Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutTLZM-2020-0001 McDavit RezoningDate of Meeting: August 6, 2020 Town of Leesburg PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING Subject: TLZM-2020-0001, McDavit Staff Contact: Richard Klusek, AICP, Senior Planner Applicant: Michael McDavit & Catherine Visintainer 312 Lake View Way NW Leesburg, VA 20176 Applicant’s Representative: Sashenka J. Brauer, Esq. Walsh, Colucci, Lubeley, & Walsh 1 E. Market Street, Ste. 300 Leesburg, VA 20176 (571) 209-5773; sbrauer@thelandlawyers.com Proposal: Rezoning from the O-1, General Office zoning district to the R-1, Single-Family Residential District to allow one single-family detached unit on a 1.75 acre parcel on Old Waterford Road. Planning Commission Critical Action Date: November 14, 2020 Recommendations: Staff recommends approval subject to the Applicant providing a note on the Concept Plan regarding stormwater requirements as described below. Acceptance Date: April 20, 2020 Acceptance Modifications/Waivers: Three granted. a. Fiscal Impact Analysis: TLZO Sec. 3.3.6.J requires that a fiscal impact analysis that demonstrates the long term fiscal benefits and costs to the Town be provided for the proposal. A waiver from this requirement was granted on the basis that one single-family home and conversion of less than 2 acres to residential use will have a negligible fiscal impact. b. Archeological Information: TLZO Section 3.3.6.M requires that an archaeological study be provided, and further that a letter from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) concurring with the evaluations of the study be submitted at the time of application acceptance. A waiver from this requirement was granted on the basis that this application proposes returning the Property to its prior R-1 zoning status. If the Property had remained in the R-1 zoning district, TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report August 6, 2020 Page 2 of 13 a single-family home construction on the Property would not require any archaeological investigations. Furthermore, this property is relatively small and only approximately 1.75 acres in size and the proposed use as a single family home will result in less land disturbance than by right office use. Lastly, research conducted by the applicant with the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation and the Virginia Department of Historic Resources revealed no indication of critical natural resources or historic resources located on the Property. c. Traffic Impact Analysis: TLZO Section 3.3.3.G requires that a Traffic Impact Analysis be submitted with an application for rezoning. The site is currently zoned for office uses and one single-family home is expected to have significantly less impact than the by-right office use. Web Link: All application documents are available on LIAM (Leesburg Interactive Applications Map) via this link: www.leesburgva.gov/LIAM and can be accessed directly through: https://www.leesburgva.gov/Home/Components/FacilityDirectory/FacilityDirectory/362/2362?b acklist=%2fdepartments%2fplanning-zoning%2fcurrent-planning-zoning-projects%2fliam- interactive-applications-map STAFF REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Suggested Motions ………………………………………………………… 4 I. Application Summary ………………..……………………………... 4 II. Current Site Conditions……………………………………………. 5 III. Zoning History…………………………………………………….. 6 IV. Uses on Adjacent Properties ……………………………………... 6 V. Staff Analysis ..……………………………………………………... 7 1. Review Timeline Summary .……………………………………. 7 2. Town Plan Compliance…………………………........................ 7 3. Resolved Issues and Other Outstanding Issues ……………… 10 VI. Rezoning Approval Criteria Analysis …………………………... 11 VII. Zoning Modification Analysis …..................................................... 12 VII. Staff Findings and Suggested Revisions …………………….……. 12 IX. Attachment List .…………………………………………………. 13 TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report August 6, 2020 Page 3 of 13 Figure 1. Vicinity Map Table 1. Basic Property Information Address: Old Waterford Road Existing and Proposed Zoning: O-1/R-1 PIN# 230-35-8464 Proposed Density: 0.57 Dwelling Units per Acre Acreage: 1.75 acres Planned Land Use: Community Office TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report August 6, 2020 Page 4 of 13 Suggested Motions: Approval I move that rezoning application TLZM-2020-0001, McDavit, be forwarded to the Town Council with a recommendation of approval on the basis that the rezoning meets the Approval Criteria of TLZO Section 3.3.15, and the proposal will serve the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good planning practice. Work Session - Or - I move that Rezoning application TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit, be scheduled for a work session on _____________________, 2020 to address the following unresolved issues with the application as identified by the Commission___________________________. - Or - Denial I move that Rezoning application TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit, be forwarded to the Town Council with a recommendation of denial on the basis that the Approval Criteria of Zoning Ordinance Section 3.3.15 have not been satisfied due to the following reasons ____________________________________. Alternate I move an alternate motion _____________________. _____________________________________________________________________________ I. APPLICATION SUMMARY: The Applicants, Michael McDavit and Catherine Visintainer, are requesting approval of a rezoning application to allow for construction of one single-family detached dwelling unit on 1.75 acres of land. Specifically, the Applicant proposes to rezone 1.75 acres from the O-1, General Office District to the R-1 Single-Family Residential Zoning District. The Applicant is proposing a density of 0.57 dwelling units per acre. A. Review Note Regarding Proffers: This application is a residential rezoning in a “nonexempt area” as defined by Virginia Code §15.2-2303.4. This section of the state code pertains to what localities can accept in proffer agreements. At its 2019 session, the Virginia General Assembly adopted new legislation regarding proffers and residential rezonings that went into effect on July 1, 2019. The 2019 legislation restores much of the ability of localities to better negotiate proffers that was lost with the 2016 proffer TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report August 6, 2020 Page 5 of 13 legislation. However, per the 2019 legislation, any contribution to an off-site public facility must demonstrate that the “new residential use creates a need, or an identifiable portion of a need, for one or more public facility improvements in excess of existing public facility capacity at the time of the rezoning...” Staff is not aware of any public facility capacity issues related to the proposed single family home so no public facility proffers have been provided with this application. II. CURRENT SITE CONDITIONS: The Subject Property consists of vacant land. Figure 2 below demonstrates conditions on the Subject Property. The property is generally overgrown with a mix of vegetation. Much of the onsite vegetation is in poor condition. Figure 2. Aerial of Subject Property III. ZONING HISTORY: The Subject Property was previously rezoned under Rezoning #ZM-140, which was approved on October 11, 1994. This rezoning permitted the development of 5,000 square feet of office space on the Subject Property, identified as Lot 2 on the Concept Development Plan, prepared by Tri-Tek Engineering, Inc. The parcel adjacent and to the southeast of the Subject Property was also included in this rezoning to the O-1 zoning district and is identified as Lot 1 on the Concept Development Plan. The office headquarters for the United States Eventing Association, Inc. is currently located on this adjacent parcel, which carries TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report August 6, 2020 Page 6 of 13 an address of 525 Old Waterford Road, NW. Prior to the approval of this rezoning, these lots comprised one parcel and were zoned R-1. Figure 3. Current Zoning IV. USES ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES: Table 3. Adjacent Land Uses Direction Existing Zoning Current Use Town Plan Land Use Designation North R-4 Single-Family Detached, Town of Leesburg Pump Station Low Density Residential South R-4, O-1 Single-Family Detached, Office Low Density Residential, Community Office East R-1 Open Space Open Space West R-4 Single-Family Detached Low Density Residential West R-4 Single-Family Detached Low Density Residential TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report August 6, 2020 Page 7 of 13 V. STAFF ANALYSIS OF THE REZONING: This application is subject to the general rezoning approval criteria of TLZO Sec. 3.3.15. These standards are discussed in Section VI below. 1. Review Timeline Summary: This application was formally accepted for review on April 20, 2020 and staff received all necessary documents and fees for review on April 24 2020. Staff had the applicant under review for a period of 42 days followed by an applicant revision period of 19 days. Staff originally expected that the Applicants 2nd submission received on June 24, 2020 would be forwarded to the Planning Commission but additional staff comments resulted in a July 30 resubmission. 2. Town Plan Compliance: TLZO Section 3.3.8 requires an assessment of whether or not the proposed rezoning is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Town Plan and states that “inconsistency with the Town Plan may be one reason for denial of an application.” Further, TLZO Section 3.3.15 includes five approval criteria, including consistency with the Town Plan that should be used in considering a rezoning application. The following sections address compliance with key elements of the Plan. A. Land Use. The subject property is located in the Central Policy Area and is in the Community Office planned land use category on the Town Plan Planned Land Use Policy Map (see Figure 4). The major intent of Community Office is “To help provide for the diverse employment needs of the Town” (Intent #1, p. 6-31) and “to provide some of the retail and personal services needs of the employees and customers of the primary use for daily needs.” Uses appropriate for this designation include office uses, such as corporate headquarters, emerging technologies facilities, hotels, conference centers, and higher educational facilities, retail and services for daily needs of workers, including such uses as personal services (e.g., dry cleaners, hair dressers), business services (e.g., office supplies, copying centers), bank facilities, restaurants, health clubs, and day care facilities (p. 6-28). Residential uses are not contemplated by the Town Plan. As such, the Town Plan recommended residential density for the subject property is zero (0) dwelling units per acre and the rezoning is therefore not consistent with Town Plan land use policy in this area. However, this rezoning application would result in improved land use compatibility which is another Town Plan Policy discussed below. TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report August 6, 2020 Page 8 of 13 Figure 4. Town Plan - Planned Land Use Policy Map B. Community Design. A key community design consideration of the proposed project is compatibility with adjacent uses. As discussed in Community Design Objective 1.a, lots and building placement should be compatible with existing and planned development in the immediate vicinity (p.5-3). The Subject Property is a small vacant parcel (1.75 acres) that is surrounded by parcels that have already been developed. Five out of seven adjacent lots are single family residential lots. An adjacent lot to the north of the Subject Property is a Town owned pump station (Figure 5) and a lot to the south is a one story office building (Figure 6). Figure 5. View of adjacent pump station. TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report August 6, 2020 Page 9 of 13 Figure 6. View of adjacent office building. Given the fact that the majority surrounding land uses are single-family detached homes, staff believes that the proposed residential use would result in a more compatible land use than the potential office development currently contemplated by the Town Plan. C. Economic Development – Maintain Employment Designated Lands. A major land use theme of the Town Plan is the need to “maintain supply of land for high wage employment” (TP p. 6-5). The proposed rezoning would remove employment designated land and this is contrary to Town Plan economic policies seeking to maintain high-wage and high tax revenue generating uses and policies that seek to limit the loss of employment land. However, as noted in other sections of this report, this Economic Development goal should be considered with other Town Plan goals including land use compatibility. Staff also notes that the viability of the subject property for office uses is questionable given the relatively small size of the property and its location away from the downtown area or major roads. The ability to build an office here has existed since 1994 but no site plan for a commercial use has ever been submitted for the subject property. D. Natural Resources and Open Space. Staff does not believe that the Applicant’s proposal to construct a single family home on the Subject Property for residential use would have a significant impact on the Natural Resources objectives of the Town Plan. In theory, the proposed rezoning would result in additional open space and tree cover as compared to an office use which would have a larger development footprint and result in additional land disturbance. E. Housing. The Town Plan has a range of Housing Objectives that are typically evaluated with a residential rezoning application. However, given the small size of the parcel and the proposal for a single house, the housing policies which call for a TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report August 6, 2020 Page 10 of 13 range of housing types among other things are generally not applicable given the scale of this application. Town Plan Compliance Summary: Considering the applicable Town Plan policies, staff believes that the proposed use of the Subject Property for a single family home is reasonable given existing conditions in the area and the challenges in developing this parcel with for Community Office uses. Given the fact that the parcel is relatively small (only 1.75 acres) and separated by distance from the downtown area and major roadways, it would be difficult to develop with office uses. Furthermore, an analysis of land use compatibility suggests that a residential use may also be more appropriate on this parcel given the fact that the office and business uses are not prevalent near the Subject Property. Unmitigated School Impacts: The proposed rezoning will provide additional residential development that will have an impact on Loudoun County Public Schools. While the single unit will have minimal impact, based on current student generation factors the proposed unit will result in an estimated 0.65 new school students. Based on current formulas, approval of this zoning application will generate estimated capital costs of $40,400 and annual operational costs estimated at $9,907 to fund the public educational services. The Loudoun County School Board is concerned about all land development applications and the capital facility expenditures and operational cost associated with each residential project. In this particular case, the schools that serve the Subject Property have sufficient capacity. Resolved Issues and Other Outstanding Issues: The proposed application meets the requirements of the R-1 District in terms of lot dimensions. During the course of project review, staff worked with the Applicant to address issues with respect to required buffer yards, stormwater, and driveway sight distance requirements. Minor issues like plan set discrepancies were also addressed. At this time, staff is requesting the Applicant provide an additional note on the Concept Plan regarding stormwater. The note would read “Prior to approval of any Mini Site Plan/Lot Grading Plan on the subject property, the applicant shall provide justification that all stormwater management and best management practices for stormwater quality (SWM / BMP) and water quantity for the site are in accordance with all Town and State criteria including the Town of Leesburg Storm Water Management Master Plan criteria and the latest versions of the Virginia Storm Water Management Handbook and the Town's DCSM, whichever is more stringent. However, the subject single-family residence project shall be exempt from needing subject coverage under the Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) General Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from Construction Activities and Virginia Storm Water Management Handbook requirements should the land-disturbing activity be less than 1 acre. The maximum area that can be disturbed during construction for this site is 1.71 acres as shown on sheet 5. However, it TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report August 6, 2020 Page 11 of 13 is the applicant's intent to disturb less than 1 acre at the time of mini site plan/lot grading plan in order to meet the State exemption criteria.” The Applicant has agreed to this note and will update the Concept Plan before the Town Council Public Hearing. VI. REZONING APPROVAL CRITERIA ANALYSIS: Zoning Ordinance Section 3.3.15 establishes the following criteria for the Planning Commission and Town Council to use, in addition to other reasonable considerations, in making their decision regarding approval or disapproval of a zoning map amendment application. Listed below are the specific criteria with staff response. A. “Consistency with the Town Plan, including but not limited to the Land Use Compatibility policies.” Staff Analysis: As discussed earlier in this report, the proposed rezoning conflicts the Planned Land Use and Economic Development Policies of the Town Plan but helps further Town Plan goals with respect to land use compatibility. B. “Consistency with any binding agreements with Loudoun County, as amended, or any regional planning issues, as applicable.” Staff Analysis: This criterion is satisfied. Staff is unaware of any conflicts regarding binding agreements with the County of Loudoun or any regional planning issues. C. “Mitigation of traffic impacts, including adequate accommodation of anticipated motor vehicle traffic volumes and emergency access.” Staff Analysis: The proposed rezoning would result in one single family home which will have a negligible impact on traffic. In addition, the proposed rezoning would actually result in a reduced trip generation as compared to by-right office development. This criterion is satisfied. D. “Compatibility with surrounding neighborhood and uses.” Staff Analysis: As described above, the Subject Property shares a boundary with five existing single family home lots. The adjacent office use is small in scale and has an appearance that is compatible with residential uses. The adjacent pump station is also relatively small and does not have a significant impact on neighborhood character. Finally, Ida Lee Recreation Center and the associated park land are located across the street from the Subject Property. Therefore, staff believes that the proposed single family home would be compatible with surrounding uses and this criterion is satisfied. E. “Provision of adequate public facilities.” TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report August 6, 2020 Page 12 of 13 Staff Analysis: The proposed rezoning would have a negligible impact on public facilities and all existing facilities are believed to have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed single family home. The application does not include proffers or cash contributions for facilities such as schools, fire and rescue services, and recreational facilities since there are no demonstrated capacity issues. This criterion is satisfied. VII. ZONING MODIFICATION ANALYSIS: The Applicant proposes two buffer yard screening modifications of Section 12.8 of the Zoning Ordinance, as listed below: A. Northern Lot Line: This buffer yard requires a 25-foot wide buffer yard with S2 screening. A modification is proposed to reduce the buffer yard from 25 feet to 10 feet in width and to reduce the amount of required screening materials. The Applicant proposes utilizing the existing vegetation on the adjacent Town sanitary sewer pumping station property (Parcel A) to provide a portion of the required screening materials. The site plan for the pump station project indicated a 10-foot wide buffer yard was provided on Parcel A. The Applicant proposes an additional 10-foot wide buffer yard on the Subject Property with the width reduction justified by the presence of a drainage swale along this lot line, the presence of the overhead power lines, and the proposed installation of a six-foot tall fence. B. Southern Lot Line: This buffer yard requires a 25-foot wide buffer yard with S3 screening. A modification is proposed to reduce the length of this buffer yard. Given the low intensity of the adjoining property use (the U.S.T.C.A. office), the Applicant proposes to provide a 25-foot wide S3 buffer along the shared lot line a sufficient distance to screen the adjoining office building and its parking area. Extending the buffer yard to the rear “tip” of the U.S.T.C.A. property is unnecessary as the rear tip only consists of a narrow triangle of vegetated land with no constructed improvements that would necessitate buffering. Staff Evaluation: Staff finds that the Applicant’s requested modifications are reasonable given existing conditions on the Subject Property and adjacent properties that require buffers per the zoning ordinance. Along the northern property line, existing drainage swales and power lines make installation of required buffers difficult to achieve. The Applicant has proposed installation of a six foot tall fence to mitigate the need for the specified buffer. Along the southern property line, staff concurs with the Applicant’s justification that it is unnecessary to buffer the area of vegetated land that is not currently developed. VIII. STAFF FINDINGS AND SUGGESTED REVISIONS: Based on the information above, Staff supports the rezoning application. The rezoning applications furthers the Town Plan Goals with respect to land use compatibility and community design despite conflicts with the TLZM 2020-0001, McDavit Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report August 6, 2020 Page 13 of 13 land use and economic goals of the plan. Staff recommends a note regarding stormwater be added to the plan set as described above. The Applicant has agreed to make this revision prior to the Town Council Public Hearing. IX . ATTACHMENTS: 1. Concept Development Plan, revised through July 30, 2020 2. Tree Management Report dated October 25, 2019 3. Applicant’s Statement of Justification, last revised July 30, 2020 4. Proffers, last revised July 30, 2020 Engineering O:\drawings\F-3216\OLD WATERFORD ROAD PROPERTY\plots\ZMAP-AMEND\3216-01-COVER.dwg, 7/29/2020 4:35:59 PM, spetrullo, _DWG To PDF.pc3, 1:1, TRI-TEK Engineering, Inc.   Engineering O:\drawings\F-3216\OLD WATERFORD ROAD PROPERTY\plots\ZMAP-AMEND\3216-02-NOTES.dwg, 7/29/2020 4:36:03 PM, spetrullo, _DWG To PDF.pc3, 1:1, TRI-TEK Engineering, Inc. S S Engineering O:\drawings\F-3216\OLD WATERFORD ROAD PROPERTY\plots\ZMAP-AMEND\3216-03-EXCOND.dwg, 7/29/2020 4:36:12 PM, spetrullo, _DWG To PDF.pc3, 1:1, TRI-TEK Engineering, Inc. Engineering O:\drawings\F-3216\OLD WATERFORD ROAD PROPERTY\plots\ZMAP-AMEND\3216-04-REZONE.dwg, 7/29/2020 4:36:22 PM, spetrullo, _DWG To PDF.pc3, 1:1, TRI-TEK Engineering, Inc. S S Engineering O:\drawings\F-3216\OLD WATERFORD ROAD PROPERTY\plots\ZMAP-AMEND\3216-05-CONCEPT PLAN.dwg, 7/29/2020 4:36:34 PM, spetrullo, _DWG To PDF.pc3, 1:1, TRI-TEK Engineering, Inc. Engineering O:\drawings\F-3216\OLD WATERFORD ROAD PROPERTY\plots\3216-INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE.dwg, 7/29/2020 4:36:41 PM, spetrullo, _DWG To PDF.pc3, 1:1, TRI-TEK Engineering, Inc. Engineering O:\drawings\F-3216\OLD WATERFORD ROAD PROPERTY\plots\ZMAP-AMEND\3216-07-ELEVATIONS.dwg, 7/29/2020 4:36:48 PM, spetrullo, _DWG To PDF.pc3, 1:1, TRI-TEK Engineering, Inc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1718 19 202122 23 24 26 27 28 29 25 2.01 16 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ®TreesPlease P. O. Box 1025 Haymarket, Virginia 20168 703-927-2048 http://www.treesplease.com ed@treesplease.com after Tri Tek Name Size Condition Comment RecommendationTree # Appendix Prepared by Edward P. Milhous TreesPlease® Old Waterford Road October 25, 2019 Leesburg, Virginia Development Tree Inventory ASCA RCA #350 ISA #MA-0004A MD TE #458 1 red  maple .64 Off the site; owned by someone else. Acer rubrum Species Rating: 80% Suitability for preservation: good. Chances of survival to be determined. Stem and buttress roots are buried in soil and/or mulch. The root system of this tree is confined on two sides. Preservation status to be determined. Do not remove off-site plants without owner consent. Leave plants alone if you don't have permission to cut. 17 2 red  maple .56 Off the site; owned by someone else. Acer rubrum Species Rating: 80% Suitability for preservation: good. Chances of survival to be determined. Stem and buttress roots are buried in soil and/or mulch. This is a serious problem for this tree. Included bark is evident. Preservation status to be determined. Do not remove off-site plants without owner consent. Leave plants alone if you don't have permission to cut. 24 2.01 crabapple .8 Suitability for preservation: moderate. Malus spp. Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 75% Chances of survival to be determined. 8/8 3 black cherry .8 Suitability for preservation: good. Prunus serotina Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 60% Chances of survival to be determined. Assorted vines are attached to this tree’s trunk. 20 4 black cherry .64 Suitability for preservation: good. Prunus serotina Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 60% Chances of survival to be determined. Included bark is evident. Vandalized: ax wounds. 20 5 black cherry .8 Suitability for preservation: good. Prunus serotina Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 60% Chances of survival to be determined. Assorted vines are attached to this tree’s trunk. 17 © E. P. Milhous 1 Old Waterford RoadOctober 25, 2019 Name Size Condition Comment RecommendationTree # Appendix Old Waterford Road October 25, 2019Leesburg, Virginia,Development Tree Inventory 6 black cherry .72 Suitability for preservation: good. Prunus serotina Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 60% Chances of survival to be determined. Assorted vines are attached to this tree’s trunk. Storm damage in the past seriously damaged this tree. 17 7 hackberry .8 Suitability for preservation: good. Celtis occidentalis Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 75% Chances of survival to be determined. 8/12 8 white mulberry .8 Suitability for preservation: poor. Morus alba Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 30% Chances of survival to be determined. One of the worst invasive exotics, it is an undesirable tree. 12 9 tree of heaven .8 Suitability for preservation: poor. Ailanthus altissima Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 30% Chances of survival to be determined. One of the worst invasive exotics, it is an undesirable tree. 12 10 tree of heaven .8 Suitability for preservation: poor. Ailanthus altissima Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 30% Chances of survival to be determined. One of the worst invasive exotics, it is an undesirable tree. Obscured hazard: This tree's trunk is hidden by English ivy. 19 11 white mulberry .8 Suitability for preservation: poor. Morus alba Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 30% Chances of survival to be determined. One of the worst invasive exotics, it is an undesirable tree. 12 12 white mulberry .8 Suitability for preservation: poor. Morus alba Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 30% Chances of survival to be determined. One of the worst invasive exotics, it is an undesirable tree. 23 13 hackberry .8 Suitability for preservation: good. Celtis occidentalis Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 75% Chances of survival to be determined. 25 14 tree of heaven .72 Suitability for preservation: poor. Ailanthus altissima Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 30% Chances of survival to be determined. One of the worst invasive exotics, it is an undesirable tree. Decay is evident in the buttress roots of this tree. 23 15 hackberry .8 Suitability for preservation: good. Celtis occidentalis Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 75% Chances of survival to be determined. Obscured hazard: This tree's trunk is hidden by English ivy. 15 © E. P. Milhous 2 Old Waterford RoadOctober 25, 2019 Name Size Condition Comment RecommendationTree # Appendix Old Waterford Road October 25, 2019Leesburg, Virginia,Development Tree Inventory 16 hackberry .8 Suitability for preservation: good. Celtis occidentalis Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 75% Chances of survival to be determined. Obscured hazard: This tree's trunk is hidden by English ivy. 10/24 17 hackberry .8 Suitability for preservation: good. Celtis occidentalis Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 75% Chances of survival to be determined. Obscured hazard: This tree's trunk is hidden by English ivy. 26 18 white mulberry .68 Suitability for preservation: poor. Morus alba Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 30% Chances of survival to be determined. One of the worst invasive exotics, it is an undesirable tree. Danger! Large pieces of wood could fall at any time. If saved, To reduce risk: prune out 2" or larger dead wood ASAP. 36 19 white mulberry .72 Suitability for preservation: poor. Morus alba Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 30% Chances of survival to be determined. One of the worst invasive exotics, it is an undesirable tree. Dead branches are a significant problem for this tree. 13 20 hackberry .8 Suitability for preservation: good. Celtis occidentalis Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 75% Chances of survival to be determined. English ivy is attached to this tree’s trunk. 13 21 sweet cherry .64 Suitability for preservation: good. Prunus avium Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 50% Chances of survival to be determined. Tree has a "J-root" system; all/most roots are on one side. There is decay in the trunk and base of this tree. 23 22 sweet cherry .8 Suitability for preservation: good. Prunus avium Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 50% Chances of survival to be determined. 16 23 black walnut .8 Suitability for preservation: good. Juglans nigra Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 80% Chances of survival to be determined. 12 24 white mulberry .4 Suitability for preservation: poor. Morus alba Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 30% Chances of survival to be determined. One of the worst invasive exotics, it is an undesirable tree. Storm damage is evident. This is a severe problem for this tree! DBH estimated. 15 © E. P. Milhous 3 Old Waterford RoadOctober 25, 2019 Name Size Condition Comment RecommendationTree # Appendix Old Waterford Road October 25, 2019Leesburg, Virginia,Development Tree Inventory 25 black cherry .72 Suitability for preservation: poor. Prunus serotina Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 60% Chances of survival to be determined. Included bark is evident. 10/9 26 Leyland cypress .8 Suitability for preservation: moderate. x Cupressocyparis leylandi Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 50% Chances of survival to be determined. Symptoms of Seiridium canker are evident. These trees are crowded. There is sparse growth of foliage in these trees. 15 (7 plants) 27 white mulberry .8 May be jointly-owned with neighbors. Morus alba Species Rating: 30% Suitability for preservation: poor. Chances of survival to be determined. One of the worst invasive exotics, it is an undesirable tree. Preservation status to be determined. Don't remove jointly-owned plants without owner consent. Leave plants alone unless you have permission to cut. 12 28 white mulberry .8 May be jointly-owned with neighbors. Morus alba Species Rating: 30% Suitability for preservation: poor. Chances of survival to be determined. One of the worst invasive exotics, it is an undesirable tree. Preservation status to be determined. Don't remove jointly-owned plants without owner consent. Leave plants alone unless you have permission to cut. 16 29 black locust .56 Suitability for preservation: poor. Robinia pseudoacacia Preservation status to be determined. Species Rating: 50% Chances of survival to be determined. Included bark is evident. This tree had a partial structural failure in the past. 15 53Average species rating © E. P. Milhous 4 Old Waterford RoadOctober 25, 2019 STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION Rezoning Application TLZM-2020-0001 Loudoun County PIN #230-35-8464 April 3, 2020 Revised June 24, 2020 Revised July 30, 2020 I. Introduction Michael McDavit and Catherine Visintainer are the applicants and owners (collectively, the “Applicant”) of a parcel located in the Town of Leesburg identified as Loudoun County PIN 230- 35-8464, which comprises approximately 1.75 acres of land (the “Subject Property”) zoned under the General Office (“O-1”) zoning district and governed by the Town of Leesburg Zoning Ordinance, as amended (the “Zoning Ordinance”). The Applicant is requesting a rezoning of the Subject Property from O-1 to the Single-Family Residential zoning district (“R-1”) to permit the construction of one single-family detached dwelling unit. The Subject Property is located on Old Waterford Road, NW. (Route 698) northwest of the intersection of Morven Park Road and Old Waterford Road, NW. II. Property Background & Proposal The Subject Property is surrounded on three sides by parcels of land that accommodate residential uses. Single-family detached dwellings in the R-4 zoning district lie to the north and west of the Subject Property. Ida Lee Park is across from the Subject Property to the east and is zoned R-1. The parcel to the southeast of the Subject Property is zoned O-1, and an office building is located on the property. This application proposes the development of one single-family detached dwelling unit for the Applicant to use as a primary residence. The proposed application will supersede the U.S.T.C.A. Headquarters rezoning, #ZM-140, which was approved on October 11, 1994. This rezoning permitted the development of 5,000 square feet of office space on the Subject Property, identified as Lot 2 on the Concept Development Plan, prepared by Tri-Tek Engineering, Inc. The parcel adjacent and to the southeast of the Subject Property was also included in this rezoning to the O-1 zoning district and is identified as Lot 1 on the Concept Development Plan. The office headquarters for the United States Eventing Association, Inc. is currently located on this adjacent parcel, which carries an address of 525 Old Waterford Road, NW. Prior to the approval of this rezoning, these lots comprised one parcel and were zoned R-1. TLZM-2020-0001 Statement of Justification Page 2 of 4 The Applicant purchased the Subject Property in 2019 and contracted with Evergreene Homes, Inc., a premier infill homebuilder that provides cutting edge designs and superior quality with an emphasis on low maintenance, energy efficiency, and low operating costs. The design of the front of the house facing Old Waterford Road, NW will feature a farmhouse style wraparound porch. The proposed side-entry garage will provide ample parking and will enhance the overall appearance of the Subject Property from the street. The high-quality design of the proposed house will complement the surrounding residential community and the character of the Town of Leesburg. The Subject Property is currently vacant and has existing tree cover and vegetation, with select higher quality trees intended to be retained. Existing vegetation that has been identified as being poor quality, hazardous, or otherwise of an undesirable nature (i.e. invasive species, vines, etc.) will be removed to enhance the overall appearance of the Subject Property. Construction of the single-family home, driveway, and related features will only require grading and clearing of a portion of the Subject Property. A 25-foot wide buffer along the southeast border of the Subject Property will provide ample vegetative screening from the adjacent commercially-zoned property. Since the Subject Property is immediately southeast of a Town sanitary sewer pumping station, the Applicant will provide adequate screening and buffering along the shared lot line to improve compatibility with this adjacent use. The Town Plan currently recommends the Subject Property for “Community Office” land uses. No site-specific recommendations are provided for the Subject Property. Although this proposal does not conform to the current Town Plan designation for this parcel, this low-impact, residential use will complement the surrounding area, and consequently, benefit the Town of Leesburg. The driveway entrance located on Old Waterford Road, NW will have a negligible impact on traffic since this project proposes a single residential structure with anticipated traffic counts much less than would typically be generated by an office use. The original purpose for the Subject Property to be zoned and planned for commercial office uses was to accommodate the location of the U.S.T.C.A. headquarters at this specific location. The U.S.T.C.A. has constructed their headquarters on the adjacent property and no longer has a use for the Subject Property. Permitting a rezoning of the Subject Property to the R-1 district to accommodate one single-family detached home offers the most compatible land use for an area that is predominantly residential. From a market perspective, there is no identified market for an office use at this location on a lot of only 1.75 acres. III. Compliance with § 3.3.15 Approval Criteria Section 3.3.15 of the Zoning Ordinance contains general standards the Planning Commission and Town Council are to evaluate when considering a rezoning request. Each use limitation is listed in bold below, followed by the Applicant’s response in italics: TLZM-2020-0001 Statement of Justification Page 3 of 4 A. Consistency with the Town Plan, including but not limited to the Land Use Compatibility Policies. The Town Plan recommends the Subject Property for “Community Office” land uses. This proposed project for a single-family residential dwelling unit is a more complementary use to the surrounding area than the current Town Plan designation. Additionally, the proposed project will result in less impervious surface and environmental impact than a “Community Office” land use. B. Consistency with any binding agreements with Loudoun County, as amended, or any regional planning issues, as applicable. The Applicant is not aware of any binding agreements with Loudoun County or regional planning issues as they pertain to the proposed application. Therefore, this criterion is satisfied. C. Mitigation of traffic impacts, including adequate accommodation of anticipated motor vehicle traffic volumes and emergency vehicle access. The traffic impact of the proposed application is negligible and arguably less than that associated with an office use on the Subject Property. Therefore, this criterion is satisfied. D. Compatibility with surrounding neighborhood and uses. The proposed residential use will complement the surrounding residential neighborhood to the north and west, and also complement Ida Lee Park across the street since the project will have a negligible impact on traffic. The Applicant will provide a 25-foot wide buffer yard to the southeast, which will provide sufficient distance and screening from the Subject Property’s boundary line and the office building on the adjacent parcel. Therefore, this criterion is satisfied. E. Provision of adequate public facilities. The Subject Property will be served by Town public central water supply and public central sanitary sewer systems. Therefore, this criterion is satisfied. IVIV. Zoning Modifications The Applicant proposes two buffer yard screening modifications of Section 12.8 of the Zoning Ordinance, as listed below: TLZM-2020-0001 Statement of Justification Page 4 of 4 1) Northern Lot Line: This buffer yard requires a 25-foot wide buffer yard with S2 screening. A modification is proposed to reduce the buffer yard from 25 feet to 10 feet in width and to reduce the amount of required screening materials. The Applicant proposes utilizing the existing vegetation on the adjacent Town sanitary sewer pumping station property (Parcel A) to provide a portion of the required screening materials. The site plan for the pump station project indicated a 10-foot wide buffer yard was provided on Parcel A. The Applicant proposes an additional 10-foot wide buffer yard on the Property with the width reduction justified by the presence of a drainage swale along this lot line, the presence of the overhead power lines, and the proposed installation of a six-foot tall fence. Site observations conducted with Town staff indicated this approach would provide sufficient screening between the existing and proposed uses. 2) Southern Lot Line: This buffer yard requires a 25-foot wide buffer yard with S3 screening. A modification is proposed to reduce the length of this buffer yard. Given the low intensity of the adjoining property use (the U.S.T.C.A. office), the Applicant proposes to provide a 25-foot wide S3 buffer along the shared lot line a sufficient distance to screen the adjoining office building and its parking area. Extending the buffer yard to the rear “tip” of the U.S.T.C.A. property is unnecessary as the rear tip only consists of a narrow triangle of vegetated land with no constructed improvements that would necessitate buffering. V. Conclusion The proposed application will permit the Applicant to pursue a residential use on the Subject Property. The proposed rezoning to the R-1 zoning district will complement the surrounding residential uses to the north and west by providing a lower density transition from Ida Lee Park to the east to the surrounding R-4 zoned properties. This application will provide a means for this currently vacant parcel of land to realize its potential and be developed in a responsible manner that will jointly benefit the Applicant and the Town of Leesburg. PROFFERS TLZM-2020-0001 June 24, 2020 July 30, 2020 Michael McDavit and Catherine Visintainer, the owners (collectively and hereinafter, the “Owner”) of approximately 1.75 acres of land, more particularly described as Loudoun County PIN 230-35-8464 (hereinafter, the “Property”), more fully depicted on the Concept Plan identified in Proffer 1, below, hereby voluntarily proffers, pursuant to Va. Code Ann. § 15.2- 2303 and § 3.3.16 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Leesburg (the “Zoning Ordinance”) that in the event the Property is rezoned by the Town Council of Leesburg, Virginia (the “Town”) to the Single-Family Residential (“R-1”) zoning district as depicted on the Concept Plan and pursuant to this Town of Leesburg Zoning Amendment application TLZM-2020-0001 (the “Application”), the development of the Property shall be in substantial conformance with the following conditions (“Proffers”). All exhibits referred to in these Proffers are attached and incorporated into these Proffers. LAND USE & DEVELOPMENT SCOPE 1. Concept Plan. Development of the Property shall be in substantial conformance with the Concept Development Plan, which is identified as Sheets 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the seven (7) sheet plan set titled “Michael McDavit and Catherine Visintainer Property Zoning Map Amendment (TLZM-2020-0001) Leesburg, Virginia” dated March 16, 2020, and revised through July 30, 2020, prepared by Tri-Tek Engineering, Inc. and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A. The Concept Development Plan shall control the use, layout and configuration of the Property, with reasonable allowances to be made for engineering and design alteration and to meet Town zoning, subdivision, and land development regulations. The undersigned hereby warrants that all Owners with any legal interest in the Property have signed this Proffer statement, that no signature from any additional party is necessary for these Proffers to be binding and enforceable in accordance with their terms, that the undersigned has full authority to bind the Property to these conditions, and that the Proffers are entered into voluntarily. [ SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE ] TLZM 2020-0001 Page 2 Owner/Title Owner of Loudoun County PIN # 230-35-8464 ____________________________ Michael McDavit State/Commonwealth of ___________________________ City/County of _____________________ to wit: I, ___________________________, a Notary Public in and for the state and city/county aforesaid, do hereby certify that Michael McDavit, whose name is signed to the foregoing instrument, personally appeared before me and have this day acknowledged that he executed the foregoing proffers with the full power and authority to do so. Given under my hand this _______ day of , 2020. Notary Public My Commission Expires: ______________________ TLZM 2020-0001 Page 3 Owner/Title Owner of Loudoun County PIN # 230-35-8464 ____________________________ Catherine Visintainer State/Commonwealth of ___________________________ City/County of _____________________ to wit: I, ___________________________, a Notary Public in and for the state and city/county aforesaid, do hereby certify that Catherine Visintainer, whose name is signed to the foregoing instrument, personally appeared before me and have this day acknowledged that she executed the foregoing proffers with the full power and authority to do so. Given under my hand this _______ day of , 2020. Notary Public My Commission Expires: ______________________ TLZM 2020-0001 Page 4 Exhibit A Concept Plan