95SN0305
..
.~
.
.
'.
~ .
Scptcrnb..~ 19, 1m ere
October 17, 1995 ere
No-ianbcr 20, 1m ere
NaJtEber 28, 1995 ere
December 13, 1995 BS
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATION
95SN0305
Trion Ventures Of Virginia, Inc.
Dale Magisterial District
Southwest quadrant of
Meadowdale Boulevard and Hopkins Road
REQUEST: Rezoning from Residential (R-7) to Neighborhood Business (C-2) with Conditional
Use Planned Development to permit laboratories and setback exceptions~
Specifically, the applicant is requesting the following setback exceptions:
A.. Side yard to be reduced from thirty (30) feet to five (5) feet;
B~ Rear yard to be reduced from forty (40) feet to fifteen (15) feet; and
C. Front yard along Hopkins Road from seventy-five (75) feet to
twenty-five (25) feet~
PROPOSED LAND USE:
A drug store/pharmacy is planned~ However, with approval of this request, other
C-2 uses, except as restricted by Proffered Condition 2, plus laboratories could be
developed on the property ~
(NOTE: TIlE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A DEFERRAL TO THE BOARD'S
JANUARY 24, 1996, l\mETING.) ~
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND DENIAL.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend denial for the following reasons:
A. The proposed development and land use does not comply with the Central Area
Land Use And Transportation Plan which designates the property for office use~
B. The requested setback exceptions and Master Plan represent an overdevelopment
of the property ~ Approval of such exceptions could set a standard for similar
exceptions along Hopkins Road should the corridor ever be developed for non-
residential uses ~
c~ The applicants have failed to address the impact on the transportation network and
related health, safety and welfare concerns.
(NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED OR THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY PROFFER
CONDITIONS. THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON
BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A " STAFF" ARE
RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION~)
PROFFERED CONDITIONS
1 ~ Site Plan and E]evations~ The Property shall be developed in substantial
conformance with (I) the site plan dated May 10, 1995 entitled "Proposed
Walgreens Conceptual Master Plan" prepared by J. K. Timmons & Associates,
P.C., and (ii) the architectural appearance of the elevations dated March 31, 1995,
last revised September 21, 1995, entitled "Proposed Walgreens Illustrative Plan",
both of which have been filed herewith~ However, the Planning Commission at
the time of Site Plan review can approve modifications re.quested by the developer
if such plodifications are deemed to comply with the spirit and intent of the site
plan and elevations submitted herewith~
2. Use Restrictions~ The only uses permitted on the property shall be as follows:
(a) Drugstore/pharmacy /laboratory;
(b) Banks and savings and loan associations;
(c) Offices; business, governmental, medical and professional;
. .
95SN0305/WP/DEC 13H
2
,.,
e
.
III
~. .
e
.
(d) Drive-in windows and outside intercom systems associated with the
foreg?ing permitted uses;
(e) Accessory uses, not otherwise prohibited, customarily accessory and
incidental to a permitted use.
No outdoor vending machines and/or outdoor pay phones shall be permitted on the
Property ~ The sale of alcoholic beverages for on- or off-premises consumption
shall be prohibited~
3. Sidewalk~ The developer shall co~truct a sidewalk along Meadowdale Boulevard
from the existing sidewalk along Hopkins Road to connect with the existing
sidewalk on Meadowdale Boulevard. The exact location, width and treatment shall
be approved at the time of Site Plan Review ~
4. Stormwater Dischar~~ Stormwater shall be stored so that the storage volume is
that of a 10 year post-development storm with a release of a 2 year pre-
development stonn~ All on-site storage shall be underground.
5. Access~ Access to Hopkins Road shall be limited to one (1) entrance/exit, which
access shall be limited to right-inlright-out traffic movements. This access shall
be located near the southern property line~ Access to Meadowdale Boulevard shall
be limited to one (1) entrance/exit. This access shall be located near the western
property line. The exact location of these accesses shall be approved by the
Transportation I?epartment.
6~ Meadowdale Improvements - Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit,
additional pavement shall be constructed along Meadowdale Boulevard at the
approved access to provide left and right turn lanes, if warranted, based on
Transportation Department standards~ The developer shall dedicate, free and
unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County, any additional right-of-
way (or easement) required for these improvements ~
7. No Loudspeakers - Outside loudspeakers shall be prohibited~ The use of intercom-
type systems commonly associated with drive-through facilities shall be permitted..
8 ~ Irriiation - All landscaping within the buffer and setback areas shall be irrigated.
9. Hopkins Road Improvements~ Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit,
additional pavement shall be constructed along Hopkins Road at the approved
access to provide a right turn lane.. The owner/developer shall dedicate, free and
unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County, any additional right-of-
95SN0305/WP/DEC13H
3
way (or easement) required for the foregoing improvements.. As and when
required and approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation, the
owner/developer shall be responsible for providing a raised median in Hopkins
Road from Meadowdale Boulevard south to restrict Hopkins Road access to and
from the Property to right-in and right-out movements only. The exact design and
location of such median shall be determined by the Virginia Department of
Transportation~
GENERAL INFORMATION
Location:
Located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Hopkins Road and Meadowdale
Boulevard and known as 5926 Hopkins Road. Tax Map 52-12 (1) Parcel 10 (Sheet 15).
Existing Zoning:
R-7
~:
1 ~ 7 acres
Existin~ Land Use:
Single family residential
Adiacent Zoning & Land Use:
North - R-7; Single family residential
South - R-7; Public (school)
East - C-5; Commercial
West - 0-2; Public/Semi-public (Meadowdale Library)
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Uti I i ties:
Public Water System
A twelve (12) inch water line is located along Hopkins Road. The use of the public water
system is required by Ordinance. The results of a computer simulated flow test indicate
..
95SN0305/WP/DEC 13H
4
e
.
.
.
that sufficient and pressure should be available t.o meet domestic and fITe protection
demands of the proposed use. Fire flow requirements are established and coordinated
through Fire Administration.
Public Wastewater System
An eight (8) inch wastewater line is located on site in the northwest comer of the request
property. The use' of the public wastewater system is required by Ordinance. The results
of a computer-simulated hy~raulic analysis indicate that sufficient capacity should be
available to support the proposed development.
Environmental:
Drainage and Erosion
Site drains to Hopkins Road then via storm sewer to tributaries and ultimately to Falling
Creek. There are no on- site drainage or erosion problems ~ Off-site flooding has occurre~
along Restingway Lane, east of Hopkins Road. The flooding has been equalized over the
last six (6) years, but the storm sewer cannot handle any additional run off~ Without a
retention or detention facility, the downstream flooding will reoccur and possibly cause
flooding of some homes~ To address flooding concerns the applicant has agreed to on-site
retention (Proffered Condition 4)~
Water Duality
If the site was able to opt out of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act requirements, then
a subsurface pipe system could be used for retention, otherwise surface retention facilities
must be provided. The applicant has proffered that all on-site retention facilities will be
underground. (Proffered Condition 4)
It may be necessary to obtain off-site easements to accommodate runoff~
Fire Service:
Bensley Fire Station, Company #3~ Dependent upon present locations, fife hydrants may
be required.. Fire lanes must be provided as per the Chesterfield Fire Prevention Code,
Section 313.
Transpo~ation:
This request will not limit development to a specific land use; therefore, it is difficult to
anticipate traffic generation. Based on drive-in bank trip rates, a permitted land use within
95SN0305/WP/DEC13H
5
the requested zoning, development could generate approximately 1,200 average daily
trips. No specific traffic generation information is available for the intended land use
(drug store with drive through windows) . Vehicles generated by this development will
be distributed along Meadowdale Boulevard which had a 1994 traffic count of 6,266
vehicles per day and Hopkins Road which had a 1995 traffic count of 25,492 vehicles per
day.
Development must adhere to the Zoning Ordinance relative to access and internal
circulation (Article 7)~ Access to major arterials, such as Hopkins Road, should be
controlled. Staff cannot support any direct access from this property to Hopkins Road~
The property is located in the southwest quadrant of the Meadowdale Boulevard/Hopkins
Road intersection. The Meadowdale Boulevard/Hopkins Road intersection is controlled
by a traffic signal. A high number of accidents have occurred at this intersection~ Due
to the property's limited frontage along Hopkiru; Road (approximately 250 feet), adequate
separation from the Meadowdale Boulevard/Hopkins Road intersection cannot be provided
to permit any direct access from the propeny to Hopkins Road.
The applicant has proffered that access to Hopkins Road will be limited to one (1)
entran~e/exit located near the southern property line. Per Proffered Condition 5, this
access will be restricted to right-ttlm-in and right-turn-out traffic movements~ Hopkins
Road is currently an undivided roadway. If a raised median is not constructed along
Hopkins Road per Proffered Condition 9, the applicant intends to restrict left turn
movements at this Hopkins Road access with the use of signs and pavement markings ~
Signing and pavement markings are not effective in eliminating prohibited left turn
movements. In addition, per Proffered Condition 9, the applicant has proffered to
cons~ct along Hopkins Road: 1) a rjght turn lane at the proposed access; and 2) as and
when required and approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), a
raised median from Meadowdale Boulevard south to restrict the proposed access to right-
turns-in and right-tums-out only. Staff does not support access to Hopkins Road~ There
is not adequate separation between the Meadowdale BoulevardlHopkins Road intersection
to accommodate any direct access from the property to Hopkins Road, even with
improvements such as a raised median along Hopkins Road~ It should be noted that the
proffers, as submitted, would allow for direct access to Hopkins Road even if VDOT does
not require the raised median along Hopkins Road. Without a commitment to limit access
to the property to Meadowdale Boulevard only, staff cannot support this request~
The applicant has also proffered that access to Meadowdale Boulevard will be limited to
one (1) entrance/exit (Proffered Condition 5). This access will be located towards the '1
western property line as generally depicted on the conceptual Master Plan~ This location
provides the greatest separation from the Meadowdale Boulevard/Hopkins Road
intersection. Due to the horizontal alignment of Meadowdale Boulevard, sight distance
\
. ~
95SN0305/WP/DEC13H
6
e
.
e
.
at this location is limited~ The developer may be required to provide improvements along
Meadowdale Boule~.ard west of the property to obtain adequate sight distance.
Mitigating road improvements must be provided for the requested densities~ The applicant
has proffered to construct a sidewalk along Meadowdale Boulevard from the existing
sidewalk on Hopkins Road across the property frontage, to the existing sidewalk on
Meadowdale Boulevard.. (proffered Condition 3)
The applicant has also proffered to construct additional pavement along Meadowdale
Boulevard at the approved access to provide left and right turn lanes (proffered Condition
6). The conceptual Master Plan depicts left and right turn lanes along Meadowdale
Boulevard into the property. As shown, a short left turn lane into the property is provided
by utilizing part of the eastbound left turn storage lane along Meadowdale Boulevard at I
the Hopkins Road intersection~ Because of the volume of traffic at the Meadowdale
Boulevard/Hopkins Road intersection and the traffic generated by this development, the
design of this left turn lane into the property as shown on the conceptual Master Plan is
not acceptable~ Additional pavement must be constructed along Meadowdale Boulevard
to provide a separate left turn lane into the property and still provide an adequate storage
lane for eastbound left turn vehicles at the Hopkins Road intersection.
Without a commitment to limit access to the property to Meadowdale Boulevard only, staff
cannot support this request~
LAND USE
General Plan:
Lies within the boundaries of the Central Area Land Use and Transportation Plan which
designates the property for office use.. The Central Area Plan is currently being revised~
A draft plan is not anticipated until early 1996.. However, as a pan of the preparation, a
market assessment has been performed by a consultant for the Central Area~ One of the
conclusions of the assessment indicated that the dispersal (stripping out) of new retail
activity in the norther section (Le~ this particular area) will only cause additional
weakening of existing commercial nodes (i~e. the Meadowbrook and Meadowdale
Shopping Centers.)
Area Development Trends:
Property in the vicinity of the Meadowdale Boulevard/Hopkins Road intersection is
characterized by single family residential development to the north, public uses to the
south and west, and commercial and office uses to the east across Hopkins Road. With the
exception of the McDonald's restaurant located across Hopkins Road from the request site,
95SN0305/WP/DEC 13H
7
retail uses along the Hopkins Road corridor have been confmed to the Meadowbrook and
Meadowdale Shopping Centers and the properties surrounding the HopkinslBeulah Roads
intersection.. Historically, with the exception of the McDonald's restaurant and adjacent
office development, pressures to allow commercial uses along the Hopkins Road corridor
have been averted.
~:
Proffered Condition 2 would restrict the uses permitted on the property. While office use
would comply with the Central Area Plan, the drug store and bank use do not conform to
the adopted Elan.
Site Design:
Plans submitted with the application depict a structure approximately 13,905 square feet
in area with two (2) drive-thru areas, associated parking and access points to Meadowdale
Boulevard and Hopkins Road. The applicant has indicated that the property would be
developed substantially in conformance with these plans unless requested by the developer
and approved by the Planning Commission at the time of site plan review (proffered
Condition 1)..
The applicant has agreed to construct a sidewalk along Meadowdale Boulevard from the
existing sidewalk along Hopkins Road to the western edge of the property as shown on
plans submitted with the application~ (proffered Condition 3)
The request property lies within an Emerging Growth Area. Redevelopment of the site
or new construction must confonn 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 applicant has requested the following setback exceptions:
A. Side yard to be reduced from thirty (30) feet to five (5) feet;
B. Rear yard to be reduced from forty (40) feet to fifteen (15) feet; and
C. Along Hopkins Road from seventy-five (75) feet to twenty-five (25) feet.
These exceptions represent overdevelopment of the site and could set a standard for similar
exceptions along Hopkins Road should the corridor ever be developed for non-residential
uses~ It should be noted that the McDonald's restaurant located across Hopkins Road from
the request site has a fifty (50) foot setback from Hopkins Road.
95SN0305/WP IDEC13H
8
e
.
e
.
Architectural Treatment:
Within Emerging Growth Areas, no building exterior which would be visible to any
residential or office district or any public right of way may consist of architectural ~
materials inferior in quality, appearance, or detail to any other exterior of the same
building ~ There is, however, nothing to preclude the use o( different materials on different
building exteriors, but rather, the use of inferior materials on sides which face adjoining
property ~ No portion of a building constructed of unadorned concrete block or cormgated
and/or sheet metal may be visible from any adjoining residential or office district or any
public right of way ~ No building exterior may be constructed of unpainted concrete block
or corrugated and/or sheet metal. Mechanical equipment, whether ground-level or
rooftop, must be shielded and screened from public view and designed to be perceived as
an integral part of the building.
In addition, the applicant has submitted elevations with this application and has indicated
that the architectural appearance of the development will be in substantial conformance
with these elevations unless modification are requested by the developer and approved by
the Planning Commission~ (Proffered Condition 1)
Buffers & Screenin~:
The Zoning Ordinance requires that solid waste storage areas (i~e., dumpsters, garbage
cans, trash compactors, etc.) 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 rights of way ~
Adjacent property to the south is zoned Residential (R-7) and is occupied by a public
school~ The Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum fifty (50) foot buffer along the
southern property boundary of the request site~ At the time of site plan review, the
Planning Cornmissi<?n may modify this buffer if adequate screening can be provided in a
lesser width. The proposed building and driveway shown on the plan submitted with the
application encroach into the required buffer. It should be noted that the applicant has
agreed to irrigate all landscaping within the buffer and setback areas. (Proffered Condition
8)
9SSN0305/WP/DEC 13H
9
Loudspeakers:
The applicant has proffered that except for intercom-type systems commonly associated
with drive-through facilities, outside loudspeakers will be prohibited~ (Proffered
Condition 7)
Conclusions:
As noted, the proposed zoning and land use does not comply with the Central Area Land
Use And Transportation Plan which designates the property for office use and is not
representative of or compatible with anticipated area development. In addition, the
requested setback exceptions and the Master Plan represent an overdevelopment of the site
and could set a standard for similar exceptions along Hopkins Road should the corridor
ever be developed for non-residential uses~ Further, the impact the transportation network
and related health, safety and welfare concerns, as discussed herein, have not been
adequately addressed. For these reasons, staff reconunends denial of this request.
CASE HISTORY
Planning Conunission Meeting (9/19/95):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case for thirty (30) days ~
Staff (9/21/95):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information
should be submitted no later than September 28, 1995 for consideration at the
Commission's October 17, 1995 public hearing~ Also, the applicant was advised that a
$50 ~ 00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the Commission's October 17, 1995 public
hearing ~
Applicant (9/29/95):
The applicant submitted revised and additional plans and proffered conditions~
95SN0305/WP/DEC13H
e
10
.
e
.
Applicant (10/4/95):
The $50.00 deferral.~fee was paid.
Applicant (10/13/95):
The applicant submitted a revised Proffered Condition 1 as discussed herein.
Planning Commission Meeting (10/17/95):
On their own motion, the Commission deferred this case for thirty (30) days~
Staff (10/18/95):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information
should be submitted no later than October 24, 1995, for consideration at the Commission's
Novemb~r 20, 1995, public hearing.
Staff (11/2/95):
To date, no new information has been received. Staff has had discussions with the
applicant regarding the potential submission of additional proffers regarding restrictions
on the uses permitted and access to Hopkins Road~ However, to date, those proffers have
not been submitted~
Applicant (11/9/95):
The applicant su"bmitted revisions to Proffered Condition 2 to further restrict the uses
permitted~ Also, the applicant submitted Proffered Condition 9 relating to access and
improvements to Hopkins Road~
Planning Commission Meeting (11/20/95):
On their own motion, the Commission deferred this case to November 28, 1995~
95SN0305/WP/DEC 13H
11
Applicant (11/27/95):
The applicant submitted a revision of Proffered Condition 2 to preclude the sale of
alcoholic beverages on the property. Further, the revisions amend all previous references
in the proffers to reflect the correct road name of "Meadowdale Boulevard" as opposed
to the incorrect reference of "Meadowdale Road~"
Planning Commission Meeting (11/28/95):
The applicant did not accept the recommendation~ There were three (3) people who spoke
in support of this request~ Those in support generally stated that the development would
assist in the revitalization of the commercial area; represents a low impact, non-polluting
use; represents a substantial business opportunity; and would, if approved by VDOT,
provide a raised median on Hopkins Road which would relieve existing and potential
traffic problems in the immediate area~
There were four (4) people who spoke in opposition to this request. They expressed
concerns that the proposed zoning and land uses do not comply with the adopted Central
Area Land Use and Transportation Plan; represents over-development of the property;
would not be compatible with the adjacent school and library uses; and would exacerbate
an existing traffic problem along Hopkins Road~ It was also stated that given the existence
of three (3) drug stores within a one and one-half mile radius, there is no need for an
additional drug store to serve the area and, if approved, it could be anticipated that one of
the existing busiJ;1esses would close leaving vacant commercial space.
It was the general consensus of the Commission that the proposed drug store use would
be an asset to the immediate area, as well as the entire County; however, given the
applicant's unwillingness to eliminate access to Hopkins Road, approval of this request
would have an adverse impact on health, safety and welfare for those traveling in the
immediate area~ Mr~ Miller indicated that given the applicant's unwillingness to eliminate
the access to Hopkins Road, approval of this request would only exacerbate an existing
serious traffic situation in the immediate area.
On motion of Mr ~ Miller, seconded by Mr ~ Gulley, the Conunission recommended denial
of this request.
AYES: .Unanimous..
Applicant (12/5/95):
The applicant requested a deferral to the Board's January 24, 1996, meeting..
95SN0305/WP IDEe 13H
.
12
.
e
.
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, December 13, 1995, beginning at 7:00 p~m~, will take
under consideration this request.
95SN0305/WPJDEC13H
13
e
A
-"', 11. ...
.
.
I
I
,
.
I
I
I
I
-I I
I I
r !.
Jr.
~ ~.: oJ !-
, , ~
---------1
.oeD rotI%
OIS:N:
(If 1M'
,
; I
. q,
~
,: ~!
~ Q J
I 0",. .:
I ......!
i }
:' "'!
; ~I
J'
. I
I~! r
f q,;; I
J. / 01. ,:
· -!:::i · ~ J
.1. 'I /
.1/./
I I, I
I ~ +: J. I
I I. I ·
.
, '"
Jt\
.,.
~
o
l:
N
I I
I
I
I
f
I
f
I
t;. f
--
~
I'
(
.
.
/ .1I~c. ~"....: i..: S'
q5 5NO 305-)
,.J
" .
\
\
\
,~
': '. ~~
\ '
,
wd
..i 5
~~ e
air J!
~i i
-'~ s
Ww w
... -' .
.,'" ti
I~ ~ ~ ~
ow;)-
a.a..
!s ~ = ~
.. j W
~~ ~ ' ~
5w _ ~ ~
..~ " i "
~ .I! z w ..
i ~; ~ i ~
~ ~w i I ;
i if ~ a..l
I !i 2 Ij
D rJ.2 tal W ~~
'" is ~ ~ .~
i.. .I....
~55N0305-2
~'-
, -'\":
ORLANDO ACCOUNTIHG
4076822748
~~01
I
e
e
Ol<LANDO AC(~()UN.rrIN'G & Tfu'{ SERVICE
200 4 T~\urQclt lrrai.l
Apopka, Florida 32703
F~r. & voice Number (407) 682-2748
TO:.-- l,at}e Rams 1 e y ____________.
COMPANY: AdJnin.. (h.es terf ield CoulltJL
DA'rE :
De~c. l:~.~9 5._________
PAGES: 2
(I nc luaescover.A-I~heet-""j ~-
SUBJECT: Co~ld vou .olea.~e see__t.l.1~ooies ~~t..t.ache.d..- 1 ~Lt.er- ~ C"'
---al:e.--_!.ii ~t!' ib1lted J:'~J tt:e-m~--S--~-t~ r l"lad 110p~C. ~tre-.. t.l1ere
'; 11 :r Po Y St'"'1 tl~
Thank ~{~.
If you did not receive all pages or message is unclear, please call
the twelephone number above i.
* * * * * * .k * * '* * * * "* it * * '* "* .. ~* * * * * * * -i* '* * -. '* *- * * * .. * .. * .. .. * .. -.k . 1\ * * Jf, * * * * * *" * * '* '* 1( * * .. 'Ii
THIS F.ACS.rMILE--~fESAGE MAY CONTAIN' 'PRTVTT.RGRT) ANn r~oNtt'fnRI\fTT~
lNFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY
NAMRD AROVR. TF TH~ R~An~~ n~ ~HT~ M~RSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED
RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE TO DELIVER IT ~o
TH~ INT~NDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY
DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS
PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMJ.lt't.NICllTION IN ~RROR,
PLEASE I~rnEDIATELY NOTIFY ME BY TELEPHONE, AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL
COlvfMUNICllTION TO ME A7.~ THE ABO'VE ADDRRS9 ~lIA. THE TJ. S. POSTAL
SERVICE.
THANr< YOU
~ ~-...,....'
,) /// ,/
4/;td/ / ~~~4:
.:_~.....~,
II ~ ..
ORLANDO ACCOUNTING
4 0 745 :::; 2 2 7 4 8
P..02
e
e
Ronald. P. Livingston
Certified public Accountant
3619 MARQJ.I,ETTE ROAQ
RICHMONO. VU'~GfNIA 2323~
(804) 27' ~ 103.:2.
Deceniller 13, 1995
1'he lIonoroble Doard of aupo.r.riCO~"'B
Chesterfield County
Re: Walgreen Zoning
Caoc 95SN030S
~
Gentl~;iu~.tl ~
I am ou.t u! ~LaLe and unable to appear before in pcrDon to
voice my opposition to the rezoning of a parcel of land, located at
Hopkins and MeadowdQl~ Buulevard, fo~ a Walgreenls Pharroncy.
1fl1e parcel is too small fo!; tllt;; b.llie or Llle pl:opoeed building
and can not be built under current County requirements unless the
set-back and buffer requiremeIlts CiL'f:J .t.~uu(.:~J.. Tl1.is ie like
attempting to put 10 pounds of sugar in a 5 pound baq.
The rezoned use of this parcel is not in the county
comprehensive master plan~ The request to reduce the set-back and
buffer size indicates further that the approval of this request is
another instance of ttzoning by exceptionn.
The. proposed use of this parcel and the location 0:1: toe
requested entrance and exit access on Hopkins Rd & Meadowdale Blvd.
would cI'eate a clear and present traffic danger conSidering ttl€
accident history of this intersection. Meadowdale Bl vd. is t..he
main access road to Meadowbrook High, School and a way to reach
Ironbridge Road without usinq Chippenham Parkway.
My dau9hter's school bus lets her off in front of the County
Library on Meadowdale Blvd. The e~isting current curve and amount
of traffic does not allow a lot of time to react to a stopped
school bus.. This project would increase the danger by more traffic
t'urning in and out of the proposed site.
r1"hA prnpn~~cl retai 1 use of this parcel does not meet allY
compelling eXist,inq need for a. phannacy in this area. Thel+e at"e
curr@ntly four (4) pharmR~i~s within 2 miles.
Thank you for allowing my COlnment,g on t.hi ~ r~'tOn1 ng ,i.ssue to
be sent by fax and your consideration of my comments is
appreciated.
ResPQotful1y I .J'/ ~-~
/.. r
~;t:I/I;~i~'>~ '
Ronald P. Livingfton, CP~