05SN0253-Oct27.pdfOctober 27, 2004 BS
STAFF,S
REQtmST A ALYSIS
AND .
RECOMMENDATION
0$SN01 ~2
(Also refer to caSe 05SN0156)
Chesterfield County planning Commission
MidlOthian Magisterial' District
EaSt and West lines of Grove Hill Road
REQUEST: Amendment to !COnditional Use Planned Development' (Case 91SN0172) to
- permit bulk exceptions, in the Residential:TOwnhonse (R-TH) District.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
Residential townhouse subdivisiOns knoWnas. Ridgemoor.and SCotterHills'have
been developed Within The GrOve project. Several units Within these subdivisions '
: were constructed in violation of the' required: setbacks. This. request would reduCe
:-the side, comer side land rear yard setbacks required for all subject lots Within this
development, thereby:legalizing the setbacks for.. units that are currently in
Violation and applying .this exception uniformlY to other subject lots.Within these
developments.
PLANNING COMMISSION. RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION ON PAGE 2.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend approval for the following reasons:
A;
-The recommended condition provides the'reliefnecessary to legalize units built in
violation of the Ordinance while maintaining close consistency With the
Residential Townhonse (R-TH).requirements,
Providing a FIRST cHoICE community through excellence in public service
B.~ .The recommended condition-provides for adequate separation of dwelling units,
thereby Protecting against overcrowding of the 'development; consistent with..the
intent of the Ordinance setback requirements.
(NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED OR THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY PROFFER
CONDITIONS. THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC"WERE .AGREED.UP°N-
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 PLANNINO COMMISSION~)
CONDITION
(STAFF/CPC) For R-TH uses, the following bulk exceptions shall apply-for deVelOpment
on the subject property:
Side.yard. A side yard ofnot less than. ten (10)feet:in
width shall be provided :' for 'each end -residenee
tow house gr°uPs or rOws (3) or more lots:
2. COmer side yard. -A-comer side yard of not less. than. ten
(10)feet,
3. Rear yard.. 'A.rear yard'of not less.than nineteen (19)-feet..-
(NOTE: This condition amends Item II °f:theTextual statement for caSe
91SN0172 for the Subject property, only; 'All :other conditions ofC~e'.
91 SN0172 remain:in effect.) .
GENE1LAL INFORMATION
Location: ' ..
Fronts the east and west. lines of Grove Hill Road, along the south line of WoOlridge
Road.' Lots 1 through. 2'/; 29 ,through 33 and 35 through '66 of the Ridgemoor '
Development and Lots 1-through 44~ 47 through 60, 65 through. 75; 77 through 79"andS1
of the Scotter Hills Developmem (Sheets 5 and 6). ' ~
Existing Zoning: ' :
R-TH with Conditional Use Planned Developmem
Size:
22.6 acres
05SN0153-OCT27-BOS
Existing' Land Use:
single family residential' or vacant
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North' - 0-2 and C-3, both with Conditional Use Planned Development; Vacant
South
East
West
uTILITIES; ENVIRONMENTAL;FIRE; TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES
This rec uest will have no impact upon these facilities. ~
R-12 and R, 15, both-with Conditional Use. Planned. Development; single
family residential '. '
- A with Conditional Use Planned Development; PubliC/semi-publiC: (Grove Shaft
Park) -
- A; Vacant
. : LnmI>
ComprehenSive Plan:
Lies within'the boundaries of the.Midlothian Area: Community Plan'Which suggests .the
.property is appropriate for.medium density residentialdevelopment 'of2.51 to 4.0· units
per. acre. . .
Area Development·Trends: " '
SurroUnding properties to: the 'nor~ southand eaSt were 'zoned aS part of The .GrOve
'mixed use development and are currently vacant or ·develOped for residential: sing!e. :.
family subdivisions or park:USe (GrOve' Shaft Park)~: Property 'to 'the west-is, vacant :and-
controlled' by the YMCA.-located-at the intersection of Woolridge and Coalfield Roads.
Zoning History: .
On'March 12, 1997, the Board of SUpervisors, upon a faVorable'recommendation by'the
CommiSsion, approved a reZ°ning of a 440 acre'tmct with Conditional Use planned-
DevelOpment to permit a mixed USe project commonly'known .aS 'The Grove (CaSe
The approved master plan identified the subject property within Parcel 7, permitting :the
development of townhomes or blUSter homes. Parcel 7 was-recorded for the development
of Iownhome projects commonly:known aS RidgemOor and Scotter Hills.' 'Subsequent!y,
staff reviewed and issued· building permits for several townhome units' incorrectly us~g ~
the cluster home setback standards specified in' the case, rather than the; R-TH
3 05SN0153-OCT27-BOS.
requirements of the Ordinance. As a result, several units were constructed in vi°lation of
side, comer side and rear yard setbacks. To date, twenty (20) of the subjeCt.units: within' '
the Scotter Hills develOpment and three (3) of the subject units within, the Ridgemoor
development have been identified as having one (1) or more setback violations, . with
additional building permits on hold as a result of inadequate, setbacks. ~" '
On September 23, 2004, the Board of Supervisors, upon a faVorable recommendation by
the Commission, approved an.amendment to Conditional Use planned. Development case
91SN01.72 to permit side, comer side and rear yard setbacks for ten(10) units within the
'Ridgemoor and Scotter Hills developments that were scheduled to. transfer oWnership
within the' following thirty (30)day period (Case 058N0135): Further, the COmmiSsion,
on September 22, 2004, initiated this current applicatiOn on the remaining lots 'within
thesetwo (2) developments'. . ' - ·
Building Setbacks.: . -.
Currently, within the Residential Townhouse (R-TH) District, a-twenty-five (25)fo°t rear'
yard, a twenty-five (25) foot comer side yard, a ten(10) fOotside yard for.. end residences
in unit groups of four (4) or ~fewer:and a fifteen (15) side yard for end residences in unit
groups of five (5) or more is required for .principal buildings. i.Consistent with apUrpose
of the Ordinance, building setbacks.permit the passage.of light and air andprotect against
the overcrowding of improvements within the development. · -
The existing structures built in violation of these setbacks maintain a.minimUmrearyard
of 19;5 feet, a minimum comer side yard of 10,4 feet anda minimum~ side. yard for end ' '
units of 10.2 feet. ' ~
The recommended condition would reduce the minimum, setbacks for a.Comer side yard
and a side yard to ten (10) feet and a rear yardto nineteen (19) feet. To:main--tain
uniformity within the projects, the :condition would permit other'units' the .sameexcepfi0m '
FUrther, these townhouse developments have cumulatively provided open sPace'in exceSS .,"
of apProximately three (3) acres of Ordinance requirements thereby assisting in ibalanCing
the closer.separation between dWelling units with respect t~density impacts. . . ..
CONCLUSIONS · · · ' .:- ..
The proposed zoning is for the purpose of legalizing the' existing-improvements that d0.not
currently comply with requirements of the Ordinance. The provision of projectopen spaces is in...
excess of Ordinance requirements protects against the'overcrowding of. these, improvements
within the development. The recommended condition provides the relief necessary to legalize
units built 'in.violation of the Ordinance while maintaining close'consistency with the Residential
Townhouse (R-TH) requirements.
Given these considerations, approval of this request is recommended.
4
05SN0153~OCT27-BOS
CASE HISTORY
Planning Comniission Meeting (10/19/04):
The developer's representative accepted .the recommendation. There was no opposition
present.
On motion of Mr. Gecker, seconded by Mr, . WilsOn, the Commission recommended
~approval'subject to the'Condition on page 2. ' ' ~ '
AYES:' Unanimous.
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, October 27, '2004, beginning at 7:00 p.m., will take
under consideration this request.
5 05SN0153-OCT27-BOS