04SN0306-Feb23.pdfISCoYembe~,..-.l-6, 2Of?! CPG
I'~ ...... t...~ 1 I ~,,2~...t ."~Dt~
February 23,. 2005 BS
STAFF'S
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
R ECOMM EN DA TION'
04SN0306
Midlothian Enterprises, Inc.
Dale Magisterial District
Gates Elementary, Salem Middle and Matoaca High School Attendance ?,one
Ot'lI thc southeast terminus of Watm~owI. F15~vay
REQUEST: R.ezoning fi'om A~.cultural (A) to Residential (R-88) with Conditional Use
'Pl~ed Development to ~rn~t exceptions to setback requirements.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
A single 'Ik~ly residential development co:ntainin~ approximmely twenty-five
(25) dweliing units is proposed. Rxcepfions m*e requested to permit building
setbacks to comply wifl: requirements of the Residenti~ (R-40) 1)ist.rict,
PLA~/NG COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
~COMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION AND ACCEPTANCE OF DiE
PROFFERED CONDITK)NS ON PAGES 2 AND 3.
STAFF I~COMMENDATION
Recommend approval for the 'fi3llowing reasons:
A. The proposed zoning and tancl nsc con/bm~s to the .~.9~4.i,...h~!7~!...~....~j!.~.~.~.~r_n...._Ar~-~
Plan which suggests ihe property is appropriate tbr residential usc of I - 5 acre
lots, suited tbr Residential (R-88) zoning.
B. The proposed zoning g~ld land 'use are representative of existing and tmtici.patcd
area development,
1.'~ro:,idm.g :.; t.qRST (.'A:-tOIC[i!. commm:ity ..-.iwcmgh excellence m publi~; scrx.,icu
The setback exceptions would accommodate consistent design standards tbr th.ose
lots which access tt'~rough Woodkmd Pond.
The proffered crmditions adequately address thc impact of this development on
necessary capital facilities, as outlined in tl?..e Zoning Ordinance and
Comprehensive Pkm. Speci.fieally, the need ~r transportalion, schools~ parks,
libraries and fire smlions is identified in the County's adopted Puhlic Facilit:ies
Plan. Thoroughfare Plan and C;apim.11mpJ.'ovcmcnt Pro,ram and the impact of this
developmem is discussed herein. The proffered conditions miligatc the impact on
capital ihcilities, thereby ensuring that adequate service leveis are ,tmintaincd as
necessary to protect thc l:~calth? safety and well:hre of County citizens.
(NOTE: COND[TI'ONS MAY' BE IMPOSED OR. 'THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY PROFFER
CONDITIONS, TtIE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON
BY BOTI-.I STAFF AND THE COMMISSION:. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE
RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE
ADDITtONAf.. CONDITIONS REC'OMMENDED BY THE P'.[,A'NNINO COMMISSION.)
CONDITION
(STA FF/C'PC)
Setbacks for principal bui.[dings and accessoL? structures shall comply
with the requirements of the Residentia[ (R~40) District provided that' such
lots are accessed through the Woodland Pond Subdiv/sima. (P)
PROFFERED CONDITIONS
The Owners-Applicants in this zoning case, pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of the Code of
Virginia (1950 as amended) a~d the Zoning Ordi~mncc of Ches[erfield County, fbr themselves
and their successors or assigns, proffer tltat the dcvelopmtnt of the .properties known as
76.~.-65>-, a9 z-00000 (the "Property") under considerati.on wil! bc
Chesterfield County Tax IDs ' '~ ' - '~" ~
developed according to the Ibtlowing conditions if~ and only it} the rez~)ning requests for R-88
with R-40 Setbacks as set fbrth in the above heading and 'the application filed herein is grm~ted.
In. tl~c event the request .is denied or approved wilh conditkms riot agreed to by the
Applicants, these proffers mid conditions shall be immediately null and void m~d of' no further
fbrce or e£f~ct.
(..S:f.'AIi'.F/CPC;) 1_
Timberi.~g. Except for the ti..tnberi~xg approYed by thc Vi.rgi~tia
State Department of Forest~5' t'or the purpose of removing dead or
diseased trees, there shall be no timbering on the iProperty until a
land distarbancc permit has bccn. obtained from the Environmenmi
Engineering I')epam~.~en.t and the app.ro~%d devices Il.ave bccn
installed, tEE)
(STAI:"F/C.PC) 2,
The applicant, subdivider, or assignee(s)shall pay th.c fbllowit~g to
t.he County of Chesterfield pr/or to the issuance of huilding pem~.it
for infrasm~cture improvements within the service district ~:br the
property:
a. $11,500 per dwelling unfl, if paid prior tn July 1,2005; or
The m~ount apN'o~d 'by 'thc Board of Sttperx, isors not to
exceed Sll,500 per dwelling trail adjusted upward by ~my
increase in the Marshall m~d Swift Building Cost h~dex
between .Inly 1, 2004, and July 1 ot' the fiscal year ia which
the paFment is made if paid atScr Jmm 30, 2005~
In the event the cash pa)~nent is not used fbr the purpose
-for which prof[;cred within 15 years of receipt, the cash
shall he returned in fifll to the payor. (B&M)
GENERAL INFOI'CvlATION
Offlhe somheast terminus of WaterlSbwI Flyway and offthe north line of Nash Road, east
of Eastfair Drive. Tax ID 762-655-7397 (Sheet 25),
Existi~g Zoning:
A
Si ze:
61.4 acres
Existing [,m~d Ii'se:
Vacant
A~iacent Zonin~ and Lm~d Use:
North- R-].5 m~d A; Vacant
South.- A; Single fiqmily residential
East - A: Single family residential or vacant
West - A; Vacant
{'14..~l'~ (lJ 31) 6- FEB 23-BO:.$
UTII,tTIES
Public Wale,' System:
'Fh.cre is an existing twelve (12) inch water line extending along tax,:, northeast boundary of
this site. This linc extends ii'om the cxis'ting sixteen (16) inch water linc along Nash
Road. Use of the public water system is required by County Code.
Public Wastewater
'['he public wastcwatcr system is not available to serve this site. The request site is wilhin
the area designated itbr .R-88 zoning by thc Southern and Western Area Plan and permits
the use of p~vate septic systems. However. the Health Dep~mem must approve the use
ora private septic system..
'Private Septic System:
Prior to recordation of'a subdivision plat, a soils analysis for each lot must be submitted
to the Health Dcpamncnt for review and approval.
ENVI.RONMENTAI~
Drainage and Eros:ion:
The property drains west and eventually into Woodland Pond. There arc cmTcn.tly no om
or off:sim drainage or erosion problems with non anticipated after development. The
property is w, oodcd and should not be thnbcred without first obtaining a land disturbance
permit fi:om the Environment'al Engineering Department, 'lifts will ensure 'that proper
erosion control devices are in place. (Proffered Co:nditio.t~ 2)
PUBLIC FACILITIES
1'he need for fire, school, library, park and n'ansportation ikcilities is identified in the Pub.tic
Facilities PIan, the Thorou~h£are Plan and the ..,.C..,,.a,.p.i!.a!_..'.t_~provement Proaram. This deve!opmcnt
wil.[ have an impact on these t.hcitifies.
Fire Service:
The Public Facilities Plan indicates that fire and emergency medical service (EMS) ca~ls
zu-e expected to increase forty-four (44) to seventy-eight (78) percent by 2022. Six (6)
new' fire/rescue stations are recommended [br construction by 2022 iu the Plan, in
addiIion to thc six new stations, the Pkm also recommends the expansion o'f' five (5)
existing stations. Based on twenty-five (25.) dwciling units, this request will generate
approximately nine (91) calls iht fire mad emergency medical services each. year. The
applicant has addressed Ge impact on fire and EMS. (.Proffered Condition 1 )
4 04 S'N03(i,6. I' ([£152317.05
The Airport Fire. Station, Company Number 15, currently provides fire protection a.~d
emergency medical service. When the property is developed; the number of hydrants,
quantity of water ~eected. for fire protectiom and access requirements will be evaluated
dm'lng the plans review process.
'17o satis~- the requirements of thc Subdivision. Ordinnnce, when the cumulative total of
tots served 'by a local street in a .subdivision exceeds fifty (50), a second public access
road to all .lots must be provided to the development. ~I2xis requirement is to provide
emergency vehicles access. Currently; Waterfowl Flyway, east of" its h~tersection with
Woodland Pond Pm-kway, so,wes a total[ of eighty4wo (82) lots. Between ttae subiect
property and Waterfowl Flyway is a tract of land contaip2ng approximately scven.D"-five
(75) acres whicl~ is currently zoned Residential (R-15). Prior to deveIopnaent, a second
means of public access must be provided to thc subject property or the developer must
obtain an exception to this second access through the tentative subdivision review
process. Currently, thc Subdivision Orclmmace criteria l~br the ~anting of this exception
includes existing severe topo~'aphic, physical or extenuating circumstaaces~ bat not
financial hardship. Unless it could be demonstmte, d that such conditions exist, the Fire
Dcpm'tment would not be supportive of tt.~is exception,
Schools:
Approximately thirteel~ (13) studcms could be generated by' fi~.is development. 'I"hc site
.ties in the Gates Fileme.ntary School attendance zone: capacity - 692, cm'ollme.nl' - 908:
Salem Middle School atte.l.~dance zone: capacity - 953, c~;:rolhnenl - t,129; and M'atoaca
i Iigh School attendance zone: capaci¢' - 1,594, enrollment - 1.4(¢7.
This request will have impact on the cie:mental' and middle schools involved, C:m'rently,
there are nine (.9) trail.ers at GOes Elemen;a'y and ibm'teen (1411 at Salem Middle. The
applicant has agreed to participate in the cost o1" providing for area school needs.
(Proffered Condition.,~,'~
'1 .i',raries:
Consistent with the Board of Supervisors' policy, d~e impact of development ou library
sctw-ices is assessed County-wide. Based on projected population grox~.th, the Pub].ic
iP'acitities Plan identifies a need for additional librao' space tkro~ghout the Cmmty. The
applican.t has addrcssed the impact of this proposed development on Iibra~' tkciti'ties.
(Protlbred Condilion 2)
Pa,'ks and Recreation:
Thc .Public Facilities Plan identifies th.e need for tkree (3) new' regional parks, scv¢l~. (7)
community parks, tw'enty'-nine (129) nek~Jrxborhood parks at',d five (5) comm;mity' centers
by ,;0,;0. In additio.% the ?_[.a...n.. identifies the n.ced for ten (10') new or expanded special
purpose parks to provide water access or preserve and interpret unique recrcationa.,
5 ()48N0396-Fl:3'~23
cultural or environmemal resom*ces.
recreational historic sites.
The Plan also idemifies shortfhlts in n~i'is and
The applicant l'~rk'; offered metksures ,to assist in addressing the impact: of this proposed
development on these Parks and Recreation facilities. (Proffered Condition 2)
Transportation:
The property (161.4 acres) is currently zoned Agricultural (A), and the applicant is
requesting rezoning to Residential (R-88). Based on single-'ihmily trip rates, development
could generate e,pproximatcly 290 ave.rage daily trips. '-1These vehicles wilt initially be
distribmcd thro't~gh streets in Woodland Pond Sulxlivision to Beach. Road which had a
2003 traffic count of 7,723 vehicles per day IlVPD), and to Nash Road which had a 2004
traffic count of 3,693 VPD.
lr~cl.udcd in thc Subdivision Ordinance is 'the Pl.anning Commission's Stub Road Policy.
The Policy suggests that srtbdivision streets anticipated to carry 1,500 VPD or more
should be designed as "no-lot t?ontage" collector roads, Trai'fic generated by this
development will initially t'ra,~:cl along Waterfowl Flyway in Woodland 'Pond
Subdi¥ision.. This street was devetoped prior re the adoption of the Stub Road Policy.
Watcrfowl Flyway had a 2004 tral'fic count of 673 VPD. Between the sub~iect property
a.~d Wa~e~'c~wt Flyway is a tract of t:md (approximately 75 acres) that is currcntfy zo~¢d
Residential (R-I. 5). Based on thc development potential of tl~e 75-acre n'a.ct and
development of thc subiect prope~iy, bnt.h with sole access via Waterfowl FllwYay, the
traffic volmn.e on Watertbwl Fl.yway is anticipated not to exceed tl:e ac. ceptablc
m~bdivision sn'eet volume as defined by the Stub Road t~olicy'.
Area roads need to bc improved to address safety m~d accommodate the increase in traffic
generated bY th.is development. Beth and Nosh Roads x~411 be directly impacted. Sections
of Beach R.oad ba.ve twemy (20) foot wide pavement with no shoulders, to twenty-.lbur
(24) foot wide pavement with two (2) ~_bot wide shoulders. Sections of' Nosh Road range
from eighteen and a hail'(18.5) to twenty (20) tbot wide pavement with ~o shoulders, to
twenty-two (22) l;~ot w/de pavemelrt with six (6) foot ,,vide shoulders. Sections t:~fNash
Road have st~bsmndard vertical and horizontal alignments with obstructions, generally
large trees and high earth banks, Iota'ted close to the edge of pavement. The capacit'i.cs of'
Beach Rottd and Nash. Road (no~1h of Woopeck:er Road) are acceptable (l,evel of Service
D) Ib.r the volume oft~-affic (7,723 m~d 3.693 'V'PD, respectively)they currently carry.
"l'he applicant has also prot'I"ercd to coi~tribut'c, cash, in an mnoum coi~sisrcnt with the
Board of Sc,per¥isors? Policy, towards mitigating the traffic impact ~>f this developm.em
(Profibred Uo~(tition 2). As devel.opment continues in this p~ of the Coumy, traffic
volumes on area roads wilt substantially increase. Cash pro.tl'k~rs alone will not cover tho
cost el: ~e improvcments necdecl to accommodate tile trat'~Ytc i~qcrea.ses. 'No mad
improvement' pro~ects in this part of the count7 ~e included in the
6 I):t S.Ni)306 -?EB23..BOS
Plan, except ibr the two-lane reconstruction of Nash Road from Applewhite Lane to First
Branch Boulevard that is scheduled to begin in Smnmer 2008.
Financial hnpact on C. apital IC'acil'~.t.~"Ns'~ ~.
P}~i:iR UNIT
Pote'ntiat Number of New Dwelling Units 25' 1.00
P0P'~dation incre, ase 68.00 2.72
Number of New Students
EIc. mcntmD- 5.65 0.23
_Middle 3.15 0. t'3
....... .kligh 4.00 0.16
TOTAL 12.80 0.51
'Net ('.os'[ for Schools I38,300 ~.5'~''~- ....
Net Cost ibr Parks 19,725 789
Net Cost for }*'ire Smti. ons 101~5.~ 425
Averaae Net Cost t'br Roads t 09,975 4.399
.................... .
'
'I.'(.)'FAI_~ NET COST
*Based on an ave.rage actual yield of .42 units per
co'rrespo~ding knpact may vary.
acre. Actual number o.t' traits and
The need for schools, parks, lib:ratios, fire smti.ons, and wmasportation facilities in this area is
identified in thc County's adopmd Public Facilities Plan, Thorou2~hlhre Plan, and Adopted Capital
hnprovomenl Progrmn m~d 'further detailed by specific dcparmmnts in tlre applicable section,s of
this reqtmst mnal~sis.
As r~otcd, this proposed development will have an impact on capital, ihcilities. Staff
calculated the fiscal impact of every new dwelling unit on schools, roads, parks, l'ihraries, and
fire stations at. S ll,549 per unit. Thc applicant has been advised that a maximum proJ:t'~r of
S1 t.500 per unit would deft-ay tim cost of the capital facilities necessitated by this proposed
development. Co.nsistent with tl~e Bom-d of Supervisors' policy, and proffers accepted from other
appticants, the applicant has offered cash to assist m cicfrayi..~g l:he cost of this proposed zooming
on such capital facilities. (Profliered Condition 2)
NOte t'hat circumstances relev..:x.qt to this case, as prcsc~tcd by ibc app/i.cant, have }~en reviewed
and it has been determined that il' is a.i_~pmpriate to accept the maximum cash proff;~r in this case.
7 (!4S N (13(16- t:'iI':?,B 2'3.-1:.~OS
LAND 'tiSE
Conmrehensive Plan:
Lies within tb~e bo'~mdaries of the Southern a~d Western Area Plan which suggests the
property is appropriate for residential use of I - 5 acre lots, suited for Residen~iaI (R.-88)
zoning.
Area. I-)eve/opmen~. Trends:
Surromading properties are zoned Agricultm:al (A) and are primarily developed ms single
t.bmily reside, nccs on acreage parcels or are zoned Residential (R.-t5) as par[ oi.' thc
Woodland Pond development and are currently vacant 1i is m~6cipaled tlhat development
in this immediate area ,Mil continue to be on Ire'ge acreage pm'eels or v, dthin large-lot
subdivisions, consistent 'Mth Residential fR,~88) District requirements, as suggested by
the Plan.
Zonimz History:
On October 19, 1989, the Commission acknow'tedgcd thc withdrawal of'a rcq~'~¢'.st t-bt
rczon.ing of thc sub. jec~ prope~:y ~¥om Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-25). (Case
89SN0352)
~i.t.~..P~.~igr~...~.g_.d_.$.2'~_b_.~4ck Exceptions:
The applica.nt proposes to rezone the property to Residential (R-88) which requires that
each lot contain a minimum of 88,000 square feet, except that under certain
circumstances specified in the Ordinance regardi.ng density calculations and open spacc
preservation, d~e minimum lot areas :may be reduced to 65~340 squm'e feet wi'fl~, the use of
one (1) public utiliD' or one (1) acre with the 'use of both public water and sewer,
tn an. efi:brt to develop this property comparable to the existing scc. fions of thc Woodland
Pond Subdivision, thc applicant h~s requested thai the building setbacks ~k~,' pr.i..acipal
strucn.~res on this property be based upon the requirements for the Residential
District. This exception would be appropriate provided that access to this property is
through the Woodland Pond Subdivision. Otherwise, building sctbac, ks should meet thc
Residential (R-88) reqmrements. (Condilion)
CONCLUSIONS
:1'l~e proposed zoning and im~d use conforms to the Southern and Western Area PIm~ which
suggests the prope~xy is appropriate for residential use of 1 - 5 acre lots. suited 1br Residential
(R-88) zoning. Tt'~e proposed zon.in~ and land usc arc. rcprcscutative of cx:isting and ~mticipatcd
area development.
8 04SN P,,?,() 6-
qqae profl;ared conditions address the impacts of this development on ncccssaw capital fhcilities,
as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan..Specifically',. thc necd for roads,
schools, parks, libraries and fire stations is identified, in. 1. he Pnblic Faci].ifies [?'lan, floe
Thorouuhfarc Plan and the Capilal Improvement Program, and the impact of this development is
disct, ssed herein. The proffered conditions adequately mitigate the impact on capital facilities,
thereby insuring adequate service levels arc maintained and protecting thc health? safety and
wel.fare of County citizens.
Given fi~cse considerations, approv.aJ, of this re. quest is recommended.
CASE HISTORY
Planning Commission Meeting (8/17/04):
At the request o-f the applicant, the Commission deterred this case to November t6, 2004.
Staff (gi181041}:
The applicant was advised in v~q'iting that an5' significant new or rt~viscd infbrmation
should be s,.,bmilted no laler than September 13, 2004~ fi')r consideration al the
Commission's November 16, 2004, public meeting. The appli.canl was also advised that
a $250.00 deferral fee was due.
Appticam (8/25/04):
The deferral fTzc was paid.
Staff ( 1
To date, no now inl.bnx~mion has beet~ submitted.
PImming Commission Meeting (t 1/I6/04):
On thei.r own motion, the Commission deferred this case 'to December 13.200.'..'I.
9 0,::~ 3.'.N 0 30 6.-}-'.Ei323.-.t3(..)F
,. tai-I (11, ] 7/04):
The applicant was ~vised i~ w~-irin.g that troy significant, new or revised i,:format.ion
sh.ou/d be subn,..it~cd no later than November 22, 2004. for cousidc, ration at the
Commission's December 13, 2004, public hearing.
Stall' ( 11/23/04):
To date, no new in~brmation or revised int'om~ation has l~en rcc. eivcd.
PJanning Commission Meeting (12;13/I14):
On their own motiom the Commission defizrred this case to January I g, 2004.
Slaff (t 2/14,;04):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised in.lbrmation
should be submitted no la.let thm~ December 20, 2004 for consideration at the
Commission's Januao' 1.8, 2005, public hearing.
Stall' (12/28/04):
To date, no ~cw' intbrmation has been st~bmittcd.
Planning Commission Meeting (.' 1/'I 8./05):
.Fhe applicant accepted the recommendat:ion. 'l"hcre. was no oppositkm prescm.
On motion of Mr. Litton, seconded by Mr. Gecker, th.c Commission recommend~
approval subiect~ ro tl~e proffered co~.~d.itions on pages .~ '~ and 3.
AYES: 't i'nanimous.
The Board of S~per'visors, on \Vednesday, Febrtmry ~:.3. 2005, beginning at 7:00 p.m., will take
under consideration lhis request.
1 {} 0.q. SN 03064F].5}B2 ~-'BO'~