Highfield part next

 

Latest version of HIghfield (Tuckahoe Bridge 2 at bottom)

On April 30, Markel Eagle held a second community meeting to present an undated version of a proposed development, Highfield, on approximately 138 acres located on Rockville Road, just south of the I64 overpass. Concerned citizens filled the meeting room at St. Mathew’s Church to listen as Natalie Croft, Director of Land Planning for Eagle, explained changes made to Highfield using input from a similar meeting in January. Also in attendance were David Owen, who represents the 57^th District in the House of Delegates, Jonathan Lyle, 5^th District Supervisor, Dwain Cosby 5^th District Planning Commissioner, Amanda Kowalski 2nd District Planning Commissioner, and Curt Pituck 4^th District Planning Commissioner. The property under discussion is in District 4.

The current proposal reduced the number of homes from 199 to 138, the density recommended for the area in the Goochland Comprehensive Land Use plan (https://www.goochlandva.us/250/2035-Comprehensive-Plan), which mirrors the density for section 2 of Tuckahoe Bridge (TB2), which adjoins the subject property to the south.

At the edge of the Centerville Village, a growth area, the parcel is part of the Tuckahoe Creek Service District, whose public utilities make smaller lots feasible.

As a significant portion of the proposed Highfield property is wetland, the 138 homes, as shown in the conceptual plan, are clustered on lots smaller than one acre. Three different sized lots are proposed, Parke lots, 9-11 k square feet; Estate lots 15k+ square foot lots; and West lots from 1-3 acres in size. Gross acreage is used to determine the number, not the size of individual lots, said Croft. Several attendees contended that there is nothing rural about the small lots.

The latest version of Highfield includes a spine road to encourage traffic to flow from the back of the subdivision to the main entrance on Rockville Road.  No homes have access to the spine road.

Traffic safety was the prime topic. Rockville Road, where crosses mark fatal crash sites, is one of the most dangerous routes in Goochland. A serious traffic crash at the TB2 entrance that afternoon was mentioned. Should Rockville Road be blocked south of I64, emergency vehicles would need to approach from the north, increasing response time.

Croft went into great detail about improvements to the Highfield frontage on Rockville Road, including removal of trees well back form the roadway to improve line of sight, turn lanes, widening, and shoulders.  

Off-site traffic safety matters, including an already failing Ashland Road intersections with Rockville Road and Plaza Drive, were mentioned in passing. Croft contended that conditions at either intersection were bad enough to trigger VDOT—the state agency whose motto is “oops!”—warrant thresholds for signalization. She cited the county major thoroughfare plan that includes possible improvements to these areas that do not include a timeline or funding.

 

As presented, Highfield has one direct access point with Rockville Road and a second connecting to a stub road in TB2, what could be called “daisy chaining”.

Croft contended that the road configuration complies with the county requirement for a second access point for subdivisions with more than 49 lots. TB2 has 49 lots, one per acre. Adding even half of the 138 lots in Highfield would result in the potential for vehicles from 118 lots using the TB2 access point, more than double the 49-lot requirement for access points.

A citizen cited Goochland County code Sec. 15-359. - Connectivity

“A proposed residential subdivision must be designed to coordinate with existing, proposed, and planned streets outside of the subdivision.

Wherever a proposed development abuts unplatted land or a future development phase of the same development, stub-outs must be provided as deemed necessary by the county to provide access to abutting properties or to logically extend the road network into the surrounding area. All stub-outs must be provided with temporary turn-arounds or culs-de-sac unless specifically exempted, and the restoration and extension of the road is the responsibility of any future developer of the abutting land.

Collector roads must intersect with collector or arterial roads at safe and convenient locations.

Local residential access roads must connect with surrounding roads to permit the convenient movement of traffic between residential neighborhoods and facilitate emergency access and evacuation, but such connections are not permitted if it would encourage substantial through traffic.”

Croft did not explain how the proposed connection with TB2 does not violate this provision of county code but contended that the county had approved it.

Goochland seems to be sending mixed signals about the daisy chaining.

A staff report, part of the R-1 (RZ-2024-00001) application for land in Courthouse Village, states “Greenbriar Branch Drive is a local road and provides only one access point onto Fairground Road.  Per zoning ordinance and the Goochland County Fire Prevention Code this road may not serve as access to more than 49 units. Outside of this property 25 lots exist that either have an existing house with access via that road or are recorded and potentially may have a house with access in the future. The proposed (20) lots by the applicant would bring the total to 45 and not cause the road to exceed that ordinance limitation.”

If this applies to land in Courthouse Village, why not to Highfield?

Other objections were that the number of homes would strain the county’s ability to provide needed services. Croft said that Highfield is projected to add 28 students to county schools, a remark greeted with howls of derision as citizens contended that the number could be as high as two students per home.

An Eagle representative countered that, based on experience, homes, especially those on the smaller lots, are bought by active adults with no school aged children.  

Croft seemed to indicate that Eagle would make no effort to inform those who have bought or may buy homes in TB2 about the connector road, contending that a sign on the VDOT required stub road would fill that requirement. Disclosure about things like the active rock quarry on the far side of I64 and designation of the opposite side of Rockville Road for economic development, would be handled by referring Highfield home purchasers to the comp plan.

Given the furor from homeowners in Reed Marsh in Courthouse Village when they learned that a 100 plus home community, which would be accessed via their roads, the county might want to impose more robust disclosure requirements going forward.

What kind of pushback will come from potential new residents should an industrial project be proposed the far side of Rockville Road when they learn that “prime economic development” is more intense than bookstores and coffee shops?

Goochland badly needs commercial development and lots of it to take the tax burden off of property owners.

One question that was neither asked nor answered at this meeting is “how does this benefit Goochland?”

There was no indication of next steps for the Highfield proposal. Stay tuned.