81S001 STAFF REPORT
CASE #81S001
ROBERT B. HILDEBRAND
~rch 25, 1981BS
REQUEST: Rezoning from Community Business (B-2) to Agricultural (A). The
applicant has indicated that Agricultural (A) zoning will reduce taxes.
SUBJECT PARCEL: LOCATION, ACREAGE AND USE: Midlothian Magisterial District.
This parcel fronts the north line of Midlothian Turnpike and is located approxi-
mately 950 feet east of the Robious Road intersection. This .7 acre parcel is
presently vacant. Tax Map 17-12 (1) Parcel 30 (Sheet 8).
RECOMMENDATION
Recommend denial for the following reasons:
A. Proposed zoning does not conform to the General Plan 2000.
B. Proposed zoning is contrary to development trends in the area.
C. Proposed zoning is incompatible with the majority of existing area zoning
and land use.
D. Although the applicant may realize an immediate economic benefit from
reduced taxes, the market value of the property could diminish as a result
of downzoning.
ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE:
North - B-2, Vacant
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
East - A, Single family residential use
GENERAL PLAN: Commercial use.
South - A, Single family residential
use or vacant
West - B-2, Vacant
UTILITIES: Public water is located along Route 60. Property lies in the
Powhite Creek sewage drainage area. The closest trunk sewer line is located to
the north of the subject property at the southern edge of the mobile home park
(north of the property). Off-site easements will be necessary in order to
extend these lines.
SOILS, DRAINAGE AND EROSION: Since new construction is not planned, this
portion of the report has been deleted.
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: This zoning change will have no immediate effect
on traffic patterns in the area.
PUBLIC FACILITIES: This parcel is served by Midlothian Fire Station, Company
Number 5. At present, fire fighting capability is adequate.
DISCUSSION: The applicant who resides on the Agricultural (A) property
which is located to the immediate east of the request parcel, has indicated that
downzoning to Agricultural (A) will reduce real estate taxes. The County Assessor
has advised that State Law requires that real estate be assessed at fair
market value and be uniform and equitable with assessments for property in the
same zoning district. The zoning change, as requested, will therefore, change
the class of real estate to be valued. If the zoning change is approved, the
subject property's value will be equalized with the adjacent property on which
the applicant resides. In effect, the zoning change will result in a reduction
in real estate taxes by sixty (60) to seventy (70) percent.
Although the applicant will receive an immediate economic benefit from downzoning,
there are more far reaching financial benefits which should be considered.
Specifically, there is an economic benefit which can be realized either immediately,
or in the future, due to commercial zoning which presently exists on the subject
property. Specifically, the existing zoning should allow the applicant to market
the property at a higher value than an Agricultural (A) classification will permit.
Consideration should therefore be given to the more long term financial aspects.
Beyond the question of financial benefit, consideration should be given to the
appropriateness of Agricultural (A) zoning in the area. The bulk of the property
lying within the area encompassed by the Robious Road and Route 60 intersection
is zoned for commercial use. Within the recent past, commercial development has
occurred with construction of Top Porker Restaurant, People's Bank of Chesterfield
and Robious Hall Shopping Center, which is presently under construction. Given
recent development, it appears that commercial use of the area encompassing the
request parcel is inevitable and appropriate. However, dependent upon the type
of commercial development which occurs on the vacant property in the area,
Community Business (B-2) use may not be appropriate in the future. Therefore,
the applicant should be advised that should commercial zoning be requested at a
later date, a less intense commercial zoning may be more appropriate and
harmonious with future development. By downzoning the property, the applicant
may relinquish his rights to B-2 uses and therefore, the value of the property
may diminish somewhat.
CASE HISTORY
Planning Commission Meeting:
(1/20/81) Mr. Crump stated that the Commission's responsibility is to
consider the appropriateness of zoning based on area land uses and development
trends.
81S001
On a motion of Mr. Crump, seconded by Mr. Williams, it was resolved to recommend
denial of this request.
AYES: Messrs. Howard, Crump, Williams, Currin and Belcher
ABSENT: Mr. O'Neill
Board of Supervisors ~{eeting:
(2/25/81) The Board deferred this case for thirty (30) days to allow the
applicant to consider withdrawal.
The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, March 25, 1981, beginning at 2:00 p.m.,
will take under consideration this request for zoning.
3 81S001
A
R-15