91SN0276March 17 ~ 0o-~ ,'"DC
July 28, 1993 B$
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATION
91SN0276
(Amended)
Evelyn J. Gray
Bermuda Magisterial District
South line of East Hundred Road
REQUEST: (Amended) Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Community Business (C-3).
PROPOSED LAND USE:
Commercial and office service uses are planned.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON
PAGES 2 THROUGH 7.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend approval for the following reasons:
The proposed zoning and land uses generally conform to the Eastern Area
Land Use and Transportation Plan, which designates the property for
commercial/office, light industrial and 100-year floodplain uses.
The proposed zoning and land uses conform to anticipated development along
this portion of the Route 10 Corridor.
The proffered conditions address concerns relative to transportation impacts,
drainage, uses permitted, density, development standards and the impacts on
adjacent residential development and capital facilities.
(NOTE:
THE ONLY CONDITION THAT MAY BE IMPOSED IS A BUFFER CONDITION. T. HE
PROPERTY OWNER MAY PROFFER OTHER CONDITIONS. THE CONDITIONS
NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE
COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED
SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL
CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.)
PROFFERED CONDITIONS
(STAFF/CPC) 1.
Prior to site plan approval, one hundred (100) feet of right of way on
the south side of Route 10 measured from the centerline of that part of
Route 10 immediately adjacent to the property shall be dedicated, free
and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County.
(STAFF/CPC) 2.A.
Prior to site plan approval for any development east of a line extending
from original Kingston Avenue/Route 10 intersection, south to the
southern property line, a 50 foot wide right of way for a special access
street (public) from Kingston Avenue along the northern line of the
property to the eastern property line to serve the future development
of Tax Map 118-15 (1) Parcel 16 shall be dedicated free and
unrestricted to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County.
(STAFF/CPC) 2.B. Prior to site plan approval for any development east of a line extending
from original Kingston Avenue/Route 10 intersection, south to the
2
91 SN0276/WP/JULY28H
(STAFF/CPC) 3.
(STAFF/CPC) 4.
southern property line, a 50 foot wide right of way for a special access
street (public) from the northeastern corner of the property along the
eastern property line to serve the future development of Tax Map 135-2
(1) parcel 4 shall be dedicated free and unrestricted to and for the
benefit of Chesterfield County. In the event that Tax Map 118-15 (1)
parcel 16 and the property are combined for development, the 50 foot
wide right of way for a special access street (public) may be relocated
eastwardly and as close as possible to the right of way of !-295, the
exact relocation of same to be approved by the Planning Commission.
Access to Route 10 shall be limited to Kingston Avenue and one
additional entrance/exit located approximately midway between the
Kingston Avenue intersection and the western property line. At the
time of site plan review, a second additional access located toward the
western property line to align with a crossover, may be approved by the
Transportation Department. If the second additional access is
approved, the developer shall be responsible for full cost of a traffic
signal and construction of the crossover (including necessary turn
lanes). The exact location of these accesses shall be approved by the
Transportation Department.
To provide for an adequate roadway system at the time of complete
development, the developer shall be responsible for the following:
Construction of additional pavement along the eastbound lanes
of Route 10 to provide an additional lane of payment for the
entire property frontage.
Construction of additional pavement along the westbound lanes
of Route 10 at the Kingston Avenue intersection to provide dual
left turn lanes.
Construction of additional pavement along the first 500 feet of
Kingston Avenue at its intersection with Route 10 to provide a
five (5) lane typical section (i.e., two (2) southbound lanes and
three (3) northbound lanes).
One-half cost of traffic signalization, if warranted as determined
by theTransportation Department, atthe Kingston Avenue/Route
10 intersection.
Construction of a thir~ (30) foot wide face of curb to face of
curb special access street (public) through the subject property
from Kingston Avenue to the western property line. It is
3 91 SN0276/WP/JULY28H
(STAFF/CPC) 5.
(STAFF/CPC) 6.
(STAFF/CPC) 7.
(STAFF/CPC) 8.
(STAFF/CPC) 9.
understood that the Transportation Department will not allow
parking thereon. The exact location of this special access street
shall be approved by the Planning Commission.
Dedication to the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted,
any additional right of way (or easement) required for the
improvements identified above, and to include right of way for
construction of an additional northbound turn lane along
Kingston Avenue at its intersection with Route 10.
Prior to any site plan approval, a phasing plan for required road
improvements identified in proffered condition #4, with supporting
traffic analysis, if requested by the Transportation Department, shall be
submitted to and approved by the Transportation Department.
Prior to obtaining a building permit, one of the following shall be
accomplished for fire protection:
The owner, developer or assignee(s) shall pay to the County
$150 per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area adjusted upward
or downward by the same percentage that the Marshall Swift
Building Cost Index increased or decreased between June 30,
1991, and the date of payment. With the approval of the
County's Fire Chief, the owner, developer or assignee(s) shall
receive a credit toward the required payment for the cost of any
fire suppression system not otherwise required by law which is
included as a part of the development.
OR
The owner, developer or assignee(s) shall provide a fire
suppression system not otherwise required by law which the
County's Fire Chief determines substantially reduces the need
for County facilities otherwise necessary for fire protection.
The architectural treatment of the development shall be similar to that
of either Rivers Bend Shopping Center or Chesterfield Meadows
Shopping Center.
No buildings shall be constructed within the 100 year floodplain.
Site plans shall be submitted for Planning Commission review and
approval as set forth in Section 21.1-276 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The developer shall notify all adjacent property owners and the last
4
91SN0276/WP/JULY28H
(STAFF/CPC) 10.
(STAFF/CPC) 11.
(STAFF/CPC) 12.
known President of the Enon Civic Association, at least twenty-one
(21) days prior to the Planning Commission's consideration of the site
plan, of the time and date of site plan consideration.
Except for those uses located within 400 feet of Route 10 or those uses
located between Kingston Avenue and Route 1-295, no use will be
open to the public between the hours of 12 midnight and 6:00 a.m.
The following uses shall not be permitted:
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
M.
N.
O.
P.
Q.
Occult Sciences such as palm readers, astrologers, fortune
tellers, tea leaf readers, prophets, etc.;
Automobile and motorcycle sales, services and/or repairs;
Taxidermies;
Veterinary hospitals and/or commercial kennels;
Material reclamation receiving centers;
Cocktail lounges and nightclubs;
Coin operated dry cleaning, pressing, laundry and laundromats;
Pawn shops, salvage barns and flea markets;
Satellite Dishes;
Residential multifamily and townhouses;
Group Care facilities;
Temporary outdoor vendors;
Wand type motor vehicle washes;
Outdoor recreational establishments;
Motorcycle rentals;
Auto rentals, except as an accessory use to a hotel;
Medical facilities or clinics devoted primarily to drug or alcohol
treatment;
Dry cleaning in conjunction with dry cleaning, pick up and
drop off.
Outside public address systems shall be limited to financial or
restaurant drive-thru facilities located within 400 feet of Route 10.
Any such public address system shall be designed so as not to
generate sound levels above 65 dBa between the hours of 7:00 a.m.
and 10:00 p.m. measured at the north line of the 100 year floodplain
of Johnson's Creek at the point closest to the source of noise. During
all other times any such public address system shall be designed so as
not to generate noise levels above 55 dBa measured at the north line
of the 100 year floodplain of Johnson's Creek at the point closest to
the source of noise.
5 91SN0276/WP/JULY28H
(STAFF/CPC) 13.
(STAFF/CPC) 14.
(STAFF/CPC) 15.
(STAFF/CPC) 16.
(STAFF/CPC) 1 7.
(STAFF/CPC) 18.
(STAFF/CPC) 19.
The 100 year floodplain of Johnson's Creek on the subject property
shall be maintained as a buffer and where the 100 year floodplain is
not at least seventy-five (75) feet wide on the subject property, the
width of the buffer shall be expanded to accommodate at least a
seventy-five (75) foot wide buffer. This buffer shall comply with
Sections 21.1-226, 21.1-227 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h) and
21.1-228(a)(3) provided, however, that utilities may be located within
the buffer, but shall only be located so as to run generally
perpendicular through the buffer and located so as to minimize
visibility through the buffer. However, the Planning Commission, at
the time of site plan review may allow parking or driveways within the
floodplain provided the location is more than one hundred fifty (150)
feet north from the north line of the sanitary sewer easement in the
easternmost twenty-four hundred (2,400) foot area of the subject
property, and seventy-five (75) feet north of the southern property line
of the subject property in the westernmost area, and adequate buffers
and screening are accomplished. Except as provided herein to
accommodate utilities, driveways and parking areas, no silvaculture
shall be permitted within said floodplain.
Any hotel located within the development shall be located north and
east of Relocated Kingston Avenue or any relocation of Relocated
Kingston Avenue.
There shall be no more than six (6) outparcels along Route 10 west of
Kingston Avenue. There shall be no more than two (2) outparcels
along Route 10 east of Kingston Avenue provided, however, that if a
hotel is built on the property along Route 10 east of Kingston Avenue,
only one outparcel will be permitted.
There shall be no on-site burning of land cleared material, debris or
construction materials.
The site shall be designed so as to store the ten (10) year post
development storm and release a maximum of a two (2) year pre-
development storm.
The area designated on the conceptual site plan as "office/service" shall
be limited to office/warehouses and C-2 uses not excluded by proffer
No.11.
Any access provided through the subject property to the south shall be
generally located as close to 1-295 as practicable so as to minimize the
6
91 SN0276/WP/JULY28H
impact on residences in the Cameron Hill Subdivision, and the exact
location of this access shall be approved by the Planning Commission.
(STAFF/CPC) 20.
Any cocktail lounges and nightclubs shall be permitted only as
accessory to a hotel, provided the maximum occupancy of any
individual lounge or nightclub so permitted shall not exceed 100.
(STAFF/CPC) 21.
If approved by the Transportation Department and VDOT, prior to
release of final occupancy permits for more than 50,000 gross square
feet of floor area, Okuma Drive shall be constructed as a cul-de-sac
towards its eastern terminus, and the developer shall initiate a request
to abandon the appropriate section(s) of Kingston Avenue so that there
is no right of way connection between Okuma Drive and Kingston
Avenue.
(STAFF/CPC) 22.
The maximum density of this development shall be 280,000 square feet
of shopping center, or equivalent densities, as approved by the
Transportation Department.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Location:
Fronts the south line of East Hundred Road, west of 1-295 and the east and west lines
of Kingston Avenue. Tax Map 118-14 (1) Parcels 19 and 24 (Sheet 33).
Existing Zoning:
A
Size:
54.7 acres
Existing Land Use:
Vacant
Adjacent Zoning & Land Use:
North - R-15 with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit commercial
uses, A and B-3; Single family residential, commercial or vacant
South - R-7 and A; Single family residential or vacant
7 91 SN0276/WP/JULY28H
East - M-l; Vacant
West - A; Single family residential or vacant
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Utilities:
Water:
The public water system is available and its use is required by Ordinance.
Wastewater:
The public wastewater system is available and its use may be required by Ordinance
(Chapter 20, Article Ill, Section 20-63 and Article Xl, Section 20-1 95). The applicant
has indicated the intention to use the public systems.
Drainage and Erosion:
Site drains to Johnsons Creek adjacent to the site. No on- or off-site erosion problems
exist; however, the downstream floodplain is very wide and subjects some areas to
flooding. High run-off associated with the proposed use will aggravate flooding
during lower frequency storms. It may be necessary to acquire off-site drainage
easements.
Effective November 15, 1991, the Chesapeake Bay Ordinance was reimplemented.
Johnsons Creek is classified as a perennial stream and, as such, will be subject to a
100 foot conservation area. Staff would recommend that runoff be retained using,
at a minimum, a two (2) year pre-development release rate and a ten (10) year post-
development release rate. (Proffered Condition 17)
Fire Service:
Enon Fire Station, Company #6. Provide County water and fire hydrant placement
for fire protection purposes in compliance with nationally recognized standards (i.e.,
National Fire Protection Association and Insurance Services Office). Fire lanes must
be provided as per the Chesterfield Fire Prevention Code, Section 313.
The proposed zoning and land uses will generate additional need for fire protection
services. Proffers have been received to address this need. (Proffered Condition 6)
8
91SN0276/WP/JULY28H
Transportation:
This request will not limit development to a specific land use. The applicant has
proffered a maximum density of 280,000 square feet of shopping center or equivalent
traffic generators (Proffered Condition 22). Based on shopping center, trip rate,
development could generate approximately 13,450 average daily trips. These
vehicles would be distributed along Route 10 which had a 1992 traffic count of
32,500 vehicles per day.
It is anticipated that future traffic volumes along Route 10 between 1-95 and 1-295 will
generate the need for an eight (8) lane facility. No funds are currently included in
VDOT's Six Year Construction Program for improving this section of Route 10. It is
critical that access to Route 10 be properly designed and controlled to maximize its
capacity. Primary access for the subject property site will be provided to Route 10
via Kingston Avenue. As part of the 1-295 project, VDOT relocated the original
Kingston Avenue/Route 10 intersection west to its current location. The proximity of
the current Kingston Avenue/Route 10 intersection to the Route 10/I-295 interchange
is undesirable and will cause congestion in the future.
The Thoroughfare Plan identified Route 10 as a major arterial with a recommended
right of way width of 120 to 200 feet. The applicant has proffered to dedicate 100
feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of Route 10, in accordance with
that Plan. (Proffered Condition 1)
The Eastern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan recommends light industrial uses
for the area along 1-295. The Plan recommends that a north/south road (Kingston
Avenue Extension) be provided from Route 10 south to service the subject property
and the planned industrial area. The applicant has submitted revised proffers to
dedicate a fifty (50) foot wide right of way for a special access street (public) along
the northern and eastern property lines (Proffered conditions 2A and 2B.) The
alignment of this street must be approved by VDOT and the Planning Commission.
The street will be generally located as close to 1-295 as practicable to minimize the
impact on residences in the Cameron Hills Subdivision. (Proffered Conditions 2B and
19)
The Eastern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan recommends that Okuma Drive
in the Cameron Hills Subdivision be reconstructed into a cul-de-sac towards its
intersection with Kingston Avenue. The applicant has proffered that, if approved by
the County and VDOT, Okuma Drive will be constructed as a cul-de-sac prior to
release of final occupancy permits for more than 50,000 gross square feet of floor
area. (Proffered Condition 21). This improvement would require residents in the
Cameron Hills Subdivision to access Route 10 via Bermuda Orchard Lane. It will
also eliminate the potential "cut through" traffic route for residents in adjoining
subdivisions located along Bermuda Orchard Lane to use Okuma Drive in accessing
9 91SN0276/W P/J U LY28H
this proposed commercial development. It may be necessary to construct this cul-de-
sac on Okuma Drive with less than 50,000 square feet of development, if the cut
through vehicles cause traffic volumes along streets in the adjoining subdivision to
exceed the acceptable level established by the Planning Commission stub road policy.
The Plan also recommends an east/west road through the subject property, parallel
to Route 10, connecting Kingston Avenue to Inge Road. The applicant has submitted
a revised proffer that will require construction of a thirty (30) foot wide special access
street (public road) through the property from Kingston Avenue to the western
property line (Proffered Condition 4E). A minimum fifty (50) feet of right of way
will be required for this east/west street.
Development must adhere to the Zoning Ordinance relative to access and internal
circulation (Article 7). A revised proffer was submitted which will limit access to
Route 10 via Kingston Avenue and one additional entrance/exit that will be located
west of the Kingston Avenue intersection. There is an existing crossover along Route
10 just west of the subject property. The revised proffer would allow, at time of site
plan review, the Planning Commission to approve a second additional entrance/exit
to Route 10 if access is obtained to that crossover and the developer provides all
mitigating road improvements. (Proffered Condition 3).
Mitigating road improvements must be provided for requested densities to achieve
an acceptable level of service. To evaluate the impact of this request, a traffic
analysis was submitted and approved. The applicant has submitted revised proffers
that require the developer to: 1) construct an additional lane of pavement along
Route 10 for the entire property frontage 2) construct dual left-turn lanes along Route
10 at the Kingston Avenue intersection; 3) widen Kingston Avenue to a five (5) lane
typical section at its intersection with Route 10; and 4) fund one-half the cost of a
traffic signal at the Kingston Avenue/Route 10 intersection (Proffered Condition 4.
A., B., C., and D.). Proffered Condition 5 allows road improvements to be phased
as development occurs. At time of site plan review, specific recommendations will
be provided regarding internal circulation.
LAND USE
General Plan:
Lies within the boundaries of the Eastern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan
which designates the property for commercial/office, light industrial and 100-year
floodplain uses.
10
91SN0276/WP/JULY28H
Area Development Trends:
Development along this portion of East Hundred Road and Route 1-295 is
characterized by a mix of agricultural, residential and commercial zoning and land
uses or vacant land.
Site Design:
The request property lies within an Emerging Growth Area. Development must
conform to the development' standards of the Zoning Ordinance which address
access, parking, landscaping, architectural treatment, setbacks, signs, buffers, utilities,
and screening of dumpsters and loading areas. Further, the applicants have submitted
proffered conditions relative to architectural treatment, site plan review and buffers.
(Proffered Conditions 7, 9 and 13)
Proffered conditions have been submitted restricting the hours of operation for uses
closest to the residential neighborhood; the noise levels of any outside public
address system; the location of hotels; the number of outparcels along Route 10; the
disposal of construction materials; and uses permitted (Proffered Conditions 8, 10,
11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18 and 20). It should be noted that Proffered Conditions 7
through 21 were submitted to attempt to address neighborhood concerns.
Architectural Treatment:
The applicants have submitted a proffered condition relative to architectural treatment
(Proffered Condition 7). Further, no building exterior which would be visible to any
agricultural or residential district or any public right of way may consist of
architectural materials inferior in quality, appearance, or detail to any other exterior
of the same building. There is, however, nothing to preclude the use of different
materials on different building exteriors, but rather, the use of inferior materials on
sides which face adjoining property. No portion of a building constructed of
unadorned concrete block or corrugated and/or sheet metal may be visible from any
adjoining agricultural or residential district or any public right of way. No- building
exterior may be constructed of unpainted concrete block or corrugated and/or sheet
metal. Mechanical equipment, whether ground-level or rooftop, must be shielded
and screened from public view and designed to be perceived as an integral part of
the building.
Buffers & Screening:
The Zoning Ordinance requires that solid waste storage areas (i.e., dumpsters,
garbage cans, trash compactors, etc.) be screened from view of adjacent property and
public rights of way by a solid fence, wall, dense evergreen plantings or architectural
feature; be separated from any residentially zoned property or any property being
11 91SN0276/WP/J U LY28H
used for residential purposes by the principal building; and that such area within
1,000 feet of any residentially zoned property or property used for residential
purposes not be serviced between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. In addition,
sites must be designed and buildings oriented so that loading areas are screened
from any property where loading areas are prohibited and from public rights of way.
With the approval of this request, outside storage would be permitted (as a restricted
use). Outside storage areas must be screened from view of adjacent properties which
have no such areas and public rights of way.
Adjacent property to the south is zoned Residential (R-7) and is occupied by single
family residences. The Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum seventy-five (75) foot
buffer along the southern property boundary of the request site. At the time of site
plan review, the Planning Commission may modify this buffer if adequate screening
can be provided in a lesser width. The applicants have proffered that the 100 year
floodplain of Johnson's Creek will be maintained as a buffer and that where the 100
year floodplain is not seventy-five (75) feet in width, seventy-five (75) feet will be
provided as a buffer (Proffered Condition 13). The proffered condition further states
that, if approved by the Planning Commission, driveways and parking areas may be
located within the floodplain provided the location is more than 150 feet north of the
sanitary sewer easement in the easternmost 2,400 feet of the property and seventy-five
(75) feet north of the easement on the remainder of the property. Further, Proffered
Condition 8 would prohibit any buildings within the 100 year floodplain. The
Chesapeake Bay Ordinance will require a conservation area along Johnsons Creek
which forms the southern boundary of the site. This conservation area would be
inclusive of the required buffer.
Conclusions:
The proposed zoning and land uses generally conform to the Eastern Area Land Use
and Transportation Plan and anticipated development along this portion of the Route
10 Corridor. In addition, the proffered conditions address concerns relative to
transportation impacts, drainage, uses permitted, density, development standards and
the impacts on adjacent residential development and on capital facilities. Therefore,
staff recommends approval of this request.
CASE HISTORY
Applicants (11/14/91):
A traffic analysis was submitted to the Transportation Department.
12
91SN0276/WP/JULY28H
Planning Commission Meeting (11/19/91):
The Commission deferred this case to a special meeting on December 9, 1991.
Planning Commission Meeting (12/9/91):
At the request of the applicants, the Planning Commission deferred this case to the
January 21, 1992, public hearing to allow the applicants an opportunity to address
transportation impacts and discuss the proposed zoning with area property owners.
Staff (12/10/91):
The applicants were advised in writing that any significant changes or modifications
should be submitted no later than December 23, 1991, for consideration at the
Commission's January public hearing.
Board of Supervisors Meeting (12/11/91):
The Board of Supervisors deferred this case pending a recommendation from
Planning Commission.
the
Applicants (1/3/92):
The applicants submitted the transportation proffered conditions, as discussed herein.
Planning Commission Meeting (1/21/92):
At the request of the applicants, the Planning Commission deferred this case to the
March 17, 1992, public hearing to allow the applicants an opportunity to address
transportation impacts and meet with area residents.
Staff (1/22/92):
The applicants were advised in writing that any significant changes or modifications
should be submitted no later than February 14, 1992, for consideration at the
Commission's March public hearing.
13 91SN02 76/WP/J U LY28H
Staff, Applicants' Representative, Area Property Owners and Bermuda District Commissioner
(2/20/92):
A meeting was held to discuss the proposed zoning and land uses. Concerns were
expressed relative to some of the uses permitted in the C-3 District; the location of
fast food restaurants; the orientation of warehouse loading areas; buffers; potential
noise and light problems; and transportation impacts.
The applicants' representative indicated the intent to request a deferral and to submit
additional proffered conditions to attempt to address concerns.
Applicants (2/27/92):
The applicants requested a thirty (30) day deferral to the Commission's
1992, public hearing.
April 21,
Planning Commission Meeting (3/17/92):
At the request of the applicants, the Planning Commission deferred this case to the
June 16, 1992, public hearing to allow the applicants an opportunity to address
transportation impacts and meet with area citizens.
Staff (3/18/92):
The applicants were advised in writing that any significant changes or modifications
should be submitted no later than April 20, 1992, for consideration at the
Commission's June public hearing.
Staff (5/14/92):
To date, no new information has been received.
Applicants (6/8/92):
The applicants requested a ninety (90) day deferral to the Commission's September
15, 1992, public hearing.
14
91 SN0276/WP/JU LY28H
Planning Commission Meeting (6/16/92):
At the request of the applicants, the Planning Commission deferred this case to the
September 15, 1992, public hearing to allow the applicants an opportunity to include
additional property and time to resolve transportation issues.
Concerns were expressed by the Commission regarding the number of deferrals and
the lack of progress in resolving the issues. The applicants' representative agreed to
submit proffered conditions for staff's review by June 26th and to the neighborhood
by July 2nd. He further agreed to meet with the neighborhood on July 9th to discuss
their concerns.
Staff (6/1 7/92):
The applicants were advised in writing that any proffered conditions should be
submitted no later than June 26, 1992, and was reminded of a neighborhood meeting
concerning this request on July 9, 1992, during which any proffered conditions
would be discussed.
Applicants (6/26/92):
The applicants submitted proposed proffered conditions
amended the application to include additional property.
for consideration and
Applicants (7/1/92):
The applicants submitted revised proffered conditions.
Bermuda District PlanningCommissioner, Staff, Applicants' Representative and Area Citizens
(7/9/92):
A meeting was held to discuss the revised proffered conditions submitted by the
applicants on July 1, 1992.
Bermuda District Planning Commissioner, Staff and Area Citizens (7/16/92):
Area citizens met and formulated a list of their concerns and suggested proffered
conditions which were subsequently sent to the applicants' representative.
15 91S N02 76/WP/J U LY28 H
Bermuda District PlanningCommissioner, Staff, Applicants' Representative and Area Citizens
(8/13/92):
A meeting was held to discuss the suggested proffered conditions as submitted to the
applicants by area citizens.
Applicants (8/20/92):
The applicants submitted revised proffered conditions.
Bermuda District Planning Commissioner, Staff and Citizens (8/27/92):
A meeting was held to discuss the revised proffered conditions submitted
applicants.
by the
Applicants (9/1/92):
The applicants submitted revised proffered conditions.
Applicants (9/2/92):
The applicants submitted revised proffered conditions.
Applicants (9/3/92):
Revised proffered conditions were submitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (9/15/92):
The applicants' representative expressed concern relative to the road improvements
requested by the Transportation Department. The applicants' representative agreed
to increase the proposed buffer to 100 feet. The applicants' representative withdrew
the M-1 parcel located at Route 10 and 1-295 from the request.
Area citizens expressed concern relative to the proposed buffer and the uses
permitted within the northern portion of the buffer.
16
91 SN0276/WP/JULY28H
Following discussions, the applicants' representative indicated that he would meet
with the Transportation Department and attempt to resolve the issues.
At the request of the applicants, the Commission deferred this case for thirty (30)
days.
Staff (9/16/92):
The applicants were advised in writing that any new or revised information should
be submitted no later than September 21, 1992, for consideration at the
Commission's October public hearing.
Staff (9/16/92):
Staff faxed a list of revised suggested transportation proffers to the applicants'
representative. The proffers addressed discussions at the Planning Commission public
hearing.
Staff and Applicants' Representative (9/18/92):
A meeting was held to discuss details regarding the revised suggested transportation
proffers. The applicants requested additional information from the Transportation
Department.
St~ff (9/22/92):
The deferral fee was paid.
Staff (9/29/92):
To date, the applicants have not submitted any new information. If additional
information or revised proffers are received, staff will advise the Commission prior to
the October public hearing.
Planning Commission Meeting (10/20/92):
The applicants' representative submitted revised Proffered Conditions 2 and 13 and
Proffered Condition 22, as generally discussed herein. The representative indicated
17 91S N02 76/WP/J U LY28 H
that it was unfair for these applicants to pay full cost of signalization at the Kingston
Avenue/Route 10 intersection and to construct a third lane of pavement on Route 10.
Mr. McCracken indicated that Proffered Condition 2 was unacceptable because the
enforcement would be difficult, if not impossible. The County Attorney's office
advised that Proffered Condition 2 was unacceptable. Mr. McCracken suggested that
the road improvements and requirements be phased such that provision of the right
of way to the south could occur at such time the easternmost portion of the property
were developed. Mr. McCracken indicated that the requested road improvements
were the same as required of other developers. He indicated that the developer
needed to pay full cost of signalization at the Kingston Avenue/Route 10 intersection
so that when needed, the funds would be available.
Mr. Cunningham indicated that the Commission had been involved in this case for
ten (10) months. He indicated that the case had been deferred from September and
he had hoped within that thirty (30) day period proffered conditions addressing
concerns would have been submitted prior to the night of the Commission meeting.
He stated that while progress had been made on density and buffer issues, there w.ere
still unresolved transportation concerns; therefore, he could not support his request.
On motion of Mr. Cunningham, seconded by Mr. Easter, the Commission
recommended denial.
AYES: Unanimous.
Board of Supervisors Meeting (11/24/92):
On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mr. Colbert, the Board deferred this case for
sixty (60) days at the applicant's request.
AYES: Unanimous.
Staff (11/25/92):
The applicant was advised in writing that any new or revised information should be
submitted no later than January 11, 1993, for consideration at the Board's January 27,
1993, public hearing. In addition, the applicant was advised that a $50 deferral fee
must be paid prior to the public hearing.
18
91S N02 76/W P/J U LY28H
Staff (1/13/93):
To date, no new information has been received.
Staff and Applicant (1/26/93):
A meeting was held to discuss transportation concerns. Staff provided the applicant
with additional information.
Board of Supervisors' Meeting (1/27/93):
On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board deferred this case for
thirty (30) days.
AYES: Unanimous.
Staff (1/28/93):
The applicant was advised in writing that any substantial new or revised information
should be submitted no later than February 10, 1993, for consideration at the Board's
February 24, 1993, public hearing.
Staff and Applicant (2/9/93):
, A meeting was held to further discuss transportation related issues.
Board of Supervisors' Meeting (2/24/93):
At the request of the Bermuda District Supervisor, on motion of Mr. McHale,
seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board deferred this case for sixty (60) days.
AYES: Unanimous.
Staff (2/25/93):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new information should be
submitted no later than April 12, 1993, for consideration at the Board's April 28
public hearing.
19 91SN02 76/W P/J U LY28 H
Staff (4/21/93):
Since the Board's February public hearing, the Bermuda District Supervisor and
Commissioner, the applicant's representative and staff have met on numerous
occasions to discuss transportation related proffered conditions and concerns. To
date, there has been no changes or amendments to the application or proffered
conditions.
Board of Supervisors (4/28/93):
At the request of the Bermuda District Supervisor, on motion of Mr. McHale,
seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board remanded this case to the Planning Commission
for further consideration.
AYES: Unanimous.
Staff (4/29/93):
The applicant was advised in writing that any substantially new information should
be submitted no later than May 7, 1993, for consideration at the Commission's June
15, 1993, public hearing.
Staff (5/8/93):
To date, no new information has been received.
Applicant (5/1 7/93):
The applicant submitted revised proffered conditions in an effort to address
transportation concerns and to allow additional outparcels along Route 10.
Applicant (5/27/93):
The applicant submitted further revised proffered conditions relative to transportation
impacts and to allow additional outparcels along Route 10.
20
91 S N02 76/WP/J U LY28H
Applicant (6/7/93):
The applicant submitted revised transportation proffers.
Applicant (6/15/93):
Proffered Conditions 14, 18 and 19 were amended to clarify their intent and to
correct typographical errors. Also, Proffered Condition 19 was amended to require
Planning Commission approval of the location of the access to the south.
Planning Commission Meeting (6/15/93):
The applicant accepted the recommendation. There was no opposition present.
On motion of Mr. Cunningham, seconded by Mr. Easter, the Commission
recommended approval and acceptance of the proffered conditions on pages 2
through 7.
AYES: Unanimous.
The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, July 28, 1993, beginning at 7:00 p.m., will take
under consideration this request.
21 91SN0276/WP/JULY28H
,4
,RANDOM.
WOODS
WOOOVALE
!CAMERON
HILLS
91SN0276 (AMENDED)
REZ:A TO C-3
SH. 53
1
.EASTERN AREA
LAND USE
AMENDMENT
CASE
I0 91SN0276
Legend
Low Density Residential
~ h4edium Density Residential
Commercial / Office
Light Industrial
Public/ Semi- Public
100- Year Floodplain