12SN0227CASE MANAGER: Darla Orr
°r
/~w~+ 1
~~- ~
` ~~}~
~~`-~-
~~.~. .
B S Time Remaining:
274 days
ADDENDUM II
12 SN0227
(AMENDED)
Twin Rivers, LLC
October 22, 2014 BS
Bermuda Magisterial District
Enon Elementary; Elizabeth Davis Middle
and Thomas Dale High Schools Attendance Zones
Southwest corner of Meadowville and North Enon Church Roads
REQUEST: (AMENDED) Amendment of conditional use planned development (Case
08SNOll 1) relative to conceptual plan, uses, development standards, access and
reduction of cash proffers in a Community Business (C-3) District. Specifically,
the proposed amendments offer a revised textLial statement and conceptual plan;
eliminate the linutation on the number of buildings permitted solely for
multifamily residential use; delete transportation improvements relative to
constriction of Meadowville Road; clarify language relative to phasing road
improvements; modify a condition relative to compliance with a drainage break
plan; reduce the cash proffer payment; and add permitted uses.
PROPOSED LAND USE
A mix of Community Business (C-3), multifamily residential, public/senu-public
uses (including, but not limited tq government buildings, fire stations, public
schools, parks and community meeting facilities) is planned. Proffered Condition
7 of Case 08SNOll 1, which will remain in effect, limits residential density to a
maximum of 400 dwelling units.
The purpose of this Addendum is to communicate the applicant's modification of Proffered
Condition 8 and revised comments from Budget and Management on "Fiscal Impacts on
Capital Facilities".
On October 15, 2015, the Applicant submitted revisions to Proffered Condition 8. Specifically,
the proffer was modified to remove references to specific dates for the timing of the change in
the Marshall and Swift Building Cost index and the delayed escalator. These revisions modify
the escalation clause in accordance with the Board's Cash Proffer Policy. To clearly
communicate the changes, Proffered Condition 8 is shown below with revisions identified.
Budget and Management's "Fiscal Impacts on Capital Facilities" section of the staff report has
been adjusted to remove a statement relative to the absence of an escalator clause. An earlier
revision to Proffered Condition 8 included the escalator, but the statement had not been removed
Pro~Tiding a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public ser~Tice
from staff's comments. The revised comments from the Budget and Management Department
are outlined below with the sentence to be deleted shown as stricken.
Staff continues to recommend approval of this case as outlined in the "Request Analysis"
PROFFERED CONDITION
The Applicant hereby amends Condition 6 of Case 08SNOll 1 to read as follows:
8. Cash Proffers.
A. For each dwelling unit, the applicant, sub-divider, or assignee(s) shall pay the
following to the County of Chesterfield, prior to the issuance of a building permit for
infrastnicture improvements within the service district for the property; ~ ,
xri~=c~C'F '~ ~lvcr-crrrvcr ~L~H~~ cirirr~crv-cri=oTCrc~9~
~i~*~^~ ^~ *'~° ~~^' ~~ ~°^*~^~ ,unless state law prevents enforcement of that
tr1~2/Ylg: `
1. For units constricted with more than two bedrooms,
a. $11,573.00 per dwelling unit, where $9073.00 shall go to school infrastnicture
improvements, $2403.00 shall go to road infrastnicture improvements and
$97.00 shall go to library infrastnichire improvements, ~ ,
~'~for the period beginning the July 1 preceding the Board of Supervisors'
approval of the case through Julyl four years later, at which point the amount
~~~zll be adjusted for the crru~lrlative change zu the Marshall and ,S~~~zft Blrzldiug
Cost Index dtrrzug that tir~~e period; or
b. `' `' .
~~e~e~-~te~Thereafter, the per dwelling unit cash
proffer amount shall be automatically adjusted, annually, by the annual
change in the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index on July 1 of each year.
2. For units constricted with two or fewer bedrooms,
a. $2500.00 per dwelling unit, where $2403.00 shall go to road infrastnict~ire
improvements and $97.00 shall go to library infrastnicture,
~u~~~38~'~ for the period begauuzug the July 1 preceding the Board of
Supervisors' approval of the case through Julyl four years later, at which
point the ar~u~unt ~~~zll be adjusted for the crru~lrlative change zn the Marshall
and ,S~~~zft Building Cost Index dtrrzng that tiu~e period; or
b. `'
> >
2 12SN0227-2014C)CT22-BOS-RPT
~~e~e~-~~e~ Thereafter, the per dwelling unit cash
proffer amount shall be automatically adjusted, annually, by the annual
change in the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index on July 1 of each year.
B. Building plans submitted for building permits shall designate the number of bedrooms
in each dwelling unit.
C. Cash proffer payments shall be spent for the purposes proffered or as otherwise
permitted by law.
D. Should Chesterfield County impose impact fees at any time during the life of the
development that are applicable to the property, the amount paid in cash proffers shall
be in lieu of or credited toward, but not in addition tq any impact fees, in a manner
as determined by the County. If Chesterfield should adopt a "workforce" or
"affordable" housing program which eliminates or permits a reduced cash
proffer, the cash proffer for any dwelling unit on the Property that is designated
as "workforce" or "affordable" housing, that meets all the requirements of the
adopted "workforce" or "affordable" housing program, and for which a cash
proffer has not yet been paid shall be adjusted to be consistent with the approved
"workforce" or "affordable" housing program. (B&M)
Revised Comments (Budget and Management:
Fiscal Impacts on Capital Facilities
Per Dwelling
Unit
Potential Number of New Dwelling Units 400 * 1.00
Population Increase 1112.00 2.78
Number of New Students
Elementary 83.83 0.21
Middle 44.90 0.11
High 60.75 0.15
Total 189.48 0.47
Net Cost For Schools $ 3,750,400 $ 9,376
Net Cost for Parks $ 530,800 $ 1,327
Net Cost for Libraries $ 136,000 $ 340
Net Cost For Fire Stations $ 314,400 $ 786
Average Net Cost Roads $ 3,772,800 $ 9,432
Total Net Cost $ 8,504,400 $ 21,261
*Based on a maximum yield of 400 units as proffered in Condition 7 of Case 08SNOll 1.
The need for schools, parks, libraries, fire stations, and transportation facilities in this area is
identified in the County's adopted Public Facilities Plan, Thoroughfare Plan and Adopted Capital
3 12SN0227-2014(. )CT22-BOS-RPT
Improvement Program and further detailed by specific departments in the applicable sections of
this request analysis.
As noted, this proposed development will have an impact on capital facilities. Staff has
calculated the fiscal impact of every new dwelling unit on schools, roads, parks, libraries and fire
stations at $21,261 per unit. The applicant has been advised that a maximum proffer of $18,966
per unit would defray the cost of the capital facilities necessitated by this proposed development.
The original case (08SNOll 1) was approved in 2008 with cash proffers in the amount of $15,600
(adjusted upward by the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index, amount is currently $20,730)
for schools, libraries, parks, fire stations and roads for those units constricted with more than
two bedrooms. For dwelling units built with two or fewer bedrooms, a cash proffer was accepted
at $10,269 (adjusted upward by the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index, amount is currently
$13,646), which does not include the schools portion.
The Cash Proffer Policy allows the County to assess the impact of development proposals on
capital facilities while recognizing unique circumstances. The County has a long history of
approving cases, uniquely positioned, with varying levels of cash proffer payment amounts
relative to the Board of Supervisor's maximum per dwelling unit cash proffer. In fact, since
inception of the program, of all the cases with cash proffers approved by the Board, nearly 27
percent of them, representing nearly 34 percent of the total lots approved, were approved with a
cash proffer amount less than the established maximum in place at the time of approval.
Staff has carefully reviewed the specifics of this case, noting the Board's recent emphasis to
make an independent assessment of rezoning requests, while evaluating cases on their own
merits.
The subject property is located adjacent to the County's and Virginia's, for that matter, premier
economic development mega-site. Owned by the County's Economic Development Authority,
Meadowville Technology Park has long been in the making. Through the County's successful
completion of the strategic interchange that improved interstate access to the site, the technology
park has expanded to become home to Fortune 500 companies including Northrip Grlmman
Corporation, Amazon.com and other technology firms. The County's investment in the park was
critical to creating such a rare, high quality regionally oriented employment center with
international drawing power.
The location of the subject property adjacent to Meadowville Technology Park demands the
highest level of attention to detail and quality for neighboring projects. Accordingly, the
applicant has proposed a prof ect unique in a variety of ways. The applicant has indicated that the
level of quality proposed is such that the values for these multifamily units would command real
estate values up to 35 percent higher than the county's average values for similar units
constricted over the last decade.
The proposed project proffers, via a textual statement, traditional mixed use development design
with a mix of residential and non-residential uses within blocks and/or within a building, though
the vertical integration of mixed uses within the same building would not be required by the
proffered textual statement. The development shall have similar architectural styles similar to
Festival Park @ Chester Village Green, West Broad Village and New Town, all of which must
be approved by an architectural review committee. The textual statement also includes quality
4 12SN0227-2014(. )CT22-BOS-RPT
building materials, including building facades of brick or stone materials and excluding vinyl.
Building facades shall have pedestrian scale design features, and sidewallcs shall be installed on
both sides of all streets, terminating on Meadowville Road and/or Enon Church Road to promote
ease of pedestrian traffic from adjacent residential uses.
The applicant has requested to amend proffered condition 6 of case 08SNOll1. The revised
condition would provide a cash proffer in the amount of $11,573 for units with more than two
bedrooms, $9,073 of which would be dedicated to schools, $2,403 would go to roads, and $97
would go to libraries. For units with two or less bedrooms, cash in the amount of $2,403 would
go to roads and $97 would go to libraries.
As noted above, the Board has approved cases with reductions in the cash proffer based on
number of bedrooms. While the cash proffer proposed by the applicant is further reduced beyond
the school component, staff believes this case is extremely unique given all the specifics of the
proposal, particularly as it relates to a site extremely critical to the county's economic
development objectives. ,
r,r,,,-~~,,,~~ ,,,,,a c.. ;~~ u,,;~,a;,,n r„~+ r,,,ao~. Staff would advise the cash proffer for libraries and
roads rather be divided pro-rata between all the four remaining capital facility categories.
While the amounts proffered are less than the Board's maximum cash proffer, staff believes the
case as proffered is unique and that the Board should recognize the mentioned specifics when
weighing all of the facts associated with this case. The list below summarizes the unique
circumstances associated with this case.
• Architectural standards requiring the style to be similar to developments such as
Festival Park at Chester Village Green, West Broad Village and New Town
(Williamsburg, Virginia). Standards include 75 percent of building facade
consisting of brick or stone and 25 percent of building facade consisting of brick,
stone, cementitious board, drivet, stucco and synthetic stucco.
• Proxinuty and integration to the county's premier economic development mega-
site and surrounding neighborhoods
• Anticipated quality levels resulting in values 35 percent higher than the County's
average assessed values for multi-family products.
• Mixed use design with a mix of residential and non-residential uses within blocks
and/or within a building
• Pedestrian elements including wallcs and amenities such as landscaped areas,
plazas, pedestrian-scaled lighting and water features
• Limitation of the number of bedrooms and of the number of units having three bedrooms
• Clubhouse and pool facility
• Focal points for civic, religious and/or institutional uses that could include parks, public
schools and gathering areas
Note that circumstances relevant to this case, as presented by the applicant, have been reviewed,
and it has been determined that while it is appropriate to accept the maximum cash proffer in this
case staff recommends that the Board give careful consideration to the uniqueness of this request
12SN0227-2014(. )CT22-B( )S-RPT
when malting its decision. The Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, through their
consideration of this request, may determine that there are unique circumstances relative to this
request that may justify acceptance of proffers as offered for this case.
12SN0227-2014(. )CT22-B( )S-RPT
CASE MANAGER: Darla Orr
N^FgFI~_L_p\oG
v* ~y~
~•
I/ ~
\~ I ~.
~IRG1N~~
BS Time Remaining:
274 days
ADDENDUM
12 SN0227
(AMENDED)
Twin Rivers, LLC
October 22, 2014 BS
Bermuda Magisterial District
Enon Elementary; Elizabeth Davis Middle
and Thomas Dale High Schools Attendance Zones
Southwest corner of Meadowville and North Enon Church Roads
REQUEST: (AMENDED) Amendment of conditional use planned development (Case
08SNOll 1) relative to conceptual plan, uses, development standards, access and
reduction of cash proffers in a Community Business (C-3) District. Specifically,
the proposed amendments offer a revised textual statement and conceptual plan;
eliminate the limitation on the number of buildings pernutted solely for
multifamily residential use; delete transportation improvements relative to
constriction of Meadowville Road; clarify language relative to phasing road
improvements; modify a condition relative to compliance with a drainage break
plan; reduce the cash proffer payment; and add pernutted uses.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
A mix of Community Business (C-3), multifamily residential, public/semi-public
uses (including, but not limited to, government buildings, fire stations, public
schools, parks and community meeting facilities) is planned. Proffered Condition
7 of Case 08SNOll 1, which will remain in effect, limits residential density to a
maximum of 400 dwelling units.
The purpose of this Addendum is to communicate revised comments for Budget and
Management's section on "Fiscal Impacts on Capital Facilities".
The table within Budget and Management's "Fiscal Impacts on Capital Facilities" section of the
staff report has been updated to reflect revised figures for the current request. The revised table
and comments from the Budget and Management Department are outlined below.
Staff continues to recommend approval of this case as outlined in the "Request Analysis"
Pro~Tiding a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public ser~Tice
Fiscal Impacts on Capital Facilities
Per Dwelling
Unit
Potential Number of New Dwelling Units 400 * 1.00
Po elation Increase 1112.00 2.78
Number of New Students
Elementary 83.83 0.21
Middle 44.90 0.11
High 60.75 0.15
Total 189.48 0.47
Net Cost For Schools $ 3,750,400 $ 9,376
Net Cost for Parks $ 530,800 $ 1,327
Net Cost for Libraries $ 136,000 $ 340
Net Cost For Fire Stations $ 314,400 $ 786
Avera e Net Cost Roads $ 3,772,800 $ 9,432
Total Net Cost $ 8,504,400 $ 21,261
*Based on a maximum yield of 400 units as proffered in Condition 7 of Case 08SNOll 1.
The need for schools, parks, libraries, fire stations, and transportation facilities in this area is
identified in the County's adopted Public Facilities Plan, Thoroeghfare Plan and Adopted Capital
Improvement Program and further detailed by specific departments in the applicable sections of
this request analysis.
As noted, this proposed development will have an impact on capital facilities. Staff has
calculated the fiscal impact of every new dwelling unit on schools, roads, parks, libraries and fire
stations at $21,261 per unit. The applicant has been advised that a maximem proffer of $18,966
per unit would defray the cost of the capital facilities necessitated by this proposed development.
The original case (08SNOll 1) was approved in 2008 with cash proffers in the amount of $15,600
(adjusted upward by the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index, amoent is currently $20,730)
for schools, libraries, parks, fire stations and roads for those units constricted with more than
two bedrooms. For dwelling units built with two or fewer bedrooms, a cash proffer was accepted
at $10,269 (adjusted epward by the Marshall and Swift Beilding Cost Index, amoent is currently
$13,646), which does not include the schools portion.
The Cash Proffer Policy allows the County to assess the impact of development proposals on
capital facilities while recognizing unique circumstances. The County has a long history of
approving cases, uniquely positioned, with varying levels of cash proffer payment amounts
relative to the Board of Sepervisor's maximem per dwelling unit cash proffer. In fact, since
inception of the program, of all the cases with cash proffers approved by the Board, nearly 27
percent of them, representing nearly 34 percent of the total lots approved, were approved with a
cash proffer amoent less than the established maximem in place at the time of approval.
2 12SN0227-2014C)CT22-BOS-RPT
Staff has carefiilly reviewed the specifics of this case, noting the Board's recent emphasis to
make an independent assessment of rezoning requests, while evaluating cases on their own
merits.
The subject property is located adjacent to the County's, and Virginia's for that matter, prenuer
econonuc development mega-site. Owned by the County's Econonuc Development Authority,
Meadowville Technology Park has long been in the malting. Through the County's successful
completion of the strategic interchange that improved interstate access to the site, the technology
park has expanded to become home to Fortune 500 companies including Northnip Gnlmman
Corporation, Amazon.com and other technology firms. The County's investment in the park was
critical to creating such a rare, high quality regionally oriented employment center with
international drawing power.
The location of the subject property adjacent to Meadowville Technology Park demands the
highest level of attention to detail and quality for neighboring projects. Accordingly, the
applicant has proposed a project unique in a variety of ways. The applicant has indicated that the
level of quality proposed is such that the values for these multifamily units would command real
estate values up to 35 percent higher than the county's average values for similar units
constricted over the last decade.
The proposed project proffers, via a textual statement, traditional mixed use development design
with a mix of residential and non-residential uses within blocks and/or within a building, though
the vertical integration of nuxed uses within the same building would not be required by the
proffered textual statement. The development shall have similar architectural styles similar to
Festival Park @ Chester Village Green, West Broad Village and New Town, all of which must
be approved by an architectural review comnuttee. The textual statement also includes quality
building materials, including building facades of brick or stone materials and excluding vinyl.
Building facades shall have pedestrian scale design features, and sidewallts shall be installed on
both sides of all streets, ternunating on Meadowville Road and/or Enon Church Road to promote
ease of pedestrian traffic from adjacent residential uses.
The applicant has requested to amend proffered condition 6 of case 08SNOll1. The revised
condition would provide a cash proffer in the amount of $11,573 for units with more than two
bedrooms, $9,073 of which would be dedicated to schools, $2,403 would go to roads, and $97
would go to libraries. For units with two or less bedrooms, cash in the amount of $2,403 would
go to roads and $97 would go to libraries.
As noted above, the Board has approved cases with reductions in the cash proffer based on
number of bedrooms. While the cash proffer proposed by the applicant is further reduced beyond
the school component, staff believes this case is extremely unique given all the specifics of the
proposal, particularly as it relates to a site extremely critical to the county's economic
development objectives. To note, the applicant has not proffered an inflation adjustment via the
Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index. Staff would advise the cash proffer for libraries and
roads rather be divided pro-rata between all the four remaining capital facility categories.
While the amounts proffered are less than the Board's maximum cash proffer, staff believes the
case as proffered is unique and that the Board should recognize the mentioned specifics when
3 12SN0227-2014OCT22-BOS-RPT
weighing all of the facts associated with this case. The list below summarizes the unique
circumstances associated with this case.
• Architectural standards requiring the style to be similar to developments such as
Festival Park at Chester Village Green, West Broad Village and New Town
(Williamsburg, Virginia). Standards include 75 percent of building facade
consisting of brick or stone and 25 percent of building facade consisting of brick,
stone, cementitious board, drivet, stucco and synthetic stucco.
• Proximity and integration to the county's prenuer econonuc development mega-
site and surrounding neighborhoods
• Anticipated quality levels resulting in values 35 percent higher than the County's
average assessed values for multi-family products.
• Mixed use design with a mix of residential and non-residential uses within blocks
and/or within a building
• Pedestrian elements including wallts and amenities such as landscaped areas,
plazas, pedestrian-scaled lighting and water features
• Limitation of the number of bedrooms and of the number of units having three bedrooms
• Clubhouse and pool facility
• Focal points for civic, religious andlor institutional uses that could include parks, public
schools and gathering areas
Note that circumstances relevant to this case, as presented by the applicant, have been reviewed,
and it has been deternuned that while it is appropriate to accept the maximum cash proffer in this
case staff recommends that the Board give careful consideration to the uniqueness of this request
when malting its decision. The Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, through their
consideration of this request, may deternune that there are unique circumstances relative to this
request that may justify acceptance of proffers as offered for this case.
4 12SN0227-2014OCT22-BOS-RPT
CASE MANAGER: Darla Orr
N^FgFI~_L_p\oG
~~a
(` ~
\~, ~ / `~-
~IRG1N~~
BS Time Remaining:
274 days
i~ ~ni~
~~g~~1~ '~4-~
4$
v
v"
Z n
z ~ ~
i~~
z cTc
ccetii
cr
i~
'
-
'
~
n
~ ~
~ Tc
~
i
i~C
iT
r, z
c
~T~~(~ ~ ~~'
T ~ ~ ~ `"17Y~ (~T
_T
-, c
G
~o.- i ~
~
~ ~n i ~ r+~r+
--
~i
crrr,
r
~
i~~
v~
~ z o rs
~_Tc
' ~Tc
PE
Hi
~---~--~--._ i i z
~n i'~ nn
-~
October 22, 2014
STAFF' S
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATION
12 SN0227
(AMENDED)
Twin Rivers, LLC
Bermuda Magisterial District
Enon Elementary; Elizabeth Davis Middle
and Thomas Dale High Schools Attendance Zones
Southwest corner of Meadowville and North Enon Church Roads
REQUEST: (AMENDED) Amendment of conditional use planned development (Case
08SNOll 1) relative to conceptual plan, uses, development standards, access and
reduction of cash proffers in a Community Business (C-3) District. Specifically,
the proposed amendments offer a revised textual statement and conceptual plan;
eliminate the limitation on the number of buildings perntted solely for
multifamily residential use; delete transportation improvements relative to
constriction of Meadowville Road; clarify language relative to phasing road
improvements; modify a condition relative to compliance with a drainage break
plan; reduce the cash proffer payment; and add permitted uses.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
A mix of Community Business (C-3), multifamily residential, public/semi-public
uses (including, but not limited to, government buildings, fire stations, public
schools, parks and community meeting facilities) is planned. Proffered Condition
7 of Case 08SNOll 1, which will remain in effect, limits residential density to a
maximum of 400 dwelling units.
Pro~Tiding a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public ser~Tice
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON
PAGES 2 THROUGH 5.
AYES: MESSRS. BROWN, PATTON AND WALLER.
NAYS: MESSRS. WALLIN AND GULLEY.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend approval for the following reasons:
A. While the amounts proffered are less than the Board's maximum cash proffer,
staff recommends that the Board give careful consideration to the uniqueness of
this request, particularly as it relates to a site extremely critical to the County's
econonuc development objectives, when malting its decision.
B. With flexibility in typical zoning standards to support the proposed traditional
neighborhood development as requested in this case, the Plan suggests design
details that ensure quality public places should be addressed. The proposal
provides standards for pedestrian areas that are designed to promote a high quality
traditional neighborhood with integrated uses.
(NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED OR THE PROPERTY OWNER(S) MAY
PROFFER CONDITIONS. CONDITIONS NOTED "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON
BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION.)
PROFFERED CONDITIONS
The Applicant hereby deletes Proffered Conditions 4.C.ii, 4D of Zoning Case 08SNOll 1. The
Applicant hereby amends Proffered Condition 1, 3.B., 4.B preamble, 4.B.iii and 4.C.i., 5 and 6 as
follows:
(STAFF/CPC) 1. With the approval of this request, Conditions 4.C.ii and 4.D. of
Zoning Case 08SNOll1 shall be deleted. Except as modified by
this request (Case 12 SN0227), all other conditions of Case
08SNOll 1 shall remain in force and effect. (P)
The Applicant hereby amends Condition 1 of Case 08SNOll 1 to read as
follows:
(STAFF/CPC) 2. Master Plan. The textual statement last revised September 3, 2013
shall be considered the Master Plan along with the Conceptual Plan
entitled, "Meadowville Town Center" dated May 29, 2013,
prepared by Timmons Kelly Architects. (P)
2 12SN0227-2014C)CT22-BOS-RPT
The Applicant hereby amends Condition 3.B. of Case 08SNOll 1 to read
as follows:
(STAFF/CPC) 3. The drainage breaks, as established in the site development plan,
shall not expand the Johnson Creek Watershed to a size greater
than what is shown in a plan entitled "Meadowville Stormwater
Management BMP-1VIP1" on sheet 7 (post developed hydraulic
analysis), revised dated August 9, 2007. (EE)
The Applicant hereby amends Condition 4.B. preamble of Case 08SNOll 1
to read as follows:
(STAFF/CPC) 4. Road Improvements. To provide an adequate roadway system, the
developer shall be responsible for the following improvements.
The exact design of these improvements shall be approved by the
Transportation Department. (T)
The Applicant hereby amends Condition 4.B.iii. of Case 08SNOll1 to
read as follows:
(STAFF/CPC) 5. If direct vehicular access is provided to North Enon Church Road,
widening/improving the west side of North Enon Church Road for
the entire property frontage to provide an eleven (ll) foot wide
travel lane, measured from the existing centerline of the road, with
an additional one (1) foot wide paved shoulder plus a seven (7)
foot wide unpaved shoulder, and overlaying the full width of the
road with one and one half (1.5) inches of compacted bitununous
asphalt concrete, with modifications approved by the
Transportation Department. If no direct vehicular access is
provided to North Enon Church Road, relocation of the ditch to
provide an eight (8) foot wide unpaved shoulder along the west
side of North Enon Church Road for the entire property. (T)
The Applicant hereby amends Condition 4.C.i. of Case 08SNOll 1 to read
as follows:
(STAFF/CPC) 6. Direct vehicular access from the Property to Meadowville Road
shall be limited to three (3) entrances/exits. The exact location of
these accesses shall be approved by the Transportation
Department. (T)
The Applicant hereby amends Condition 5 of Case 08SNOll 1 to read as
follows:
(STAFF/CPC) 7. Timber Mana e~ nlent. Timber management, for the purpose of
enhancing the health and viability of the forest, shall occur under
the supervision of a qualified forester, and will only be allowed
upon the subnussion and approval of the appropriate forest
3 12SN0227-2014OCT22-BOS-RPT
management plan to include, but not linuted to, erosion control,
Chesapeake Bay Act/wetland restrictions, and the issuance of a
land disturbance permit by the Environmental Engineering
Department. Any other timbering shall be incorporated into the site
development erosion and sediment control plan/narrative as the
initial phase of infrastnicture constriction and will not commence
until the issuance of the actual site development land disturbance
pernut. (EE)
The Applicant hereby amends Condition 6 of Case 08SNOll 1 to read as
follows:
(STAFF/CPC) 8. Cash Proffers
A. For each dwelling unit, the applicant, sub-divider, or
assignee(s) shall pay the following to the County of
Chesterfield, prior to the issuance of a building pernut for
infrastnicture improvements within the service district for
the property; provided, however, that for the period through
June 30, 2017, the applicant, sub-divider, or assignee(s)
shall pay the following to the County of Chesterfield,
immediately after completion of the final inspection:
1. For units constricted with more than two bedrooms,
a. $11,573.00 per dwelling unit, where
$9073.00 shall go to school infrastnicture
improvements, $2403.00 shall go to road
infrastnicture improvements and $97.00
shall go to library infrastnicture
improvements, if paid prior to July 1, 2017;
or
b. If paid after June 30, 2017, and before July
1, 2018, $11,573.00 per dwelling unit,
adjusted for the four year cumulative change
in the Marshall and Swift Building Cost
Index between July 1 of the fiscal year in
which the case was approved and July 1 four
years later. Thereafter, the per dwelling unit
cash proffer amount shall be automatically
adjusted, annually, by the annual change in
the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index
on July 1 of each year.
4 12SN0227-2014OCT22-BOS-RPT
2. For units constricted with two or fewer bedrooms,
a. $2500.00 per dwelling unit, where $2403.00
shall go to road infrastnicture improvements
and $97.00 shall go to library infrastnicture,
if paid prior to July 1, 2017; or
b. If paid after June 30, 2017, and before July
1, 2018, $2500.00 per dwelling unit,
adjusted for the four year cumulative change
in the Marshall and Swift Building Cost
Index between July 1 of the fiscal year in
which the case was approved and July 1 four
years later. Thereafter, the per dwelling unit
cash proffer amount shall be automatically
adjusted, annually, by the annual change in
the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index
on July 1 of each year.
B. Building plans submitted for building permits shall
designate the number of bedrooms in each dwelling unit.
C. Cash proffer payments shall be spent for the purposes
proffered or as otherwise pernutted by law.
D. Should Chesterfield County impose impact fees at any time
during the life of the development that are applicable to the
property, the amount paid in cash proffers shall be in lieu of
or credited toward, but not in addition to, any impact fees,
in a manner as deternuned by the County. If Chesterfield
should adopt a "workforce" or "affordable" housing
program which elinunates or permits a reduced cash
proffer, the cash proffer for any dwelling unit on the
Property that is designated as "workforce" or "affordable"
housing, that meets all the requirements of the adopted
"workforce" or "affordable" housing program, and for
which a cash proffer has not yet been paid shall be adjusted
to be consistent with the approved "workforce" or
"affordable" housing program. (B)
GENERAL INFORMATION
Location:
The request property is located in the southwest corner of Meadowville and North Enon
Church Roads. Tax IDs 823-659-3856, 6573 and 9483; 824-659-2386, 5689, and 8890.
12SN0227-2014C)CT22-BOS-RPT
Existing Zoning:
GS with conditional use and conditional use planned development
Size:
67.7 acres
Existing Land Use:
Vacant/wooded
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North - R-12; Single-family residential or vacant
South and West - I-2; Industrial or vacant
East - R-12 and A; Vacant
UTILITIES
Public Water System:
The public water system is available to this site. There is a sixteen (16) inch water line
extending along Meadowville Road. Connection to the public water system is required.
(Proffered Condition 2 of Case 08 SNO 111)
Public Wastewater System:
The public wastewater system is available to the request site. There is an eighteen (18)
inch wastewater line extending along Meadowville Tech Parkway. Connection to the
public wastewater system is required. (Proffered Condition 2 of Case 08SNOll 1)
ENVIRONMENTAL
Drainage and Erosion:
The subject property is very flat and drains in several directions. The part of the property
that drains north under Meadowville Road will drain through storm sewer systems in
Meadowville Landing to the James River. That portion of the property that drains to the
south will drain through Meadowville Technology Park tributaries to Johnson Creek.
There are currently no known on- or off-site erosion problems on the property and none are
anticipated after development. Due to the extreme flatness of the area, staff has been
working with area developers to deternune how much of the land drains to the north to the
James River and how much of the land drains to the south to Johnson Creek. Condition 3.B.
of Case 08SNOll1 required the developer to follow the approved drainage break plan
entitled "Meadowville Stormwater Management BMP-MP Post Developed Hydraulic
Analysis." The applicant is requesting to modify Condition 3.B. to allow drainage breaks to
12SN0227-2014(. )CT22-B( )S-RPT
be deternuned during the site plan approval provided the development plan would not
expand the Johnson Creek Watershed to a size greater than what is shown on the
approved drainage plan for the area. Staff has approved the drainage area divide for these
parcels and finds the proposed proffered condition suitable. (Proffered Condition 3)
Due to the downstream flooding of Route 10, Proffered Condition 3.A of Case 08SNOll 1
requires that the developer retain the post- development 2, 10, and 100-year storm event and
release at the pre-development 2, 10, and 100-year storm event for any portion of the
property that drains to the south into Johnson Creek.
The subject property is wooded and, as such, should not be timbered without obtaining a
land disturbance pernut from the Department of Environmental Engineering. This will
ensure that the adequate erosion control measures are in place prior to any land disturbance.
(Proffered Condition 7)
PUBLIC FACILITIES
The need for schools, parks, libraries, fire stations, and transportation facilities in this area is
identified in the County's adopted Public Facilities Plan, Thoroughfare Plan and Capital
Improvement Program and fiirther detailed by specific departments in the applicable sections of
this request analysis.
Fire Service:
The Public Facilities Plan, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, indicates that fire and
emergency medical service (EMS) calls increased by forty-four (44) percent from 2001 to
2011, significantly faster than the county's population increase of seventeen (17) percent.
Of the total incidents in 2011, nearly seventy-six (76) percent were medical emergencies
and twenty-four (24) percent were fire-related. It is expected with the general aging of the
population that medical emergency incidents will increase faster than the rate of
population growth over time. Five (5) new fire/rescue stations are recommended for
constriction by 2022 in the Plan. In addition to the five (5) new stations, the Plan also
recommends the replacement/revitalization of four (4) existing stations.
Based on 400 dwelling units, this request will generate approximately ninety (90) calls
for fire and emergency medical service (EMS) each year. The applicant has not offered
measures to offset the impact of this development on fire facilities due to the reduced
cash proffers.
The River Bend Fire Station, Company Number 18, currently provides fire protection and
EMS. When the property is developed, the number of hydrants, quantity of water needed
for fire protection, and access requirements will be evaluated during the plans review
process.
7 12SN0227-20140CT22-BOS-RPT
Schools:
Residential Yield: 400
Student Yield
From Functional °/~~ ~u~d~'
Membership, No. of
School Name Residential Capacity, Q:'ai~a~.aty~ ~~
9-30-13 Trailers
Development 2013-14 2~i~.2~.~~.~p~
Elementary: Enon 84 494 569 7
Middle: Elizabeth Davis 46 1,189 1,284 2
High:
Total
School
Elementary
M fiddle:
High:
Thomas Dal
Name
e 61 2,271 2,824
191
Projected Membership and Capacity Trends Over Time ***
Projected Projected
~1 cmbcr+hip, ~1 cmbcrship,
9-311-I ~ 9-311-I
Enon 502 522
Elizabeth Davis 1,213 9~1.% 1,244 97%
Thomas Dale 2,220 79% 2,180 77%
Projected
~1 cmbcrship,
9-311-? II
533
1,331 10~1~0/n
2,199 7~%
NOTE: * The Student Yield is based on the FY2014 Cash Proffer Methodology as provided by the Chesterfield County Finance
Department.
NOTE: * * If a school is less than 90% of capacity and has trailers, those trailers are not identified in the staff report.
Student Membership is based on membership as of 09-30-13.
School Capacity is based on the 2013-14 Space Utilization Study.
*** DISCLAIMER: Please note that Projected Membership AND Functional Capacity are updated on an ANNUAL
BASIS and are based on the September 30 membership for a given year and the Space Utilization Study Report which is
conducted every year. The Space Utilization Study is a report that is conducted annually whereby Planning staff conducts a
site visit of every school in the county and the Principal reviews his or her floor plan and identifies the use of every
classroom. From that information a report is prepared that calculates the Functional Capacity of that school. The school
system needs to know how each of their facilities is utilized for funding and space allocation purposes. Again, it is important
to note that these numbers change every year.
After review of this request, the proposed development will have a substantial impact on schools,
especially at the elementary level. The elementary school students generated by the proposal will
put the enrollment at Enon Elementary School over capacity. Over time this case, combined with
other tentative residential developments, infill developments and other zoning cases in the area,
will continue to push these schools to capacity. Therefore, the aforementioned units should
8 12SN0227-2014OCT22-BOS-RPT
continue to be subject to fiill cash proffers, to nutigate the impact that this development would
have on schools. In addition, a discussion of the case's unique nature and impact on capital
facilities is also detailed in the Fiscal Impacts on Capital Facilities section of the staff report.
Libraries:
The proposed development will impact the Enon Library. The Public Facilities Plan
identifies a need for additional library space in the Enon Library service area. The
applicant has not offered measures to fiilly offset the impact of this development on
library facilities.
Parks and Recreation:
The Public Facilities Plan identifies the need for three (3) regional, seven (7) community
and twenty-nine (29) neighborhood parks by 2020. In addition, there is currently a
shortage of community and neighborhood park acreage in the county. The Public
Facilities Plan identifies a need for 354 acres of regional park space, 252 acres of
community park space and 199 acres of neighborhood park space by 2020. The Plan also
identifies the need for linear parks and resource based-special purpose parks (historical,
cultural and environmental) and makes suggestions for their locations. The Plan
addresses the need for addition of recreational facilities to include sports fields, trails,
playgrounds, court games, senior centers and picnicking arealshelters at existing parks to
complete build-out. In addition, the Plan identifies the need for water access and trails
along the James and Appomattox Rivers and their major tributaries, Swift and Falling
Creeks.
The applicant has not offered measures to address the impacts of this development on
parks and recreation facilities.
County Department of Transportation:
The applicant is requesting to amend Case 08SNOll1 to eliminate or modify several
proffered conditions. The Transportation Department offers no objection to the requested
amendments regarding access and transportation improvements to North Enon Church
Road. However, the Transportation Department cannot support this request because the
applicant has not addressed the traffic impact of the development per the Board of
Supervisors' Cash Proffer Policy.
In January 2008, the Board of Supervisors approved a rezoning request (Case 08SNOll 1)
for development of a mixed-use project. With that zoning approval, the Board accepted
proffered conditions relative to transportation that, among other things, required a
seventy (70) foot wide right-of--way dedication and constriction of two (2) lanes for a
new Meadowville Road through the property, pernutted no direct vehicular access to
North Enon Church Road, and provided cash contributions in accordance with the Board
of Supervisors' Cash Proffer Policy to address the traffic impact of the development.
North Enon Church Road is identified as a collector on the County's Thoroughfare Plan.
The applicant is requesting to delete Proffered Condition 4.C.ii of Case 08SNOll 1 which
9 12SN0227-20140CT22-BOS-RPT
precludes direct vehicular access to North Enon Church Road. By deleting this proffer,
development of the property could include access to North Enon Church Road. The
applicant is also requesting to amend Proffered Condition 4.B.iii. of Case 08SNOll1,
which would require that with any direct access to North Enon Church Road, the road
would be widen/improved to a total travel way width of eleven (ll) feet measured from
the centerline with an additional one (1) foot wide paved shoulder plus a seven (7) foot
wide unpaved shoulder, and overlaying the fiill width of the road with 1.5 inches of
asphalt concrete for the entire property frontage. (Proffered Condition 5)
With Case 08SNOll1, to address recommendations by the Econonuc Development
Department, the applicant proffered a condition to dedicate and constrict a public road
("New Meadowville Road") through the property (Proffered Condition 4D of Case
08SNOll1). The applicant is now requesting to delete that proffer, and will primarily
utilize existing Meadowville Road and North Enon Church Road as depicted on the
proposed revised master plan. In addition, the applicant is requesting to amend Condition
4.C.i to increase direct vehicular access from the Property to Meadowville Road from
two (2) entrances/exits to three (3) entrances/exits. (Proffered Condition 6)
As part of this request, the applicant is seeking to modify the preamble statement to
Proffered Condition 4.B. of Case 08SNOll1 to clarify the timing of the road
improvements (Proffered Condition 4). A phasing plan for the road improvements
required for the development will be submitted at the time of site plan review for
Transportation Department review and approval. (Condition 4.E. of Case 08SNOll 1)
The traffic impact of this development must be addressed. Some roads in this area need to
be improved to address safety and accommodate the increase in traffic generated by the
residential part of this proposed development. With this amendment, the applicant is
requesting to amend Proffered Condition 6 of Case 08SNOll1 concerning the
contribution of cash proffers to mitigate the impact of the residential part of this proposed
development. As development continues in this part of the county, traffic volumes on
area roads will substantially increase. Cash proffers alone will not cover the cost of the
improvements needed to accommodate the traffic increases. The applicant has failed to
adequately mitigate the traffic impact of the residential part of this request in accordance
with Board of Supervisors' Cash Proffer Policy. As stated above, the Transportation
Department cannot support this request.
Vir ink is Department of Transportation (VDOT~:
Whereas an eleven (ll) foot lane is proposed from the centerline (on the project side of
the road) with a one (1) foot paved shoulder, plus an additional seven (7) foot unpaved
shoulder is an improvement over the existing condition, VDOT notes that traffic in
excess of 2,000 vehicles per day is expected to use the road in the future. In addition, a
higher proportion of thick and larger vehicles are expected to use the road given the
increase in both residential and commercial usage anticipated.
For collector roads, or higher classified roads, a twelve (12) foot lane is a VDOT standard
according to the VDOT Road Design Manual. Alsq the front ditch slopes adjacent to the
shoulder are to be no steeper than four (4) to one (1) at the expected design speed.
10 12SN0227-20140CT22-BOS-RPT
Fiscal Impacts on Capital Facilities:
Per Unit
Potential Number of New Dwelling Units 400* 1.00
Po elation Increase 1048.00 2.62
Number of New Students
Elementary 85.60 0.21
Middle 45.60 0.11
High 61.20 0.15
Total 192.40 0.48
Net Cost For Schools $ 3,778,000 $ 9,445
Net Cost for Parks $ 498,800 $ 1,247
Net Cost for Libraries $ 129,200 $ 323
Net Cost For Fire Stations $ 283,600 $ 709
Avera e Net Cost Roads $ 3,207,600 $ 8,019
Total Net Cost $ 7,897,200 $ 19,743
*Based on a maximum yield of 400 units as proffered in Condition 7 of Case 08SNOll 1.
As noted, this proposed development will have an impact on capital facilities. Staff has
calculated the fiscal impact of every new dwelling unit on schools, roads, parks, libraries and fire
stations at $19,743 per unit. The applicant has been advised that a maximem proffer of $18,966
per unit would defray the cost of the capital facilities necessitated by this proposed development.
The original case (08SNOll 1) was approved in 2008 with cash proffers in the amount of $15,600
(adjusted upward by the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index, amoent is currently $19,971)
for schools, libraries, parks, fire stations and roads for those units constricted with more than
two (2) bedrooms. For dwelling units built with two or fewer bedrooms, a cash proffer was
accepted at $10,269 (adjusted epward by the Marshall and Swift Beilding Cost Index, amoent is
currently $13,146), which does not include the schools portion.
The Cash Proffer Policy allows the County to assess the impact of development proposals on
capital facilities while recognizing unique circumstances. The County has a long history of
approving cases, uniquely positioned, with varying levels of cash proffer payment amounts
relative to the Board of Sepervisor's maximem per dwelling unit cash proffer. In fact, since
inception of the program, of all the cases with cash proffers approved by the Board, nearly
twenty-seven (27) percent of them, representing nearly thirty-four (34) percent of the total lots
approved, were approved with a cash proffer amoent less than the established maximem in place
at the time of approval.
Staff has carefiilly reviewed the specifics of this case, noting the Board's recent emphasis to
make an independent assessment of rezoning regeests, while evaluating cases on their own
merits.
The subject property is located adjacent to the Coenty's, and Virginia's for that matter, prenuer
econonuc development mega-site. Owned by the County's Econonuc Development Aethority,
11 12SN0227-2014C)CT22-BOS-RPT
Meadowville Technology Park has long been in the malting. Through the County's successful
completion of the strategic interchange that improved interstate access to the site, the technology
park has expanded to become home to Fortune 500 companies including Northnip Gnlmman
Corporation, Amazon.com and other technology firms. The County's investment in the park was
critical to creating such a rare, high quality regionally oriented employment center with
international drawing power.
The location of the subject property adjacent to Meadowville Technology Park demands the
highest level of attention to detail and quality for neighboring projects. Accordingly, the
applicant has proposed a project unique in a variety of ways. The applicant has indicated that the
level of quality proposed is such that the values for these multifamily units would command real
estate values up to thirty-five (35) percent higher than the county's average values for similar
units constricted over the last decade.
The proposed project proffers, via a textual statement, traditional mixed use development design
with a mix of residential and non-residential uses within blocks and/or within a building, though
the vertical integration of nuxed uses within the same building would not be required by the
proffered textual statement. The development shall have similar architectural styles similar to
Festival Park at Chester Village Green, West Broad Village and New Town, all of which must be
approved by an architectural review committee. The textual statement also includes quality
building materials, including building facades of brick or stone materials and excluding vinyl.
Building facades shall have pedestrian scale design features, and sidewallts shall be installed on
both sides of all streets, ternunating on Meadowville Road and/or Enon Church Road to promote
ease of pedestrian traffic from adjacent residential uses.
The applicant has requested to amend Proffered Condition 6 of case 08SNOll1. The revised
condition would provide a cash proffer in the amount of $11,573 for units with more than two (2)
bedrooms, $9,073 of which would be dedicated to schools, $2,403 would go to roads, and $97
would go to libraries. For units with two (2) or less bedrooms, cash in the amount of $2,403
would go to roads and $97 would go to libraries.
As noted above, the Board has approved cases with reductions in the cash proffer based on
number of bedrooms. While the cash proffer proposed by the applicant is further reduced beyond
the school component, staff believes this case is extremely unique given all the specifics of the
proposal, particularly as it relates to a site extremely critical to the county's econonuc
development objectives. To note, the applicant has not proffered an inflation adjustment via the
Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index. Staff would advise the cash proffer for libraries and
roads rather be divided pro-rata between all the four remaining capital facility categories.
While the amounts proffered are less than the Board's maximum cash proffer, staff believes the
case as proffered is unique and that the Board should recognize the mentioned specifics when
weighing all of the facts associated with this case. The list on the following page summarizes the
unique circumstances associated with this case.
• Architectural standards requiring the style to be similar to developments such as
Festival Park at Chester Village Green, West Broad Village and New Town
(Williamsburg, Virginia). Standards include seventy-five (75) percent of building
12 12SN0227-2014C)CT22-BOS-RPT
facade consisting of brick or stone and twenty-five (25) percent of building facade
consisting of brick, stone, cementitious board, drivet, stucco and synthetic stucco.
• Proximity and integration to the County's prenuer econonuc development mega-
site and surrounding neighborhoods
• Anticipated quality levels resulting in values thirty-five (35) percent higher than
the County's average assessed values for multifamily products.
• Mixed use design with a mix of residential and non-residential uses within blocks
and/or within a building
• Pedestrian elements including wallts and amenities such as landscaped areas,
plazas, pedestrian-scaled lighting and water features.
• Limitation of the number of bedrooms and of the number of units having three (3)
bedrooms
• Clubhouse and pool facility
• Focal points for civic, religious and/or institutional uses that could include parks,
public schools and gathering areas
Note that circumstances relevant to this case, as presented by the applicant, have been reviewed,
and it has been deternuned that while it is appropriate to accept the maximum cash proffer in this
case staff recommends that the Board give careful consideration to the uniqueness of this request
when malting its decision. The Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, through their
consideration of this request, may deternune that there are unique circumstances relative to this
request that may justify acceptance of proffers as offered for this case.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Econonuc Development supports the development of the Twin Rivers Town Center with the
following key points:
• A mixed use development which contains appropriate commercial and retail
space.
• A "Main Street" design that presents the character of a "Town Center".
• Apartments that are of the quality and design that complement the Meadowville
Technology Park and the adjoining residential community.
The development of a "Town Center" as described above would be an asset to the Park for both
new and existing businesses as well as the surrounding community. Having commercial and
retail services within a convenient wallting distance (i. e. restaurants, medical, laundry, personal
care, retail shops, etc.) would strengthen the Park and provide an opportunity to the developer.
13 12SN0227-2014OCT22-BOS-RPT
LAND USE
Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan identifies the property as being appropriate for Community
Mixed Use. The Plan suggests appropriate uses include an integrated nuxture of
concentrated commercial and higher density residential uses with public spaces. The Plan
suggests the majority of uses within these developments should be commercial and office
uses with residential uses developed in conjunction with commercial uses.
Relative to design of Community Mixed Use areas, the Plan suggests flexibility in typical
zoning standards to encourage innovative and creative design and higher quality
developments. The Plan suggests Urban or Traditional Neighborhood design standards,
such as a grid of frequently interconnected roads and alleys, sidewallcs, public spaces, on-
street parking and pedestrian scale streetscape and streetlight design should be employed
to ensure integration of uses.
The Plan suggests appropriate commercial uses are those that serve community wide
trade areas generally attracting customers living or working within an approximate radius
of ten (10) nines such as grocery and department stores, home centers, limited repair
services and other goods and services that are purchased on a less frequent basis than
within convenience or neighborhood business areas. The Plan suggests that the higher
density residential uses should be developed at, or exceeding, eight (8) to twelve (12)
dwelling units per acre, but that residential uses should not be the predonunate use.
Area Development Trends:
The property is located at the northeastern edge of the Meadowville Technology Park.
Properties north of Meadowville Road are zoned Residential (R-12) and are occupied by
single-family residential use within the Meadowville Landing subdivision. Properties to
the east of North Enon Church Road are zoned Residential (R-12) and Agricultural (A)
and are currently vacant. Properties to the south and west are zoned General Industrial (I-
2) and are occupied by industrial use (within the Meadowville Technology Park) or are
vacant. It is anticipated that industrial uses will continue to develop on properties to the
south and west, with residential to the north and east, as recommended by the Plan. The
Plan suggests alternative land uses to those shown on the Land Use Plan (such as
Community Mixed Uses) that capitalize upon their proximity to the James River may be
appropriate on properties to the north and east.
14 12SN0227-2014OCT22-BOS-RPT
Zonin H~ istorX:
On January 9, 2008 the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation from the
Commission and staff, approved rezoning of the request property from General Industrial
(I-2) to General Business (GS) with conditional use to pernut multifamily uses plus
conditional use planned development to pernut exceptions to ordinance requirements
(Case 08SNOll 1). A traditional development with a mix of residential and commercial
uses incorporating sidewallcs, tree-lined streets and open spaces was approved.
Approximately twenty-five (25) acres (known as Tracts A - I of Case 08SNOll 1) located
along the periphery of the development (adjacent to Meadowville and Enon Church
Roads) were limited to Community Business (C-3) District uses and outdoor recreational
uses for community events. Integrated residential uses, limited to a maximum of 400
units, and commercial uses were permitted on the remainder of the property (identified as
Tract K of Case 08SNOll 1) located in the center of the development. Within this nuxed
use tract, a maximum of two (2) buildings could contain all residential uses. Conditions
of approval also addressed architectural treatment, building heights, setbacks, buffers,
landscaping, parking and prohibited uses.
Current Proposal:
A traditional nuxed use development including commercial, office and higher density
residential uses with sidewallcs, tree-lined streets, open spaces, buildings closer to streets,
and on-street parking is still offered on the request property. While this proposal includes
many of the same development standards approved with Case 08SNOll1, a revised
textual statement and conceptual development plan are proposed. A comparison of the
current proposal and existing zoning are discussed in detail below.
Site Design:
Should this request be approved, the Textual Statement, last revised September 3, 2013,
and the revised conceptual plan, dated May 29, 2013 would become the Master Plan for
the development, replacing the Textual Statement and Master Plans approved with Case
08SNOll 1. (Proffered Condition 2)
A summary of the key components of the existing and proposed Master Plans is provided
herein below. The major difference between these Plans is that the existing Master Plan
contains tracts that only permit commercial uses while the proposed plan contains nuxed
use tracts and/or an all-residential tract. The proposed plan also introduces a "Main
Street" concept.
Current Master Plan -Case 08SNOll 1:
• Commercial -Nine (9) tracts (Tracts A - I) located along the periphery of
the project adjacent to Meadowville and Enon Church Roads are restricted
to commercial uses only
1~ 12SN0227-2014OCT22-BOS-RPT
• Mixed Use -One (1) tract (Tract K) located centrally within the
development pernuts residential, office and commercial uses.
o A maximum of two (2) buildings could contain all residential uses.
o Other buildings must have commercial and/or office uses on the
first floor, except for twenty-five (25) percent of the first floor of
the nuxed use buildings could be occupied by residential use.
Proposed Master Plan:
• Mixed Use - Tract I -located along the periphery of the development
(adjacent to Meadowville and North Enon Church Roads) would pernut a
mix of commercial, office and residential uses and includes an area
designated as "Main Street."
o All buildings could contain a mix of commercial and residential
uses.
o All buildings must have commercial and/or office uses on the first
floor, except that twenty-five (25) percent of the first floor could
be occupied by residential uses.
o Buildings fronting "Main Street" would be permitted to contain
one (1) residential unit on the first floor to meet ADA (Americans
with Disabilities Act) requirements.
• Residential or Mixed Use -Tract II -located in the southwestern portion
of the property would pernut all residential uses or a mixture of
commercial, office and residential uses subject to limitations identified for
Tract I
o There is no limitation on the number of buildings that may contain
all residential uses, including the first floor.
As with Case 08SNOll1, tract boundaries and sizes may be modified in the current
proposal so long as their relationship with each other and any adjacent properties is
maintained. Any mixing of residential and non-residential uses within a tract will require
the submittal of a Mixed Use Plan for approval by either the Planning Department or the
Planning Commission to ensure appropriate land use transitions and compatibility both
within the tract and with surrounding properties. (Proposed Textual Statement, Item LB
and C)
1Ei 12SN0227-2014C)CT22-BOS-RPT
Development Standards:
Unless specifically regulated by the proposed Textual Statement, the development of all
tracts must comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for General Business
(GS) uses in an Emerging Growth District Area. These standards are designed to
promote high quality, well-designed projects and address access, parking, landscaping,
architectural treatment, setbacks, signs, buffers, utilities, and screening of dumpsters and
parking areas. Many of the same exceptions to these standards granted in Case 08SNOll 1
are requested with the current proposal to allow the planned traditional mixed use
development.
Density:
No change is proposed in the maximum residential density of 400 dwelling units.
(Condition 7 of Case 08 SNO 111)
Uses:
Both the existing and proposed zoning would pernut uses within the Community
Business (C-3) and Residential Multifamily (R-MF) Districts, commercial outdoor
recreational establishments for outdoor entertainment such as for community events, and
live-work units. Both cases also restrict uses considered to be too intense for the
traditional village development. (Textual Statement Items ILG and III)
The proposal lists additional uses that may be developed in locations that serve as focal
points (Textual Statement Item IIL7). Potential uses include, although not exclusively,
municipal offices, fire stations and public schools. It is important to note that Substantial
Accord Deternunation would be necessary prior to the location of any public facilities
within the development.
As previously noted, the existing zoning limits the number of buildings that can contain
all residential units to two (2) buildings and permits residential units on a maximum of
three (3) floors within mixed use buildings. The proposal has no linut on the number of
buildings that can contain all residential uses or the number of residential floors. The
proposal would prohibit any residential units with more than three (3) bedrooms and
limits the number of units permitted to have three (3) bedrooms to a maximum of forty
(40) units. (Textual Statement Item IV.B.4)
Mixed Use Guarantee and Phasing:
The Plan suggests that residential use should not be the predonunate use within
Community Mixed Use Areas. Conditions of the existing zoning (Case 08SNOll 1) linut
certain tracks to be solely for commercial use and require most of the residential uses to
be located within mixed use buildings so as to guarantee an appropriate nux of uses.
The proposal removes the requirement for commercial-only tracts and the restriction on
the number of buildings and floors occupied by residential use. To guarantee a nux of
uses, the proposal would permit a maximum of 200 dwelling units within Tract II until a
17 12SN0227-20140CT22-BOS-RPT
final inspection is approved for at least 30,000 square feet of non-residential uses fronting
"Main Street" in Tract L This condition would ensure that the building space for non-
residential uses is available, not that the spaces are occupied. Dwelling units located
within these buildings could be permitted and occupied simultaneously. Once this non-
residential requirement is satisfied, the remainder of the 400 dwelling units could be
constricted. (Textual Statement Item V)
Architectural Treatment:
A variety of architectural treatments and building design features is necessary in creating
neo-traditional/urban village developments as is proposed with this request. The proposal
would require architectural treatment of buildings to use a nuxture of design features.
(Textual Statement ILC.2)
The existing zoning requires the development to have a sinular architectural style as
Chester Village Green. The Chester Village Green development has a unique
architectural design theme which provides continuity, an urban village identity and
cohesiveness in building design and materials. No building exteriors (whether front, side
or rear) consist of architectural materials inferior in quality, appearance or detail to any
other exterior of the same building. Buildings possess architectural variety and
harmonious proportions, and avoid monotonous facades or large bullcy masses. Design
elements such as balconies and/or terraces, articulation of doors and windows, sculptural
or textural relief of facades, architectural ornamentation, varied roof lines and other
appurtenances such as lighting fixtures provide an overall cohesive village character.
The architectural treatment offered with the current proposal is similar to the existing
zoning. However, with the current proposal, conditions are offered to specify certain
architectural elements discussed below:
The current proposal also offers that the development would have an architectural
style similar to Chester Village Green, as required in the existing zoning, and adds
West Broad Village (a 115 acre mixed use development in Henrico County) and
New Town (a 365 acre nuxed use development in Williamsburg) as developments
from which similar architectural styles may be used to design the proposed
development (Exhibit B and Textual Statement ILC.2). West Broad Village and
New Town contain a variety of architectural styles that incorporate similar
architectural design principals to buildings found in Chester Village Green. While
the condition does not identify the specific architectural or design features used to
ensure a similar architectural style as these other developments or to give the
village appearance of several small buildings clustered together, Exhibit B is
offered as an example of those architectural styles (Textual Statement ILC.2). A
deternunation regarding architectural compatibility and appropriate building
design elements will be negotiated during plans review.
The existing zoning requires submittal of architectural designs to the Econonuc
Development Authority (EDA), but does not require the EDA's approval. With
the proposal, an architectural review committee (ARC), consisting of three (3)
members -the developer's appointee, the Econonuc Development Authority's
18 12SN0227-2014OCT22-BOS-RPT
(EDA's) appointee, and a licensed architect -will be established and tasked with
approving architectural designs prior to site plan approval (Textual Statement
IL C.2)
The above referenced developments, to which the proposed development will be
architecturally compatible, have predonunately masonry (brick and/or stone)
building facades; therefore, it is anticipated that the proposed development will
continue to incorporate predonunately masonry facades. The proposal specifies
that seventy-five (75) percent of each building facade (front, sides and rear) will
be brick or stone materials (Textual Statement II.C.3). The condition identifies
materials that would be permitted on the remaining twenty-five (25) percent of
building facades. The ARC must approve the use of any other products to be used
on the remaining twenty-five (25) percent of building facades. (Textual Statement
ILC.3)
Minimum roof materials would be a thirty (30) year dimensional shingle or better,
except for flat roofs. (Textual Statement Item ILC.4)
The existing limitation on building heights of three (3) stories along Meadowville and
North Enon Church Roads has been deleted. The proposal would permit all buildings at a
maximum height of six (6) stories. (Textual Statement Item ILC.1)
Storefronts:
Staff would prefer non-residential uses on the first floor of buildings along and at the
main entrance to provide a positive first impression upon entering the development from
the Meadowville Technology Park. As proposed, buildings containing all residential uses
would be permitted along both sides of the road in Tract II at this gateway; therefore,
staff accepted a compronuse such that buildings fronting Twin Rivers Drive (as shown on
the Master Plan) would have first floor storefront type windows similar to those shown
on Exhibit A (Textual Statement Item IV.B.3)
Parlcm~:
The proposal seeks the same provisions for on-street parking and parking for residential
uses within non-residential tracts as proposed with the existing zoning (Textual Statement
ILA). These standards are consistent with those applied to Village Districts and would be
appropriate in this traditional neighborhood design.
The existing zoning provides for the location of parking areas such that buildings provide
a barrier between these areas and Meadowville and North Enon Church Roads to
mininuze the views of parking areas from both roads. The proposal would pernut parking
between buildings and these roads. The parking areas proposed along Main Street and
Twin Rivers Drive would be limited to a single row of parking spaces on both sides of
drive aisles to avoid large expanses of parking. Along Main Street and Twin Rivers
Drive, traffic lanes would be separated by landscaped pedestrian areas to facilitate
pedestrian traffic along and across these proposed roads and parking aisles, unless
modified during plans review. (Proposed Textual Statement ILA.6)
19 12SN0227-20140CT22-BOS-RPT
Street Trees:
Both the existing and proposed zoning would require street trees along both sides of all
public and private streets that provide general circulation throughout the development
and one side of Meadowville Road. The proposal would require street trees along North
Enon Church Road if direct vehicular access is provided to the road. (Proposed Textual
Statement ILA.B)
Pedestrian Design/Sidewallcs:
The Plan encourages new developments to incorporate quality design standards for
pedestrian ways that create unique and viable places. Useable public spaces with pedestrian
scale streetscape and streetlight design are critical to the design of traditional neighborhood
developments to ensure integration of uses. The proposal provides standards for pedestrian
areas to add high visual interest, such as decorative paving units, decorative pedestrian-
style lighting, landscaped areas, water features and benches. These standards are designed
to ensure a high quality traditional neighborhood design with integrated uses.
(Textual Statement II.H.1)
The existing and proposed zoning require sidewallcs on both sides of all public and private
streets that provide general circulation through the development (Textual Statement II.H2).
It is important for sidewallcs to be wide enough to accommodate outside activities, such as
outdoor dining, while maintaining adequate pedestrian flow. The proposal would require
sidewallcs along Main Street to be wide enough to provide a six (6) foot wallcing aisle
(sidewallc), exclusive of pedestrian design elements and spaces for outdoor sales and dining.
(Textual Statement II.H.3)
A deternunation regarding the exact design of pedestrian areas and sidewallcs will be
negotiated during plans review.
Focal Points:
Focal points are intended to create gathering spaces of interest for surrounding areas and
offer inviting pedestrian-oriented areas. As proposed, focal points would be provided in
both development tracts (Textual Statement Item IIL7 and IV.B.S). Staff typically seeks a
minimum of 0.75 acres of open space to serve as focal points. No nunimum area has been
defined with the proposal; however the proposal provides for two (2) focal points in both
development Tracts. Within Tract II, the club house and pool facility would be built with
the first phase of development to serve as one of the focal points within that Tract.
Buffers and Setbacks:
To accommodate flexibility in the proposed traditional neighborhood design with
buildings closer to streets, the existing and proposed zoning do not require setbacks from
streets, driveways and parking areas, except along Meadowville and North Enon Church
Roads (Textual Statement ILD). In addition, no buffers are required between uses,
between the development and adjacent properties or along Meadowville and North Enon
Church Roads. (Textual Statement Item ILE.1)
20 12SN0227-20140CT22-BOS-RPT
Proposed Access to North Enon Church Road:
The existing zoning restricts direct vehicular access from the property to North Enon
Church Road. With the proposal, vehicular access to North Enon Church Road would be
pernutted and the existing fifty (50) foot landscaped setback requirement along North
Enon Church Road would be deleted. As a development gateway, the proposal would
pernut a reduction in the setback with supplemental landscaping and fencing along North
Enon Church. (Textual Statement Item ILE)
Restrictive Covenants:
Both the existing and proposed zoning require the recordation of a restrictive covenant to
advise fiiture occupants the project is adjacent to the Meadowville Technology Park and
industrial uses. (Textual Statement Item II.F)
CONCLUSION
The development of a town center that contains integrated, high quality commercial and
residential uses with convenient, well-planned pedestrian access would complement the
Meadowville Technology Park and surrounding community. While the amounts proffered are
less than the Board's maximum cash proffer, staff recommends that the Board give carefiil
consideration to the uniqueness of this request, particularly as it relates to a site extremely critical
to the County's econonuc development objectives, when malting its decision.
This proposal seeks flexibility in typical zoning standards to support the planned traditional
neighborhood development. The Plan suggests that quality public places including sidewallts,
pedestrian scale streetscape and streetlight design should be addressed, along with other design
standards. The proposal provides standards for pedestrian areas with high visual interest
designed to ensure a high quality traditional neighborhood design with integrated uses.
Given these considerations, approval of this request is recommended.
CASE HISTORY
Planning Commission Meeting (7/17/12):
The Commission on their own motion and with the applicant's consent, deferred this case
to their September 18, 2012 public hearing.
21 12SN0227-2014C)CT22-BOS-RPT
Staff (7/18/12):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be subnutted no later than July 23, 2012 for consideration at the Commission's
September 18, 2012 public hearing.
Applicant (8/31/12 and 9/18/12):
Revised proffered conditions and textual statement were subnutted.
Planning Commission Meeting (9/18/12):
On their own motion, the Commission deferred this case to their December 10, 2012
public hearing.
Staff (9/19/12):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than October 1, 2012 for consideration at the Commission's
December 10, 2012 public hearing.
Staff (12/4/12):
To date, no new information has been received.
Planning Commission Meeting (12/10/12):
The Commission on their own motion and with the applicant's consent deferred this case
to their March 19, 2013 public hearing.
Staff (12/11/12):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than January 7, 2013 for consideration at the Commission's
March 19, 2013 public hearing.
22 12SN0227-2014C)CT22-BOS-RPT
Staff (3/4/13):
To date, no new information has been received.
Planning Commission Meeting (3/19/13):
On their own motion and with the applicant's consent, the Commission deferred this case
to their May 21, 2013 public hearing.
Staff (3/20/13):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than March 25, 2013 for consideration at the Commission's
May 21, 2013 public hearing.
Staff (5/2/13):
To date, no new information has been received.
Planning Commission Meeting (5/21/13):
On their own motion and with the applicant's consent, the Commission deferred this case
to their July 16, 2013 public hearing.
Staff (5/22/13):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than May 28, 2013 for consideration at the Commssion's
July 16, 2013 public hearing.
Applicant (5/29, 6/7, 6/17, 7/9 and 7/10/13):
Revisions to the proffered conditions, Textual Statement and Master Plan were
submitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (7/16/13):
On their own motion and with the applicant's consent, the Commssion deferred this case
to their August 20, 2013 public hearing.
23 12SN0227-2014OCT22-BOS-RPT
Staff (7/17/13):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be subnutted no later than July 22, 2013 for consideration at the Commission's
August 20, 2013 public hearing.
Applicant (7/16, 7/23, 8/1 & 8/12/13):
Revisions to proffered conditions, Textual Statement and an exhibit were provided.
Applicant (8/19/13):
Revisions to proffered conditions, Textual Statement and an exhibit were provided.
Planning Commission Meeting (8/20/13):
On their own motion and with the applicant's consent, the Commssion deferred this case
to their September 17, 2013 public hearing.
Staff (8/21/13):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than August 26, 2013 for consideration at the Commission's
September 17, 2013 public hearing.
Applicant (8/26/13):
The application was amended to modify the request to reduce rather than delete the cash
proffer. In addition, an additional proffered condition and modifications to the Textual
Statement were subnutted.
Applicant (9/3/13):
Modifications to the proffered conditions and Textual Statement and an additional exhibit
were submitted.
24 12SN0227-2014OCT22-BOS-RPT
Planning Commission Meeting (9/17/13):
On their own motion and with the applicant's consent, the Commssion deferred this case
to their November 19, 2013 public hearing.
Staff (9/17/13):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than September 23, 2013 for consideration at the
Commission's November 19, 2013 public hearing.
Applicant (10/2/13):
Proffered condition 8 relative to cash proffer payments was amended.
Planning Commission Meeting (11/19/13):
The applicant's representative accepted the recommendation. There was support
expressed for an urban nuxed use development and relief to the cash proffer policy for
unique developments that include a mix of commercial uses. No one spoke in opposition
to the request.
Mr. Patton stated the proposal is an integral part of the overall Meadowville Technology
Park development; Econonuc Development is satisfied with the quality offered;
consideration is warranted for the private investment planned; the benefits of a mixed use
product to compliment the Park; and the increased tax revenue for the commercial
component.
In response to questions from Mr. Waller, Econonuc Development noted the
development will provide the retail and service amenities corporate management seeks
when locating companies.
Mr. Waller stated consideration should be given to road impacts relative to the cash
proffer reduction and that the Plan promotes improvements to key interchanges serving
econonuc development.
In response to questions from Mr. Waller, the Budget & Management Department
explained the average value of multifamily units used for their comparison and that
Budget evaluated cash proffers offered by the applicants in conjunction with all elements
of the case.
Mr. Gulley explained his concern relative to the road portion of the cash proffer not being
offered. Dr. Wallin added that he had not heard quantifiable evidence to ensure the
proposal was fair to all parties.
2~ 12SN0227-2014C)CT22-BOS-RPT
Dr. Brown stated that he felt establishing a dollar value for architectural upgrades and
what elements add architectural quality is subjective. He offered an evaluation on the
anticipated annual tax revenue for the dwelling units and noted the commercial
component will also offer tax revenue for capital improvement needs.
Mr. Patton stated he felt this case should be considered for its long term benefit to the
County. On a motion of Mr. Patton, seconded by Mr. Waller, the Commission
recommended approval of this case and acceptance of the proffered conditions on pages 2
through 5.
AYES: Messrs. Brown, Patton and Waller.
NAYS: Messrs. Wallin and Gulley.
Board of Supervisors Meeting (12/11/13):
On their own motion and with the applicant's consent, the Board deferred this case to
their Febniary 26, 2014 public hearing.
Staff (12/14/13):
The applicant was advised in writing that any new or revised information should be
submitted no later than December 16, 2013 for consideration at the Board's Febniary 26,
2014 meeting.
Staff (1/28/14):
To date, no new or revised information has been received.
Staff (2/26/14):
The purpose of the addendum was to provide the Textual Statement and Exhibit C which
were onutted from the staff report.
Board of Supervisors Meeting (2/26/14):
On their own motion and with the applicant's consent, the Board deferred this case to
their May 28, 2014 public hearing.
2Ei 12SN0227-2014C)CT22-BOS-RPT
Staff (2/27/14):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than March 3, 2014 for consideration at the Board's April
23, 2014 public hearing.
Staff (4/25/14):
Updated comments were received from Schools. No new or revised information has been
received from the applicant.
Board of Supervisors Meeting (5/28/14):
On their own motion and with the applicant's consent, the Board deferred this case to
their July 23, 2014 public hearing.
Staff (5/29/14):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than June 2, 2014 for consideration at the Board's July 23,
2014 public hearing.
Staff (6/23/14):
To date, no new information has been subntted.
Board of Supervisors' Meeting (7/23/14):
On their own motion, the Board deferred this case to their October 22, 2014 public
hearing.
Staff (7/24/14):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than August 18, 2014 for consideration at the Board's
October 22, 2014 public hearing.
27 12SN0227-20140CT22-BOS-RPT
Staff (9/23/14):
To date, no new information has been subnutted.
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, October 22, 2014, beginning at 6:30 p.m., will take
under consideration this request.
28 12SN0227-2014OCT22-BOS-RPT
TWIN RIVERS, LLC
TEXTUAL STATEMENT
Revised:
September 3, 2013
Re: Zoning Application Twin Rivers, LLC for an amendment to previous zoning case
08SNOll 1 on Chesterfield County Tax ID's 823-659-3856, 6573 and 9483; and 824-659-2386,
5689 and 8890 as set forth hereinbelow.
L General Conditions.
(A) The development shall have a traditional mixed use development design with a mix
of residential and non-residential uses within blocks and/or within a building. Buildings will be
located close to the sidewalks and other buildings, the streets lined with trees and sidewallcs, on-
street parking, and open spaces.
(B) The Property shall be developed as generally depicted on the attached Master Plan,
entitled "Meadowville Town Center" dated May 29, 2013, prepared by Timmons Kelly
Architects, and as provided in the accompanying proffers and as set forth herein below.
The tracts shall be located in the area as generally depicted on the Master Plan, but their
location and size, including further divisions into sub-tracts, may be modified through the site
plan process, so long as the parcels generally maintain their relationship with each other and any
adjacent properties. Such Plan shall be subject to appeal in accordance with the provisions of the
Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan appeals.
(C) The mixing of residential and non-residential uses within a tract may be permitted if a
Mixed Use Plan is submitted for review and approval by the Planning Department or the
Planning Commission at the election of the developer. Such review will be subject to appeal in
accordance with the provision of the Zoning Ordinance for site plan appeals. The Mixed Use
Plan shall address the land use transitions and compatibility between the different uses within a
tract and adjacent properties. Land use compatibility and transitions may include, but not
necessarily limited tq the exact locations of uses, buffers and site design.
IL General Requirements and Exceptions.
(A) Parlcin~.
1. If on-street parking is permitted, those spaces shall be counted towards the
required number of parking spaces for all uses.
2. The Applicant shall provide parking for residential uses based on 2 spaces per
dwelling unit.
3. Commercial or office uses shall provide parking based on 4.4 spaces/1,000
gross floor area.
4. Parking may be further reduced based on Zoning Ordinance Section 19-512.
5. Parking shall not be required on each parcel or site where the use is located,
but rather may be provided off-site but must be in the town center project,
including on-street parking, subject to approval at the time of plans review, which
may include requirements for easements.
6. Parking areas along Main Street and Twin Rivers Drive shall be limited to a
single row of parallel or pull in parking spaces on both sides of each drive aisle;
traffic directions shall be separated by a landscaped pedestrian plaza, unless
modified during site plan review. If modified, the design shall not pernut large
expanses of parking areas and shall encourage pedestrian traffic.
(B) Street Trees. Street trees shall be planted along both sides of all public and private
streets that provide general circulation throughout the development, including but not
limited to one (1) side of Meadowville Road. Street trees shall only be required along
North Enon Church Road if direct vehicular access is provided to North Enon Church
Road..
(C) Architectural Standards.
1. The maximum height for all buildings shall be (6) stories. This height limit
shall not restrict the use of a roof of a six (6) story building for features such as,
but not linuted to, decks, patios, or gardens. The maximum height of accessory
buildings and strictures within all Tracts shall be one-half (1/2) the height of the
principal building.
2. The development shall have similar architectural styles to Festival Park @
Chester Village Green, West Broad Village and New Town as shown on, although
not exclusively, on Exhibit B dated September 3, 2013 attached hereto. An
architectural review committee (the "Twin Rivers ARC") shall be established
prior to site plan review. The ARC shall consist of three (3) members to include
the developer's appointee, the Economic Development Authority's appointee, and
an architect from Timmons Kelly Architects. In the event that Timmons Kelly
Architects is unable to perform another licensed architect may be substituted.
Architectural designs shall be submitted to the the Twin Rivers ARC for review
and approval prior to site plan approval. Architectural treatment of buildings shall
utilize a mixture of design features. Design features may include articulation of
doors and windows, sculptural or textural relief of facades, and architectural
ornamentation or varied rooflines, incorporated so as to have the appearance of
several small buildings clustered together in buildings of large mass.
3. Seventy-Five percent (75%) of each building facade being defined as the face
of the front, sides and rear of a building, excluding windows, trim, architectural
detailings, and doors) shall be brick or stone materials. No block will be used in
the building facade. Architectural concrete block may be used for ramps and
stoops so as to add architectural interest.
2
The remaining twenty five percent (25%) of each building facade, as defined
above, shall be brick, stone, cementitious board, drivet, stuccq and synthetic
stucco. In conjunction with site plan approval, the Twin Rivers ARC must
approve the use of any other products not listed above herein above.
4. Minimum roof material shall be a 30 year dimensional shingle or better
excluding buildings with a flat roof design.
5. Building facades along Main Street and front building facades for other mixed
use buildings shall have pedestrian scale design features such as pedestrian scale
lighting, architectural detailing on the first floor, building entry treatments such as
arched or frame entrances with strictured overhangs and/or awnings and non-
reflective storefront windows.
(D) Setbacks.
All buildings (including accessory strictures) along internal roads, interior private
driveways, parking areas and streets shall be permitted to have zero (0) foot
setback requirement for front, side, corner side, rear, and through lots. This
condition does not negate the requirement for sidewallcs and street trees as
required herein. No setback shall be required from proposed or existing public
roads except along North Enon Church Road and Meadowville Road. Provided
however, that corner side yards shall meet sight distance requirements as may be
established at the time of site plan review.
(E) Buffers and Landscape Areas.
1. No buffers shall be required between various uses and adjacent properties.
2. A minimum fifty (50) foot building, drives, and parking setback shall be
maintained along North Enon Church Road. Except where necessary to
accommodate access and utilities that nln generally perpendicular through the
setback, trees having a caliper of four (4) inches or greater shall be maintained
within this setback along with the installation of perimeter landscaping C. This
does not preclude the removal of diseased, dead, or dying trees. This does not
preclude the removal of trees for the installation of sidewallcs within the setback.
This setback may be reduced to a twenty five (25) foot setback with the addition
of a decorative fence not to exceed four (4) foot in height or a continuous
hedgerow with a nunimum planting height of two (2) feet and a maximum growth
height of four (4) feet. In addition, use of intermittent tree groupings can be used
to breakup the visual linear line of the hedgerow, as approved by the Planning
Department at time of site plan review.
(F) Restrictive Covenants shall be recorded prior to issuance of a building permit. Said
Restrictive Covenants shall include the following language:
This property is adjacent to the Meadowville Technology Park.
-,
Neighboring property will be used for industrial and other business
purposes. Traffic, noise, and lighting concerns related to Meadowville
Technology Park should be addressed through the owner of Twin Rivers.
(G) Uses Not Permitted. The following uses shall not be pernutted on the Property:
1. Feed, seed and ice sales;
2. Fraternal uses;
3. Indoor flea markets;
4. Kennels, commercial;
5. Material reclamation receiving centers;
6. Motor vehicle sales and rental;
7. Secondhand and consignment stores; and
8. Taxidermies.
(I~ Pedestrian Elements.
1. General. Pedestrian wallcs and amenities shall be provided and maintained
between uses. These pedestrian areas shall be designed to include amenities that
add high visual interest, such as but not limited to: decorative paving units;
decorative pedestrian-style lighting; benches; landscaped areas; plantings; bike
racks; plazas; water features; display windows; gathering areas; and other
pedestrian elements. The exact design and location of pedestrian elements shall
be approved by the Planning Department Director and the Twin Rivers ARC prior
to site plan approval.
2. Sidewallcs, General. Sidewallcs shall be installed along both sides of all public
and private streets that provide general circulation throughout the development.
Sidewallcs shall not be required along Meadowville Road and North Enon Church
Road. One or more Sidewallcs shall terminate on Meadowville Road and/or North
Enon Church Road to promote ease of pedestrian traffic from adjacent residential
uses.
3. Main Street Pedestrian Elements. Sidewallcs along Main Street shall be
occasionally internipted with design feat~ires to avoid large spans of flat concrete
work such as by providing brick walls; pavers; landscaping; decorative concrete
(such as fossils, stamps); curves in concrete; and other elements to enhance visual
interest. Pedestrian areas shall be wide enough to accommodate sidewalks a
minimum of six (6) feet in width to allow uninternipted pedestrian movement. In
addition, space for outdoor sales and dining areas shall be provided at multiple
locations along Main Street.
III. Uses: Uses permitted shall be limited to:
1. Uses permitted by right or with restriction in the Community Business (C-3)
District.
2. Uses pernutted by right or with restriction in the Residential Multi-family
(R1VIF') District.
4
3. Accessory uses pernutted in the R-MF and C-3 Zoning Districts.
4. Recreational establishments, commercial outdoor to be limited to outdoor
entertainment for community events such as performances, concerts, theatres,
amphitheatres, and other community events.
5. Mixed-Use Buildings, as defined as multi-story buildings that accommodate a
combination of commercial and/or office and/or residential uses within the same
stricture.
6. Live/Work units, as defined by the Zoning Ordinance.
7. The development shall provide locations that serve as focal points for civic,
religious, and/or institutional uses. These focal points shall beat ends of sight
lines such as may occur at a tee intersection of two streets, at a sudden road bend,
or at one end of a central commons area, and shall include elements such as
pedestrian wallcways, benches, landscaped areas, plazas, water features or other
pedestrian scaled features. Buildings associated with the use of the focal point
shall be designed with a strong architectural appearance in character with the
project's theme, such-uses include but are not limited to the following:
a. Municipal offices, fire stations, libraries, museums, community
meeting facilities, and post offices;
b. Places of worship;
c. Public schools;
d. Parks;
e. Gathering areas;
f. Fountains.
A minimum of two focal points shall be required within each tract.
IV. General design standards and guidelines.
(A) Tract L
1. Development of Tract I shall be a mix of all uses as defined in III above.
2. There shall be no minimum parcel size or maximum density per acre.
Buildings in Tract I shall be pernutted to have residential uses on the first
floor up to twenty-five percent (25%) of the gross square footage of the first
floor except for buildings fronting on Main Street as designated on the Master
Plan shall only be permitted to have a single residential unit on the first floor
to meet ADA requirements.
(B) Tract IL
1. Development of Tract II shall be permitted to be a mix of all uses as defined
in III above.
2. There shall be no minimum parcel size or maximum density per acre. There
shall be no limitation on the number of dwelling units per floor.
3. Buildings in Tract II may contain all residential uses; however buildings
fronting on Twin Rivers Drive shall have first floor storefront type windows
similar to those shown in Exhibit A, dated July 24, 2013, attached hereto.
4. There shall not be more than three (3) bedrooms in any dwelling units, and no
more than 10 dwelling units may contain three (3) bedrooms.
5. A clubhouse and pool facility shall be provided to serve residential uses. This
area shall serve as a focal point of Tract II as required by Condition III(7)
above and shall be designed to accommodate and facilitate gatherings. This
shall be developed and concurrent with the first phase of development on
Tract II.
V. Phasing Plan.
A maximum of 200 dwelling units shall be permitted in Tract II until such time as final
inspections have been approved by the Department of Building Inspections for a cumulative
total of at least 30,000 square feet of non-residential uses fronting Main Street in Tract I.
This shall not prohibit the issuance of permits or Certificates of Occupancy for dwelling units
located within mixed-use buildings fronting Main Street that will be constricted
simultaneously with the non-residential uses in Tract L (P)
~~~
Applicant/Agent
6
u~,a~..~a~,=~"" °,~o.~~.da V I N I~ N I A A 1 N fl 0 0 U l 3 1! 8 3 1 S 3 H 0
S4liZ MNI'JtlN TMHLOl01W •3Ntl0 3N~LSi1di3LS Stbbl
,y a
s L~~ ~ ~ H~~ d 2I~1,K~~ HMOJ, ~'ITIAMOQV~W
~'I'I~I•Sl~IOlNY1II.L Nv~d a3lsvw ~ ~ -
i §1_f
~
z
0 ~ -
~
i __ p
0~
~
~~
~
o~
~ ~ ~~
`~
K
R~
ti~
Ep AD
CKp RCd ~ /
ENpN
0
-{-
~'
~~~
~ ~~ I
~, ~ ',
133LLLS NIbN
~u~~~~ ~
ICI
O II~
~,f I H
~~, ~~ ~ ~
_,
~~,;
~~ , `-
~~_
_,,~ ~~
~~
.-
z~ N
~, a
~~,
W
W
U
~O
~~ ~ a
~a
a~
o
~~ O
;~,
\ ~
_ ~ ~
---
`~
a
~ ~
--
o
~,,
'~,
-__
,,,
~ _~_
_-,
7
~ ~ ~ T~'
<,
~. „~. ~
.,,,
r~
~ wM~
!i
~:
.,., ..
~rw, .,
,,, , ..
. M
.- ,
„~~
.~
o nt* y
~ Jk
d' ° _
Y r
~L ~ ~ ~ 1~ i}~ ~ ~ y~~
~`Y ~~~Y ~~t ro t r' r~
z
9 ~' ~ ~ C `,
'*j
t
t ~4 / ~'
~.. vy M y IG15 ~4... I.~ u m,J;_ ..s.,.._
.. iijj~~TT r .v.,.._.~~'
7~s j ~
~ I I ~ 3 ~~
• 1
I ~~' i ~~~
ii
,~.
i ~
I',
k ,. .Y
.,,
~.
k
i
~ ~
,. _ ~,
~ ~ ~ ~ ,.... ~.. ~ I~
~,~
SSA?j ~~~ `ll~ 7Ai~#~;.KP.
$a.~ ,~=c } kR~7}ab~,
~,B;~~C i. ,G-~'~
,,
;t y
~Y ~ V
n f ~"~ F r °~~ ~ ~~.
~, ~~ 1 i~ '= ~ ~ ~`
~5 ly a,
~ ` ~ ` ~'
4~ ~ ~ ~ rl ~~ e.~b
Y:
~ r t ~ ~`', z.. ~ ~~ ~
4 ~ ~-; .
~~ ` ~~
..
., ,,..
I ~ ~
„~ ,.
,r.;, : ~ ,~ ~ -
___
,.,. ~, ~'~ h ~~~'~ <,n'. ~~ ~,~x
~~
~,.'
,,,;!
~ l r ~p
IR'«I _ ~_
Y I
•~
L
lA~'`)
W
O
/^~~
~./ /
^O
W
W
I
Q
~~
W
2
X
W
O
N
12SN0227-2
.,~._- , ,
„,~ ,~
~5. ~~
l
~~
F
u ~e
~~ "l",yl i",~ ~
"P? !~F ~
°z t~'
a Y a + ~~i
n~
~ ~ ~~
~~. j
i ;~
~~
4~
,, ...
~~
~~~
~~
~`
~~~` :~
r
~~ ` M1
_ ~~
~ ~_ ~~ ~ ~ t NA f ~ ~
1 ~ 7 ?~"'"
t~.. *~
~ f. Cn ,"ter!. `may
~:
d.
~ ~..,~xE
Jy
Y
v
r
~ ~
E
.~
yr. ~ tr
f
;~ ~~^~:
~ ~_
,~:j
~v r:~
i~,~'
' ' E ^I
~..,~
-«v
1~
~' 9
,, ~
,~
~'`~-.
~~ f';~r
,. ''
~. i
~i
~~
;~
~`~
~ `~;
,?" ,
y~.1~ ~~~,~~
.~ .~~
~:~'i
~:, ~ .
-~
.: _~
~~
~~
~~~ ,. ,.
`~ r~
~.
4
Fri-, ',y,
4ai
,'r} 1'
~..
- ~" .
~~ ~~ .
{~ ~I
! Ills
t Iii.
M
O
N
M
i
N
N
~--~
Q
''~^
vJ
m
~_
X
w
12SN0227-3