13SN0132CASE MANAGER: Robert Clay
174 5)
BS Time Remaining:
365 daysJaattafy 21,
STAFF'S
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATION
13SNO132
(AMENDED)
Chesterfield Business Partners LLC
and
Kingsland Towncenter LLC
Dale Magisterial District
Hopkins Road Elementary; Falling Creek Middle; and Bird High School Attendance Zones
West line of Iron Bridge Road at Kingsland Glen Drive
At and within the vicinity of 7000 Iron Bridge Road
REQUEST: (AMENDED) Amendment of conditional use (Cases 06SNO237 and 07SN0226)
relative to reduction of cash proffers in a Community Business (C-3) District.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
A mix of residential housing types, commonly known as the Watermark
development, is planned.
The applicant requests amendments to Proffered Conditions 11 of Cases
06SNO237 and 07SNO226 to reduce the cash proffer. Specifically, these
amendments address the following:
• For non -age restricted dwellings, reduce the cash proffer to the Board's
maximum acceptable cash proffer;
Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public senTice
• For age -restricted dwellings, reduce the cash proffer to the Board's
maximum acceptable cash proffer minus the schools' component; and
• Delay the escalator, as outlined in the Cash Proffer Policy.
(NOTE: IN ORDER FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO CONSIDER THIS
REQUEST AT THEIR SEPTEMBER 16, 2015 MEETING, A $2,000.00 DEFERRAL FEE
MUST BE PAID PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC MEETING.)
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITION ON
PAGES 1 AND 2.
AYES: UNANIMOUS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend denial for the following reason:
The proffered condition does not adequately address the proposed development's impacts
on capital facilities for age -restricted dwellings. Consequently, the County's ability to
provide adequate facilities to its citizens will be adversely impacted.
(NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED OR THE PROPERTY OWNER(S) MAY
PROFFER CONDITIONS. CONDITION NOTED "CPC" IS A CONDITION
RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMISSION.)
PROFFERED CONDITION
(CPC) 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 infrastructure improvements within the service district for the property, unless
state law prevents enforcement of that timing:
a. $18,966 per dwelling unit, for the period beginning the July 1 preceding
the Board of Supervisors' approval of the case through July 1 four years
later, at which point the amount will be adjusted for the cumulative change
in the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index during that time period.
b. Provided, however, that if any building permits issued on the Property are
for senior housing, as defined in the proffer on age restriction, the
applicant, sub -divider, or assignee(s) shall pay $10,602.00 per dwelling
unit, allocated on a pro -rata basis among the categories for parks, libraries,
fire and roads, for the period beginning July 1 preceding the Board of
Supervisors' approval of the case through July 1 four years later, at which
2 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
point the amount will be adjusted for the cumulative change to the
Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index during that time period.
C. 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.
d. Cash proffer payments shall be spent for the purposes proffered or as
otherwise permitted by law. (B&M)
(Staff Note: This proffered condition supersedes Proffered Condition 11 of Cases 06SNO237 and
07SNO226 (Cash Proffer). All other conditions of approval for Cases 06SNO237 and 07SNO226
would remain in effect.)
GENERAL INFORMATION
Location:
The request property is located fronting the west line of Iron Bridge Road and the north and
south lines of Kingland Glen Drive. Tax IDs 770-677-6585; 771-676-6355; 771-678-2064;
772-676-1473; and 772-677-3568.
Existing Zonin
C-3
Size:
101 acres
Existing Land Use:
Vacant
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North, South and West — R-7 and C-3 with conditional use and conditional use planned
development approval; Single-family residential, multifamily residential or vacant
East — R-15, A, A with conditional use approval and C-3 with conditional use and
conditional use planned development approval; Single-family residential,
multifamily residential, office or vacant
3 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
UTILITIES
Public Water and Wastewater Systems:
Connection to the public water and wastewater systems is required per proffered conditions
of Cases 06SNO237 and 07SN0226.
ENVIRONMENTAL
Drainage and Erosion:
This request will have no impact on these facilities.
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 further detailed by specific departments in the applicable sections of
this request analysis.
Fire Service:
The Public Facilities Plan as part of the Comprehensive Plan indicates that fire and
emergency medical service (EMS) calls increased by 44% from 2001 to 2011,
significantly faster than the county's population increase of 17%. Of the total incidents in
2011, nearly 76% were medical emergencies and 24% 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 construction by 2022 in the Plan. In addition to the five new stations,
the Plan also recommends the replacement/revitalization of four (4) existing stations.
Based on (440) dwelling units, this request will generate approximately (87) calls for fire
and emergency medical service each year.
Reference the Budget and Management Department's comments on the financial impact
of this request as it relates to fire and EMS.
The Dale Fire Station, Company Number 11, currently provides fire protection and
emergency medical service. 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.
Schools:
High performing, high quality public schools contribute to the quality of life and
economic vitality of the County. The Comprehensive Plan suggests a greater focus
should be placed on linking schools with communities by providing greater access,
4 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
flexible designs and locations that better meet the needs of the communities which they
serve. The Public Facilities Plan, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, identifies
countywide school facility needs. Specifically, the Plan identifies the need: to revitalize
or replace sixteen (16) elementary schools and construct three (3) new elementary
schools; to revitalize or replace six (6) middle schools and construct two (2) new middle
schools; to revitalize or replace two (2) high schools and construct three (3) new high
schools; and to construct one (1) additional technical center.
More locally, the proposed rezoning case will continue to have a significant impact on
the aforementioned schools involved. The existing zoning limits development to a
maximum of 740 dwelling units. To date, building permits have been issued for 300
units and 440 units remain to be constructed. The elementary and secondary school
students generated by the proposal would continue to push enrollment to capacity and
beyond capacity at each school. The five (5) trailers at Hopkins Road Elementary are
used for instruction and the fourteen (14) trailers at Falling Creek Middle and the five (5)
trailers at Bird High are used for instruction and storage. 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 beyond their capacity. Additionally, the
financial impact of residential development on school facilities is addressed in the
"Financial Impact on Capital Facilities" section below. The aforementioned units should
continue to be subject to full cash proffers, to assist in mitigating the impact that this
development would have on schools. Reference the Budget and Management
Department's comments on the financial impact of this request as it relates to schools.
The chart on the next page offers information on schools' memberships and capacities.
The projected student membership and capacity trends at this time indicate that there will
be an overall increase in membership at the elementary and secondary levels by 2021.
Staff continues to monitor student membership on a regular basis in these areas and
membership projections are analyzed and updated annually.
5 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
Residential Yield: 440
Elementary: Hopkins Road 568 tDd% 574 tDtia�% 590 08%
Middle: Falling Creek 1,186 97% 1,207 99% 1,384 1 ] :VX/
High: Bud 1,778 88% 1,799 89% 1,832 9ll x%
NOTE: * The Student Yield is based on the FY2015 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 09-30-14.
School Capacity is based on the 2014-15 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.
Libraries
The Public Facilities Plan, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, recognizes that the
public library system's role in the county has expanded beyond its traditional function as
a resource for information and materials, and now serves as a community gathering place
for educational, cultural and information services; community support during emergency
events; economic development; and revitalization activities. The Plan identifies
6 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
Student Yield
From
Functional
% of
Membership,
No. of
School
Name Residential
Capacity,
Ca pa f:iit;y,
9-30-14
Trailers
Development
2014-15
2014-f5
Elementary:
Hopkins Road 92
554
544
02% 5
Middle:
Falling Creek 49
1,186
1,222
97/0 14
High:
Bird 67
1,799
2,020
89/0 5
Total
208
Projected Membership and Capacity
Trends Over Time ***
Elementary: Hopkins Road 568 tDd% 574 tDtia�% 590 08%
Middle: Falling Creek 1,186 97% 1,207 99% 1,384 1 ] :VX/
High: Bud 1,778 88% 1,799 89% 1,832 9ll x%
NOTE: * The Student Yield is based on the FY2015 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 09-30-14.
School Capacity is based on the 2014-15 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.
Libraries
The Public Facilities Plan, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, recognizes that the
public library system's role in the county has expanded beyond its traditional function as
a resource for information and materials, and now serves as a community gathering place
for educational, cultural and information services; community support during emergency
events; economic development; and revitalization activities. The Plan identifies
6 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
countywide library facility needs. Specifically, the Plan identifies the need to: expand or
replace five (5) existing libraries; construct five (5) new libraries; and construct a
community arts center.
More locally, the proposed development would impact the Central Library or the
Meadowdale Library. The Public Facilities Plan identifies the need to expand the Central
Library by 6,000 square feet by finishing a shell space within the existing facility.
Reference the Budget and Management Department's comments on the financial impact
of this request as it relates to libraries.
Parks and Recreation:
The Public Facilities Plan identifies the need for three (3) regional parks totaling 600
acres, ten (10) community parks totaling 790 acres, nine (9) neighborhood parks totaling
180 acres, and three (3) water-based special purpose parks. The Plan also identifies the
need for urban parks within mixed use developments to compliment and provide linkages
to the County's park system. The Plan identifies the need for linear parks & trails and
resource-based special purpose parks [historical, cultural and environmental] and makes
suggestions for their locations. The Plan also addresses the need to expand existing park
sites to meet level of service standards. The Plan also identifies the need to improve
access to blueways through the acquisition of easements and properties. Co -location with
schools and other compatible public facilities is desired.
Reference the Budget and Management Department's comments on the financial impact
of this request as it relates to parks and recreation.
County Department of Transportation:
The traffic impact of this development must be addressed. Area roads need to be
improved to address safety and accommodate the increase in traffic generated by this
development. The applicant is requesting to amend the previously approved cash proffer.
Reference the Budget and Management Department's comments on the financial impact
of this request as it relates to transportation.
Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT):
VDOT staff has no comments concerning this case.
Airport:
A portion of this site is located within the Airport Operational Area. Plan policies
discourage residential uses in this area. However, the residential uses allowed through the
previous zoning cases were approved prior to the adoption of the Plan.
7 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
Financial Impact on Capital Facilities:
*Based on the number of dwelling units approved (Cases 06SNO237 and 07SN0226) and
remaining to be built dwelling units. The actual number of dwelling units and corresponding
impact may vary.
The original zoning cases (06SN0237 and 07SN0226) were approved in August 2006 and April
2007 respectively. In 06SN0237, Condition 4 proffered a density of 650 units with cash proffers
on units in excess of 150 (Condition 11) in the amount of $15,600 (currently escalated by the
Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index to $22,245). The approved cash proffer for senior units
was $10,269 (currently escalated to $14,641). In 07SN0226, Condition 4 proffered a density of
90 units with cash proffers (Condition 11) on all units in the amount of $15,600 (currently
escalated to $20,730). The approved cash proffer for senior units was $10,269 (currently
escalated to $13,646).
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, parks, libraries, fire stations
and roads as $21,261 per unit.
To address the impact of this development on capital facilities, the applicant has requested to
amend the previously approved cash proffers to $18,966 per each dwelling for non -age restricted
units and $10,602 per dwelling for age restricted units.
While appropriate to maintain the cash proffers approved with cases 06SNO237 and 07SN0226,
the Board of Supervisors has set the current cash proffer at $18,966, an amount lower than what
was approved, in some instances, with the original cases. Staff supports the request to reduce the
cash proffer to $18,966 for non -age restricted housing units. However, the applicant's cash
proffer of $10,602 falls short of addressing its impact on capital facilities. If accepted, the
amended cash proffers for either housing type would remain fixed for a period of four years after
13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
Per Dwelling
Unit
Potential Number of New Dwelling Units
440*
1.00
Population Increase
1,223.20
2.78
Number of New Students
Elementary
92.21
0.21
Middle
49.39
0.11
High
66.83
0.15
TOTAL
208.43
0.47
Net Cost For Schools
$
4,125,440
$
9,376
Net Cost for Parks
$
583,880
$
1,327
Net Cost for Libraries
$
149,600
$
340
Net Cost For Fire Stations
$
345,840
$
786
Average Net Cost Roads
$
4,150,080
$
9,432
TOTAL NET COST
$
9,354,840
$
21,261
*Based on the number of dwelling units approved (Cases 06SNO237 and 07SN0226) and
remaining to be built dwelling units. The actual number of dwelling units and corresponding
impact may vary.
The original zoning cases (06SN0237 and 07SN0226) were approved in August 2006 and April
2007 respectively. In 06SN0237, Condition 4 proffered a density of 650 units with cash proffers
on units in excess of 150 (Condition 11) in the amount of $15,600 (currently escalated by the
Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index to $22,245). The approved cash proffer for senior units
was $10,269 (currently escalated to $14,641). In 07SN0226, Condition 4 proffered a density of
90 units with cash proffers (Condition 11) on all units in the amount of $15,600 (currently
escalated to $20,730). The approved cash proffer for senior units was $10,269 (currently
escalated to $13,646).
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, parks, libraries, fire stations
and roads as $21,261 per unit.
To address the impact of this development on capital facilities, the applicant has requested to
amend the previously approved cash proffers to $18,966 per each dwelling for non -age restricted
units and $10,602 per dwelling for age restricted units.
While appropriate to maintain the cash proffers approved with cases 06SNO237 and 07SN0226,
the Board of Supervisors has set the current cash proffer at $18,966, an amount lower than what
was approved, in some instances, with the original cases. Staff supports the request to reduce the
cash proffer to $18,966 for non -age restricted housing units. However, the applicant's cash
proffer of $10,602 falls short of addressing its impact on capital facilities. If accepted, the
amended cash proffers for either housing type would remain fixed for a period of four years after
13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
which it would be escalated by the cumulative change in the Marshall and Swift Building Cost
Index, a provision recently adopted by the Board of Supervisors.
The Planning Commission and 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.
T ANT) TN -F
Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan designates the request property as Community Business and
Industrial, where C-3 uses that serve community -wide trade areas, and I-2 and limited I-3
uses such as moderate to intense manufacturing and uses which normally have outside
storage areas are appropriate. The Plan does not encourage residential development under
these two (2) land use designations. It should be noted, however, that the allowable land
uses were approved prior to the recent adoption of the Plan.
Area Development Trends:
Adjacent property to the north, south and west is zoned Residential (R-7) and has been
developed or planned for development for residential uses in the Ampthill Gardens,
Kings Forest and Watermark Subdivisions. Property to the east, across Route 10, is zoned
residential and agricultural and is occupied by single-family residential or office uses or
is vacant. In addition, the subject property surrounds the Meridian Watermark
Apartments, a multifamily development zoned as part of the original case (06SN0237).
The Plan anticipates commercial and industrial uses in this area for the foreseeable future.
Zoning History:
On August 23, 2006 and April 25, 2007 the Board of Supervisors, upon favorable
recommendations from the Planning Commission, approved C-3 zoning with conditional
use and conditional use planned development on properties which included the subject
property (Cases 06SNO237 and 07SN0226). With the approval of Cases 06SNO237 and
07SNO226 the applicant offered and the Board of Supervisors accepted a cash proffer,
intended to address the impact of the residential development on necessary capital
facilities.
Architectural Standards:
The Textual Statements of Cases 06SNO237 and 07SNO226 require the architectural
treatment of buildings, including materials, color and style, to be compatible within the
Tracts established at the time of approval of those zoning cases. Compatibility may be
achieved through the use of similar building massing, materials, scale, colors and other
architectural features. In addition, in conjunction with Tentative Subdivision/Site Plan
approval, a written and/or graphic description of the planned overall architectural
treatment of all buildings is to be submitted to the Planning Department for review and
9 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
approval. These requirements would not be changed as a result of approval of the current
request. This required architectural theme statement was submitted (see Attachment 2)
and approved on February 13, 2013.
CONCLUSION
The proffered condition does not adequately address the proposed development's impacts on
capital facilities for age -restricted dwellings. Consequently, the County's ability to provide
adequate facilities to its citizens will be adversely impacted.
Given these considerations, denial of this request is recommended.
CASE HISTORY
Planning Commission Meeting (11/15/12):
On their own motion and without the applicant's consent, the Commission deferred this
case to their February 19, 2013 public hearing.
Staff (11/16/12):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than December 10, 2012 for consideration at the
Commission's February 19, 2013 public hearing.
Applicant (1/23/13):
The application was amended to clarify the request as an amendment of conditional use
instead of an amendment of zoning.
Planning Commission Meeting (2/19/13):
On their own motion and with the applicant's consent, the Commission deferred this case
to their May 21, 2013 public hearing.
Staff (2/20/13):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than March 11, 2013 for consideration at the Commission's
May 21, 2013 public hearing.
10 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
Staff (4/25/13):
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 Commission's
July 16, 2013 public hearing.
Staff (6/14/13):
To date, no new information has been received.
Applicant (7/8/13):
A proffered condition and a pattern book of development standards were submitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (7/16/13):
On their own motion and with the applicant's consent, the Commission deferred this case
to their September 17, 2013 public hearing.
Staff (7/17/13):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than July 22, 2013 for consideration at the Commission's
September 17, 2013 public hearing.
Staff (8/29/13):
To date, no new information has been received.
11 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
Planning Commission Meeting (9/17/13):
On their own motion and with the applicant's consent, the Commission 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 (9/26/13):
Revised proffered conditions were submitted.
Applicant (10/2, 10/15, 10/23 and 11/8/13):
Revised proffered conditions and a revised design guidelines manual were submitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (11/19/13):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their January 21,
2014 public hearing.
Staff (11/21/13):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than November 25, 2013 for consideration at the
Commission's January 21, 2014 public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a
$1,000.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the Commission's public hearing.
Staff (12/19/13):
To date, no new information has been received, nor has the $1,000.00 deferral fee been
paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (1/21/14):
Due to inclement weather, the Planning Commission meeting was postponed to January
23, 2014.
12 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
Staff (1/21/14):
Schools submitted revised comments to reflect current school functional capacities based
on the 2013-14 Space Utilization Study as well as current school trailer data.
Applicant (1/23/14):
The deferral fee was paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (1/23/14):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their March 18,
2014 public hearing.
Staff (1/24/14):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than January 27, 2014 for consideration at the Commission's
March 18, 2014 public hearing.
Also, the applicant was advised that a $1,000.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
Commission's public hearing.
Staff (2/14/14):
To date, no new information has been received, nor has the deferral fee been paid.
Applicant (3/18/14):
The deferral fee was paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (3/18/14):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their July 15, 2014
public hearing.
13 13SN0132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
Staff (3/19/14):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than May 5, 2014 for consideration at the Commission's
July 22, 2014 public hearing.
Also, the applicant was advised that a $1,000.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
Commission's public hearing.
Planning Commission (5/22/14):
Due to the planned renovations to the public meeting room, the Commission rescheduled
their July 15, 2014 public hearing to July 22, 2014.
Staff (6/19/14):
Revised comments were received from School Board Administration expanding on their
previous comments by providing school membership and capacity projections for future
years.
To date, no new or revised information has been received from the applicants, nor has the
deferral fee been paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (7/22/14):
On their own motion and with the applicant's consent, the Commission deferred this case
to their October 21, 2014 public hearing.
Staff (7/23/14):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than August 11, 2014 for consideration at the Commission's
October 21, 2014 public hearing.
Staff (9/18/14):
To date, no new information has been received.
14 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
Planning Commission Meeting (10/21/14):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their January 20,
2015 public hearing.
Staff (10/22/14):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than November 10, 2014 for consideration at the
Commission's January 20, 2015 public hearing.
The applicant was also advised that a $1,000.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
Commission's public hearing.
Staff (12/23/14):
To date, no new information has been received, nor has the deferral fee been paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (1/20/15):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their March 17,
2015 public hearing.
Staff (1/23/15):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than January 28, 2015 for consideration at the Commission's
March 17, 2015 public hearing.
The applicant was also advised that a $2,000.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
Commission's public hearing.
NOTE: ALSO IT HAS BEEN FOUND THAT THE APPLICANTS OWE 2 PAST
FEES OF $1,000 EACH.
Applicant (2/9/15)
All deferral fees were paid.
15 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
Staff (3/2/15):
To date, no new information has been received.
Planning Commission Meeting (3/17/15):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their June 16, 2015
public hearing.
Staff (3/18/15):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than April 6, 2015 for consideration at the Commission's
June 16, 2015 public hearing.
The applicant was also advised that a $2,000.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
Commission's public hearing.
Applicant (5/13/15, 5/29/15, 6/9/15 and 6/11/15):
A revised proffered condition was submitted.
The $2,000.00 deferral fee has not been paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (6/16/15):
The applicant did not accept staff's recommendation, but did accept the Planning
Commission's recommendation.
The applicant noted that the original cases allowed for a reduced cash proffer for age -
restricted dwellings, and that this proposal represents a recalibration of those figures.
There were no citizens to speak for or against this case.
There was discussion among the Commission about the Board historically accepting a
reduced cash proffer for age -restricted dwellings. It was noted the Board would be
reviewing the Policy and any Policy changes should be at the Board level.
On motion of Dr. Brown, seconded by Mr. Gulley, the Commission recommended
approval and acceptance of the proffered condition on page 2 and 3.
AYES: Messrs. Brown, Gulley, Patton, Waller, and Wallin.
16 13SNO132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
Staff (6/18/15):
To date, no new or revised information has been received, nor has the $2,000.00 deferral
fee been paid.
Board of Supervisors Meeting (7/22/15):
At the request of the applicant, the Board deferred this case to their September 16, 2015
public hearing.
Staff (7/22/15):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than July 28, 2015 for consideration at the Commission's
September 16, 2015 public hearing.
The applicant was also advised that a $2,000.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
Commission's public hearing.
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, September 16, 2015 beginning at 6:30 p.m., will take
under consideration this request.
17 13SN0132-2015SEP16-BOS-RPT
Condition to be amended from Case 06SNO237 with approval of
Case 13SNO132
11. Cash Proffers. The applicant, subdivider, or assignee(s) shall pay the following to the
County of Chesterfield prior to the issuance of any residential building permit for
infrastructure improvements within the service district for the Property in excess of 150
dwelling units:
A. $15,600.00 per dwelling unit if paid prior to July 1, 2006. Thereafter, such
payment shall be the amount approved by the Board of Supervisors not to exceed
$15,600.00 per unit as adjusted upward by any increase in the Marshall and Swift
Building Cost Index between July 1, 2005 and July 1 of the fiscal year in which
the payment is made if paid after June 30, 2006.
B. Provided, however, that if any residential building permits issued on the Property
are for senior housing, as defined in the proffer on age -restriction, the applicant,
sub -divider, or assignee(s) shall pay $10,269.00 per unit to the County of
Chesterfield, prior to the time of issuance of a residential building permit, for
infrastructure improvements within the service district for the Property if paid
prior to July 1, 2006. The $10,269.00 for any units developed shall be allocated
pro -rata among the facility costs as follows: $602 for parks, $348 for library
facilities, $404 for fire stations, and $8,915 for roads. Thereafter, such payment
shall be the amount approved by the Board of Supervisors not to exceed $10,269
per unit as adjusted upward by any increase in the Marshall and Swift Building
Cost Index between July 1, 2005 and July 1 of the fiscal year in which the
payment is made if paid after June 30, 2006.
C. Cash proffer payments shall be spent for the purposes proffered or as otherwise
permitted by law. 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 determined by the county.
13SN0132 —Attachment 1
Condition to be amended from Case 07SNO226 with approval of
Case 13SNO132
11. Cash Proffers. The applicant, subdivider, or assignee(s) shall pay the following to the
County of Chesterfield prior to the issuance of any residential building permit for
infrastructure improvements within the service district for the Property:
A. $15,600.00 per dwelling unit if paid prior to July 1, 2007. Thereafter, such
payment shall be the amount approved by the Board of Supervisors not to exceed
$15,600.00 per unit as adjusted upward by any increase in the Marshall and Swift
Building Cost Index between July 1, 2006 and July 1 of the fiscal year in which
the payment is made if paid after June 30, 2007.
B. Provided, however, that if any residential building permits issued on the Property
are for senior housing, as defined in the proffer on age -restriction, the applicant,
sub -divider, or assignee(s) shall pay $10,269.00 per unit to the County of
Chesterfield, prior to the time of issuance of a residential building permit, for
infrastructure improvements within the service district for the Property if paid
prior to July 1, 2007. The $10,269.00 for any units developed shall be allocated
pro -rata among the facility costs as follows: $602 for parks, $348 for library
facilities, $404 for fire stations, and $8,915 for roads. Thereafter, such payment
shall be the amount approved by the Board of Supervisors not to exceed $10,269
per unit as adjusted upward by any increase in the Marshall and Swift Building
Cost Index between July 1, 2006 and July 1 of the fiscal year in which the
payment is made if paid after June 30, 2007.
C. Cash proffer payments shall be spent for the purposes proffered or as otherwise
permitted by law. 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 determined by the county.
13SN0132 —Attachment 1
♦'
al
WATERMARK TOWNHOMES ARCHITECTURAL THEME NARRATIVE
The townhouse and small detached units shall be traditional or transitional with
traditional detailing which may include a variety of architectural features,
materials and color palettes to provide architectural variety throughout the
community. Highly stylized houses with overstated eclectic design elements,
houses with overly mixed styles shall not be permitted. Exterior facades which
face a public street shall have a formal arrangement and organization of all
elements provided in the elevation, which elements shall include doors, and
windows, and a varied application of porches, stoops, columns, cornices, trim
details such as shutters, quoins, jack arches and the like. Houses shall utilize
simple rectangular massing with traditional gable, hip and/or shed roofs as
appropriate to the size and shape of the house.
Single family detached homes and attached townhouse rows with the same
elevations may not be located adjacent to, or facing directly across from each
other on the same street. This requirement does not apply to homes on different
streets backing up to each other or houses or townhomes which are diagonal
from each other across streets. The same color schemes may not be used on
adjacent houses or townhouse rows or on houses or townhouse rows directly
across from each other.
Single family detached houses with garages that face a public street shall
incorporate architectural features to mitigate the visual impact of the garage door.
These features shall include decorative lintels or shed roof overhangs above the
doors and garage door treatments such as raised panel or carriage house styles.
Flat front garage doors will not be permitted.
r -1
1 � ,w � ,fie • ��� y � "` � ,,ti � � ¢..�
JANUARY 24, 2013
�U
DIRE,C'iuA rjha iiwNu DEPT.