Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201700001 Staff Report 2017-05-23 eraMEV6�1► 1. i ri-6\P1 ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING U STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: SUB201700001 Ben Plummer— Staff: Christopher P. Perez, Senior Planner Private Street Request Cameron Langille, Senior Planner Planning Commission meeting: Board of Supervisors meeting: May 23, 2017 Not applicable Owners: Terry & Cheryl Plummer Applicant: Roger W. Ray &Associates, Inc. Location: Vacant Lot on Brookwood Road Acreage: 14.58 acres TMP: 05600-00-00-03510 By-right use: R-1 Residential - 1 unit/acre Magisterial District: White Hall Proffers/Conditions: Proposed Requested # of Dwelling Lots: 2 DA—X Proposal: Comp. Plan Designation: Greenspace—public 1. Request for private street approval in parks, open space, environmental features accordance with 14-233(A)(2) and 14-234 of the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. Request for an exception from curb and gutter requirements in accordance with 14- 410 of the Subdivision Ordinance. 3. Request for an exception from sidewalk requirements in accordance with 14-422 of the Subdivision Ordinance. 4. Request for an exception from planting strip requirements in accordance with 14-422 of the Subdivision Ordinance. Character of Property: Heavily wooded Use of Surrounding Properties: Residential uses (small lots with single family homes) Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable: 1. The proposed private street meets the 1. None factors to be considered for authorization under Section 14-233(A)(2). 2. The curb and gutter waiver meets the factors to be considered in accordance with 14-410(I)(2)(i) and 14-410(I)(2)(iii). 3. The sidewalk and planting strip waiver meets the factors to be considered in accordance with 14-422 (E) and (F). 4. Engineering and Fire and Rescue staff have no objections to the authorization of the private street. RECOMMENDATION: 14-233 and 14-234 - Staff recommends approval of the private street to serve the subdivision of Lot A into two parcels with the following conditions: a)The private street shall be bonded prior to final plat approval. b) A private street maintenance agreement shall be recorded with the final plat. 1 STAFF PERSONS: Christopher P. Perez, Senior Planner Cameron Langille, Senior Planner PLANNING COMMISSION: May 23, 2017 AGENDA TITLE: SUB20 1700001 —Ben Plummer—Private Street Request APPLICANT: Roger W. Ray&Associates, Inc. PROPERTY OWNER: Terry& Cheryl Plummer APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: Request for private street approval to serve the proposed two lot residential subdivision on Tax Map Parcel56-35I located off of Brookwood Road [Attachment A]. Exhibit A depicts the new 1.74 acre Lot Al and the residual 12.84 acre Lot A on Tax Map Parcel 56-351 [Attachment B]. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Greenspace in the Crozet Master Plan. SELECTED PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY: • SUB2007-182 Booth, Michael Zinsser-Waiver to Section 14-404 of Subdivision Ordinance Approved on 9-4-2007. The 14-404 waiver has two conditions: 1)No more than 2 dwelling units will be constructed and 2)...grant the applicants the right to have a single private shared driveway (see attached). • SUB2009-66 Booth,Michael Zinsser-Boundary Line Adjustment Plat Approved 6-16-2009. The plat added the frontage on Brookwood Road to TMP 56-35. This frontage used to be publically dedicated land for a public road; however, it was abandoned per DB 3676-494 (see attached)as part of the development of the land. • SUB2009-144 Booth,Michael Zinsser-Final Subdivision plat Approved 11-30-2009. The plat divided TMP 56-35 into two parcels (Lot A 14.58 acres and the Residue 31.269 acres). REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: Lot frontage on a public or private street is a minimum requirement of the both the Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has requested one private street to be authorized per Section 14-233(A)(2)for frontage purposes [Attachment C]. The applicant is also requesting an exception of curb and gutter for the private street per Section 14-410 of the Ordinance, and exceptions to the sidewalks and planting strips per Section 14-422 of the Ordinance. There are four different requests to be considered with this application; all require Planning Commission action: 1. Section 14-233 and 14-234-Authorization of a Private Street serving two lots within the Development Area with the following conditions: 2. Section 14-410 (I)—Exception of the curb and gutter requirement. 3. Section 14-422 (E)(2) -Exception of the sidewalk requirement. 4. Section 14-422 (F)(2) -Exception of the planting strip requirement. • (Ordinance language presented in bold italics followed by staff comment) 1.AUTHORIZATION OF PRIVATE STREETS . , F. Private streets may be authorized in the development areas by the Planning Commission within a two lot subdivision as provided for in Section 14-233(A)(2). ANALYSIS OF SECTION 14-233(A)(2) Two-Lot Subdivision: The proposed private street will be within a two-lot subdivision on TMP 56-35I creating a new 1.74 acre lot for residential use(Lot Al) and the residual 12.84 acre parcel(Lot A). The proposed subdivision meets the 14-404 waiver conditions approved by the Planning Commission through SUB2007-182 [Attachment D],which stated that no more than 2 dwelling units will be constructed on TMP 56-35I. ANALYSIS OF SECTION 14-234: Per Section 14-234(C),the Commission may authorize one or more private streets to be constructed in a subdivision if it finds that one or more of the circumstances described in section 14-233 exists and that: (ordinance language presented in bold italics followed by staff comment): 1. The private road will be adequate to carry the traffic volume which may be reasonably expected to be generated by the subdivision; The amount of traffic expected on the proposed private street is minimal. Staff from the Engineering and Fire and Rescue Divisions find that the design is safe and adequate for this type of traffic. 2. The comprehensive plan does not provide for a public street in the approximate location of the proposed private street; The Comprehensive Plan does not provide for a public street in the location of the private street. 3. The fee of the private street will be owned by the owner of each lot abutting the right-of-way thereof or by an association composed of the owners of all lots in the subdivision, subject in either case to any easement for the benefit of all lots served by the street; Section 14-317 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that a maintenance agreement be submitted for review by Planning staff and the County Attorney in all situations where improvements are required to be maintained. A private street maintenance agreement has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney with no objections. This agreement will be recorded along with the final subdivision plat, pending Commission approval of the private street request. 4. Except where required by the commission to serve a specific public purpose, the private street will not serve through traffic nor intersect the state highway system in more than one location;and The private street will not serve through traffic, and will only intersect Brookwood Road in one location. 5. If applicable, the private street has been approved in accordance with section 30.3,flood hazard overlay district, of the zoning ordinance and other applicable law. The private street does not lie in a flood hazard overlay district and will not require any upgrades nor impact the flood plain. SUMMARY/RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS: This proposal meets the factors to be considered in the ordinance,therefore, Staff recommends approval of the private street request with the following conditions: a. The private street shall be bonded prior to final plat approval. b. A private street maintenance agreement shall be recorded with the final plat. 3 2.EXCEPTION OF CURB AND GUTTER REQUIREMENT In the development areas, streets shall be constructed with curb or curb and gutter, sidewalks and planting strips. The requirement for curb or curb and gutter may be varied or excepted by the Planning Commission as provided in section 14-203.1. ANALYSIS OF SECTION 14-410(I)Waivers from Curb and Gutter Requirements Per Section 14-410(I)(2), in reviewing a request for a variation or exception under section 14-203.1 to allow a rural cross-section(no curb and gutter) instead,the commission shall consider whether: i. The number of lots in the subdivision and the types of lots to be served; The private street will only serve two single-family detached lots. ii. The length of the Street; The private street is approximately 395' in length. iii. Whether the proposed street(s)or street extension connects into an existing system of streets constructed to a rural cross-section; The private street will connect to Brookwood Road, which is constructed to a rural street cross- section standard. iv. The proximity of the subdivision and the street to the boundaries of the development and rural areas; The private street is nearly one-half a mile north of the development and rural areas boundaries(Rte. 250-Rockfish Gap Turnpike). v. Whether the street terminates in the neighborhood or at the edge of the development area or is otherwise expected to provide interconnections to abutting lands; The street terminates in the Brookwood neighborhood and is not expected to interconnect to abutting properties due to topography, critical slopes, and stream buffers. vi. Whether a rural cross-section in the development areas furthers the goals of the comprehensive plan, with particular emphasis on the neighborhood model and the applicable neighborhood master plan; The rural cross section of the proposed private street will be consistent with the existing street network of the Brookwood subdivision. It serves only two lots and will not serve through traffic, and therefore is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. vii. Whether the use of a rural cross-section would enable a different principle of the neighborhood model to be more fully implemented;and The rural cross section allows the neighborhood model principle of"Site Planning that Respects Terrain"to be met by requiring less grading and fill to build the street. viii. Whether the proposed density of the subdivision is consistent with the density recommended in the land use plan section of the comprehensive plan. As noted earlier,the waiver request, SUB2007-182,previously granted by the Commission limits development of TMP 56-35I to no more than two(2) single-family dwellings. The proposed density of the subdivision associated with the private street requests is consistent with this condition. 4 SUMMARY: Staff's opinion is that the waiver to curb and gutter requirements is appropriate based on the type of uses to be served,the length of the street, and the design of the existing street network to which the new road will connect. Staff recommends approval of the curb and gutter waiver. 3. EXCEPTION OF SIDEWALK REQUIREMENT In the development areas, streets shall be constructed with sidewalks and planting strips.The requirements for sidewalks may be varied or excepted by the Planning Commission as provided in section 14-203.1. ANALYSIS OF 14-422(E)Waiver From Sidewalk Requirements: Per Section 14-422(E)(2), in reviewing a request to waive the requirement for sidewalks,the commission shall consider whether: i.A variation or exception to allow a rural cross-section has been granted; No such waiver has been granted;however,during the approval of SUB2007-182,the Commission imposed a condition on the 14-404 waiver to grant the applicants the right to have a single private shared driveway. The shared driveway is not feasible because the subdivision requires frontage to each lot. Frontage can only be provided through a public or private street. As such the applicant is proposing a rural cross-section private street, which more closely resembles the driveway standards imposed by the Commission to access the subdivision. The private streets will be designed in accordance with the requirements in Section 14-412. A typical section detail is included in this report(see Attachment B, Sheet 2). ii.A surface other than concrete is more appropriate for the subdivision because of the character of the proposed subdivision and the surround neighborhood; No alternative surface is proposed. iii. Sidewalks on one side of the street are appropriate due to environmental constraints such as streams, stream buffers, critical slopes,floodplain, or wetlands, or because lots are provided on only one side of the street; Sidewalks are not being proposed on one side of the street. iv. The sidewalks reasonably can connect to an existing or future pedestrian system in the area; There is no existing pedestrian system in the area. v. The length of the street is so short and the density of the development is so low that it is unlikely that the sidewalk would be used to an extent that it would provide a public benefit; Yes, the length of the street is so short and the density of the development is so low that it is unlikely that the public would benefit from sidewalks in this area. Additionally the private street connects to Brookwood Road,which is constructed to a rural street cross-section and is not provided with sidewalks. vi.An alternate pedestrian system including an alternative pavement could provide more appropriate access throughout the subdivision and to adjoining lands, based on a proposed alternative profile submitted by the subdivider; The subdivider has not proposed an alternative profile. Additionally,this is a two-lot subdivision. vii. The sidewalks would be publicly or privately maintained; No sidewalks are proposed. viii. The waiver promotes the goals of the comprehensive plan, the neighborhood model, and the 5 applicable neighborhood master plan;and The waiver is consistent with the Crozet Master Plan as the plan does not call for a public road or sidewalk connection in this area. The property doesn't provide reasonable access potential to other adjacent property due to topography. i . Waiving the requirement would enable a different principle of the neighborhood model to be more fully achieved. Waiving the sidewalk requirements to allow for a rural cross section allows the neighborhood model principle of"Site Planning that Respects Terrain"to be met by requiring less grading and fill to build the street. SUMMARY: It is staffs opinion that utilizing the rural cross-section is reasonable for the proposed private street since it will not connect to any existing sidewalk network nearby. Requiring installation of sidewalks along the private streets is unnecessary given the nature of the surrounding development and the fact that the private street will not serve pedestrian traffic. 4. EXCEPTION OF PLANTING STRIP REQUIREMENT In the development areas, streets shall be constructed with sidewalks and planting strips. The requirements for planting strips may be waived by the Planning Commission as provided in Section 14- 203.1. ANALYSIS OF SECTION 14-422 (F)Waivers from planting strip requirements: Per Section 14-422(F)(2),the commission shall consider whether: L A waiver to allow a rural cross section has been granted; No such waiver has been granted; however, during the approval of SUB2007-182, the Commission imposed a condition on the 14-404 waiver to grant the applicants the right to have a single private shared driveway. The shared driveway is not feasible because the subdivision requires frontage to each lot. Frontage can only be provided through a public or private street. As such the applicant is proposing a rural cross-section private street,which more closely resembles the driveway standards imposed by the Commission to access the subdivision. The private streets will be designed in accordance with the requirements in Section 14-412. A typical section detail is included in Attachment B on Sheet 2. ii.A sidewalk waiver has been granted; A sidewalk waiver is included with this request and is recommended for approval by staff. iii. Reducing the size of or eliminating the planting strip promotes the goals of the comprehensive plan, the neighborhood model, and the applicable neighborhood master plan;and Waiving the planting strip requirements to allow for a rural cross section allows the neighborhood model principle of"Site Planning that Respects Terrain"to be met by requiring less grading and fill to build the street. iv. Waiving the requirement would enable a different principle of the neighborhood model to be more fully achieved. Waiving the planting strip requirements to allow for a rural cross section allows the neighborhood model principle of"Site Planning that Respects Terrain"to be met by requiring less grading and fill to build the street. 6 SUMMARY: Staff's opinion is that the requirement for planting strips is inconsistent with the surrounding street network. Additionally,waiving the sidewalk requirements of 14-422(E)makes the request for a waiver of the planting strip requirements reasonable. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the four(4)requests outlined below: 1. Section 14-233 and 14-234-Authorization of a Private Street serving two lots within the Development Area with the following conditions: a. The private street shall be bonded prior to final plat approval. b. A private street maintenance agreement shall be recorded with the final plat. 2. Section 14-410 (I)—Exception of the curb and gutter requirement. 3. Section 14-422 (E)(2) -Exception of the sidewalk requirement. 4. Section 14-422 (F)(2)-Exception of the planting strip requirement. ATTACHMENTS: A. Area map B. Exhibit A—Plat&Private Street Detail C. Private Street Request(Applicant Justification) D. 14-404 Waiver Approval w/Conditions (SUB2007-182) 7 .64, n /�c� sip •_ 56b 0C�18 5565 r56'. : -..... _� —5489 �. . I 56D 10 / 8-21 56D-OB=9 «s - g3 /I� 5317311 c X /b' : o 4D-6910t \ N,� 5592' N. _�� ----• 555440� 5533/-�\' f� o ... c') V567�8 \ ` \ • \ 'r%56D_KA7.5555, `.. a r 56D-OB• /378 . �5 01--505323 j 1474"'" & 92556 -1A 56D-0G�4 _ 56D=0B-AB , °56HA0;1=�2 ^" "° -tea 1- 5525'56H-0 •"3384 5335 i \ �- 5586• "-- 5530� �6c—� - 1 I it "915"� . ' ^� / r1.545 '�y �,� ;!38856H-0 475341 `56H-01544• „� «a� rn ,0 900 S-56D-0'10 \M I e C-165582� 56D--0C-5'"�- -0 �"� �,56D--06'17A 551 39z •- - 5454 a— `� / 56D--0D� �5589_ /� '�56D-OC$.< lam\ tr tw -.S6H-01 56T0 •905' _ *- �56Dr-0C_15 ` • 5520 56D-08-1156D--0B_ �� 5472 v �° ,r ,, i 56D--0D�12�\ -5535� �5478. .r ° 5583- , r55-76 K ,� 5500 56H 01--A1 �} 1 �' �� s� S510 / �• r - � 5674 ' �� 56D-OD-13_;�� � � , 01--10543 � (� 608 ► - ._ ..., Q \ma`s 5577-- t-•• 5568 e/6 i. •i-0&16•5506 -56H=01=95459 .©� C' \ ` © / 56D-0B- 56D-;OE-1•s6. v ,� a C 14 \5500 5505) 0 5477� 5465t / , :+ O 1 56e- - J '�'S' ' A. yy '>-0315 6D-E_'-2� /' (. 6Ht-0-8 -6C-0C 56D-OC-8 1 - ?�` 5505ti�\ > /\A 56H`0 1--185839 u•,N N hrO� o AY 56D--0Ce13. s 1 56D--0 -3 / 1 ,156H-01�205833 56D--0C-9 � --- • D-16 _- 5558 �5$DzOG10 5�17 /11'? `5•82156N 01`19- Q 5- 6D=0C-12 524-� t '• ��- ss 37, / r a R ��, 6 �5565 5548 56D 40E��/ 0 4 SSD--0E�6 56H 0 I-2 < ..•. - s53656DD---0C-I� i- �b�/I 5'�l�7(/,r�- 5851 Nitokt• �' 56D-0E 122 11,a;• ;1_-'�_J V 5,an-B�:5t,3..30 56-37 \ ,. • 53 -j� \55_23I,.,l irre-* 56H-01-215820 , �` �`• E-175547°56D-0E�145529'S6D5481 AL. --\W ' S6D\--0E-7 5661 c ,te . -- /5541 5535\:..$.. .,, a7s q 1 CONCEPTUAL ��� 4/1" e"1 -16 _ 56D=0E+13// ° �15465) I545o I PLAN . `.7 //- //t.:, _ y.,_ ce! 10 �5455 �� 56M I 1156M-10 I -v I 'ES c• i �p:� _ _ � �E� ` 111I I i _628�,„1(11 Ig36, .- �- 580'ft= - h56H-01-31\t• �3 `6M�1•,1°,l�68j�1` ( 56 351 591• �j Q ROGER W. RAY & ASSOC..INC. 56M$I 6E3 BILLE, VR CRGINT GINIA 22901 �� .. \ ,41.\� 7, 6H-0 LAND SURVEYORS V LAND PLANNERS • 5541 t5 .i \56M:12 434-293-3195 ��tlllM., ATERVAIE'DR\ 5 6M-f13 I _ ` T71 ! icni . ,41,40 616•ft56M-165436 `-"fl'•-- _ - pr r t>-- �6� • 56F-01--A ir Zr0,11111111 \illikiiiii r.•,,,, 4, t 4.3:.:.‘ ? 659 40 ,11401.01.01111111111.7414111L6. N-4''4.%:.*44.41<kNilmo.....'N\-..., , ,..40 , INAIMIX...00.-. 56F:01,32._ '-,,,,,. • \ ei a 1 1%9 A 10„ 4 300 ft �� �:Ti ��� 56F 1-33926 923 :1_31 ' �4 — svwee ,•r _ a -0-� �, 1 EXHIBIT A' , 4' CONTOURS WERE TAKEN FROM THE ALBEMARLE'f�OUNTY`pis�D�ITA.' --__ �. _ __ __ t , PRIVAT- STREET REQUEST,'" , '600-,--- �' 6`,°-- ``� `; TE' pECENBER 2G:-2016 „� � -- ,1 , FVISED: APRIL 7. 2617_ • _ - �- '-�',„ `. ER M RAY 6 ASSOC.,INC / HFi00KM00D OK- PRpp�SED- co_ 663 BERKMAR COURT '/ , BLOCK 0,''SE Tiiak , 90 . ___-PRIVATE -- ,sF - CHA LOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22903 '� .,, i4 : '• . .--HL. , "• 13'1'3, -'�yAT /\v# .1'` STREET--- - - ? LAND S{iRVEYORS - LAND P�ANNEF ..t': 1 r i •�''-- ..," ,, ' BI SO.` cENT-ERLI€ ,--"_ • co -- --- 434 293-3195 6 ``,`` .\Nf s` ..:*s-: ,/: . :,::::.::::::::i T,1 ,1 '1,1 1 `, ,S\ '<"s L00VA2/ - ` . ' /©\.` -.`,``, r-'- '1-• / ,I\,,1,I \ .% 1' 11 11 ; ,„ 11 11 r K; , pP`►V Cb p / , ~ ' ` r 1 r rr ,rl ' '•, ' ', ,I , 11 1` �1 rr 1�1 r ,�l'pc 6 oSC, i .�Y G`\ '-k- Z 1 . t\__-' r d /' `t� 1 r r r t 6 J�1 v / r 1 r te r:':: 1 1 1 ,� , f N15'53'14'M ,, r /:::.y: r ; 1Vttv; Qr•, 50'6 r /; / ' QC0 V 1, yBpRp�OOKMObD SUBDIVISION, by , /' /A 59.29 r. 1R ; 1 �RON JZ o'%5 BLOCK E.' SECTION THREE i -AV,'o '', . , ,VARrA L IDT11; r . ouND ti , / co. S- ' ' , ;PRXLVA SEET / / ._ D.B. 1-31Z FLAT __ ,' ' ,- 'T.M.56-36 N15'53'14'M d� . 4 ' ME / ,/s \, '�`' 7= ,r� _- 'mot=—�_- �J,''/•',',, SM;CHARLOTTESVILLE:LLLC 74.68' i t ..' r , ,1 / ,/ (�',. sme / -------- ------- ------------`_-..' ' ' •' ••'• 'O.B.270-50 511 PLAT ,`/ r, ,, Q`',/, N. ' '�— TT6� . '` ,='--r c ---__- '`://'"',i i'�:o.,. N51'32'55.E ' '�/, -%s0• S. - - ------.7. ---- • jr 111.88 - % ,;'. rp.•q4�; //, 4 P -'" --- ------------------------------'' _ K .77- •,,,-','.1 • /'� ,1/�f" ;x �O A 0j�, ?a ' , ' SET t �:PMNB 'y�1'.' - ' '--- _- -------------•.SEfiV�CE A-----iY i r N 58'E ' ;,",' _ „r_ a , ems • - • LB IIATILE GOl7Ntlr- (iFHOFjI • 75.13' i i r 11'11,11,1, 'r'� _ i i pp�� --/-AO•' gQ 20'SANITARY E`R e /.'30 J i 1,1" ,'1 4 QY- , 5 f...-..--3 _-;, _- - -------IQ=4-6m=B97r495.34.. ). `\ 'c__-_- ALONG CENTERLRE 6itiligii s ss 1 se• to• n o I_ t_pr k-_--_' '-'''' _ -F'fir__ .:t,'7" -. .. - ✓'�,\_ `r am-- °=h _ f�ICKINGHOLE CR / � I \ $ ,. smE Pi . ,L.Pl,UP( S'G _6: 2414ER"- -M -{!; :7:f+tz>�.. .�_:....--T .4`:' ... ' 11 -'' AS IT MEANDERS• \ r T ,M- -- '- e= �93 •v. 'i- ` ! 0 B:3 B-59B T 6Ot PL•1t7= . .^:: . , MAJOR COURSES SHOWN Z° 4,1:27 -' 84,ALRta_ "'"'` 6 .� T _ rp 'SE 4 5 - N 9'2 1 - t ' a. p aPeq" / ',' ,',' :.r...'.....:::.:rr':. ... . .ems 1 , ............ . '...?. - .. :4 .............. N40 46 10 M 0-" ' 87'40' i. ICE ---_ t--- -- _- ,',' c :::.':'i:. : . .. ... SEWER AUTHdA(TY. r ¢ 5 I y -,.. RIVANNA,�IATER AND SE E 30'SANITARYEfI IiIGHIAP-MAY:' % 7 ...r... . .. - ... ...... ....... D B. f5-55,57 PLATHOL.L)( � 1 GRAPHIC SCALE 1'=100, d� ' 8 'i • / :�.L 0 100 200 ,300 i _ ` / i SHEET 1 OF 2 10901C TYPICAL SECTION (NOT TO SCALE) 2' 5' 5' 2' 3' : 3/B'vi' 3/B^^1`1:12 10' WIDE FILL TRAVEL CUT SECTION SURFACE SECTION PRIVATE STREET PROFILE FROM ALBEMARLE COUNTY GIS DTM 660 )660 655 655 650- 650 645 645 640 •L ��`` 640 . 635 635 630 630 625 5 625 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 HORIZONTAL SCALE : i" - 100' 63 ROGER W. RAY RK6 R ASSOCTINC. VERTICAL SCALE : 1" - 10' CHARLOTTESVILL. VIRGINIA 22901 LAND SURVEYORS LAND PLANNERS 434-293-3195 SHEET 2 OF 2 10901C ROGER W. RAY & ASSOC., INC. 663 Berkmar Court CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901 TELEPHONE: (434) 293-3195 FAX NUMBER: (434) 293-4202 E-MAIL: RWRINC@EARTHLINK.NET Brian S. Ray, LS Land Surveyors Roger W. Ray, LS Land Planners Albemarle County Planning Commission April 7. 2017 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 RE: Tax Map 56 Parcel 351 To Commission Members: As an agent for the property owners, Terry L. Plummer and Cheryl L. Plummer, and in accordance with Section 14-233.A.2 of the Albemarle County Subdivision Ordinance, I am requesting the approval of a Two-Lot Private Street to serve proposed Lot Al and Lot A as shown on the enclosed Exhibit A, dated December 29, 2016, revised April 7, 2017. am also requesting variations to the curb & gutter, sidewalk and planting strip requirements as provided in Sections 14-410(i), 14-422(E) and 14-422(F). We are proposing a rural section be used for the two lot street with no curb & gutter, sidewalks or planting strips. The proposed division is eligible for a private street since it is a two-lot subdivision. The owners are requesting the private street since it will allow significantly less environmental degradation verses a public street. The reduced width of the private street will require less grading and less impervious area. This request also meets each of the five findings listed in Section 14-234.C. as follows: 1. The private street will be adequate to carry the traffic volume which may be reasonably expected to be generated by the subdivision. This 2 lot private street shall be built to meet the requirements as defined under Section 14-412.A.1 as listed here: Each private street serving two (2) lots: (i) shall not exceed a sixteen (16) percent grade calculated over a distance of fifty (50) feet; (ii) shall have a travelway that is at least ten (10) feet in width; and (iii) shall include a rectangular zone super)acent to the driveway that is clear of all obstructions, including any structures and vegetation, that is at least ten (10) feet in width and fourteen (14) feet in height. 2. The comprehensive plan does not provide for a public street in the approximate location of the proposed private street; The comprehensive plan does not show any proposed public streets in this area. 3. The fee of the private street will be owned by the owner of each lot abutting the right-of-way thereof or by an association composed of the owners of all lots in the subdivision, subject in either case to any easement for the benefit of all lots served by the street. The fee of the private street will be owned by Lot A, as is runs across Lot A, in the new private street easement. 4. Except where required by the commission to serve a specific public purpose, the private street will not serve through traffic nor intersect the state highway system in more than one location; The private street only connects to Brookwood Road in one location and will only serve the two lots shown. 5. If applicable, the private street has been approved in accordance with section 30.3, flood hazard overlay district, of the zoning ordinance and other applicable law. The private street does not lie in a flood hazard overlay district. For the above reasons, the New Two-Lot Private Street meets the requirements of the Albemarle County Subdivision Ordinance to access the proposed New Lot Al and Lot A as shown. The streets in the Brookwood neighborhood have no curb & gutter, sidewalks or planting strips. This two lot street will connect directly to Brookwood Road which is a rural section road. The two lot street will never be a through street or serve additional lots. Therefore we are requesting the variations noted and recommended by county staff. Respectfully, Brian S. Ray, L.S. Copy: Ben Plummer cye `^�'t;h� ilk COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road,North Wing Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596 Phone(434)296-5832 Fax(434)972-4012 September 14,2007 Roger Ray 1717-1B Allied Street Charlottesville,VA 22903 RE: SUB2007-00182 Michael Booth—Waiver Tax Map 56,Parcel 35 Dear Mr.Ray: The Albemarle County Planning Commission,at its meeting on,unanimously approved the above-noted. petition with the following conditions: 1. No more than 2 dwelling units will be constructed on Lot A(13.96 acres). 2. The Board of Supervisors will either abandon the 50'right-of-way,which would access this property to the subdivision behind it/or grant the applicants the right to have a single private shared driveway under County standards to access the 2 dwelling units to be built. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action,please do not hesitate to contact me at(434)296-5832. Sincerely, CZIN," David Pennock Principal Planner Zoning and Current Development Cc: Booth,Michael Zinsser Or Charlotte Zinsser Booth 3626 Blufton Mill Road Free Union Va 22940 File TENTATIVE MAY 23, 2017 6:00 P.M. LANE AUDITORIUM,COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING 401 MCINTIRE ROAD 1. Call to order and establish quorum. 2. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public. 3. Consent Agenda (on next sheet). 4. Public Hearing Items. a. ZTA 201600007 —Utility Scale Photovoltaic Generation Facility The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to receive comments on its intent to recommend adoption of an ordinance amending Sections 18-3.1, Definitions, and 18-10.2.2, By Special Use Permit of the Albemarle County Code. The ordinance would amend Section 18-3.1 by adding a definition of solar energy systems. The ordinance would amend Section 18-10.2.2 to allow solar energy systems by special use permit in the Rural Areas (RA)zoning district. A copy of the full text of the proposed ordinance amendments is on file in the office of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and in the Department of Community Development, County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. (Margaret Maliszewski) 5. Committee Reports. 6. Review of Board of Supervisors Meeting—May 10, 2017. 7. Old Business. 8. New Business. a. ZTA201700001 Transient Lodging Transient Lodging presentation provided to the Board of Supervisors on May 10, 2017 (Rebecca Ragsdale) 9. Adjournment-8:00 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA a. SUB201700001 Ben Plummber Request for private street approval in development area for a two-lot subdivision.Associated with the request are special exception requests to permit a rural cross section void of curb&gutter, sidewalks, &planting strips. (Chris Perez) From: Greg Kamptner Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 10:03 AM L'(,AS S ) q- �� To: Bill Fritz Subject: FW: Zinnser-Booth Waiver Request i. f0 La L�/c. 4v- � 7 CJ Bill n k-- r '--�r(% s- This is for your information at this point and it pertains to SUB 2007-182 -- Michael Zinnser Booth and Charlotte Zinnser Booth. The PC granted a section 14-404 waiver last September 4 (see my memo to Corban Klug and the excerpt from the PC's September 4 Action memo below). Corban is an attorney with Scott Kroner and he represents the Booths. Bob Kroner and I had discussed this proiect and the Booths' options last October, and Bob has now assigned this project to Corban. Greg Kamptner Deputy County Attorney County of Albemarle Notice: This email may contain attorney-client privileged information.privileged work product,or other confidential information. It is intended only for the designated recipient. If you receive this message and are not a designated recipient you are requested to delete this message immediately and notify me that you have received this by mistake. Thank you. From: Greg Kamptner Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 9:57 AM To: 'Corban A. Klug' Subject: RE: Zinnser-Booth Waiver Request Corban- To follow up on my voice mail: The application before the Commission last September 4 was a waiver of the requirements of section 14-404 of the County Code, which requires that a subdivision take access from a single existing road. Your clients desired the waiver to gain access to Lot B from Route 240, and access to Lot A from an extension off of Brookwood Road. The multiple access points would allow the subdivision without requiring a road to cross Lickinghole Creek. Your clients agreed to restrict the development of Lot A to 2 dwelling units. The right-of-way off of Brookwood Road that would provide access to Lot A was dedicated to public use, but it was never built. One of the owners whose house abuts the right-of-way objected to it becoming an open public street. Condition 2 of the Section 14-404 waiver stated: "2. The Board of Supervisors will either abandon the 50' right-of-way, which would access this property to the subdivision behind it or grant the applicants the right to have a single private shared driveway under County standards to access the 2 dwelling units to be built." Under current VDOT regulations (and they are in the process of being revised), the State will not accept a public street serving a residential subdivision into the state maintained system unless it serves 3 or more dwellings. The condition gave your clients two options: (1) ask the Board of Supervisors for permission to allow what essentially would be a 2-lane private driveway across the public right-of-way; I'll note that County staff would likely recommend against this approach; (2) ask the Board of Supervisors to abandon the public right of way so that a private street could be built in its place; there are two issues related to this request--whether the Board would approve the request in the first place, particularly since it is in the County's development area identified in the Comprehensive Plan (it appears that the appropriate procedure in this case would be under Virginia Code 33.1-157 et sea)and, if so, to whom would the abandoned right-of-way be conveyed (see Virginia Code 33.1- 165). The Commission's approval with these conditions was not appealed to the Board of Supervisors. Your clients have two other options: (1) proceed with subdividing their land without the section 14-404 waiver; last week the Board of Supervisors amended the Water Protection Ordinance regarding stream crossings (see this link and the attachments: htttrf/www:alibemarle.org/upload/images/Forms Center/Departments/Board of Supervisors/For ms/Agenda/20030507/WPTAExecSummary.htm); or(2) re-apply for a section 14-404 waiver. I suggest that you also work with Bill Fritz and his staff in the Current Development Division of the Department of Community Development (296-5832) regarding this subdivision. Below is the Planning Commission action memo for your client's Section 14-404 waiver. SUB2007-00182 Michael Booth—Waiver DEFERRED FROM AUGUST 7 PC MEETING Proposal for a waiver to subdivision ordinance section 14-404, "Lot location to allow access from lot onto street or shared driveway". The request is for a waiver to allow each of two proposed lots to access out on to separate public streets. The property, described as Tax Map 56, Parcel 35, contains 45.6 acres zoned R1 (Residential)and EC (Entrance Corridor). This site is located in the Whitehall Magisterial District off Crozet Avenue [Route 240] across from Meadow Drive. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Crozet Community, with land use recommendations including CT-1 (Development Area Reserve), CT-2 (Development Area Preserve), CT-3 (Urban Edge), and CT-4 (Urban General). (David Pennock) Motion: Mr. Zobrist moved, Mr. Edgerton seconded, to approve the waiver of 14-404 for SUB-2007-00182 Michael Booth with the following conditions: 1. No more than 2 dwelling units will be constructed on Lot A(13.96 acres). 2. The Board of Supervisors will either abandon the 50' right-of-way, which would access this property to the subdivision behind it or grant the applicants the right to have a single private shared driveway under County standards to access the 2 dwelling units to be built. Mr. Kamptner clarified that they were actually in addition to and not an alternative to the motion. Ms. Joseph pointed out that when a driveway was put in that there would be standards. The County would be looking at it to make sure the drainage is not such that it would cause problems on Mr. Newton's property, which is adjacent. Mr. Shepherd pointed out that it would be a road that would have to be approved by the Planning Commission. It is a road serving 2 lots in the development area and would require Commission approval. Mr. Strucko said that it would be a common driveway instead of a road. Ms. Joseph pointed out that it was 1 road serving 2 lots in the growth area. Therefore, the r request would come back to the Commission. The motion passed by a vote of 7:0. (Mr. Zobrist voted aye with kudos to the applicant for making this great gift to the Crozet community.) • Ms. Joseph asked what the procedure would be next. Would this request qo to the Board of Supervisors with the Commission's recommendation? Mr. Kamptner replied that the waiver has been approved. There are some conditions to actually develop Lot A. The applicants needs to make a request to the Board of Supervisors as to the use of that property or to make a request that public right-of-way be abandoned in conjunction with the owners in the subdivision. Ms. Joseph said that it is up to the applicant to make that request. The recommendation from the Planning Commission will be for them to approve that. Mr. Ray asked if it would not be appropriate to do that when they submit the subdivision plat creating Lot A and Lot B. Mr. Kamptner said that was fine. If there is abandonment, of course, the Booths would want to obtain an easement over that abandoned right-of-way. Ms. Joseph acknowledged that it was a gift to the community. Greg Kamptner Deputy County Attorney County of Albemarle Notice: This email may contain attorney-client privileged information,privileged work product,or other confidential information. It is intended only for the designated recipient. If you receive this message and are not a designated recipient you are requested to delete this message immediately and notify me that you have received this by mistake. Thank you. From: Corban A. Klug [mailto:cklug@ascottkroner.comj Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 2:17 PM To: Greg Kamptner Subject: Zinnser-Booth Waiver Request Hi Greg: I received your message on Monday afternoon. I haven't heard from you and I thought I would check in. Give me a call at your earliest convenience. Thanks! Regards, Corban Corban A. Klug, Esq. Attorney at Law SCOTT KRONER, PLC 418 East Water Street P.O. Box 2737 Charlottesville,Virginia 22902 434.296.2161 (voice) 434.293.2073 (fax) www.scottkroner.corn