over to the dark side of consulting engineering working with Kurt Gloeckner before starting up my own practice in 1995. I am also one of the engineers for the original Willow Lake Subdivision. I am here tonight representing the applicants for the critical slopes waiver request. Critical slopes are defined as slopes equal to or greater than 25%-that's 4 feet over and 1 foot up or down. Critical slopes are derived from county aerial topographic maps and have been transferred to the subdivision plat in your package. Some critical slopes are natural. Some are man-made. But these are not differentiated on the county maps. They appear as one outlined area. Slopes that are man-made do not apply,they are exempt and thus special permission to build on them is not necessary. The staff is not authorized to determine which are natural and which are man-made. This is why we are here tonight—the PC members have this control. They can determine which is which. In an email I sent last night to Summer, Bill and the commissioners I included a colored jpeg file showing what I thought were man-made critical slopes. These are the ones outlined in red. The owner's intent is to create lots where homes can be built along the front property setback line. So,with this mind, we met this morning with Linda Porterfield and walked all of slopes along the front side of these proposed lots. After doing this I would like to modify my jpeg drawing. I would like to show all of the critical slopes along the frontage are indeed man-made and were created during the construction of Willow Lake Drive. Now,unless we gather our coats right now and make the journey to Willow Lake,I don't know how to convince you as a group that these slopes are man-made,other than to give you my opinion as a professional engineer. So,with this in mind, and in agreement with the owners, I offer the following suggested conditions of approval to ensure homes are located where intended —along the road frontage and not anywhere else. Recommended Conditions of Approval: 1. All ten(10)of these proposed lots shall be part of an HOA that will be responsible for the remaining open space which will remain undeveloped. 2. To ensure a home is built along the Willow Lake Drive frontage,the rear setback line of 20-feet is to be increased to 60-feet. This is for the eight(8)proposed lots along Willow GOLF COURSE DESIGN • ENGINEERING • SITE DESIGN • LAND PLANNING Lake drive and does not include the two lots in the cul-de-sac. In addition, sheds or out buildings will not be allowed within this 60-foot setback. 3. To ensure the protection of mature trees within this 60 feet, these eight (8) lots shall carry with it a provision that healthy trees 8" in diameter or greater may not be removed unless approved by the HOA. 4. To ensure the control of soil erosion within this 60 feet, grading shall not be allowed on these eight(8) lots unless approved by the HOA. This does not including the installation of underground utilities or fencing. Account ID: 10-004-OO\PC presentation by engineer BRIAN P. SMITH, PE GOLF COURSE DESIGN • ENGINEERING • SITE DESIGN • LAND PLANNING WILLOW LAKE VIEW PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT . .«' o , TMP 77E1-01-00-000B0. TMP 77E1-01-00-00000 & 1MP 77E1-02-00.000A0 SCOTTSVILLE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT . NEE oaMn.VNGWM sewID LandMO i,u,..ime� ,� �... .,. 1/ / �/ 2 W ?-- /. C2 Z - /- + I \ �• ..n. —` _ jy rwwrr0~0 I . ,� \ �.,s' '' ! rJ CI I I 1r-1 /ki ,. --- - �- 1_1!1 lyi L�i/ Lill L—j I-1 , \\ 110 1� �� '�` \ I I !I `♦ i —1 / I 1 ( ! ! +I I\"�) I I ...°". /..' (D 1 (� a�Lr .�e a a 1 I s�!1 a e 1 I ! ! I I !_ _ta _:s� �— _��._........... ! FZ `\ i :'moo ����.a wa.w awe on,ir iyy,.��,d b-�r1 s s �'s - - r .. 47 1 \!�J/- I ___ , I1 ! 1 l II- '�t, L_1 L_I L_I I I i—'� r r , uro:...+b i IL- / ICNE - -'' �' / 1 l' , ,/' � ���1 I ♦ / -- ' - -- -/' ` -�' r I i F B ice' \ • - -� WV ZE1-o P.seen►+.P� > - �" IM es s.K. Glinallil MIN > ' ,i'-'• .,. «:a .M:. , •-.J \ _.�. I / • 1.I . I 1 µ.momm 1 / �•�._._� / \ \ 1010 \ WILLOW LAKE VIEW PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT J TMP 77E1-01-00-01700, TMP 77E1-01-00-000BO, IMP 77E1-01-0000000 & IMP 77E1-02-00.000A0 N0M SCOTTS\.ILLE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT IENO1. 1.Racel.17,Al-2.C12.mat*Jur of1W77E1-012Gm0.m1i aafl1 a 2422 Or 00 aar.11.Ml.am 42.1 AMAMI!COIMV,VUS*M 101. .r a/mrlp2tlatWarl papr17.Alit CI aSCM mq not drr 11.411944 0A0121. z� - _ a Wars aper924af202424W�puc23 Cl02od.rrga array4Ta.a. w ! l t.Inn *P araMAINOapnN far AlvMYbn. ID L.1d .r.LLC ^ .i•4 1.P71E1-01-0a01mIl 0l 1.16 P D1 MCllam.rbpp �� I 11071E1-01-0203720 DO 11167111 0191211.M.,VA___ 1 7PE1-01-0®CU a p 1116 P 111 W. W IMP 7731-01204264Q CO 1232.14410 00 �l o 6 rrre.amrarvr 1M1CSIl.1.0.q42E ICOiPr+O • �.:an 644922•°°'m.aT 77314.o Pa*PnP1.1I.. '`^- i+�+..r'�_ l-,r, /"_1 �\ / I— bacroa0a.aa _M777EW1-17 j�1 1^: meow ; , •x w i A ..4 We VEW wJ 7.a�prapr..as ry o47•2 .u.rrn a m aabuwbw.d.I1.I. �I I �ol�mYu� °"J1,....s. .i 61r a.a.ell..m.ln..mmd.nasp.a n almmow.h ld.Atom.* woks R4.alm Oren... i pal-'- -1 .. maap.9pwramallm.eeue.a.enAa.lra..Cm..rAmadq.a plpptlE2,.anp plat i Man-made slopes -. �ppwetlp..111N.d.•f.14 Vy.praM.Elafaada.aWda.pmpaMtia22m2116tM1llml aflP..a dy ./ r �J RoPrlb/•ArerY.a nc aq Wno VYw .. 4 �' i _� ' -�- -1--w 1 —/ I — 1 \.. j\/ \��i ! m 11. µµ'�� ��'dC.`c!i'I I—, T I I J�r r r , 'r r` r r� i i i \ r^�� �� i" ' ]� M — \ ---A. I _r J ll i I f I I�� I —I II I I I �I/r—I I _ / i I / `\��_ ''1rr_, /� VICMY WM �. ,.�,.•, Jq v II I'L r-' I` I! f,J^ I/-'`'1'' -J i l l 1 %t I i 1 \\ i W I/ l 1-1-- o�d.wlsw""flr,d ..rr..ndn. , f� - ' 'I _ I �', �_ ' (I I /' r1-...-1� I-�•' r 1 , ..w..oadr,u� 1' wal-r- / d a fOlf I, 1 p ' _/✓a e�.L.-_ s s�-j+ -__Ft.._--•LL_ I I I 1 d. WAIN "�' �;�m -- ...me, I lij a %um IA.rm. wain wow !ad..1r" �--.r/ �`!.� s� ces.r.ril�s :. -"s_sr:-r�t� - '� L-� II 1 �iI r/ ram' r I L 1^ I i _ �T G; 1 fr I •I I 1�_I _IL.,r it '�I ' �' y I — ;1 } '-- -1 f— _�`I1�-'`'f' �`. E ,'� :1" � b_� —I —� `"'+l (�''I 6 lfi.. ilr'�� 11+ionau�v.�( � �/ '.' _� �'� 'lam 1 �Ill.k-�'i'---l"i� ...qv,- ..." —'-- ��_t -_-I-"I� _ ��- 5,... I II , f' l.� a ,,, ` . . j "11J -1 _ 11 _ I ' --.6. • __�/ F'�\ 1 fi --I`1-4a,_1 -• I 1-r 1bs--_I j k Ni , .tee m.� ` I.a' 1 121•422 20.slots,.mamma1 m Al P N. a L BRAN P.SWIM PE v,/ � Ate`' -.or."'" arao�� i 71111112 a r / pl yy ,i'i _ inrr•� ,,,,-Vis f -� �-�� r "11 ' / if '►ter ..c 2 �- • d' w 1•1 /J1 -' .._ a \ /! Y /',' \!'aH `—ram' ^uYr. �.� _` , / Par.abet MU p FRIENDS OF WILLOW LAKE March 1,2011 Mr. William D. Fritz Chief of Current Development Office of Community Development 401 McIntire Road North Wing Charlottesville,VA 22902 Re: Willow Lake View Preliminary Subdivision Plan Dear Mr. Fritz: Thank you for meeting with us on Friday, February 25th, regarding the application of the Water Protection Ordinance to the proposed Willow Lake View development, and specifically to discuss whether, as we believe, a 100' setback from the western shore of the lake applies to any construction or land-disturbing activity. We neglected to point out in our letter that the WPO requires in Section 2-103,"Rules of Construction," that"This chapter protects paramount public interests and shall be liberally construed to effectuate its several purposes." (emphasis supplied). These paramount public interests and purposes, set forth in the immediately preceding section, are as follows: Sec.17-102 Purposes. The board of supervisors finds that this chapter is necessary to protect the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the county and the Commonwealth of Virginia and to prevent water from being rendered dangerous to the health of persons living in the county, and is supported by the findings of watershed studies that have been conducted. Therefore, the specific purposes of this chapter are to: Mr. William D. Fritz Office of Community Development March 1, 2011 Page 2 1. inhibit the deterioration of state waters and waterways resulting from land disturbing activities; 2. protect the safety and welfare of citizens, property owners, and businesses by minimizing the negative impacts of increased stormwater discharges from new land development and redevelopment; 3. protect against and minimize the pollution and eutrophication of public drinking water supplies resulting from land development; 4. control nonpoint source pollution, erosion and sedimentation,and stream channel erosion; 5. maintain the integrity of existing stream channels and networks for their biological functions, drainage, and natural recharge of groundwater; 6. protect the condition of state waters for all reasonable public uses and ecological functions; 7. provide for the long-term responsibility for and maintenance of stormwater management facilities and best management practices; 8. regulate the discharge of pollutants into storm drainage systems and state waters by prohibiting illicit discharges and connections, and the dumping of refuse and pollutants; the board of supervisors hereby determines that applying such regulations to not only the county's municipal separate storm sewer system but also to privately owned and operated storm drainage systems and state waters is necessary to prevent any further degradation to water resources; 9. facilitate the integration of stormwater management and pollution control with other county ordinances, programs, policies, and the comprehensive plan; and 10. promote the long-term sustainability of groundwater resources." (citations and legislative references omitted, emphasis supplied). We believe that each and every enumerated purpose of the WPO will be adversely impacted if the Planning Commission determines that a 100' setback is not required at this development. Significantly, we believe that the proposed development with less than a 100' setback will lead directly to the deterioration of state waters and waterways and will lead to increased stormwater discharges into Willow Lake, and from there into the stream beds and contiguous non-tidal wetlands of Cow Branch and Moore's Creek. We note that the subsection 8 of the"Purposes" provisions of the WPO specifically Mr. William D. Fritz Office of Community Development March 1, 2011 Page 3 states that the Board of Supervisors deems it necessary, to prevent any further degradation of water resources, to apply the provisions of the WPO not only to municipal storm sewer systems, but also to "privately owned and operated storm drainage systems and state waters." We point out that Willow Lake is privately owned and maintained by the Willow Lake Property Owners Association, ("WLPOA") of which all of us living in the development of Willow Lake are members. Ironically, while the WLPOA (and its members and neighboring property owners) is trying to protect the integrity of its lake, it appears that BD Land Development, LLC is treating Willow Lake as its own repository for stormwater run-off. We note the following statement from Brian P. Smith, PE, on behalf of the developer's request for a critical slope waiver, which appears in a letter dated October 22, 2010 addressed to you (copy attached for your reference): "Concern 2: 'Excessive stormwater run-off' Continued protection of our streams and environment are more important now than ever before. Currently in place just below this development is an existing lake that will provide water quality and detention. Further, by building near Willow Lake Drive, the runoff will be encouraged to infiltrate the soil prior to reaching the lake and eventually Cow Branch." (emphasis supplied). If Mr. Smith agrees that continued protection of our water resources is "more important now than ever before", and he considers Willow Lake to be what amounts to a "privately owned and operated storm drainage system", and therefore subject to the provisions of the WPO, then why should BD Land Development, LLC, the proponents of the development along the western shore of Willow Lake, be treated any differently than the WLPOA, and not subjected to the provisions of the ordinance, particularly the 100' setback requirement? In summary,we believe that the WPO requires that a minimum 100' setback apply to the western shore of Willow Lake and the development proposed by BD Land Development, LLC. Thank you again for your consideration of our interests in this matter. Mr. William D. Fritz Office of Community Development March 1, 2011 Page 4 Sincerely, aki D4(4. ,41._ Charlotte Hisey 445 Maple View Court 04.4 / • 5)44'dis.. Om Sinclair 1249 Maple View Drive Robert B. Goss Owner, The Inn at Monticello 1188 Scottsville Road (adjoining property owner) Enclosure FRIENDS OF WILLOW LAKE February 25,2011 Albemarle County Engineer Office of Community Development 401 McIntire Road North Wing Charlottesville,VA 22902 Re: Willow Lake View Preliminary Subdivision Plan Dear Sir: We are homeowners in the development of Willow Lake and the adjoining area. We are writing to you for our own clarification but also on behalf of neighbors, who share our concerns about proposed development in our area. We request to be advised of your position on the building setbacks that will apply to single-family homes and duplexes in the proposed subdivision of Willow Lake View. As you are aware, BD Land Development, LLC has filed a preliminary plat for the subdivision of 7+ acres of land located between Willow Lake Drive and Willow Lake. The preliminary plat shows that 20' rear setbacks from the edge of the lake will be used for the siting of new dwellings. And at a meeting of the members of the Willow Lake Homeowners' Association and representatives of BD Land Development on Wednesday, February 23, 2011, Janet Matthews, a principal in BD, confirmed the developer's position that a 20' rear setback is all that is required under the circumstances. We have carefully reviewed the Water Protection Ordinance, Albemarle County Code, Sections 17-100 et sue., and believe, based on our reading of its provisions, and our familiarity with the area around the lake,that a 100' rear setback applies, instead of a 20' setback. Albemarle County Engineer Office of Community Development February 25,2011 Page 2 Section 17-317, "Duty to retain or establish stream buffer" provides: "Except as provided in section 17-319, any land subject to this article and each stormwater management/BMP plan shall provide for stream buffers for the purposes of retarding runoff, preventing erosion, filtering nonpoint source pollution from runoff, moderating stream temperature, and providing for the ecological integrity of stream corridors and networks,as provided herein: A. If the development is located within a development area or an area of infill and redevelopment, stream buffers shall be retained if present and established where they do not exist on any lands subject to this article containing perennial streams, and/or nontidal wetlands contiguous to these streams. The stream buffer shall be no less than one hundred (100) feet wide on each side of such perennial streams and contiguous nontidal wetlands, measured horizontally from the edge of the nontidal wetlands, or the top of the stream bank if no wetlands exist." (emphasis supplied). This section of the ordinance, in connection with the definition of"contiguous nontidal wetlands",1 clearly subjects the proposed development site to a minimum setback of 100'. "Contiguous nontidal wetlands" is defined in Section 17-104 (9) as follows: "The term "contiguous nontidal wetlands" means nontidal wetlands that lie within or adjacent to a stream channel or within the flood plain of that stream channel so that there is a hydrologic connection between the stream and the wetland, and including impoundments of water along a natural stream channel." (emphasis supplied). As shown on the attached tax map,and based on our familiarity with the area shown, Cow Branch is a"natural stream channel." 2 Willow Lake,which has frequently been 1 The term"nontidal wetlands" is defined in Section 17-104(30)as"wetlands other than tidal wetlands that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration to support,and that under normal circumstances do support,a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. . . " We believe that vegetation of this type grows along the natural stream bed of Cow Branch,and in the indicated flood plain,as well as along the western shore of Willow Lake. 2 We note the definition of "perennial stream" in the Water Protection Ordinance requires reference to the most recent U. S. Geological Survey. An alternative to this reference under the definition is that the stream has been determined by the Planning Commission to be"perennial" Albemarle County Engineer Office of Community Development February 25,2011 Page 3 described by Ms. Matthews as an"impoundment", is clearly located "along" it. As if that were not clear enough for Willow Lake to be deemed a "contiguous nontidal wetland",and for a 100' rear setback to apply,the developer's own preliminary subdivision plat shows the lake as within the 100-year flood plain for Cow Branch. Based on the above,we respectfully request your advice as to whether a 100' setback applies to the area surrounding Willow Lake,particularly in the area on the western shore of the lake,where BD Land Development has proposed to build single family houses and duplexes. Sincerely, Charlotte Hisey �J 445 Maple View Court 1 . . J6 Sinclair 1249 Maple View Drive Robert B. Goss Owner, The Inn at Monticello 1188 Scottsville Road (adjoining property owner) following a site-specific evaluation using guidelines issued by the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department. We believe that Cow Branch, by the plain meaning of the language of definition and our familiarity with the nature of the stream,qualifies as a"perennial stream." . �`n 77E1-1B 51 '► d�°� 91-2 aT . , , 4, c- lip-1).4, Ill' v� '� ���®`, a t .,. 1111 Zit 11741/4/4 4'1/4'I i•t, 4111, '1;44 IA17 Arlitp > 4.% Obi P , me 409 °off �,b 1p ®/�© :+ © of ��F7. m 1� ®�'4 dv o7,q.� � CD `�'b �� o vdAllr ,nJ �, 77E1-01-.1 '4F v--o-L3LL. L e'j6''o\0 ';9 lL 77E1-0A-4 Ni N / ��Fl, I V4°- 77E1--0A-5 ND �� . c m dv�y 77E, oB-„ 3�'b ,,4%7 yx �d C . 778.'--08_12 ITI 3 0� v'Cu NF 91-29 t •i i I is y a "77-25 0 \/\� BRANOH BRIAN P.SMITH,PE CML ENGINEERING,INC 105 WEST HIGH STREET CHARLOTTESVILLE,VA 22902-5018 PHONE (434)296-3644 FAx (434)296-2041 bpspe@embarqmail.com October 22, 2010 Mr. Bill Fritz County of Albemarle Zoning& Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: Willow Lake View Critical Slopes Waiver Request Dear Bill, Presently under consideration is a preliminary subdivision plat on R4 zoned property in the Willow Lake Subdivision area. These tracts of land along Willow Lake Drive are described as TMP 77E1- 01-00-01700,TMP 77E 1-01-00-000B0, TMP 77E 1-01-00-00000 and TMP 77E l-02-00-000A0. All but parcel 17 have critical slopes associated with them as defined by the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance. Please refer to the attached Preliminary Subdivision Plat for a pictorial view of these slopes. Building sites can be selected to either avoid or minimize the disturbance of critical slopes. Below are my thoughts with regard to the concerns listed in Section 4.2.5.a.1 of the Code entitled Request. Concern 1: "Rapid and/or large-scale movement of soil and rock" It is recognized the development on slopes are at a greater risk of soil movement than on flat terrain, especially during the crucial construction stage. Presumably, this project is not large enough to mandate an Erosion & Sediment Control Plan as each lot most likely will be developed independently. However, as a minimum,the County requires an Erosion& Sediment Control Agreement with the builder when the building permit is issued. This agreement mandates the site to be protected with adequate erosion control during construction as the standards in the State Handbook are to be followed. Concern 2: "Excessive stormwater run-off" Continued protection of our streams and environment are more important now than ever before. Currently in place just below this development is an existing lake that will provide water quality GOLF COURSE DESIGN • ENGINEERING • SITE DESIGN • LAND ATTACHMENT A Bill Fritz WILLOW LAKE VIEW October 22, 2010 Page 2 and detention. Further, by building near Willow Lake Drive,the runoff will be encouraged to infiltrate the soil prior to reaching the lake and eventually Cow Branch. Concern 3: "Siltation of natural and man-made bodies of water" Siltation has its greatest risk to bodies of water during the short window of construction. After the vegetation grow-in period this risk is lessened with each passing year. Erosion control methods installed and managed by the contractor and reviewed and inspected by government entities will minimize the potential for erosion. In addition, if inspections discover challenges during construction, additional controls can be implemented. These controls will only be removed after the area is well established. Concern 4" "Loss of aesthetic resource" For some, the disturbance of critical slopes could be seen as a loss of aesthetic resources in many situations. But, for this particular project, one might consider a now versus later view from Willow Lake Drive with aesthetics in mind. Merriam-Webster defines aesthetic as pleasing in appearance, appreciative of, responsive to, or zealous about the beautiful. The parcels under review are limited to the woods on the hillside just east of the existing drive. These woods are a mixture of various deciduous and evergreen trees. Some are healthy. Some are not. The majority of the critical slopes extend behind the existing residential homes in the common area where there are not any plans for development. Only a small portion of this vegetation will be removed to build homes. For the most part these trees will be undisturbed thus maintaining a pleasing view from the road. Concern 5: "In the event of septic system failure, a greater travel distance of septic effluent, all of which constitute potential dangers to the public health, safety and/or welfare" The new homes will be on public sewer. I hope this information is helpful in your review. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Brian P. Smith, PE President Attachment Cc: Mr. James Bonner Account ID: 10-004-00/critical slopes waiver request BRIAN P. SMITH, PE GOLF COURSE DESIGN • ENGINEERING • SITE DESIGN • LAND P ATTACHMENT A