Revision Item

Discussion

Analysis

Special Exception Plat

Relocated site for proposed assisted living facility, further away from the intersection of Routes 29 and 673 (Fosters Fork Road) and more internal to the remainder of the community. The scale of this building has also been reduced to one-story on one side.

The new proposed location should minimize visual impacts of the institutional type building in a rural area, when combined with the reduction in mass of the building design.  The new site is also an improvement in staff's evaluation because it is more integrated with the remainder of the proposed community.

Special Exception Plat

Relocated site for the proposed sewage treatment facility to an area that is further removed from existing residential areas. 

The new site is in closer proximity to Route 29 and topographically situated so that the treated effluent would be pumped uphill to the primary drainfield areas.  If any conveyance malfunction were to occur, the impact to off-site residential areas in this location would be lessened.  The County Soil Scientist has concurred that this revised location is preferable over what was originally proposed by the applicant.

More Detailed Trip Generation Information

A trip generation study was conducted using three existing and similar communities in Virginia, combined with a much larger facility in Baltimore of which the applicant's consultant had personal knowledge. 

Staff had originally expressed concern over the use of the ITE charts in this particular case because there were only one or two examples from the 1990s used as a basis.  The revised trip generation information presented by the applicant confirms staff's belief that the ITE numbers in this case were lower than what could be expected.  The applicant’s revised materials project a rate of 645 vehicle trips per day, as opposed to the 500 vehicle trips per day originally projected. 

It should be noted that the County’s transportation consultant, Kellerco, has reviewed the applicant’s revised trip generation and has suggested an alternative calculation that results in a trip generation estimate of 839 vehicle trips per day.  This estimation was derived by removing two of the facilities surveyed by the applicant because their size is much larger and it was Kellerco’s opinion that this fact could possibly skew the trip generation estimates.  (Kellerco letter at Attachment 2). 

Applicant’s Suggested Revisions to Staff Draft Development Conditions

The Planning Commission reviewed and discussed the applicant’s suggested changes at the April 11th work session.  Staff’s suggested revisions are included as Attachment 1.

The revisions put forward by staff at this time address many of the discussion points between the applicant and the Planning Commission and provide some clarification from the original staff draft.  Outstanding issues are noted in the text of the conditions.