|
Staff
Analysis:
Staff and
the appropriate referral agencies have reviewed these
requests for conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, the
Zoning Ordinance, and other relevant policies and
regulations. A summary of staff and referral agency
findings, comments, and recommendations are provided below.
The actual responses from referral agencies are available
upon request.
Comprehensive Plan:
The
Village of Liberty
The
Comprehensive Plan identifies the Village of Liberty as a
Category II village. Infill development and limited
expansion are appropriate due to the proximity of the
Bealeton Service District and development in that area.
Villages and settlements are not planned to be served by
public utilities or planned to receive future services.
The Villages
within the County vary in character amongst themselves and
from other more urban related developments within the
County. The rural villages, in general, have a different
traditional character from that found in relatively recent
subdivisions. The reasons for their existence, social
structure, need for services, mix of uses and other
characteristics are different. Thus, villages and the
“suburban residential” portions of the service districts
must be treated differently at both the plan and formation
stage, and in designing appropriate implementation
techniques.
Staff has
suggested the provision of additional buffering (dedication)
along adjacent RA properties to effectively create the hard
edge for the Village. In the case of this proposal, RA and
V zoned land will be rezoned to a higher density, R-4. The
proposed development would be adjacent to the Village. The
proffers do not contain any architectural guidelines to
demonstrate that the proposed new development will blend
with the existing character of the adjacent Village.
The
Comprehensive Plan “General Design Principles” state that
neighborhoods should possess an identifiable community
center or focal points, for example a park, elementary
school, recreational center. Further, every neighborhood
should contain a centrally located neighborhood park, a
number of pocket parks and other enhancements for community
use. Neighborhoods should be designed in a generally
rectilinear pattern of blocks.
The
Adopted Bealeton Plan
The Bealeton
Service District Plan was adopted on November 19, 2002
following a two year Citizen Committee, Planning Commission
and Board of Supervisors adoption process. The key concept
advanced first by the Citizen Committee, endorsed by the
Planning Commission and accepted by the Board of Supervisors
was that Bealeton have a central core of commercial and
employment functions. The Plan anticipates that commercial
functions would predominate in the south-eastern quadrant of
the core area, while employment uses would predominate in
the north-western quadrant, the quadrant which the applicant
proposes to develop. These uses would be buffered by
adjacent high and medium density residential uses. The
future “Bealeton Connector” is envisioned to remove regional
traffic from Route 17, which runs through the center of the
community. Since this Bypass would take decades to build,
the Plan proposes the construction of a major collector road
parallel to Route 17, called Church Street, which would link
the neighborhoods to the west with Bealeton’s retail and
employment areas in the core, the future VRE station and
industrial areas in the south, and with Liberty High School,
a future middle school and Grace Miller Elementary School in
the north.
A
long-standing and important Fauquier County planning goal
has been to concentrate and guide growth into the Service
Districts. These areas are planned for relatively more
intensive use and density. In order to support and promote
growth, adequate public facilities and infrastructure,
including public water and sewer, have been planned for the
Service Districts.
The pivotal
goals and tenets of the Bealeton Service District Plan, are
to create, over a long period spanning decades, a town
center consisting of a full range of employment,
institutional, retail, civic and residential, and open
space/recreational areas. The existing Service District
Plan represents the building blocks to establishing a town
character with well linked neighborhoods, businesses and
public institutions/parks. The objective is to provide a
clear mix of land uses, housing, jobs, and a more balanced
community which reduces traffic and creates better fiscal
balance.
Comment:
A second
entrance for the development is recommended. There is only
one (1) way for ingress/egress shown on the CDP. Staff
notes that an emergency access has been provided for Fire &
Rescue personnel and apparatus. One access point is also a
concern due to the traffic volume that will be generated by
the residents. The project entrance (Colonial Crossing
Parkway) should align with the development on the west side
of Route 17 (Freedom Place); which as currently proposed,
does not.
Rezoning:
In the
Comprehensive Plan, the land use for the proposed project
area is identified as Low Density Residential (1-3 dwelling
units per acre). Residential rezoning applications are
expected to be presented at the low end of each density
range for the specified service district location. For
example, in the Comprehensive Plan designated residential
locations where Low Density Residential development is
proposed (1-3 dwelling units per acre), any application
above one (1) dwelling unit per acre must justify those
increases with the:
1.
Provision of affordable housing (low/moderate income
housing); and/or
2.
Elimination of lot subdivision potential through
easements (Purchase of Development Rights) on: (a) Rural
Agricultural (RA) and Rural Conservation (RC) zoned
properties generally located within the service district's
magisterial district; (b) property designated as parkland or
marked as a hard open space edge along the service district
boundary within the service district plan; or (c) a critical
future transportation corridor designated by the Board of
Supervisors needing protection from further development;
and/or
3.
Implementation of unique town-scaled designs
consistent with the adopted service district plan; and/or
4.
Other combinations other than cash/material
contributions to the needs of the County.
The
applicant’s Statement of Justification (included as
Attachment 1) provides their rationale for the proposed
increase in density from 1 unit per acre to 1.94 units per
acre. As noted by the applicant, they believe the proposed
layout is a “unique town-scale design.” In staff’s opinion,
the layout is a standard suburban design with no “unique”
features. There is a neighborhood park area and a 100-foot
buffer to the adjoining RA properties, both of which are
Zoning Ordinance requirements. The applicant further states
they are providing a “hard open space edge” along the
Service District boundary, which is the case as this
property is the last parcel at the edge of the Service
District. With the required buffer and the floodplain at
the eastern edge of the property, this edge is the result of
no action on the part of the developer.
The
applicant argues that the proposed extension of the
East-West Connector Road through the property provides for a
critical transportation corridor not required by Colonial
Crossing. This roadway is shown on the County’s
Comprehensive Plan through this property and, once
completed, will be used by this development. In fact, a
portion of this road is the development’s only access point
without which the development could not be realized. The
applicant only proposes to build the section to be used by
the development, and has not demonstrated that the area to
be dedicated and not constructed is in a workable location.
This area is problematic due to floodplain, wetlands, and
soils.
As proposed,
the right-of-way dedication of a 50-foot strip to Old Marsh
Road does not represent any loss of development potential by
the applicant, as this area cannot be developed for any use
other than a trail or as a portion of the open space area.
The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) requested
the dedication of this strip to establish an option for
rerouting Old Marsh Road traffic through the Colonial
Crossing development, once traffic volumes require the
closure of the intersection Old Marsh Road and the new
East-West Connector. This closure will be necessary due to
the minimal separation between Route 17 and Old Marsh Road.
Implementing
the Master Water and Sewer Plan referenced in the
Comprehensive Plan is another of the applicant’s
justifications for increasing project density. The
applicant states they are expanding the size of the sewer
pump station for the proposed commercial development north
of the High School. However, the applicant is also the
property owner of this referenced property and would be the
chief beneficiary of this sewer expansion. Staff is not
clear how this expansion contributes to the needs of the
county to the extent that a density increase is warranted.
Finally, the
applicant indicates that they should be given credit for
their willingness to provide a critical loop of the proposed
water line connection to the High School that will enhance
the public water system. This connection would probably be
WSA required for the proposed development on this site for
redundancy and fire protection needs; confirmation is needed
from WSA.
Staff notes
that the parcels are located within the Bealeton Service
District, identified in the Comprehensive Plan as Low
Density Residential (1-3 dwelling units per acre). However,
today that area is zoned Rural Agricultural and Village.
The maximum by-right units available to the 80-acre parcel
would be five (5) lots with a 68-acre residue parcel.
Before a proffer analysis occurs on a rezoning, the Board of
Supervisors needs to assess its land use consistency with
the Comprehensive Plan and adjoining properties as well as
transportation and infrastructure impacts. Typically at the
point where staff and the Planning Commission are satisfied
with the proposed land use density and design, then
consideration of proffers and how public facilities, road
and infrastructure impacts are to be mitigated can be
considered. That point was not realized with this project,
and the Planning Commission was required to act
prematurely. Now the Board of Supervisors is being asked to
evaluate the proposed land use as well as the proffers, and
the development’s impact on public facilities and
infrastructure.
The current
Proffer Policy, for single family dwelling units, identifies
$28,503 per unit for monetary contributions; the applicant’s
proposal is consistent with this policy. However, it
appears the applicant is seeking a credit for a 55-foot
right-of-way reservation on an adjoining property under the
applicant’s control as it relates to proffered contributions
of $4,500 per unit for the Bealeton Bypass and $500 per unit
for Emergency Services. It is not clear from the proffer
language whether the applicant is seeking a credit from the
regular Proffer Policy contributions or is seeking relief
from a contribution to the Bealeton Bypass and a portion of
the Emergency Services contribution. Also, it is not clear
what value the applicant has placed on this off-site
reservation. If the value is $5,000 per unit ($4,500 + $500
X 111) or $555,000, the proffer could be revised to more
clearly explain the intent. To staff’s knowledge there has
been no assessment made of the value of this off-site
reservation.
Also, the
applicant has not continued the East-West Connector Road
(what they identify as Colonial Crossing Parkway) through
their property. The applicant’s plan shows a right-of-way
dedication. However, the applicant should consider design
and construction of this key Comprehensive Plan roadway as
part of its project.
Engineering
The
Engineering Department has reviewed the plans for the
referenced project. The application includes a separate
seven (7) page Concept SWM Plan; the proffers should be
amended to incorporate this Plan as well as the 6 page
Concept Development Plan submittal as part of the overall
application. The following items should be addressed
through the rezoning application:
1.
The developer should be responsible for constructing
the proposed “East/West Connector” from the east property
line of the project to completion of the intersection with
Route 17.
2.
The proposed sewage pumping station should be planned
to be large enough to provide capacity to serve the future
developing area (at full development) that logically drains
to the pump station.
3.
On page 2 of the Proffers the first full paragraph
should include a statement that “final engineering shall
be in full compliance with the Fauquier County Design
Standards Manual.”
4.
On page 3 of the proffer statement, under II A, open
space areas and recreational facilities should be physically
constructed along with the overall site infrastructure and
not simply bonded for future construction.
5.
Page 4 of the proffer statement advises that the
County may have to obtain the necessary off-site
right-of-way and easements. Acquisition of all right-of-way
and/or easements required for the project should be the
responsibility of the developer.
6.
On page 6 under item C.3 the last sentence should be
revised to read as follows: Wooden bridges or other
appropriate structures shall be constructed where
appropriate to cross drainageways or wetlands.
7.
On page 6 item A.2 should establish minimum design
and construction standards for the emergency access road.
8.
There is to be no fill in the FEMA regulated
floodplain without a Special Exception. These include pond
embankments and fill for trails, roads, or lots. The
floodplain reflected on the FEMA maps does not correlate to
the actual lay of the land as represented on the current
application. It is strongly recommended that a floodplain
study be prepared to accurately reflect the true floodplain
limits. The applicant should be required to file a Special
Exception to address the perceived need for fill in the
floodplain for the East-West Connector Corridor at this
time.
9.
Two major drainageways cross under the proposed
parkway reservation. These culvert crossings should be
sized now to determine the ponding area that these culverts
might create. Alternatively, building lots should not be
proposed in the vicinity of Lots 24-27. Also, the alignment
of this travel corridor should be verified to be in an
agreeable location with respect to other properties that it
is projected onto.
10.
No utility easements or lots are to be located within
the SWM/BMP facility areas.
11.
Plan should provide vehicular access to the sewage
pumping station.
12.
All applicable State and Federal permits are to be
filed with the first submission of the Final Construction
Plans. This includes the COE/DEQ permits for disturbance of
wetlands.
13.
Swales and drainageways should be protected to the
maximum extent possible. Lots 9, 10, 29-32, 43, 76-79 and
any other lots in defined swales should be relocated.
14.
All ponds and outfall structures are to be kept 25
feet from the property lines. Trees, shrubs, and any other
woody plants are not to be planted on the embankment or
adjacent areas extending at least 25 feet beyond the
embankment toe and abutment contacts. This area is to be
within a maintenance easement. Tree save areas and
landscaping cannot be in these areas.
15.
No stormwater runoff generated from new development
shall be discharged into a jurisdictional wetland without
adequate treatment.
16.
Proof of provisions for adequate fire flow will be
required with the first submission of the Final Construction
Plan.
17.
Numerous lots are located in soils that are
characterized as having a high water table. This submission
did not superimpose the proposed layout with Lot Numbers on
the soils map so we cannot identify specifically which
lots. The County recommends that no below grade basements
be constructed on soils with high water table due to wetness
unless the foundation drainage system of the structure is
designed by a licensed professional engineer to assure a dry
basement and preclude wet yards and recirculation of pumped
or collected water. Unless, in the opinion of the County
Engineer, the topography of the lot in relation to the
overlot-grading plan precludes grading the site to drain the
basement to daylight, all basements shall be designed to
gravity daylight without assistance from mechanical means.
All discharged water (mechanical or gravity) must be
conveyed to the subdivision stormwater collection system and
discharged through the stormwater management facilities.
Drainage easements, where necessary, shall be placed on the
Final Plat. A note shall be placed on the Final Plat
stating, “Basements are not recommended in mapping units 5A,
14B, 67B, 74A & B, 78A, 178A, 79A, and 475B. Basements in
these mapping units are subject to flooding due to high
seasonal water tables. Sump systems may run continuously,
leading to possible premature pump failure.”
18.
The parkway alignment will need to be coordinated
with the Freedom Place alignment for this road. As
proposed, with this application opposite sides of the
Parkway will be constructed.
19.
Dry ponds are not appropriate in drainage areas over
50 acres or in high water table soils.
20.
BMP qualifying open space is to be limited to
jurisdictional wetland and floodplain areas that do not have
overlying encumbrances such as easements and trails. Areas
within private lots do not qualify.
21.
An overlot grading plan is to be provided as part of
the Final Construction Plans. It is to show discharge
points for sump pumps and downspouts that are controllably
conveyed away from all building structures an into an
appropriate drainage collection and conveyance system.
22.
Typical road section widths should be based on the
County’s Class 2A or 4A standard depending on traffic
counts. Sidewalks should be provided on both sides. The
typical section may not fit in the 50-foot right-of-way as
depicted on Sheet 4.
23.
It appears that sewer and water extensions will
require offsite easements. Any necessary offsite easements
will have to be acquired prior to final subdivision
approval. It appears the Cedar Run sanitary connection
referenced is 1,800 feet west along Route 28 from the creek
that the sanitary line appears to follow.
24.
The “C”, CN, Tc and other pre-condition assumptions
will be evaluated with the Final Construction Plans based on
values from the Fauquier County Design Standards Manual.
All on-site channels must be verified to be adequate in
accordance with the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control
Handbook Minimum Standards #19 for the total drainage area
to the point of analysis within the channel in addition to
reducing post-development peak discharge to pre-development
based on the overall project area as shown in the
preliminary SWM/BMP calculations.
Zoning
The Zoning
Office has the following comments:
Request
to rezone a portion of parcel 6990-10-5075-000 currently
zoned Village and a portion of parcel 6899-29-5691-000
currently zoned V/RA to R-4 (Cluster), with a proposed
development of 111 single family dwellings:
1.
The application for Special Exception – Category 20
must be approved before plan approval can be granted.
2.
Although the application states that 31.19 acres (51%
of the acreage proposed for rezoning) is to be in open
space, it is difficult to ascertain whether the layout
presented in the Conceptual Development Plan (CDP-Sheet 4 of
6) meets the Zoning Ordinance requirements for open space.
Since an open space calculation table is not provided with
the CDP, it is not clear that area within pump stations and
within a street reservation have been counted toward meeting
the open space requirement in violation of Zoning Ordinance
(Z.O.) Section 2-309 (5).
Proffers:
1.
It appears that prior Zoning comments have been
addressed satisfactorily with the following exception:
a.
Under II. A. The Suggested Language for this section
has not been revised to reflect that the 56th
occupancy permit shall not be issued until the two (2)
recreation facilities are constructed.
Suggested
Language:
II.A. The recreation facilities (Village Pocket
Park (inclusive of trails and landscaping) and Neighborhood
Village Green-Active Recreation Area (inclusive of trails,
tot-lot, landscaping and activity field)) shall be built
concurrently with the dwelling units adjacent to the
facilities. In no case, shall the 56th occupancy
permit be issued prior to the construction of one of
these two recreation facilities. All other
open space, landscaping and open space elements, including
trails shall be constructed prior to the issuance of the 100th
building permit for the project.
2.
On line 6 of the opening paragraph of the proffers,
it is not clear what is meant by “substantial conformance”
with the proffers. It is understood that development will
proceed in substantial conformance with the Concept
Development Plan (CDP). However, the development must be in
conformance with the proffers.
3.
It is not clear if these proffers apply to the entire
Rezoning Plan (all of the Plan Sheets) or only the CDP
(Sheet 4 of 6). The proffers must apply to the entire plan,
including all sheets submitted as part of the plan. If the
CDP is going to be referenced, the entire set of plans
should be titled “Concept Development Plan.
4.
Under III.A.1. On the 3rd line, delete
“twenty-eight thousand dollars”.
Request for Category 20 Special Exception for a sewage
pump station:
1.
Applicable Standards:
a.
3-320.3, Above Ground Sewage Pumping Station
b.
5-006, General Standards
c.
5-2001, Additional Submission Requirements
d.
5-2002, Standards for All Category 20 Uses
2.
Section 3-320.3 requires approval of a site plan for
this facility, in compliance with Article 12.
Soil
Scientist
After
reviewing the Special Exception plat, this office has the
following comments:
1.
Provide complete information for the Interpretive
Guide to the Soils of Fauquier County, Virginia.
2.
Change note 11 on page three to read “Basements are
not recommended on soils with a high seasonal water table.
They include map units: 5A, 14B, 74B, 78A, 798A, 178A, 178B
and 475B.”
3.
Most of soils on this parcel are rated fair to good
for general development using central sewer and central
water. Soil map units 5A, 14B, 178A and 178B are rated poor
to very poor for development using central water and sewer.
4.
The following soil map units may contain hydric
soils, which indicate the presence of jurisdictional
wetlands: 5A, 14B, 78A, 79A, 178A, and 178B. Areas of
jurisdictional wetlands will decrease available area for
development.
5.
Avoid placing houses in drainageways and swales.
6.
Prevent unnecessary loss or degradation of natural
resources, including prime farmland, floodplains and
seasonally wet soils. Prime cropland includes soil map
units 14B, 71B, and 75B. Floodplains include soil map 5A.
Seasonally wet soils include soil map units 5A, 14B, 74B,
78A, 79A, 178A, 78B and 475B. (Zoning Ordinance 2-406)
Parks &
Recreation
The Parks
and Recreation Department submits its comments on the
proposal as follows:
The
Department acknowledges return comments provided to our
review comments of April 10, 2006. We very much appreciate
the favorable response to our request. The developer and
design team should be commended for their efforts as it
pertains to recreational needs in this area of the County.
The trail
leading to the “Village Pocket Park” could be reduced to 6
feet from 10 feet with same safety buffer. This trail does
not need to be conveyed to the County, but stay with the HOA
for maintenance.
Transportation
As of the
preparation of this report, VDOT has not commented on the
revisions although new comments are anticipated. For the
Board’s information VDOT’s comments September 26, 2006
comments are included. Those are the comments that should
be addressed with the latest submission.
The Warrenton Residency staff reviewed
the above referenced rezoning and has the following
comments:
1.
The CDP shows the road construction being performed
by Freedom Place at the intersection of Route 17 as
constructing the two lanes on the north side of the 120’ of
right-of-way being dedicated. However, they are going to
construct the southern two lanes of the four lane roadway,
and may not line up with the lanes being proposed to be
constructed by this project.
2.
Remove the note on the typical section indicating the
road will be prime and double seal.
3.
VDOT continues to recommend that any roads that are
required for the development of the adjacent properties or
in accordance with the County’s Comprehensive Plan be
constructed to the property line. The grades should be
looked at on the adjacent parcels to ensure the construction
of the road does not prohibit the adjacent parcel connecting
to the road. In accordance with the VDOT Land
Development Manual Chapter 3-10 Section V, the
construction of any improvements in association with the
County Comprehensive Plan, regional transportation plans, or
VDOT’s Six-Year Plan should be provided by the developer.
4.
The VPD shown for the roads north of Colonial
Crossing Parkway do not add up to the 510 VDP for the 51
lots shown, and this should also include future traffic
counts if Old Marsh Road is re-routed through the
subdivision.
5.
There is a potential utility connection to Freedom
Place shown along Route 17. VDOT recommends that an
alternative route be explored, and that should only be used
as a last resort.
6.
On site road improvements proffer IIIC1 needs to be
worded that Colonial Crossing Parkway shall be constructed
in accordance with GS-7 Geometric Design Standards for Urban
Collector Street in the Road Design Manual.
7.
Proffer IIIB is indicating that the County or VDOT
shall acquire additional right-of-way for the offsite road
improvements if the developer is unsuccessful. VDOT does
not acquire right-of-way for developer required frontage
improvements. In addition, VDOT does not have a procedure
for escrowing funds for any improvements that the developer
was unable to complete.
8.
VDOT continues to recommend that the four lane road
section be constructed through the first intersecting road
for the subdivision (not Old Marsh Road), and then tapered
back to a two lane road section.
9.
The frontage improvements to Route 17 at the
intersection with Colonial Crossing Parkway should be
completed in the initial phase, and we recommend the
re-alignment of the intersection be performed prior to any
occupancy permits being issued.
10.
VDOTs June 27, 2005 comments indicated that Exhibit
12A on page 28 of the Traffic Impact Analysis indicated that
a signal has been committed to be built at the intersection
of Route 17 and 663, but it is unclear who is constructing
this signal. If the signal has not been funded to be
constructed, it cannot be used as an assumption for the
TIA. In addition, the delays with and without the signal
for background traffic and with the site traffic cannot be
compared because they were not provided. The comment
response letter only indicated that they did not feel a
signal at this intersection was necessary because traffic
would use the light at Route 17 and Old Marsh Road.
However, it did not address what the increased delay would
be without the signal.
Water
and Sewer
To date, the
County has not received comments from the Fauquier County
Water and Sanitation Authority (WSA). The WSA’s comments
are critical to this project in light of the exceptionally
limited sewer capacity as noted in the WSA’s draft report on
the Remington Wastewater Treatment Plant, Enhanced Nutrient
Removal, Preliminary Report (Dated, February 2007). This is
a new study, along with the County’s Business Development
Strategies Preliminary Findings and Recommendations Report
(Dated, January 26, 2007). Both pose concerns about the
availability for sewer to this and other proposed
residential development in the Bealeton, Opal and Remington
Service Districts. The County needs to review the
applicant’s residential and commercial projects as a
package.
In addition,
the WSA’s preference for the above ground sewer pump station
location is needed before action can be taken on the Special
Exception.
Summary and Recommendations:
It is
recommended that the Board of Supervisors hold the public
hearing on this item. Staff asks the Board to also consider
Planning Commission’s recommendation and referral agency
comments. Although the applicant has addressed some of the
previous comments, further refinements to include the
aforementioned comments should be considered.
Staff has
met with the applicant and its representative and notes that
they are working diligently to respond to the complex issues
raised. However, they were not involved in the numerous
meetings between staff, the Planning Commission and the
initial applicant, so they may not have a complete
understanding of the necessary project refinements. Staff
would encourage the applicant to request postponement of
this item. The Board may also wish to consider the
applicant’s request to close the public hearing and postpone
action. If the applicant does not opt to postpone, staff
would recommend denial of both applications.
Updated
comments from VDOT were not available at the time of
preparation of this report. It is also recommended that the
applicant and its representative continue to work with staff
to address the outstanding items identified in this report.
The refinements many require modifications to both the
proffers and CDP; therefore, the public hearing should
remain open or be rescheduled when the project refinements
have been completed.
Staff notes
the highlights from the new project submittal:
·
Incorporation of a phasing plan of two (2)
years with no more than 62 units built the first year;
·
Conformance with the County monetary Proffer
Policy;
·
A credit applied to the monetary proffers in
consideration of the reservation of a 55-foot strip for
future public use along the northerly portion of the
property as follows: 1. $4,500 per unit for any proffer
applicable to the Bealeton Bypass {it is not clear what is
the intension of this proffer, as the applicant has not made
a contribution to the Bealeton Bypass}; and 2. $500 per unit
for Emergency Services. As noted previously, the applicant
needs to more clearly explain the intent of this proffer;
·
Revised lot layout;
·
Reservation of a “Roadway Extension Corridor”
a 110-foot wide area to accommodate a feasible option for
road alignment for the East-West Connector, past the point
that the applicant proposes to build it (as shown on the
CDP); and
·
Inclusion of note on plat, per County
Engineer, regarding basements not recommended in soil
mapping units with high shrink swell potential.
Items that
the applicant should address in the resubmittal include, but
are not limited to:
·
Addition of the proposed commercial portion of
the parcel to the rezoning request. As the applicant and
property owner are now the same, there is the opportunity
for a more complete evaluation of this section of the
Service District;
·
Assurance from the WSA that there is adequate
sewer capacity for development of both the planned
residential and commercial portions of this property;
·
Identification of the WSA’s preferred location
for the proposed pump station;
·
Construction of the pump station to ensure it
is large enough to accommodate additional equipment and
capacity for the commercial acreage on this parcel (note:
commercial is not part of this rezoning application).
Future hook-up of the commercial property should not impact
residential community;
·
Address how the four-lane road section of the
East-West Connector will be constructed through the first
intersecting road for the subdivision;
·
Justification for rezoning (per Chapter 6 of
the Comprehensive Plan) for a density higher than one
dwelling unit per acre (application is closer to 2 units per
acre);
·
Incorporation of Low Impact Development (LID)
principles – relocation of lots, flood easements, and house
setbacks from floodplain (25-foot requirement);
·
VDOT acceptance of the Traffic Impact Analysis
and the proposed roadway improvements;
·
Update typical road sections to reflect County
and VDOT requirements, including sidewalks on both sides of
streets;
·
Staff recommends that the developer design,
construct and build “Colonial Crossing Parkway” along the
property frontage and through the edge of the property;
·
Size the culvert crossings that will need to
cross the two major drainage ways under the proposed
East-West Connector reservation areas to determine the
ponding area. Alternatively, reconfigure the lot layout
in the vicinity of Lots 24-27.
·
Verify the alignment of the East-West
Connector corridor to determine if it is in an agreeable
location with respect to adjoining properties.
·
Relocate lots to protect swales and
drainageways. The prior applicant was working with staff to
revise the CDP and to request modifications to allow the
lots to shift toward the commercial development to help
protect the future lot owners and to protect the more
environmentally sensitive areas near the floodplain;
·
Provide a copy of the floodplain study for
review;
·
Revise proffers so that the County and VDOT do
not have the responsibility of acquiring right-of-way or
easements for the project development;
·
Mitigation of Bealeton regional transportation
impacts and a monetary contribution to the Bealeton
Transportation Fund for the Bealeton Connector. The
applicant appears to be seeking a credit toward these
impacts as noted previously;
·
Architectural guidelines proffered to
demonstrate that the proposed new development will blend
with the existing character of the adjacent Village of
Liberty; and
·
Refinements to the proffer statement to
address any project revisions.
|
