Loading...
01SN0170-Feb28o.pdfFebruary 28, 2001 BS STAFF'S REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 01SN0170 Compson at Courthouse L.C. Matoaca Magisterial District South line of Iron Bridge Road REOUEST: Amendment to (Case 98SN0185) relative to road improvements within Beach Road. Deletion of a requirement to construct a raised median on Beach Road from Iron Bridge Road to the southern boundary of the subject property is requested. (Proffered Condition 7.f. of Case 98SN0185) PROPOSED LAND USE: A shopping center and related out parcels as well as office uses are being, or have been, developed on the property. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend denial for the following reason: The deletion of the requirement to construct a raised median will possibly increase traffic congestion and the potential for accidents during peak periods on Beach Road near the Beach Road/Route 10 intersection. Providing a FIRST CHOICE Community Through Excellence in Public Service. GENERAL INFORMATION Location: South line of Iron Bridge Road and west line of Beach Road. 5718, 770-660-4296 and 770-661-4379, 5546 and 6078 (Sheet 25). Existing Zoning: C-3 Size: Tax IDs 769-661-Part of 13.7 acres Existing Land Use: Commercial or vacant Adjacent Zoning and Land Use: North - A, C-2 and O-2 with Conditional Use Planned Development; Office, commercial or vacant South - A; Single family residential or vacant East - A and C-2 with Conditional Use Planned Development; Single family residential, public/semi-public, office and commercial West - A; Vacant UTILITIES Public Water and Wastewater Systems: This request will not impact the public water and wastewater systems. The use of the public water and wastewater systems are required by an existing condition of zoning under Case 98SN0185. (Proffered Condition 1) ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC FACILITIES The deletion of Proffered Condition 7.f. will not have an impact on these facilities. Transportation: In July 1998, the Board of Supervisors approved rezoning (Case 98SN0185) to Community Business (C-3) to permit development of a commercial and office project. Based on 2 01SN0170/WP/FEB280 general office and retail trip rates, this development could generate 7,700 average daily trips. As part of that zon/ng approval, the Board of Supervisors accepted several transportation proffers. One (1) of those proffers (Case 98SN0185 Proffered Condition 7.f.) requires the developer to construct a raised median within Beach Road from Iron Bridge Road (Route 10) to the southern boundary of the request site, with median breaks at Krause Road and at the site access road. The proffer requires the Beach Road median to be designed and constructed to preclude vehicles exiting the request site from traveling north on Beach Road and to preclude vehicles traveling southbound on Beach Road from turning left onto Krause Road. The applicant is seeking an amendment to this zoning case by requesting deletion of the proffered condition regarding construction of the Beach Road median. Staff does not support the applicant's request. Subsequent to the 1998 rezoning, a site plan (Courthouse Commons Shopping Center) was submitted and approved for development of part of the commercial property within the request site. The approved site plan included a requirement to install the raised median within Beach Road, as per the proffered condition. As road construction activity began along Beach Road, adjacent property owners expressed concerns about the raised median being constructed from Route 10 to Krause Road. This section of the Beach Road raised median will restrict left turn movements into Krause Road, as well as left turn movements into and out of the existing bank in the southwest corner of the Beach Road/Route 10 intersection. The developer of the shopping center has not constructed the raised median from Route I0 to Krause Road, but did construct the raised median from Krause Road to the southern boundary of the request site. The section of the median that was installed precludes vehicles exiting the shopping center from traveling north on Beach Road. The proposed amendment would relieve the developer of the obligation to install the raised median along Beach Road from Route 10 to Krause Road and allow the developer to remove the existing raised median that was recently installed. Removal of the Beach Road median will require Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) approval. As previously noted, the section of the raised median that was not installed along Beach Road by the shopping center developer will restrict left turning movements into and out of the existing bank. In conjunction with development of the bank parcel in 1986, direct access was provided to Route 10 and Beach Road. These accesses are located approximately 200 feet from the Beach Road/Route 10 intersection. As traffic volumes increase along Route 10 and Beach Road, it will become increasingly difficult and unsafe to access the bank site from these major roadways, especially during peak traffic periods. To provide alternative access to the bank parcel, a proffered condition for development of the Courthouse Commons Shopping Center (part of subject parcel) requires the recordation of an access easement across the shopping center property to allow traffic generated by the bank to use the shopping center accesses onto Route 10 and Beach Road. 3 01SN0170/WP/FEB280 To prevent increased traffic volumes at the bank accesses, these two (2) developments should only be connected when both existing bank accesses are closed. In addition, the raised median that was not constructed will restrict left turn movements from Beach Road into Krause Road. To access properties/existing developments along Krause Road after restriction of the left turn movement, traffic can turn right from Route I0 at several existing access locations. The shopping center developer installed a raised median in Beach Road along the site frontage, with a median break that only allows vehicles to turn left from Beach Road into the site. The Beach Road/Route 10 intersection is controlled by a traffic signal. Traffic generation by full development of the 14.2 acre development could warrant a traffic signal at the existing access onto Beach Road. This access is located approxin~ately 700 feet south of Route 10. Traffic signals this close together will increase traffic delays and result in congestion. To reduce the possibility of a traffic signal being needed at this Beach Road access, the raised median was installed. This request amendment to the proffered condition would allow for the removal of this median and possibly create the need for a traffic signal. The Transportation Department does not support a traffic signal at this location. Beach Road is identified on the Thoroughfare Plan as a major arterial. The 2000 traffic count on Beach Road was 11,322 vehicles per day. As development continues to occur in this area of the County, the volume on Beach Road is anticipated to increase substantially. It is anticipated that the traffic volume on this section of Beach Road will increase to nearly 24,000 vehicles per day in the next 20 years. Beach Road will need to be improved to a four (4) lane divided roadway, which typically includes a raised median. No funding is included in the current Six Year Secondary Road Improvement Program for Beach Road. As traffic volumes continue to increase along Beach Road, the raised median will better control turning movements, thereby reducing congestion and the potential for accidents during peak periods on Beach Road near the Beach Road/Route 10 intersection. Staff does not support deleting the requirement for the raised median within Beach Road. LAND USE Comprehensive Plan: Lies within the boundaries of the Central Area Plan which suggests the request property is appropriate for community mixed uses which include shopping centers and other commercial and office uses. The Plan further indicates that appropriate land use transitions should be provided between existing and future residential development and higher intensity uses. 4 01SN0170/WP/FEB280 Area Development Trends: Properties along this portion of the Iron Bridge Road corridor, in the vicinity of the Iron Bridge Road/Beach Road intersection, are characterized by a mix of office, commercial and public/semi-public (Chesterfield County Government Center and U.S. Post Office ) uses and by vacant, agriculturally zoned property, transitioning to single fmnily residences on acreage parcels south of the intersection, along Beach Road. It is anticipated that these development patterns will continue in the future. Zoning History: On July 29, 1998, the Board of Supervisor, upon a favorable recommendation by the Planning Commission, approved rezoning to Community Business (C-3) to allow development of a commercial/office complex. Numerous proffers were accepted, one of which required construction of a raised median along Beach Road to control turning movements. The details of that proffered condition are discussed in the "Transportation Section" of this Request Analysis. This application proposes deletion of this requirement. CONCLUSIONS Ifa raised median is not provided to control turning movements, an increase in congestion and the potential for accidents during peak periods on Beach Road, near the Beach Road/Route 10 intersection is possible. Given these considerations, denial of this request is recommended. CASE HISTORY Plaiming Commission Meeting (2/20/01): The applicant did not accept staff's recommendation, but did accept the Planning Commission's recommendation. There was no opposition present. Mr. Marsh stated that until such time that the southern access road and traffic signal are constructed and installed, the existing median should be removed within Beach Road and the requirement to construct a median in Beach Road should be deleted. Mr. Cunningham expressed concern that eventually a median would be necessary within Beach Road to control traffic movements and if the requirement to construct the median is deleted taxpayers would have to pay for its construction in the future. 5 01SN0170/WP/FEB280 Messrs. Gulley and Gecker both expressed concern, that taxpayers may ultimately have to pay for the median construction. Mr. Litton indicated that if a traffic signal existed at the westermnost access to the shopping center on Iron Bridge Road, it would allow for better westbound turning movements onto Iron Bridge Road from the project, and the raised median on Beach Road would be beneficial. Without that signal, he indicated the best way to go west on Iron Bridge Road from the shopping center is to turn left onto Beach Road, which is precluded with a raised median. On motion of Mr. Marsh, seconded by Mr. Litton, the Commission recommended approval of this request. AYES: Unanimous. The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, February 28, 2001, beginning at 7:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 6 01SN0170/WP/FEB280 A ^ ~-2 , c-5 V A V A AC AC- W KRAUSE RD HH A A H A ZC 0 6OO IIIII Feet 01SN0170 AMEND ZONING Sh. 25 CASE 01SN0170 GENERAL ILLUSTRATION OF POTENTIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT E)ISNOI70-! BANK N ~1~ EXISTIN( ~ EXISTING MEDIAN '~ EXISTING DIRECTIONAL CROSSOVER t m MEDIAN (NOT CONSTRUCTED) Q DIRECTIONAL CROSSOVER (NOT CONSTRUCTED)