02SN0238-June23.pdf STAFF' S
REQUEST ANALYSIS
RECOMMENDATION
~--~1 ~A ~AAA
J~e 23, 2004'BS
02SN0238
Douglas R. Sowers
Matoaca Magisterial District
Watkins and Swift Creek Elementary,
Midlothian Middle and Midlothian High School Attendance Zones
East line of Otterdale Road
REQUEST:
Various amendmems to Conditional Use Planned Developmem (Case 88S008). (See
the following for :details of the requested amendments.)
PROPOSED LAND USE:
This property is part of the original Greenspring mixed use development'whieh
contained approximately 1,313 acres. The applicant Wishes to proceed with
developing the subject property, cOnsisting of approximately 208 acres, independent
of other portions of the original Greenspring project and amend specific requirements
of the original Greenspring rezoning.
SYNOPSIS OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS I THROUGH VI WITH THE IMPOSITION OF
CONDITIONS 1 THROUGH 5 AND THE ACCEPTANCE OF PROFFERED CONDITIONS 1
THROUGH 7 ON PAGES 2 THROUGH 9.
Providing a FIRST CHOICE Community Through Excellence in Public Service
AYES:
NAY:
Messrs. Litton, Bass, Gulley and Wilson.
Mr. Geeker.
SYNOPSIS OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS I THROUGH IV AND VI WITH nvwosmON
OF CONDITIONS 1 THROUGH 5 AND-ACCEPTANCE OF PROFFERED CONDITIONS 1
THROUGH 5 AND 7. RECOMMEND DENIAL OF AMENDMENT V. RECOMMEND THAT
PROFERED CONDITION 6 NOT BE ACEPTED.
AMENDMENT I (Applicant's Amendments 1, 2, 3 and 4)
Amendment to Condition. 1 of Case 88S008 to modify the approved Textual Statement to
reflect the requested amendmems outlined herein and substitute a new'Conceptual Master
Plan for the approved Conceptual 'Master Plan: The requirement tO conform: to- the
Conceptual Site DevelopmemPlan (see attached) would be deleted. This amendment would
allow the request property to be developed asa separate project, from that portion of the
remaining acreage originally'zoned and not included in this request. -
With respect to land uses~ the amended Master Plandeletes a golf course.- The requirement
to restore the" '
Tomahawk" and the "Ellett HancoCk" structures would be' deleted. .
RECOMMENDATION (AMENDMENT I)
Recommend approval of Amendment I for the following reasons:
Conditions of zoning approval fOr CaSe88S008 plus the conditions stated herein
insure land use compatibility and transition between USes developed.on'the request
property and between uses developed on. the request property and existing and'
anticipated area development.
The Tomahawk structure has been destroyed by fire. The Preservation'Committee
determined that the Ellett Hancock structure cannot 'be feasibly restored due im
extensive deterioration. -. -
(NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED OR THE PROPERTY OWNER MAy pROFFER
CONDITIONS. THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/Cpc" WERE.AGREED UPONBY
BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A ,STAFF, -ARE
RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY-A "CPC" :ARE
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMME~ED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
CONDITIONS
(STAFF/CPC) 1.
The Textual Statement, titled Greenspring: 'Conditional Use 'and
Zoning Application, revised April 1, 1988, including the "Residential
2 02SN023g-JUNE23-BOS
Site Development Criteria" table, Exhibit IV and the conditions of
zoning for Case 88S008 and the Conceptual Master Plan, dated
February 6, 2004, shall be the Master Plan for the subject property,
except as stated herein. And further, provided that the subject
property shall be permitted to be considered as a separate project from
the remaining portion of that land area covered under Case 88S008.
(P)
(STAFF/CPC)
All references and' requirements relating to golf in the Textual
Statement and conditions of zoning for Case 88S008 shall be deleted.
(P)
(STAFF/CPC)
The requirement to restore the Tomahawk and Ellett Hancock
structures shall be deleted. (P)
(STAFF/CPC)
All references and requirements relating to the plan entitled
"Conceptual Site Development Plan - Greenspring - Chesterfield
CoUnty, Virginia" in the Textual Statement and conditions of zoning
for Case 888008 shall be deleted. (P)
Note: Conditions 1 through-4 supersede ConditiOn- 1 of Case 88S008
for the request property only.)
AMENDMENT II (Applicant's RequeSt 9)
Amendment to Condition 14 of Case 88S008 to clarify the manner in which'.the on-site water
line distribution system will be looped with future area water line extensions. This
amendment is discussed in the Utilities section of this '.,Request AnalysiS".
RECOMMENDATION (AMENDMENT ID
'Recommend approval of Amendment 11 for the following reason:
The requested modification will clarify the manner in which the on-site water line is looped
with future area water line extensions.
PROFFERED CONDITIONS
(STAFF/CPC) 3.
Water. In lieu of a water line connection'to the Queensmill West
development, the developer shall extend asixteen (16) inch water line
adjacent to the proposed extension of Woolridge Road from the
southern boUndary to the northern boUndarY of the request site. In
addition, the developer shall extend an aPpropriately sized water line
along the East/West Arterial (as herein defined) from otterdale Road
to the eastern portion of Tract E. CLI)
3 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
(STAFF/CPC) 4.
Water and Wastewater Plan. The required overall Water and
Wastewater Systems Overall Plan for this development shall be
submitted tothe Utilities Department for review and approval at least
thirty (30) days prior to the initial Submission of any tentative, site, or
schematic plan. This shall be accompanied by a Phasing Plan which
will establish a schedule for extenSions of the required Water and
wastewater lines incrementally with each phase of develOpment. ~
(StaffN0te: 'Proffered ConditionS 3 and 4 supersede Condition 14of
Case 88S008 for the request property only.)
AMENDMENT 1II (Applicant's ReqUest 7) '
Deletion of Conditions 7, 9, 1'1 and 20 of Case 88S008 relative to the design, of a 1ake
(Condition 7); submission of an Overall' erosion and sediment control plan (ConditiOn 9);
submission of soil studies Prior to cOnstruction (Condition 11); and measures designed to
protect the water quality of Swift Creek Reservoir (Condition20). These amendments are
discussed in the Environmental- section of this "Request, Analysis."
RECOMMENDATION (AMENDMENT lib
Recommend approval of Amendment m for the following reasonS:
A.
Co
Regulations relative to'the design of lakes are part'of the County's recently adopted
Upper Swift Creek Stormwater Management Plan. Therefore, deletion of Condition
7 of Case 88S008 is acceptable. ' ' '
Erosion and sediment control plans must be submitted in accordance with C°unty
requirements. Therefore, deletion of Condition 9 of Case 88S008 is acceptable.:,
Current County regulations require submission of soils analysis prior to'constructiOn
on the request property. Therefore, deletion of Condition t 1 of Case.88S008.is
acceptable.
Since approval of the original zoning, regulations regarding the protectiOn of the
water quality of Swift Creek Reservoir have been adopted, current State and Count5'
regulationS and proffered conditions address water quality issues-and insure
protection ofthe Swift Creek Reservoir. Therefore, deletion of Condition20'ofCase
88S008 is acceptable. ' ' '
CONDITION
(STAFF/CPC)
The requirements of Conditions 7, 9; 11 and 20 of Case 88S008 shall
be deleted for the request property onlyl (EE)
4 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
PROFFERED CONDITIONS
STAFF/CPC
(STAFF/CPC)
Timbering. With. the exception of timbering which has been
approved by the Virginia State Department of Forestry for the'
purpose of removing dead Or diseased trees, there shall be no
timbering until a land disturbance permit has been obtained, fxom the
EnvirOnmental Engineering Department and the approved devices
have been installed. (EE)
Stonnwater. The developer shall leave-in place the temporary
sediment control devices and/or, at the election of the developer, .
construct new BMPs or combinations of BMPs, which woUld
achieve, (i) a maximum phosphorous limit of .22 for residential
development, and (ii) a maximum phosphorus.limit of .45 for
commercial development, until (i) Chesterfield County has
constructed the downstream regiOnal BMP into which aportiOn of the
development will drain pursuant to Upper Swift Creek Watershed
Plan or (ii) to the extent a portion of the Property does not drain into a-
regional BMP, then as to' that portion of the'Property, upon
completion of the initial regional BMP. (EE)
AMENDMENT IV (Applicant's Request.8)
Deletion of Condition 30 requifilagthe dedication of sixty-five (65) acres and the reservation
for purchase of thirty-five (35) acres for public use. This amendment is disCusSed in the
Fiscal Impact Section of this "Request Analysis.',
REcoMMENDATION (AMENDMENT IV)
Recommend apProval of Amendment IV for the following reason:
The applicant has addressed the impact of this develOpment on capital facilities, as discussed
herein.
PROFFERED CONDITION
(STAFF/CPC) 5. Cash Proffer
Prior to the time of issuance of a building permit for each of
the first twenty five (25) dwelling :units, the applicant,
subdivider, or its assignee, shall pay m the County of
Chesterfield the folloWing amount for infrastructUre
imprOvements for.schools within the service district for the
Property:
5 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
the amount approved bythe Board of Supervisors, but
not to exceed $4,166 per dwelling unit as adjusted)
upward by any increase in the Marshall and SWift
Building Cost Index between July 1', 2003 and'July 1
of the fiscal year in which the payment is made~.'
b) If anY of the cash proffer is not expended-for the purposes
designated by the Capital. Improvement "Program within
fifteen (15) years from the d~te of payment, it-shall be
returned in full to the payor. Should Chesterfield CountY
impose, impact fees at any time .during': the lire'of the
development that are applicable tothe Property; theamount
paid in cash proffers shall be in lieu of or credited toward,: but.
not-be in addition to, any impact fees, in a manner determined
bythe County. (B&M)
(Staff Note: This condition supersedes Condition 30of Case
88S008 for the request property only.) : -
AMENDMENT V (Applicant's Requests 5 and 6~ ' '
Amendment to sections of the approved Textual Statement for Case 888008 relative: to ' '~'
access, and road improvements are requested.' Specifically, the following amendments.are
requested to modify requirements to: (1) dedicate fight of way for Genito Road; Otterdale
Road, Powhite Parkway and Old Hundred Road; (2) construct Powhite Parkway Extended ~.
from Brandermill Parkway to Otterdale Road ( 3 ) construct four (4) lanes of WOOlfidge Road
Extended and the Collector Loop Road; if necessary; (4) ~ provide ditch and'-shoulder
improvements along Genito and otterdale Roads; (5) construct left and'right turn lanes.ai~ng
Otterdale Road, Genito Road and Powhite Parkway Extended; if required;(6) provide for full
cost of signalization of access onto Otterdale ROad, Genito ROad and PoWhite Parkway
Extended, if warranted; and'(7) provide a traffic analysis. These amendments are diScussedin
the Transportation section of this ~'Request Analysis." ·
RECOMMENDATION (AMENDMENT V) ' ' '
Recommend denial of Amendment rg. Recommend that Proffered Condition 6 not be accepted.
This recommendation is made for .the following reason:
Proffered cOnditions may-not address the traffic impact of' this. requeSt.on area.roads
consistent with the commitments made for transportation improvements in the o~iginal
Greenspring zoning case.
6 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
PROFFERED CONDITION
(CPC)
6. Road Improvements and Phasing.
ao
.Right-of Way Dedication. In conjunction with recordation of the
initial subdivision plat, prior to any site plan approval, or within sixty
(60) days from a written request by the county, whichever occurs first,
the applicant or his assignee shall dedicate to the county, free and
unrestricted, the following fights of way:
A 200 foot wide right Ofway for Powhite.Parkway Extended-
across the northwestern part of the Property;
ii.
A 120 foot wide right of way for a north/south major arterial
("Woolridge Road Extended") frOm the Southern Property
line to the northern-Property line. The exact location'of this
fight of way.shall be approved by Chesterfield Department. of
Transportation (CDOT);
111.
A ninety (90) foot wide right of way for an'east/west major
arterial (the "East/West Arterial") from Otterdale Road to the
eastern Property line. The exact location of this right of way
shalIbe approved'by CDOT;
iv.
A fOrty five (45) foOt wide right of way fOr Otterdale Road
adjacent to the Property, measured from the centefline of
Otterdale ROad; and
Rights of way or easements for access .(the "Site Road',), as
approved by CDOT, from Woolridge Road Extended across
the Property to the Lennon parcel (Tax ID 7196945885) on
both the east and west sides of Woodridge Road Extended.
The Site Road right of way width shall generally be sixty (60)
feet; however, the exact width and location of these rights of
way or easements shall be approved by CDOT.
bo
Construction. In order to provide an adequate rOadway system, the
applicant Or his assignee shall be responsible for the following road
improvements:
Construction ofa.four (4) lane divided facility for Woolridge
Road Extended, to VDOT Urban Minor Arterial standards (50
MPH) with modifications approved by CDOT, from the
northern Property line to the East/West Arterial intersection;
ii.
Constmction of two (2) lanes of the East/West Arterial, to
VDOT Urban Minor Arterial standards (50 MPH) with
7 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
Co
modifications approved by CDOT, from Otterdale Road to
Woolridge Road Extended;
iii.
Realignment of Otterdale Road at the East/West Arterial
intersection to create a T-intersection, if approved by CDOT;
iv.
Construction of left and-'right turn lanes at each approved
access along the Site Road, along Woolridge Road Extended,
along the East/West Arterial and along Otterdale Road,
including at the East/West ~ Arterial/Otterdale Road
intersection, and at the East/West Arterial/Woolridge Road
Extended intersection, as determined by CDOT;
Full cost of traffic signalization at all approved accesses
including at the East/West Arterial/Woolridge Road Extended
and at the Site Road/Woolridge Road Extended intersections,
if warranted, as determined by CDOT;
Widening/improving the east' side of Otterdale Road to an
eleven (11) foot wide travel lane, measured froTM the
eenterline of the road, with an additional one (1) foot wide
paved shoulder pluSa seven (7) foot wide unpaved shoulder,
with modifiCatiOns apprOved by CDOT~ from the
northernmost approved access onto Otterdale Road to the
southern ProPerty line; and
vii.
Any rights-of-way necessary for improvements specified in
Proffered COndition 6.b. In the event the developer is unable
.to acquire the right of way necessary for 'these road
improvements,'the applicant or his assignee.may request, in
writing, the county to acquire such fight of way as a public
road improvement. All costs associated with the acquisition
of such right of way shall be borne by the applicant or his
assignee.
Phasing. Prior to any site plan or subdivision construction plan
approval, whichever occurs first, aphasing plan for the improvements
specified in Proffered Condition 6.b2 shall .be submitted to and
approvedby CDOT. The approved phasing plan shall require~ among
other things, the following:
The initial developmem on the Property of 175 residential
units and 20,00'0 Square feet of nonresidential uses shall haVe
sole access to Woolridge Road Extended; and
8 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
AMENDMENT VI
ii. PriOr to recordation or site plan approval on the Property of a
cumulativetotal of more than 175 residential units or siteplan
approval of more than 20,000'square' feet of nonresidential
uses, whichever occurs first, four (4) lanes of WOolridge Road
Extended as required by Proffered Condition 6.b.i4'and tWo
(2) lanes of Powhite'Parkway Extended from the Watermill
Parkway intersection m Woolridge :Road Extended .and-tWo
(2) lanes of Woolridge RoadExtended from Powhite Parkway
Extended to the northern Property line; shall be completed;as
determined by CDOT.
Access.' Prior to any site plan or tentative SubdiVision. planapproval,
whichever occurs first, the applicantor his assignee shall submit to
CDOT, and receive its approval of, a plan for access to the Property
from the .Site Road, WOolridge Road Extended,-the-East/West
Arterial and Otterdale Road. Access to the Property shall COnformto
the apprOved access plan.. · .
PROFFERED CONDITION
The applicant has offered an additional proffered condition that addresses the phasing .of
the residential portion of the project. -'
RECOMMENDATION (AMENDMENT VI) ~"
Recommend that Proffered Condition 7 be. accepted. · . ·
(STAFF/CPC) 7. Phasing. There shall' be no lots-recorded prior to.July 1; 2005 on:
the Property. There. Shall beno site plan approved-for anY' :
residential multifamily units prior to July l~ 2005. (P) ' ·
(Staff Note: This Condition Supersedes Textual Statement Itemsl4,
15, 16, 20, 21 and 22 of Case 888008 for the requeStPropertYonlY.)
Location:
GENERAL INFORMATION
East line of Otterdale Road~ sOuth of Gamecock Road. Tax ID 716-691-4229 and 718 -691 -
6889 (Sheet 9).
Existing Zoning:
0:2 and R-9 with Conditional Use Planned Development
02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
Size:
208.5 acres
EXisting Land Use:
Vacant
.. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North
East
South
West
- A; Vacant
- 0-2 and R-9 with ConditiOnal Use Planned Development; Community Recreation
- R~9, 0-2 with Conditional Use Planned Development, R-15 .and A; Vacant
'A; Vacant
UTILITIES
Public Water System:
There is an exiSting sixteen (16) inch water line extending along the north side of Genito
Road, approximately 5,300 feet soUth of the request site. 'Extension of an appropriately sized
water line along the right of way of the future North Woolridge Road will be necessary to
serve the request site. The use of the public water system is required by a previous condition
of zoning. (Case 88S008, Condition 13)
To address future development, the applicant has Proffered to extend a sixteen (16) inch
water line along the proposed route of North Woolridge Road from the southern boundary to
the northern boundary of the site. In addition, the developer will extend an approximately-
sized water line along the proposed east/west collector road from Otterdale Road to the
eastern portion of Tract E. (Proffered Condition 3)
The applicant has proffered to submit'for review and.approval a Water and Wastewater
Systems Overall Plan for this development. That plan will be accompanied by a phasing plan
which establishes a schedule for incremental water system extensions with each phase ofthe
development. (Proffered Condition 4)
Public Wastewater System:
There is an existing sixty (60) inch wastewater trunk line extending along the north side of
Genito Road, approximately 5,300 feet south of the request site. This existing sixty (60) inch
wastewater trunk line is a portion of the Upper Swift Creek Transport System. A portion of
this wastewater trunk was originally requiredbY a previous condition of zoning, as well as
the dedication of easements to the County for this constmction (Case 88S008, Conditions 15
and 16). Subsequent to the approval of Case 88S008, the County completed constmctionof
10 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
the Upper Swift Creek Transport System; thus satisfying the requirements of Conditions 15
and 16.
The use of the public waStewater system is required by a Previous.condition of zoning(Case
88S008, Condition 13). The request site drains toward Tomahawk Creek. Extension ofan
appropriately sized wastewater tnmk line along Tomahawk.Creek, from-the existing, sixty
(60) inch wastewater trunk line to the northern boundary of this site, wil! be neCessary:~t~-
provide public wastewater service. Extension of the Tomahawk Creek wasteWater trunk.lines
is required by a previous condition of zoning. (Case 88S008, Condition 15) ' ~_.
The applicant has proffered to submit for review and approval' a Water. and Wastewater
Systems Overall Plan for this development. That plan will be accompanied bY a phasing plan
which establishes a schedule for'incremental water system extensions witheachphase offiae
development. (Proffered Condition 4) '
ENVIRONMENTAL . ..
Drainage and Erosion:
Currently, there are no existing on-site erosion or dr~iinage problems with none anticiPated
after' development. Although Tomahawk Creek Currently exhibits signS:of natural stream
degradation, the degradation should be stabilized or improved with the envirOnmental
measures that will be implemented with this project andthe proposed enhancementsto~the.
floodplains. The property is heavily wooded and, as such, should not be timbered-until the :' ' ..
issuance of a land disturbance permit. This will insure that-adequate erosiOn control ..-..
measures are in place prior to any land disturbance. (Proffered: ConditiOn 1) .. ·
Water Quali _ty:
The property drains into the reservoir via TOmahawk Creek, which borders the eastern
property line. Since Tomahawk'Creek is a perennial stream, the prOperty Will:be subject t0 a
100 foot conservation area along the creek. Also alOng the 'easteTM ProPertY'line. are
proposed, enhanced floodplain-structures that are part ofthe'iregional watershed plan: .The
tributary that drains through' the Center of the'property and forms a portion :of the northern
property line is a Riparian CorddorManagement-NRPA~, whichprohibits distUrbance ofthe
natural vegetation within the 100-year floodplain except as permitted by OrdinanceS.-.' '.:
To address concerns recently expressed by the Planning CommiSsion and area..citizens
relative to stormwater rtmoffphosphorus loads in the UpPer Swift Creek Watershed, staffhas
suggested that the applicant has agreed to maintain sediment basins orconstruct neTM BMPs,
or a combination thereof, until such downstream regional BMPs have been eoustmcted2.:
(Proffered Condition 2) ~
11
02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
PUBLIC FACILITIES
The need for fire, school, library, park and transportation facilities is identified in the Public
Facilities Plan, the Thoroughfare Plan and the Capital Improvement Program. This development will
haVe an impact.on these facilities.
Fire Service:
... '. The Public Facilities.Plan indicates that emergency Services calls are expected to increase
- forty.-five (45) percem by 2015. Eight (8) new fire/rescue stations are recommended for
"~':: - ' COnstruction by 2015 in the Public Facilitie. s Plan..Based on 2,584 dwelling units, this request
' cOuld generate approximately. 666 -calls for fire and EMS serVice each year. The proposed '
i zoning amendment will not result in any additional dwelling units over the number'of units
permitted on this portion of the request under Case 88S008.' Consequently, there is no net
increase in the impact on capital facilities resulting from this request.
This property is currently served by the Swift Creek Fire/Rescue Station; Company Number
-'~ 16. 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:
Approximately 1,370 students will be generated by this development.
The property is currently in the Watkins Elementary School attendance zone. The area On the
south side of powhite Parkway is proposed to go to'Swift Creek Elementary and the area on.
the north side of Powhite Parkway-is proposed to gOto Evergreen Elementary. This site is
also 'in the Midlothian Middle and Midlothian High SchoOl attendance zone.
Watkins Elementary School: capacity -.752, enrollmem - 855; Swift Creek Elementary
School: caPacity- 759, enrollment L 748; Evergreen Elementa~ School: capacity- 87~,
enrollment- 802; Midlothian Middle School: capaCity -. 1,331, enrollmem - 1,399; and
Midlothian High School: capacity- 1,568, enrollment, 1,600.
There are currently eight (8) trailers at Watkins Elementary; three (3) trailers at Swift Creek
Elementary; four (4) trailers at Evergreen Elementary; five (5) trailers at Midlothian Middle
and five (5) trailers at Midlothian High.
The students generated by this development would create significant enroliment increases at
the elementary, middle: and high school levels. The elementary schoOls will continue to
experience significant enrollment increases even if the redistricting proposal is approved by
the schOol board. The applicant has agreed to participate in the cost of providing for area
school needs. (Proffered Condition 5)
12 02SN023g-JUNE23-BOS
Libraries:
Consistent with the Board of SuperVisors' Policy, the impact of development on library
services is assessed coUnty-wide. Based on .projected .populatiOn ~gr~wth, the Public
Facilities Plan identifies a need for additional library space throughout the County. Taking
into account the additional space provided by the new La Prade and Chester.Libraries, there
is still a-projected need for additional library space throughout the CoUnty: .
This develoPment would likely affect the existing Midlothian Library or a pOssible new
branch in the Genito Road/Powhite Parkway area as proposed, by the Public Facilities Plan.
The proposed zoning amendment will not result' in any additional dwelling Urdts Over the
nUmber of units permitted on this portion of the request Under Case 88S008. Consequently,
there is no net increase in the impact' on capital facilities resulting from this request.
Parks and Recreation: ~ -
The Public Facilities Plan identifies the need for four (4) new regional .parks. There:is
currently a shortage of community Park acreage in the CoUnty. The Plan identifies a need for
625 acres of regional park space and 116 acres of community parkspace by 2015~. The Plan"
also identifies the need for neighborhood parks and special purpose parks-and makes
suggestions for their locations. The proposed zoning amendment will 'not result .in any
additional dwelling units over the number' of units permitted on this portion of the request
Under Case 88S008. Consequently, there is no net increase in the impact on Capital facilities
resulting from this request.
Transportation:
The applicant is requesting relief from many of the transportation, conditions in the Textual
Statement from the Original Greenspring zoning. The applicant has submitted proffers that
restate some of those same conditiOns, which apply to development of the subject property.
The applicant has also committed to limit the amoUnt of development that occurs on~e
property until sections ~of .the Powhite Parkway and Woolridge. Road Extended are
constructed. One of the original Greenspring zoning conditions requires a traffic impact
analysis to be submitted, if requested by the Transportation Department..The'applicant is
seeking relief of this condition and is Unwilling to proffer a.similar condition. Therefore,
staff does not support this request.
BaCkgroUnd
In 1988, the Board of Supervisors approved a Conditional Use Planned Development (Case
88S008 "Original Greenspring Project")'on approximately 1,3.00 acres for a mixed-nsc
development that included retail, office and residential land uses. With that apprOval, the
Board accepted the Textual. Statement that includes several transportation conditions
addressing maximum density, right of way dedications, access control and construction of
mitigating road improvements. Conditions of zoning approval for Case 88S008 restricted the
13 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
- maximum density of the Original Greenspring Project to 2,303 residential'units, 193,000
~ Square feet of retail, 1,250,000 square feet of office and. a 300 room inn/conference center or
. ~ . equivalent ·densities based on traffic generatiom Original Greenspring Project was
anticipated to generate approximately 43,360 average dally trips.
' The major road improvements required by the Original Greenspring.Project include: 1)
construction of four (4) lanes of Powhite Parkway Extended across the Original Greenspring
~ .. ~ 'Project; 2) construction of two (2)-additional lanes ofPowhite ParkwayExtended'frOm the
". '- Original Greenspring Project to Brandermiil ParkWay; 3) constmctionof four (4) lanes of
~' ~ Woolridge Road Extended and Collector Loop Road, if necessary; and 4)' construction oftWo
(2) lanes of Powhite Parkway'Extended and two (2) lanes of Woolridge Road Extended
across'an adjacent parcel (identified as Parcel 8 on the Original Master Plan and currently
identified as the Lennon parcel). A condition: of the Original GreenSpring Project zoning
'-~ 7' requires that a phasing plan for these required.road improvements be. approved.by the
Transportation Department.
.. Another condition of the Original Greenspring Project zoning requires that initial access.fOr
the development will be providedvia Powhite Parkway Extended/Old Hundred ROad. The
"initial access" condition was prOVided as part of the .original Greenspring Zoning to insure
· .'i : that the major traffic impact generated by the development would be directed towards
powhite Parkway Extended and not towards the. GenitoRoad area.
In 1995, the Board .of Supervisors approVed amendments to.-the Original-Greenspring
COnditional Use Planned Development to alloW deVelopment of approximately 810 acres
('!Phase I Greenspring") independently of the Original 'Greenspring Project. The 19~5
amendment did not relieve-the Phase ! Greenspring developers of required road
improvements, except for right of way dedications acrOss properties theydid not control..
As required by a condition of the. Original. GreensPring Project, .the Phase' I developer ~"
.submitted a phasing plan for the entire Greenspring project; ~'Affer evaluating the prOposal,:
staff agreed to a Phase I consisting of the followingr°ad:.improVementS:: 1) ~o (2) la~eS~°f
the required four (4) lanes forWoolridge Road. Extended; ~thadequate turn la, es,: froin
Geuito Road north to its intersection with'the Collector Loop Road; a~d-2)tWo (2)'lanes fOr
Collector Loop Road, with adequate tumianes fxom Woolridge Road Ex~ended. to powhite
Parkway Extended/Old Hundred Road.
In March 2002, the Board of Supervisors again-approved amendments to .the Original
. Greenspring Conditional· Use Planned Development to allow an additional 282 acres ("PhaSe
II Greensp g ) to be developed independently of the Ongmal.Greenspnng Project and.of
Phase I Greenspring. The 2002 amendment did relieve the Phase II GreensPring developer 0f
most all tranSportatiOn conditi°ns.oUtlined in the Origin~ Greenspring zoning. A Proffered
condition of that zoning approval-.(Proffered Condition 3) 'requires that property to be'
developed based on one (1) of two (2) road access alternatiVes(Alternative A and Alternative
B),. Alternative A includesa requirement for the Phase H': Greensp .ring developer to.dedicate
a ninety (90) foot wide right-of way and construct tw0 (2) lanes of~Woolridge Road Extended
1'4 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
from that property to Old HundredRoad. Alternative B includes a requirementfor the Phase
II Greenspring developer to provide $800,000 toward the construction of PoWhite Parkway
Extended and a section of Woolridge Road Extended. In order to construct this improvement
partial ~publie funding is required. Unless the Transportation Department notifies the
applicant within a specific time frame that the County wants the development to oeeur under
Alternative B conditions, the Phase II Greenspring developer is pern~itted to developthe
property in accordance with Alternative A conditions.
In April 2002, the Board appropriated funds towards- construction of Alternative B
improvements. Staff has completed'part of the preliminary engineering on Alternative B
improvements, and has determined that the estimated cOst is nov/significantly higherlthan
the preliminary budget, which.includes the phase II developer's $800,000 contribution.
TherefOre, the County has not notified the developer to develop.:under Alternative B. 'i.
Two (2) Proposals h~tve been submitted to the Virginia DePartment Of Transportation
(VDOT), under the Public-Private TransportatiOn Act (PPTA), forthe extensiOn of the
Powhite Parkway from its current terminus at Old Hundred Road to HullStreet Road near
Beaver Bridge Road. Both proposals would complete this secti°n of the P°White Extension
as a Toll Road. The proposals are currently being reviewed byVDOT. Detailedinf0rmati°n
has not been provided, and accordingly the Board of Supervisors has .not been. reqUestedto ~
take a position on these propOsals. - · - .. ·
Current Request
The SUbject property (Phase .Ill Greenspring), identified on the Master Plan'.as Tra6t B~ _'
consisting of approximately 163 acres and Tract E consistingofapproximately fortY-five (45)
acres, was included in the Original Greenspring ProjeCt, but not in Phase:I'or Phase II.
Greenspring. Current zoning would allow up to .15,000 sqUare feet per ;acre. :of
commercial/office on Tract B, and up to three (3) residential units per acre on Tract E2 TraCt
B could also be developed for residential use up to fifteen (15) units per. acre~ The Ori~-
Greenspring Textual Statement, .Which applies to all. _the 'Prope~ties~ in.. the: Ori~al
Greenspring, including the subject property, has a maximum density conditiOn (TeXtual
Statement Condition 19 of Case 88S008). Development of Phases I, II and Phase...:~.
Greenspring cannot exceed that maximum density. Based on anticipated development _.-
densities of Phases I and II, Phase 1II Greenspring could generate approximately20,000
average daily trips. '
Vehicles generated by the development will be distributed-along 0tterdale Road~ Genito :
Road, Old Hundred Road and Woolridge Road, which had 2003 traffic Counts. Of 1,090;-
13,603; 7,067; and 9,806 vehicles per day, respectively. .
Sections of Otterdale Road have nineteen (19) to twenty(20) foot wide pavement with no,
shoulders. Sections of Genlto Road have twenty (20) to twenty-one (21) foot wide pavement
with no shoulders. Sections of Old Hundred Road have twenty~One '(21) to twenty-two (22)
foot wide pavement withno shoulders: These roadS'have fixed objects adjacent to the edge
15 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS '
of the pavementi and substandard vertical and horizontal alignments. The capacity of these
rOads· is.acceptable for the volume of traffic they currently carry.
Sections of Woolridge Road between Timber Bluff Parkway and Genito Road have twenty
(20)'to twenty-one (21) foot wide pavement with no shoulders, and guardrail immediately
adjacent to the road. The section of Woolridge Road across the Swift Creek Reservoir is not
in the State Highway'System, and is the responsibility of the County. Based on current traffic
volume.this section of Woolridge Road is at capacity, and as traffic volumes increase this
section of road should be improved to a four (4) lane divided roadway.
· ~ As noted, roads in this area have narrow pavement widths, little or no shoulders, and poor
vertical and horizontal alignments. .The traffic generated by this development will
· s~gnificantly increase the need for transPortation improvements in this area. No road
- : improvement projects in this area of the County are included in the Secondary Road Six-Year
Improvement Plan.
The Thoroughfare Plan identifies the extension of WOolridge Road, as a major arterial with a
recommended right of way width of ninety (90) feet, from Genito Road to Route 288.-
Otterdale Road currently serves as the major north/south road for this part of the County. Due
to its current condition, reconstructing Otterdale Road to handle increased traffic will be very
cosily. Once the proposed Woolridge Road Extended from Genito Road to Route 288 and the
propoSed East/West Arterial from Otterdale Road to Woolridge Road Extended are
constructed, they could better handle north/south travel. In order to avoid major
reconstruction of sections of Otterdale Road and eliminate bridging Otterdale Road.for
Powhite Parkway Extended, Staff recommends that cul-de-sacs be constructed on Otterdale
Road at Powhite Parkway Extended. These eul-de'sacs are anticipated to be provided when
Powhite Parkway Extended is constructed. In shifting the.traffe from Otterdale Road to
Woolridge. Road Extended, it is. anticipated that Woolridge Road Extended from the
East/West Arterial to Route 288 may need to be a Six (6) lane facility; therefore, the
recommended right of way width on this section of road should be increased from ninety (90)
to 120 feet. The recommendations in this report anticipate cul-de-sacs on Otterdale Road:
Staff will recommend these same changes to the Thoroughfare Plan, with upcoming
Comprehensive Plan amendments,
As previously stated, the applicant (Phase 1II developer) has-proffered several conditions that
are required by the Original Greenspring zoning. These conditions include right of way.
dedications along Otterdale Road, for Powhite Parkway Extended, for the East/West Arterial,
and for Woolridge Road Extended, which the applicant has agreed to increase from ninety'
(90) to 120 feet wide (Proffered'Condition 6.a.). The applicant has.also proffered to dedicate
a stub road right of way or easement (the "Site Road') on each side of Woolridge Road
Extended to the adjacent parcel to the north (i.e., the' Lennon parcel) (Proffered Condition
&a.v.). A limited access interchange is proposed for the Woolridge Road Extended/Powhite '
Parkway intersection. The Site Roads that. will extend through the subject property will serve
as the only access for development of that part of the Lennon parcel south of Powhite
Parkway Extended.
16 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
Access to major arterials, such as the East/West Arterial and Woolridge Road-EXtended,
should be controlled. The applicant has proffered that an access plan will be submitted, for
Transportation Department review and approval, which shows access from the property to'
the East/West Arterial and Woolridge Road Extended (Proffered Condition 6.d.).Aecess to
the East/West Arterial and Woolddge Road Extended will be based on the approved access
plan.
The applicant has proffered some of the road improvements required' by-.the. Original
Greenspring zoning. The proffers are; 1) construction of a four (4) lane diVided facility fOr
Woolridge Road Extended from the northem property-line to the East/West Arterial
intersection; 2) construction of two (2) lanes of the East/West Arterial from:Otterdale ROad
to WOolddge Road Extended; 3).realignment of Otterdale Road at the-East/West Arterial
intersection to create a T-intersection; 4) construction of left and right mm lanes at .each
approved access along the Site Road, along Woolridge Road Extended, along the East/~est
Arterial and along Otterdale Road, including at the East/West Arterial/otterdale Road
intersection, and at the East/West .Arterial/Woolridge Road Extended.intersection;5) full
cOst of traffic signalizatiOn, at all approved accesses' inclUding at. the.:-East/West
Arterial/Woolridge Road i Extended and at the Site Road/Woolridge Road Extended
intersections, if warranted; and6) widening/improving the east side of OtterdaleRoad toan
eleven (11) foot wide travel lane, measured from the centefline of the. road,-with 'an
additional one (1) foot wide paved shoulder plus a seven (7) foot wide unpaved Shoulder
from the' northernmost approved access onto Otterdale Road to the southern property li~e.
(Proffered Condition 6.b.) -
The Original Greenspring zoning required construction of four (4) lanes ofPowhite'parkway.
Extended across the Original Greenspring Project, construction of two (2) additional lanes of
Powhite Parkway Extended from'the Original Greenspring Project to Brandermill Parkway,
and construction of-two (2)lanes of Powhite Parkway Extended and .two (2)lanes .Of.
Woolridge Road Extended across the Lennon parCel, The applicant has asked, r~lief fr°m'
these requirements, and has proffered to limit development On the property until:parts of
Powhite Parkway Extended'and Woolridge'Road Extended are C°nst~'Uc~ed I~Y the a~plicant
or by others. SpecificallY, the apPlicant has proffered that prior to:development o fn~ore ~ -
175 residential units or more than '20,000 square feet of nonresidential ::USes; whichever
occurs first, four (4) lanes of-W°olddge Road-Extended from the northern prOpertY line to
the East/West Arterial intersection, two (2)lanes of Powhite Parkway EXtended from the
Watermill Parkway intersection to Woolridge Road Extended, and two' (2).lanes
Woolridge Road Extended from Powhite Parkway Extended to.the northern:'property line
shall be completed (proffered COndition 6.c.ii.). The applicant has also pr.o. ffered'that'the
initial development of 175 residential units.and 20,000 sqUare feet of nonresidential USes.wi'll'
have sole access to Woolridge Road Extended. (Proffered Condition 6.c.i.)
Another current condition of zoning the applicant is requesting relief from,-requires 'the
monitoring of this development to-determine if actual traffic generation and distributionis
materially different from the assumptions in the original traffic~ study. If additional traffic
studies indicate that more site traffic is generated than originally assumed and additiOnal
17 02SN0238-JUNE23-B.OS
mitigating road improvements cannot be provided, permissible densities of this project may
be reduced/The applicant is unwilling to proffer a similar condition that, if required by the
Transportation Department, a traffic analysis will be submitted. Without the traffic analysis
condition, the impact of this development on the road network may not be adequately
addressed. Therefore, the Transportation Department recommends denial of Amendment ¥.
Financial Impact on Capital Facilities:
The proposed zoning amendment-will not result in any additional dwelling units over the
number of units permitted on this portion of the originally planned residential community
govemed by zoning case 88S008, Accordingly, there is no net increase in the impact on
capital facilities resulting from this request. However, under the Conditions ofcase"88S008,
the dedication of sixty-five (65) acres and the reservation for purchase of an additional thirty-
five (35) acres was proffered for use by County Schools. The requirement for the reservation
of land for purchase is no longer applicable. The time has expired to exercise that Option.
Under the proposed requested'amendment; the applicant has proffered the payment ofcash in
lieu of dedicating a proportionate amount of the sixty-five.(65) acres of land to the County.:
The proportionate amount of land being proffered for conversion to cash is approximately
10.3 acres. The amount of cash proffered, to be paid on a per dwelling unit basis, equates :to
$104,150, or $10,105 per acre. The cash proffer states that the payments will be made on the
first twenty-five (25) dwelling units. Staff f'mds this proffer acceptable. (Proffered Condition
5)
LAND USE
Comprehensive Plan:
Lies within the boundaries of the Upper Swirl Creek Plan which suggests the property is
appropriate for a mix of regional-scale office, commercial, .light industrial, townhouse and
multi-family development as well as single family residential use of 2.0 units per acre or less.
Area Development Trends:
Properties to the north and west are zoned Agricultural (A) and are vacant. Properties to the
east and south are zoned Residential (R-9 and R- 15) and Corporate Office (0-2) and are part
of the original Greenspring development not included in this request or are currently Zoned
Agricultural (A). These parcels are currently occupied by Community recreational uses or are
vacant. Property to the east and southeast were previously approved for develoPment
independent of the original GreensPring I Project. (Cases 95SN0307 and 01SN0189)
Zoning History_:
On May .25, 1988, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation by the
Planning Commission, approved rezoning on the request property and adjacent property to
18 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
the north, east and south from Agricultural (A) and Residential (R-15) to Residential (R,9)
and Office Business (O) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit a mix of
residential, office, commercial and recreational uses (Case 888008), Subject to a number of
conditions. This project, which contained approximately 1,313 acres, was COmmonly known
as Greenspring. ~ ~
On September 27, 1995, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation by the
Planning Commission, approved various amendments to Case 88S008; affecting an-809 acre
portion of the original t3reeuspring development, adjacem to, east and south of, the sUbject
property (Case 95SN0307). These amendments were similar to those requested', in :this
application. ~
On March 27, 2002, the Board of Supervisors, upon a recommendation by 'the plannihg" -:
Commission that was favorable with the exception of the deletiOn of road improvements,
approved various amendments to Case 88S008,'affeeting a282 acre portion of the original
Greenspring development, adjacent to and south of,-the subject property.(Case 01SlXI0189).
these amendments are Similar to those requested in this application. . : -
Master Plan: -
The applicant is requesting that ConditiOn 1 of Case 88S008-be modified:tO reflect'the
amendments discussed herein,' substitute a new conceptual Master Plan and delete the
requirement to conform tO the Conceptual Site DevelOpment Plan. This amendment Would
also allow this 208 acre parcel to be developed independent'of the. remaining 1,313 acres
originally zoned. As' previously noted, in 1995 and 2002, adjacent 809 and 282 acretracts
representing a portion of the original GreenSpring develOpment, Were approVed· for
development independent of the originally zoned acreage (cases 95SN0307 and 01SN0189).
Therefore, with apProval of this request, none of the original Greenspring property' will
remain under the conditions of the original Master' Plan.
The revised Master Plan also deletes the golf course.
Restorationofthe Tomahawk and Ellett Hancock Stmctures: '
Conditions of zoning require that the Tomahawk and Ellett Hancock structures be restored.
The Tomahawk structure has been destroyed by fire. The.preservation 'Committee
determined that restoration of the Ellett Hancock structure is not feasible.
Phasing:
In response to concerns expressed by the Matoaca District Commissioner relatiVe to.the
impact of the development on area roads and schools, a proffered.conditi°n was'submitted
for the phasing of the residential portion of the development, No sIngle family residential lot
can be recorded nor can. any multifamily, site plan be approved priOr to July 1, 2005.
(Proffered Condition 7)
19 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
CONCLUSIONS
The proposed amendments relative to the approved Master Plan, restoration of the Ellett and
Tomahawk dwellings and provision of a golf course (Amendment I); utilities (Amendment'II);
. drainage and erosion and water quality (Amendment Ill); and dedication and reservations (Part of
Amendment IV) are consistent with amendments previously approved for an adjacent portion of the
Greenspring Project (Cases 95SN0307 and 01SN0189). Further, such amendments would permit the
applieantto proceed with developing the subject property, independent of adjacent portions of the
.... original Greenspring Project. In conjunction with these 'amendments, it is recommended that
-Proffered Conditions 1 through 5 be accepted and that Conditions 1 through 5 be imposed.
Ir'is recommended that Amendment V, requesting relief to some of the transportatiOn cOnditions of
the Original Greenspring Project (Case 88S008), be denied. Proffered Condition 6 maynot address
the traffic impact of this portion ofthe development on area roads consistent with.the commitments
as outlined in the original Greenspring zoning. In conjunction with this recommendation, Proffered
Condition 6 shOuld not be accepted.
It is al. so recommended that Amendment VI, addressing the phasing of the residential portion of the
project be approved and that Proffered Condition 7 be accepted.
CASE HISTORY
Planning COmmission Meeting (6/18/02):
At therequest of the applicant; the Commission deferred this case to July 16, 2002.
Staff (6/19/02):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information should
be submitted no later than June 24, 2002, for consideration at.the Commission's July public
hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must be paidprior t° the
COmmission's public heating.
Staff (7/16/02):
. The deferral fee was paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (7/16/02):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to September 17, 2002.
20 02SN0238-JUNE23,BOS
Staff (7/17/02):
The applicant was advised in Writing that any significant, new or revised information shoUld
be submitted no later than JUly 22~ 2002, for consideration at the commission's Septemberl-..-:
public.hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a $250.00'deferml fee must be paid prior
to the Commission's public hearing .....
Applicant (8/1/02):
The deferral fee was paid.
Staff (8/15/02):
To date, no new information has been submitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (9/17/02):
At the request of the applicant, the-Commission deferred'this ease to. November 19, 2002.
Staff (9/18/02): . -
The applicant was advised.in writing that any significant new or revised information shoUld
be submitted no later than ·'October 20, 2002, for 'conSiderati°nat the commisSi°n's:~'-
November public hearing:_ Also, the applicant was advised thata $250.00 deferral fee must
be paid prior to the Commission's public heating. - - -
Applicant (11/1/02):
The deferral fee was paid.
Staff (11/1/02):
To date, no new information has been submitted.
21
02SN0238-JUNE23,BOS
'Planning Commission Meeting (11/19/02):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to January 21, 2003.
Staff(11/20/02):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information should
be submitted no later than November 25, 2002, for consideratiOn at the COmmission's
January public hearing. Also, the apPlicant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must be
Paid prior to the Commission's public hearing.
- Applicant (11/25/02):
The deferral fee was paid.
Staff (12/27/02):
To date, no new information has been sUbmitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (1/21/03):
At the request of the applicant; the Commission deferred this case to March 18, 2003.'
Staff (1/22/03):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant'new orrevised information Should
be.submitted no later than januat3r 27, 2003, for consideratiOn at the Commission's March
public hearing. Also, the apPlicant was adVised that a $250!00 deferral fee must be paid prior~
to the Commission's public heating.
AppliCant (2/7/03):
The deferral fee was paid.
staff (2/26/03):
To date, no new information 'has been submitted.
22
02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
Planning Commission Meeting (3/18/03):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this. ease to May 20, 2003.
Staff (3/19/03): .
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or reviSed inf0rmation,shOuld.
be submitted no later than March 24, 2003, for consideration at the Commission's May
public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised thata $25'0.00 deferral fee. must be Paid prior
to the Commission's public, heating. ~ ~' '~
Applicant (3/26/03):
The deferral fee was paid.
Staff (4/21/03):
To date, no new information has been submitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (5/20/03):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this 'ease.to the C°mmission?s ~
August 19;2003, public headng~ ~ . ~
Staff (5/21/03):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised infOrmatiOn should
be. submitted no later than jUne 16, 2003, for consideratiOn at:the Commission's August
public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a $250.00deferral fee'must be paid prior
to the Commission's public hearing.
Applicant (7/29/03 and 7/30/03):
The'deferral fee was paid. The applicant requested a deferral.
23 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
Planning Commission Meeting (8/19/03):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to the Commission's
November 18, 2003, public hearing.
Staff (8/20/03).-'
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant'new or reVised information should
be submitted no later than. September 15, 2003, for consideration at the Commission's
November public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must
be paid prior to the Commission's ·public hearing.
Applicant (9/3/03):
- :~ The deferral fee was paid.
· Applicant. (10/20/03 and 11/6/03):
. Revised proffered conditions and textual statements were submitted. The applicant withdrew
proffered conditions addressing minimum dwelling, size, restrictive covenants relative .to
single family development and manufactured homes:
Further, the applicant withdrew requested exceptions W the construction of Powhite Parkway
Extended and related conditions.
planning Commission Meeting (11/18/03):
At the .request of the applicant, the. Commission' deferred .this case to their December 16,
2003, public hearing.
Staff (11/19/03):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information should
.be submitted no later than November 24, 2003, for consideration at the Commission's
December:public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a $500.00 deferral fee must
be paid prior to the Commission's public hearing.
24 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
Staff (11/26/03 ):
To date, no new information has been submitted nor has the $500.00 'deferral fee been paid.
Applicant (12/4/03):
The deferral fee was paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (12/16/03): -
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to theirFebmary 17, 2004,'
Staff (12/17/03):
' The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information, should
be submitted no later than December 22, 2003, for "cOnsideration at the COmmission's
February public hearing. Also, the appliCant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must be
paid prior to the Commission's public hearing. ' ' ·
Applicant (12/29/03):
The deferral fee was Paid~
Applicant (2/6/04):
The .application was amended to include additional property. Revised prOffered, conditions
were submitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (2/17/04):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their April 20, 2004;
public hearing.
Staff (2/18/04):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information should
be submitted no later than February 23, 2004, for consideration at the Commission's 'April
25 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
public hearing. Also the applicant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must be paid prior
to the Commission's public hearing.
Applicant.(3/4/04)~
The deferral fee was paid.
:.'APPliCant (3/30/04):
Revised proffered conditions and textual statement were submitted.
Applicant (4/16/04):
Revised Proffered Condition 2 was submitted. Proffered Condition 6.e. requiring a traffic
impact analysis was withdrawn resulting in the Transportation Department recommending
denial of Amendment V.
Planning Commission Meeting (4/20/04):
The applicant did not accept staff's recommendation, but accepted the Commission's
recommendation. There was opposition present. Concerns were expressed relative to the
withdrawal of the traffe impact analysis, and the eonditi0n of, and increased traffic on,
Otterdale Road.
Mr. Bass noted his disagreement with the previous traffic analysis condition and that the
applicant was providing considerable road improvements as part of this request.
Mr. Gulley indicated support.for Mr. Bass' position; that this case Provided relief for area
roads; and that developers be required to make improvements to accommodate their impact
and not improvements to accommodate future developments.
Mr. Gecker noted that the applicant bought the property; with the obligation to'meet existing
conditions of zoning; that such requirements should have been evaluated in the purchase ~
price; and that granting relief to these requirements violated the policy that growth should
pay for growth.
On motion of Mr. Bass, seconded by Mr. Litton, the Commission recommended approval
subject to the conditions and acceptance of the proffered conditions on pages 2 through 9.
26 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
AYES:
NAY:
Messrs. Litton, BaSs, Gulley and Wilson.
Mr. Gecker.
Board of Supervisors' Meeting (5/26/04):
The Board, on their own motion, deferred this caSe to their June 23, 2004,.'public heating
to allow further study of the transportation issues relatedto this request. · ~ ~ .
Staff (5/27/04): . .. . . :-
The applicant waS advised in writing that any.significant newor revised information
should be submitted no later than June 1, 2004, for consideration at theBoard, sjUne:23,
2004, public hearing. . ' .....-~ ....
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, June 23, 2004, May 26, 2004; beginning at 7:00 p.m.., will
take under consideration this request. . -.... -
27 02SN0238-JUNE23-BOS
02SN0235
TEXTUAL STATEMENT
(THIRD REVISED AND RESTATED
AMENDMENT TO CASE 88S008)
1. The Textual Statement, titled Greenspring: Conditional Use and Zoning
Application, revised April 1, 1988, including, the "Residential Site
Development Criteria". tabl% Exhibit IV and the conditions of zoning for Case
88S008 and Conceptual Master Plan, dated February 6, ·2004, shall_be the
Master Plan for the subject property, except as stated herein. And further,
provided that the subject property shall.be permitted to be considered as a
separate project from the remaining portion of that land area covered under
88S008.
2. Ail references ~nd requirements relating to golf in the Textual Statement and
conditions of zoning for Case 88S008 shall be deleted.
3.
The requirement to restore Tomahawk and the Ellett and Hancock structures
shall be deleted.
All references and requirements relating to the plan entitled "Conceptual Site
DevelOpment Plan -- Greenspring -- Chesterfield County, Virginia" in the
Textual. Statement and conditions of zoning for Case 88S008 shall be deleted.
5. The requirements of Conditions 14,~'15 and 16 contained within section.4(A)
of the TeXtual Statement for Case 88S008 shall be deleted.
' 6. -'The requirements of Conditions 20, 21 and 22 of section 4(A) of the Textual
Statement for Case 88S008 shall be deleted.
7. The requirements of Conditions 7, 9, 11, and 20 of Case 88S008 shall be
deleted.
8. The requirements of Condition 30 of'Case 88S008 shall be deleted.
9. The requirements'of Condition 14. of Case 88S008 shall be deleted..
~L393908v8 ~..017292.00739
Tract F
APPROVED MASTER PLAN
Greenspring ..
Greenspring
LEGEND
lstale
Slefle
Allacbed
APPROVED CONCEPTUAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
MellioFamil?
Becre$11om
Office
AMENDED MASTER PLAN
FEBRUARY 6, 2004
GRAPHIC SCALE
[ ~///21 ~ rF//j/////////2~ Y/r/////////////////////////'~t
1000' 0 500' 1000' 200,
I
I
F~.~e III
Case ~02SN0238
/
I
I
I
I
Phase II
C~e ~1SN018~
Greenspring
Boundaries of Phase I, Phase II,
and Phase III
Z
13.
O~
Z
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
?
?
n-'
0
Z.
O~SN %3~-5
L
O~
.
/
/
0
0