|
Staff
Analysis:
Staff and the appropriate referral agencies have reviewed
this request for conformance with the Comprehensive Plan,
the Zoning Ordinance, and other relevant policies and
regulations. Staff or referral agency findings, comments,
and recommendations are available upon request.
Requirements of the Zoning Ordinance
Section
7-301 of the Zoning Ordinance provides that private streets
are prohibited for all subdivisions in RA, RC and
residential zones unless a Special Exception is obtained in
accordance with the requirements of Section 5-2800 or
5-2900.
Section
5-2900 further provides that, in residential, RA and RC
zones, the Board of Supervisors may grant a Special
Exception to permit the construction of private streets
within a subdivision where the following standards are met:
1.
The requirements of the Virginia Department of
Transportation (VDOT) necessary for the dedication of public
streets will not permit the development of the proposed
subdivision in a manner, which is in harmony with the
surrounding character of the neighborhood or the proposed
development scheme.
2.
The proposed private streets, based upon anticipated
traffic generation volume, would adequately serve the lots
to be developed and provide sufficient emergency vehicle
access to the subdivision, and demonstration that adequate
provisions will be made to provide for continuing
maintenance and repair of the streets by a homeowners
association. For any subdivision with 80 lots or more, a
traffic impact analysis must be provided to establish the
justification of the request.
Planning
Office
The Planning
Office typically discourages the use of private streets, in
part, due to the long-term maintenance issues to the future
residents. In addition, private streets are frequently
extended to serve additional parcels that are further
divided, thus increasing the traffic impacts on these roads
with no design or construction requirements.
During its
review of this request the Board of Supervisors should
consider the following items:
-
Whether or not the proposed private street would be in
harmony with the surrounding character of the
neighborhood.
- The
development scheme of the subject property and the
adjoining developments, and how a private street would
fit in with these designs.
- The
requirement for continuing maintenance of the private
street by the homeowners.
- The
traffic impacts of the development on a private street.
-
Whether or not the proposed private street would align
with the County’s goals of protecting open space and
discouraging non-essential alternations to scenic,
agricultural, and historic areas.
- The
ability for any further development along this road or
the possibility of a future extension to serve other
parcels.
Engineering
The
Engineering office has reviewed the above referenced plan
and has the following comments:
1.
The proposed road location crosses soils that are
characterized as being hydric or having hydric soils
inclusions, which indicate the possibility of wetlands.
Wetlands permits may be required from the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality and the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers. Both DEQ and USACOE are currently
investigating possible wetlands disturbance violations on
this site.
2.
The lots that will utilize this road will generate 40
vehicles per day. The road width should accommodate two-way
traffic. A typical section of 18 foot width and 4 foot
shoulders is considered the minimum for this traffic count.
3.
All culverts will be required to pass the 10 year
storm and velocities will have to be non-erosive for the
2-year storm.
Soils
After
reviewing the above stated Special Exception, the soils
office has the following comments.
- State
source of the soil map as “Preliminary soils information
provided by Fauquier County Soil Scientist Office via
Type 1 Soil Report (mapped at 1”=400’) dated July 25,
2005.”
-
Include soil map units 480C and 480D in soil
interpretive information. State source as “Interpretive
Guide to the Soils of Fauquier County, Virginia, Fifth
Edition, 2004.”
- Due to
the presence of soils with a low bearing capacity (soil
map unit 14B), soils with a high seasonal water table
(14B, 480C and 480D), steep slopes (77D and 480D), soils
that are shallow to bedrock (77C and 77D), and multiple
drainageway and swale crossings, extensive design work
will be required to construct a stable, serviceable road
that does not impede water flow or cause erosion,
regardless of whether it is a private road or a public
road.
VDOT
The Warrenton Residency reviewed the above referenced
Special Exception for a waiver of public street
requirements, and has no comments. The entrance will need
to be constructed in accordance with VDOT Private
Subdivision/Street Entrance standards, and will need to
demonstrate that it meets sight distance requirements since
it will be serving three (3) or more lots.
Summary and Recommendations:
Staff
recommends that the Board hold a public hearing on this item
and consider that input as well as the Planning Commission’s
recommendation.
Staff has
several concerns with the applicant’s proposal:
- The
width of the road will not accommodate two-way traffic;
- It is
not clear if an emergency vehicle access and turnaround
has been accommodated;
- The
cul-de-sac length waiver request is nearly double the
by-right length;
- The
road maintenance for approximately 2400 linear feet of
road is a rather large financial obligation for an HOA
of 4 (four) homes;
- There
are pending DEQ and USCOE violations for possible
wetland disturbance related to the proposed road, which
has already been constructed;
- The
soils at the road location have high shrink swell
potential and require significant design work; and
- It is
not clear whether any of the neighboring parcels may
want (or need) to utilize this proposed road in the
future.
In addition,
the applicant has not submitted a Preliminary Plat for the
project. It is recommended that the Preliminary Plat be
submitted with this companion Special Exception so that the
Board of Supervisors may make its decision based on complete
information. Based on the concerns noted above, staff would
recommend that the Board either deny this item or consider a
90-day deferral period for this application, in order for
the applicant to work out some refinements.
|
