06SN0256
I)
October 24, 2007 BS
ADDENDUM
06SN0256
Henry E. Myers, Jr.
(General Partner of Myers Family Partnership)
Dale Magisterial District
Southeast quadrant of Frith Lane and Lori Road
REQUEST: Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Corporate Office (0-2).
PROPOSED LAND USE:
Office uses are planned.
On October 23,2007, the applicant, at the request of Mr. Miller, submitted an additional proffered
condition limiting the amount of development with access only to Frith Lane on Lori Road. Staff
recommends acceptance of the additional proffered condition.
(NOTE: SINCE THE ADDITIONAL PROFFER WAS SUBMITTED SUBSEQUENT TO
THE ADVERTISEMENT OF THE CASE, IT WOULD BE NECESSARY FOR THE
BOARD TO SUSPEND THE PROCEDURES TO CONSIDER THE ADDmONAL
PROFFER.)
PROFFERED CONDITION
2. Building permits shall not be issued on more than 20,000 gross square feet of building
area with access only to Lori Road and/or Frith Lane. (P)
Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service
06SN0256-0CT24-BOS-ADD
May 16, 2006 CPC
July 18, 2006 CPC
September 19, 2006 CPC
January 16, 2007 CPC
April 17, 2007 CPC
May 23, 2007 BS
June 27, 2007 BS
August 22, 2007 BS
October 24, 2007 BS
STAFF?S
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATION
06SN0256
Henry E. Myers, Jr.
(General Partner of Myers Family Partnership)
Dale Magisterial District
Southeast quadrant of Frith Lane and Lori Road
REQUEST:Rezoning from Agricultural (A)to Corporate Office (O-2).
PROPOSED LAND USE:
Office uses are planned.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND DENIAL.
AYES: MESSRS. GECKER, GULLEY, LITTON AND WILSON.
NAY: MR. BASS.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend approval forthe following reasons:
A.The proposed zoning and land uses conform to the Central Area Plan which
suggests the property is appropriate for mixed use corridor uses to include office
and residential.
B.The proposed zoning and land uses are representative of, and compatible with,
existing and anticipated area development.
Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service
(NOTE: THE ONLY CONDITION THAT MAYBE IMPOSED IS A BUFFER CONDITION.
THE PROPERTY OWNER(S) MAY PROFFEROTHER CONDITIONS. THE CONDITIONS
NOTED WITH ?STAFF/CPC? WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE
COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLYA ?STAFF? ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY
BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLYA ?CPC? ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.)
PROFFERED CONDITION
(STAFF)Public wastewater system shall be used. (U)
GENERAL INFORMATION
Location:
Southeast quadrant of the intersection of Lori Road and FrithLane. Tax ID 769-663-Part of
9114 (Sheet 25).
Existing Zoning:
A
Size:
6.9 acres
Existing Land Use:
Vacant
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North and West? R-TH and A; Townhouses and single family residential
South and East; ? A; Vacant
UTILITIES
Public Water System:
There is an existing eight (8) inch extending along the north side of Lori Road, opposite
the request site. Use of the public water system is required by County Code.
Public Wastewater System:
A ten (10) inch wastewater sub-trunk line extends across Lori Road and continues across
the eastern portion of the Myers property not proposed for rezoning, approximately 400
2 06SN0256-OCT24-BOS-RPT
feet southeast of the request site. Use of the public wastewater system is intended and
has been proffered. (Proffered Condition)
ENVIRONMENTAL
Drainage and Erosion:
The subject property drains to the north andthen via storm sewers and open channels to
Proctor?s Creek. There are currently no known on- or off-site drainage or erosion problems
and none are anticipated after development. The entire property exhibits characteristics of
wetlands and these wetlands may or may not exist in the portion of the property being
requested for re-zoning.
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Fire Service:
Airport Fire Station, Company Number 15, currently provides fire protection and
emergency medical service (EMS). This request will have a minimal impact on fire and
EMS.
Transportation:
This request will not limit development to a specific land use; therefore, it is difficult to
anticipate traffic generation. Based on general office trip rates, development could
generate approximately 850 average daily trips. Traffic generated by this development
will be distributed along Iron Bridge Road (Route 10), which had a 2004 traffic volume
of 26,520 vehicles per day between Beach Road and Route 288. Based on the volume of
traffic it carried during peak hours, Route 10 in this area was functioning at an acceptable
level. (Level of Service C)
During site plan review, specific recommendations will be made regarding access and
internal circulation.
LAND USE
Comprehensive Plan:
Lies within the boundaries of theCentral Area Plan which suggests the property is
appropriate for mixed use corridor uses which includes office and residential land uses.
Area Development Trends:
The area is characterized by Chesterfield County governmental uses and residential land
uses. The parent parcel is zoned Agricultural (A), and it is staff?s understanding the
existence of wetlands mayhinder development of that portion of the property.
3 06SN0256-OCT24-BOS-RPT
Development Standards:
The request property currentlylies within an Emerging Growth Area. Thepurposeofthe
Emerging Growth District Standards is to promote high quality, well-designed projects.
Development of the site 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.
Architectural Treatment:
In addition to Emerging Growth Districtrequirements for architectural treatment, the
Zoning Ordinance requires that buildings in this area be compatible with Federalist and
Colonial architecture and be compatible with buildings located in the same block or directly
across the road, unless otherwise approved by the Director of Planning based upon existence
of buildings not meeting the standards.
CONCLUSION
The proposed zoning and land uses conform to theCentral Area Plan, which suggests the property
is appropriate for mixed use corridor use. In addition, the proposed zoning and land uses are
representative of, and compatible with,existing and anticipated area development.
Given these considerations, approvalof this request is recommended.
CASE HISTORY
Planning Commission Meeting (5/16/06):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to July 18, 2006.
Staff (5/17/06):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than May 22, 2006, for consideration at the Commission?s
July 18, 2006, public hearing.
Also, the applicant was advised that a $130.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
Commission?s public hearing.
Applicant (6/1/06):
The deferral fee was paid.
4 06SN0256-OCT24-BOS-RPT
Staff (6/28/06):
To date, no new information has been submitted. At the request of the Dale District
Commissioner, a community meeting has been scheduled on this request for July 31,
2006.
Planning Commission Meeting (7/18/06):
On their own motion, the Commissiondeferred this case to September 19, 2006.
Staff (7/19/06):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than July 24, 2006, for consideration at the Commission?s
September 19, 2006, public hearing.
Area Property Owners, Applicant, Staff and Dale District Commissioner (7/31/06):
Ameeting was held to discuss this case. Concerns were expressed relative to the impact
of the proposal on Lori Road, to include buffers, setbacks, access and traffic; and the
need to establish a plan of development for the entire parent parcel.
Staff (8/28/06):
To date, no new information has been submitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (9/19/06):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to January 16, 2007.
Staff (9/21/06):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than November 13, 2006 for consideration at the
Commission?s January 16, 2007, public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a
$130.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the Commission?s public hearing.
5 06SN0256-OCT24-BOS-RPT
Staff (12/4/06):
To date, no new information has been submitted. The deferral fee has not been paid.
Applicant (1/8/07):
The deferral fee was paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (1/16/07):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to April 17, 2007.
Staff (1/17/07):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than February 12, 2007, for consideration at the
Commission?s April 17, 2007, public hearing.Also, the applicant was advised that a
$130.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the Commission?s public hearing.
Applicant (4/6/07):
To date, no new information has been submitted. The $130.00 deferral fee was paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (4/17/07):
The applicant accepted staff?s recommendation, but did not accept the Commission?s
recommendation.
There was opposition present expressing concerns relative to access to Lori Road and the
resulting traffic impact.
Mr. Litton indicated that he had attempted to work with property owners to develop an
access plan for the area which would provide access from this property through the parent
parcel (of the subject property) to the south; however, the applicant had been unwilling to
address such a proposal. He indicated that sole access to Lori Road would only
exacerbate the congestion at the Lori Road/Beach Road/Ironbridge Road intersection.
6 06SN0256-OCT24-BOS-RPT
On motion of Mr. Litton, seconded by Mr. Wilson, the Commission recommended
denial.
AYES: Messrs. Gecker, Gulley, Litton and Wilson.
NAY: Mr. Bass.
Board of Supervisor?s Meeting (5/23/07):
On their own motion, the Board deferred this case to their June 27, 2007, meeting.
Staff (5/24/07):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information
should be submitted no later than May 29, 2007 for consideration at the Board?s July
public hearing.
Staff (6/5/07):
To date, no new information has been submitted.
Board of Supervisors? Meeting (6/27/07):
On their own motion, the Board deferred this request to August 22, 2007.
Staff (6/28/07):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than July 2, 2007, for consideration at the Board?s August
public hearing.
Staff (7/19/07):
To date, no new information has been submitted.
Board of Supervisor?s Meeting (8/22/07):
On their own motion, the Board deferred this case to their October 24, 2007, public
hearing.
7 06SN0256-OCT24-BOS-RPT
Staff (8/23/07):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information
should be submitted no later than August 29, 2007, for consideration at the Board?s
October public hearing.
Staff (9/28/07):
To date, no new information has been received.
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, October 24, 2007, beginning at 6:30 p.m., will take
under consideration this request.
8 06SN0256-OCT24-BOS-RPT
This page is blank.