07SN0292April 23, 2008 BS
~~
~~' - =~~x
.:..
~,
.~'IR~p~If~
ADDENDUM
07SN0292
(AMENDED)
Emerson Companies LLC
Bermuda Magisterial District
Bellwood Elementary; Salem Middle; and Bird High Schools Attendance Zones
West line of Jefferson Davis Highway
REQUEST: Conditional use to permit multi-family residential uses and Conditional
Use Planned Development to permit exceptions to ordinance standards. In
addition, proffered conditions and restrictions have been offered on the
underlying Community Business (C-3) and General Business (C-5)
zoning.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
With approval of this request, multi-family residential and/or commercial
uses would be permitted. The potential exists for the property to be
developed for all multi-family residential uses (up to a maximum of 275
dwelling units), all commercial uses (except as restricted by the Textual
Statement) or a combination of such uses.
On April 9, 2008, the applicant submitted an additional proffered condition relative to
mixing of residential and commercial uses in an effort to attempt to guarantee, at least for
a limited time period, a mixed use project. Since this additional proffer represents a
significant modification to the proposal since the Planning Commission's consideration
of this case, staff recommends that the Board remand the case to the Commission for
reconsideration.
Specifically, a portion (fifty (50) percent of the first floor where such space fronts or is
oriented towards Jefferson Davis Highway) of buildings located within 120 feet of
Jefferson Davis Highway would be reserved for commercial uses. However, after
eighteen (18) months following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for dwelling
units within the building, these "reserved" commercial units may be occupied by
residential multi-family uses. Proffered Condition 6 does not require development of, or
actual occupancy by, any commercial use and, therefore, fails to guarantee the
Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service
development will be a multi-use project. As noted, the condition only reserves space for
commercial uses for eighteen (18) months after an occupancy permit has been issued for
a dwelling unit in the building. In addition, the condition only obligates the developer to
obtain a building permit for the commercial use, not to complete construction of the
space or to actually locate commercial uses within the project.
As stated, Staff recommends that the case be remanded to the Planning Commission;
however, should the Board wish to consider this request, staff recommends denial as
outlined in the "Request Analysis".
PROFFERED CONDITION
A minimum of fifty (50) percent of the gross square footage of the first
floor of any portion of a building located within one hundred twenty (120)
feet of the ultimate right of way of Jefferson Davis Highway where such
space fronts on or is oriented towards Jefferson Davis Highway shall be
occupied by uses permitted in the Community Business (C-3) District.
Provided however if a building permit for commercial tenant upfit is not
issued from the Chesterfield County Building Inspection Department
within eighteen (18) months after obtaining the first certificate of
occupancy for a dwelling unit in said building, the commercial unit(s) may
be occupied by residential multi-family uses. (P)
07 SN0292-APR23-BOS-ADD
~ 1 ~. ,~ ~,'~ ,
~ `; ~~~ 'r
i
> ~ I ` t ~dP ~~r R~ ~ -
~`
~~ r
~ ~ c'~t~.w :a, y.
N ~ /
{
M-~ ~~~ - 1 t ~~
~ I o ,. ~
~ I i i
y•
~I ~ ~
I
II iI ~ Ir
I ~I~ ' III ~
J- ~s~ ,
~ ~~r,, I~ ~ U II ~ r1~PJ ' ~
} N v ~ IG~ ` v~SO V ~ J l
,~ ~ ...: ,v t~ ~
a V ~ ~I ..:::::::.:: ~ I ~
....
I
......
:..~:::::t:::':.::...:.... ~ i
..
.....
. .
......
....
..
.....
... ~ r..
..
..... .
.... x • ..
..:
......
~ `~ i t
~ ~ ~::::::::" 1
E ¢ ,r" ~
~ / ~,.' s ~
M ~ ~ ~~ t
` 3)
~ ' ~~ ~~~ ~
i~~ i I,
,, ' •~ ~
Y ~ ~ ~ O LL
W O IF"~
i I c0
U r % , ~ ~
j ~ ~ ~ i
'.. ~~~ ~~~ ~ v o
o~ ~ I'
~~"~ <~~ N
~ I I O ~ o
~ / i
O
/ ;" ~ ~ ti ~ o
y ~ i ~ ~ II
,,: - ~ ~~ ,~~-~ _ j ~~ ~ -
~~~~ '' ' .
May 15, 2007 CPC
August 21, 2007 CPC
October 16, 2007 CPC
December 18, 2007 CPC
February 19, 2008 CPC
March 18, 2008 CPC
April 23, 2008 BS
STAFF’S
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATION
07SN0292
(AMENDED)
Emerson Companies LLC
Bermuda Magisterial District
Bellwood Elementary; Salem Middle; and Bird High Schools Attendance Zones
West line of Jefferson Davis Highway
REQUEST:Conditional use to permit multi-familyresidential uses and Conditional Use
Planned Development to permit exceptions to ordinance standards. In addition,
proffered conditions and restrictions have been offered on the underlying
Community Business (C-3) and General Business (C-5) zoning.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
With approval of this request, multi-family residential and/or commercial uses
would be permitted. The potential exists for the property to be developed for all
multi-family residential uses (up to a maximum of 275 dwelling units), all
commercial uses (except as restricted by the Textual Statement) or a combination
of such uses.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND DENIAL.
AYES: Messrs. Gulley, Bass, Hassen and Brown.
NAY: Mr. Waller.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend denial for the following reasons:
Ю±ª·¼·²¹ ¿ Ú×ÎÍÌ ÝØÑ×ÝÛ ½±³³«²·¬§ ¬¸®±«¹¸ »¨½»´´»²½» ·² °«¾´·½ »®ª·½»
A.The residential uses fail to conform to the Jefferson Davis Highway Corridor Plan
which suggests the property is appropriate for general commercial use. However,
as noted herein, there are circumstances which suggest that a mix of uses may be
appropriate. To date, those circumstances have not been addressed.
B.The proposal fails to address access concerns of the Transportation Department.
C.The proffered conditions do not adequately address the impacts of this
development on necessary capital facilities, so as to insure adequate service levels
are maintained to protect the health, safety and welfare of county citizens, as
further discussed herein.
D.The proposal fails to address the Police Department’s health, safety and welfare
concerns regarding security, as discussed herein.
E.The exception to buffer requirementsof the Zoning Ordinance from adjacent
properties cannot be granted with a Conditional Use Planned Development,
therefore the item should not be accepted.
(NOTES:A.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.
B.ITEM II.E. OF THE TEXTUAL STATEMENT IS NOT A LEGAL
CONDITION. SHOULD THE BOARD WISH TO APPROVE THIS
REQUEST, THE FOLLOWING CONDITION SHOULD BE IMPOSED
TO REPLACE PROFFERED CONDITION 5 BELOW. THE
APPLICANT WILL NEED TO AGREE TO THE CONDITION IN
ORDER FOR THE REMAINING PROFFERED CONDITIONS TO
REMAIN IN FORCE AND EFFECT.)
CONDITION
Except for Item II.E, the Textual Statement dated December 6, 2007, and last revised February
28, 2008 shall be considered the Master Plan. (P)
(NOTE: THIS CONDITION SUPERSEDES PROFFERED CONDITION 5.)
î ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
PROFFERED CONDITIONS
The Owner-Applicant 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 itself and its
successors or assigns, proffers that the development of the property known as Chesterfield
County Tax ID 794-666-6515 and Tax ID 794-665-8176 with a Conditional Use to permit
residential multi-family (RMF) uses and a CUPD to permit bulk exceptions, and subject to the
conditions and provisions of the Textual Statement will be developed as set forth below;
however, in the event the request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to by the
Applicant, these proffers and conditions shall be immediately null and void and of no further
force or effect. These proffered conditions apply to the existing underlying C-3 and C-5 zoning
plus uses allowed by the Conditional Use and Conditional Use Planned Development.
1.Timbering. Except for the timbering approved by the Virginia State Departmentof
Forestry for the purpose of removing dead or diseased trees, there shall be no timbering
on the Property until a land disturbance permithas been obtained from the Environmental
Engineering Department and the approved devices have been installed. (EE)
2.Utilities. Public water and wastewater systems shall be used. (U)
3.Transportation. Prior to any site plan approval, in conjunction with recordation of the
initial subdivision plat or within ninety (90) days of a written request by the
Transportation Department, whichever occurs first, sixty (60) feet of right-of-way,
measured from the centerline of Jefferson Davis Highway adjacent to the property shall
be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County. (T)
4.Access. Direct vehicular access from the property to Jefferson Davis Highway shall be
limited to two (2) entrances/exits. The exact location of these entrances/exits shall be
approved by the Transportation Department. (T)
5.Master Plan. The textual statement dated December 6, 2007, last revised February 28,
2008, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P)
GENERAL INFORMATION
Location:
West line of Jefferson Davis Highway, south of Velda Road. Tax IDs 794-665-8176 and
794-666-6515.
Existing Zoning:
C-3 and C-5
í ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
Size:
16.2 acres
Existing Land Use:
Commercial, manufactured home park, communication tower and vacant
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North – C-3, C-5 and R-7; Commercial, residential or vacant
South – I-1; Commercial or vacant
East- C-5; Commercial or vacant
West- R-7; Residential or vacant
UTILITIES
Public Water System:
There is an existing twelve (12) inch water line extendingalong the west side of Jefferson
Davis Highway before crossing to the eastside of the highway, approximately 200 feet
south of this site. The public water system is available to serve this site. The existing
manufactured home park is served by a two (2) inch master water meter. Use of the public
water system has been proffered. (Proffered Condition 2)
Public Wastewater System:
There is an existing eight (8)inch wastewater collector line extending approximately thirty
(30) feet west of the existing manufactured home park, within an easement across the
western portion of this site. The existing manufactured home park is not connected to the
public wastewater system. Use of the public wastewater system has been proffered.
(Proffered Condition 2)
ENVIRONMENTAL
Drainage and Erosion:
The subject property drains to the south through adjacent Central Park Subdivision to
Proctor’s Creek and then via Proctor’s Creek to the James River. There are currently no
known on- or off-site drainage or erosion problems and none are anticipated after
development. There is a high probability that offsite drainage easements will be
necessary to adequately drain the development to Proctor’s Creek.
A portion of the property is wooded and should not be timbered without obtaining a land
disturbance permit from the Departmentof Environmental Engineering and the
ì ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
appropriate devices being installed (Proffered Condition 1). This will insure that
adequate erosion control measures are in place prior to any land disturbance.
PUBLIC FACILITIES
The need for schools, parks, libraries, fire stations and transportation facilities in this area is
identified in the County’s adopted Public Facilities Plan, the Thoroughfare Plan and the Capital
Improvement Program and further detailed by specific departments in the applicable sections of
this “Request Analysis”.
Fire Service:
ThePublic 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 (6) new stations, the Plan also recommends the expansion of five (5)
existing stations.
Based on 275 dwelling units, this developmentwill generate approximately 165 calls for
fire and emergency medical service each year. The applicant has not addressed the
impact on fire and EMS.
The proposal includes provisions which would permit buildings to have a maximum
height of four (4) stories and which would eliminate minimum setbacks for buildings,
except along Jefferson Davis Highway (Textual Statement Items II.C. and D.). It should
be noted that the development will be reviewed at the time of site plan submittal in
accordance with the 2003 International Fire Code relative to fire access lanes
requirements for buildings exceeding three (3) stories and thirty (30) feet in height.
The Dutch Gap Fire Station, Company 14, and the Bensley Bermuda Volunteer Rescue
Squad, currently provide fire protection and emergency medical service. When the
property is developed, in addition to that noted above, the number of hydrants, quantity
of water needed for fire protection and access requirements will be evaluated during the
plans review process.
Schools:
Approximately 146 (Elementary: 63, Middle: 36, and High: 47) students will be
generated by this development. Currently, this site lies in the Bellwood Elementary
School attendance zone: capacity - 381, enrollment – 437; Salem Middle School zone:
capacity – 1,018, enrollment – 914; and Bird High School zone: capacity - 1,722,
enrollment - 1,788. The enrollment is based on October 1, 2007 and the capacity is as of
2006-2007.
This request will have an impact on school facilities. There are currently nine (9) trailers
at Bellwood Elementary; four (4) at SalemMiddle; and five (5) at Bird High School.
ë ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
This case combined with other residential developments and zoning cases in the area will
continue to push these schools over capacity,necessitating some form of relief in the
future. The applicant has not offered measures to assist in addressing the impact on
school facilities.
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. This
development would most likely affect the Chester or Central Libraries. The Public
Facilities Plan identifies a need for additional library space in the Chester area. The
applicant has not addressed the impact of this development on library facilities.
Parks and Recreation:
ThePublic 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 not offered measures to address the
impact of this proposed development on the infrastructure needs of Parks and Recreation.
Police:
A high density residential project could be developed with the approval of this request.
With the support of the county administration, the Police Department seeks to have
developers of new high density residential projects implement its recommendations for
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) which are planning and
designing principles that constitute proactive crime prevention tools. Through CPTED
principles, proper design and effective use of the environment can lead to a reduction in
the fear and incidence of crime. In addition, the Police Department recommends that
high density residential projects either enter into a contract for the permanent presence of
an on-site police officer or annually submit a security plan for review and approval.
The applicant has not addressed these security concerns accordingly, the Police
Department does not support this case.
Transportation:
The property is approximately sixteen (16) acres located on the west side of Jefferson
Davis Highway (Route 1/301) just south of Velda Road. The property is currently zoned
Community Business (C-3) and General Business (C-5) and the applicant is requesting a
Conditional Use to permit residential multi-family (R-MF) uses. Condition II.I of the
Textual Statement limits residential development on the property to 275 dwelling units.
Based on trip rates for apartments, 275 dwelling units could generate approximately
ê ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
1,800 average daily trips (ADT). This traffic would initially be distributed to
Route1/301, which had a 2006 traffic count of 19,278 vehicles per day (vpd) between
Route 288 and Willis Road and was functioning at Level of Service “B.”
TheThoroughfare Plan identifies Route 1/301 as a major arterial. Access to major
arterials should be controlled to minimize the number of potential conflict points and help
maintain an acceptable level of service. Access to the property from Route 1/301 should
be limited to one (1) access. The applicant has proffered to limit access to Route 1/301 to
two (2) public roads. (Proffered Condition 4)
Area roads need to be improved to address safety and accommodate the increase in traffic
generated by this development. The applicant is unwilling to proffer to contribute cash,
in an amount consistent with the Board of Supervisors’ Policy, towards mitigating the
traffic impact of this development.
Because the applicant is not willing to limit access to Route 1/301 or address the traffic
impact of this development in accordance with the Board of Supervisors’ Cash Proffer
Policy, the Transportation Department cannot support this request.
The Jefferson Davis Highway Corridor Plan suggests regional mixed use for the area in
the northeast quadrant of the Route 288/Route 1 interchange. In 1996, the county
prepared a conceptual plan for development of that area. The conceptual plan
recommends construction of a major access road to Route 1/301 approximately halfway
between Pinehurst Street and Melba Street. The conceptual plan also recommends an
additional public road that would intersect Route 1/301 at generally the same location as
the applicant’s proposed Main Street. The Access Plan for this area, based on the
recommendations from the 1996 conceptual plan, is attached.
TheThoroughfare Plan recommends a right of way width of 120 to 200 feet for Route
1/301. The applicant has proffered to dedicate sixty (60) feet of right of way along Route
1/301 in accordance with this Plan. (Proffered Condition 3)
The property is located within the JeffersonDavis Highway Enterprise Zone. Based on
the Board of Supervisors’ policy regarding development within the Enterprise Zone, road
improvements will not be required by the County. Road improvements may be required
by the Virginia Department of Transportation.
VDOT’s “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 impact VDOT’s regulations will have on the development process or upon zonings
approved by the county.
é ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
Virginia Department of Transportation:
To date, no comments have been received from the Virginia Department of
Transportation regarding this request.
Fiscal Impacts on Capital Facilities:
PERUNIT
Potential Number of New Dwelling 275*1.00
Units
Population Increase 748.002.72
Number of New Students
Elementary64.080.23
Middle 35.750.13
High 46.480.17
TOTAL146.300.53
Net Cost for Schools 1,470,7005,348
Net Cost for Parks 166,100604
Net Cost for Libraries 95,975349
Net Cost for Fire Stations 111, 375405
Average Net Cost for Roads 2,459,0508,942
TOTAL NET COST 4,303,20015,648
*Based on the Textual StatementII (I) the actual number of dwelling units and corresponding
impact may very.
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 developer has been advised that a maximum proffer of
$15,600 per unit would defray the cost of the capital facilities necessitated by this proposed
development.
The applicant has proffered no conditions that address the fiscal impact of the proposed
development on capital facilities. The applicant maintains that this property is being developed
in an area targeted for revitalization and will, in turn, serve as a catalyst for revitalization of other
areas north of Route 288 and, that payment of cash proffers would render the project financially
infeasible. The proffers, as offered in this case, do not address the fiscal impact of the proposed
development on capital facilities. Consequently,the county’s ability to provide adequate capital
è ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
facilities to its citizens will be adversely impacted. Staff recommends the applicant fully address
the impact of this development on capital facilities.
Note that circumstances relevant to this case, as presented by the developer, have been reviewed
and it has been determined that it is appropriate to accept the maximum cash proffer in this case.
The Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, through their consideration of this
request, may determine that there are unique circumstances relative to this request that may
justify acceptance of proffers as offered for this case.
LAND USE
Comprehensive Plan:
Lies within the boundaries of the Jefferson Davis Highway Corridor Plan which suggests
the property is appropriate for general commercial use including community-scale
commercial, motor vehicle oriented commercial and light industrial uses.
An important mission of the Plan is to encourage a sustainable highly livable and
workable community. Goals of the Plan include making the Jefferson Davis Corridor a
better place to live and work by balancing economic demands of development with the
needs of the people to create a sense of place, attractiveness and comfort; strengthening
residential neighborhoods; promoting the availability of work places offering job
opportunities; and, providing necessary public and commercial services to meet the
diverse needs of area residents. The Plan recognizes that flexible redevelopment of
certain areas are opportunities to revitalize underused tracts within the Corridor which
will strengthen business areas and neighborhoods.
Area Development Trends:
Area properties are zoned for, and occupied by, a variety of commercial and residential
uses or are vacant. It is anticipated that a mix of commercial, office, light industrial and
higher density residential uses will continue in the area, as recommended by the Plan.
Zoning History:
A use permit (64-65A) was granted on a portion of the property to allow sixty-five (65)
manufactured homes. While there are now sixty-one (61) units on the overall property,
some of those units are not located within the boundaries of the approved use permit and
are therefore illegal.
On March 17, 1998, the Planning Commissiondetermined that a communications tower
on the request property was substantially in accord with the County‘s Comprehensive
Plan subject to standard conditions including conditions relative to security fencing,
tower design and lighting.
ç ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
On April 1, 1998, the Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance to height limitations to
permit a 199 foot communications tower on the request property.
Site Design:
A Conditional Use to permit multi-family residential use plus a Conditional Use Planned
Development to permit exceptions to Ordinance requirements are proposed on the 16.2
acre tract zoned Community Business (C-3) and General Business (C-5). A mixed use
project consisting of multi-family residential use, to include over-shop housing, and
commercial uses is planned as generally depicted on the Conceptual Plan and as provided
in the proffered conditions and Textual Statement. A Mixed Use Plan will be submitted
for review and approval by the Planning Department or Planning Commission for areas
where the mixing of residential and non-residential uses are proposed (Textual Statement
I.B.). It should be noted, however, that since the proposal does not guarantee a mix of
uses, the potential exists for the property to develop for 275 multi-family units with no
supporting commercial uses or conversely for commercial uses with no residential uses.
The request property lies within the Jefferson Davis Highway Corridor District. Unless
specifically regulated by proffered conditions and the Textual Statement, redevelopment
of the site or new construction must conform to the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance which address standards to encourage reinvestment and revitalization of the
area. Such standards address access, parking, landscaping, architectural treatment,
setbacks, buffers, signs and screening.
Other Development Standards:
Typically, where exceptions to Ordinance development standards (i.e. minimum
setbacks) are requested for residential developments, there are specific design standards
suggested by staff to achieve superior quality and housing sustainability for higher
density residential projects. These standards address street trees, sidewalks, open space
and focal points, among other things. As previously noted, the development must comply
with requirements of the Jefferson Davis Corridor except as modified by the Textual
Statement. Reduced and zero (0) foot setbacks for the development are proposed, in
addition to an increase in building heights, and a reduction in parking requirements. The
design standards offered for street trees, sidewalks, open space and focal points, as well
as setbacks for front loaded garages are consistent with those typically required by the
Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors on similar residential projects recently
approved. (Textual Statement II.B, D, G, J and K)
The Textual Statement requires the open space to include courtyards which will have
benches and other amenities that accommodateand facilitate outdoor public activity. To
maintain the integrity of these courtyards, a provision precludes solid waste storage areas
from being located in these courtyard areas. (Textual Statement II.(J))
ïð ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
Uses:
As noted herein, commercial and residential uses would be permitted. Except as
restricted by Textual Statement (I.E.) which prohibits uses such as motor vehicle sales
and rental and indoor flea markets, permitteduses would be limited to uses permitted in
the Community Business (C-3) District, uses permitted within the Residential Multi-
family (R-MF) District, commercialoutdoor recreational use limited to outdoor
entertainment for community events such as performances, concerts and similar uses,
multi-use buildings where commercial, office and/or residential (over-shop housing)
uses, and the existing 199-foot communications tower. (Textual Statement I (D))
Residential Density:
Since the proposal does not guarantee a mix of uses, the potential exists for the property
to develop for 275 apartments yielding a density of approximately 16.97 dwelling units
per acre assuming that all of the property is developed for residential uses. Density may
increase if only a portion of the property is developed for residential uses. (Textual
Statement III.I)
Buffers and Setbacks:
Development of the request property would be subject to development standards of the
Jefferson Davis Highway Corridor District, unless specifically regulated by the proffered
conditions and Textual Statement. The Jefferson Davis Highway Corridor District
requires buffers in certain circumstances from adjacent properties. In this case, no
buffers are proposed within the developmentbetween various uses or from adjacent
properties. (Textual Statement II (E))
This item of the Textual Statement should be revised to delete the exception requested to
buffers from adjacent properties. Exceptions to Zoning Ordinance requirements for
buffers between adjacent properties may be granted at the time of site plan review not
through the approval of a Conditional Use Planned Development.
Parking:
The applicant has incorporated the provision for on-street parking throughout this project
to be counted towards required parking for all uses. This standard is consistent with
those standards applied to Village Districts and would be appropriate in this traditional
development design. (Textual Statement II.A.1)
The Ordinance requires a minimum of two (2) parking spaces for each residential unit.
Further, parking for the proposed mix of non-residential uses would be calculated at
shopping center standards of 4.4 spaces for every 1,000 gross square feet of uses.
Ordinance standards permit a reduction in the required number of parking spaces based
on shared use and /or provision of pedestrian connections between uses. Textual
ïï ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
Statement Items II.A.2 through 4 duplicate these Ordinance requirements and, as such,
should be removed from the Textual Statement.
Communications Tower
As previously noted, an existing 199-foot communications tower will remain on the
request property subject to standard conditions relative to security fencing, tower design
and lighting from the 1998 approval (Textual Statement I. (D) (6)). With this case a
setback for buildings is proposed from the tower and there is a requirement that the base
of the tower and accessory ground mounted equipment or structures be screened (Textual
Statement I. (D) 6.) This condition has typically been approved where towers are located
in the vicinity of residential uses or other visible areas to assure sufficient landscaping is
installed at an initial height and spacing to provide screening of the base of the tower and
accessory ground mounted equipment and structures.
CONCLUSIONS
The proposal fails to guarantee the development will be a multi-use project; therefore the
potential exists that the property could be developed as a 275 unit multi-family complex which
does not comply with the Jefferson Davis Highway Corridor Plan which suggests the property is
appropriate for general commercial use. As discussed herein, the Plan, adopted in 1993, did not
envision the current nationwide trends toward integrated,mixed-use developments having
collocation of residential uses supported by convenience service uses. As noted above, the Plan
identifies the importance of livable and workable communities to the Jefferson Davis Highway
Corridor. Toward this end, integrated mixed-use projects containing commercial, office and
higher density residential uses may be appropriate to promote public convenience and
accessibility and to support redevelopment of successful communities. While this project
contains commercial and residential components,including multi-use buildings where residential
uses may be located over or among commercial uses, the proposal fails to guarantee a mix of
uses. The property could be developed for multi-family complex with no supporting commercial
uses. Given today’s development trends, it may be appropriate to deviate from the Plan to allow
mixed use developments in certain areas, which incorporate higher quality standards, and a well
designed mix of integrated uses.
As discussed in the “Transportation Section”, the proposal fails to address access limitations
along Jefferson Davis Highway so as to minimize conflict points.
In addition, the proffered conditions do not adequately address the impacts of this development
on necessary capital facilities, as outlined inthe Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
Specifically, the needs for roads, schools, parks, libraries and fire stations is identified in the
Public Facilities Plan, the Thoroughfare Plan and the Capital Improvement Program, and the
impact of this development is discussed herein. The proffered conditions do not mitigate the
impact on capital facilities, thereby insuring adequate service levels are maintained and
protecting the health, safety and welfare of county citizens.
ïî ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
The application also fails to address the impactof the residential uses on the health, welfare and
safety of the residents of the development and surrounding areas through crime prevention
measures recommended by the Police Department, as discussed herein.
In addition, Item II. E. of the textual statementshould not be accepted since it requests relief to
buffer requirements which by ordinance must be sought during plans review, not with Conditions
Use Planned Development.
Given these considerations, denial of this request is recommended.
___________________________________________________________________________
CASE HISTORY
______________________________________________________________________________
Planning Commission Meeting (5/15/07):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to August 21, 2007.
______________________________________________________________________________
Staff (5/16/07):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than June 18, 2007 for consideration at the Commission’s
August 21, 2007 public hearing.
Also, the applicant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
Commission’s public hearing.
______________________________________________________________________________
Applicant (6/8/07):
The deferral fee was paid.
______________________________________________________________________________
Planning Commission Meeting (8/21/07):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to October 16, 2007.
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 16, 2007 public hearing.
ïí ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
Also, the applicant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
Commission’s public hearing.
Applicant (8/27/07):
The deferral fee was paid.
Staff (9/21/07):
To date, no new or revised information has been received.
Planning Commission Meeting (10/16/07):
On their own motion, the Commission deferred this case to their December 18, 2007
public hearing.
Staff (10/17/07):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information
should be submitted no later than October 22, 2007 for consideration at the
Commission’s December 18, 2007 public hearing.
Staff (11/15/07):
To date, no new or received information has been received.
Applicant (12/6/07):
The application was amended as discussed herein.
Planning Commission Meeting (12/18/07):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their regularly
schedule meeting in February 2008.
ïì ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
Staff (12/19/07):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information
should be submitted no later than December 26, 2007 for consideration at the
Commissions’ February, 2008 meeting.
In addition, the applicant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
Commissions’ February, 2008 public hearing.
Applicant (1/8/08):
The deferral fee was paid.
Applicant (1/24/08):
Revisions to the proffered conditionsand Textual Statement were submitted.
Applicant (2/6/08):
Revisions to the proffered conditions and Textual Statement were submitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (2/19/08):
On their own motion, the Commission deferred this case to their March 18, 2008, public
hearing.
Staff (2/20/08):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be received no later than February25, 2008 for consideration at the March 18,
2008 meeting.
Applicant (2/19/08 and 2/28/08):
Revisions to the proffered conditionsand Textual Statement were submitted.
ïë ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
Planning Commission Meeting (3/18/08):
The applicant did not accept the recommendation. There was support present
representing that the proposed development will jumpstart revitalization efforts in the
area; that the cash proffer policy should be waived for this project; and that the quality
development would replace blighted structures and a trailer park.
Mr. Hassen expressed concern that the project is not a true mixed use project since it does
not guarantee commercial uses and that even for revitalization efforts the county cannot
ignore impacts on schools and roads.
Mr. Gulley stated there was no guarantee that development would be provided as shown
in pictures and he was concerned with the lack of commercial guarantee.
Mr. Waller stated the county should be equitable when applying the cash proffer policy to
revitalization projects and felt the property frontage could be reserved for commercial.
On motion of Mr. Hassen, seconded by Mr. Gulley, the Commission recommended
denial of this request.
AYES: Messrs. Gulley, Bass, Brown and Hassen.
NAY: Mr. Waller.
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, April 23, 2008, beginning at 6:30 p.m., will take
under consideration this request.
ïê ðéÍÒðîçîóßÐÎîíóÞÑÍóÎÐÌ
EMERSON COMPANIES, LLC
TEXTUAL STATEMENT
December 6, 2007
Revised: February 28, 2008
This is a request for a Conditional Use to permit Residential Multi-Family and a
Conditional Use Planned Development (CUPD) that will permit bulk exceptions to ordinance
standards.
I.General Conditions.
(A) The development may have a traditional mixed use development design with a mix
of residential and non-residential uses within blocks and/or within a building. Buildings will be
located close to the sidewalks and other buildings, the streets linedwith trees and sidewalks, on-
street parking, and open spaces.
(B) The mixing of residential and non-residential uses may be permitted if a Mixed Use
Plan is submitted for review and approval by either the Planning Department or the Planning
Commission at the election of the developer.Such review will be subject to appeal in
accordance with the provision of the Zoning Ordinance for site plan appeals. The Mixed Use
Plan shall address the land use transitions andcompatibility between the different uses and
adjacent properties. Land use compatibility andtransitions may include, but not necessarily
limited to, the exact locations of uses, buffers and site design.
(C) The Property shall be developed as generally depicted on the attached Conceptual
Plan, dated January 24, 2008, prepared by Designforum, and as provided in the accompanying
proffers and as set forth herein.
(D) Uses permitted shall be limited to:
1. Uses permitted by right or with restriction in the Community Business (C-3)
District.
2. Uses permitted by right or with restriction in the Residential Multi-family
(RMF) District.
3. Accessory uses permitted in the R-MF and C-3 Zoning Districts, except as
restrictedherein.
4. Recreational establishments, commercial outdoor to be limited to outdoor
entertainment for community events such as performances, concerts, theatres,
amphitheatres, and other community events.
5. Mixed-Use Buildings, as defined as multi-story buildings that accommodate a
combination of commercial and/or office and/or residential uses within the same
1
This page is blank.
structure. This does not preclude single-use buildings.
6. A 199’ communications tower which is currently located on the Property. Said
tower shall comply with the requirements of Case No. 98PD0243 and the
following:
(a) Evergreenplantings having an initial height andspacing to provide
screening of the base of the tower and accessory ground mounted
equipment or structures from adjacent properties shall be planted along the
fence surrounding the communications tower.
(b) There shall be a sixty-five (65) foot building setback from the security
fence around the base of the communications tower.
(E) The following uses shall not be permitted on the Property:
1. Feed, seed and ice sales;
2. Fraternaluses;
3. Indoor flea markets;
4. Kennels,commercial;
5. Material reclamation receiving centers;
6. Motor vehicle sales and rental;
7. Secondhand and consignment stores; and
8. Taxidermies.
II.General Requirements and Exceptions.
(A)Parking.
1. If on-street parking is permitted, those spaces shall be counted towards the
required number of parking spaces for all uses.
2. The Applicant shall provide parking for residential uses based on 2 spaces per
dwelling unit.
3. Commercial or office uses shall provide parking based on 4.4 spaces/1,000
gross floor area.
4. Parking may be further reduced based on Zoning Ordinance Section 19-512.
(B)Street Trees. Street trees shall be planted along both sides of all public streets and all
private streets that provide general circulation throughout the development.
(C) Architectural Standards.
1. The maximum height for all buildings shall be four (4) stories. The maximum
height of accessory buildings and structures within all Tracts shall be one-half
(1/2) the height of the principal building.
2
This page is blank.
2. The development shall have a similar architectural style and materials to
Chester Village Green.
(D) Setbacks.
(i) All buildings (including accessory structures) along internal roads, interior
private driveways, parking areas and streets shall have zero (0) foot setback
requirement for front, side, corner side, rear, and through lots.
(ii) No setback shall be required from proposed or existing public roads except
along Jefferson Davis Highway. Provided however, that corner side yards shall
meet sight distance requirements as may be established at the time of site plan
review.
(E) Buffers and Landscape Areas. No buffers shall be required between various uses
and adjacent properties.
(F)Garages. Front loaded garages shall be located no closer to the street than the
front façade of the dwelling unit.
(G)Sidewalks: Sidewalks shall be installed along both sides of all public and private
streets that provide general circulation throughout the development.
(H) Minimum parcel size. There shall be no minimumparcel size or maximum
density per acre for RMF uses.
(I) Number of dwelling units. There shall be no more than sixteen (16) residential
dwelling units per floor. The maximumnumber of dwelling units shall be 275
units.
(J) Open Space. A minimum of ten (10) percent of the Property shall be devoted to
open space. Open space shall includebut not be limited to Resource Protection
Areas, Stormwater Management Areas, and courtyards. Part of such courtyard
areas shall have benches or other amenities that accommodate and facilitate
outdoor public activity. Open space requirements shall not include solid waste
disposal areas..
(K) Focal Point. A minimum of 0.75 acres of centrally located open space shall be
reserved near the entrance to the development to serve as a focal point such as a
“Main Street” as shown on the Conceptual Plan. Such space shall be designed to
provide open green space, with uses located around the perimeter of such open
area and oriented to face toward such areas.
___________________________________
Applicant/Agent
3
This page is blank.
This page is blank.
òÛÎÇÛÊÃ
éî
This page is blank.
éî