Loading...
95SN0161 ...... - October 20, 1994 CPC No\'ember 15, 1994 CPC No'.'ember 22, 1994 BS December 14, 1994 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 95SN0161 C & R Realty, L.P, and Gray Loblolly Co., L.P. Matoaca Magisterial District South line of Ivy Mill Road REOUEST: Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-88) of 2,170 acres with Conditional Use on fifteen (15) acres of this property to permit private recreational facilities. PROPOSED LAND USE: A single family residential subdivision and community recreational facilities is planned. In addition, the applicant is proposing to dedicate and to reserve for purchase by, Chesterfield County a total of 210 acres for public facility use. (NOTE: THE ENCLOSED PROFFERED CONDITIONS WERE NOT SUBMITTED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE BOARD'S POLICY RELATIVE TO TIMING OF SUBMISSION PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. THEREFORE, IF THE BOARD WISHES TO CONSIDER THE AMENDED APPLICATION AND REVISED PROFFERS, IT WILL BE NECESSARY FOR THE BOARD TO AMEND THEIR RULES OF PROCEDURE.) PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS ON PAGE 3 AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON PAGES 3 THROUGH 8. (NOTE: SINCE THE COMlVßSSION'S CONSIDERATION OF THE REQUEST, THE CONDITIONS AND PROFFERED CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN MODIFIED TO DELETE ALL REFERENCES TO A GOLF COURSE AND AN ADDITIONAL PROFFERED CONDITION SUBMITTED TO INSURE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS BETWEEN PARCELS A AND B.) STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend denial for the following reasons: A. The proposed zoning and land uses do not conform to the Southern and Western Area Plan, which designates the request property and surrounding area for rural conservation area uses until such time that adequate provisions are made for public facilities, to ensure orderly area development and cost effective extensions of utilities. B. The Plan notes that the request property and surrounding area would be appropriate for residential use of 1.01 to 2.5 units per acre only if provision is made for public water and wastewater, road improvements and other public facilities. At present, public water is in excess of a mile from the property and public wastewater is not available. As noted in the Utilities section of this "Request Analysis and Recommendation," extension of public water to the property in a manner that ensures water quality meeting State and Federal regulations may be difficult and could be costly for County taxpayers to provide. Further, public wastewater will not be available for the foreseeable future. In addition, as noted in the Fire Service and Schools sections, any subdivision developed on the request property would be located in a relatively isolated and lightly populated area, which makes provision of adequate services difficult and costly. Addressing the service needs of future residents could require the spending of limited County resources on facilities that would be under-utilized. Given these considerations, the applicant's proposal violates the stated goal of the Plan, which is to insure that development occurs in an orderly manner with adequate and cost effective public facilities. C. The applicant has failed to address the utilities, schools, and other capital facilities impacts as outlined herein. However should the Board of Supervisors wish to approve this request, imposition of the following conditions and acceptance of the proffered conditions would be appropriate. (NOTES : A. THE ONLY CONDITION THAT MAY BE IMPOSED ON THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THIS REQUEST IS A BUFFER CONDmON. THE PROPERTY OWNER(S) MAY PROFFER OTHER CONDITIONS ON THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THIS REQUEST. CONDITIONS MAYBE IMPOSED ON THE FIFTEEN (15) ACRES OF RESIDENTIAL ZONING WITH CONDITIONAL USE, OR THE PROPERTY üWNER(S) MA Y PROFFER OTHER CONDITIONS. 2 95SNO 1611WP/DEC 14J - ~ B. 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.) CONDITION - ENTIRE PROPERTY (STAFF/CPC) A 100 foot buffer shall be maintained between any residential lot and any playfields, courts or similar active recreational uses to include, but not necessarily be limited to, swimming pools and boat marina areas. This buffer shall conform to the requirements of Sections 21.1-227 through 21.1-288 of the Zoning Ordinance. (P) CONDITION - FIFTEEN (IS) ACRE CONDITIONAL USE AREA FOR PRIVATE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES (STAFF/CPC) Outdoor public speaker or address systems shall not be used between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m., Sunday through Thursday and 11:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m., Friday and Saturday. (P) PROFFERED CONDITIONS Having had preliminary discussions with most of the County departments concerning this Application, the Applicants in this rezoning case, pursuant to Section 15.1-491.2: I of the Code of Virginia (1950 as amended) for themselves and their successors in interest and/or assigns (excluding the County of Chesterfield) proffer that the development of the property under consideration will be developed according to the following proffers and conditions if, and only if, the rezoning request and Conditional Use is granted. In the event the Rezoning and Conditional Use is denied or approved with conditions not approved by the Applicants, the proffers and conditions shall immediately be null and void and of no further force or effect. (STAFF/CPC) 1. The maximum density of this development shall be 535 single family residential lots. (STAFF/CPC) 2. At the time of recordation of the first subdivision plat, thirty-five (35) feet of right of way on the south side of Ivey Mill Road, measured from the center line of that part of Ivey Mill Road immediately adjacent to the property, shall be dedicated free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of the County of Chesterfield (lithe County"). 3 95SNO 161/WP/DEC 14J (STAPP I CPC) (STAFF/CPC) (STAPF/CPC) (STAFF/CPC) (STAFP/CPC) 7. 3. No individual residential unit shall have direct access to Ivey Mill Road. 4. Additional pavement shall be constructed along Ivey Mill Road at each approved access to provide left and right turn lanes. Any additional right-of-way (or easements) required for these improvements shall be dedicated free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of the County. 5. Prior to any final check plat approval, the following improvements shall be completed or committed as determined by the Transportation Department. A. Construction of a five (5) foot wide shoulder on each side of Ivey Mill Road from its easternmost intersection with River Road west along its existing paved section (total distance approximately O. 9 mile). B. Improvement of Ivey Mill Road to an eighteen (18) foot wide paved road, five (5) foot shoulders and six (6) foot wide ditch sections from its existing paved section west to the northernmost property line. C. Dedication to and for the benefit of the County, free and unrestricted, any additional right-of-way (or easement) required for the improvements identified above. 6. Prior to final check plat approval of more than 236 residential units, the following improvements shall be completed or committed as determined by the Transportation Department. A. Widening of Ivey Mill Road to a twenty (20) foot wide paved road from its easternmost intersection with River Road to the northernmost property line. B. Dedication to and for the benefit of the County, free and unrestricted, any additional right-of-way (or easement) required for the improvement identified above. The Applicants shall pay the following to the County prior to the time of building permit application for infrastructure improvements within the service district for the property: 4 95SNO 161/WP/DEC 14J (STAFF/CPC) (STAFF/CPC) (STAFF/CPC) (STAFF/CPC) - -. A. $5,083 per lot, if paid on or prior to June 30, 1995; or B. The amount approved by the Board of Supervisors not to exceed $5,083 per lot adjusted upward by any increase in the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index between July 1, 1994 and July of the fiscal year in which the payment is made if paid after June 30, 1995. 8. Two Hundred Ten (210) acres shall be reserved for purchase by the County for public facilities as generally shown on the Conceptual Plan. The purchase price shall be Five Hundred Thousand and no/l00 Dollars ($500,000.00) or the Fair Market Value of the 210 acres, at the time of conveyance, whichever amount is the lesser. The reservation, including settlement of said purchase, shall be for a period of one hundred fifty (150) days from the date Rezoning occurs. The 210 acres shall be Parcels A, B and C, as designated on the Conceptual Plan. 9. Upon request by the County, a minimum twenty (20) foot wide easement shall be granted within the development to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle circulation. The exact location and number of easements shall be approved by the Department of Parks and Recreation at the time of the first tentative subdivision or at the time the easements are requested, whichever occurs first. 10. Prior to the release of more than 180 building permits, the Applicants shall be responsible for extending public water to Area A as designated on the Conceptual Plan. 11. Upon request by the County, but no sooner than 150 days after rezoning, the Applicants shall dedicate to and for the benefit of the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted, the right-of-way for the road as generally shown on the Conceptual Plan as the Recreational Access Road. The exact location and width of right- of-way for the Recreational Access Road shall be approved by the County Transportation Department but shall not exceed seventy (70) feet in width plus any additional easements necessary to construct the road. Bonding for the cost to construct this Recreational Access Road shall be provided to the County in conjunction with recordation of any subdivision section that includes access to this road, or as required by Proffered Condition 12, whichever occurs first. 5 95SNO 1611WP /DEC 14J (STAFF/CPC) (STAFF/CPC) (STAFF/CPC) (STAFF I CPC) (STAFF/CPC) 12. In the event that the County constructs part of the Recreational Access Road and the cost for the construction totals at least $350,000, the Applicants shall m conjunction with that construction construct the remaining length of the Recreational Access Road. Upon request by the County, the applicants shall provide a bond or other sureties to the County for their costs of such construction. 13. In the event that the County does not construct the Recreational Access Road, then in that event, the Applicants shall construct and complete said Recreational Access Road to VDOT standards prior to the release of the 237th building permit. Said construction shall extend said road from the southern line of Ivey Mill Road southwardly to the easternmost boundary of Area A as shown on said Conceptual Plan. In the interim, Applicants shall grant the County easement of access to Area A over, upon and across roads currently in existence throughout the project, which easements shall expire upon the construction of said Recreational Access Road. 14. Applicants will pay $150 per month for the water used in the flushing of the water line which will be extended from Saddlebrook Road into the proposed development, said flushing being necessary to maintain and preserve the quality of water supply within the development. These payments shall begin upon the approval of the fIrst final subdivision check plat and continue until the 100th building permit in the development has been issued or until the County advises Applicants that said payments are no longer required, whichever event shall first occur. Applicants shall have the right, subject to review by the County Utility Department, to recapture and use the flushed water within the development in a manner in keeping with health, safety and welfare standards established by the County. 15. With the exception of timbering to remove dead or diseased trees which has been approved by the Virginia Department of Forestry, there shall be no timbering until a land disturbance permit has been obtained from the Environmental Engineering Department and the approved devices installed. 16. Runoff from any stable area or rider's ring shall drain through a BMP. 6 95SN01611WP/DEC14J - - (STAFF/CPC) 17. Any single family dwelling unit on a lot adjacent to Lake Chesdin (Appomattox River Water Authority property) shall have a minimum of 2,800 gross square feet. All other single family dwelling units shall have a minimum of 1,900 gross square feet. (STAFF/CPC) 18. The Applicants shall not seek relief of the mandatory use of the public water system. (STAFF/CPC) 19. If the use of septic tank and drain field systems is approved for the Applicants, there shall be no mass drainfields permitted. (STAFF) 20. Upon request by the County, a minimum twenty (20) foot wide easement shall be granted between Parcels A and B, generally parallel to Lake Chesdin, to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle circulation. The exact location of this easement shall be approved by the Department of Parks and Recreation at the time of the first tentative subdivision or at the time the easement is requested, whichever occurs first. GENERAL INFORMATION Location: South line of Ivey Mill Road, south of River Road. Tax Map 157(1) Parcell; Tax Map 169(1) Parcell; and Tax Map 170(1) Part of Parcel 7 (Sheets 46 and 47). Existing Zoning: A Size: 2, 170 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - A; Single family residential or vacant South - A; Lake Chesdin East - A; Single family residential or vacant West - A; Lake Chesdin 7 95SN0161/WP/DECI4J PUBLIC FACILITIES Utilities: Public Water System The public water system is not available to the request site. The closest existing water line is a sixteen (16) inch line located at Pypers Point Drive (entrance to "Pypers Point" Subdivision) approximately 10,000 feet east of the request site. The use of the public water system is required by County Code under Section 20-43 as the request site is located within the boundaries of the Southern and Western Area Plan. The applicant has agreed not to seek relief of this requirement. (Proffered Condition 18) Because of the distance between the existing water line and the proposed development, the anticipated demands on a line extended to the development will be insufficient to "turn over" the water in the pipe within a reasonable time frame in order to maintain water quality meeting State and Federal requirements. In the absence of an orderly progression of development and extension of public water along River Road and Ivey Mill Road over time, the only acceptable method available to maintain water quality in a long extension would be to install a flushing station on the line before it enters the development. The flushing station would serve to increase the demand through the line by discharging treated water onto the ground. The station would be metered so that the amount of treated water lost at that location could be accounted for. The Utilities Department currently maintains twelve (12) flushing stations throughout the County's water system. While most are located at the end of distribution lines, several are located within a line where two (2) pressure zones meet causing a "dead zone" with very little movement of water. Samples are taken weekly and checked for chlorine residual. Flushing is continuous, and the discharge rate of each station is adjusted as needed to maintain the desired chlorine residual. The Utilities Department's line flushing program was established to comply with the Clean Water Act, and the direct costs must be passed on to our customers. Specifically, the twelve (12) existing flushing stations are located on water lines that were already in service when the Clean Water Act was enacted and were constructed with no anticipation that flushing would be required. Therefore, the costs of flushing these lines cannot be passed on to individuals who developed in areas served by these lines. The opposite is true with this proposed development. Unlike the previously mentioned flushing operations, this request is the first instance in which the requirement to flush a waterline extension is anticipated as a direct result of developing property. Because the proposed development will generate the need to flush the line, the applicant is being asked to reimburse the County for line flushing costs associated with the development. The amount of water lost from the system due to line flushing for the proposed development during the initial phases of construction has been estimated at approximately 8 95SNOI 61/WP/DEC 14J - - 37,960,000 gallons per year. Based upon the rate charged by the Appomattox River Water Authority, the cost of this lost water has been estimated at approximately $18,000 per year, which would far exceed the revenue gained from the customers served during the initial phases of the proposed development. Staff feels that the owner/developer should bear the cost of this lost water since this development falls outside the planned service area reflected in the Southern and Western Area Plan. This payment should continue until such time as the daily water demands of the development and any adjacent development which may subsequently occur are sufficient to cause turnover in the pipe within a reasonable time frame, thereby maintaining water quality at an acceptable level. Staff has discussed this matter with the developer, and the developer has included a proffered condition agreeing to pay $150 per month ($1800 per year) for line flushing until one hundred (100) homes have been constructed (Proffered Condition 14). While Staff appreciates the developers' intention, this proffer provides payment for only three (3) days of line flushing per month although flushing will occur daily. In addition, staff feels that the daily demands of 100 homes may not be sufficient to maintain the desired water quality. Unless the Developer assumes more of a responsibility for payment for the flushing of water, the cost will be borne by the County's existing water customers. Staff is willing to work with the Developer to reach a compromise, but at this point we are not close to an agreement. Public Wastewater System The public wastewater system is not available to the request site. The County's adopted Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan, which serves as a guide to extensions of the public systems to the year 2015, does not project the extension of the public wastewater system into this area. The County's adopted Comprehensive Plan (which includes the Southern and Western Area Plan) and the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan both recommend and project extensions of the public water and wastewater system to occur only as growth progresses outward in an orderly manner from existing service areas (Le., those documents do not support "leapfrog" development). Connection of the proposed development to the public wastewater system would require extensive construction of new trunk lines, pumping stations and force mains through areas now only sparsely developed. In addition, substantial upgrading of existing wastewater facilities all the way to the Proctors Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant would be required. Preliminary estimates project costs into the tens of millions of dollars. The use of the public wastewater system is required by County Code under Section 20.63.1 as the request site is located within those boundaries of the Southern and Western Area Plan where public sewer is required. However, under the provisions of Section 20-63.1, paragraph b, the Planning Commission may, through tentative subdivision review, grant relief from the mandatory connection requirement if it determines that: 9 95SNO 1611WP/DEC 14J I. the use of a septic system will not adversely affect the ability to extend public sewer to other area properties; 2. the use of a septic system will not encourage future area development that is inconsistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan; and 3. the use of a septic system is not reasonably likely to adversely affect the public health, safety or welfare in the future. In granting such relief the Commission may impose conditions to mitigate the impacts of the exception. At the time of first tentative subdivision review, staff will submit comments and recommendations relative to the above criteria. Staff will consider, among other issues, concerns over protection of the Lake Chesdin Reservoir and the potential financial burden that may be borne by existing and future wastewater system customers should connection of the proposed development to the public system ever be necessary, due to failing septic systems. Private Septic Tank and Drainfield Systems County water and wastewater are required for this project by the Southern and Western Area Plan. If an exception to the requirement that County wastewater be used is granted, the applicant's soil scientist must locate drainfield sites and reserve drain field sites on each lot, and such sites must be approved by the Health Department. Further, as discussed herein, if the Southern and Western Area Plan is amended to include this land area within the boundaries of that area designated appropriate for development of one (1) to five (5) acre lots, the County Ordinance would permit use of individual septic tank and drainfield systems with approval by the Health Department. Chesterfield County Ordinance requires that no drainfield be installed within 100 feet of Lake Chesdin which is a public water supply. In order to protect Lake Chesdin, no drainfield easement will be approved. The applicant has proffered that there will be no mass drainfields (proffered Condition 19). All other County and State Ordinances and regulations apply. Also, as noted above, if the Southern and Western Area Plan is amended, the County Ordinance would permit use of individual septic tank and drain field systems with approval of the Health Department. Environmental: Drainage and Erosion Property drains directly into Lake Chesdin. No existing on- or off-site drainage or erosion problems. No anticipated drainage or erosion problems if land disturbance of steep slopes is minimized. 10 95SN01611WP/DEC14J - - - Lake Chesdin, Nooning Creek and Cattle Run are designated as perennial streams. A 100 foot conservation area in accordance with Chesapeake Bay Act requirements must be maintained adjacent to these streams. The applicant has proffered drainage and water quality standards, to address concerns relative to the impact that development on the request property will have on Lake Chesdin (proffered Conditions 15 through 17). It should be noted that due to the language of the proffers, these requirements will not apply to any development undertaken by the County on this property. Fire Service: Phillips Fire Station, Company #13. County water flows and fire hydrants must be provided for fire protection purposes in compliance with national recognized standards (Le., National Fire Protection Association and Insurance Services Office). The proposed development is in an area characterized by a low number of residences. Consequently fire/rescue service to this area is outside the desired six (6) minutes or less response time that the Fire Department attempts to achieve in areas with heavier density. It presently takes the closest fire apparatus over six (6) minutes to respond to the vicinity of the proposed entrance to this development. The closest ambulance is over eleven (11) miles away and would average a response time of approximately thirteen (13) minutes to the entrance. Based on the statistical average for the County, upon build out of 535 lots, 108 fire/rescue calls would be generated each year by this development. These calls for assistance would receive a response time beyond the desired six (6) minute response. Any subdivision developed on the request property should be phased to conform to the Subdivision Ordinance relative to the number of lots permitted on a single access. Specifically, no more than fifty-nine (59) lots should be recorded and no more than fifty (50) building permits should be issued until such time that a second public road access is provided, to ensure emergency vehicle access should one (1) of the roads become blocked. The Fire Department does not intend to agree to any relief to this portion of the Ordinance. Due to the physical location of the property, there is no foreseeable need for a fire/rescue station site within this development. Specifically, its isolation from any existing major roads, as well as projected roads, renders it unsuitable as a site location. It would, therefore, not be the intent of the Fire Department to utilize any of the land which the applicant proposes to reserve for purchase for public facilities. (Proffered Condition 8) 11 95SNO 161/WP/D EC 14J Financial Impact on Capital Facilities: PER UNIT Potential # New Dwelling Units 535* 1.00 Population Increase 1,498 2.8 Number New Students Elementary 156.76 0.29 Middle 71.16 0.13 High 82.39 0.15 Total 310.30 0.58 Net Cost for Schools 1,198,935 2,241 Net Cost for Parks 225,770 422 Net Cost for Libraries 77,0040 144 Net Cost for Fire Stations 110,210 206 Average Net Cost Roads 1,146,505 2,143 Total Net Cost 2,758,460 5,156 (excluding roads) *Based on proffer restricting density to 535 lots. (proffered Condition 1) The proposed zoning and land use will have a fiscal impact on capital facilities. Consistent with the Board of Supervisors' policy, the applicant has offered cash proffers to address the impact of this proposed zoning on such capital facilities. (proffered Condition 7) Schools: Approximately 310 school age children will be generated by this request. This request will have a significant impact upon the Chesterfield County public school system. With respect to the assignment of school attendance zones for any specific development, a final decision will be made only after the first building permit for new construction is received and the need for school services is anticipated. Tentatively, students generated by this development will be assigned to the Matoaca Elementary School attendance zone: capacity - 503, enrollment - 436; Matoaca Middle School zone: capacity - 780, enrollment - 571; and Matoaca High School zone: capacity - 820, enrollment - 690. 12 95SN0161/WP/DEC14J ,- - .- The decision to tentatively assign this area to schools towards the southeast rather than the north is due to the proposed subdivision's large size and far southern location. Traditionally, new subdivisions that are on the border of two existing school attendance areas (as is this proposed area for all three levels - elementary, middle, and high) are tentatively assigned to the schools that would be best capable of handling the impact. Schools to the north of this proposed subdivision currently are at or above program capacity and would be severely impacted by this subdivision. These schools are in need of relief and cannot accommodate a subdivision the size of the request property. The Matoaca schools, however, have room for new growth. In addition, transportation routes to the Matoaca schools would be quicker and more direct than routes to schools to the north. The applicant has offered land for reservation for purchase for public facility use (Proffered Condition 8). There are no projected plans to construct additional school capacity in the vicinity of the request site. The School Administration has indicated that they have no need for land in this area. (see attached letter) Transportation: The applicant has proffered a maximum residential density of 535 lots. (proffered Condition 1) There are several proposed public facilities identified in this rezoning application and the proffered conditions. Total development of this property could generate approximately 6,840 average daily trips (4,840 residential trips, 650 golf course trips, 750 marine/boat launch trips, and 600 County park trips). These vehicles will be distributed to Ivey Mill Road and River Road which had 1994 traffic counts of 243 and 1,430 vehicles per day, respectively. Ivey Mill Road (3.8 miles) is in the State Secondary System. The 0.5 mile section of Ivey Mill Road from its western intersection with River Road and the 0.9 mile section from its eastern intersection with River Road are paved. The remaining 2.4 miles of Ivey Mill Road are unpaved. Ivey Mill Road has inadequate shoulders and ditches. The County has previously received petitions and several other requests from citizens to pave Ivey Mill Road. No funds are identified in the II Six Year Secondary Road Improvement Plan" for improvements to Ivey Mill Road. The Thoroughfare Plan identifies Ivey Mill Road as a collector with a recommended right-of-way width of seventy (70) feet. The applicant has proffered to dedicate thirty- five (35) feet of right-of-way measured from the centerline of Ivey Mill Road for the entire length of the property in accordance with that Plan. (Proffered Condition 2) The Thoroughfare Plan also identifies a North-South and East-West Collector extending from Ivey Mill Road through the subject property. The Thoroughfare Plan was developed based on a build-out scenario of the County in accordance with adopted land use plans. These plans recommend 1.01 to 2.5 units per acre for this property. The 13 95SNO 161/WP/DEC 14J proposed density is only 0.25 units per acre. Therefore, the collectors are no longer needed. In conjunction with the initial phase of this project, the applicant has proffered to construct left and right turn lanes along Ivey Mill Road at each approved access (proffered Condition 4), and to reconstruct Ivey Mill Road from its eastern intersection with River Road to the northern property line (total distance 2.1 miles) to an eighteen (18) foot wide paved road with five (5) foot wide shoulders and six (6) foot ditch sections (proffered Condition 5). Improving Ivey Mill Road will require the developer to acquire "off-site" right-of-way. Prior to development of more than 236 residential lots, the applicant has proffered to increase the width of the paved surface to 20 feet for this same section of Ivey Mill Road. (Proffered Condition 6) If Ivey Mill Road is reconstructed as outlined in the proffered conditions, approximately 1.2 miles of Ivey Mill Road north of the subject property, will still be unpaved. Improvements to this section of Ivey Mill Road should be provided as other properties in this area develop. The Planning Commission's stub road policy requires that subdivision streets anticipated to carry more than 1,500 vehicles per day should be designed and constructed as residential collectors (i.e., "no-lot frontage" roads). Several residential collector roads will be required in conjunction with development of this property. This requirement will be addressed at time of tentative subdivision review. Area roads need to be improved to accommodate increased traffic generated by this development. The applicant has proffered to contribute cash towards "off-site" road improvements in accordance with the Board's policies. (proffered Condition 7). At the time of tentative subdivision review, specific recommendations will be provided regarding the internal street network and required residential collectors, access to Ivey Mill Road, and providing stub road rights of way to adjacent properties. Parks and Recreation: It is the goal of the Chesterfield County Department of Parks and Recreation to provide a special purpose park in the Lake Chesdin area. Program objectives for the park were determined by the County residents. Several sites were considered, encompassing an area along the Appomattox River from the AmelialPowhatan border to the Brasfield Dam. The main program objective for this park is to greatly expand recreational services to County residents by providing public access to Lake Chesdin. There are other general programming objectives to consider. They include the reservation and development of land for recreational and educational uses. 14 95SNO 1611WP/DEC 14J - - .- The applicant proposes to reserve for purchase by the County 210 acres for public facilities (Proffered Condition 8). Parks and Recreation believes the purchase of the property at the price of $500,000 or the fair market value at time of conveyance, whichever amount is less, would be reasonable. It should be noted that securing property in this area has been a difficult process. The Department of Parks and Recreation believes the proffers as they relate to Parks and Recreation issues provide adequate assurances or surety for development of public facilities. (Proffered Conditions 8 through 13 and 20) LAND USE General Plan: Lies within the boundaries of the Southern and Western Area Plan, which designates the request property and surrounding area for rural conservation uses until such time that adequate provisions are made for adequate public facilities to serve the demands of future residents. At the direction of the Planning Commission, staff has prepared an amendment to the Southern and Western Area Plan to designate the request property for residential development on one (1) to five (5) acre lots. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of this amendment and forwarded it to the Board for their consideration. Area Development Trends: Area development is characterized by scattered single family residences on acreage parcels, agricultural uses, Lake Chesdin or large vacant parcels of land. Recreational Facilities: Public and private recreational facilities are proposed within this development. The private facilities could include swimming pools, tennis courts or other recreational facilities primarily for use by residents of the development. Public facilities could include a marina, or other recreational facilities such as playing fields for use by the general public. The recommended conditions will minimize the impact of these facilities on future residents in the development and are similar to conditions imposed on other projects. (Conditions) Dwelling Size: The applicant's proffered conditions address minimum size of dwelling units. (Proffered Condition 17) 15 95SN0161/WP/DEC14J Conclusions: The proposed zoning and land uses do not conform to the Southern and Western Area Plan, which designates the request property and surrounding area for rural conservation area uses until such time that adequate provisions are made for public facilities. The ~ notes that the request property and surrounding area would be appropriate for residential use of 1.01 to 2.5 units per acre only if provision is made for public water and wastewater, road improvements and other public facilities. In this manner, orderly development of the area is achieved in an efficient way which discourages "leapfrog" development and minimizes the cost of providing public facilities in the future. At present, public water and wastewater is not available to the request property. While the applicant proposes to develop a subdivision on public water, the extension of such a line will result in water quality which does not meet State and Federal regulations. In order to provide the development with water quality that meets State and Federal standards, it is anticipated the water line extension must be periodically flushed, at considerable expense to County taxpayers. In addition, the applicant intends to use septic tank and drainfield systems. The adopted Plan recommends orderly growth with the extension of public sewer. In addition, the applicant's proposal to dedicate and reserve land for public facilities conflicts with the Public Facilities Plan element of the adopted Southern and Western Area Plan and the proposed Public Facilities Plan (under consideration by the Planning Commission) which, except for a special purpose park on Lake Chesdin, do not recommend any additional schools, community or regional-level parks, libraries, or fire facilities within several miles of the request property. The proposed zoning and land use is premature and could lead to similar requests on other properties currently designated on the Southern and Western Area Plan for rural conservation use. Approval of this request would have the effect of perpetuating past land use patterns that have led to piecemeal development, with large tracts of land between developments remaining vacant or underdeveloped. One of the stated goals of the adopted Plan is to promote inftll development as a means of establishing an efficient and desirable growth pattern. Such in fill development would also have the effect of minimizing the costs of extending public facilities and maximizing the use of existing facilities. Approval of the current request would defeat the stated purpose of the adopted Plan to encourage infiU development. Given these considerations, denial of this request is recommended. CASE HISTORY Applicant (10/20/94): Revised proffered conditions were submitted. 16 95SNOI611WP/DEC14J - - - Planning Commission Meeting (10/20/94): The Commission instructed staff to prepare a proposed amendment to the Southern and Western Area Plan which would include this land in that area designated appropriate for residential development of one (1) to five (5) acre lots with use of public water and septic tank/drainfield systems. At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case for thirty (30) days. Staff (10/21/94): The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information should be submitted no later than October 27, 1994, for consideration at the Commission's November 15, 1994, public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a $50.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the Commission's November public hearing. Applicant and Staff (10/26/94): A meeting was held to discuss revisions of the proffered conditions. Applicant (11/3/94): The applicant submitted revised proffered conditions in an attempt to address some of the concerns outlined in the "Request Analysis and Recommendation. " Applicant (11/8/94): The applicant submitted revised proffered conditions, as outlined herein. Applicant (1119/94): Minor amendment were made to the proffered conditions submitted on November 8, 1994. To date, the applicant has not paid the $50.00 deferral fee. 17 95SNO 161/WP/DEC 14J Applicant (11110/94): The $50.00 deferral fee was paid. Applicant (11115/94): Revised Proffered Conditions 7, 8 and 21 and new Proffered Conditions 22 and 23 were submitted, as discussed herein. Planning Commission Meeting (11/15/94): The applicant accepted the Planning Commission's recommendation. There was no opposition present. Mr. Marsh noted that this project had been in the planning stages for approximately two (2) years. He stated that this was a unique proposal which provided major benefits to the County. Mr. Marsh indicated that while he took the goals and policies of the Southern and Western Area Plan seriously, this was a unique circumstance which, given the proffers, provided major benefits to the County. Mr. Easter also noted that the concepts of the Plan are important and that the County must insure that services can be provided in a cost efficient manner. He stated that there had been no overriding principal which had been outlined which would lead him to believe that the delineation between the rural conservation area and the area suitable for development was a precise decision. He stated that given the current proposal, the goals and principals of the Plan would not be violated. On motion of Mr. Marsh, seconded by Mr. Gulley, the Commission recommended approval of this request subject to the conditions on page 3 and acceptance of the proffered conditions on pages 3 through 8. AYES: Unanimous. Planning Commission Meeting (11/15/94): The Commission recommended that the Southern and Western Area Plan be amended to include this area within the boundaries of the residential designation suitable for development of one (1) to five (5) acre lots (i.e., R-88 zoning). 18 95SNOI61/WP/DECI4J - .- - Board of Supervisors' Meeting (11/22/94): The Board deferred this case for thirty (30) days to allow the applicant time to revise the proffered conditions to delete the references to a golf course; to allow staff time to prepare a financial analysis; and to allow the School Administration to comment relative to their desires for a school site on this property. Staff (11/23/94): The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information should be submitted no later than November 28, 1994, for consideration at the Board's December public hearing. Applicant (11/29/94): A revised Proffered Condition 7 was submitted. Staff and Applicant's Representative (12/9/94): A meeting was held to discuss revised proffered conditions to delete reference to the golf course. Applicant (12/7/94): Revised proffered conditions, as discussed herein, were submitted. The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, December 14, 1994, beginning at 7:00 p. m., will take under consideration this request. 19 95SN01611WP/DECI4J - COUNTY Þu. \lQ ~(/. -~ (\ tf$ U\ t!! ~ æ 8 -.r. ,... () C'J) ~ 0 o¿~ $' OIl \0\ I')¡;¡ Stud en I' CHESTERFIELD COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Superintendent Thomas R. Fulghum November 28, 1994 Mr. Lane Ramsey, County Administrator Chesterfield County P. O. Box 4û Chesterfield, VA 23832 Dear Lane: I am writing in response to a recent request by Mr. Harry Daniels for a written statement concerning the proposed rezoning case #95SN0161 which includes a single family residential subdivision near Lake Chesdin. After reviewing again the population projections, and the plan for public utilities, it is our conclusion that no school site wil1 be needed in this development and that the interests of the county and school division would be best served by a cash proffer instead of a school site. Thank you. Sincerely, ~ Thomas R. Fulghum S uperintenden t TRF/CKC/pbs ---., ..... Carl K. Chafin Assistant Superintendent I¿,~ ._ , ~~k" ~~~~~ -, Þ6J¡ Z?t.j~;%.- ~ - Q~ 6',;> ~ /\ ~<:i" ~ . .~~ ~ v~¿.. _, '/ : ""'-".;- '" ,/, --~ "f/ ·"~Z-··~/ .....~-... ,I ¡ ~ .'~ cc: /Thomas E. Jacobson Planning Director OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT Post Office Box 10 . Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 (804) 748-1411 · FAX (804) 796-7178 · TOD (804) 748-1638 Equal Opportunity Employer / ( ~. ^ '\ , '. r 1_- "t '\ .....-.:.--, 1\ 11 11 11 ~::"~ " 11 ..---......-- 'I 11 ~~ ~ " ¡- Z :J 0 (..V "t / :: z ':'::-.. ..~~~. REZ: A TO R-88 WITH WITH C.U. ON 15 AC. ~SH. 46 a 47 ( J ( )' ./ / / q5SNOI~I-J - NOTES: - TAX PARCELS: 157 (1)-1 169 (1)-1 170 (1)-7 PORTION OF SEWER: INDIVIDUAL SEPTIC SYSTEMS 1294± ACRES 456± ACRES 420± ACRES WA TER: COUNTY WATER ALL RIGHT OF WAYS SHOWN ARE 50 FEET IN 'MDlH CHESDIN lANDING PHASE 1 DEVELOPMENT 28 LOTS 200' FRONTAGE PHASE II DEVElOPMENT 41 LOTS 200' FRONTAGE PHASE III DEVE.OPMENT 103 LOTS 200' FRONTAGE PHASE IV DEVE.OPMe4T 100 LOTS 200' FRONTAGE CHESDIN SHORES PHASE I DEVElOPMENT 76 LOTS 200' FRONTAGE PHASE II DEVELOPMENT 86 LOTS 200' FRONTAGE PHASE III DEVELOPMENT 57 LOTS 200' FRONTAGE PHASE IV DEVELOPMe4T 44 LOTS ZOO' FRONTAGe: TOTAL LOTS "" 535 210 ACRES RESERVED FOR PURCHASE PARCEL A 45 ACRES PARCEL a 55 ACRES P ARC:::L C 110 ACRES 1.5 AC"~E MIN. 1.5 ACRE MIN. 1.5 ACRE MIN. 1.5 ACRE MIN. 1.5 ACRE MIN. 1.5 ACRE MIN. 1.5 ACRE MIN. 1.5 ACRE MIN. QS SNO '" 1-2 - o o o Z g c: <t !U~ ..J CD"S a.<8- c:1l.. '-Q) (I)-¡¡; W-E :ß.- ~,.^S: e \1S VI"tJ §: ::!::)á3-:-: c:c: ....2 O CD,;;:: .s:::.o "5:I: ZOti; <tcn~ ..J ¡2 o (\oJ ~ ä: Z :¡;¡~ 2! : .!i J! 1D8 ! ~O£ 0 !.~ .ß! .. (j0"äj a.co~ .c ~ BE ïa (1St'll ID E=1t) CI i~ .3 'g.2~~~f8 " Ii! ãi.n ~ ~H 2 ..... w "õ I- 0 Q 5~ .~~ ~l§~H .!!! " 0 .. ¡¡¡ ~~ ~ .!!! ~ '" ~.~~~:~ 2~s 8->- 8 c z õO' " .. 0 ~! c: :it ~ .. ..c 'fã¡~~ [; ai ~ £ ,,~ '" u U E :;; ... ~'ä æ ·êø 0:::$ ~~ &. .. " ~ 0 0 ".... .š ~ CI: '2 i¡; II a.Õ-¡5i~"jj" .! 0 áa: '" 0 ~ :ê~EEi"¡¡¡~~ c: ~ ::::. e- O> -.., u :z 0> ~ Ur! ¡Eel ß g: 0.5 c: :!;j ~tæin'\ij ~ ;;¡ .. ]I õI .. W .. u 0..- ¡¡¡Ë~ ,g ~=a.ïn!~ð.l 3 :š ~ u ~ ~ ~ en~ ~~ .. 3:.." ~ "~~".!!!oii5 ''E .5! ~ ~ " LL .S = å.õ .. ,;¡ c"i §:g~ ~ § tJ e;" 5 .. 011 ii5 0 .. .. ¡jUt~~U_: .!!! .. 0 ~ .... ca Gi ~ S ~ III:!: ëiI' '¡¡r 0 E >-E en .. :cã;õ \1S:J ~ ~ 0 :J ~ã I-"~ . ! ~ 0 .. IID~~ß a:: 0 Q . CI:.=! ¡; 5 .. ¡: i .. " ¡; 0 1: .. II! 0 ¡: 0 <II <II '" 0 .. .. ~ u 0 ãš 0 .. 't:I 'ãi ~ '" E ~ .. ~ ~ õI ¡:: '" II! II! .. .. c ! 5 ~ 't:I :¡¡ :s ~ ~~ '2 i ! :::J ~ to .. ß II! 't:I 't:I :¡¡ 't:I ãš :::J C :ê u c .. 0 .. "1:J :J 3" <XI "2 c c ~ <:::. .i!S 0 õi oS C '" c øtQ ãš ~ ~ 111 :::J :::J ::s ::s .f! 1! ..c :::J .. 0 j~ õ' '2 5 " -a: I/) 0 0 c ãš :::J oS 1ij '&j ,..; .. .a "'0 C\Î .¡ ::s 111 E c E ..c :;; '" c .. _~;; I 0 E Cl 1: 11 t; æ .. Q) E 1';' ~LA?~ q '" 0 œ '" '" a:: < "1 0 0 111 0 0 Z :J ~ a: .¡ ,..; ::sO a: C:"'-UJ ,.... '" 100111 ~Œ(t1*. 11m or cf .'Ii; ""~ ~ i <II Æ E I~ 1: à]c: e~ ~~ ·n -gf! à ê .0" CI , ~ " " ~¡¡ .. E .. " -eI :;h z~ .., '" '" ... .. c :r .., if! €j eI~ a.- 2I~ 111- co C'tI c .. eIeI -0 a.m ~~ ::s ::s o 0 00 :i-u ~:! _t: -- "'; - - ..c:..c: 0(,) - - ..c:..c: ;;. ..0..0 11 ìii. 0..0 !-u a.CI: - - "" ¡¡; Co <D <D ë '" <D o U ~ ~ ~ "CB CoCo=" C \@ - ¡;; ¡! E en u Õ - E !: ~~I@ 8~C ':', .~. t l<] i <D '" 0 ~ e- " ® (II Co Co g' :g ¡;; I I õ"" ~~ :: @) g; '" - Coca en '6 '" Co ~@. X ~ =æ 8 w cc en en en en en en .:.: t: C ) en Qj t: en en ~ t: C ) to ãi t: .Q t: Õ .:.: .Q ë Eë: ::I ãi :J (ij (¡j :E F 0 .c ãi C ) ãi êñ Qj ..c: a. êñ Q C ) Qj Qj 0 ::J F 0- ~ (J) ::» ~ ;: ~ ~ .s Qj C ) E ü: Õ (J) ::I >. ~ a. 0 C ) a: z « -' 0 C- o 0 Ó !.O en c: ct! .2 <D ëã W .... "5 ~ Co 0 - c: a- I- .... ( ) <D - ãi _ fJ) E 0) -' <D 'x 0. $ e a3- "0 Co Co ~() æ « c: Lf:~ 0 .~ 0 J: ::! ... 0 ct Ow oj:. 0 'i C') - .2 -' 0 tC C\I :::;) a. Q; <õ ~ 3:~ aJ~æ -c;- ca"a.. <II 0 rn .ª~~ ~-:l3 o~¡f ~Æ-ª! <II . '" o ~ ?: ,..; o..iU<DÕ o ¡;: ëñ .- ct·='t3m .. ð 3:,g CD.... ._ õ §:-g.æ Z CD ra (.J ª (') en en ,.. Q c :: .., en ... o (J "> ... Q c.. :: (fJ - o "C ... ca o m >- - c -' o (,j !2 Q II) ;;: ... ~ Q 'Ë - ( ) TM Q .:::. (,j _N Q I I .:::. - >- r: .a "C 2! c.. 0 z< "C < Cj5SNO/6/-4 ~I '\. \' , , " I , I , I "( '..... A .......... . ... TR ~ I ( . '. '." I' I I, ,. \ \ . t~... -'. ...- I --- I - -...... I ......... I / :/ Þ· )} ,~~ j , !: !:---.. , . .... - -_.! :- ',' I ? '".....: ~ I " I ~, I ~- ~- : " \, I -'l _u-- I I I . ·f········· I ¿ z ; ------....------- /~ / *>Ir.ïF' " .f~~& --\ \ 1 \ , . I \ \\ \ \~/ ~ / ./" r'J~ I \ ~ .......-;--. " ~.\ ...-L-, ~ "--- - ~ ~ ~ I \ ~. ~ ò' ~ <0 t" " .. .. .. .. . _~~.I / I 1 I I \ I Y / ) I I I \ ,. I \ "'" .. REEDY! 8RANCH -. - , - / -- ... . -....J. '- I f , N I~ \ COUNTY J THOROUGHFARE PLAN XXX Proposed Collector I Recommended For Deletion '15 5N'O¡(ö ':'-5 ._~ - - ---- 1>/\ VED ROAD UNPA VED ROAD PROPOSED ,l\t rHO \'1~i\ IENTS N ;\ ¡ , ~~j NOT TO SCALE '15SNOI~ [-6 - \Q - ~ "::t rJ1 IrJ ~ Z en ç.;;¡ ¡... Q ~ 0 ...;¡ < ç.;;¡ z ~ 0 >- 0 (") - N ~ 0 ¡... U z ~ ~ ;::¡ < ~ - ~ - ~ '"- ¡... ~ èn ~ Z U...;¡ t;J u...;¡ ~ ;0 ~ 0 - c:: 0 u 0 N > Q ...;¡ ~ 1!!:. >- ç.;;¡ < 9 ~ ~ rJJ. - :- 0 Z - c:: ~ 0 .. 0 .... ~ ~ ... - ~ IrJ ",. \Q ~ '1S5NO/~J-7 DEC-"J.4-19~4 13: 34 SRLZMRH RERL ESTATE 2884514 P.02 - - MEMO TO: Mr. Brad Hammer ~ Deputy County Administrator Chesterfield County. Virginia FROM: Reuben J. Waller, Jr. SUBJECT: Development Growth and its Relationship with the Utilities Department DATE: December 13, 1994 Before the Board of Supervisors is a zoning case that has a direct impact on the operations of the Utiliûes Department. According to my interpretation of that portion of the Staff Report dealing with utilities concerning Zoning Case 95SN0161, if the Board of Supervisors approves the zoning case with the attached proffers, it is the same as directing the Utilities Department to subsidize the operating deficit of the water line extension in question. The potential for other developers to ask for the same type of subsidy represents a clear and present danger to the operating budget of the Utilities Department. Although the Utility Department could raise rates to cover deficits. this is not prudent physical responsibility and indirectly raises the taxes. In a time when we are talking about fiscal restraint and total quality management (TQM) approach to govenunent, Chesterfield should not be in the subsidy business. I took the opportunity to briefly review the "Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan" prepared by Whitman. Requardt and Associates dated September, 1992. This plan sets forth guidelines for future utility development towards the year 2015. A theme within this study that was paid for by the ratepayer/taxpayer indicates "growth should pay for growth". While that may be a over simplification, there is no indication the facilities plan suggests there shouJd be subsidies to developers in matters regarding utility services. Why does Chesterfield spend money for studies and if it concurs with the ftndingst doesn~t follow them? If the Board does approve this case in a manner wherein the ratepayer/taxpayer will be provìding a subsidy, and does !121 provide a similar subsidy for a developer in the future, isn't there potential for a law suit based on unequal treatment? Conventional wisdom would indicate decisions should not be made today that knowingly would lead into law suits tomorrow. I am sure the County attorney will provide legal advice as to potential future problems (degree of risk) and solutions in this matter. In closing,govennnent should not compete with the private sector nor should it provide operating subsidies as represented or styled in this case. / I (/2 )~?/;J ¡) ~~-f- TOTAL P.02