Staff and the appropriate referral agencies have reviewed
this request for conformance with the Comprehensive Plan,
the Zoning Ordinance, and other relevant policies and
regulations. Staff and referral agency findings, comments,
and recommendations are summarized below. The actual
responses from referral agencies are available upon request.
Engineering Department has reviewed the above referenced
plan and has the following comments:
All applicable State and Federal permits, including
wetlands permits, shall be provided prior to final
construction plan approval.
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
that “Basements are not recommended in mapping units 74B,
78A, and 79A. 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
An overlot grading plan is to be provided as part of
the Final Construction Plans. It is to show downspout
discharges and sump pump discharges.
Proof of provisions for adequate fire flow will be
required with the first submission of the Final Construction
Plans. It is to be based on the guidelines issued by the
Office of Emergency Services.
Lot 31 should also be included in the restricts
indicated in General Note #33 if “future Wakefield Drive” is
not complete at the time of construction of this
reviewing the Fauquier County Soil Survey for the rezoning
stated above, this office has the following comments:
The soils on this parcel are rated fair to very poor
for general development using central sewer and central
Hydric soils and soil map units with the potential
for hydric inclusions are present on the property.
Therefore, it is possible to have jurisdictional wetlands on
the property. High seasonal water tables, shallowness to
bedrock, and high shrink-swell potential negatively impact
development under R-4 zoning.
Division comments that new residential development creates
an impact on its operating and capital costs. If the
Rezoning for the Craig Property for 26 lots on 13.09 acres
is approved, the subject development will impact the level
of service for schools. The impact on capital facilities is
estimated to cost $11,890 per student. In addition, the
School Division will sustain an impact on annual operating
costs at $9,495 per student.
that will primarily be impacted by this project are Liberty
High School, Cedar Lee Middle School, and M. M. Pierce
Elementary School. Liberty High School is currently over
capacity. Temporary trailers are being used for
classrooms. A new high school has not been approved at this
time. Pierce Elementary added temporary trailers for
classrooms this year. Funding for a new elementary school
has been approved in the FY 2006-2015 Capital Improvements
Program for fiscal years 2008/09 and 2009/10.
The Library comments that in 2004, it opened a new branch
library in Bealeton to serve the fastest growing population
area in Fauquier County. The Library Board believes that the
Board of Supervisors should request funds, as recommended by
the adopted proffer policy in connection with rezonings, so
that high-quality library services may be maintained in the
The Warrenton Residency staff reviewed the above referenced
rezoning dated July 22, 2005, and has the following
Currently none on the streets within Southcoate
Village Subdivision have been accepted for state
maintenance; therefore, VDOT does not have the jurisdiction
or ability to grant access for this proposed subdivision off
of these streets. It also has some concerns about
construction traffic for the proposed lots being accessed
from newly constructed streets.
The VPD shown on the plan is indicating that all
traffic from the proposed lots will exit through Fox Haven
subdivision, but it does seem reasonable that all of the
traffic would exit in this direction.
Typical section needs to indicate a minimum of 3 feet
from the back of the sidewalk to the right-of-way line.
CG-R is not acceptable within the right-of-way for
use for the curb and gutter.
Constitution Way in Southcoate Village is 30 feet
from face of curb to face of curb. The 2005 Subdivision
Street Requirement Manual requires 28 feet for streets with
an ADT (average daily trip) up to 400 and for an ADT of 401
to 1500 the width should be 36 feet. There are 13 houses
within Southcoate Village which access this street and would
generate an ADT of 130. The ADT of the proposed subdivision
would be 310, but if this is split between the two
subdivisions the street appears to be wide enough to
accommodate the additional traffic.
When Route 28 is widened to a four lane divided road,
these property owners may desire to have access through the
subdivision which would enable them to exit their properties
at a crossover.
Concept development plan includes a note that the
connection with the adjacent subdivision is to be
coordinated with that subdivision, but it does not identify
who will be responsible for the construction. For instance,
Constitution Way has an existing temporary turn around at
the end of the street that will need to be removed after the
street is extended.
The worksheet that was prepared for the turn lane
requirements for the access to Route 28 indicated that full
frontage improvements were required. This means that the
developer should be paying their pro rata share of the
widening of Route 28 to four lanes.
Summary and Recommendations:
recommended that the Board of Supervisors hold the public
hearing on this item. Should the Board consider the
Planning Commission’s recommendation of approval, an
Ordinance has been prepared.
applicant has proposed proffers to would allow for the
development’s residents to use roads not yet adopted into
the state system, but roads that are open to the public,
bonded and pending acceptance. This change to the proffers
was done subsequent to the Planning Commission’s
recommendation to forward this item with a recommendation of
approval. In addition, VDOT does not have the jurisdiction
or ability to grant access for a proposed subdivision off
streets that are not accepted into its state system. If
this issue cannot be resolved prior to the Board meeting, it
is suggested that this item be postponed to work out
refinements to the proffers.