Loading...
13CW0106CASE MANAGER: Scott Flanigan I~f: ,i. t,w_.h.-r:.1 ~3 September 19, 2012 BS STAFF' S REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 13CW0106 Myers Iron Bridge Road -Myers Family Partnership, LP Dale Magisterial District South West line of Iron Bridge Road REQUEST: An exception to the requirements of Section 19-232 of the Zoning Ordinance as it relates to the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act. Specifically, the applicant is requesting to encroach into 0.19 acre of an existing Resource Protection Area (RPA) to perform grading and construction related to buildings, the road network and a stormwater management facility. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Under the Zoning Ordinance, a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act exception request goes directly to the Board of Supervisors without a Planning Commission recommendation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval with the three (3) conditions below for the following reasons: A. A Water Quality Impact Assessment (WQIA) has been approved by the Environmental Engineering Department. B. The proposed development is consistent with the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act. C. The six (6) findings, as required by Section 19-235 (b)(1) have been satisfied. Note: Approval of this request by the Board of Supervisors constitutes the Board's determination that the six (6) findings have been satisfied. CONDITIONS 1. The mitigation measures outlined in the document titled Myers Ironbridge Road Water Quality Impact Assessment Chesterfield County, Virginia, prepared by Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service Balzer and Associates, Inc; dated July 3, 2012 shall be incorporated and implemented during the plan review process. (EE) 2. The Department of Environmental Engineering may approve alternative mitigation measures if it is determined that such alternatives will not increase impacts to the RPA or downstream water bodies. (EE) 3. A twenty-five (25) foot Riparian Protection Area shall be maintained along the entire north side of the Resource Protection Area for parcel 772-660-1584 as shown on Exhibit B in the Staff's Request Analysis. No timbering shall be allowed in the Riparian Protection Area except as approved by Chesterfield County for the removal of dead or diseased trees. Destruction or alteration of the Riparian Protection Area, other than those authorized by Chesterfield County, shall be prohibited. No storage of materials, grading or construction for any structures or other improvements shall be allowed within the Riparian Protection Area. However, boardwalks, wildlife management structures, observations decks and one (1) informative sign may be placed within the Riparian Protection Area provided any such structure does not impede the natural movement of water and preserves the natural contour of the ground, and is subject to prior written approval by Chesterfield County. (EE and P) (NOTE: Approval of this exception is for encroachment into the RPA buffer only and does not guarantee development of the site as explicitly proposed in the WQIA referenced in Condition 1 above. Development of the site is subject to all ordinance requirements, review processes, and/or other requirements currently adopted at the time of plans review.) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: Myers Iron Bridge Road project is located at 10226 Iron Bridge Road, which drains to Swift Creek part of the Appomattox drainage basin. The encroachment request is located on parcel Tax ID 772-660-1584 per attached map. Existing Zonin C-3 and A Size: 14.99 acres Existing Land Use: The commercially zoned property fronting along Iron Bridge Road is mostly denuded, containing an access road to the adjacent commercial development and landscaping. The rear or southern portion of the parcel zoned agricultural is mostly forested. 2 13CW0106-SEP19-BOS-RPT Condition of Resource Protection Area: A historical spring box on the parcel provides the flow of an unnamed tributary which bisects the front portion of the subject property along Iron Bridge Road from the larger agricultural zoned tract at the rear of the property. The area of RPA buffer on the subject site, approximately six (6) acres, is located along parts of the northern boundaries of the parcel adjacent to all jurisdictional features associated with the unnamed tributary to Swift Creek (Exhibit A). The character of the RPA in the project area consists of either areas of impervious cover or denuded vegetation from current uses. The remaining RPA buffer is in good condition consisting of mature mixed hardwood forest and more than 1.31 acres of jurisdictional waters and forested wetlands associated with the perennial flowing channel. Area of Proposed Resource Protection Area Encroachment: The total area of the encroachment for this proposed development will impact approximately 35,793 square feet (0.82 acre) of which 11,981 square feet (0.27 acre) is existing forested buffer and 23,812 square feet (0.55 acre) is existing development and previously disturbed vegetative buffer. (Exhibit A) The area of the encroachment as part of this formal exception request, within the seaward fifty (50) feet of the limits of the RPA, may impact approximately 8,165 square feet (0.19 acre) of RPA buffer. Of the 8,165 square feet, approximately 1,833 square feet will be permanently disturbed as a result of grading and construction related to the proposed road, parking lot, commercial building and the retaining wall with the remaining 6,332 square feet converted during construction of the stormwater management facility. (Exhibit A) REQUEST On August 28, 1991 the Board of Supervisors approved rezoning request Case 91 SN0200 for commercial community business use development on a three (3) acre portion of this parcel fronting Iron Bridge Road. This was done prior to November 23, 2004, the Board of Supervisors amended the Zoning Ordinance in accordance with the mandate by the Commonwealth of Virginia under the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act regulations requiring among other things, that site-specific refinements of the RPA boundaries with respect to the determination of water bodies having perennial flow be conducted as part of the plan review process. The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act requirements of the Zoning Ordinance specify that a RPA be established adjacent to perennial water bodies, to include connected and contiguous wetlands. The RPA shall consist of an undisturbed 100 foot natural vegetative buffer area. On February 3, 2006 staff confirmed that the stream channel on the property had perennial flow and therefore the limits of RPA would extend into the project area of the parcel. On July 6, 2012 the applicant submitted a request in order to obtain relief through the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act exception process administered by the Environmental Engineering Department Water Quality Section. As a result of this submittal, the applicant has requested an exception for potential impacts to lands within designated Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas and downstream water bodies (Exhibit A). This means the portions of the site 3 13CW0106-SEP19-BOS-RPT improvements and stormwater management facility within this development will encroach into the remaining fifty (50) foot RPA if this request is approved. (Note: The applicant proposes to clear for site layout, buildings, stormwater management facility and road network.) Encroachments to the RPA within parcels recorded between October 1, 1989 and March 1, 2002 may be approved through an administrative process provided the request for encroachment pertains only to the first fifty (50) feet or landward fifty (50) feet of the RPA. In this request, the encroachment will also occur within seaward fifty (50) feet of the RPA therefore requiring approval of this encroachment from the Board of Supervisors. The applicant asserts that implementation of the limits of Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas, which include RPA and in this case connected and contiguous wetlands and vegetative buffer associated with the unnamed tributary to Swift Creek, would preclude the use of the existing portion of the parcel for the proposed development as originally planned. The applicant proposes to prepare the site for the development of a commercial building, such as a bank, which will complement the existing adjacent commercial structures and businesses. ANALYSIS To approve a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act exception request, the Board of Supervisors must determine that the proposed development satisfies the six (6) findings, outlined below, as required by Section 19-235 (b)(1). The following findings for granting such an exception are: Finding 1. The requested exception is the minimum necessary to afford relief. In order to provide continuity with existing improvements, namely the already existing road network and required development constraints the areas selected for the encroachment provided the least disturbance of the vegetation while utilizing existing encroachments or areas of denuded RPA while still meeting the project goals. The shared access point and use of a retaining wall minimizes the encroachment into the buffer area of the proposed development. Finding 2. Granting the exception shall not confer any special privileges upon the applicant that are denied by this division to other property owners who are subject to its provisions and who are similarly situated. The existing encroachments as part of the current uses occurred prior to Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act requirements. Development of the parcel requires the natural resources, including wetlands and historical spring box to comply with the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act area designations. The proposed request for encroachment into RPA buffer area is a result of site constraints (i.e. existing and recorded development, type of development, existing road network layout, topographical features, existing jurisdictional features), and the applicant's desire to allow for improvements similar to that which was previously intended as a result of the rezoning request case submittal of August 28, 1991. (91 SN0200) Finding 3. The exception request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this division and will not result in a substantial detriment to water quality. 4 13CW0106-SEP19-BOS-RPT Staff is satisfied in that the applicant has agreed to address water quality protection during all phases of development. The project provides for water quality improvements by the implementation of stormwater treatment facilities, reduction of planned buffer encroachments and the proposal of mitigation to include 0.81 acre riparian area as shown on Exhibit B. Finding 4. The exception request is not based upon conditions or circumstances that are self-created or self-imposed. In 1991, a portion of the parcel fronting the Iron Bridge Road commercial corridor was rezoned for commercial community business. The expectation was that this area would later be use for commercial developed. At the time the limits of the RPA did not extend onto the project area. In 2004, asite-specific requirement for determining perennial flow was adopted. In 2006, asite-specific assessment was approved indicating that the stream channel had perennial flow and therefore required RPA buffer area to be placed along the stream channel and any connected and contiguous wetlands associated with the channel. Compliance with this requirement extended the limits onto the project area limiting the available area for future development. Any development fitting for this area of the parcel would impact the RPA and therefore require the need for encroachment. Finding S. Reasonable and appropriate conditions are imposed, as warranted, that will ensure that the permitted activity will not cause a degradation of water quality. The applicant will employ erosion and sediment control standards during the construction process. Protection of the remaining buffer, reduction in buffer encroachment and preservation of additional riparian buffer will be provided in order for the protection of the remaining environmental resources on the adjacent portion of the parcel (Exhibit B). Proper best management practices will be employed to ensure treatment and proper disposal of storm water discharges as a result of the proposed and future development within the project area development. Finding 6. The request is being made because of the particular physical surroundings, use, shape or topographical conditions of the specific property involved or property adjacent to or within 100 feet of the subject property, or a particular hardship to the owner will occur, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of this division is carried out. The size and shape of the parcel, the existing topography and the location of the perennial flowing stream and historical spring box in this section of the property make this site difficult to accommodate the proposed use. Additionally the existing road network configuration and adjacent developments have resulted in a limited area in which to construct improvements outside of the newly formed buffer area. The request is based on the applicant's wishes to continue with the plan development which reflected the anticipated development prior to the 2004 adoption of the site-specific refinements of the limits of the RPA. Therefore, any proposed improvement of this nature would most likely result in an encroachment within the RPA buffer area. The applicant addressed these findings as part of the application process. See Attachment A. 5 13CW0106-SEP19-BOS-RPT CONCLUSION The applicant has requested an exception for potential impacts to lands within designated Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas, which include RPAs, as shown on Exhibit A. Implementation of the 20041imits of the RPA results in the inability for the applicant to use this area as originally approved by the Board of Supervisors in 1991 through the rezoning request (Case 91 SN0200) for commercial community business use development. The proposed encroachment into the 100 foot buffer would permit some development with the majority impacts within the areas existing encroachments. The applicant proposes to locate the project on the parcel such that development will comply with zoning, building setbacks and development standards. The applicant can still maintain a reasonable use while reducing the impact to the riparian area along the unnamed tributary. The request will also result in an additional 35,233 square feet (0.81 acre) of protected riparian buffer with the dedication of forested buffer areas adjacent to existing stream channel and associated wetlands on the remaining portion of the parcel as shown on Exhibit B. All mitigation measures are outlined in the document titled Myers Ironbridge Road Water Quality Impact Assessment Chesterfield County, Virginia, prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc; dated July 3, 2012 and shall be incorporated and implemented during the plan review process. Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve this request subject to the three (3) conditions and note included in this report. 6 13CW0106-SEP19-BOS-RPT ATTACHMENT - A Applicant's response to the six (6) findin sg as required by Section 19-235 (b)(1). REQUEST FOR AN EXCEPTION TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE Myers Family Partnership, LP Myers Iron Bridge Road 10226 Iron Bridge Road Tax ID # 772-660-1584 The following discussion addresses the exemptions and exceptions from Section 19-235 of the Chesterfield County Code. Each exception is addressed for the proposed Resource Protection Area impacts at the Brook Creek Crossing Phase 3 Subdivision site. Section 19-235 (b) Exceptions. (1) Exceptions to the requirements of sections 19-232 and 19-233 may be granted, subject to the procedures set forth in 19-235(b)(2), provided that a finding is made that: 1. The requested exception is the minimum necessary to afford relief: This exception request is the minimum necessary to meet County development requirements on this property. The site was originally designed with no RPA on the property based on the State and County policy in place at the time of zoning in 1991. A perennial flow determination was obtained for the onsite channels per the County's requirements on February 3, 2006. The channels onsite were determined to be perennial. Prior to the institution of the RPA on the site there was approximately 1.36 acres of RPA disturbed by an existing house, gas station and associated clearing. An additional 0.34 acres was disturbed by a portion of the parent track with the approved Walgreens-Iron Bridge WQIA. The requested exception is the minimum necessary to afford relief based on the applicants following design modifications: a. The applicants are utilizing a shared entrance with the Walgreens located to the east. This entrance was designed to reduce the amount of impacts to the RPA and spring box. b. The applicants are proposing to build a retaining wall along the southern edge of the property in order to minimize impacts to the wetlands and RPA. c. The applicants have reduced the County's landscape setback from 75' to 50' along Ironbridge Road to reduce further encroachment into the site. d. The property was zoned C-3 in 1991 and is located within the County's community mixed use planned area along Ironbridge Road. 2. Granting the exception will not confer upon the applicant any special privileges that are denied to other property owners who are similarly situated: 13CW0106-SEP 19-BOS-RPT The exception request being made adheres to the regulations and guidance stated within the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance. The requested exception does not provide the owner any additional privileges over other owners with the area. This property has been owned by the Myers Family Trust since before 1980. Portions of the property were cleared and/or developed prior to the institution of any RPA regulations. The existing property is located along Ironbridge Road and is surrounded by developed properties that were developed prior to Chesterfield County RPA regulations. The size and configuration of the property, in relation to the Ironbridge Road improvements, adjacent properties and the RPA make the development of this property a unique case compared to other cases. The total property is 15.24 acres, however, only 3.1 acres along Ironbridge Road is zoned commercial and of that only 1.5 acres is outside of existing wetlands. 3. The exception request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation requirements of the Zoning Ordinance: The proposed development will not result in a substantial detriment to water quality. The site currently contains approximately 0.43 acres of previously disturbed RPA, primarily cleared area associated with the former house on the property. The applicants propose to provide a stormwater management facility on the property to provide water quality treatment. Due to the configuration of the property and the proximity of the streams, the only possible location for stormwater management is within the RPA. The remainder of the property cannot be used for stormwater management since the development will not be able to drain to the other side of the stream. Additionally, the existing wetlands will be preserved onsite to provide a water quality buffer between Ironbridge Road, the development and the perennial stream. The grading and retaining wall to be located on the site will ensure that all sediment during construction and post-construction pollutants will be diverted into the stormwater management basin. Additional RPA will be preserved on the property downstream of the site to help ensure better water quality within the streams onsite. A total of 35,233 square feet of forested area outside of the existing RPA will be preserved in conjunction with this plan. 4. The proposed exception is not based upon conditions or circumstances that are self-created or self-imposed: The Myers Family Trust has owned the property since before 1980. In 1992 the parent tract was subdivided for a gas station located to the east of this site. At this time there were no RPA regulations in Chesterfield County. There was also a house with a cleared yard on the property. The gas station and cleared yard are located within what is now the RPA. The site currently contains approximately 0.43 acres of previously disturbed RPA. 5. Reasonable and appropriate conditions have been imposed that will prevent the allowed activity from causing a degradation of water quality Past encroachments indo the RPA exist from the development/construction of Ironbridge Road, the former BP gas station, the development of the Walgreens, and the former house on the property. Erosion control measures will include safety fence, diversion dikes, silt fence and super silt fence 8 13CW0106-SEP19-BOS-RPT along RPA. A sediment basin or sediment traps will be constructed in the location of the pond during construction to control sediment on the site. The retaining wall to be constructed along the edge of the development will ensure that sediment and post-construction runoff will be diverted to the stormwater management facility. The stormwater management facility outfalls will have outlet protection and energy dissipators as necessary to reduce the velocity of the stormwater discharge to prevent potential impacts downstream. See Finding 3. above for proposed project compensation that will positively effect onsite water quality. 6. The request is being made because of the particular physical surroundings, use, shape or topographical conditions of the specific property involved or property adjacent to or within 100 feet of the subject property, or a particular hardship to the owner will occur, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of this division is carried out: The request is being made based on a hardship to the owner due to the size and shape of the buildable area outside of the RPA and wetlands. Without the impacts shown on the plan, the site would not be buildable. The location of the existing spring and stream onsite added to the fact that the zoned portion of the property is only along Ironbridge Road, the property was zoned prior to the RPA regulations and it is located in a primary commercial corridor of Chesterfield County. These are hardships based on existing conditions, unique parcel shape, and topographic conditions that are not owner caused and the impacts are not being done for mere convenience. 13CW0106-SEP 19-BOS-RPT y y ` ~ ~ N ~ ~,o r~ 1 ~ a w ti - N 1 s~ Q I 1 ~ 1 ~ _ O U w~ W3a ~~ o ' N ~o • a ¢U W W ~~ ~ ' ~~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ' U 11 ®I A V ~ ~ ¢ I U = I ¢ ~ _~~ oQ ' N • ~ ~ ~ (, U O N U U W ''~~ ¢ ~ ' U ~` ~~ ¢ w ~I N 1 U `~ U N', U I " I O N =O ~ 'CJ ¢ ..¢:: ~... N.. .. U ~ Y... ...1 ... .. .. .. ...... 0 ` ~ ':::t:::::::::::: W ¢ N ¢ / .. ~..... l ~' r.: ' (~ ~ ~ ~ .:::c::::::::::~ ¢ J~ ~ ~ ::: *~::::::. \ ..~.... ~, Nl Qg U ¢ ::::\ O ~ ¢ U ¢ f ~ ^ ¢ / 1 D ~~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ \ I U ^ ¢ ¢ , ~ i ~ ~ w N > ~~' ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ z cn ~ ~ woo ~ ~ ~ a~ N i Q ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ i i ~ _ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ o z --~~'VI -- ¢ oW~ o o ¢' ; N ~~Q ¢ U U ~ a N M a ¢ _ HiNi~ain'uNnoo a~ei~aelseHO ~~ w~ ~ ~ o io ~oialsia vanwaaa _ 3 - ~ m NH~d SlOHd W I 'dIOM ~ m m ~ Q ~~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~~aide Noai-sa~~w ~ o ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 _ vlwoaln'uNnoo a331~a31s3HO ~V o w~ d o ~ . _ _ _ _ rv `J~Il11SI4 HOII Wl139 " _ - ~ _ ~ - NH3d NOIlHSN3dW00 HIOM m m O ~~' ~ ~ ~ ~~aiae Noarsa~~.w o ~ o ~ ~ ~ N ~~_ ~ ~~, ~~ i __ ,, _ __ ~,~~ - ~, ~, ~~, ~~ ; a ~~ ~~ _ ~~~ ~~~ ~' ', .. - ~ r i ~' ~ ~~~~~~ A ` i ~ ~~ _ ~, ~ . / ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ '~ _ -- ~ ~ ~~ _ ~ ~ t _ i -- -_- ~ _- ~#. ~t ~ ~ ~+i ~ ~d ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~_ _~~ ,~ r „ ~ ,~ ,~ _,, '~, ~, ~ ~~ i / ~~~ ~ ~ ~ -,,~ . ~ m \ ~~ o- ~ ~ ~_ - ~-- ~~ - ~'~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ ,~ ~~~ '. - 1 ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ =- ~~-_ I ~~ ~~ ~ 1 ~ ~ _ ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~_ ~~ I ~, ~ ; ~ ~ ~ I -- -_ ~ ~ ~ 1 -_ _ ~ ~, ~ f - \I f 1 ~ 1 ~I f \~ \\ - _ I ~ I / 1 I ~ J I l L li~l \I I ~ I i__-_ ~ / -- I / ~ ~ f 1 1 I 1 a ; ( J/ \1 / \ \ __\ [ ~ I ~ I // i / / 1 \~ 1 7 I 1\ \~ I ` ~ ~ ~ __-~_i I \~ 1 \ I, I ~~\ ~ 1~ I l ~ \ I / 1.~ f ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ f I I~, / I \~ I ~ I%+ I \ ~ I f ~ \ \ I i$.I \~ 1 ~ ~ / / / ~ i \ ` \ \ \ 1 ~ I / l / l j / ~ ~ l ` \I ~ / I \ \ I I 1 lp l~ ~1 ~ ~~ I ~ ~ 11~ \\ I\ I f ~ ~ I 1 ~ ~ ~ l ~ 1~\ 1 ~~ ~~ 1 1 \~ \ ~ 1 / 1 I 1 I 1 1 - ~ ~ 1~ \~ I I I I i ~ I ~ l ~ 1 1 ~ \ ~ \-°. I I I ~ 1 1 I ~ ~ I I I P I S ~ ~~ \1 1 1 ~ 1 ~ _ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1/// I ~ I 1 a ~ 1 I _- ~ I z \I / ~ _ d _ _ _ / I I Il \I - ~ I I/ / w _ x a u I ~ / _ / - / \ / ~ I - ~ / .-~ a ~ l l ~ ` \ - ~ ~ ! I / I/ ~ ( I I 1 f I ,-- ~ ~ I I w l ~ 11 I ~ ~` ~\ a>a I ~ i ' ` ~-~~--- ~ i ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ _ _, ~ ~ ~ ~~ -~ ~ ~' ~ ~ \ I ~', ~~~ 13CW0106-2