Loading...
04SN0182-Nov23.pdfREQUEST: November 23, 2004 BS ADDENDUM 04SN0182 (Amended) George P. Emerson, Jr. Dale Magisterial District Gates Elementary, Salem Middle and Matoaca High School Attendance Zones South line of Nash Road Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-40). PROPOSED LAND USE: A single family residential subdivision is planned. A maximum density of 1.09 dwelling units per acre is permitted within the Residential (R-40) District; the theoretical density is 0.99 dwelling units per acre; and the average actual lots recorded in Residential (R-40) districts using public water and individual septic systems in 2002 were 0.41 dwelling units per acre. Attached is a memorandum from the School Administration reiterating their position that the developer should be required to address the impact of this development on the school system. Staff continues to recommend denial of this request, as noted in the "Request Analysis." Providing a FIRST CHOICE Community Through Excellence in Public Service 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS-ADDENDUM OG SfudeO,~5 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CHESTERFIELD COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Billy K. Cannaday, Jr., Ed.D., Superintendent November 23, 2004 Planning Department Chesterfield County Billy K. Cannaday, Jr. Superintendent RECEIVED NOV 2 3 2006 PLANNING DEPARmENT Proffered Conditions for Cases 03SN0332 Fairweather Investments and 04SN0182 George P. Emerson, Jr. The two above referenced cases are on the agenda for the Board of Supervisors this evening. As you are aware, the proffered conditions in each case make no provision for the impact of the development on the school system, while both cases will generate additional students. The FY2005-2011 Capital Improvement Plan approved by the School Board and the Board of Supervisors is based upon the collection of proffers throughout the seven years of the Plan. Without the collection of these proffers, additional debt will be required to fund all approved projects. The cash proffer program approved by the Board of Supervisors sets a maximum amount per lot of $11,500 and is calculated with nearly 48% of the cost ($5,509) attributable to the public schools. It is the position of the school administration that developers should be required to address the impact of development on the school system in all cases. BKCJr/kk OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT Post Office Box 10 · Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 (804) 748-1411 · FAX (804) 796-7178 · TDD (804) 748-1638 Equal Opportunity Employer November 2.3, 20'04'BS STAFF'S REQUEST.ANthLySIs AND. RECOma ND^UON ' 04SN0182 (Amended) George P. Emerson, Jr. Dale Magisterial D~stfict' Gates Elementary,Salem Middle and.. 'MatoacaHighSchool Attendance Zones South line ofNash Road REQUEST: Rezoning from Agl'icultural (A) to Residential (R-40). PROPOSED. LAND USE: A single.familY residential subdivision is planned: A maximum density of 1.09 dwelling units per acre is permitted within the-Residential (R-40) District; the theoretical density is 0.99 dwelling, units' per acre; and the .average actual lots recorded in Residential (R.40) districts using public water and individual septic systems in 2002 were 0.41 dwelling units per acre. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ' RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON- PAGES 2 THROUGH 6. ' ' AYES: MESSRS. LITTON, WILSON, GULLEY AND BASS. NAY: MR. GECKER. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend denial for the following reasons: Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service he While a proffered condition maintains a conservation area along Swift Creek as suggested by the Southern and Western Area Plan, the. request fails to comply, with the land use recommendations of the Plan which suggest the subject property is appropriate for residential use Of 1 to 5 acre lots, suited:for Residential (R-88) zoning. While the applicant has 0ffered a contribution (Proffered Condition 3.e.) to assist in defraying.the cOst of this proposed development onroad infrastmcture'within the Traffic .Shed, the remaining proffered cOnditions do not adequately mitigate the impact of this development on other capital facilities, as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance and' the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically; the need for SchOols, parks, libraries, fire stations and transportation' facilities is identified in the County's adopted Public Facilities Plan, the Capital Improvement Program and .the . Thoroughfare 'Plan and the impact' of this development is discussed herein. The proffered condition varies from that which, has consistently been accepted -in accordance with the Board of Supervisors' Policy. While equivalent in dollar value to what would be appropriate to accept .in this case.had the applicant made a cash proffer under the County's policy, the remaining proffered conditions fail to address the impact of this request on Schools,parks, libraries and fire stations. Therefore, the proffered condition does not adequately mitigate the impact on those capital facilities and thereby does not assure that adequate service levels for those facilities are maintained as necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of County citizens. (NOTE:. THE ONLY CONDITION THAT MAY BE IMPOSED IS A BUFFER CONDITION, HOWEVER THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY PROFFER 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 (NOTE: PROFFERED CONDITION 3.E. HAS BEEN REVISED SUBSEQUENT TO THE COMMISSION'S CONSIDERATION OF THIS REQUEST.) George P. Emerson, Jr. (the "Applicant"), .pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of the Code of Virginia (1950 as amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County, for itself and -its successors or assigns;, proffers that the development of the.parcel known as Chesterfield COunty Tax IdentificatiOn Numbers 768-654-15 87 (the "PropertY")under consideration will be developed according to the following.conditions if, and only if, the rezoning request for R-40 is granted. In the event the request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to bY the APplicant, the proffers :and'conditions shall immediatelY be null and void and ofn° further force or effect. If the zoningis granted, theseprOffers and conditions will supersede all proffers and conditions now existing on the Property. 2 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS (CPC) (CPC) (CPC)' (a) If the existing dam andpond straddling an adjacent property line is used for the project's BMP, then it sliall be retrofitted to meet current day standards as outlined in the Environmental En~neering reference manual to include, but not .limited' to, property primary spillways, emergency spillways, and structural stability. The retrofit design shall be performed by a qualified professional andall remedial action shall take place, inconjunction with that phase of development which is located within the dam's contributory drainage way. If the proper easements'cannot be Obtained to retrofit the existing facility, identified in item l (a), upstream BMPs shall be cOastmcted to render the existing primary spillways adequate to pass the ten (10) year storm. (EE) Timbering. With the exception oftimbering which'has beenapproved by the Virginia State Department of ForeStry for the pUrpose of removing dead or diseased trees~ there shall be no timbering on the Propei'ty until a. land disturbance permit has been obtained frOm the Environmental Engineering Department, and the approved devices-have been installed. (EE) - TransportatiOn a. Accesses. Direct access from the Property to Nash Road shall be limited to no more than one (1)public road (the "Nash Road .. Access").' Direct access from the-Property to' Eastfair Drive accesses"). 'The eXact locatiOn of these accesses shall be approved by the Transportation DePartment. bo NashRoad Improvements; If the Nash Road Access is constructed, the Applicant shall be responsible.for the following: (i) ' (ii) (iii). Widening/improving the east side Of Nash Road to an eleven (11) foot wi& travel' lane,, measured from the centefline of Nash Road.with an additional one. (1) foot wide paved oulder plus a seVen(7)foot-x¥ide: unpaVed shoulder and Verlaying the fullwid~of the.rOad wi-th ~one and.one, half (1.5) inches of compacted bituminous asphalt concrete, with modifications approvedby the Transportation Department, for the entire property.frontage. Construction of.additional pavement along Nash Road at the Nash Road AcceSs to provide let. and right mm lanes. Dedication to Chesterfield County, free. and unrestricted, of any additional fight-of-Way (or easements) required for the improvements identified above. In the event the Applicant is 3 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS unable-.to acquire the right-of-way necessary for the road improvements identified in Proffered C6nditions 3(b)(i) and 3O0)(ii), the Applicant may request, in writing, the County to acquire such right-of-way as a public road improvement. All ' costs associated with the acquisition of the.right.of_waY shall be borne by the APplicant,, In the.event the County.chOoses not to assist the Applicantm. acquisition of such "off-site" right-of-Way, the. ApPlicant shall be relieved of the obligation to acquire such"off-site' fight-of way, and shall :only be obligated to' proVide .the rOad improvement than can be accommodated' within' available right-of-Way as determined by the Transportation Department. Co Eastfair Drive Improvements. If one or both of the Eastfair Drive Accesses are constructed, the APplicant shall be responsible for the following: (i) Construction ofadditional pavement along Eastfair Drive-at the Easffaire :Drive Accesses to provide left-and right mm lanes; based 0nTranSportation DePartment standards. (ii) DediCation to Chesterfield County; free and unrestricted, of any additional right-of-way.(or easements)required for the imprOvemems identified in Proffered Conditions 3(c)(i). do Transportation Phasing Plan: Prior'to'any eonsmtctiOn plan'approval; a phasing-planfor the. reqUired'road improvements, as idenfifiedin Proffered Conditions 3(b)'and 3(c)(i), shall be submitted to and approved by the Transportation Department. (NOTE: PROFFERED CONDITION 3.E." HAS BEEN MODIFIED SUBSEQUENT' TO THE COMMISSION'S CONSIDERATION OF'TInS REQUEST IN AccORDANCE WITH .REPRESENTATIONS TO T~ COMMISSION AT: TIlE HEARING GU~EEING. A .:CERTAIN DOLLAR AMOUNT TOWARDS ROADIMPROVEMENTS,. SHOULD THE' BOARO WISH TOr APPROVE TInS 'REQUEST; IT .WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO ACCEPT PROFFERED J CONDITION 3.E. AS MODIFIED AND.NOTED AS RECOMMENDEDBy THE COMMISSioN.) e. Transportation'Contribution, The :Applicant, his successor, or his assigns shall pay to Chesterfield'County either: 1) prior to issUance of the first building Permiti.the sum of $400;000 and ~ach'year from.the date off that initial' PaYment thereafter shall pay another $~t00,000 until all the lots on the Property have 'been recorded or until these · cumulative paYments :equal to $2,000,000, whichever occurs first; or 4 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS 2) prior to issuance of the init. iai building permit within each recorded subdivision section, the sum of $9522, multiplied by the number of lots in that SubdivisiOn Section~ The Applicant, his successor, or his assigns shall pay the one oftheselwo options that provides a greater dollar mount.to. Chesterfield County each year:. In no evem shall the total amount paid by-the. Applicant; his SuCcessor, 9r his assigns :be less than $2,000,000; hOwever, the total arno, ,u~.,,t~aid.shall not exceed $2;000;000 mttil.after.the'recor, dation °fthe 21'0 10t On the Property. After the recordation of the initial 210. lOts on the Property, the Applicant, his sUccesS0r,:or his assi~s shall pay the sum of $9,522 for every lot recOrded thereafter: The paymentsshai1 be.used for road improvements within Traffic Shed- 17 or for road. improvements that provide relief to that Traffic Shed, as determined by the Transportation Department. The payments could be used-ioWards road improvements' such as'the.reConstruction of Nash Road,or an extension of Nash Road from Beach Road to-Iron-Bridge Road (Route 10). If, upon the mutual agreement of the Transportation Department and the Applicant; his successor, or his assigns,' the Applicant, his successor, or his assignsconstrUcts an extension of'Nash Road from Beach Road to Iron Bridge'Road (Route 10), then the Applicant, his successor, or his assigns shall receive a reductiOn in the payments as set forth abOve inprofferedCondition 3.(e): The'reduction shall, be equal to the costs, .as approved by the:Transportation Department, :to the Applicanti his successor~ or his' assigns in providing such road improvements. For the purposes of this proffer, the cOsts shall include, but not be'limited to, the cost of right-of-way acquisition, engineering .costs, costs of relocating utilities'and actual costs of ConstructiOn (including labor, materials, and overhead) ("Work"). Before any Work is performed, the. Applicant, his successor, or his assigns, shall receive priOr written approval, by the Transportation· Department for any redUction(s) inpayment(s). Dedication of Right-of-Way.. In conjunctionwith recordation of the initial subdivision plat or within sixty ~60) days from a written request by the County, Whichever occurs first, forty-five_ (45) feet of fight-of-way on the east side of Nash Road, measUred froma revised centerlin¢ of Nash ROadbased onVDOT Urban'Minor Arterial (50 MPI-I) standards with modifiCationS approved by the Transportation Department; immediately adjacent m the Property shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit' of Chesterfield County. (T) 5 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS (cPc) 4. (CPC) 5. (CPC) 6. Trail/Open SpaCe along Swift Creek- a. An open_ space area, .a minimum, of 150 'feet in width shall be provided along the: length.,of Swift Creek frOm. the.northern to the southern parcel bOundaries. Within .this area the .developer shall prOvide a trail. The exact length, Width, and treatment'of, the'trail .shall be submitted to the. Department of parks and Recreation for comments. The open space/trail shall be owned and maintained by the homeowners Association. (P&R) Covenants Conditions, and. Restrictions. R is the intention of the Applicant.to incorporate the lots in this parcel into the Community known as the Highlands and to that end, restrictive covenants shall be recorded in conjunction with .the recordation of any-subdivision plat' for the Property, which will-subject said lots to all the covenants, conditions, and restriction currently in effect in all sections of the Highlands. (P) Manufactured..Homes~ (a) Manufactured homes, shall not be permitted on the PropertY. This proffered conditiOn shall not be interpreted to prohibit the installation of any mobile real estate sales office permitted on the property by an approved Conditional Use, which shall not be used for dwelling purposes. Co) The following shall be recorded as a restrictive covenant in conjunction'with the recordation of any subdivision plat fOr the property: "No manufactured homes shall be allowed to become a residence, tempor .ary or otherwise.,' (P) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: South line of Nash Road, northeast of Eastfair Drive and east line of Eastfair Drive, north.of Regalia Drive. Tax ID 768-654~1587 (Sheet 25). Existing Zoning: A Size: 438 acres 6 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS Existing Land Use: Vacant Adiacent Zoning and Land Use: North South East West - A; Single family residential or vacant - R-25; Single family residential or vacant - A and I-3; industrial (landfill) or vacant - A and R-25 - Single family residential or vacant UTILITIES Public Water System: There is an existing sixteen (16) inch water line extending along the north side of Nash Road adjacent to this site. In add're'on, a twelve (12) inch water line extends along Easffair Drive in Chandon in the Highlands Subdivision, and is adjacent to this site. Use of public water to serve this site is required by County Code. Preliminary inveStigation of the available fire flows from the existing sixteen (16) inch water line along Nash Road indicate that residual pressure in the on-site water lines may' be inadequate and will require an additional tie-in to the twelve (12) inch water line in Eastfair Drive. 'Fire flow demands are established bythe Fire Department. Public WasteWater System: The public wastewater system is- not available to serve this site.~ The request site is within that portion of the Southern and. Western Area Plan suitable for R-88 zoning which permits the use of private.septic systems. Private Septic System: The Health Department must approve anyneW septic systems. Priorto recordation'of a subdivision plat, soils analysis fOr each lot must be submitted to the Health. Department for review and approval. ENVIRONMENTAL Drainage and Erosion: The majority of the property drains east and directly into Swirl Creek, and the remaining portion drains southwest through The Highlands. There are currently no on- or off-site drainage-or erosion problems with nOne anticipated after, development. The property is heavily.wooded and should not be timbered without first obtaining a land disturbance permit 7 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS from the Environmental Engineering Department and the appropriate devices installed. This will insure that adequate erosion control meaSures..are-in place prior to any timbering. (Proffered Condition .2) The creek that drains the majority of the property drains into a pond Prior to entering Swift Creek. The pond appears to have doubled in size since 1994 with.the dam being offsite on adjacent.property. Proffered Condition 1 requires .the developer to address the impact of additional runoff by agreeing to analyze the dam and retrofitting the dam if necessary to meet the current standards of the Environmental. Eng~eering Manual.for existing pondS. Water Quality: Swift Creek, which forms the eastern property line, is a perennial stream'and is therefore subject to a one hundred (100) foOt conservation area in which there are very limited USes. PUBLIC FACILITIES The need for fire, school, library, park-and transportation facilities-is identified in the Public Facilities Plan, the ThoroughfarePlan and the Capital Improvement program and further detailedby specific departments in the applicable sections of this "Request'Analysis." This development will have an impact on these facilities. Fire Service: The Public Facilities Plan indicateS .that fire and emergency medical service (EMS) calls are expected to increase fortyrfour (44) to seventy-eight (78) percent by' 2022. Six (6) new fire/rescue stations are recomm_ ended for construction by 2022in the Plan._ In addition to the six (6) new stations, .the Plan.als0 recommends theexpansion of five (5)eXisting stations. Based on 180 dwelling urn'ts, this request will generate hpproximately sixtY-six (66) calls fOr fire and emergency medical serviCe each year:The applicant has not addressed the impact on fire and EMS. . f The AirPort Fire Station,-Company Number 15, currently provides fire protection and emergency medical service.' When the property is developed, ~e' nUmber of hydrants,. quantity of water needed for:fire'prOtection, and access requirements will be evaluated during the plans review process. Schools: Approximately ninety-seven (97) students could be generated by thiS development. This site lies in Gates ElementarY-Seh0ol attendance zone: capacity- 692; enroIlment--906; 'Salem Middle School zone: capacity- 953; enrollment -.' 1,129; and Matoaca High School: capacity- 1,594, enrollment ~1,467. " 8 04SNO182-NOV23-BOS This request will have an impact on schools. Currently, there are nine (9) trailers at Gates Elementary and fourteen (14) at Salem Middle. The proffered conditions fait to address the impact of this development on schools. Libraries: COnsistent with the Board of Supervisors' Policy, the impact of development on library services is assessed countywide.' Based on projected Population growth, the Public Facilities Plan identifies a need for additional library space throughout the COunty. Even ifthe facility improvements that have been made since the Plan was published are taken into account, there is still an unmet need-for additional library space throughout the County. Development of this property would most likely affect the Central Library. The Plan identifies a need for additional space in this area of the County. The proffered conditions fail to address the impact of this development on library facilities. Parks and Recreation: The Public Facilities Plan identifies the need for three (3) new regional parks, seven. (7) community parks, twenty-nine (29) neighborhood parks, and five (5) community centers by 2020. In addition, the Public Facilities Plan identifies the need for ten (10) new or expanded special purpose parks to provide water access or preserve and interpret unique recreational, cultural or environmental resources. The Plan also identifies shortfalls in trails and recreational historic sites. The applicant has not offered measures to assist in addressingthe impact of this proposed development on these Parks and Recreation facilities. The Southern and Western Area Plan provides that land along important river and stream corridors should be reserved for expanded public access compatible with' natural resource protection goals. The Plan provides that these designatedgreenwayS should be improved as development occurs and conveyed to the County-to link existing and prOposed special purpose-park sites with other activity centers as part of a future countywide trail system. The applicant has offered to provide a trail along Swift Creek .in. an open space corridor in compliance with the Plan (Proffered Condition 4). Although the trail is not public; the corridor will be-preserved and maintained by the Homeowner's Association. Provided that the trail is built to standards outlined by the Department of Parks and Recreation, the Homeowners Association will have the option of dedicating land or a public easement for the trail in the future if they desire the'benefits of County maintenance or to permit the trail to become part of a larger trail network. It should be noted that the condition does not require that the trail be bUilt to Parks and Recreation standards; only that the plans will be submitted to Parks and Recreation for comments. Transportation: The property (438-acres) is currently zoned Agricultural (A), and the applicant is requesting rezoning to Residential (R-40). Based on single,family trip rates, development could 9 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS generate approximately 2,420 average dally trips. These vehicles will be initially distributed along Easffalr Drive and along Nash Road. Nash Road had a 2003 traffic count of 7,915 vehicles per day (VPD). The.Thoroughfare Plan identifies Nash Road as major arterial with a recommended right-of- way width of ninety.(90) feet. The applicant has proffered to dedicate forty-five (45) feet of right-of, way,-measured from a revised centerline of Nash Road, in accordance with that Plan. (Proffered Condition 3.f.) The Thoroughfare Plan also identifies Easffair'Drive as a.major arterial. Access'to major arterials, such as Nash Road and Eastfalr'Drive, should be controlled, The applicant has proffered that direct access from the property to Nash Road willbe limited to no more than one (1) public road, and direct access from the property to Eastfair Drive will be limited to no more than two (2) public roads. (Proffered Condition 3.a.) The Subdivision Ordinance requires that subdivision streets must conform to the Planning Commission Stub Road Policy, Which suggests that traffic volumes on those streets should not. exceed an acceptable level of 1,500 vehicles per day. In accordance with the Stub ROad Policy, residential collector streets may be required through parts of the.property,-SpeCific recommendations regarding the need for these residential collectOr streets will be addressed at time of tentative subdivision plan review. The traffic impact of this development must be addressed. The applicant-has proffered that: 1) if direct access is provided to Nash Road, left and right turn lanes along Nash Road will be constructed at the apprOved access, based on TransportatiOn Department standards, and Nash Road will be widen/improved along the east'side to an eleven (11) foOt'wide'traVel lane'with an additional one (1) foot wide paved shoulder plus a seVen (7) foot wide'unpaved shoulder, and overlayed with asphalt thefull width of the road for the entire property frontage; and 2) if direct access is provided to Eastfair Drive, left and right turn lanes along.Easffair Drive will be construct at each .approved accesS, based on Transportation Department standards (Proffered Conditions 3.b.and 3.c.). Both left and right turn lanes are anticipated to be warranted' along Nash'Road and alOng. Eastfak.'Drive. · " The developer will' probably need to. acqUire"0ff-Site" right-of-Way to. construct the road improvements along Nash Road; According to Proffered Condition 3.b., if the developer needs off-site right-of-way and is unable to' acquire it, the developer may request the County to acquire'the right-of-way as a public road improvement. All costs assOciated withthe acquisitionwill be borne by the developer. If the. County chooses not to assist with the right- of-way acquisition, the' developer will not be'6bligated to acquire the off-site right-of-Way, and will only be obligated to construct rOad improvements within-the available tight'of-way. (Proffered Condition 3.b.) Most' area roads in this part of the County'have little or no shoulders with p0or 'vertical- and horizontal aligiunents.' The roads need to-be improved to address Safety'andaccommodate the increase'in'traffic generated by this deC~elOpment. Nash Road and Beach Road will be directly 10 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS impacted by this development. Sections'ofNash Road range from eighteen and a half (18.5) to twenty (20) feet wide pavement withno shOulders, fixed objects adjacent to the edge of the pavement, and sUbstandard vertical and horizontal alignments. This road is at capacity (Level of Service E)'for the volume of traffic it currently carries (7,915 VPD). Sections of Beach Road have twenty-four (24)foot wide pavement With two (2) foot wide shoulders and substandard vertical and horizontal alignments, The current volUme 0ftraftic (14,354 VPD) on that section of Nash Road.exceeds the'caPacity of the road (Level of serVice F). The only road improvement project in this part of the County included in the Secondary' Road Six- Year Improvement Plan is the reconstruction of Nash-Road as a two-lane road from Applewhite Lane to First Branch Boulevard, currently scheduled to begin cOnstruCtiOn in Summer 2008. The applicant has proffered a contribution toWards improvements to area roads (Proffered- Condition 3.e.). The road improvements will be provided within Traffic Shed 17 or for road improvements that provide relief to that Traffic Shed. The money could be usedtowards mad improvements such as the reconstruction °fNash Road or an extension.ofNash Road ('Hash Road Extended") from Beach Road to Iron Bridge Road (Route 10), Proffered Condition 3.e. requires the developer, to pay: :1) the. initial sUm of $40.0,000 and anOther $400,000 each year thereafter~ until these cUmulative payments equal to $2,000,000, or 2) the sUm of $9,522 multiplied by the total nUmber of lots in each Subdivisionsectionthat is recorded. The applicant will pay the one of these two options that provides a greater dollar mount to the County each year; however, the total amount paid by the applicant will not be less'than $2,000,000. Proffered Condition 3.e. allowS, at the approval of the Transportation DePartment, the payments to be reduced, if the applicant constructs an extension of Nash Road from Beach Road to Route 10. As development continues in this part of the. County, traffic volUmes on area roads will substantially increase. Additional funds will need to be identified to cover the cost of the improvements needed to accommodate the traffic increases. At time of tentative subdivision, specific recommendations will be provided regarding, among other things, access and the internal street network. 11 04SN0182-NOV23~BOS Financial Impact on Capital Facilities: . .. . PER UNIT Potential Number of New DWelling Units .' " .'t80' ' ' . 1.00 Population Increase . 489.60 2.72 Number of New Students ... . Elementary ~ 43220 · 0.24 Middle ' ' 23~40 : . 0.13 High . · 30.60 - 0.17 TOTAL - - . . 97.20 . .54 Net Cost for Schools ' 872,460 '4,847 Net Cost for Parks . 124;740-! ' 693 Net Cost for Libraries · .. 67,500 .: . ~ .. ' 375 Net Cost for Fire Stations · '72;180- ': 401 Average Net Costfor Roads - . · ~- 739;620 " ' 4,109 TOTAL NET COST · · 1,876;500 ' : 10,425 * Based on an average actual yield of 0.41- units per acre.. Actual number of lots and correspOnding impact may vary. ' ' As noted, this proposed development will haVe an impact on capital:facilities. Staffhas calculated the fiscal impact of every new dwelling unit on Schools, roads, parks, libraries~ andfire stations at $10,425 per unit. The applicant has been advised that a maximum proffer of $9,522 per unit-woUld defray the cost o f the capital facilities necessitated by this proposed development. The a pp !ieant h~ offered, a Transportation ContributiOn to help offset the impactof~s request'on roads, but has not profferedto address the impactof thisreqUest on other cal~ital facilities ~r°fferedcondition 3~?0. Note that circumstances relevant to-this case, as presented by the applicant? have been reviewed and it' has been determined that it is appropriate to accept'the :maximum leash prOffer in this case.: The applicant has offered cash in the mount of $9,522 per unit; Payablein either periodic $400;000 lump sum amounts or on a per unit basis, to assist in ·defraying'the cost:of this proposed zoning .on the road infrastmcture. While the Transportation Contribution is:equivalent in dollar valueto What would be appropriate to accept in this Case had the apPliCantmadea cashproffer under the County;s Policy, the rem~g proffered conditions fail to addresS the impact of this request On sChobls, parks, libraries, and fire stations. Accordingly, the County's ability to. provide adequate-facilities to'its citizenS will be adversely impacted. Staffrecommends that the aPl~licant fully address, the imPactOf this development on capital :facilities. 12 04SN0182=NOV23-BOS The Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, through their consideration of this request, may determine that there are unique circumstances relative to this case that may justify acceptance of proffers below the Value of the maximum acceptable amount. LAND USE Comprehensive Plan: Lies within the boundaries of the Southern and Western Area Plan which suggests the property is appropriate for residential use of 1 to 5 acre lots, suited for Residential (R-88) zoning. - Following the adoption ofthe Southern and Western AreaPlan, staffconsistently interpreted the area designated on the Plan as "appropriate for residential use of 1 to 5 acre lots, Suited for Residential (R-88) zoning" to support Residential (R~25) and Residential (R-40)zoning provided the overall denSity of a particular development did not exceed 0.5 dwelling units per acre as requiredin the-'Ordinance standards for Residential (R-88) zoning districts. This interpretation continued until direction was prOvided bythe Board of SUPervisors through their review and approval ofrezoning cases in 2002.that the above designation was intended to suggest Residential (R-88) zoning, not alternatiVe zoning distfictSthat may proVide for residential use on one (1) tofive (5) acre lots. Since theBOard's direction, Staff has consistently recommended Residential (R,88) zoning within these areas of the Plan. The Residential (R-25) and Residential (R-40) zoning districts..Provide 'atypiCal ~subUrban residential design rather than the rural preservation design that WOuld be accomplished through Residential (R-88) zoning, as'recommended'by~the Pl.an. Area Development Trends: Properties adjacent to the north-, and generally west of the. request property are. zoned Agricultural (A) and are occupied.by large-lot single family residential uses.. Propertiesto the South are zoned Residential (R-25).and are occupied'bY single family residential use within the. Highlands'Subdivision;: Properties to the east:are zoned Agricultural. and Heavy Industrial (1-3) and are occupied bY industrial uses (landfill)' orare vacant.' It is anticipated that larger-lot residential development will continue in'the area generally north, south-and west of the request property on prOperties ZOned Residential (R-88) as recommended bY the Plan or on properties where amral conservation design, intended'to Protect.the-rural character of the area as.recommended by the Plan, is emplOye& 'It is anticipated that areas-to the east will continue to develop for industrial use, as recommended'by- the Central Area Plan. Use Limitations: Proffered Condition 6.(a) precludes manufactured homes.. The Ordinance also precludes manufactured homes in residential zoning districts. The prOffered conditionhas been offered in anticipation of a potential State law change, which may require localities'to allow 13 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS manufactured homes in residential districts. If the State law is amended, depending upon the adopted language, the proffered condition may not be enforceable in the future. Restrictive Covenants: Proffered Condition 5 provides that certain restrictive covenants will be recorded in conjunction with the recordation of any subdivision plat for the Property which will sUbject the proposed developments to the restrictive covenants of the Highlands Subdi¥ision and Proffered Condition'6.(b) provides that a.restfictive covenant will be recorded which precludes manufactured homes. The County Will only insure the recordation of the covenants and' will not be responsible for their enforcement. Once covenants are 'recorded, they can be changed. Enforcement of Proffered Condition 5 would be easier-to administer if the proffer outlined specifically the exact covenants to be.recorded. CONCLUSIONS' While a proffered condition maintains a conservation area along Swift Creek as suggested bythe Southern and Western Area Plan, the request f~ls to comply with the land use recommendations of the Plan which suggest the subject property is .appropriate for residential use of 1 to 5 acre lots, suited for Residential (R-88) zOning. The intent of the:Plan to protect the' special visual features and rural character of the area will be compromised with the approval of this request: The proposed rezoning will provide a typical suburban residential design rather than the rural preservation design that would be accomplished through ReSidential (R-88)'zoning, as recOmmended by the Plan. Further, while 'the applicant has offered a contribution (Proffered Condition .3.e.) to assist in defraying the cost of this proposed development on road infrastmcture'within the Traffic Shed, the remaining proffered conditions do not adequately mitigate the impact of this development on other capital facilitieS, as outlined in the Zoning'Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.- Specifically, the need for schOols, parks, libraries, fire stations and transportation facilities is .identified in the County?s adopted Public Facilities Plan,-the Capital Improvement Program and the Thoroughfare Plan and the impact of this development is discussed herein. The proffered condition varies from that which has consistently been accepted in accordance with'the Board of Supervisors' Policy. While equivalent in dollar value to what would be appropriate.to accept in this case :had the applicant made a cash proffer under the County's policy, the remaining proffered conditions failto address the impact of this requeSt on schools, parks, libraries and fire statiOns. Therefore, 'the proffered conditions do not adequately mitigate the impact on capital facilities and thereby does not assure that adequate service levels are maintained as necessary to protect-the health, safetY and welfare of County citizens. Given these considerations, denial of this request is recommended. 14 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS - CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (6/15/04): At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their September 21, 2004, public hearing. Staff (6/16/04): The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information must be submitted no later than July 19, 2004, for consideration at the Commission's September 21, 2004, public hearing. Also, the applicant was'advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must be paid. prior to the Commission's public heating. Applicant .(6/25/04): The $250,00 deferral fee was paid. Staff (9/1/04): No new or revised information has been received. AppliCant (9/21/04): The applicant amended the application to change the applicant and .agent'and submitted revised and additional prOffered conditions.. Planning Commission Meeting (9/21/04): At the request of the applicant; the Commission deferred this Case to.their October 19, 2004, public heating. Staff (9/22/04): The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or reVised information must be subrm'tted no later than September 27, 2004, for consideration at the' Commission's October 15 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS 19,. 2004, public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a $500.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the CommisSion's public hearing.. Staff (9/27/04): . No new or revised information has been received.' Applicant (10/6, 10/7 & 10/8/2004): . Drafts of new and revised proffered conditions were. submitted for staff comment. Applicant (10/11/04): . New and revised proffered conditions were submitted: Staff (10/11/04): To date, the $500.00 deferral fee has not been paid. Applicant (10/12/04): An additional proffered condition was submitted: Applicant (10/18/04): A proffered condition was with&am and an additional proffered condition was submitted, Planning Commission Meeting (10/19/04): The applicant did not accept staff's'recommendation. Citizens spoke in favor of and in'opposition to the request. ~The Presidem of the Highlands Homeowner' s Association expressed support for the request and recognized those present in support of the request. He noted that Nash Road is dangerous and congested and Provided that the Transportation contribution is an innovative way to proVide forthe needed rOad improvements2 16 ' 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS Citizens who opposed the request expressed that the request does ~ot comply with the Comprehensive Plan; that the proffered 'conditions do not address the impact of-the development on schOols, parks, libraries, and fire and emergency medical services; that the County continues to fall behind in providing infrastructure due to over development; and that the development should be delayed until infrastructure improvements are complete. In addition, a citizen suggested that the proposed Nash Road Extension may not solve congestion problems at Beach Road due to high volume of traffic on Beach Road. In response to questions from the Commission, the Director. of Transportation stated that the contribution does not guarantee the construction of Nash Road Extended and will not cover the entire cost of the road and while he believes the proposed road is a better resolution to the area congestion than improvements to Beach Road, the final decision whether to construct the road or other improvements will be made by the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Wilson stated he is concerned about the impact on area schools but believes the pending bond referendum will provide funding to schools, and that the Transportation contribution offers a unique resolution to area transportation issues: Mr. Gulley provided that dUe to the proximity to the existing Highlands development, he is not concerned that the proposed R40 zoning does not comply with the Plan. He added that he would like for the applicant to. proffer that Nash Road Extended will be constructed. Mr. Gecker expressed concerns that the.proposed development is. premature and that the Transportation Contribution will not cover the construction costs when the road is built. Further, he noted his concerns with the impact of the'proposed deVelopment on schools. It was the consensus of staff, the applicant and the Commission that Proffered Condition 3.e. should be modified to clarify the minimum transportation contribution offered. On motion of Mr. Litton, seconded by Mr. Bass, the Commission recommend-approVal and acceptance of the proffered conditions on pages 2'through 6 with Proffered Condition 3 modified as discussed. AYES: Messrs. Litton, Wilson, Gulley and Bass. NAY: Mr. Gecker. Applicant (10/27/04): Revised Proffered Condition 3, as per the agreement at the Planning Commission Meeting, was submitted. The Board of Supervisors, on Tuesday, November 23, 2004, beginning at'7:00 p~m.,'will take under consideration this request. 17 04SN0182-NOV23-BOS o · · o I I