Loading...
18RW0147 CASE NUMBER: 18RW0147 APPLICANT: Tarrington Holdings, LLC CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA ANALYSIS Magisterial District: MIDLOTHIAN 4001 Ashwell Drive AND RECOMMENDATION Board of Supervisors (BOS) Public Hearing Date: DECEMBER 13, 2017 BOS Time Remaining: 365 DAYS WILLIAM H. SHEWMAKE (804-783-7595) Case Manager: WEEDON CLOE (804-768-7797) REQUEST An exception to the requirements of Section 19.1-524 of the Zoning Ordinance, which relates to Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas. Specifically, the applicant is requesting to encroach into 0.13 acres of an existing Resource Protection Area (RPA) to perform grading and construction of five residential lots and principle dwelling units. RECOMMENDATION Under the Zoning Ordinance, a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act PLANNING exception request goes directly to the Board of Supervisors without a COMMISSION Planning Commission recommendation. RECOMMEND DENIAL FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1.The six findings specified by Section 19.1-527.B for exceptions to the requirements of Section 19.1-524 of the Zoning Ordinance have not been met. Specifically: 2.Finding (b) - Granting the exception would confer special STAFF privileges upon the applicant that are denied to other property owners who are subject to its provisions and are similarly situated. 3.Finding (d) - The exception request is based on conditions or circumstances that are self-created or self-imposed. Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service 218RW0147-2017DEC13-BOS-RPT Map 2: Comprehensive Plan Classification: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL The designation suggests the property is appropriate for 1.0 dwelling per acre or less. Map 3: Surrounding Land Uses & Development Robious Landing Park James River Tarrington Subdivision 318RW0147-2017DEC13-BOS-RPT ENVIRONMENTAL Drainage, Erosion and Water Quality Staff Contact: Weedon Cloe (804-768-7797) cloew@chesterfield.gov BACKGROUND On May 22, 2002, the Board of Supervisors approved rezoning case 02SN0131 for the Tarrington development, which included rezoning 735.1 acres of R-40 to R-25 with a conditional use planned development, plus proffered conditions on 6.8 acres of R-40. As part of the zoning case, the developer proffered to develop the project in four phases. The preliminary plans for Phases I, II, and III were approved by the County in 2002, 2003, and 2006, respectively. The preliminary plat for Phase IV (15TS0199) development area (Phase IV) was first submitted to the County for review on March 17, 2015 and approved on November 17, 2016. This approval was granted for eighty (80) lots on 106.8 acres. On December 15, 2016, staff received a complete Resource Protection Area (RPA) Designation sultant who provided the RPA Designationdesignation, the James River, along with an unnamed tributary to the James River, Salles Creek, and an unnamed tributary to Salles Creek were all identified as streams with perennial flow requiring an RPA. The designated RPAs are partially located within the area of additional residential lots (See Exhibit A). In a letter to the applicant and consultant dated March 3, 2017 staff concurred with the RPA Designation. On March 31, 2017, the applicant submitted a request for a vesting determination to develop the property under the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act requirements as they existed prior to November 23, 2004 (i.e. the applicant requested the ability to develop portions of Phase IV under older regulations predating this portion of the Tarrington development). On May 15, 2017, the County issued a letter indicating that there were no vested rights to develop the project under the requirements in effect on or before November 23, 2004. The applicant did not appeal this determination. The applicant did appeal the March decision by the Director of Environmental Engineering concerning the boundaries of the RPAs. The Planning Commission upheld the decision of the Director of Environmental Engineering on May 16, 2017, which resulted in the boundaries of the RPA as designated , remaining as confirmed. On October 4, 2017, the applicant submitted this application to the County to seek exceptions to Section 19.1-524 of the Zoning Ordinance which prohibits development within RPAs. PROPOSAL Section 19.1-523 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that as part of, or prior to, the zoning or plan review processes, a RPA Designation shall be conducted. Developers may conduct the RPA Designation and submit it for approval by the Environmental Engineering Department. The purpose of the RPA Designation is to determine whether waterbodies on or adjacent to proposed development areas have perennial flow and/or other RPA features. Once the boundaries of the 418RW0147-2017DEC13-BOS-RPT RPA have been established by a field designation, the developer must adhere to the requirements that regulate and/or prohibit development activities within the RPA. The subject of this request is that the applicant has requested an exception to allow land disturbance and construction within the designated RPAs currently located within the boundary of the Tarrington Subdivision Phase IV. Specifically, the applicant is proposing to clear and grade within a currently forested RPA for site layout and construction of five residential lots and principle dwelling units within Sections 18 and 19 (See Exhibit A). The character of the RPA on the property consists of a mature hardwood forest. The total area of RPA buffer on the Phase IV property is approximately 18.5 acres and comprises 17.3% of the parcel. The applicant proposes to impact approximately 5750 square feet, or 0.13 acres, of RPA (Exhibits B and C). To grant an exception to the requirements of Section 19.1-524 of the Zoning Ordinance, six findings listed in Section 19.1-527.B must be made. These findings are: The requested exception is the minimum necessary to afford relief. a. Granting the exception shall not confer any special privileges upon the applicant that are b. denied by this division to other property owners who are subject to its provisions and who are similarly situated. c.The exception is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this division and will not result in a substantial detriment to water quality. The exception request is not based on conditions or circumstances that are self-created or self- d. imposed. Reasonable and appropriate conditions are imposed, as warranted, that will ensure that the e. permitted activity will not cause a degradation of water quality. The request is being made because of the particular physical surroundings, use, shape, or f. topographical conditions of the specific property involved or property adjacent to or within 100 feet of the subject property, or a particular hardship to the owner will occur, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of this division is carried out. Staff reviewed the Statement of Six Findings submitted by the applicant and concluded that two of the six findings specified by Section 19.1-527.B for granting exceptions to the requirements of Section 19.1-524 of the Zoning Ordinance cannot be made. Staff noted the following deficiencies in two of the findings: Finding b Granting the exception shall not confer any special privileges upon the applicant that are denied by this division to other property owners who are subject to its provisions and who are similarly situated. Staff believes that granting this exception would confer special privileges upon the applicant that are not available to other property owners/developers. Pursuant to Section 19.1-525.13 of the , a twenty-five (25) foot building setback from the RPA is required on all lots developed within the county after November 23, 2004. The applicant submitted Phase IV for development after this date. Permitting the applicant to clear and grade for yards within established RPAs on newly created lots could set a precedent for other developers to seek 518RW0147-2017DEC13-BOS-RPT exceptions to encroach into sensitive environmental areas when proposing the creation of lots within established RPAs. Finding d The exception request is not based on conditions or circumstances that are self-created or self-imposed. Staff believes this exception request is based on conditions that are self-created. Tarrington Holdings, LLC should have been aware when the property was purchased that the parcel in question contained numerous well-documented mines and potential environmental features that would affect the development of this site. Additionally, the applicant can pursue other development options that would be less impactful on the RPAs within the five lots. Potential options might include: decreasing the size of the primary structures, omitting rear decks, or seeking variances to decrease other setback requirements. For these reasons, staff recommends denial of this request. Should the Board determine that the six findings can be made, staff recommends the Board make the findings with the following conditions. CONDITIONS 1.The mitigation measures outlined in the document titled Water Quality Impact Assessment For an Encroachment into the first 20 to 30 feet of RPA Buffer for Lots 5,6,7, & 8 of Proposed Tarrington Subdivision, Section 18 and Lot 92 of Tarrington Subdivision, Section 20 in Chesterfield County, prepared by E.D. Lewis and Associates and received September 29, 2017 shall be incorporated and implemented during the plan review process. (EE) 2.The Department of Environmental Engineering may approve alternative mitigation measures if it is determined that such alternatives will not increase impacts to the Resource Protection Area (RPA) or downstream water bodies. (EE) 3.Approval of this application for an exception is for encroachment into the Resource Protection Area only and does not guarantee development of the site as explicitly proposed in the WQIA referenced in Condition 1 above. Development of the site is subject to all ordinance requirements, review processes, building permits and/or other requirements currently adopted at the time of plan review. (EE) 618RW0147-2017DEC13-BOS-RPT Exhibit A An Overview of Proposed Encroachments to the RPA on Tarrington Phase IV 718RW0147-2017DEC13-BOS-RPT Exhibit B Proposed Encroachments to the RPA on Four Proposed Lots in Section 18 818RW0147-2017DEC13-BOS-RPT Exhibit C Proposed Encroachments to the RPA on One Proposed Lot in Section 20 918RW0147-2017DEC13-BOS-RPT