07SN0206
January 16, 2007 CPC
March 20, 2007 CPC
May 15, 2007 CPC
July 17, 2007 CPC
August 21, 2007 CPC
October 16, 2007 CPC
January 9, 2008 BS
STAFF’S
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATION
07SN0206
(AMENDED)
GBS Holding Ltd
Matoaca Magisterial District
Watkins Elementary; Midlothian Middle; and Midlothian High Schools Attendance Zones
West line of Old Hundred Road
REQUEST:Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-15) plus Conditional Use Planned
Development to permit exceptions to Ordinance requirements.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
A single family residential subdivision is planned. The applicant has agreed to limit
the number of lots to forty-five (45), yielding a density of approximately 1.2
dwelling units per acre with a minimum lot size of 9,500 square feet. (Proffered
Condition 2 and Textual Statement)
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON
PAGES 2 THROUGH 4.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend denial for the following reasons:
A.While the proposed zoning and land uses conform to theUpper Swift Creek Plan
which suggests the property is appropriate for single family residential use of 2.0
units per acre or less, the application fails to address compatibility between the
proposed cluster lots and the adjacentResidential (R-15)development through
which the smaller cluster lots could have sole access.
Ю±ª·¼·²¹ ¿ Ú×ÎÍÌ ÝØÑ×ÝÛ ½±³³«²·¬§ ¬¸®±«¹¸ »¨½»´´»²½»·² °«¾´·½ »®ª·½»
B.The application fails to address transportation concerns relative to access, as
discussed herein.
(NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED OR THE PROPERTY OWNER(S) 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
The Owners and the Developer (the “Developer”) inthis zoning case, pursuant to Section 15.2-2298
of the Code of Virginia (1950 as amended) andthe Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County, for
themselves and their successors or assigns, proffer that the development of the Property known as
Chesterfield County TaxIdentification Number part of 714-698-3178 (the “Property”) under
consideration will be developed according to the following conditions if, and only if, the rezoning
request for R-15 and the conditional use plan of development 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 of 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.Master Plan. The Textual Statement, dated July 25, 2007, and Exhibit A,
dated March 1, 2007, and revised July 25, 2007 shall be considered the
Master Plan. (P)
(CPC)2.Density. The maximum number of dwelling units developed on the Property
shall be forty-five (45). Of this total, a minimum of seventeen (17) lots shall
be of Lot Type B and a maximum of twenty six (26) shall be of Lot Type A,
as further defined in the Textual Statement. (P)
(CPC)3.Timbering. With the exception of timbering, which has been approved by the
Virginia State Department of Forestry, there shall be no timbering until a
land disturbance permit has been obtained from the Environmental
Engineering Department and the approveddevices have been installed. (EE)
(CPC) 4. Utilities. The public water and wastewatersystems shall be used, except for
model homes/sales offices not in permanent dwellings and/or construction
offices. (U)
(CPC)5.Cash Proffers. The Developer, subdivider, or assignee(s) shall pay the
following to the County of Chesterfield prior to the issuance of a building
permit for infrastructure improvementswithin the service district for the
Property:
A.$15,600.00 per dwelling unit if paid prior to July 1, 2007. At the time
of payment, the $15,600 will be allocated pro-rata among the facility
î ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
costs as follows: $5,331 for schools, $602 for parks and recreation,
$348 for library facilities, $8,915 for roads, and $404 for fire stations.
Thereafter, such payment shall be the amount approved by the Board
of Supervisors not to exceed $15,600.00 per unit as adjusted upward
by any increase in the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index
between July 1, 2006 and July 1 of the fiscal year in which the
payment is made if paid after June 30, 2007.
B.If, upon the mutualagreement of the Transportation Department and
the Developer, the Developer provides road improvements (the
“Improvements”) in the vicinityof Old HundredRoad, then the
transportation component in this Proffered Condition shall be
reduced by an amount not to exceed the cost to construct the
Improvements so long as the costis of equal or greater value than
that which would have been collected through the payment(s) of the
road component of the cash proffer as determined by the
Transportation Department. Once the sum total amount of the cash
proffer credit exceeds the cost of the Improvements, as determined
by the Transportation Department,thereafter the Developer shall
commence paying the cash proffer as set forth in this Proffered
Condition as adjusted for the credit.For the purposes of this proffer,
the costs, as approved by theTransportation Department, shall
include, but not be limited to, the cost of right-of-way acquisition,
engineering costs, costs of relocating utilities and actual costs of
construction (including labor, materials, and overhead) (“Work”).
Before any Work isperformed, the Developer shall receive prior
written approval by the Transportation Department for the
Improvements and any credit amount.
C.Cash proffer payments shall be spent for the purposes proffered or as
otherwise permitted by law. Should ChesterfieldCounty impose
impact fees at any time during thelife of the development that are
applicable to the Property, the amount paid in cash proffers shall be
in lieu of or credited toward, but not in addition to, any impact fees,
in a manner as determined by the county. (B&M)
(CPC)6.Access. Direct vehicular access from the Property to Old Hundred Road
shall be limited to one (1) public road. The exact location of this access shall
be approved by the Transportation Department.
A. In conjunctionwithany development that includes direct vehicular
access from the property to Old Hundred Road; additional pavement
shall be constructed along Old Hundred Road at the public road
intersection to provide left and right turn lanes. The Developer shall
dedicate to Chesterfield County, free and unrestricted, any additional
right-of-way (or easements) required for these improvements. (T)
í ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
(CPC) 7. Dedication. In conjunction with recordation of the initial subdivision plat or
within sixty (60) days from the date of a written request by the
Transportation Department, whichever occurs first, forty-five (45) feet of
right-of-way on the west side of Old Hundred Road, measured from the
centerline of that part of Old Hundred Road immediately adjacent to the
Property, shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of
Chesterfield County. (T)
(CPC)8.Buffers. All required buffers shall be located within recorded open space.
(P)
(STAFF NOTE: SINCE THE COMMISSION’S CONSIDERATION OF THIS REQUEST
PROFFERED CONDITION 9 HAS BEEN AMENDED. )
(CPC)9.Stormwater Management. Low impact development (“LID”) stormwater
management techniques shall be usedthroughout the Property and included
in the calculation of the post-development phosphorusloads. (EE)
9.Stormwater Management.The developer acknowledges that if the water
quality of the Swift Creek Reservoir has reached a median level that
exceeds .04 mg/l in-lake phosphorus or otherwise degrades to an
unacceptable level, that the Director of Environmental Engineering,may
recommend that the County adopt phosphorus loading standards that are
more restrictive than the standards applicable as of October 10, 2007. To
mitigate the impact of this development on the water quality of the Swift
Creek Reservoir and the Upper Swift Creek Watershed, and consistent
with the County's duty to exercise its police powers to protect the County's
water supply, the Developer and his assignees agree that the phosphorus
loading standards of the zoning ordinance applicable to any undeveloped
portion of the subject property shall be those standards that are in effect at
the time of subdivision or site plan approval for any residential uses. This
condition shall not apply to residential uses located within the same
structure as commercial uses. All substantially approvable construction
plans in the Department of Environmental Engineering that have complied
.
with the submittal criteria for review shall not be affected(EE)
GENERAL INFORMATION
Location:
West line of Old Hundred Road, northwest of Otterdale Road. Tax ID 714-698-Part of
3178.
ì ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
Existing Zoning:
A
Size:
38.8 acres
Existing Land Use:
Vacant
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North and West – R-15; Single family residential or vacant
South - R-40;Singlefamily residential
East- A; Single family residential
UTILITIES
Public Water System:
There is an existing twenty-four (24) inch water line extending along the north side of
Midlothian Turnpike that terminates westof Huguenot Springs Road, adjacent to the
Huguenot Springs Water Tank, approximately 2.12 miles north of this site. A sixteen (16)
inch water line is under construction in conjunction with the Hallsley development and
when completed will extend from Midlothian Turnpike along Dry Bridge Road and
continuing south along Old Hundred Road to terminate at a point, adjacent to the southern
boundary of this site. Use of the public water system is recommended by theUpper Swift
Creek Plan . (ProfferedCondition 4)
Public Wastewater System:
There is an existing sixty (60) inch wastewater trunk line extending along the north side of
Genito Road, adjacent to the Swift Creek Reservoir, approximately three (3) miles southeast
of this site. The request site is within the drainage area of the Upper Swift Creek Basin. In
conjunction with the Hallsley development, a forty-two (42) inch wastewater trunk line is
under construction along a portion of Swift Creek and Nelsons Branch. In addition, the on-
site wastewater collector lines are under construction for Hallsley Section 1. When
completed, the public wastewater system will be available to serve this site. Use of the
public wastewater systemis recommended by the Upper Swift Creek Plan. (Proffered
Condition 4)
ë ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
ENVIRONMENTAL
Drainage and Erosion:
The subject property drains to the east through North Hundred subdivision and then via
tributaries to Swift Creek Reservoir. There are currently no on- or off-site drainage or
erosion problems and none are anticipated afterdevelopment. The southern portion of the
parcel is wooded and, as such, should not be timbered without obtaining a land disturbance
permit from the Department of Environmental Engineering. This will ensure that adequate
erosion control measures are in place prior to any land disturbance. (Proffered Condition 3)
Water Quality:
With the adoption of the amended Upper Swift Creek Plan a goal was adopted that
residential developers address the impact of their development on water quality. Such
conditions could include (i) implementing phosphorus loading standards that are more
restrictive than the standards of the Zoning Ordinance; (ii) implementing more restrictive
requirements for zoned but undeveloped land if notified by the Director of Environmental
Engineering that the water quality of the Swift Creek Reservoir has reached a median level
that exceeds .04 mg/l in-lakephosphorus for two consecutive years, or exceeds other
applicable water quality standards; and/or (iii) implementing other measures approved by
the Director of Environmental Engineering to address the impact of development on water
quality in the Upper Swift Creek Watershed. The applicanthas addressed these goals.
(Proffered Condition 9)
PUBLIC FACILITIES
The need for fire, school, library, park and transportation facilities is identified in the Public
Facilities Plan, the Thoroughfare Plan and the Capital Improvement Program. This development
will have an impact on these facilities.
Fire Service:
The Public Facilities Plan indicates that fire and emergency medical service (EMS) calls are
expected to increase forty-four (44) to seventy-eight (78) percent by 2022. Six (6) new
fire/rescue stations are recommended for construction by 2022 in the Plan. In addition to the
six new stations, the Plan also recommends the expansion of five (5) existing stations. Based
on forty-five (45) dwelling units, this request will generate approximately seven (7) call for
fire and emergency medical service each year. The applicant has addressed the impact on
fire and EMS. (Proffered Condition 5)
The applicant has requested that some dwellings be allowed to front on open space or
courtyards. If access to the dwellings is by alleys, such alleys may be required to be
constructed as a fire lane in accordance with the 2003 International Fire Code. This
requirement will be evaluated at thetime of tentative subdivision review.
ê ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
The Swift Creek Fire Station, Company Number 16, currentlyprovides fire protection and
emergency medical service. When the property is developed, the number of hydrants,
quantity of water needed for fire protection, and access requirements will be evaluated
during the plans review process.
Schools:
Approximately twenty-three (23) (Elementary:10, Middle: 6, High: 7) students will be
generated by this development. Currently this site lies in the Watkins Elementary School
attendance zone: capacity - 752, enrollment - 743; Midlothian Middle School: capacity -
1,301, enrollment - 1,424; and Midlothian High School: capacity - 1,589, enrollment -
1,520. The enrollment is based on September 29, 2006 and the capacity is as of 2006-2007.
This request will have an impact on the elementary and middle schools. There are currently
seven (7) trailers at Watkins Elementary and six (6) trailers at Midlothian Middle.
The current Capital Improvements Plan and Public Facilities Plan contain no new facilities
in this area. Increased capacity for this area will be provided by additions to these schools by
2012. This case combined with other residential developments and zoning cases in the
zones, will continue to push these schools over capacity, necessitating some form of
additional relief in the future. The applicant has addressed theimpact of the development on
schools. (Proffered Condition 5)
Libraries:
Consistent with the Board of Supervisors’ policy, the impact of development on library
services is assessed County-wide. Based on projected population growth, the Public
Facilities Plan identifies a need for additional library space throughout the County.
Development in this area ofthe county would most likelyimpact either the Midlothian
Library or a proposed new branch in the Genito Road area. The Plan indicates a need for
additional library space in this area of the County. The applicant has addressed the impact
on library facilities. (Proffered Condition 5)
Parks and Recreation:
The Public Facilities Plan identifies the need for three (3) new regional parks, seven (7)
community parks, twenty-nine (29) neighborhood parks and five (5) community centers
by 2020. In addition, the Public Facilities Plan identifies the need for ten (10) new or
expanded special purpose parks to provide water access or preserve and interpret unique
recreational, cultural or environmental resources. The Plan identifies shortfalls in trails
and recreational historic sites.
The applicant has offered measures to assist in addressing the impact of this proposed
development on these parks and recreational facilities. (Proffered Condition 5)
é ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
Transportation:
The property (38.8 acres) is currently zoned Agricultural (A), and the applicant is requesting
rezoning to Residential (R-15) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit
exceptions to the zoning ordinance requirements. The Transportation Department cannot
support this case because the applicant is requesting direct vehicular access to Old Hundred
Road.
The applicant has proffered a maximum density of forty-five (45) units (Proffered Condition
2). Based on single-family trip rates, development could generate approximately 500
average daily trips. These vehicles will be initially distributed to Old Hundred Road. Based
on the most recent data from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), this
section of Old Hundred Road was carrying 2,535 vehicles per day (VPD) in 2006.
The Thoroughfare Plan identifies Old Hundred Roadas a major arterial with a
recommended right of way width of ninety (90) feet. The applicant has proffered to dedicate
forty-five (45) feet of rightof way, measured from the centerline of Old Hundred Road, in
accordance with that Plan. (Proffered Condition 7)
Vehicular access to major arterials, such as Old Hundred Road, should be controlled. In
order to reduce conflicts points and the potential for accidents, no direct vehicular access
should be provided from the property to Old Hundred Road. Vehicular access to Old
Hundred Road could be provided via the streets in the adjacent subdivision to the north
(Hallsley Subdivision). Included in the Subdivision Ordinance is the Planning
Commission’s Stub Road Policy. The Policy suggests that subdivision streets anticipated to
carry 1,500 VPD or more should be designed as “no-lot frontage” collector roads. Traffic
generated by this development traveling along the streets within Hallsley Subdivision is not
anticipated to cause those streets to exceed acceptable subdivision street volumes as defined
by the Stub Road Policy. The applicant has proffered one (1) public road access from the
property to Old Hundred Road (Proffered Condition 6). Staff does not support this access.
The applicant has also proffered to construct left and right turn lanes along Old Hundred
Road at the proposed public road intersection with any development that includes this access
onto Old Hundred Road. (Proffered Condition 6)
Area roads need to be improved to address safety and accommodate the increase in traffic
generated by this development. Old Hundred Road will be directly impacted by
development of this property. Sections of this road have approximately nineteen (19) foot
wide pavement with no shoulders. This road is at capacity(Level of Service C) for the
volume of traffic it currently carries (2,535 VPD).
The applicant has proffered to provide cash, in an amount consistent with the Board of
Supervisors’ Cash Proffer Policy, towards mitigating the traffic impact of this development
(Proffered Condition 5). Proffered Condition 5 would also allow, upon mutual agreement of
the Transportation Department and the applicant, the applicant to provide road
è ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
improvements equal to the cost of such payment(s). This option will be considered at time
of tentative subdivision plat review.
As development continues in this part of the county, traffic volumes on area roads will
substantially increase. Cash proffers alone will not cover the cost of the improvements
needed to accommodate the traffic increases. No road improvement projects in this part of
the county are included in the Six-Year Improvement Plan.
The Virginia Department of Transportation’s (VDOT) “Chapter 527” regulations, dealing
with development Traffic Impact Study requirements, have recently been enacted. Staff has
been meeting with VDOT to attempt to understand the process and the impact of the
regulations. At this time, it is uncertain what impactVDOT’s regulations will have on the
development process or upon zonings approved by the county.
As previously stated, the applicant has requested a direct vehicular access onto Old Hundred
Road. The Transportation Department cannot support this request.
Financial Impact on Capital Facilities:
PERUNIT
Potential Number of New Dwelling Units 45*1.00
Population Increase122.402.72
Number of New Students
Elementary10.490.23
Middle 5.850.13
High7.610.17
TOTAL23.940.53
Net Cost for Schools $240,660$5,348
Net Cost for Parks27,180604
Net Cost for Libraries15,705349
Net Cost for Fire Stations18,225405
Average Net Cost for Roads 402,3908,942
TOTAL NET COST$704,160$15,648
* Based on a proffered maximum of forty-five (45) dwelling units (Proffered Condition 2). The
actual number of dwelling units and corresponding impact may vary.
As noted, this proposed development will have an impact on capital facilities. Staff has calculated
the fiscal impact of every new dwelling unit on schools, roads, parks, libraries, and fire stations at
$15,648 per unit. The applicant has been advised that a maximum profferof $15,600 per unit
ç ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
would defray the cost of the capital facilities necessitated by this proposed development. Consistent
with the Board of Supervisors' policy, and proffers accepted from other applicants, the applicant has
offered cash and road improvements to assist in defraying the cost of this proposed zoning on such
capital facilities. (Proffered Condition 5)
Note that circumstances relevant to this case, aspresented by the applicant, have been reviewed and
it has been determined that it is appropriate to accept the maximum cash proffer in this case.
LAND USE
Comprehensive Plan:
Lies within the boundariesof the Upper Swift Creek Plan which suggests the property is
appropriate for single family residential use of 2.0 units per acre or less.
The Upper Swift Creek Plan Amendment is currently under review.
Area Development Trends:
Properties to the north and south are developed as part of the Hallsley and North Hundred
Subdivisions. Property to the west is vacant, but is zoned for single-family development as
part of the overall Hallsley project. Properties to the east are zoned Agricultural (A) and are
occupied by single family dwellings. Residential development at densities consistent with
the Plan is expected to continue in this area.
Site Design:
The property is proposed for amix of residential uses, to include courtyard (Lot Type A)
and conventional lots (Lot Type B), as well as open spaces. These uses will be located as
depicted on the Master Plan (Attachment), as described in the Textual Statement
(Attachment) and the proffered conditions. The boundaries and sizes of these development
areas may be modified so long as their relationship with each other and adjacent properties
is maintained. (Proffered Condition 1 and Textual Statement II)
Density:
A maximum of forty-five (45) dwelling units have been proffered, yielding an overall
density of 1.2 dwelling units per acre. (Proffered Condition 2)
Courtyard Lots (Lot Type A):
A maximum of twenty-six (26) courtyard homes are proposedon individual lots having a
minimum of 9,500 square feet.Exceptions have been requested to lot width, lot coverage
and building setbacks. (Proffered Condition 2 and Textual Statement IV.A.1-3)
ïð ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
Buildings may front on public roads, as well as open spaces and courtyards with appropriate
access easements. Alleys may be provided to serve these lots. The Textual Statement
contains language establishing minimum standards for alleys. The location and design of
alleys is best addressed during plan review when more details are known; therefore, this
language should be omitted from the Textual Statement. (Textual Statement IV.A.4-6)
Conventional Lots (Lot Type B):
A minimum of seventeen (17) homes are proposed on individual lots having a minimum of
20,000 square feet. An exception has been requested to reduce the required front yard for
dwellings. (Proffered Condition 2 and Textual StatementIV.B)
Compatibility with Adjoining Development:
This proposal would permit cluster or courtyard lots containing a minimum area of 9,500
square feet (Lot Type A).The Zoning Ordinance requiresa minimum lot size of 12,000
square feet for single family development. Access to the subject property would be
provided through the adjacent Hallsley Subdivision, which is zoned Residential (R-15) and
requires a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet. With approval of this request, a cluster
lot development would have sole access via a local streetthrough a conventional R-15
subdivision, resulting in a compatibility issue between these two (2) development types. As
such, staff does not support an exception to permit lots below an area of 12,000 square feet.
Open Space, Buffers, Sidewalks and Street Trees:
Within each of the courtyard developments, a minimum of 8,000 square feet of open space
would be located as a focal point. This focal point size is smaller than the three- quarter
(.75) acre area typically required by the Commission and Board on similar projects.
(Textual Statement IV.A.7)
Where lot areas are reduced below the minimum 15,000 square feet, the Ordinance will
require that comparable amount of square footage be placed in open space. A minimum
provision of five (5) acres of open space is proposed. (Textual Statement III.D)
All required buffers would be recordedin open space. (Proffered Condition 8)
Sidewalks and street trees shall be provided throughout the project. (Textual Statement
III.B and C)
Parking:
The Ordinance requires the provision of two (2) off-street parking spaces for each dwelling
unit. An exception is requested to permit both parking within garages and on-street parking
to be credited towards thisminimum requirement (TextualStatement III.A). While staff
supports such exceptions since they reduce the amount of impervious area and therefore, the
impact on water quality, the developer and future owners should be cautioned that with
ïï ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
respect to enclosed parking, it will not be possible in the future to convert garages into living
space.
CONCLUSIONS
While the proposed zoning and land usesconform to the Upper Swift Creek Plan which suggests
the property is appropriate for single family residential use of 2.0 units per acre or less, the
application fails to address compatibility between the proposed cluster lots and the adjacent
Residential (R-15) development through which thesmaller cluster lots would have sole access.
Further, the application fails to address transportation concerns relative to access on Old Hundred
Road, as discussed herein.
Given these considerations, denial of this request is recommended.
CASE HISTORY
Planning Commission Meeting (1/16/07):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to theirMarch 20, 2007,
meeting.
Staff (1/17/07):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information should
be submitted no later than January 22, 2007, for consideration at the Commission’s March
2007, public hearing. In addition, the applicant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must
be paid prior to the Commission’s public hearing.
Applicant (1/27/07):
The deferral fee was paid.
Area Property Owners, Applicant, Staff and Matoaca District Commissioner (1/31/07):
A meeting was held to discuss this case. Concerns were expressed relative to provision of
utilities; protection of environmental features; provision of open space; and architectural
style and size of proposed dwelling units.
ïî ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
Applicant (2/15/07):
The application was amended to withdraw the request for community recreation uses.
Applicant (2/22/07; 3/2/07; and 3/6/07):
Draft proffered conditions and Textual Statements were submitted.
______________________________________________________________________________
Applicant (3/7/07):
Signed proffered conditions and Textual Statement were submitted.
____________________________________________________________________________
Planning Commission Meeting (3/20/07):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their May 15, 2007,
meeting.
Staff (3/21/07):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information should
be submitted no later than March 26, 2007, for consideration at the Commission’s May 15,
2007, public hearing. In addition, the applicant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must
be paid prior to the Commission’s public hearing.
Applicant (5/14/07):
The deferral fee was paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (5/15/07):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to theirJuly 17, 2007,
public hearing.
Staff (5/16/07):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, newor revised information should
be submitted no later than May 21, 2007, for consideration at the Commission’s July public
hearing. The applicant was also advised that a $250.00 deferral fee was due.
ïí ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
Staff (6/22/07):
To date, no new information has been received, nor has the deferral fee been paid.
Applicant (7/11/07):
The deferral fee was paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (7/17/07):
On their own motion, the Commission deferred this case to their August 21, 2007, meeting.
Staff (7/18/07):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information should
be submitted no later than July 23, 2007, for consideration at the Commission’s August 21,
2007, public hearing.
Applicant (7/25/07):
Revised proffered conditions, Textual Statement and exhibit were submitted.
Planning Commission (8/21/07):
Mr. Bass requested that the case be deferred to October 16, 2007.
The applicant did not accept the recommendation for deferral.
There was opposition present to the deferralindicating the applicant had addressed area
resident’s concerns regarding impact on wells and compatibility.
In response to concerns expressed by staff, the applicant indicated a willingness to revise the
proffered conditions to preclude access to Old Hundred Road.
Mr. Bass indicated that the Plan amendment is under consideration and this is a sensitive
area.
On their own motion, the Commission deferred this case to their October 16, 2007, meeting.
ïì ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
Staff (8/22/07):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information should
be submitted no later than August 27, 2007, for consideration at the Commission’s October,
2007, public hearing.
Staff (9/21/07):
To date, no new information has been received.
Applicant (10/15/07):
An additional proffered condition was submitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (10/16/07):
Following discussions regarding the water quality proffer, the applicant agreed to amend
Proffered Condition 9.
The applicant accepted the Commission’s recommendation. The property owner spoke in
support of this request. There was opposition present citing concerns relative to density and
the impact on the Transportation network.
Mr. Bass indicated that area developers are agreeing to address road improvements. He
further stated that with access to Old Hundred Road, staff’s concerns regarding accessing a
higher density developmentsolely through a lower density development would be
addressed.
On motion of Mr. Bass, seconded by Mr. Gulley, the Commission recommended approval
and acceptance of the proffered conditions on pages 2 through 4.
AYES: Messrs. Gecker, Gulley, Bass, Litton and Wilson.
Applicant (11/6/07):
Revised proffers regarding water quality were submitted.
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, January 9, 2008, beginning at 6:30 p.m., will take under
consideration this request.
ïë ðéÍÒðîðêóÖßÒçóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
This page is blank.
Woodle Property
TEXTUAL STATEMENT
October 10, 2006
Revised January 11, 2007
Revised February 21, 2007
Revised March 1, 2007
Revised March 2, 2007
Revised March 6, 2007
Revised March 7, 2007
Revised June 29, 2007
Revised July 25, 2007
This application contains one (1) exhibit (Exhibit A: Master Plan) titled “Woodle
Property,” identifying Lot Types A and B and Open Spaces, prepared by Timmons Group
dated March 1, 2007 and last revised on July 25, 2007.
I.Rezone: Rezone 38.8 acres (the “Property”) from A to R-15, to permit residential
uses permitted in the R-15 zoning district, and Conditional Use Planned
Development (“CUPD”) to permit exceptions to Ordinance requirements as set
forth below.
II. General Conditions: To accommodate the orderly development of the Property,
Lot Types A and B and Open Spaces (the “Tracts”) shall be generally located as
depicted on the Master Plan, but their location and size may be modified (such as
moving the location of a Tract boundary) so long as the Tracts generally maintain
their relationship with each other and any adjacent properties. A plan for Tract
modification shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and
approval. Such plan shall be subject to appeal in accordance with the provisions
of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan appeals.
III. Requirements and Exceptions for all Tracts
A.Parking. On-street parking shall generally be permitted on all public
streets and around the courtyard areas. Where on-street parking is
permitted, those spaces shall be counted towards the required number of
parking spaces for the lots. Any private garage parking or other type of
enclosed and/or covered parking area shall be counted toward the
calculation of the required parking spaces.
B.Sidewalks. Sidewalks shall be provided on both sides of all roads, except
within or along any recorded Open Space areas.
C.Street Trees. Street trees shall be planted or retained along each side of all
public streets and around the courtyard areas, except that street trees shall
not be required within or along any Open Space. Street trees will be
maintained by the community association and not necessarily incorporated
into the public right-of-way.
This page is blank.
D.Open Space. A minimum of five (5) acres of the Property shall be located
within recorded Open Space.
IVRequirements and Exceptions for Specific Tracts.
A.Lot Type A – Courtyard Lots
1.Front, Side, Corner side and Rear Yards. No minimum.
2.Lot Area and Width. Each lot shall have a lot area of not less than
9,500 square feet and a lot width of not less than thirty (30) feet.
3.Percentage of Lot Coverage. All buildings, including accessory
buildings, on any lot shall not cover more than fifty (50) percent of
the lot area.
4.Alleys. Alleys, where provided, will generally serve the rear or
side portion of a lot. Alleys will be private, located within a
minimum eighteen (18) foot wide private easement that will be
maintained by the community association. Alley pavement shall be
a minimum of fourteen (14) feet in width.
5.Frontage. All buildings shall front on a street, open space or
courtyard. Street frontage for dwelling units shall not be required
provided there is access to a public street via an easement or right-
of-way and that such dwelling unit fronts on an alley or courtyard.
6.Garages. Garages shall be accessed from the alleys. Alleys and
driveways shall be hardscaped.
7.Focal Point (Courtyard). A minimum of 8,000 square feet of
required Open Space shall serve as a focal point for the Lot Type
A lots as generally depicted on the Master Plan. Part of these areas
shall be hardscaped and have benches or other amenities that
accommodate and facilitate gatherings. The focal points shall be
developed concurrent with development of the Lot Type A lots.
B.Lot Type B
All Lot Type B lots shall comply with the Zoning Ordinance requirements
for Residential R-15 Zoning District, except as follows:
1.Lot Area. Each lot shall have a lot area of not less than 20,000
square feet.
2. Front Yard. The front yard shall be a minimum of thirty (30) feet
in depth for lots not located on a cul-de-sac.
\4212831.9
2
This page is blank.
This page is blank.
This page is blank.