County Staff Report Available Now

The Albemarle County Planning Staff Report on the Arden Place development is available now in PDF form. Click here to open or download it.

A associated document from Deputy County Attorney, Greg Kamptner, is available from Albemarle County.

Update: Here is the actual request for waiver to build a pedestrian path instead of a road. In particular note the first paragraph on page 2. See the comments below for details.

4 thoughts on “County Staff Report Available Now

  1. There seems to be conflicting recommendations in the staff report. Near the bottom of page 7 we find:

    "Staff recommends approval of the waiver of section 32.7.2.4. The proposed access to the
    Woodbrook subdivision should be limited to pedestrian access only."

    However, near the bottom of page 8 the report says:

    "The connection to Woodbrook should, at a minimum, accommodate pedestrians, bicycles and emergency vehicles."

    These two requirements are very different. The first suggests a footpath with minimal grading and environmental impact, the second suggests a full width road, bridge, culvert and re-grading to 10% slope contour.

    So which is it?

  2. Dan notes confusion that I have found in talking with folks in the planning office, namely whether emergency vehicles should be able to use the walkway. If so, it's a "beefier" pathway for sure.

    I think we heard Saturday that the emergency access problem had been solved another way. If true, it apparently hasn't shown up in the staff report.

    Steve Wilson

  3. I've written both Andy McGinty, the developer, about this point of confusion as well as Gerald Gatobu, Principal Planner for the County. Here is Mr. McGinty's reply:

    ———-

    Mr. Gould,

    Thank you for bringing that to our attention. I believe that is simply an oversight due to the last minute change.

    The development team’s request is for pedestrian and bicycles only – no emergency connection.

    Your points are very accurate – there would be a much greater impact on the slopes, stream and woodland preservation should the construction of an emergency connection be required.

    I’ve copied Gerald at the county so he is aware of the discrepancy.

    Thanks,

    Andy

  4. Mr.Gatobu was kind enough to call me about this. Here's how it was explained to me.

    The note on page 8 is intended only to draw attention to the fact that the development does require emergency access, not that such is specifically required via Woodbrook. (Although the wording on page 8 seems to indicate otherwise.)

    However, as it turns out, it doesn't really matter. Only the actual waiver request matters — and it does *not* request vehicular access via Woodbrook. (See the original post above these comments for a link to the actual waver request from the Arden Place developers.) If the waver is approved (and the staff report recommends that is) we get a footpath and no vehicular access.

Comments are closed.