95SN0123~'~.~ ~ 1 nh4
November 22, 1994 BS
REQUEST AN~YSIS
AND
RECOMMYmNDATION
95SN0123
DuVal Development/William DuVal
Bermuda Magisterial District
Off the southern terminus of Cedar Lane
and the south line of Osborne Road
REQUEST:
Rezoning from Agricultural (A), Residential (R-15) and Residential Townhouse
(R-TH) to Residential (R-12) of 41.9 acres, and from Residential Townhouse (R-
TI-I) to Community Business (C-3) of 5.8 acres.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
A single family residential subdivision, with a minimum lot size of 12,000 square
feet, is planned on that portion of the property for which R-12 zoning is
requested. The remainder of the property, for which C-3 zoning is requested,
could be developed for any permitted or restricted C-3 use.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON
PAGES 2 AND 3.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend approval for the following reasons:
Ao
The proposed zoning and land uses conform to the Chester Village Plan, which
designates that portion of the property for which R-12 zoning is requested for
residential use of 1.01 to 8.0 units per acre, and the remainder of the property for
general commercial use.
The proposed zoning and land use conform to existing and anticipated area
residential and commercial development patterns.
(NO~:
Ao
THE ONLY CONDITION THAT MAY BE IMPOSED IS A BUFFER
CONDrrION. THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY PROFFER OTHER
CONDITIONS.
Bo
THE COUNTY ¥,rILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ENFORCING
THE RP_~TRICTIVE COVENANTS IN PROFFERED CONDITION 3,
ONLY THAT THEY BE RECORDED. ONCE THE COVENANTS
ARE RECORDED, THEY MAY BE AMENDED AS PROVIDED FOR
IN THE COVENANTS.
THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" vqE~ AGREED
UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS
WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOM/ViENDED SOLELY BY
STAFF. CONDITIONS %WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL
CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION.)
PROFFERF]3 CONDITIONS - R-12 AND C-3 TRACT
(STAFF/CPC)
1. Public water and sewer shall be used.
(STAFF/CPC) 2.
With the exception of timbering to remove dead or diseased trees
which has been approved by the Virginia State Department of
Forestry, there shall be no timbering until a land disturbance
permit has been obtained from the Environmental Engineering
Department.
PROFFERED CoNDm0N$ - R- 12
(STAFF/CPC) 3.
The following declaration of restrictions shall be recorded in
conjunction with the recordation of any subdivision plat:
The foundation of all residences shall be constructed of
brick only on all exposed exterior walls.
All residences shall conform to a Colonial or Traditional
Architectural style.
No one-story residence shall be built on a lot adjacent to
another one-story residence.
No fence shall be permitted between the residence and the
street line. Split rail fences or other wooden fences may be
built between the rear of the house and the real lot line.
The split rail fences may be backed with wire to provide
animal retention. No metal or chain-link fence shall be
2
95SN0123/WP/NOV22H
(STAFF/CPC) 4.
(STAFF/CPC) 5.
(STAFF/CPC) 6.
(STAFF/CPC) 7.
Location:
Where possible, except for the physical house site and 20
feet adjacent, no trees with a diameter of six (6) inches or
more, measured two (2) feet from the ground, may be
cleared from any lot. Smaller trees and brush may be
cleared at the Builder's discretion.
The minimum gross square footage for homes shall be 1600 square
feet of heated livable space, exclusive of garages and porches.
(NOTE: The term "livable" shall not require the space to be
"finished. ~)
All lots abutting the northern property line shall conform to the
Residential (R-15) requirements.
~U property owners adjacent to the entire property shall be mailed
notices by the owner/developer of tentative subdivision plan
submission to Chesterfield County. Prior to tentative subdivision
plan approval, the owner/developer shall provide the Planning
Department with evidence of such mailings.
The total number of lots shall riot exceed ninety-nine (99).
GENERAL INFORMATION
Off southern terminus of Cedar Lane and the south line of Osborne Road.
13 (1) Part of Parcel 8 and Tax Map 116-1 (I) Parcel 8 (Sheet 32).
Existing Zoning:
R-15 and R-TH with Conditional Use Planned Development and A
Size:
Tax Map 98-
47.7 acres
Existing Land Use:
Single family residential or vacant
3 95SN0123/WP/NOV22H
Adjacent Zoning & Land Use:
North - R-15 and C-5; Single family residential or vacant
South - A and R-7; Single family residential or vacant
East - C-3, and C-5 with Conditional Use; Commercial or vacant
West - R-15; Single family residential
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Utilities:
Public Water System
There is a sixteen (16) inch water main along Perdue Avenue, a twenty-four (24) inch
main along the east side of Jefferson Davis Highway, and an eight (8) inch main along
the west side of Jefferson Davis Highway, approximately 500 feet from the eastern
property line of the request site. The applicant has proffered the use of the public water
system (Proffered Condition 1). The results of a computer simulated fire flow test
indicate sufficient flow and pressure should be available to meet the domestic and fire
flow needs of the proposed use.
Public Wastewater System
There is a twelve (12) inch wastewater line crossing Jefferson Davis Highway,
approximately 450 feet from the eastern property line of the request site. Extension of
the twelve (12) inch line must be designed to allow future service to properties southwest
of the request site. The request site lies within the "Route 1/301 Sewer Assessment
District". Annual assessments for properties within the district began in June 1991. To
date, no payments have been received on the request site. At the time of property
ownership transfer, the current owner will be required to either pay all applicable
assessments both past and future, or pay all overdue assessments up to the time of
ownership transfer, and transfer the responsibility for all remaining assessments to the
new owner. The applicant has proffered the use of the public wastewater system
(Proffered Condition 1). The results of a computer simulated hydraulic analysis indicate
that sufficient capacity should be available to accommodate the domestic flows of the
proposed use.
Environmental:
Drainage and Erosion
The majority of the request property drains east, into a wetlands area adjacent to
Jefferson Davis Highway, then to Red Water Creek and ultimately to the James River.
4
95 SN0123/WP/NOV22H
The southernmost portion of the property is located within a floodplain that might contain
additional wetlands. No existing or anticipated on- or off-site drainage or erosion
problems. Off-site easements and drainage improvements may be required due to
increased runoff generated by the proposed development. Development must conform
to the Chesapeake Bay Act relative to wetlands and other matters of water quality. To
insure that proper erosion control devices are in place prior to any land clearing activity,
the applicant has proffered that there will be no timbering of the property until a land
disturbance permit has been issued. (Proffered Condition 2)
Fire Service:
Dutch Gap Fire Station, Company #14. County water flows and fire hydrants must be
provided for fire protection purposes in compliance with nationally recognized standards
(i.e., National fire Protection Association and Insurance Services Office).
Fiscal Impacts:
The number of lots that will be developed under the proposed zoning amendment is less
than the number of lots that could be developed under the existing zoning. Based upon
an existing Master Plan, 221 units could be developed under existing zoning while a total
of ninety-me (99) units is proposed. Consequently,. the proposed zoning and land use
will not have a fiscal impact on capital facilities.
Schools:
The proposal would reduce the overall number of lots that could be developed on the
property from approximately 221 to ninety-nine (99); thereby reducing the total number
of school age children which could be generated by the development.
Approximately fifty-seven (57) school age children will be generated by this
development. The site lies in the Curtis Elementary School attendance zone: capacity -
695, enrollment - 798; Chester Middle School zone: capacity - 720, enrollment - 916;
and Thomas Dale High School zone: capacity - 1,325, enrollment - 1,492.
Transportation:
The proposed C-3 portion of this request must be provided with access to Jefferson Davis
Highway through adjacent property to the east, which lies within the Jefferson Davis
Highway Enterprise Zone. Based on the Board of Supervisors' policy regarding
development within the Enterprise Zone, road improvements will not be required.
Development of the proposed C-3 property must adhere to the Zoning Ordinance relative
to access and internal circulation (Article 7). As noted herein, access to this part of the
property must be provided through adjacent property to Jefferson Davis Highway. Due
to the vertical alignment of lefferson Davis Highway in this area, sight distance is
5 95SN0123/WP/NOV22H
limited. Selection of an acceptable access location will be limited based on available
sight distance.
Access to the proposed R-12 portion of this request can be provided via Cedar Lane and
Perdue Avenue. Perdue Avenue intersects Osborne Road at two (2) locations. Part of
Perdue Avenue from its westernmost intersection with Osborne Road eastward is not in
the State Secondary System. In order for this development to use the western portion
of Perdue Avenue, this road must be brought into the State System, and the westernmost
intersection of Perdue Avenue, with Osborne Road, must be realigned with Shady Lane.
An approximate 1.4 acre adjacent agriculturally zoned parcel is surrounded by proposed
R-12 zoning request, but is not included in this request. In developing the proposed
residential property, public road access must be provided to the 1.4 acre parcel
LAND ~ISE
General Plan:
Lies within the boundaries of the Chester Village Plan, which designates the majority of
the property for residential use of 1.01 to 8.0 units per acre, and the easternmost portion
of the property for general commercial use.
Area Development Trends:
Development to the north, south and west is characterized by residential zoning and land
uses. Properties to the east, northeast and southeast are zoned agriculturally and
commercially and are developed commercially or remain vacant. The request property
surrounds an agriculturally zoned property occupied by a single family residence, which
has an access easement across the request property to Osborne Road.
Zoning History:
On February 25, 1981, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation by
the Planning Commission, rezoned the majority of the request property plus property to
the north, between Osborne Road, Perdue Avenue and Cedar Lane, from Agricultural
(A) and Residential (R-15) to Residential Townhouse (R-TIt), Residential (R-15) and
Office Business (O), with Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 80S129), subject
to conditions that were designed to address land use compatibility issues. A single family
and townhouse residential complex was planned, with an office use permitted on the
Office Business (O) tract. Subsequent to this rezoning, a portion of the property was
developed as Warfield Estates, a single family subdivision; however, the majority of the
property has remained vacant.
6
95SN0123/WP/NOV22H
Site Design:
The proposed C-3 portion of the request property lies within the Jefferson Davis
Highway Post Development Area. New construction 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.
The proposed R-12 portion of the property must be developed in accordance with the
requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. Further, the applicant has
agreed that all lots abutting the northern property line will conform to Residential (R-15)
requirements to insure compatibility with adjacent development. (Proffered Condition
5)
The applicant has also agreed to notify adjacent property owners of subdivision plan
submission. (Ih:offered Condition 6)
Architectural Treatment:
Within Post Development Areas, no building exterior located on the C-3 U'act which
would be visible to public rights of way can be constructed of unadorned concrete, block
or corrugated and/or sheet metal. Mechanical eqtiipment, whether ground-level or
rooftop, must be shielded and screened from public rights of way. New construction on
the proposed C-3 portion of the request property must adhere to Post Development
requirements. In the residential tract, the applicant has agreed that the minimum house
size will be 1,600 square feet (Proffered Condition 4). Further, the applicant has agreed
to record restrictive covenants which address architectural style (Proffered Condition 3).
It should be noted that the County will not be responsible for enforcing restrictive
covenants.
Buffers & Screening:
The Zoning Ordinance requires that solid waste storage areas (i.e., dumpsters, garbage
cans, trash compactors, etc.) located on the proposed C-3 position of the property 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 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
fights of way.
7 95SN0123/WP/NOV22H
With the approval of this request, outside storage would be permitted as a restricted use
on the C-3 portion of the property. Outside storage areas must be screened from view
of adjacent properties which has no such areas and public rights of way. The Zoning
Ordinance requires a minimum seventy-five (75) foot buffer along the western property
boundary of the proposed C-3 zoning, adjacent to the proposed R-12 zoning. At the time
of site plan review, the Planning Commission may modify this buffer if adequate
screening can be provided in a lesser width. In addition, at such time that adjacent
residential property is zoned or utili?ed for a non-residential use, the buffer can be
further reduced or eliminated.
Conclusions:
The proposed zoning and land uses conform to the Chester Village Plan, which
designates the request property for residential use of 1.01 to 8.0 units per acre and
commercial uses. In addition, the proposed zoning and land use conform to existing and
anticipated area residential and commercial development patterns. Therefore, approval
of this request is recommended.
CASE HISTORY
Planning Commission Meeting (8/16/94):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case for thirty (30) days
to allow the applicant to meet with area residents and attempt to address their concerns.
Staff (8/17/94):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information
should be submitted no later than August 23, 1994, for consideration at the
Commission's September 20, 1994, public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that
a $50.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the Commission's September public hearing.
Applicant (8/25/94):
The applicant paid the $50.00 deferral fee.
8
95SN0123/WP/NOV22H
Applicant, Bermuda District Commissioner, Area Residents and Staff (8/23/94):
A meeting was held to discuss the proposal. Concerns were expressed relative to lot
sizes; development density; access; traffic; house sizes; and development standards for
the residential portion of the request. In addition, area residents stated that rezoning the
residential portion of the request to R- 15 would be more in keeping with area zoning and
development patterns. It was agreed that another meeting was needed to reach a
consensus for a compromise that would address these concerns.
Applicant, Bermuda District Commissioner, Area Residents and Staff (8/30/94):
A meeting was held to discuss the proposal. The applicant agreed to submit additional
proffered conditions and/or restrictive covenants to address concerns about lot sizes
adjacent to Warfield Estates and Goyne's Subdivision; density; house sizes; and
development standards for the residential portion of the request property. However, the
applicant continued to express a desire to have R-12 zoning on the entire residential
portion of the request.
Staff (8/31/94):
Staff discussed the submission of additional proffered conditions and/or restrictive
covenants with the applicant's representative. If these conditions or restrictions are
finalized prior to the September public hearing, staff will forward them to the Planning
Commission in an addendum.
Staff has expressed concern about the wording to proffered conditions, as well as the
advisability of incorporating development standards such as fencing and foundation
materials into proffered conditions rather than restrictive covenants. Specifically, such
conditions could be difficult to administer and enforce and, depending on the wording,
difficult to interpret
Applicant (9/9/94):
The applicant submitted additional proffered conditions.
Applicant (9/20/94):
The applicant submitted an additional proffered condition.
9 95SN0123/WP/NOV22I-I
Planning Commission Meeting (9/20/94):
The applicant accepted the recommendation. There was opposition present who
expressed a desire for R-15 zoning versus R-12 zoning.
Mr. Cunningham noted that the proposed zoning would substantially reduce the total
number of dwelling units permitted on the property and, therefore, the impact on schools
would be reduced. He further noted that the applicants had agreed to limit the
development to a total of ninety-nine (99) lots which is substantially less than the number
of lots permitted in an R-12 District. In addition, he noted that the proffered conditions
require lot sizes of comparable size adjacent to area development to the north.
On motion of Mr. Cunningham, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Commission recommended
approval of this request and acceptance of the proffered conditions on pages 2 and 3.
AYES: Unanimous.
Board of Supervisors' Meeting (10/26/94):
At the request of the applicant, the Board deferred this ease for thirty (30) days.
Staff (10/27/94):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information
should be submitted no later than November 7, 1994, for consideration at the Board's
November 22, 1994, public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a $50.00
deferral fee must be paid prior to the Board's November public hearing.
Applicant (11/4/94):
The applicant paid the $50.00 deferral fee.
Staff (11/16/94):
To date, no new information has been received.
The Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, November 22, 1994, beginning at 7:00 p. m., will take
under consideration this request.
10
95SN0123/WP/NOV22H
WARFIELD'
iSNOI23
, R-15 8~ R-TH TO .,R-12
I~R-TH TO "C-3
As a resident of Warfield Estates ! oppose the rezoning being requested by Duvai
Development as per case 95NS0123. I respectfully request the Chesterfield Board of
Supervisors to reject this case and leave the zoning that is currently in place. I would not
object to having the R-TH property rezoned to R-12 as long the proffered conditions that
have been submitted by the developer remain in place.
Name
Address & Phone
il?o
"Tcz~, .- az. r
As a resident of Warfield Estates I oppose the rezoning being requested by Duval
Development as per case 95NS0123. I respectfully request the Chesterfield Board of
Supervisors to reject this case and leave the zoning that is currently in place. I would not
object to having the R-TH property rezoned to R-12 as long the proffered conditions that
have been submitted by the developer remain in place.
Name
Address & Phone
o9"103 P/.:TRD¢~ ~ ~ CH~-~r~R
As a resident of Warfield Estates ! oppose the rezoning being requested by Duvai
Developmeut as per case 95NS0123. i respectfully reqnest the Chesterfield Board of
Supervisors to reject this case and leave the zoning that is currently in place. I would not
object to having the R-TH property rezoned to R-12 as long the proffered conditions that
have been submitted by the developer remain in place.
Nante
Address & Phone
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
Mr. O'Neill stated that people had to realize that times are
changing and young families cannot afford to purchase homes
and the townhcuse is an alternative. He stated that 1.~-,,~he
townhouses sold for $4'4,000 these residents would be
taking care of their properties. Mr. Bookman stated that he
had a development in his area where townhouses were approved,
then changed to single family R-7, and he would much rather
have the townhouses than the 1t-7 development.
Mr. Daniel stated he felt this plan was on the scale of some
of the other best plans in the County.
After further discussion of the matter, it was on motion of
Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. O'Neill, resolved that this
request be approved as recommended by the Planning Commission
for "Plan B" subject To the following conditions:
Mr. Henson stated the Highway Department had reviewed the
plans for the curve on Osborne Road and did not have any
objections. Mr. Goyne indicated his mother would have to
exit from her premises on a right-of-way beside a large tree
which would be dangerous.
Mr. Dodd stated that Chester had not experienced growth like
it had in the past 2 years as other areas in the County had.
He stated that there are certain guidelines which have to be
followed. He stated this development has very low density,
that some of the property is Chester oriented and another
part Petersburg Pike oriented. He stated that the applicant
has been most cooperative in trying to prepare a plan that
would be in the best interest of the area. He stated he
realized this was a very emotional situation but that he
felt the residents were becoming too class conscious. He
stated this development was on par with that of Brandermill
and he felt it was the best plan for the area. tie stated
the townhouses were not rental units but would be individually
owned. There was some discussion regardiqg the access for
the Goyne property and Mr. Balderson stated that during
schematic plan approval, an access off of. the cul-de-sac
could be provided rot without any change in conditions at
this meeting.
Working interpretations of any and all conditions and/or
exceptions to the application shall be made by the Planning
Commission at the request of Community Development, upon
submission review and approval of schematic plans as
required by Section 21-34 (L) (4) c of the Zoning
Ordinance. F~rthermore, the Commission may conditionally
approve schematic plans to ascertain that they will be in
conformance with the approved Master Plan and other
applicable ordinances.
The application form and all exhibits shall be considered
the application and Master Plan. It shall be the policy
of the Planning Commission to interpret the Master Plan,
as a statement of intent and purpose. The Master Plan shall
be modified by the conditions as imposed and approved.
herein and to conditions imposed by schematic plan approval.
'' ~' ' ' · : · · ' · " ~1 .... ' "" .- '.~'-'~.~'~"~ ~ ~/~
3. Approval of the ~aster Plan does not ~mply that ~he County
gives final approval of any particular subdivision road
section.
4. Except,~where expressly referred to herein, approval of ~hts
application does not guarantee that the developer can
build or construct facilities in the future in accordance
with present regulations. If future County standards
are more or less restrictive than those established herein]
the County may require construction to .adhere to the more
restrictive standards.
A copy of any covenants, deed restrictions and amendments
related to homeowner association shall be approved by
Development Review and the County Attorney's Office for
adherence to CounTy Ordinances prior to the recordation
of such documents.
f6.
No uses shall be permitted which would use any water or
sewer system other than the Chesterifeld County public
utility system. Approval of this ~equest does not
obligate the County to extend any water or sewer lines.
Ail extensions and necessary improvement costs shall be
borne by the developer. Prior to construction, water and
sewer plans must be submitted to, and approved by, the
Utilities Department. These plans shall include a
detailed hydraulic analysis of the existing sanitary
sewer lines. (Note: The existing lines may not have the
capacity for the density proposed).
o
The dedication of common open space to any con. unity
association and the improvements therein shalI be
continually reviewed by the Planning Commission throughout
the life of the development in order, that the areas do
not become.a burden at any one time on the lot owners of
Perdue Spring. . ........
The number and location of fire hydrants shall be determined
by the Chesterfield Fire Department. The developer shall bear
the cost of installation for hydrants.
o
Street lighting standards, equipment, maintenance, of other
than .standard County street lighting, shall be provided
by the developer (or his assignees) at his (their)
expense. If the County agrees to pay for street lighting
current, the Board shall first approve the street lighting
plan as to the County's commitment.
10.
A right turn lane shall be provided along Route 1 at the
proposed intersection of the east/west road through the
townhouse project. A profile of Route 1 shall be submitted
to VDH&T to verify that adequate sight distance was provided
at this intersection.
11. Adequate sight distance shall be proVided on Osborne '
Road at the proposed intersection of the north/south
cul-de?sac and at the Perdue Avenue intersection. Perdue
Avenue shall be reconstructed to align With Shady Lane.¥~',~: '~ '~'
(Note: This will require an extensive amount of grading .
on Osborne Road.)
12. An additional lane of pavement and curb an~gutter shall
be installed on Osborne Road from the eastern property
line to Hillside Road.
13.
14.
Individual single family lot access shall be prohibited
to Osborne Road. A twenty-five (25) foot buffer shall be
maintained along the length of the single family
residential property abutting Osborne Road. ~With the
exception of necessary grading for the provision of adequate
sight distance and turn lanes, this buffer shall be
maintained in its natural state. At the time of
schematic (tentative subdivision plan) approval,
additional vegetation may be required.
A public right-of-way shall be dedicated to_the northern
terminus of Rock Hill Road.
15.
A fifty (50) foot buffer shall be maintained between the
Office Business (0) property and the proposed R-15
subdivision. A seventy-five (75) foot buffer shall be
maintained for the remaining length of the R-15 subdivision
and the R-TH area along the eastern boundary adjacent
to the B-3 and B-2 property to the east. A twenty-five
(25) foot buffer shall be maintained around the northern
and western boundaries of the R-TH property except that a
200 foot buffer shall be maintained'along the westernmost
edge of the R-TH property (more specifically, adjacent to
the Williams' property). No buildings, parking or other
facilities shall be permitted within these buffer areas
with the exception of the R-TH access road to Jefferson
Davis Highway which may transverse the eastern buffer. These
buffers shall be planted in accordance with "Guidelines
for Landscaped Buffers."
17.
The structure erected on the Office Business (0) property
shall have a residential appearance. Renderings showing
the materials and colors to be used in construction
shall be submitted to the. Planning Commission for approval
in conjunction with schematic plan review.
All signs for the Office Business (O) property shall be
constructed of wood material, employ subdued colors and
blend with the architectural style of the development.
Signs may be illuminated, but shall not be luminous.
Renderings shall be submitted to Development Review for
· . .' - -' -. . ' ,~, ,,.','~ · ',, · '.'., ",-..":..... ? 'v-. ; :,,.'..,e~, ,,,..,.~.,.,.,,:~.', ,'~..;~..~.,....~;.~.,~.:. ...,...~.
..... '~.- -...- --'.',-,..~.:-,....:,--~, :"- ~.-' ,,.~ -:. -." -- .', . -'. . :,;'..* '. ~ ..~ ~ - ..:-'.: .... ,'.-'-,.~....~--.~.~,,-,~..-~,~.~.---~.-:..,~' ,~"
.~'-.":.,;-' ' '- - ".".-.~ ':":' ~'7",," ',",';-"." ..~.:~`~v`.~.~````~.~`~.`~./~..~`~.::~`~`w~``~;:``~;~`-:~ ;~>.?.,,~'.--*.,.~:.~.,;:,,.-'~.-,:.,J'$,'~rg~.'?:~:~.~.~
-.~.;-.. .,-...~;,;..-.:....., ,~:.~',~f...~.,*.'~:,..:.'......,,...~-... f,,.-:...'.,,~:..,..:'~.. ;:~.:....~.....~;::~.~ ,,,,,? ~..:,~?,:,,...;.,~.%.;,,..;~....--'~.';,.,:,,..~,.,,.~.~..~,.~,:;,,;~
· ::.:- -. · · ., '-'.:.:, ,,.~,~...,; -.-~.' '..... ;~;.,",...'.. ".:.'~.--.,:'- :. ','..'::u -. ~.`~.:`::~.~-..:~``~;~-.~-~`;g~Y~L~*~.~`~;~:::~`~?~.~:~`~`~.`~`~`~-' ,"";'d",
, 18. The east/west co'llector road serving the a
· have a minimum right-of-way width of eight~
eighty (80) foot right-of-way sba1! have
of forty-eight (48) feet of pavement width.;(face~
to facb of curb) and shall be divided, by a
foot raised landscaped median,
19. All R-~15 lots shall be served by public road access,
20.
21.
The grading plan shall take into consideration preserva:ion of
of as much natural vegetation as possible. The grading
plan shall be approved by Development Review in conjunction
.with final subdivision approval·
The townhouses to be constructed shall be similar in
architectural 'style to the renderings submitted with the
application.
22.
24.
Access shall be prohibited to Cedar Lane by a physical
barrier'or Cedar Lane shall be constructed to State
standards and taken into ~he State system.
Townhouses shall have a minimum floor area of 1200 square
feet.
A twenty-five (25) foot buffer shall be maintained along
the west side (rear) of Lots 30 and 31; and along the
south line (rear) of Lots 15 and 16 which lies adjacent
to and to the north of the Williams' property; and along
the south line of Lot 23 and the west line of Lots 20 and
21 and more specifically, along those lots which abut the
north and east line of the Goyne Estate. Within these
buffer areas, there shall be installed a four (4) foot
high landscaped earth berm. Those areas which have existing
vegetation shall not be required to be bermed provided the
existing vegetation and/or supplemental vegetation provides
effective buffering. Also within these buffers, there shall
be installed a combination of the following plants:
Type
Whitepine - Pinus strobus
Dogwood -Cornus florida
Redbud - Cercis canadensis
Skip laurel - prunus laurocerasus
schipkaensis
Waxleaf lucidum - Ligustrum lucidum
Azalea - Azalea indica alba
Initial Height
4' - 5'
3' - 4'
4' - 5'
~artin 1~. er
1-3-86
eoox 17
WAR~'LET. D ESTATES
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVM
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
We feel the best use of this property to
--~ '/'own houses anO 1~-15 single family ........... s F'er the
19~i zonin~ approval. '-'~'~'-
All single family residenc¢o per thc
by i)uV'al ~-~
~ evelopment. -,~- ~ z.r-ec
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
~e~,~ the Pest u~:p o±' *' '~
~Io property
Town ,houses an~i A.-l~, sin~'le family
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
We feel the best use o'f this property -to
_~__ Town houses ano M--15 single family resioences ~er the
1S81 zoning approval.
All single famil? residences r.~-- t h~ ' ''
by DuVal Deveiopmont,.
Address: ll7 ..............g~ . /~C~C~5~_
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
~e,o~ t,~e be~t use of t. hi~ property t,o De
Sip,'~ed -
Addrcsa::
Town houses and i~-15 single family resiaences per the
1981 zoniny~ approval.
All single famil:~ -.,~,~ ' ~.e~-
z eo~m. enu.:~, per the n, rc'.~fers o~fe:red
by DuVal Development.
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuV~
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
We feel the bes't use o2' this property %o be-
Town houses anO 1~-15 sin~.~±e family resiaences per the
1~81 zonin~ approval.
All sin~ie ~ '"' " ' '
by DuVa. i Development.
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuV~
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuV~
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
We feel t~e best use o.*' this pre:perry
Addrc ss:
Town houses and N.-!S sin~lle family r'esictenoc,,a-' } el' t~'!e
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
'rown houses aha~{' -~.~. sin,.lo famii,v reslaences :.ez ....... ~,n,:.~
i~i zonin~ ap~,Poval.
· ~,37 ' "~ ~ '
Add r.c .....
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
....... ,:. C,est use c:=+ this property to be:
.~,~.u~e~_~ ano lb sin~.,le famil:~ resimences per the
Ig%i zc, ninp~ ap~rovai.
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
We feel the best ua;e of' this
Addrczs~ -
Town houses an~ /d-lb oin~',le famii,v resioences [_>er the
i~81 zonin~
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
We feel the "',-- o.+
=el.t use tni&; F-,rc~?ert, y ¢o oc':
Town houses and H-lb sina~,ie family resimences F~er the
I~,~i zoning approvaz.
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuV~
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
We feel t~e best use of this propert7 to
Town iaouses anO R-15 single famit$, resio, ences per tf'~e
1~81 zonin.~ approval.
Allsingle ~.11.~. rco_~nc.e~,~-' ..... per the.
by Dural i)evelopment.
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
Town houses ant:=.~'-i~-.~. sing..lc famii;, res~=,~=.=.~..=,~ per the
~-~ zoning_, approval.
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Of Qee: 804-353.7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
Town houses an~ E-15 single family ~ ,
1981 zonina a~proval.
Addrc~,c:
DuVAL DEVELOPMENT
William B. & Gene H. DuVal
DuVal
P.O. Box 9691
Richmond, Virginia 23228
Office: 804-353-7655
Fax: 804-353-8109
Home: 804-755-7775
We feel t~e best use. of this property to be'
Town houses and id-lb single family resio, ences per the
1981 ~ ' ~
~onln~ approval
All single f~nil¥ residences per t. he ~,ro~fers
by DuVal Development.
Si~ned- - -