Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Right Of Way Trees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dispute over tree removal, VDOT work order and right‑of‑way discussed for 623 Mineral Avenue
Summary
A property owner and councilors reviewed a VDOT work order and correspondence for 623 Mineral Avenue; the owner said the trees are on private property and VDOT records in the meeting packet reflect that status, while the town described a single work order that covered multiple locations after a storm.
Get email alerts on the Right Of Way Trees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Walter Cameron Jr., a local property owner, presented a packet of documents at the Dec. 8 council meeting about 623 Mineral Avenue and a related VDOT work order. Cameron told the council he checked the meeting packet and the VDOT correspondence and said the work‑order notes indicate the trees in question were on private property, not in the VDOT right‑of‑way.
"So if you get down to the very last part ... it said that the trees are not in the V. right away, and they belong to the property owner," Cameron said, summarizing the VDOT correspondence he provided.
Town staff and the clerk explained the town had submitted a single work order after a storm to clear a tree that fell across the road and asked VDOT to review dead trees; staff said the single work order covered two different locations and that the crew had inspected and determined some trees were not dead and that some were not in VDOT's right‑of‑way. The clerk said the town measured an 80‑foot right‑of‑way (40 feet from the centerline each side) in consulting with VDOT staff.
Councilors and attendees debated notification: property owners said they received no notice prior to a contractor visit, while staff said correspondence and work‑order notes in the packet documented the sequence and that VDOT's follow‑up concluded the area in question is private property. The property owner raised concerns about compensation if VDOT action damaged trees and sought more consistent notification for residents before removals.
No vote or enforcement action was taken; council members asked staff to continue fact‑finding and to return with clarified documentation about right‑of‑way lines, the work‑order history and any required notification process.

