98SN0142.PDFJune 24, 1998 BS
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATION
98SN0142
Amck Prope~ies, Inc.
Midlothian Magisterial District
West line of Winterfield Road
REQUEST: Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-15).
PROPOSED LAND USE:
A single family residential subdivision having a minimum lot size of 17,500 square
feet is planned. The applicant has agreed to limit development to a maximum of
forty-nine (49) lots, yielding a density of approximately 1.25 units per acre.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON
PAGES 2 THROUGH 5.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend approval subject to the applicant addressing concerns relative to Proffered Condition
14. This recommendation is made for the following reasons:
The proposed zoning and land use conform with the land use recommendations of
the Midlothian Area Community. Plan which suggests the property is appropriate
for residential use of 1.01 to 2.5 dwelling units per acre.
Bo
Proffered Condition 14 addresses the orientation of garage doors. Enforcement of
the condition would be the responsibility of County staff. Typically, such
requirements are addressed through restrictive covenants. As written, the
enforcement of the condition will be difficult due to the vague language and the
lack of a definitive measure for staff to determine whether relief should be granted
to allow front entry garages.
(NOTE: THE ONLY CONDITION THAT MAY BE IMPOSED IS A BUFFER CONDITION.
THE PROPERTY OWNER(S) MAY PROFFER OTHER 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
(STAFF/CPC)
1. Public water and wastewater systems shall be used.
(STAFF/CPC) 2.
Except for the timbering approved by the Virginia State Department
of Forestry for the purpose of removing dead or diseased trees,
there shall be no timbering on the Property until a land disturbance
permit has been obtained from the Chesterfield County
Environmental Engineering Department and the approved devices
have been installed.
(STAFF/CPC) 3.
The Applicant, subdivider, or assignee(s) shall pay the following to
the County of Chesterfield at the time of building permit application
for infrastructure improvements within the service district of the
Property:
a. $6,000.00 per lot if paid prior to July 1, 1998; or
bo
The amount approved by the Board of Supervisors not to
exceed $6,819.00 per lot, if paid between July 1, 1998 and
June 30, 1999; or
The amount approved by the Board of Supervisors not to
exceed $6,819.00 per lot adjusted upward by any increase in
the Marshal and Swift Building Cost Index between July 1,
1998 and July 1 of the fiscal year in which the payment is
made, if paid after June 30, 1999.
In the event the cash payment is not used for the purpose for which
proffered within fifteen (15) years of receipt, the cash shall be
returned in full to the payor.
(STAFF/CPC) 4.
The Property shall be subdivided into no more than forty-nine (49)
residential lots.
2
98SN0142/WP/JUNE24G
(STAFF/CPC)
(STAFF/CPC)
(STAFF/CPC)
(STAFF/CPC)
o
o
At time of recordation of the first subdivision plat, thirty-five (35)
feet of right of way on the west side of Winterfield Road, measured
from the centerline of that part of Winterfield Road immediately
adjacent to the Property, shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted,
to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County.
To provide for an adequate roadway system at time of complete
development and to account for the County's intention to realign
Winterfield Road through the Property, the Applicant shall be
responsible for the following:
ao
At time of recordation of the fa'st subdivision plat, a seventy
(70) foot wide right of way for the north/south collector
("Winterfield Road Relocated") from Winterfield Road to
the southern Property line, shall be dedicated, free and
unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County.
The exact location of this right of way shall be approved by
the Chesterfield County Transportation Department (the
"Transportation Department");
Construction of additional pavement along Winterfield
Road, at the Winterfield Road Relocated intersection to
provide left and right turn lanes;
Co
Construction of two (2) lanes of Winterfield Road Relocated
to Virginia Department of Transportation ("VDOT") Urban
collector standards (40 mph) from Winterfield Road to the
southern Property line; and
Dedication to Chesterfield County, free and unrestricted, any
additional right of way (or easements) required for the
improvements identified above.
Direct access to Winterfield Road shall be limited to Winterfield
Road Relocated. Direct access to Winterfield Road Relocated shall
be approved by the Transportation Department. The Transportation
Department shall approve the exact location of these accesses.
Prior to any road and drainage plan approval, a phasing plan for the
required road improvements, as identified in Proffered Condition 6,
shall be submitted to and approved by the Transportation
Department.
3 98SN0142/WP/JUNE24G
(STAFF/CPC)
(STAFF/CPC)
(STAFF/CPC)
(STAFF/CPC)
(STAFF/CPC)
(CPC)
(STAFF/CPC)
(STAFF/CPC)
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
All driveways on each individual subdivision lot shall paved. The
exact pavement type, which may include asphalt, concrete,
aggregate materials, and brick or stone pavers, shall be approved by
the Planning Department.
All exposed portions of the foundation of each dwelling shall be
covered with brick, stone, or dryvit type materials.
All exposed portions of coal burning or wood burning fh'eplace
chimneys for each dwelling shall be covered with brick, stone or
dryvit type materials; gas or ornamental fkeplaces may be wall-
vented with no chimneys as allowed by applicable building codes;
however, such vented enclosures shall not be cantilevered and must
have a base to match the foundation.
All residential lots that abut Salisbury Heathland and Lintenfield
sections and Michaux, Section C shall have a minimum lot area of
twenty-five thousand (25,000) square feet. All other residential lots
shall have a minimum lot area of twenty thousand (20,000) square
feet.
The gross floor area of each dwelling unit shall be a minimum of
two thousand two hundred (2,200) square feet.
Except as stated herein, all dwellings that provide a garage shall
employ side or rear entry garage design; provided, however, if the
provision of a side or rear entry garage cannot be reasonably or
feasibly accomplished because of features on or around the lot, such
as topography, utility and drainage features and easements, grading,
or other applicable features or governmental requirements that
would effectively prohibit the provision of safe access and orderly
design of the lot if a side or rear entry garage design is employed,
then a dwelling may employ a front entry garage design.
Any open basins required for water quantity or quality control
designed to serve the Property shall be landscaped or otherwise
improved so that the facilities become visual enhancements to and
amenities for the uses developed on the Property. At the time of
subdivision plan review, a plan depicting these requirements shall
be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval.
The Tentative Subdivision Plan for the Property shall be submitted
to the Planning Commission for review and approval.
4
98SN0142/WP/JUNE24G
(STAFF/CPC) 17.
(STAFF/CPC) 18.
Location:
Except as provided herein, all trees having a caliper of six inches or
greater within twenty-five (25) feet of Salisbury Heathland and
Lintenfield sections and Michaux, Section C shall be maintained.
The trees may be disturbed for the installation of utilities, and any
dead or diseased trees may be removed. The twenty-five (25) foot
tree preservation area shall be exclusive of any required setback.
The Property shall not have access onto Treport Road.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Fronts the west line of Winterfield Road, south of Elmstead Road. GPIN 725-711-1557
(Sheet 7).
Existing Zoning:
A
Size:
39.2 acres
Existing Land Use:
Vacant
Adjacent Zoning & Land Use:
North - R-15; Single family residemial or vacant
South - A; Single family residential or vacant
East - A; Single family residential or vacant
West - R-40 and R-25; Single family residential or vacant
UTILITIES
Public Water System:
There is an existing sixteen (16) inch water line along a portion of Wimerfield Road and
adjacent to the northeast comer of the request site. In addition, there is an existing six (6)
inch water line in Treport Road approximately 170 feet north of the request site. Use of
5 98SN0142/WP/JUNE24G
the public water system is intended and has been proffered by the applicant. (Proffered
Condition 1)
Public Water System:
There is an existing fifteen (15) inch wastewater trunk line along Michaux Creek
approximately 300 feet west of the request site. Use of the public wastewater system is
intended and has been proffered by the applicant. (Proffered Condition 1)
ENVIRONMENTAL
Drainage and Erosion:
Most of the site drains to the southwest to Michaux Creek then to the James River. There
are no existing or anticipated on- or off-site drainage or erosion problems; however, the
creek appears to be experiencing natural degradation. It may be necessary to obtain off-
site easements to control increased runoff from development of the property.
The applicant has proffered that, with the exception of timbering which has been approved
by the Department of Forestry to remove dead or diseased trees, there will be no timbering
until a land disturbance permit has been obtained from the Environmental Engineering
Department ff'roffered Condition 2). This will ensure that proper erosion control measures
are in place prior to any timbering and related land disturbance.
Water Quality.:
Proffered Condition 15 requires that any BMP be designed as an amenity.
PUBLIC FACILITIES
The need for fire, school, library, park and transportation facilities is identified in the Public
Facilities Plan, the Thoroughfare Plan and the FY1998-2002 Capital Improvement Program and
further detailed by specific departments in the applicable sections of this Request Analysis. This
development will have an impact on these facilities.
Fire Service:
The Public Facilities Plan indicates that Emergency Services calls are expected to increase
forty-five (45) percent by the year 2015. Eight (8) new fire/rescue stations are
recommended for construction by the year 2015 in the Public Facilities Plan. This
property is currently served by the Midlothian Fire/Rescue Station, Company Number 5
and Forest View Rescue Squad. Based on forty-nine (49) residential lots, this request will
generate approximately ten (10) emergency calls for fire and rescue services per year. The
6
98SN0142/WP/JUNE24G
applicant has agreed to participate in the cost of providing for these facilities. (Proffered
Condition 3)
When the property is developed, the number of hydrants and quantity of water needed for
£n'e protection will be evaluated during the plans review process.
Schools:
Approximately twenty-eight (28) school age children could be generated by this
development. The site lies in the Weaver Elementary School attendance zone: capacity -
775, enrollment - 677; Midlothian Middle School zone: capacity - 1,350, enrollment -
1,318; and Midlothian High School zone: capacity - 1,750, enrollment - 1,181.
This development will have an impact on area schools. The applicant has agreed to
participate in the cost of providing for area school needs. (Proffered Condition 3)
Library:
The proposed development will likely impact the Midlothian Branch Library. The Public
Facilities Plan (1995) identifies a need for additional library space in this service area
based on anticipated population growth. The applicant has agreed to participate in the cost
of providing for these facilities. (Proffered Condition 3)
Parks and Recreation:
The Public Facilities Plan identifies the need for two (2) new regional parks in the County
by 2015. The Public Facilities Plan further identifies a current need for fifty (50) acres
of regional park space in the northern area. The applicant has offered measures to assist
in addressing the impact of this proposed residential development on these facilities.
(Proffered Condition 3)
Transportation:
The applicant has proffered a maximum density of 49 residential lots (Proffered Condition
4). Based on single family detached trip rates, development could generate approximately
540 average daily trips. These vehicles will be distributed along Winterfield Road which
had a 1997 traffic count of 10,034 vehicles per day.
The Thoroughfare Plan identifies Winterfield Road as a collector, with a recommended
right-of-way width of seventy (70) feet. The applicant has proffered to dedicate thirty-five
(35) feet of right-of-way, measured from the centerline of Winterfield Road, in accordance
with that Plan. (Proffered Condition 5)
7 98SN0142/WP/JUNE24G
The Thoroughfare Plan also identifies a north/south collector (Winterfield Road
Relocated), with a recommended right-of-way width of seventy (70) feet, extending
through the property. The applicant has proffered to dedicate a seventy (70) foot wide
right-of-way for Winterfield Road Relocated in accordance with that Plan. (Proffered
Condition 6.a.)
Access to collectors, such as Winterfield Road and Winterfield Road Relocated, should be
controlled. The applicant has proffered that direct access to Winterfield Road will be
limited to Winterfield Road Relocated (Proffered Condition 7). The proffer also requires
the Transportation Department to approve the location of the access to Winterfield Road
Relocated. The Planning Commission's Stub Road Policy requires that streets projected
to carry approximately 1,500 vehicles per day or greater, should be designed and
constructed as "no lot frontage" streets. Winterfield Road Relocated is projected to carry
more than 1,500 vehicles per day. Based on the configuration of the property and the
possible alignment of Winterfield Road Relocated, direct lot frontage may be the only
means of providing access to some lots within this proposed residential development.
Should it be the desire of the applicant to front lots on this road, it will be necessary to
seek a waiver to the "Stub Road Policy" at the time of tentative subdivision review.
In recording the Heathland section of the Salisbury Subdivision, a right-of-way (Treport
Road) was stubbed to the subject property. The applicant has proffered that no access will
be provided from the property to Treport Road. (Proffered Condition 18)
Mitigating road improvements must be provided to address the traffic impact of this
development. The applicant has proffered to: 1) construct additional pavement along
Winterfield Road at the Winterfield Road Relocated intersection to provide left and right
turn lanes; and 2) construct two (2) lanes of Winterfield Road Relocated from Winterfield
Road to the southern property line (Proffered Condition 6.b. and c). Construction of the
turn lanes along Winterfield Road may require acquisition of "off site" right-of-way.
Area roads need to be improved to address safety and accommodate the increase in traffic
generated by this development. The applicant has proffered to contribute cash towards
mitigating this traffic impact (Proffered Condition 3).
98SNO142/WP/JUNE24G
Financial Impact on Capital Facilities:
PER
DWELLING
UNIT
Potential # New Dwelling Units 49* 1.00
Population Increase [ 137-201 2.8
Number New Students
Elementary 13.57 0.28
Middle 6.57 0.13
High 7.60 0.16
Total 27.73 0.57
Net Cost for Schools 152,047 3,103
Net Cost for Parks 31,017 633
Net Cost for Libraries 16,072 328
Net Cost for Fire Stations 14,014 286
Average Net Cost Roads 120,981 2,469
Total Net Cost 334,131 6,819
* Based on a proffered condition restricting subdivision of the property into no more than 49
residential lots. (Proffered Condition 4)
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 $6,819 per unit. The applicant has been advised that a maximum proffer of $6,000 per unit
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 to assist in defraying the cost of this proposed zoning on such capital
facilities. (Proffered Condition 3)
Note that circumstances relevant to this case, as presented by the applicant, have been reviewed
and it has been determined that it is appropriate to accept the maximum cash proffer in tiffs case.
9 98SN0142/WP/JUNE24G
LAND USE
Comprehensive Plan:
Lies within the boundaries of the Midlothian Area Communi .ty Plan which suggests the
property is appropriate for residential use of 1.01 to 2.5 units per acre.
Area Development Trends:
The surrounding properties are characterized by single family residential uses and vacant
parcels zoned Agricultural (A) and Residential 0~-15, R-25 and R-40). It is anticipated
that residential zoning and land use patterns will continue in the area.
Comparison of Area Densi .ty:
The adjacent property to the nortin is Salisbury Subdivision, Heathland Section with a
density of 1.16 lots per acre and Literffield Section with a density of 1.38 lots per acre.
Adjacent property to the west is Michaux Subdivision, Section C with a density of 0.92
lots per acre. The applicant has agreed to limit develOPment to a maximum of forty-nine
(49) lots, yielding a density of approximately 1.25 units per acre. (Proffered Condition
4)
Comparison of Area Lot Sizes:
The average lot size in Heathland Section is 32,875 square feet, in Litenfield Section is
30,893 square feet and in Michaux, Section C is 43,560 square feet. The applicant has not
proffered an overall average lot size. Adjacent lot sizes in Heathland Section range
between 25,680 square feet to 31,200 square feet. Adjacent lot sizes in Michaux, Section
C range between 28,800 square feet to 127,875 square feet. The applicant has proffered
that any lot abutting existing lots in Heathland and Litenfield Sections and Michaux,
Section C will have a minimum lot area of 25,000 square feet, and that all other lots will
have a minimum lot area of 20,000 square feet. (Proffered Condition 12)
Comparison of Area House Sizes:
The applicant has proffered a minimum gross floor area for houses of 2,200 square feet
(Proffered Condition 13). By comparison, house sizes on adjacent lots in Salisbury
Heathland and Litenfield Sections and Michaux Section C range from 2,642 to 4,850 gross
square feet.
Site and House Design:
Proffered Condition 16 requires that the tentative subdivision plan be submitted to the
Planning Commission for review and approval. Proffered Condition 9 requires the paving
10 98SN0142/WP/JUNE24G
of driveways; Proffered Condition 10 requires that the exposed portion of house
foundations be covered with brick, stone or dryvit type materials; and Proffered Condition
11 requires that coal or wood burning fireplace chimneys be covered with brick, stone or
dryvit type materials.
Proffered Condition 14 is intended to limit the development of from entry garages on the
property. Staff does not support the acceptance of Proffered Condition 14. Typically,
such restrictions are enforced through covenants. The condition, as written, will require
additional staff effort and a cost to determine whether a side or rear entry garage is feasible
at the time of building permit review. Further as written, the condition does not give staff
definitive measures to determine whether a side or rear entry garage is feasible. It should
be noted that any appeal of staff's decision on this condition would be to the Board of
Zoning Appeals. Staff would recommend that the condition be amended to prohibit front
entry garages or that the restriction be incorporated into the restrictive covenants.
Proffered Condition 17 will require that any trees having a caliper of six (6) inches or
greater within twenty-five (25) feet of adjacent subdivisions to be maintained, unless
removal is necessary for utility installation or the tree is dead or diseased. It should be
noted that future individual property owners will be responsible for maintaining these trees
and compliance with this condition.
CONCLUSIONS
The proposed zoning and land use conforms with the land use recommendations of the Midlothian
Area Communi .ty Plan which suggests the property is appropriate for residential use of 1.01 to 2.5
dwelling units per acre.
Given these considerations, approval of this request is recommended, subject to the applicant
adequately addressing concerns relative to Proffered Condition 14, as discussed herein.
CASE HISTORY
Planning Commission Meeting (11/18/97):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to January 20, 1998.
Staff (11/19/97):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information should
be submitted no later than November 24, 1997, for consideration at the Commission's
January 20, 1998, public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a $150.00 deferral
fee must be paid prior to the Commission's public hearing.
11 98SN0142/WP/JUNE24G
Applicant (12/2/97):
The applicant paid the $150.00 deferral fee.
Applicant, Staff, Midlothian District Planning Commissioner and Area Citizens (12/2/97):
A meeting was held to discuss this request and citizen concerns. The meeting ended due
to an emergency and must be rescheduled in order for all concerns to be addressed.
Planmng Commission Meeting (1/20/98):
On their own motion, the Commission deferred this case to March 17, 1998.
Staff(i/22/98):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information should
be submitted no later than January 27, 1998, for consideration at the Commission's March
17, 1998, public hearing.
Staff, Midlothian District Commissioner and Area Citizens (2/11/98):
A meeting was held to discuss the concerns of area citizens and how those concerns might
best be addressed.
Staff (2/27/98):
To date, no additional information has been received.
Planning Commission Meeting (3/17/98):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to May 19, 1998.
12 98SN0142/WP/JUNE24G
Staff (3/18/98):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information should
be submitted no later than March 24, 1998, for consideration at the Commission's May 19,
1998, public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a $150.00 deferral fee must be
paid prior to the Commission's public hearing.
Applicant (4/13/98):
The applicant paid the $150.00 deferral fee.
Applicant, Staff, Midlothian Planning Commissioner and Area Citizens (4/14/98):
A meeting was held to discuss this request and citizen concerns. Concerns dealt with lot
sizes, house sizes, architectural restrictions, garages, access, BMP treatment, subdivision
plan review, buffers and traffic. The applicant agreed to revise and resubmit proffers.
Staff (5 / 1/98):
To date, no new information has been received.
Applicant (5/19/98):
The applicant submitted revised proffered conditions.
Planning Commission Meeting (5/19/98):
The applicant accepted the Planning Commission's recommendation. There was opposition
present. Concerns were expressed relative to the safety of access to Winterfield Road. It
was noted that the applicant is negotiating with the adjacent property owner to the south
which would further accommodate extension of Winterfield Road Relocated.
13 98SN0142/WP/JUNE24G
On motion of Mr. Shewmake, seconded by Mr. Cunningham, the Commission
recommended approval of this request and acceptance of the proffered conditions on pages
2 through 5.
AYES: Messrs. Shewmake, Cunningham, Gulley and Miller
ABSENT: Mr. Marsh.
Board of Supervisors' Meeting (5/27/98):
The Board deferred this case to their June 24, 1998, public hearing.
Staff (5/28/98):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significam new or revised information should
be submitted no later than June 2, 1998, for consideration at the Board's June public
hearing.
Midlothian District Supervisor and Commissioner, Adjacent Property Owner to the South;
Applicant and Staff (6/9/98):
A meeting was held to discuss the alignment of the relocation of Winterfield Road. There
were also discussions regarding the possibility of a zoning application being filed on the
adjacent property to the south.
Staff (6/15/98):
To date, no new information has been submitted.
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, June 24, 1998, beginning at 7:00 p.m., will take under
consideration this request.
14 98SN0142/WP/JUNE24G
SALIS
~ALISBU
ICHAUX
· C
~C
c ¢_$
Ill
TURNPIKE
¢
~C
A
?
TO R-15
% CASE#
t
--4-
6O
I
!
POWHTI~
'", I/
" I .I / , ,, i
COUNTY THOROUGHFARE PLAN
CASE # 98SN0142
i
N
IIIll
WINTERFIELD ROAD RELOCATED
78%N0/4.~ -7__
98SN0142
In Midlothian Magisterial District, ATACK PROPERTIES, INC.
requested rezoning and amendment of zoning district map from
Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-15). A single family
residential subdivision with a minimum lot size of 17,500
square feet is planned. Residential use of up to 2.90 units
per acre is permitted in a Residential (R-15) District. The
applicant has agreed to limit development to a maximum of 49
lots yielding a density of approximately 1.25 units per
acre. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is
appropriate for residential use of 1.01 to 2.5 units per
acre. This request lies on 39.2 acres fronting
approximately 160 feet on the west line of Winterfield Road,
approximately 350 feet south of Elmstead Road. GPIN 725-
711-1557 (Sheet 7).
Mrs. Humphrey excused herself from the meeting.
Ms. Beverly Rogers presented a summary of Case 98SN0142 and
stated that the Planning Commission recommends approval and
acceptance of the proffered conditions. She further stated
that staff recommends approval subject to the applicant
addressing concerns relative to Proffered Condition 14,
relating to front entry garages. She noted that the request
conforms to the Midlothian Area Community Plan.
Mr. Brennen Keene, representing the applicant, stated that
the recommendation of the Planning Commission is acceptable.
He further stated that much effort has gone into this
request in addressing neighborhood concerns.
Mrs. Humphrey returned to the meeting.
Mr. Keene then presented an overview of the realignment of
Winterfield Road and stated that the proffered conditions
address concerns relative to the realignment of Winterfield
Road to the south. He further stated that until realignment
is completed for Winterfield Road, the proposed development
will require access onto existing Winterfield Road. He
stated that the proffered conditions will require safe
access onto existing Winterfield Road. He further stated as
it relates to Proffered Condition Number 14, relating to
front entry garages, the applicant intends to develop homes
with side or rear entry garages, however, there are times
when special typographical conditions make it difficult to
employ a side or rear entry garage. He further stated that
Proffered Condition Number 14 was created in cooperation
with Mr. William Shewmake, Midlothian District Planning
Commissioner, and the area neighborhood. He requested the
6/24/98 98-493
Board's favorable consideration of the request.
Mr. Bob Pinkum, a resident of Salisbury Subdivision,
expressed concerns relative to public safety aspects
surrounding the proposed request and to there only being one
access into the proposed development until the realignment
of Winterfield Road is completed. He requested that the
Board not approve this request until adequate measures are
taken to realign Winterfield Road in its entirety.
Ms. Annette Sullivan, a resident of Winterfield Road,
expressed concerns relative to the developer being able to
develop with sole access to existing Winterfield Road and to
the current traffic dangers along Winterfield Road. She
stated that she feels the developer should be required to
complete the realignment of Winterfield Road in its
entirety.
Mr. Steve Sullivan, a resident of Winterfield Road,
expressed concerns relative to safety issues as it relates
to the proposed development. He stated that he feels Atack
Properties is a good builder, however, he is concerned about
the location and timing of the proposed development. He
further stated that the development should not move forward
until the realignment of all of Winterfield Road is
completed. He displayed pictures showing the location of a
recent accident on Winterfield Road, which is the same
location that the developer wants to construct his access to
Winterfield Road. He reemphasized safety and timing issues
surrounding this proposed development. He stated that he
would like the Board to consider delaying this development
until adequate safety issues and other concerns are
addressed.
Ms. Faye Palmer, a resident of Salisbury Subdivision, stated
that there is a lot of concern for public safety and the
dangers on Winterfield Road if this development is approved.
She further stated that she does not feel this is the
appropriate time to address the construction of the access
to Winterfield. She stated that while there is another
possible entrance into the proposed development from Treport
Road, the Salisbury neighborhood is opposed to this
correction. She further stated that the developer has
agreed not to correct to Treport Road. She noted that a
large tree trunk is located on Winterfield Road, causing a
sight distance problem. She suggested that the tree trunk be
removed to improve the sight distance.
Mr. Keene stated that a five percent increase in traffic is
expected onto Winterfield Road from the proposed
development. He further stated that the applicant is
developing a tentative subdivision plan which will be
brought back to the Planning Commission for review, at which
time the safety of the access to Winterfield Road can be
reviewed.
Mr. Warren excused himself from the meeting.
There was brief discussion relative to the engineering of
the proposed access and the location of tree trunk.
6/24/98 98-494
Mr. Barber requested staff to negotiate with the property
owner, if necessary, to address the removal of the tree
trunk. He stated that he originally questioned the ninety
day feasibility study relative to the purchase of the
adjacent property to the south (the Jefferson property),
however, after discussions with Mr. Jefferson he feels more
comfortable with the time period, as Mr. Jefferson stated
that it was normal language in a contract. He stated that
he feels, with some level of confidence, that two-thirds of
Winterfield Road will be constructed in the short-term. He
further stated that County funds are not available to
complete the realignment of Winterfield Road, therefore, it
will be the responsibility of others to complete the road.
He stated that he depends on the engineers as it relates to
construction and safety of the entrance. He further stated
that the applicant has increased the square footage of homes
and lot sizes to an acceptable level.
Mr. Barber then made a motion, seconded by Mr. McHale, for
the Board to approve Case 98SN0142 and accept the proffered
conditions.
Discussion, comments, and questions ensued relative to the
realignment of Winterfield Road.
When asked, Mr. Keene stated that the applicant has
proffered to not access Treport Road from this development.
There was brief discussion relative to the investment the
applicant is making; whether wetlands are located on the
property; and that a wetlands evaluation had not been
completed at this time.
Mr. Daniel stated that when he reviewed the proposed
request, it appeared to be a standard zoning case, however,
as he studied the request further, he felt it is a classic
example of in-fill zoning. He further stated that this
request does not appear ready for action. He stated that he
feels if this zoning is approved, a portion of Winterfield
Road will be constructed, which will only be utilized by the
people that will ultimately live in the proposed
subdivision. He expressed concern that there will
eventually be a demand on the public to complete
construction of realigned Winterfield Road. He stated that
he is unsure of the proper action at this time, but he will
vote for anything which allows the applicant to continue to
further work on, and study, this proposal. He indicated
that he does not feel he is in the position to approve the
request and that he does not feel the request is ready for
public commitment.
Mr. Barber stated that there have been many neighborhood
meetings and a lot of effort put into this request. He
inquired as to any suggestions Mr. Daniel may have in making
this request better.
Mrs. Humphrey expressed concern that a wetland delineation
has not been conducted on the proposed development property
and that the amount of wetlands may significantly impact the
development of the Jefferson property. She expressed
concerns that the drainage issues have not been adequately
6/24/98 98-495
addressed.
Mr. Barber stated that what he has attempted to accomplish
is to get the two area property owners together so that the
alignment of Winterfield Road can reflect the County's
future expectations of where the road will be located. He
further stated that at this time, the Board cannot demand
that the applicant purchase the adjacent property or
construct a road on someone else's property. He stated that
the role the Board can play is to ensure that the plans are
laid for the future realignment of Winterfield Road. He
further stated that it is his understanding that homes would
not be built in wetlands and that run-off will be handled.
Mrs. Humphrey stated that her concern is not the Atack
property, but with the Jefferson property. She further
stated that she is uncomfortable that there are not any
guarantees regarding the realignment of Winterfield Road in
its entirety at this point. She stated that she would be
more comfortable with this request if eighty-five percent of
the road were proposed at this time.
Mr. Barber stated that this Board is not in the position of
demanding people to purchase someone else's property.
There was brief discussion relative to how the run-off from
this development would be handled.
Mr. McElfish stated that staff is not aware of any severe
run-off problems in this area. He further stated that if
there were problems, staff would have recommended certain
conditions at this time. He indicated that Michaux Creek
has no impact on this zoning request.
Mr. Barber reiterated that a lot of time and effort has been
put into this request by the applicant, community, the
Planning Commissioner, and himself.
Mr. Warren stated that the drainage issue is an important
issue and that he does not feel safety issues have been
thoroughly addressed at this time.
Mr. McCracken stated that staff feels that the proffered
conditions give the County the tool needed to achieve the
necessary improvements to Winterfield Road to ensure as safe
an access as possible. When asked, he stated that realigned
Winterfield Road will have to be constructed into the
property to acconumodate the initial development.
Mrs. Humphrey expressed concerns relative to traffic dangers
at the proposed access and requested staff to address these
concerns.
Mr. McHale stated that he feels the proposed zoning is
appropriate for this area. He further stated that as he
understands it, if the Board approves this request, there
will be another opportunity for public input regarding the
details of addressing the issues of safe access. He stated
6/24/98 98-496
that if this request is approved, it allows the opportunity
to accelerate improvements on Winterfield Road, however, if
the Board denies the request, nothing will be improved. He
further stated that he feels the Board has an opportunity at
this time, if the request is approved, to begin addressing
the issue of the unusual curves on Winterfield Road. He
stated that the developer will have to make some substantial
off-site improvements. He further stated that he can
support the proposed request.
Mr. Daniel acknowledged the efforts that have gone into this
request and stated that the request is a difficult case. He
further stated that he agrees that R-15 is an appropriate
land use. He stated that the Board is bound by its
judgement as to whether the actual granting of the zoning
will impact the health, safety, and welfare of the public
at-large. He further stated that he feels there are
significant outstanding issues regarding this request. He
inquired as to whether Mr. Barber would consider a deferral
to allow staff to address safety issues regarding the access
to existing Winterfield Road.
Mr. Barber stated that many community meetings have been
held regarding this request and all issues concerning the
proposed development were discussed and resolved. He
further stated that he concurs that the curve on Winterfield
Road is dangerous, however, access will not be allowed to
existing Winterfield Road until there are assurances
regarding safety. He stated that if the request is not
approved or is deferred, the dangerous curve remains that
much longer, therefore he feels the Board should expedite
this request. He further stated that at the May 27, 1998
Board meeting, he did request a thirty-day deferral to
address the Winterfield Road realignment. He stated that in
his best ability and judgement, this request is ready to
move forward. He further stated that he will not amend his
motion, which would be to approve the request and accept the
proffered conditions.
Mrs. Humphrey stated that she would feel more comfortable if
she better knew that the Jefferson property would also be
developed in a timely fashion.
Mr. Barber stated that the Jefferson property belongs to
someone else, not the developer. He further stated that the
applicant is not in a position to present that parcel to
this Board at this time and the owner of that property has
not come forward. He stated that he has done all he can to
move this request forward and to improve the safety for
constituents in the Midlothian District.
Mrs. Humphrey stated that she is not totally comfortable
with all the components relating to this request, however,
she will support the request.
Mrs. Humphrey called for the vote on the motion made by Hr.
Barber, seconded by Mr. McHale, for the Board to approve
Case 98SN0142 and accept the following proffered conditions:
1. Public water and wastewater systems shall be used.
6/24/98 98-497
Except for the timbering approved by the Virginia State
Department of Forestry for the purpose of removing dead
or diseased trees, there shall be no timbering on the
Property until a land disturbance permit has been
obtained from the Chesterfield County Environmental
Engineering Department and the approved devices have
been installed.
The Applicant, subdivider, or assignee(s) shall pay the
following to the County of Chesterfield at the time of
building permit application for infrastructure
improvements within the service district of the
Property:
$6,000.00 per lot if paid prior to July 1, 1998;
or
The amount approved by the Board of Supervisors
not to exceed $6,819.00 per lot, if paid between
July 1, 1998 and June 30, 1999; or
Co
The amount approved by the Board of Supervisors
not to exceed $6,819.00 per lot adjusted upward by
any increase in the Marshal and Swift Building
Cost Index between July 1, 1998 and July 1 of the
fiscal year in which the payment is made, if paid
after June 30, 1999.
In the event the cash payment is not used for the
purpose for which proffered within fifteen (15)
years of receipt, the cash shall be returned in
full to the payor.
The Property shall be subdivided into no more than
forty-nine (49) residential lots.
At time of recordation of the first subdivision plat,
thirty-five (35) feet of right of way on the west side
of Winterfield Road, measured from the centerline of
that part of Winterfield Road immediately adjacent to
the Property, shall be dedicated, free and
unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield
County.
To provide for an adequate roadway system at time of
complete development and to account for the County's
intention to realign Winterfield Road through the
Property, the Applicant shall be responsible for the
following:
At time of recordation of the first subdivision
plat, a seventy (70) foot wide right of way for
the north/south collector ("Winterfield Road
Relocated") from Winterfield Road to the southern
Property line, shall be dedicated, free and
unrestricted, to and for the benefit of
Chesterfield County. The exact location of this
right of way shall be approved by the Chesterfield
County Transportation Department (the
"Transportation Department");
6/24/98 98-498
bo
Construction of additional pavement along
Winterfield Road, at the Winterfield Road
Relocated intersection to provide left and right
turn lanes;
Co
Construction of two (2) lanes of Winterfield Road
Relocated to Virginia Department of Transportation
("VDOT") Urban collector standards (40 mph) from
Winterfield Road to the southern Property line;
and
Dedication to Chesterfield County, free and
unrestricted, any additional right of way (or
easements) required for the improvements
identified above.
Direct access to Winterfield Road shall be limited to
Winterfield Road Relocated. Direct access to
Winterfield Road Relocated shall be approved by the
Transportation Department. The Transportation
Department shall approve the exact location of these
accesses.
Prior to any road and drainage plan approval, a phasing
plan for the required road improvements, as identified
in Proffered Condition 6, shall be submitted to and
approved by the Transportation Department.
Ail driveways on each individual subdivision lot shall
paved. The exact pavement type, which may include
asphalt, concrete, aggregate materials, and brick or
stone pavers, shall be approved by the Planning
Department.
10. Ail exposed portions of the foundation of each dwelling
shall be covered with brick, stone, or dryvit type
materials.
11. Ail exposed portions of coal burning or wood burning
fireplace chimneys for each dwelling shall be covered
with brick, stone or dryvit type materials; gas or
ornamental fireplaces may be wall-vented with no
chimneys as allowed by applicable building codes;
however, such vented enclosures shall not be
cantilevered and must have a base to match the
foundation.
12. Ail residential lots that abut Salisbury Heathland and
Lintenfield sections and Michaux, Section C shall have
a minimum lot area of twenty-five thousand (25,000)
square feet. All other residential lots shall have a
minimum lot area of twenty thousand (20,000) square
feet.
13. The gross floor area of each dwelling unit shall be a
minimum of two thousand two hundred (2,200) square
feet.
14. Except as stated herein, all dwellings that provide a
garage shall employ side or rear entry garage design;
provided, however, if the provision of a side or rear
6/24/98 98-499
entry garage cannot be reasonably or feasibly
accomplished because of features on or around the lot,
such as topography, utility and drainage features and
easements, grading, or other applicable features or
governmental requirements that would effectively
prohibit the provision of safe access and orderly
design of the lot if a side or rear entry garage design
is employed, then a dwelling may employ a front entry
garage design.
15.
Any open basins required for water quantity or quality
control designed to serve the Property shall be
landscaped or otherwise improved so that the facilities
become visual enhancements to and amenities for the
uses developed on the Property. At the time of
subdivision plan review, a plan depicting these
requirements shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval.
16.
The Tentative Subdivision Plan for the Property shall
be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and
approval.
17.
Except as provided herein, all trees having a caliper
of six inches or greater within twenty-five (25) feet
of Salisbury Heathland and Lintenfield sections and
Michaux, Section C shall be maintained. The trees may
be disturbed for the installation of utilities, and any
dead or diseased trees may be removed. The twenty-
five (25) foot tree preservation area shall be
exclusive of any required setback.
18. The Property shall not have access onto Treport Road.
Ayes: Humphrey, Warren, Barber, and McHale.
Abstention: Mr. Daniel.
6/24/98 98-500