02SN0140-Nov28.pdfx~ ..... ~,,~,. nn nnn~ CPC
November 28, 2001 BS
STAFF'S
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATION
02SN0140
The G. H. Cogbill Limited Company
Dale Magisterial District
South line of Iron Bridge Road
REQUEST: Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Community Business (C-3).
PROPOSED LAND USE:
Commercial uses, except as restricted by Proffered Condition 2, are planned.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON
PAGES 2 AND 3.
AYES: Messrs. Marsh, Litton, Cunningham and Gulley
ABSENT: Mr. Gecker
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION
Recommend denial for the following reason:
The application fails to adequately address the transportation concerns, as discussed herein.
Providing a FIRST CHOICE Community Through Excellence in Public Service.
(NOTES:
Bo
THE ONLY CONDITION THAT MAY BE IMPOSED IS A BUFFER
CONDITION. THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY PROFFER OTHER
C, ONDITIONS.
THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED
UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS
WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE ~COMMENDED SOLEY BY STAFF.
CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.)
PROFFERED CONDITIONS
The property owner and the developer (the "Developer") in this zoning case, pursuant to Section
15.2-2298 of the Code of Virginia (1950 as amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield
County, for themselves and their successors or assigns, proffer that the development of the Property
known as Chesterfield County GPIN/Tax Identification Number 769-661-5718 (Part) (the
"Property") under consideration will be developed according to the following conditions if, and only
if, the rezoning request for C-3 is granted. In the event the request is denied or approved with
conditions not agreed to by the Developer, the proffers and conditions shall immediately be null and
void and have no further force or effect. If the zoning is granted, these proffers and conditions will
supersede all proffers and conditions now existing on the Property.
(CPC)
1. Utilities. Public water and wastewater systems shall be used. (U)
(CPC) 2.
Uses. Except as qualified herein, uses permitted shall be those uses permitted
Joy-right and those permitted with restrictions in the C-3 District except the
following uses shall not be permitted:
i. multi-family housing;
ii. townhouses;
iii. cocktail lounges, but not including sit-down restaurants or cafeterias;
[NOTE: The purpose of this proffer is to restrict uses that primarily
sell on-premises alcoholic beverages; however, restaurants with
accessory sale of alcoholic beverage are not intended tobe included
in this restriction.]
iv. pool halls;
v. pawn shops; and
2 02SN0140/WP/NOV28S
vi. second hand shops. (P)
(cpc) 3.
Dedications. Prior to any site plan approval, sixty (60) feet of right-of-way,
on the south side of Iron Bridge Road/Route 10 ("Route 10") measured from
the centerline of Route 10 immediately adjacent to the Property shall be
dedicated free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County.
(T)
(CPC) 4.
Transportation. No direct access shall be provided from the Property to
Ironbridge Road (Route 10). (T)
(CPC) 5.
Architecture. The development on the Property shall have architectural
styling similar to the structure depicted in the elevation prepared by Douglas
Bollinger & Associates, Inc. dated September 16, 2001 and attached as
Exhibit A. Brick and slate or slate-like roofing materials shall be the primary
materials used on the structure shown in the elevation. (P)
(CPC) 6.
The unenforceability, illegality, elimination, revision or amendment of any
proffer set forth herein, in whole or in part, shall not affect the validity or
enforceability of the other proffers or the unaffected part of any such proffers.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Location:
South line of Iron Bridge Road, west of Beach Road. Tax ID 769-661-Part of 5718 (Sheet
25).
Existing Zoning:
A
Size:
2.6 acres
Existing Land Use:
Vacant
3 02SN0140/WP/NOV28S
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North - A and C-5; Commercial or industrial
South - A and C-3; Commercial or vacant
East - C-3; Commercial
West - A; Vacant
UTILITIES
Public Water System:
There is an existing thirty (30) inch water line extending along the southern side of Iron
Bridge Road. In addition, them is an existing eight (8) inch water line serving the existing
Courthouse Commons Shopping Center, approximately 250 feet south of the request site.
Use of the public water system has been proffered. (Proffered Condition 1)
Public Wastewater System:
There is an existing eight (8) inch wastewater collector which serves Courthouse Commons
Shopping Center, approximately 100 feet south of the request site. Use of the public
wastewater system has been proff'emd. (Proffered Condition 1)
The existing wastewater line was extended from the adjacent Deerfield Estates Subdivision.
The Utilities Department has concerns as to the possibility of future wastewater flows
generated by the existing and planned commercial development of the Cogbill property
overburdening the existing wastewater lines which pass through Deerfield Estates. The
system has been analyzed based on "build-out" of the commercial area using standard flow
criteria for the design of wastewater systems. Using flow criteria representative of a "worst
case" scenario, the analysis indicated that a substantial amount of existing wastewater lines
could experience a surcharge condition. The existing pumping station, which serves
Deerfield Estates, has been determined to have sufficient capacity to accommodate build-out
flows from the commercial area.
During review of the first zoning application for a portion the Cogbill property, Case
98SN0185, the applicant was made aware of the Utilities Departments' concerns as to
possible future surcharge of the Deerfield Estates wastewater lines. At that time, the
applicant agreed to provide a proffer stating that they would take responsibility for any future
upgrades necessary to address a surcharge condition in the Deerfield Estates lines. However,
the applicant asked that the proffer be submitted when a zoning application was made for the
remainder of the property. With submittal of the current application, the Utilities
Department again requested the proffer be included, but was advised that it would not be
forthcoming. The applicants engineer has indicated that based on typical flows generated by
4 02SN0140/WP/NOV28S
similar commercial development, it is not felt that a surcharge of the Deerfield Estates lines
is likely to occur. This won't be known for certain until "build-out" of the commercial area
has taken place. If a surcharge should occur, and there is no proffer in place whereby the
County can require the developer to make necessary upgrades, the burden will fall upon the
County and its water and wastewater customers.
The Utilities Department will continue to pursue a proffer to address our concerns with
future zoning applications for the Cogbill property.
ENVIRONMENTAL
Drainage and Erosion:
The property drains south and then via storm systems to the existing BMP. There are no
known on- or off-site drainage or erosion problems and none are anticipated after
development.
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Fire Service:
Fire protection and emergency medical service is currently provided by the Airport
Fire/Rescue Station, Company Number 15. When the property is developed, the number of
hydrants and quantity of water needed for fire protection will be evaluated during the plans
review process.
Transportation:
This request will not limit development to a specific land use; therefore, it is difficult to
anticipate traffic generation. Based on drive-in bank and fast food restaurant trip rates,
development could generate approximately 2,750 average daily trips. These vehicles will be
distributed along Iron Bridge Road (Route 10), which had a 2001 traffic count of 44,240
vehicles per day. The applicant is unwilling to provide road improvements that would
adequately address the traffic impact of the development. Staffdoes not support this request.
The Thoroughfare Plan identifies Route 10 as a major arterial with a recommended right of
way width of 120 to 200 feet. The applicant has proffered to dedicate sixty (60) feet of right
of way, measured from the centerline of Route 10, in accordance with that Plan. (Proffered
Condition 3)
Development must adhere to the Zoning Ordinance relative to access and internal circulation
(Division 5). Access to major arterials, such as Route 10, should be controlled. The
applicant has proffered that no direct access will be provided from the property to Route 10
5 02SN0140/WP/NOV28S
(Proffered Condition 4). The adjacent development is a shopping center (Courthouse
Commons West). In conjunction with that development, access driveways were constructed,
on each side of the subject property, onto Route 10. Access for the subject property to Route
10 will be provided via those existing driveways.
Mitigating road improvements must be provided to address the traffic impact of this
development. A condition of zoning for developing Courthouse Commons West, required a
right turn lane to be constructed along Route 10 at each approved access. To address this
condition, the developer of Courthouse Commons West constructed an additional lane of
pavement along Route 10 for the entire length of the subject property. This additional lane
of pavement currently serves as that right mm lane. As development continues in this area
and traffic volumes increase on Route 10, this lane of pavement, that currently serves as a
right turn lane, will become a third eastbound "through-lane". To address the traffic impact
of this development, a separate right mm lane should be constructed along Route 10. The
applicant is unwilling to provide this improvement. Without this commitment, the
Transportation Department cannot support this request.
LAND USE
Comprehensive Plan:
Lies within the boundaries of the Central Area Plan which, suggests the property is
appropriate for community mixed uses to include commercial and office uses and integrated
townhouse or multi-family residential uses. Further, the Plan suggests that development
around the Government Center should incorporate Federalist and Colonial architectural
design features such as the Chesterfield Meadows Shopping Center.
Area Development Trends:
Properties along this portion of the Iron Bridge Road corridor, in the vicinity of the Iron
Bridge Road/Beach Road intersection, are characterized by a mix of office, commercial and
public/semi-public (Chesterfield County Government Center) uses and by vacant,
agriculturally-zoned property. It is anticipated that the southeast quadrant of Beach and Iron
Bridge Roads will continue to be developed for a mix of commercial and office uses
transitioning into residential development having densities of 2.51 to 4.0 units per acre.
Site Design:
The request property lies within an Emerging Growth Area. New construction must conform
to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance which address access, parking, landscaping,
architectural treatment, setbacks, signs, buffers, utilities, and screening of dumpsters and
loading areas.
6 02SN0140/WP/NOV28S
The subject property was originally part of a larger parcel of land that was owned by the
Cogbill family. In 1998, upon a favorable recommendation by the Planning Commission,
the Board rezoned approximately 14.2 acres of that parent parcel to accommodate a mix of
commercial and office uses. A shopping center, Courthouse Commons, has now been
developed on the commercial portion of that property. Originally, staff encouraged the
property owner to plan and zone their entire holdings at the same time so as to insure a
unified development having proper land use transitions. Because of tax implications,
however, there was a reluctance to zone the entire property and, in lieu of that zoning, the
applicant presented an overall conceptual plan showing how the property could be ultimately
developed in a piecemeal fashion but still achieve the goals of a unified development, which
had as one of the elements, land use transitions. The subject property was shown as out
parcels on that plan. The remaining portion of the property not yet zoned is shown on the
plan for expansion of the in-line shops with office uses to the rear and residential uses to the
south.
Uses are intended to share driveways and parking areas. However, because ora "gray" area
in the Ordinance with respect to the definition of a project, it could be contended that
development of the subject property will not be a part of the project (Courthouse Commons
Shopping Center), which has already developed on part of the parent parcel. Therefore,
consideration should be given to concerns relative to compatible architectural styles and
signage to insure that ultimately the development in this quadrant is perceived as a unified
development consistent with the intent of the Plan and the overall conceptual plan which was
submitted as a part of the zoning for the Courthouse Commons Shopping Center.
Architectural Treatment:
Currently, the Zoning Ordinance requires that architectural treatment of buildings, including
materials, color and style, must be compatible with buildings located within the same project.
Compatibility may be achieved through the use of similar building massing, materials, scale,
colors and other architectural features. A project is defined as a development that is planned,
developed or managed as a unit. There is some question as to whether this development
would be defined as part of the Courthouse Commons Shopping Center project. Therefore,
staff discussed with the applicants concerns relative to compatible architectural designs with
the shopping center and noted the recommendations of the Plan relative to architectural
treatment surrounding the Government Center. As previously stated, the Central Area Plan
suggests that new development in proximity to historic structures in and around the
Chesterfield County Government Center should be architecturally compatible with the
Federalist and Colonial architecture of structures in the area.
In an attempt to address this concern, the applicant has submitted a proffered condition
requiring that the architectural treatment and materials be as depicted on the attached
7 02SN0140/WP/NOV28S
elevations labeled "Revised Exhibit A". Other buildings on outparcels in the shopping center
have employed simulated slate roofs, brick, chimneys and dormer windows. The
architectural treatment required for the shopping center was based upon the treatment of the
bank which had been developed at the southeast comer of Iron Bridge and Beach Roads.
Staff is of the opinion that the elevations should be revised to employ dormers and chimneys
to insure compatibility with the other buildings which have been developed in the southeast
quadrant. Such revisions would be consistent with the recommendations of the Plan.
In addition, within Emerging Growth Areas, no building exterior which would be visible to
any A, R or O District or any public tight 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 of 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 corrugated and/or sheet metal may be
visible from any adjoining A District or any public right of way. No building exterior may
be constructed of unpainted concrete block or corrugated and/or sheet metal.
All junction and accessory boxes must be minimized from view of adjacent property and
public tights of way by landscaping or architectural treatment integrated with the building
served.
Mechanical equipment, whether ground-level or rooftop, must be screened from view of
adjacent property and public fights of way and designed to be perceived as an integral part of
the building.
Signs:
Since the Ordinance is not explicit as to whether the subject property would be considered a
part of the Courthouse Commons Shopping Center, if the property is developed for a
maximum of two (2) uses, each use would be permitted a freestanding sign, not to exceed an
area of fifty (50) feet and a height of fifteen (15) feet. As opposed to if this property were
considered part of the Courthouse Commons Shopping Center development, each use would
be considered an out parcel to the development and permitted a freestanding sign not to
exceed an area of twenty (20) square feet and a height of eight (8) feet. Again, since the
original intent was to treat the overall parent parcel as a unified development, consideration
should be given to requiring signage to comply with out parcel requirements.
Buffers and Screening:
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
and that such area within 1,000 feet of any residentially-zoned property or property used for
8 02SN0140/WP/NO¥28S
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.
With the approval of this request, outside storage would be permitted as a restricted use.
Outside storage areas must be screened from view of adjacent properties which have no such
area and public rights of way.
CONCLUSIONS
The proposed zoning and land use conforms to the Central Area Plan which suggests the property is
appropriate for community mixed use. This could include a mix of shopping center and other
commercial and office uses.
However, as previously noted, the Central Area Plan suggests that new development, in proximity to
historic structures in and around the Chesterfield County Government Center, should be
architecturally compatible with the Federalist and Colonial architecture of other such structures in
the area. While the elevations submitted with the application depict a Colonial architectural design,
the design does not incorporate some of the elements employed in the adjacent development. Given
the discussions during the zoning on the adjacent office and shopping center development relative to
the potential for piecemeal development if the parent property were not zoned and planned at the
same time and the master plan that was presented at that time showing how the property could be
developed piecemeal, but in a unified fashion, concems relative to architectural compatibility and
signage should be addressed.
The application fails to adequately address the traffic impact of this development, as discussed
herein. Given this consideration, denial of this request is recommended.
CASE HISTORY
Applicant (11/7/01):
Revised elevations and Proffered Condition 5, relative to architectural style and materials
were submitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (11/20/01):
The applicant did not accept staff's
Commission's recommendation.
recommendation, but did accept the Planning
9 02SN0140/WP/NOV28S
There was no opposition present. There was discussion relative to architectural
compatibility, signage and traffic impact.
Mr. Litton indicated that with the proffer relative to architecture and the attached elevation,
he felt the proposal is architecturally compatible with area development. He further stated
that the existing turn lane addresses the traffic impact. He stated this development is not part
of the shopping center and therefore should not be subject to the sign restrictions.
On motion of Mr. Litton, seconded by Mr. Cunningham, the Commission recommended
approval of this request and acceptance of the proffered conditions on pages 2 and 3.
AYES: Messrs. Marsh, Litton, Cunningham and Gulley
ABSENT: Mr. Gecker
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, November 28, 2001, beginning at 7:00 p.m., will take
under consideration of this request.
10 02SN0140/WP/NOV28S
PUBI
3: I
I 3:
i
!1
Jl
Jl
'T"
X
m
02SN0140- I