The URL can be used to link to this page

13SN0501 CASE MANAGER: Ryan Ramsey May 22, 2013BS ADDENDUMII 13SN0501 Church #9509 LP Clover Hill Magisterial District Southwest line of Midlothian Turnpike REQUEST:Amendment of zoning (Case 01SN0276)relative to the location of a traffic signal in Neighborhood Business (C-2) and Community Business (C-3) Districts. PROPOSED LAND USE: Neighborhood and community business uses, except as restricted by previous conditions of zoning, are planned. This application would modify the location of a proposed signalized intersection to provide access to the request properties. The purpose of this addendum is to advise the Board that the applicant’s amended proffer was submitted prior to the advertisement of the zoning request in the newspaper.In addition, updated comments from Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)are also being providedbased upon the Department’s review of the revised proffered condition. On May 6, 2013 the applicant amended Proffered Condition 1. Since the amended proffer was submitted priorto the advertisement of the casein the newspaper (May 8, 2013), it will not be necessary for the Board to suspend their procedures to consider the revised proffered conditionas incorrectly noted in the previous addendum. Staff continues to recommend denial of this request for reasons outlined in the “Request Analysis.” PROFFERED CONDITION The property owners and applicant in this case, pursuantto Section 15.2-2298 of the Code of Virginia (1950 as amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County, for themselves and their successors or assigns, proffer that the property under consideration will be developed according to the following proffer if, and only if, the request submitted herewith is granted with only those conditions agreed to by the owners and applicant. In the event this request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to by the owners and applicant, the proffer shall immediately be null and void and of no further force or effect. 1.Access from the Property to Route 60 shall be limited to one entrance/exit. The entrance/exit shall be limited to right turns in and out and the location shall be approved by the Transportation Department, unless the Virginia Department of Ð®±ª·¼·²¹ ¿ Ú×ÎÍÌ ÝØÑ×ÝÛ ½±³³«²·¬§ ¬¸®±«¹¸ »¨½»´´»²½» ·² °«¾´·½ »®ª·½» Transportation (“VDOT”) approves a signalized crossover at the existing median break just west of the Tuxford Road intersection; should VDOT not approve a signalized crossover at the existing median break just west of the Tuxford Road intersection, the previously-approved signalized intersection approximately 600’ west of Tuxford Road will remain in full force and affect. If VDOT approves a signalized crossover to serve the Property, then right and left turn lanes shall be provided as approved by VDOT.(T) (Staff Note: This Proffered Condition supersedes Proffered Condition 1 of Case 01SN0276) Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT): Be advised that, at this time, theDepartmenthas not received adequate information tosupport a signal along this corridor in order to meet the previously outlined proffered conditions and that a review of any proposed work within the VDOT Right of Way,including a “signalized intersection approximately 600feetwest of Tuxford Road”,shall be required through the site plan submittal process. Elements of the review, previously noted in VDOT comments dated January 17, 2013 apply. Identified below are those elements. All proposed road improvements will need to be shown onapproved site plan(s): During site plan review stage, VDOT staff will provide specific recommendations regarding roadway design elements –to include review of proposed signal locations, turn lane design, roadway geometrics, pavement design, queuing at possible signal location(s), and potential impact Route60 traffic operations. Specific land uses and densities that are identified during the plan review stage could impact VDOT’s recommendations and final site plan approval. Note: As the spacing between signals is reduced and/or land use densities are increased – ensuring adequate operations along Route 60 can become more difficult. Previous submittals: Our records show that the most recent plan submissions for this project were in October of 2010 and included two (2) parts -one set of plans for the proposed site work, and a second set of plans for the associated road improvements. Should the applicant elect to proceed with either of these proposals, please note that prior to issuance of a permit for any construction activity within Route 60 right-of-way, these plans will need finalized and any remaining or outstanding comments will need to be addressed. Signal Warrants: Development land uses and densities and resulting traffic generation will be evaluated with respect to MUTCD signal warrants. We understand that several land use anddensity combinations have been considered in the past –signal warrant analysis is impacted by final land uses and densities chosen as well as by the phasing anticipated for those developments. î ïíÍÒðëðïóÓßÇîîóÞÑÍóßÜÜóî CASE MANAGER: Ryan Ramsey May 22, 2013BS ADDENDUM 13SN0501 Church #9509 LP Clover Hill Magisterial District Southwest line of Midlothian Turnpike REQUEST:Amendment of zoning (Case 01SN0276)relative to the location of a traffic signal in Neighborhood Business (C-2) and Community Business (C-3) Districts. PROPOSED LAND USE: Neighborhood and community business uses, except as restricted by previous conditions of zoning, are planned. This application would modify the location of a proposed signalized intersection to provide access to the request properties. The purpose of this addendum is to advise the Board of applicant’s revised proffered condition. On May 6, 2013 the applicant amended Proffered Condition 1. Proffered Condition 1would allow Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)to determine if a new traffic signal canbe installed at the existing median break on Route 60.With the requested amendment, if VDOTdoes not approve a traffic signal at the existing median break, the applicant may pursue the approval ofa traffic signal byVDOT atalocation approximately 600 feet west of the Tuxford Roadintersection. Staff continues to recommend denial of this request for reasons outlined in the “Request Analysis.” NOTE: SINCE THE AMENDED PROFFER WASSUBMITTED SUBSEQUENT TO THE ADVERTISEMENT OF THE CASE, IT WOULD BE NECESSARY FOR THE BOARD TO SUSPEND THEIR PROCEDURES TO CONSIDER THE REVISED PROFFERED CONDITION. PROFFERED CONDITION The property owners and applicant in this case, pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of the Code of Virginia (1950 as amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County, for themselves and their successors or assigns, proffer that the property under consideration will be developed according to the following proffer if, and only if, the request submitted herewith is granted with only those conditions agreed to by the owners and applicant. In the event this requestis denied or approved with conditions not agreed to by the owners and applicant, the proffer shall immediately be null and void and of no further force or effect. Ð®±ª·¼·²¹ ¿ Ú×ÎÍÌ ÝØÑ×ÝÛ ½±³³«²·¬§ ¬¸®±«¹¸ »¨½»´´»²½» ·² °«¾´·½ »®ª·½» 1.Access from the Property to Route 60 shall be limited to one entrance/exit. The entrance/exit shall be limited to right turns in and out and the location shall be approved by the Transportation Department, unless the Virginia Department of Transportation (“VDOT”) approves a signalized crossover at the existing median break just west of the Tuxford Road intersection; should VDOT not approve a signalized crossover at the existing median break just west of the Tuxford Road intersection, the previously-approved signalized intersection approximately 600’ west of Tuxford Road will remain in full force and affect. If VDOT approves a signalized crossover to serve the Property, then right and left turn lanes shall be provided as approved by VDOT.(T) (Staff Note: This Proffered Condition supersedes Proffered Condition 1 of Case 01SN0276) î ïíÍÒðëðïóÓßÇîîóÞÑÍóßÜÜ CASE MANAGER: Ryan Ramsey February 19, 2013CPC April 16, 2013 CPC May 22, 2013 BS STAFF’S BS Time Remaining: REQUEST ANALYSIS 365 days AND RECOMMENDATION 13SN0501 Church #9509 LP Clover HillMagisterial District Southwest line of Midlothian Turnpike REQUEST:Amendment of zoning (Case 01SN0276)relative to the location of a traffic signal in Neighborhood Business (C-2) and Community Business (C-3) Districts. PROPOSED LAND USE: Neighborhood and community business uses, except as restricted by previous conditions of zoning,are planned.This application would modify the location of a proposed signalized intersection to provide access to the request properties. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND DENIAL. AYES: MESSRS. BROWN,GULLEY AND WALLER. NAY: DR. WALLIN. ABSENT: MR. PATTON. RECOMMENDATION Recommend denialfor the following reason: The proposal does not provide adequate crossover or traffic signalspacing along this section of Route 60 in order to minimize traffic congestion and delay.Approval of this proposal may set precedence for future traffic signal request which do not meet any spacing standards and may result in adverse impacts to traffic progression and safety. (NOTE: THE ONLY CONDITION THAT MAY BE IMPOSED IS A BUFFER CONDITION. THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY PROFFER OTHER CONDITIONS.) Ð®±ª·¼·²¹ ¿ Ú×ÎÍÌ ÝØÑ×ÝÛ ½±³³«²·¬§ ¬¸®±«¹¸ »¨½»´´»²½» ·² °«¾´·½ »®ª·½» PROFFERED CONDITION The property owners and applicant in this case, pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of the Codeof Virginia (1950 as amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County, for themselves and their successors or assigns, proffer that the property under consideration will be developed according to the following proffer if, and only if, the request submitted herewith is granted with only those conditions agreed to by the owners and applicant.In the event this request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to by the owners and applicant, the proffer shall immediately be null and void and ofno further force or effect. 1.Access from the Property to Route 60 shall be limited to one entrance/exit.The entrance/exit shall be limited to right turns in and out and the location shall be approved by the Transportation Department, unless the Virginia Department of Transportation (“VDOT”) approves a signalized crossover at the existing median break just west of the Tuxford Road intersection.If VDOT approves a signalized crossover to serve the Property, then right and left turn lanes shall be provided as approved by VDOT. (T) (Staff Note: This Proffered Condition supersedes Proffered Condition 1 of Case 01SN0276) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: The request property is located on the southwest line of Midlothian Turnpike, northwest of Tuxford Road. Tax IDs 751-706-3789; 751-707-1228 and 4548. Existing Zoning: C-2 and C-3 Size: 22.1acres Existing Land Use: Commercial (display and customer parking lotsfor motor vehicle sales) or vacant Adjacent Zoning and Land Use: North –C-3with CUPDand A;Commercial, public/semi-publicor vacant South and East –R-7; Single-family residential West –C-5 and I-1with CUPD;Commercial, industrial, officeor vacant î ïíÍÒðëðïóÓßÇîîóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ UTILITIES Use of the public water and wastewater systems is required by county code.The proposed amendment will not impact the required use of public utilities. ENVIRONMENTAL Drainage and Erosion: This request will have minimal impact on these facilities. PUBLIC FACILITIES Fire Service: The Buford Fire Station, Company Number 9, and ForestView Volunteer Rescue Squad currently provide fire protection and emergency medical service (EMS). This request will have a minimal impact on Fire and EMS. County Department of Transportation: The applicant is requesting to amend Proffered Condition 1 ofzoning Case 01SN0276 regarding the location of a new traffic signal on Midlothian Turnpike (Route 60). The Transportation Department does not support this request. In 1993, the Board of Supervisors approved the rezoning (Case 91SN0230) of the property to allow commercial development.The Transportation Department was in support of the applicant’s request (right-in/right-out access to Route 60). As part of that approval, the Board accepted several transportation related proffers.Proffered Condition 5 of Case 91SN0230 limits development to 200,000 square feet of shopping center or equivalent densities. Based on shopping center trip rates, development could generate approximately 10,650 average daily trips. These vehicles will be distributed along Route 60,which had a 2011 traffic count of 63,000 vehicles per day. Another proffered condition of Case 91SN023 (Proffered Condition 6) limited direct vehicular access from the property to Route 60 to one (1) entrance/exit that would accommodate right-turns-in andright-turns-out only. In 2001, the Board of Supervisors approved an amendment (Case 01SN0276) to Proffered Condition 6 of Case 91SN0230, which allowed a new crossover to be constructed and a new traffic signal to be installed on Route 60 no closer than 600 feet west of the Tuxford Road intersection, if approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT).The Transportation Department did not support this request. The applicant is now requesting, if approved by the VDOT, the installation of a new traffic signal at the existing crossover on Route 60 just west of the Tuxford Road intersection. That existing crossover currently serves a car dealership located on the north í ïíÍÒðëðïóÓßÇîîóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ side of Route 60. The intersection of Route 60 and Tuxford Road is controlled by a traffic signal. The spacing between the traffic signal at the Tuxford Road intersection and the proposed traffic signal location would be approximately 420 feet. Per VDOT Access Management standards, signalized intersection spacing along this part of Route 60 is 1,320 feet.This request nor the 2001 request (600 feet) do not meet VDOT standards. The Transportation Department did not support the 2001 request for a signalized crossover 600 feet from the Tuxford Road intersection; therefore, the Transportation Departmentstrongly opposes this request. Route 60 is a major east/west corridor in the northern part of the county that carries a large volume of traffic. As previously stated, a 2011 traffic count on Route 60 adjacent to this request was 63,000 vehicles per day. In comparing recent traffic counts along the entire length of Route 60, this section between Powhite Parkway and Robious Road carries the highest volume of traffic. Most of the intersections on Route 60 from Chippenham Parkway to Huguenot Road are, or will be in the near future, operating at an unacceptable level of service.Installing traffic signals along major arterials, like Route 60, typically increases traffic delays and results in more mainline congestion. In addition to the potential increase in traffic congestion, having traffic signals 420 feet apart may not allow adequate spacing to provide sufficient vehicular storage. Vehicles turning left into the property could spill-over into the westbound through lanes of Route 60 and into theTuxford Road intersection. As previously stated, the applicant is requesting to amend a proffered condition to allow VDOT to determine if a new traffic signal on Route 60 should be installed 420 feet from the Tuxford Road intersection. The Transportation Department does not support this request. Virginia Department of Transportation(VDOT): Please note that subsequent to the County’s zoning action, anyworkproposed within Route 60 right-of-way will need to be reviewed and approved by VDOT through the site plan and permitting processes.Noteworthy review elements will include: All proposed road improvements will need to be shown on approved site plan(s) : During site plan review stage, VDOT staff will provide specific recommendations regarding roadway design elements –to include review of proposed signal locations, turn lane design, roadway geometrics, pavement design, queuing at possible signal location(s)and potential impact Route 60 traffic operations.Specific land uses and densities that are identified during the plan review stage could impact VDOT’s recommendations and final site plan approval.Note: As the spacing between signals is reduced and/or land use densities are increased – ensuring adequate operations along Route 60 can become more difficult. Previous submittals : Our VDOT’srecords show that the most recent plan submissions for this project were in October 2010 and included two parts -one set of plans for the proposed site work, and a second set of plans for the associated road ì ïíÍÒðëðïóÓßÇîîóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ improvements. Should the applicant elect to proceed with either of these proposals, please note that prior to issuance of a permit for any construction activity within Route 60 right-of-way, these plans will need finalized and any remaining or outstanding comments will need to be addressed. Signal Warrants : Development land uses and densities and resulting traffic generation will be evaluated with respect to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD)signal warrants.We understand that several land use anddensity combinations have been considered in the past –signal warrant analysis is impacted by final land uses and densities chosen as well as by the phasing anticipated for those developments. LAND USE Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plandesignates the request properties asaCorporate Officearea where professional and administrative offices or other similar usesare appropriate. Area Development Trends: The area is characterized by a mix of residential, office, light industrial,commercial and public/semi-public (church) land usesor vacant land. Propertiesto the south and east are currently zoned Residential (R-7) andoccupied by single-family residences in the Shenandoah subdivision.Properties to the west are located within the Moorefield Park office development. Zoning History: On August 25, 1993the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission, approved rezoning of the request property with proffered conditions (Case 91SN0230). With the approval of this case, neighborhood and community business uses were permitted. Motor vehicle sales and service uses were limited to the northwestern most portion of the request site. In addition, this case limited access to Route 60 from the request propertyto a right turn in and out only. On December 19, 2001 the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission, approved an amendment to Case 91SN0230 (Case 01SN0276). The Board approved conditions pertaining to the modification of access restrictions and expansion of motor vehicle sales, service and repairuses on the request site.Specifically, the approved access to Route 60was limited to right turns in and out unless the VDOT approved a signalized intersection no closerthan 600 feet to Tuxford Road intersection. ë ïíÍÒðëðïóÓßÇîîóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ Site Design and Development Standards: Currently the property lies within the Post Development District Area. At a minimum, development must conform to the standards of the Zoning Ordinance, which address access, parking, landscaping, architectural treatment, setbacks, signs, buffers, utilities,screening of dumpsters and loading areas. Conditions of zoning also address building height limitations; limitations of hours for outdoor activities; prohibition of outdoor speaker system; notification of the last known president of the Shenandoah Community Association and all adjacent property owners prior to site, architectural or landscape plan submission; square footage limitations for individual uses; buffers; and use limitations. CONCLUSION Givenreasons outlined in the Transportation Section of this “Request Analysis”, staff recommends denial of thisrequest. CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (2/19/13): At the request of the applicant, the Commissiondeferred this case to their April 16, 2013 public hearing. Staff (2/20/13): The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information should be submitted no later than February 25, 2013 for consideration at the Commission’s April 16, 2013 public hearing. The applicant was also advised that a $1,000.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the Commission’s public hearing. Staff (3/25/13): To date, no new information has been received. ê ïíÍÒðëðïóÓßÇîîóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ Planning Commission Meeting (4/16/13): The applicant did not accept the recommendation. Opposition was present noting concerns relative to increased traffic on Midlothian Turnpike, elevated congestion at the Midlothian Turnpike and Tuxford Road intersection and the likelihood of increased auto accidents related to the reduced spacing of the signalized intersections. There was support noting the economic benefits of infill development. Discussion followed relative to the applicant’s traffic study that demonstratednosignificant increase intraffic impacts onMidlothian Turnpikebased on the proposal to modify the spacing of the signalized intersection. Dr. Wallin stated that VDOT should review the spacing requirements for the signalized intersection and whether the proposal will have adverse impacts on adjoining properties. Dr. Brown, Mr. Gulley and Mr. Waller noted concerns relative to unacceptablelevels of service for Midlothian Turnpike, impacts of increased traffic and congestion onadjoining neighborhoods and unexplored access options into the subject property. On motion of Mr. Gulley, seconded by Mr. Waller, the Commission recommended denial. AYES: Messrs. Brown, Gulley and Waller. NAY: Dr. Wallin. ABSENT: Mr. Patton The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, May 22, 2013 beginning at 6:30 p.m., will take under consideration this request. é ïíÍÒðëðïóÓßÇîîóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ éî