25SN1153: Marlbank Farms Residential Rezoning and Adjustments
Chesterfield County
Summary not yet generated for this topic.
Community sentiment
At a glance
- Public comments
- 9
- Last 30 days
- 0
Last discussed May 19, 2026.
Public comments (9)
Stated that community members overwhelmingly oppose the Marlbank Farms rezoning and argued the application is an attempt to bypass sewage access issues.
Planning Commission - May 19, 2026 · 2:41:40 →Expressed concern that the development will destroy rural character, violate the village green zone plan, and cause drainage and high water table issues.
Planning Commission - May 19, 2026 · 2:46:23 →Highlighted local infrastructure deficits including lack of drugstores and grocery store crowding, pedestrian safety hazards, and threats to local wildlife.
Planning Commission - May 19, 2026 · 2:49:44 →Argued against high-density development, citing traffic chaos, stormwater runoff, flooding, and loss of rural atmosphere after living in the area for 53 years.
Planning Commission - May 19, 2026 · 4:42:30 →Described lifelong residency in Matoaca and the severe traffic delays on local roads, pleading with the commission to reject the high-density proposal.
Planning Commission - May 19, 2026 · 2:53:11 →Voiced concern over overcrowded schools, locker shortages at Matoaca High School, and unmanageable traffic increases.
Planning Commission - May 19, 2026 · 2:56:03 →Noted century farm heritage, shrink-swell blue marl clay soil issues, engineering challenges with berm construction near power lines, and water capacity limits.
Planning Commission - May 19, 2026 · 2:57:47 →Expressed concern about creek flooding, well water depletion in neighboring properties, and traffic safety hazards.
Planning Commission - May 19, 2026 · 5:00:30 →Criticized over-development and continuous flooding of infrastructure in southern Chesterfield County.
Planning Commission - May 19, 2026 · 3:03:17 →