cloverleaf mall site development plan - College of Humanities and ...

Cloverleaf mall Site Development
Plan
Prepared By: Sytira Kirby
Virginia Commonwealth University Master of Urban and Regional Planning
Spring 2008

Cloverleaf Mall Site Development Plan Panel
Dr. Mort Gulak - Panel Chair
Associate Professor, L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Andrew Bleckley - Client Representative
Associate, Design Forum
Tom Jacobson - Panel Member
Chesterfield County Department of Revitalization
Ed Simpson - Panel Member
Adjunct Professor, L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs

Table of Contents
Executive Summary 1
I: Existing Conditions
Introduction 5
Description of Site 5
History 7
Previous Plans 9
Land Use 10
Zoning 13
Circulation 16
Demographics 19
Surrounding Influences 28
Environmental Conditions 31
Market Analysis 34
Summary of Existing Conditions 39
II. Plan - Cloverleaf Place
Vision 45
Goals & Objectives
Mixed Use 46
Density 49
Urban Design 49
Housing 51
Green Space 52
Civic Space 53
Sustainability 55
Connectivity 66
Implementation Strategy 70
Alternative Development Concepts 71
Conclusion 72
End Notes 73

Executive Summary
In the early 1970s, while Cloverleaf Mall was still in the construction phase, the mall’s developer, Leonard Farber was retained by Henrico County to develop
the proposed Regency Square Mall, which was scheduled to be completed by 1975. Farber agreed and from Cloverleaf Mall’s opening, in 1972, Richmond’s
first regional mall faced almost immediate competition and foresaw the glimmer of its eventual decline. In the decades which followed, the Richmond market
became saturated by regional shopping centers, the newest ‘towne centers,’ and commercial strip developments.
In 2002, Chesterfield County retained the services of both a retail consultant and the Richmond District of the Urban Land Institute to recommend a strategy
to stymie the hemorrhaging mall site. Both groups determined the future of the site was no longer as a traditional shopping mall and that Chesterfield
County must play a lead role in its redevelopment.
In the years which followed, Chesterfield County slowly purchased the mall building and the site from its various owners. In 2007, Chesterfield County and
Crosland, Inc., a Charlotte-based development firm, agreed to work in partnership to redevelop the site of the Cloverleaf Mall.
The Cloverleaf Mall Site Development Plan provides an alternative design concept.
Situated advantageously at the intersection of Midlothian Turnpike and Chippenham Parkway, at the City of Richmond- Chesterfield County border, the former
mall site boasts existing infrastructure, few environmental issues, and accessibility and visibility from two of the most heavily trafficked roadways in the
Richmond region. Perhaps more importantly, the site is located in one of the fastest growing counties in Virginia, within which the mall is situated in an area
that has experienced tremendous growth rates in the past ten years.
The site is disadvantaged by the land around it, which was developed between the 1970s to reflect the design concepts of the mall itself; that is massive scale,
large lots, and easy accessibility to accommodate America’s growing relationship and eventual dependence upon the automobile. These modern design
trends have lead to the neglect of places, those sites which bring people together in a definable and unique environment and connect them with one another
and the world around them, along the eastern Midlothian Turnpike corridor.
Cloverleaf Place is meant to be just that, a place which connects people with each other, the community, and with the surrounding environment. Cloverleaf
Place incorporates the characteristics of traditional pre-World War II neighborhoods with the latest ‘green’ technology while accommodating for the automobile
and the human need for connectivity between locations. By doing so, the plan not only reintroduces the site back into the urban fabric using traditional
design techniques but simultaneously returns the land itself to its nearly natural state using the newest technology all the while accommodating for today’s
needs. Cloverleaf Place is a traditional mixed use village rooted in the principles of New Urbanism, sustainability, and connectivity, all of which guarantee its
success and longevity. Specific plan goals are as follows:
Cloverleaf Place is a mixed-use development comprised of commercial, civic, residential, and office activities in addition to green and open
spaces.
Cloverleaf Place is built compactly in a clustered design to encourage walk-ability, enable a more efficient use of services and resources, and
to allow for larger tracts of open space.

Cloverleaf Place is a neighborhood with a range of housing types that provide opportunities for a wide variety of people.
Meaningful green space promotes the health, vitality, and character of Cloverleaf Place.
Cloverleaf Place incorporates a civic use to connect residents and users to the larger community and to continue the public-private
partnership which exists between Chesterfield County and Cloverleaf Place.
Cloverleaf Place is a sustainable neighborhood which achieves an on-going balance between the total resources consumed and the total
resources created.
Cloverleaf Place boasts connectivity both into and within the site that is efficient, pleasant, and safe for pedestrians and automobiles.
Figure 1: Cloverleaf Place

I. Existing Conditions

Introduction
The site of the former Cloverleaf Mall, in Chesterfield County, Virginia, has
long been considered an ideal location for future redevelopment. Chesterfield
County has worked diligently to obtain the site and form a partnership
with a developer to create a master plan that will benefit the residents of
Chesterfield County as well as trigger innovative redevelopment along the
eastern Midlothian Turnpike corridor.
Since 2006, Chesterfield County and Crosland, Inc., a Charlotte-based developer,
have worked in tandem to design a master plan community for the site.
The Cloverleaf Mall Site Development Plan was completed as a Studio project
for the Master of Urban and Regional Planning degree at Virginia Commonwealth
University. This plan provides an alternative design concept for the
redevelopment of the former Cloverleaf Mall site.
Infrastructure and Easement
Electricity is provided by Dominion Virginia Power. Water and sewer services
are provided by Chesterfield County. The site includes a 150 foot
easement for two electric lines, which run from south to north through the
western portion of the site. These lines connect to the transformer station
located across Midlothian Turnpike at The Boulders. In addition, the site
includes another fifty foot easement for Commonwealth Gas, which is located
adjacent to the existing Virginia Power easement. As a result, the site is
limited by a two hundred foot easement for both natural gas and power.
This document is divided into two sections. The first is an exploration and
assessment of the conditions currently affecting the site. The second section
details and illustrates recommendations for redevelopment.
Description of Site
The Cloverleaf Mall site is bound to the north by Midlothian Turnpike and
by Chippenham Parkway to the east. The property lines extends to the south
just beyond the site of the former movie theater and to the west from behind
the movie theater and adjacent to the those parcels fronting Granite Springs
Road. The site is 83 acres. (See Map 1).
Figure 2: Dominion Virginia Power lines and easement.

Boulder
Parkway
Midlothian Turnpike
Granite Springs Rd.
Chippenham Parkway
Starview Lane
Back Entrance
Cloverleaf Drive
Map 1: Cloverleaf Mall Site
Source: Chesterfield County

History
1944 - 1968:
Carnival Owner, John
H. Marks uses the 98-acre
site between Turner Road and
what would become chippenham
Parkway as the winter
home for his carnival
animals. 3 1960- 1969:
Chippenham Parkway
(State route 150) is
constructed. 5
Dec. 16, 1986:
The Chesterfield County
Board of Supervisors is asked to
support extending bus routes along
Midlothian Turnpike on an experimental
basis to study the feasibility
of permanent bus service
in the county. 16
Dec. 2, 1989:
C h i p p e n h a m - Pa r h a m
Connector opens.
August 12, 1989:
Regency Square
A campaign to beautify
Mall. 35
Midlothian Turnpike calls for open at nearby Cloverleaf
Mall. 29
trees to be planted on the highway’s
median and along the right of way.
Oct. 12, 1995:
Oct. 27, 1986:
The entire project, from Cloverleaf
A Cloverleaf Mall guard
Chesterfield Mall
Mall at the Richmond city line to
commits arson by starting a
1 8 0 7 / 1 8 0 8 :
shopping center undergoes
a two-phase
Sycamore Square in the village
small fire in a trash bin, which
“Old Manchester Pike
of Midlothian, might cost
caused a nearby natural gas
near Richmond had been
expansion.
1979:
$300,000. 21
line to rupture and two
mall transformers to
surfaced in gravel and was
1 9 6 2 : Cloverleaf Interchange
is completed
Larry J. Hudson, 32
Feb. 1989:
explode. 30 Dec. 17, 1997:
recognized as the first “artificial”
road or paved road
constructed. 6 at chippenham Park-
is arrested in the parking
Azalea mall is
Oct. 1991:
Cloverleaf Mall
Virginia Center Commons
(phase one) Opens.
Place, a safe place
to offer Project Safe
in the state” 2 way and US 60. 12
lot at Cloverleaf Mall for
holding a young woman
The center will be nearly
for teenagers. 34
1971- 1979:
June 3, 1986:
against her will in his
1 million sq. ft. upon
Chippenham Parkway Louisa man pleads guilty
vehicle. 20
completion. 25
is expanded to dual to shooting woman with a
Aug. 1991:
lanes with diamond and pellet gun in the parking lot
An argument over a woman
cloverleaf intersections.
at the Cloverleaf Mall complex.
of Cloverleaf Mall. 14
led to gunfire inside the theater lobby
24
17 50 1800 1850 1900 1950 1998
1976:
Aug. 16, 1990:
Expansion begins on
April 1988:
April 4, 1993:
Sept. 1, 1996:
a former Petersburg
Midlothian turnpike
The new Cloverleaf
Mall cinemas
Chesterfield officials George D. Zamias
police officer-turned crack
1956:
to widen the road to
look at extending Greater Developer Co. of Johnstown
buys Cloverleaf
18 addict abducts and rapes a
The Shops
six lanes. 11
open.
Richmond Transit Co. bus service
33- year-old Richmond woman west on Midlothian Turnpike for Mall for $10.5 million.
at Willow Lawn
from the Cloverleaf Mall
city residents who want to
Open. 4 O c t o b e r
parking lot. 23
work or shop at Cloverleaf
Mall. 27
15, 1975:
Regency Square
Nov.7, 1996:
Sept. 30, 1988:
mall Opens. 9
Charlita Singleton, 39, and
Virginia Overland’s Midlothian
July, 1993:
August 16,
Cheryl Sonya Edwards, 25, are
Express Jobs bus, begins service to provide
city residents with transportation to
ers Inc. closes its shop at
Schwarzschild Jewel-
1972:
stabbed to death inside the All For One
Cloverleaf Mall opens
store at Cloverleaf Mall in Chesterfield
County. Their bodies were found
N o v e m b e r
jobs along Midlothian Turnpike from Cloverleaf
Mall west to Chesterfield Towne Cen-
the Cloverleaf Mall . 28
as a joint venture between
6, 1975:
“East of the
Leonard L. Farber Co. and
in a rear office of the store early
Chesterfield mall
ter. Permanent approval of the routes is
Mountains, two principal
Arlen Shopping Centers,
Inc. 8
County assessments
1992:
the next morning. 32
Shopping Center
expected after a Nov. 29, 1988 public
routes led from where Richmond
stands today deep into the
hearing by the SCC. 19 for the land and buildings at
Opens.
interior. One was a path to the
1987: The
Cloverleaf Mall total more than
Dec. 16, 1996:
settlements that were to become
1985:
Shops at Willow
$60 million. Cloverleaf Mall grew Jean and casualwear
Lynchburg and Roanoke, a course
Farber sells Cloverleaf
Mall to a Chicago-
600,000 square feet with
employing as many as 2,200 people during Inc. closes its store in
Lawn are renovated to
to 88 stores and services on 78 acres, retailer, County Seat
now followed approximately
by US 60 and 460.” 1 based investment trust, 100 stores. Chesterfield
the Christmas shopping season, earning
LA Partners, for $32.6 Towne Center is renovated to
an estimated annual sales volume exceeding
million. 13 850,000 square feet and
$120 million in 1991. 26
135 stores. 17
22
Sept. 20, 1994:
Sears, Roebuck and Co.
plans to build a store at
Chesterfield Towne Center;
increasing speculation about
whether it will keep its store
1997:
T a u b m a n
Centers, Inc. buys
Cloverleaf Mall. 33

Aug. 29, 1998:
2004:
Richmond Mayor Tim Kaine proposes
extending Greater Richmond
purchases Cloverleaf
Chesterfield County
2003:
Cloverleaf Mall
Transit Co. bus routes into Chesterfield,
Henrico and Hanover counties.
Oct. 16, 2004: million.
Mall for nearly $9
has $16.39 million in
mall sales. 58
The proposal includes bus lines on
51 Chesterfield County
Midlothian Turnpike to Chesterfield
Towne Center. 39
Sept. 2003:
purchases the former
Nov. 2007:
Sears store adjacent to
Short Pump Mall
57
Cloverleaf Mall. Aug. 13, 2004:
The rezoning of Cloverleaf
is on hold at least until
and Stony Point
Chesterfield County obtains a
March 9, 1998:
Fashion Park
purchase option to buy the Cloverleaf
January, as is the acquisition of
2000:
Eastern Midlothian Plan is
open.
C h e s t e r f i e l d
50
Mall. The Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
the final piece of the property after
the board’s action Wednes-
in the final stages. Key recommendations
include the formation
County Board of Supervisors
votes to allow Chesterfield County
July 23, 2003:
accepts the County’s purchase contract of $6.1
million. The deal includes about 25 acres but not
day (November 20, 2007). 66
of the Eastern Midlothian Business
off-track betting parlors decides to spend $44,000
the Sears or Tire America buildings and about
Alliance to encourage investment
in the corridor. 36
older industrial de-
in redeveloping Clover-
only in areas zoned for to find a company interested
15 acres around them. Cloverleaf Mall is
assessed at approximately $12 million.
56
Nov. 2007:
Jan. 23, 2008:
velopment. 43
leaf Mall. 49 Crosland tentatively agrees
Chesterfield Board of Supervisors
votes unanimously to
May 18,
with the county to purchase the
Feb. 1998:
2006:
May 2000:
Chesterfield supervisors
Jan. 25, 2003:
mall from the county for the amount authorize the purchase of the remaining
46 acres at Cloverleaf Mall. The
Off-Track Betting
vote unanimously to oppose the
The Sears, Roebuck and
May 28, 2004:
Chesterfield County Chesterfield invests in it contingent upon
is proposed at Cloverleaf
Mall.
amendment to extend GRTC into
Co. store and auto center Chesterfield County chooses
Chesapeake Realty Ventures
signs an agreement to several factors: rezoning of the site, acquiring
all the property, and a financial the Millmar Partnership family trust to
county will enter into an agreement with
Chesterfield County stating fear
42 close at Cloverleaf Mall;
redevelop the Cloverleaf
of being stuck with the tab after
the two-year trial pe-
Sears was the last remaining
anchor tenant. 48
of developers to revitalize Clo-
LLC of Baltimore as their choice
Mall site with Crosland, contribution from the county in the
buy the land with a cap of $7.37 million.
68
Inc. 60 redevelopment effort. 65
verleaf Mall.
riod ended. 55
37
19 98 20 04 20 08
1998:
May 13, 2001:
Nov. 16, 2007:
C h e s t e r f i e l d
GRTC Expands service
Chesterfield County’s outgoing Board
County Board of Supervisors
adopts a comprehen-
into Chesterfield
of Supervisors defers the purchase of the final
Jan. 15, 2008:
County.
sive plan for the Eastern
44
piece of the Cloverleaf Mall site. As a consequence, the
Chesterfield County
May 28, 2004:
agreed-upon $7.25 million sales price expired when the deal
announces Cloverleaf
Midlothian Turnpike
Chesterfield County
wasn’t approved. Which means the family trust that owns the
Mall to close February
Area. 38
Oct. 2001:
promotes Planning Director,
46 acres (the Millmar Partnership family trust) at the mall
29, 2008. 67
February
Cloverleaf Mall
2 0 0 2 :
Thomas E. Jacobson to the new position
of Director of Revitaliza-
the purchase next year. The 46 acres is the ground
may ask for more money when the new board considers
16, 1999:
Cinemas close. 45 Cloverleaf
Hearing on bus expansion
spurs flares of emo-
million in mall
be a top priority. 54
some parking lots. 64
mall has $33.40
tion. Cloverleaf Mall will
beneath the mall structure and includes
tion from Chesterfield
sales. 46
Oct. 19 – Oct. 23,
residents. 40
2007.
2002:
May 17, 2004:
Chesterfield County Board of
Chesterfield County
A local investor buys
Supervisors is scheduled to hear
hires a retail consultant and the former Sears, Roebuck
and Co. store at
the mall site. 63
the proposal for rezoning
Dec. 29, 1999:
Dec. 11 2005:
Feb. 26, 2007:
the richmond District of the ULI to
Chesterfield County
Cloverleaf Mall retains
about three dozen
Kroger plans to open
conduct a market analysis for the mall Cloverleaf Mall.
Board of Supervisors agrees
new store in Chippenham
53
site and recommend a strategy for the local
Place. The store will bring
to spend $60,000 to study a
smaller shops and no Jan. 24, 2007:
government. Both groups determined that
proposal for extensive road
anchor tenants.
150 jobs to Chesterfield
County. 62
59 Chesterfield County’s
the future of the site was no longer as a
improvements and potential
2 0 0 4 :
Board of Supervisors unanimously
approve the purchase
shopping mall and that the County government
must play a lead role in
development around Cloverleaf
Mall. 41 mall has $13.37
and sale agreement of the
Cloverleaf
the redevelopment of the
million in mall
mall property from chesterfield
County to Cro-
site. 47
sales. 52
sland, Inc. 61

Previous Plans
The Cloverleaf Mall site has been included in two recent plans: The Eastern
Midlothian Turnpike Plan i and the Analysis of the Potential for Activity in
the Eastern Midlothian Turnpike Study Area of Chesterfield County ii . While
these plans have provided some guidance and direction for the site, neither
plan deals specifically with the development of the site as a singular entity.
The Eastern Midlothian Turnpike Plan
In Chesterfield County, plans for growth become part of The Plan for
Chesterfield County, the county’s comprehensive plan, upon adoption by the
Board of Supervisors. The Eastern Midlothian Turnpike Plan was adopted
on April 22, 1998.
The Cloverleaf Mall Site Development Plan adheres to, and seeks to
accomplish, many of the various goals set forth by Chesterfield County. These
include:
• Create an inviting atmosphere where people will want to work, play,
shop, and live.
• Ensure Eastern Midlothian Turnpike functions as an economic center
for the region.
• Achieve harmony among land uses.
• Improve the aesthetic quality and functional design of Midlothian
Turnpike.
Analysis of the Potential for Activity in the Eastern Midlothian
Turnpike Study Area of Chesterfield County
Chesterfield County commissioned The Chesapeake Group, Inc. to perform
a detailed market analysis of the Eastern Midlothian Turnpike district; it was
completed in April 1996. The study provides data for both residential and
commercial economic conditions. The document is listed as a supplement to
The Eastern Midlothian Turnpike Plan. Please see Market Analysis for plan
details.
Additional Plans
The Cloverleaf Mall site, located along the City of Richmond-Chesterfield
County boundary, is affected not only by Chesterfield County’s plans for
the site, but additionally by the City of Richmond’s plans for the Midlothian
corridor within the city limits. As a result, the City of Richmond’s Master
Plan 2000 – 2020 iii must also be detailed.
The Cloverleaf Mall Site Development Plan complies with many of the city’s
overall goals. These goals include the following:
Figure 3: Eastern Midlothian Turnpike Study Area
Transportation Goals
• The city will be served by a multi-modal regional
transportation system.
• The city will have a roadway system that supports the

efficient movement of private vehicles and public transit.
• Pedestrian movement will be protected and an integral part
of the transportation system.
Housing and Neighborhood Goals
• Richmond neighborhoods will provide a variety of housing
choices and home ownership opportunities.
• Development will be sensitive to the scale and design of
existing neighborhoods.
Community Character Goals
• Gateways and image corridors will be maintained and
enhanced as important contributors to the city’s overall
positive image.
Land Use Goals:
• Obsolete structures and uses will be transformed into
productive and quality uses that support Richmond’s
neighborhoods, residents, and heritage.
Land Use
The Cloverleaf Mall site is currently designated as a Regional Mixed Use
Area, according to the Eastern Midlothian Turnpike Plan i . The Regional
Mixed Use District (C-4) provides for a mixture of integrated office, shopping
center, and light industrial parks. Where appropriate, this area could include
community scale mixed uses such as shopping centers, other commercial
uses, or offices. This designation does not permit residential development.
However, subsequent notes provide that should it later be determined that
residential uses may be appropriate, then these should be of high quality and
upscale design, subsidiary to and integrated within office, commercial or
light industrial projects.
Regional Mixed Use areas should be designed to be compatible with
surrounding residential areas. Offices, churches, or other similar uses should
be located between more intense commercial or light industrial uses and
surrounding residential areas to ensure effective land use transitions. Uses
should be planned and designed to accommodate pedestrian access.

Cloverleaf Mall Site
Additional Land Uses Affecting the Site
Figure 4: Eastern Midlothian Turnpike Land Use Plan (Chesterfield County)
The City of Richmond’s Master Plan 2000 – 2020, Chapter 11 “Midlothian Planning District” ii details land uses along Midlothian Turnpike, east of
Chippenham Parkway. These have been designated as General Commercial, General Office, and Economic Opportunity Areas.

Economic Opportunity Area
• Development must enhance the economic
base of the city.
• Development must provides tax base and
employment opportunities.
• Uses may include light industrial, office,
institutional, retail, and high density
housing.
• Landscape must be used to provide a
buffer.
General Commercial
• Small strip shopping centers.
• Auto-oriented businesses.
• Adequate buffering should be provided in
order to protect the neighborhoods.
General Office
• To feed off of The Boulders development.
• Office related uses.
• Retail.
• Hotel fronting Midlothian Turnpike.
Figure 5: Eastern Midlothian Land Use Plan (City
of Richmond)

Zoning
Currently, five different zoning classifications exist within the site. These
include four business district classifications and one small residential district
(See Map 2). The largest portion of the site is classified as C-5: General
Business District. Varying degrees of business zones have been relegated to
small parcels along the perimeter of the site, two of which are adjacent to the
Chippenham Parkway on-ramp. The residential zone is also located adjacent
to Chippenham Parkway. The current zoning classifications and their
locations seem to reflect spot zoning and limit the cohesion of the site. The
entire site will have to be re-zoned for future development.
The following list provides an overview of each zoning classification on the
Cloverleaf Mall site i :
C-2 NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT
The C-2 zoning designation permits neighborhood-oriented retail services to
include small shopping centers or developments which serve neighborhoodwide
trade areas. Design controls shall be applied to provide an effective
land use transition between the residential community and higher intensity
uses. Access to arterial roadways is limited. Integrated vehicular/pedestrian
circulation should be provided within the site as well as between adjacent
developments. Generally, this district should be located at the intersection of
arterials or at the intersection of arterials with major collector streets. ii
C-3 COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT
The C-3 zoning classification permits community-scale commercial
development to include shopping centers, which serve community-wide
trade areas and promote public convenience and accessibility. Mixed use
projects containing commercial, office and residential townhouse/residential
multifamily uses should be encouraged. Design controls should apply to this
district requiring integrated design standards within individual projects.
Access to and the number of conflict points along arterial roadways should
be limited. Integrated vehicular/pedestrian access should be provided within
each project as well as between adjacent developments. Generally, C-3 zones
should be located along major arterials at their intersections with other
arterials. iii
See Appendix for Chesterfield County Zoning Classifications.
C-4 REGIONAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
The purpose and intent of the C-4 District designation is to encourage
integrated developments containing a mixture of regional shopping centers,
employment centers, major office/light industrial parks and/or high density
residential developments. Urban design standards should apply within
individual projects. Access to and the number of conflict points along major
arterial roadways should be limited. An integrated system of vehicular/
pedestrian circulation should be provided within individual projects and
be extended to adjacent developments. Sites should be designed to ensure
maximum compatibility with, and minimal impact on, existing and future
residential development in the area.
The C-4 District should generally be located on large sites adjacent to
the county’s limited access arterials at intersections/interchanges with major
arterials. Direct access onto major arterials should be required and direct
access onto limited access arterials should be encouraged. Generally, a C-4
District in a given location within the county should contain a minimum of
35 acres and a minimum 500,000 square feet of commercial, office and/or
industrial uses. iv
C-5 GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
The purpose and intent of the C-5 District is to provide areas primarily for
motor vehicle oriented uses. Accordingly, these should be located along
arterials or near industrial areas. v
R-7 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
Those uses permitted by right in the R-88 District, provided, however that
after August 27, 1997, R-7 zoning shall no longer be granted by the Board
of Supervisors. Provided further that any property that has been zoned R-7
on or before August 27, 1997, shall continue to be subject to the provisions
contained in this division. vi
R-88 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
The R-88 district permits the following:
(a) Single-family dwellings.
(b) Churches and other places of worship, including parish houses, Sunday
schools and temporary revival tents.

(c) Publicly operated schools, colleges, libraries and museums.
(d) Publicly operated parks, playgrounds and athletic fields, including
their customary buildings and facilities. Public and private forests, wildlife
preserves and conservation areas.
(e) Propagation and cultivation of crops, flowers, trees, and shrubs which are
not offered for sale.
(f) Group homes. vii
These zoning classifications represent much of the zoning surrounding
the site within Chesterfield County. East of Chippenham Parkway, the
City of Richmond has zoned the Midlothian Turnpike corridor in a similar
fashion. Currently, the area along US 60 is zoned B-3 , which permits most
businesses, including, but not limited to, dry cleaning, adult entertainment,
funeral homes, dwelling units, hospitals, hotels, radio and television
broadcasting, and service and self-service businesses. viii
See Appendix for City of Richmond Zoning Classifications.

Map 2: Cloverleaf Mall Zoning Classifications
Source: Chesterfield County

Circulation
The Cloverleaf Mall site is advantageously located at the intersection of Chippenham Parkway (Virginia 150) and Midlothian Turnpike (US 60). Chesterfield
County has designated each of these roads as primary routes. Midlothian Turnpike, a major arterial road, travels eastward from Clopton Street (on
Richmond’s Southside) to the Chesterfield-Powhatan County line. Chippenham Parkway runs north-south as the connection between Parham Road and
Pocahontas Parkway (Virginia 895).
At the mall site, Midlothian Turnpike is a 6-lane thoroughfare with a large, grassy median. There are two primary entrances into the site, both of which
are controlled by stoplights. The site is visible and easily accessible from Midlothian Turnpike. From US 60 West there are two dedicated left-turn lanes,
controlled by stoplights, at each entrance. Chippenham Parkway is located east of the site and is accessible by cloverleaf and on-ramps. The parkway is a
four-lane road with a concrete median. The mall site is visible and easily accessible from Chippenham Parkway via Midlothian Turnpike.
Figure 6: Cloverleaf Mall as seen from Midlothian Turnpike
Traffic Analysis
A large volume of traffic travels past the site daily. The average daily traffic count on Midlothian Turnpike is 49,500. i ii The average annual weekday traffic
count, that is traffic traveling on Mondays through Thursdays, is 53,500. iii iv According to The Eastern Midlothian Plan, Midlothian Turnpike between
Chippenham and Powhite Parkways carries the highest volume of traffic of any roadway in the county (excluding freeways). v The average daily traffic
See Appendix for complete traffic counts for both Chesterfield County and the City of Richmond.

count on Chippenham Parkway is 69,500. The average annual weekday traffic count along Chippenham Parkway is 76,000. vi From these calculations,
approximately 124,000 automobiles pass the site daily.
Midlothian Turnpike (US 60)
From Providence Road
to Chippenham Parkway
(VA 150)
From Chippenham
Parkway (VA 150) to
Carnation Street
Estimated
Daily Traffic
in front of
Mall Site
Annual Average
Daily Traffic 56,000 43,000 49,500
Annual Average
Weekday Traffic
(Mon. - thurs.)
Estimated
Weekday
Traffic in
front of Mall
site
60,000 47,000 53,500
Chippenham Parkway (VA 150)
From Jahnke Road to
Midlothian Turnpike (US
60)
From Midlothian Turnpike
(US 60) to Hull Street (US
360)
Estimated
Daily Traffic
adjacent to
the Mall Site
Annual Average
Daily Traffic 66,000 73,000 69,500
Annual Average
Weekday Traffic
(Mon. - thurs.)
Estimated
Weekday
Traffic
adjacent to
the Mall site
72,000 80,000 76,000
Total Estimated Traffic
Passing the Mall Site
Daily
Weekdays (Mon.
- Thurs.)
119,000 129,000
Source: 2006 Virginia Department of Transportation Daily Traffic Volume

Other Modes – Public Transit, Bicycle, Pedestrian
The Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC) operates one route (62
Hull Street-63 Midlothian Turnpike) between downtown and the Cloverleaf
Mall site. Bus service is provided Mondays thru Saturdays. During the
week, buses operating along the eastern route run approximately once per
hour. During Peak Hours, between 7 am – 10 am and 5:30 PM and 7:30 PM,
buses occur once every thirty minutes. The first bus of the day leaves
the site at 7:30 am; the last bus departs at 9:26 PM. The trip lasts
approximately 30 – 40 minutes depending on the time of day. Saturday
service begins at 8:10 am and occurs approximately once per hour. Again,
the last bus of the evening runs at 9:30 PM. The western route begins and
ends earlier, at 6:19 am and 8:25 PM, respectively. The occurrence patterns
are very similar to the eastern route. The Cloverleaf Mall/Beaufont Mall stop
is the only stop in Chesterfield County along Midlothian Turnpike.
Other modes of travel are non-existent in the areas adjacent to the site.
Neither sidewalks nor bike lanes exist along Midlothian Turnpike or
Chippenham Parkway. The pedestrian atmosphere around the site is
extremely discouraging due to the auto-dominated nature of Midlothian
Turnpike. The 45 mile-per-hour speed limit, 6 – 10 lanes of traffic, and lack
of crosswalks make it is nearly impossible for pedestrians to negotiate US 60.
Circulation Between Site and Adjacent Sites
Circulation between the mall site and adjacent sites is limited to one street,
the back entrance to Cloverleaf Mall. This entrance is located in the
eastern section of the site, parallel to Chippenham Parkway, and connects to
Cloverleaf Drive. Currently, there are no access roads between the site and
Starview Lane or the existing commercial development to the west along
Granite Springs Road.
Figure 7: GRTC bus stop at Cloverleaf Mall site.
See Appendix for Map of Routes and Bus Schedules.
Figure 8: Midlothian Turnpike intersection in front of Cloverleaf Mall site.

Demographics
1990 and 2000 US Census Data i
The population in the areas surrounding the Cloverleaf Mall site has experienced tremendous growth between 1990 and 2000. In the area immediately
surrounding the mall, population growth has been stable, having increased only slightly from 43,325 to 50,799. This change reflects the same rate of growth
experienced by the Richmond-Petersburg Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The population living between one and two miles from the site, however,
has experienced tremendous growth, between 145% and 150%. In addition, the population living within five miles of the site has also increased from
234,000 to just over 380,000.
Growth in the population is directly proportional to rate of growth in the number of households and housing units. As such, growth immediately
around the mall is modest while those areas between one and two miles from the site have experienced astronomical growth.
1/2 Mile 1 Mile 2 Miles
1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change
Population 43,325 50,799 17.3% 63,506 156,026 145.69% 79,213 198,978 151.19%
Male
20,143 23,748 29,776 73,550 37,143 94,341
Female
23,182 27,051 33,730 82,476 42,070 104,637
5 Miles Richmond-Petersburg MSA
1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change
Population 234,598 383,368 63.41% 865,640 996,512 15.12%
Male
111,082 183,612 411,642 478,537
Female
123,516 199,756 453,998 517,975
Race
The racial composition of the population living within a half-mile of the site is more diverse than areas between one and five miles from the site. The
population in this district is made up primarily of Caucasians and African Americans, 50% and 40%, respectively. However, the neighborhood has witnessed
a surge of Hispanic and Latino citizens between 1990 and 2000. These inhabitants now make up approximately 4.5% of the population, as compared to only
2% of the population of the Richmond-Petersburg MSA. In addition, those listed as ‘Other Races’ make up another 4% of the population in this area.
The districts between one and five miles of the site reflect the same racial compositions as the entire Richmond-Petersburg MSA. Overall, approximately 65%
of the population is Caucasian, 30% is African American, 2% is Asian, 2.3% is Hispanic, and 2.6% is defined as ‘Other Race.’
See Appendix for complete census data tables by census tract.

Race
1/2 Mile 1 Mile 2 Miles
1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change
White Alone
26,681 26,373 -1% 40,853 93,685 129.32% 53,864 119,483 121.82%
Black or African American
Alone 15,561 20,943 34.6% 21,093 52,586 149.31% 23,408 67,095 186.63%
American Indian and Alaska
Native Alone 141 220 56% 176 577 227.84% 183 723 295.08%
Asian and Pacific Islander
748 1,077 43.98% 1,128 3,483 208.78% 1,461 4,512 208.83%
Asian Alone
1,036 3,442 4,471
Native Hawaiian and
Other Pacific Islander Alone 41 41 41
Hispanic or Latino 414 2,361 470% 681 5,749 744.20% 843 7,318 768.09%
Other Race 194 2,186 1027% 256 5,695 2124.61% 297 7,165 2312.46%
Some Other Race Alone
1,396 3,336 3,960
Two or More Races
790 2,359 3,205
Race
5 Miles Richmond-Petersburg MSA
1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change
White Alone
166,717 252,529 51.47% 595,909 646,796 8.54%
Black or African American
Alone 62,825 107,713 71.45% 252,376 299,268 18.58%
American Indian and Alaska
Native Alone 526 1,379 162.17% 2,610 3,928 50.50%
Asian and Pacific Islander
3,820 9,461 147.67% 11,768 20,567 74.77%
Asian Alone
9,272 20,173
Native Hawaiian and
Other Pacific Islander Alone 189 394
Hispanic or Latino 2,125 11,724 451.72% 8,788 23,179 163.76%
Other Race 710 12,286 1630.42% 2,977 25,953 771.78%
Some Other Race Alone
5,965 10,887
Two or More Races
6,321 15,066

Age
Between 1990 and 2000, the area within a half-mile of the site experienced an increase in the population between the ages of forty and fifty-nine and seventy
to seventy nine. These figures indicate an aging population living near the mall site. In addition, the neighborhood also experienced growth in the
number of children under the age of eighteen.
These patterns are similar to those found in the tracts within one and five miles of the mall site. The entire Richmond-Petersburg MSA is experiencing the
growth of age groups between forty and fifty-nine and seventy and older. In addition, the number of those younger than eighteen is also increasing
at a rapid rate.
Age
Less than 18 Years
19 - 24 Years
25 - 29 Years
30 - 39 Years
40 - 49 Years
50 - 59 Years
60 - 69 Years
70 - 79 Years
80 Years and Older
1/2 Mile 1 Mile 2 Miles
1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change
11,922 14,530 21.88% 17,504 42,070 140.35% 21,012 54,875 161.16%
4,412 3,859 -14.3% 6,013 10,690 77.78% 7,137 13,514 89.35%
4,768 3,824 -24.7% 6,415 11,621 81.15% 7,884 13,692 73.67%
8,488 8,054 -5.39% 12,472 25,281 102.70% 15,702 31,190 98.64%
5,423 8,715 60.7% 8,479 26,411 211.49% 10,727 34,366 220.37%
3,092 5,793 87.4% 4,864 17,917 268.36% 6,077 23,687 289.78%
2,766 2,849 3.0% 4,258 9,867 131.73% 5,786 12,744 120.26%
1,710 2,136 24.9% 2,368 8,333 251.90% 3,416 10,202 198.65%
744 717 -3.8% 1,133 3,836 238.57% 1,472 4,708 219.84%
Age
Less than 18 Years
19 - 24 Years
25 - 29 Years
30 - 39 Years
40 - 49 Years
50 - 59 Years
60 - 69 Years
70 - 79 Years
80 Years and Older
5 Miles Richmond-Petersburg MSA
1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change
60,632 100,323 65.46% 222,770 264,456 18.71%
20,444 32,467 58.81% 76,916 74,834 -2.78%
21,874 27,900 27.55% 78,590 68,061 -15.47%
45,460 60,840 33.83% 159,574 161,194 1.02%
33,344 63,251 89.69% 119,859 165,079 37.73%
18,698 44,738 139.27% 75,151 114,892 52.88%
17,939 24,008 33.83% 69,455 67,390 -3.06%
11,164 19,733 76.76% 43,097 52,918 22.79%
5,043 10,108 100.44% 20,228 27,688 36.88%

Educational Attainment
Levels of educational attainment vary according to distance from the mall site. The community around the mall has significantly lower percentages
of educated citizens than those further from the mall. Only 41% of the population has a high school diploma or equivalent and have had some college,
although no degree. However, in the districts between one and five miles from the site, the number of high school graduates with some college experience
is between 44% and 50%. The percentage of people with a Bachelor’s degree is 18% within the neighborhood immediately around the mall while those
communities between one and five miles from the site boast more than 20% of their population with college educations. The percentage of collegeeducated
citizens is proportional to the distance from the mall. The further one travels from the site, the higher the percentage of citizens with Bachelor’s
degrees. Finally, the percentage of citizens with graduate, professional, or doctorate degrees within a half-mile from the mall is only 7% as compared to 10%
in other areas further from the site.
1/2 Mile 1 Mile 2 Miles
1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change
Educational Attainment
Less than 9th Grade
1,965 1,507 -30.4% 2,801 4,374 56.16% 3,151 5,925 88.04%
9th to 12th Grade; No
Diploma
4,854 3,727 -30.2% 6,507 10,713 64.64% 7,479 14,167 89.42%
High School Graduate or
Equivalent 7,384 9,022 22.2% 10,771 26,171 142.98% 13,033 32,270 147.60%
Some College; No Degree
5,708 8,093 41.8% 8,467 25,060 195.97% 11,109 30,651 175.91%
Associate Degree
1,624 1,879 15.7% 2,391 6,091 154.75% 3,133 7,398 136.13%
Bachelor’s Degree
4,031 5,821 44.4% 6,729 20,671 207.19% 9,359 26,851 186.90%
Graduate or
Professional Degree 1,425 2,361 65.7% 2,323 10,186 338.48% 3,800 13,327 250.71%
5 Miles Richmond-Petersburg MSA
1990 2000 change 1990 2000 change
Educational Attainment
Less than 9th Grade
10,728 11,799 9.98% 51,417 36,283 -41.71%
9th to 12th Grade; No
Diploma
20,195 25,588 26.70% 85,556 77,927 -9.79%
High School Graduate or
Equivalent 36,326 56,457 55.42% 153,019 172,485 12.72%
Some College; No Degree
31,768 55,186 73.72% 112,025 144,137 28.67%
Associate Degree
8,351 13,225 58.36% 29,157 34,430 18.08%
Bachelor’s Degree
30,899 57,966 87.60% 91,054 127,851 40.41%
Graduate or Professional
Degree 15,255 30,357 99.00% 43,726 64,109 46.62%

Persons per Household
Most (77%) households in each of the specified areas consist of between one and three people, with two person households as the most prevalent.
Within the half-mile surrounding the mall, however, there has been a significant growth in the number of households with six and seven persons per
household.
Total
Households
Person per
Household
1 Person
Household
2 Person
Household
3 Person
Household
4 Person
Household
5 Person
Household
6 Person
Household
7 or More
Persons in
Household
Average
Household Size
1/2 Mile 1 Mile 2 Miles
1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change
17,829 20,516 15.1% 25,530 62,893 146.3% 32,155 78,421 143.9%
4,825 5,594 16% 6,555 16,796 156.2% 8,283 19,862 139.8%
5,838 6,528 12% 8,267 21,241 156.9% 10,761 26,392 145.3%
3,401 3,819 12% 5,053 11,293 123.5% 6,149 14,281 132.2%
2,495 2,640 6% 3,724 8,341 124.0% 4,600 10,919 137.4%
925 1,243 34% 1,369 3,503 155.9% 1,674 4,683 179.7%
237 393 66% 394 1,111 182.0% 488 1,500 207.4%
108 195 81% 168 22 -663.6% 200 718 259.0%
2.48 2.46 2.52

Total Households
Person per Household
5 Miles Richmond-Petersburg MSA
1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change
93,010 152,415 63.9% 331,771 387,721 16.9%
1 Person Household 24,199 42,775 76.8% 82,521 102,222 23.9%
2 Person Household 30,844 50,786 64.7% 108,838 129,185 18.7%
3 Person Household 17,194 26,090 51.7% 63,182 69,728 10.4%
4 Person Household 13,540 20,527 51.6% 49,507 55,174 11.4%
5 Person Household 5,090 8,414 65.3% 19,239 22,105 14.9%
6 Person Household 1,598 2,701 69.0% 5,849 6,377 9.0%
7 or More Persons in 545 1,118 105.1% 2,635 2,930 11.2%
Household
Average Household
Size
2.41 2.48
Median Household Income
The median household income of the community within a half-mile of the mall is significantly lower than areas farther from the mall site.
Considering inflation, each figure has been equated to 2008 figures according to the Consumer Price Index. Within a half-mile of the site the median
household income is $58,819 as compared to $62,168 within one mile, $66,953 within two miles, $63,053 within five miles, and $59,294 for the entire MSA.
1/2 Mile 1 Mile 2 Miles
1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change
Median Household
Income $23,884.45 $46,424.55 $28,835.80 $49,068.21 $26,977.39 $52,844.93
2008 Inflation
Calculation
(Consumer Price $40,657.50 $58,819.29 45% $49,085.97 $62,168.77 26.65% $45,992.48 $66,953.83 45.6%
Index) ii
Median
Household
Income
5 Miles Richmond-Petersburg MSA
1990 2000 change 1990 2000 change
$33,274.25 $49,766.38 $33,489.00 $46,800.00
2008 Inflation
Calculation
(Consumer Price
Index) iii $56,641.36 $63,053.35 11.3% $57,006.92 $59,294.98 4.0%

Housing
In addition to the number of housing units added to the specified areas, each of these districts is experiencing low vacancy rates, which hover between
4% and 5%. This is an increase for most areas but not for the community immediately surrounding the mall site. In addition, the number of owneroccupied
housing units is also increasing throughout the MSA. Home ownership has increased 190% in the area one mile from the mall.
1/2 Mile 1 Mile 2 Miles
Total Housing Units
1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change
19,027 21,395 12.4% 27,403 65,699 139.8% 34,318 82,381 140.1%
Occupied 17,864 20,412 14.3% 25,666 62,802 144.7% 32,248 78,355 143.0%
Vacant
Tenure
1,163 983 -18.3% 1,737 2,897 66.8% 2,070 4,026 94.5%
Owner-Occupied 9,141 12,239 34% 14,454 41,980 190.4% 19,038 53,274 179.8%
Renter-Occupied 8,723 8,173 -6.7% 11,212 20,822 85.7% 13,210 25,081 89.9%
5 Miles Richmond-Petersburg MSA
1990 2000 Change 1990 2000 Change
Total Housing Units
99,057 160,913 62.44% 355,207 410,394 15.5%
Occupied 92,995 152,411 63.89% 331,824 387,721 16.8%
Vacant
Tenure
6,062 8,502 40.25% 23,383 22,673 -3.0%
Owner-Occupied 59,648 100,108 67.83% 215,751 262,345 21.6%
Renter-Occupied 33,347 52,303 56.84% 116,073 125,376 8.0%

Map 3: Richmond-Petersburg MSA 2000 Census Tracts Based Upon Distance from the Cloverleaf Mall Site
Source: Chesterfield County

Noting an approximate 2.4% growth rate per year, the Virginia Employment
Population Projections: Chesterfield County
2006. iv Commission was able to project the population growth in Chesterfield
In 2003 the Virginia Employment Commission projected Chesterfield County to 2020. The following illustrates these projections:
County will be the most populous jurisdiction in the Richmond-Petersburg
MSA by 2010. The County may add more than 100,000 people between 2000
and 2020. In order to determine projections the county charted the pattern
of population growth between 2000 and 2006. The following table illustrates
Chesterfield County Population Projections 2000
to 2020
these trends:
Year Population Change
1990 209,274 -------
Chesterfield County Population Estimates 2000 to 2000 259,903 24.2%
2006
2010 316,000 21.6%
Year Population Change
Projection
2000 256,500 -------
2020
Projection
366,000 15.8%
Source: 2010 and 2020 Virginia Employment Commission Projections v
2001 264,000 2.13%
Population Projections: City of Richmond
2002 271,000 2.65%
In 2003 the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission projected
2003 278,000 2.58%
the population growth for City of Richmond as well as for the Richmond-
Petersburg MSA for 2000 to 2030. These findings are illustrated in the table
below:
2004 284,000 2.16%
2005 291,000 2.46%
2006 299,000 2.75%
Source: The Chesterfield County Demographic and Economic Profile, May

Richmond Regional Planning District Commission Population Projections 2000 – 2030
Average
Growth Annual
Locality 2000 2010 2020 2030 Rate Growth
City of
Richmond
197,790 191,600 189,600 189,600 -4.1% -0.1%
Richmond-
Petersburg MSA
996,512 1,121,100 1,236,200 1,345,000 35% 1%
Source: Virginia Employment Commission, May 2003 vi
Surrounding Influences
The Cloverleaf Mall site is located along the City of Richmond-Chesterfield County border. Located at the intersection of Chippenham Parkway and
Midlothian Turnpike, the mall site is convenient for both neighborhood and regional users. The site is affected by numerous commercial uses located along
Midlothian Turnpike as well as the many neighborhoods surrounding US 60.
Neighborhoods & Housing Data
Many of the neighborhoods located within 1 mile of the mall site were developed prior to Cloverleaf Mall’s construction, between the 1950s and 1960s. As a
result, the housing stock is of good quality but smaller, usually 1,000 to 1,200 square feet, and offering less amenities to homeowners; these ranch-style homes
typically offer three bedrooms and one bathroom.
The neighborhoods within Chesterfield County have been named in the Eastern Midlothian Plan i and are as follows: Turner Road West, Turner Road East,
Turner/Ruthers/Providence, Scottingham and Whitestone, and Midlothian North.
Turner Road West is characterized by its established single family neighborhoods.
Turner Road East comprises of individual “road-stripped” lots with some small single family subdivisions located to the south. In addition, an apartment
unit is also located in this area.
Turner/Ruthers/Providence is a diverse community comprised of subdivisions and “road-stripped” rural lots. In addition, the area also contains a townhouse
development and mobile home park.
Scottingham and Whitestone are two connected, interrelated subdivisions.

Midlothian North has much less residential development than land south of US 60. Currently, there are four subdivisions and a few “road-stripped” lots. In
addition, both a retirement community and an apartment complex exist within this area.
Numerous neighborhoods exist east of Chippenham Parkway, within the Richmond city limits. These comprise of single family, multi-family, and mobile
home developments.
Today, single family homes in this area typically sell for $150,000. ii Figure 10
Figures 9 and 10: Examples of typical houses located in the eastern Midlothian
Turnpike area.

Commercial Influences
As a traditional, auto-dominated commercial strip, Midlothian Turnpike
provides the consumer with a plethora of retail and service options. The
following table illustrates the commercial destinations located between Belt
Boulevard and Powhite Parkway according to the author’s site survey, completed
in March 2008. As the table demonstrates, restaurants, health and
beauty shops, thrift and discount stores, convenience marts, motels, auto
services, and home furnishing showrooms dominate the area. While there
are many options available to the user in these categories, many common
businesses are not represented along the corridor. These include, most notably,
a grocery store, alcohol and tobacco shops, and banking services. In addition,
few apparel, sporting goods, and tech stores exist. While commercial
competition thrives along Midlothian Turnpike, untapped market potential
still exists.
Goods and Services Surrounding the
Cloverleaf Mall Site
Midlothian
Turnpike
Belt Boulevard
to Erich Road
Erich Rd. to
German School
Road
German School
Rd. to Labrook
Drive
Labrook Dr. to
Old Warwick
Old Warwich Rd.
to Carnation
Street
Carnation St. to
Arcadia Street
Arcadia St. to
Chippenham
Parkway
Chippenham
Parkway to Turner
Road
Turner Rd. to
Ruthers Road
Ruthers Rd. to
Buford Road
Buford Rd. to S.
Providence Road
S. Providence Rd.
to Fairwood Drive
Fairwood Dr. to
Gateway Center
Pkwy.
Gateway Center
Pkwy. To Powhite
Parkway
Powhite Pkwy. To
Aboretum Place
Food at/ Away from
Home
Alcohol/Tobacco
Apparel
Grocery
Market
Appliance/Hardware
Health/Beauty
Thrift and/or Pawn
Discount
Convenience
Source: Author’s Site Survey, March 2008
Entertainment
Sporting Goods
Health Care
Tech. (Computer, Cell,
Electronics)
Hotel/Motel
Auto (Sales, Repair,
Parts & Rental)
Storage & U-Haul
• • •
• • • • • •
• • • • • • •
• • • • • •
• • • •
• • • • • •
• • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • •
• • • •
• • • •
Light Industrial
Loan Services
• • • •
• • • • • • • • • • • • •
• • • • •
Home Furnishings
Laundry
Banking
Other

Environmental conditions
The Cloverleaf Mall site has relatively few environmental issues.
Topography and Drainage
The topography of the mall site is generally flat, changing only thirty-five feet from the highest to the lowest points i (see Map 4). The project area is approximately
270 feet above mean sea level (msl) and is situated higher than adjacent properties. Surface drainage is directed by sheet flow and drop inlets to the
County sewer system. ii
Geology
Chesterfield County is in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont sections of east-central Virginia. The site is located along the boundary of the Piedmont and
Coastal Plain Geologic Provinces and underlain by granite, grandiorite, augen-gneiss of uncertain age. Soils are projected to consist of clays and silty clays. iii
Wetlands
According to the US Department of Fish and Wildlife, the mall site does not have any wetlands within its boundaries (see Figure 10). This is due to the site’s
topography and its distance from any primary streams. iv There is a small, intermittent stream located in the wooded area behind the former movie theater,
which does drain into the wetlands located south of Cloverleaf Drive. This wetland may impact the ability of adjacent sites to be developed entirely and may
affect connectivity between sites.

Map 4: Topography of Cloverleaf Mall Site
Source: Chesterfield County

Figure 11: Wetlands near Cloverleaf Mall Site

Recognized Environmental Condition
In September 2004, EEE Consulting, Inc. performed a Phase I Environmental
Site Assessment of the two former Sears buildings and associated property
located at the Cloverleaf Mall site. v The study determined three potential
recognized environmental conditions:
1. Eighteen underground hydraulic lifts at the Sears automotive
service center.
2. Oil/Water separator at the Sears automotive service center.
3. Four alleged 6,000 gallon gasoline underground storage tanks
(UST), supposedly removed at the Sears automotive service
center.
There is a potential to encounter petroleum-contaminated soils/groundwater
during subsurface construction activities at the former Sears automotive
service center due to the use and presence of eighteen underground hydraulic
hoists. EEE Consulting, Inc. recommends a Phase II investigation to
determine if such releases have occurred and to determine if there has been
petroleum release from the oil/water separator. In addition, the report states,
the owner needs to provide more information of the four alleged 6,000 gallon
gasoline USTs; these were never registered with the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality. Because information is seemingly lacking, an additional
investigation will be necessary to determine if the USTs are still in the
ground and if a release has occurred in the area.
The report sites two previous surveys, which identified asbestos containing
material (ACM) within the former Sears retail building:
1. Vinyl Floor Tiles and Mastic - original flooring, main aisles, and
boiler room office.
2. Fire Doors - throughout the main building.
3. Pipe Insulation, Gaskets, and Transite Pipe - boiler room within
main building.
Most, but not all of the above material were reported to be in place and in
good condition. According to EPA regulations, friable ACM must be removed
and disposed of properly prior to demolition activities. EEE Consulting,
Inc. estimates the cost of removing all of the above mentioned ACM
would range between $50,000 and $100,000.
Hazardous Waste Sites
According to the EPA database, currently, there are two hazardous waste
sites near the mall site. vi Both of these are located along Midlothian Turnpike.
The first is at the intersection of US 60 and US 150, the second is located
east of the Midlothian Turnpike and Granite Springs Road intersection.
Market Analysis
Analysis of the Potential for Activity in the Eastern Midlothian Turnpike
Study Area of Chesterfield County i was completed in April 1996 by The
Chesapeake Group, Inc. for Chesterfield County. The study provides data for
both residential and commercial economic conditions.
Housing
The study places Chesterfield County in the context of state and regional
trends to determine salient housing trends within the market area. From
these sources, the following patterns were recognized:
• More permits were issued for single-family units than multi-family
units.
• The number of housing permits issued during the 1990s is relatively
stable, although less than the number of those issued in the 1980s.
• The study area provides ample land for future development, zoned as
both residential and agricultural.
• Housing growth is projected to continue at a modest rate between
1990 and 2010.

The study suggests that the primary housing to be sought should be
single-family, either detached or townhouse-types of structures, meant
for owner-occupation. Furthermore, there is a growing opportunity for
senior oriented housing projects.
Market Area
The market area was determined through customer intercept and telephone
surveys. As a result, the market area of the Eastern Midlothian Area
includes most of Chesterfield County and the City of Richmond. This
area is comprised of approximately 84,000 households, 69% of which
live in Chesterfield County. The market area represents a regional scale
market in terms of land mass, inter-jurisdictional nature, and population.
Approximately 80% of all patrons live within the market area. Finally, the
market area represents a composite market area not associated with any
individual business.
Market Analysis – Shopper Intercept Survey
The following was determined from the shopper intercept surveys:
Primary purpose of visiting Eastern
Midlothian Turnpike Area
Shop 73%
Eat/Drink 19%
Work 13%
Personal Service 10%
Bank 10%
Professional Service 7%
Other 12%
Source: The Chesapeake Group, Inc. 1996.
Frequency of Trips to Eastern Midlothian
Turnpike Area
More than Once a Week 33%
Once per Week 21%
Few Times per Month 18%
Once per Month 16%
Less Often 12%
Source: The Chesapeake Group, Inc. 1996.
These frequencies illustrate the convenience aspects of certain retail centers
within the area.
Means of Transportation Used
to Travel to Shopping Centers
Auto/Drive 71%
Ride 18%
Walk 5%
Bicycle 0%
Other 6%
Source: The Chesapeake Group, Inc. 1996.
Of those who either walked or used other means of transportation, 53% used
public transit during some portion of their trip.
Demographics
Significant findings include:
• Majority of patron households contain between two and four people.
• Approximately 50% of households do not have any children under the
age of six.
• 98% of households have at least one person who is 21 years of age or
older.
• 42% of households have two or more members employed full-time.
• 55% of households include either male or male and female income
earners; only 10% of households have females as the primary income
earner.
• 74% of primary income earners are between the ages of thirty and
sixty.
• The average patron household income is estimated at $54,000.

• 43% of households have an annual income between $45,000 and
$79,000.
Spending
Consumers spend the largest portion of their income on transportation,
housing, and food. Of the patrons interviewed within the Eastern
Midlothian Area, 90% own at least one automobile, 56% own their home, and
the majority spent approximately $88.00 per week on food at supermarkets
or similar facilities.
Market Analysis – Telephone Survey
The following was determined:
Frequency of Trips to the Eastern Midlothian Area
More than Once per Week 14%
Once per Week 16%
Few Times per Month 22%
Twice per Month 7%
Once per Month 22%
Less Often 19%
Source: The Chesapeake Group, Inc. 1996.
Almost two-thirds (63%) of patrons generally visit one or more businesses.
Means of Transportation to the Eastern
Midlothian Area
Auto/Drive 82%
Ride 8%
Walk 3%
Bus and Walk 7%
Source: The Chesapeake Group, Inc. 1996.
Demographics
Significant findings include:
• Average household size: 2.58 people.
• 41% of households contain three or more people.
• 73% of households do not contain children under six years of age.
Number of People in Household Employed Full-Time
0 3%
1 32%
2 50%
3 12%
4 or More 3%
Source: The Chesapeake Group, Inc. 1996.
Number of People in Household Employed Part-Time
0 70%
1 30%
2 or More 0%
Source: The Chesapeake Group, Inc. 1996.
Sex of the Primary Income Earner
Male 69%
Female 25%
Both 5%
Uncertain 1%
Source: The Chesapeake Group, Inc. 1996.

Age of Primary Income Earners in Household
Under 21 5%
21 to 29 9%
30 to 39 31%
40 to 49 22%
50 to 59 24%
60 to 69 16%
70 or Over 14%
Source: The Chesapeake Group, Inc. 1996.
Total Annual Household Income
Less than $15,000 26%
$15,000 to $24,999 4%
$25,000 to $34,999 6%
$35,000 to $44,999 10%
$45,000 to $ 59,999 22%
$60,000 to $79,999 20%
$80,000 to $99,999 2%
$100,000 or More 10%
Source: The Chesapeake Group, Inc. 1996.
Spending
The following trends were noted:
• 77% of those interviewed own their homes.
• 54% have lived in their homes for more than ten years.
• 43% do not pay a mortgage or rent payment.
• 22% pay between $500 and $749 per month for either mortgage or
rent payments.
• 84% own at least one automobile.
Average Amount of Money Spent per Week on Groceries
Less than $30 10%
$30 to $49.99 20%
$50.00 to $74.99 36%
$75.00 to $99.99 19%
$100 to $124.99 10%
$125.00 to $149.99 4%
$150.00 or More 1%
Source: The Chesapeake Group, Inc. 1996.
Additional Information
Respondents listed the following as favorable conditions of the Eastern
Midlothian Area:
+ Convenient
+ Variety of Shops/Activities
+ Cleanliness
+ Individual Stores
Respondents listed the following as unfavorable or negative aspects of the
Eastern Midlothian Area:
- Fear of Crime
- Lack of Public Transportation
- Traffic Congestion
Patrons listed the following as important issues affecting the study area:
• Convenience
• Variety
• Price
• Quality
• Particular Stores
• Perception of Crime
• Perception of Traffic
• Perception of Parking
Retail Demand Forecast
Demand for retail and related goods and services is a function of the size of
the market. The market is largely dependent upon the number of households
in the area and the ability to make purchases. The ability to make purchases
is dependent upon demographics, spending, and available transportation.

Estimated Retail and Related Services Sales and
Supportable Space Estimates for the Eastern
Midlothian Area for 1995 – 1996
Food $ 344,272,000 893,304 sq. ft.
Eat/Drink $ 169,474,000 616,269 sq. ft.
General Merchandise $ 222,357,000 1,069,667 sq. ft.
Furniture $ 95,828,000 417,712 sq. ft.
Automotive $ 402,300,000 1,965,092 sq. ft.
Drugstore $ 77,195,000 233,924 sq. ft.
Apparel $ 91,392,000 370,491 sq. ft.
Hardware $ 81,809,000 442,186 sq. ft.
Auto Service $ 122,270,000 881,557 sq. ft.
Miscellaneous $ 167,702,000 867,456 sq. ft.
TOTAL $1,774,599,000 7,757,658 sq. ft.
Source: The Chesapeake Group, Inc. 1996.
The study estimates 2,000 new housing units to be added to the Eastern
Midlothian Area between 1995 and 2000. This represents an increase in
housing in the area of about 3% and approximately 5% of the anticipated
growth in the county during the same period. From these housing estimates,
the study then projects retail and related services sales and subsequent
square footage.
Eat/Drink $ 168,041,800 611,061 sq. ft.
General
Merchandise
$ 220,477,800 1,058,622 sq. ft.
Furniture $ 77,422,400 337,482 sq. ft.
Automotive $ 381,305,320 1,862,541 sq. ft.
Drugstore $ 94,138,600 285,268 sq. ft.
Apparel $ 73,023,400 298,028 sq. ft.
Hardware $ 81,117,560 438,449 sq. ft.
Auto Service $ 136,832,440 1,000,971 sq. ft.
Miscellaneous $ 183,878,280 951,130 sq. ft.
TOTAL
$1,759,600,000 7,727,306 sq. ft.
Source: The Chesapeake Group, Inc. 1996.
From this table and the previous analysis it is clear those services most
likely to succeed in the future are those with a firm foothold in the
area. These include automotive, food, and general merchandise. The
study concludes, however by stating significant economic opportunities
include stabilization of the retail sector, expansion of office space and related
employment, and the inclusion of light industrial flex space. It is unclear
what data these suggestions are based upon, as they were never mentioned
within the market analysis.
Retail and Related Services Sales and Supportable
Space Estimates for the Eastern Midlothian
Turnpike Area for 2000
Food $ 341,362,400 885,754 sq. ft.

Summary of Existing Conditions
Strengths:
Location:
Located along the City of Richmond – Chesterfield County
border.
Located at the intersection of Midlothian Turnpike (US 60) and
Chippenham Parkway (Virginia 150).
Size of Site:
80 acres is the “ideal size for a small town or a quarter of a city.
80 - acres is the area encompassed within a ¼ mile radius
– the distance a person would comfortable walk on a daily
basis to work/live/play.” i.
Existing Infrastructure:
The site is serviced by Dominion Power and Chesterfield County for
water and sewer.
GRTC currently provides a route to/from downtown Richmond
from the site.
Few Environmental Issues:
The topography is flat and without drainage or wetland issues.
Recognized Environmental Conditions are limited and easily fixed.
Existing Public-Private Partnerships:
It is the desire of both Chesterfield County and the City of Richmond
to redevelop the Midlothian Turnpike corridor into one with
attractive, mixed-use, multi-modal, economically stimulating
commercial and residential developments.
Chesterfield County and Crosland, Inc. have worked together to
purchase and develop the site.
Existing Land Use:
The site is already classified as Regional Mixed Use, which allows for
the integration of office space, shopping centers, and light
industrial parks; plans should be pedestrian oriented.
Accessibility and Visibility:
The site is easily accessed by Midlothian Turnpike, east and west.
The site is additionally accessed by the former mall’s back entrance,
which connects to Cloverleaf Drive.
The site is visible from both Midlothian Turnpike and Chippenham
Parkway.
Potential Customers:
The number of vehicles passing the site daily (along both US 60 and
Virginia 150) is approximately 124,000.
There has been tremendous population growth within 1 and 2 miles
of the site.
Chesterfield County is projected to become the most populous
county in the Richmond-Petersburg MSA by 2010, adding
more than 100,000 people between 2000 and 2010.
The population between the ages of 40 - 59 and 70 - 79 has
increased and are projected to continue in the next ten years.
The median household income of those living within two mile of the
site is higher than the Richmond-Petersburg MSA average.
The number of owner-occupied housing units has increased between
1990 and 2000.
Market Conditions:
The Market Analysis shows the primary reason users visit Midlothian
Turnpike is for shopping, eating and drinking, and working.
Respondents to the market analysis listed convenience, variety of
shops/activities, cleanliness, and individual stores as the most
favorable conditions found along Midlothian Turnpike.

Kroger:
Kroger has signed an agreement with Crosland, Inc. to build on the
site.
The annual sales volume per Kroger is $28 million.
The store will bring 150 jobs to Chesterfield County.
Kroger typically draws customers from 2 – 2.5 mile radius. ii
Weaknesses:
Aesthetics:
The site is divided by a 200 - foot power and gas easement.
The site exists within an auto-dominated atmosphere.
Perception :
Crime -
The site suffers from a recent history of violent activity.
Traffic Congestion -
The site’s location at the intersection of Midlothian
Turnpike and Chippenham Parkway has caused traffic
conflicts at the intersection closest to Virginia 150 by those
drivers attempting to cross multiple lanes of traffic to enter
the site.
Connectivity:
The site is not easily accessible from adjacent sites. Connectivity
relies upon Midlothian Turnpike and, to a lesser extant,
the back entrance to the former mall.
GRTC does not provide service to any other sites within
Chesterfield County, subsequently limiting the connectivity
between the site and other parts of the county and the region
as a whole.
No other modes of transportation exist within the site, along
Midlothian Turnpike or Chippenham Parkway.
Population:
Low educational attainment levels around the site equate to lower
median household income levels and less capital to spend on
consumer goods and housing units.
The City of Richmond’s growth is projected to decline by - .1%
annually.
Zoning:
Currently, the site is divided into five zoning categories.
Opportunities:
Population:
The increase in the number of citizens between the ages of 40 - 59
and 70 - 79 create opportunities to provide more age-conscious
goods, services, and site plans.
Competition:
The City of Richmond has yet to allow for mixed-use developments
along Midlothian Turnpike within the city. A mixed-use
development on the site would be the first such development
when traveling westward along US 60.
Consumer choices found along Midlothian Turnpike offer a lot of
choices but little variety of goods and services. The area
is inundated by food away from home (both fast food and
restaurants), health and beauty stores, thrift and pawn
shops, convenience centers, hotels and motels, automobile
businesses, which include sales, repair, parts and rental, and
home furnishing markets. The market, however is missing
some fundamental businesses, such as a grocery store, banks,
and alcohol and tobacco shops. In addition few sporting
goods or technology stores exist along the corridor.
As cited by the respondents of the Analysis of the Potential for Activity in the Eastern
Midlothian Turnpike Study Area of Chesterfield County.

Adjacent Parcels:
Many of the parcels adjacent to and near the site are undeveloped or vacant, providing a unique opportunity for this development to act as a spark to
trigger the re-development of the Eastern Midlothian Turnpike area.
Threats:
Competition:
From its foundation, the site has faced increasing local and regional competition. In addition to recent shopping centers and strip developments
throughout the Richmond region, numerous consumer options also exist along Midlothian Turnpike between Belt Boulevard and Powhite Parkway.
Westward Expansion of Chesterfield County:
In recent years a large majority of new development has occurred in the western portions of Chesterfield County.
Perception:
High vacancy rates in large shopping centers immediately surrounding the site, for example Chippenham Square and Beaufont Shopping Center,
make the area appear to be ‘dead’ or blighted, which further hurts the perception of the area by both residents and citizens of the Richmond-Petersburg MSA.

II. Plan - Cloverleaf Place

vision
In the early 1970s, while Cloverleaf Mall was still in the construction phase, the mall’s developer, Leonard Farber was retained by Henrico County to develop
the proposed Regency Square Mall, which was scheduled to be completed by 1975. Farber agreed and from Cloverleaf Mall’s opening, in 1972, Richmond’s
first regional mall faced almost immediate competition and foresaw the glimmer of its eventual decline. In the decades which followed, the Richmond market
became saturated with regional shopping centers, the newest ‘towne centers,’ and commercial strip developments.
Between the 1970s and today, the land around the mall site began to reflect the design concepts of the mall itself, that is massive scale, large lots, and easy accessibility,
which accommodated America’s growing relationship and eventual dependence upon the automobile. While traveling along Midlothian Turnpike
today, between Belt Boulevard and Powhite Parkway, one is immediately struck by the vast sense of space. Wide lanes, lack of vegetation, and seemingly impossible
distances between uses reiterate the dominance of the automobile, and the subsequent neglect of the pedestrian, on this lifeless strip of concrete. In
the wake of this modern design trend, the design of places, those sites which bring people together in a definable and unique environment and connect them
with one another and the world around them, has been abandoned.
In order for the Cloverleaf Mall site to compete within this new, extremely competitive environment, new design concepts must strike a balance between the
automobile and the pedestrian. In doing so, the site may be transformed from a concrete field into a place.
Cloverleaf Place is meant to be just that, a place which connects people with each other, the community, and with the surrounding environment. Cloverleaf
Place incorporates the characteristics of traditional pre-World War II neighborhoods with the latest ‘green’ technology while accommodating for the automobile
and the human need for connectivity between locations. By doing so, the plan not only reintroduces the site back into the urban fabric using traditional
design techniques but simultaneously returns the land itself to its nearly natural state using the newest technology all the while accommodating for today’s
needs. Cloverleaf Place is a traditional mixed use village rooted in the principles of New Urbanism, sustainability, and connectivity, which work together to
guarantee it’s success and longevity.

Mixed Use
Goal I: Cloverleaf Place is a mixed-use development comprised of commercial,
civic, residential, and office activities in addition to green and
open spaces.
i. Mixed-Use Village – located along Midlothian Turn
pike.
ii. Civic and Open Space – located in the south western
corner of the site.
iii. Single Family Residential – located in the south
eastern corner of the site.
Objective 1.1: Cloverleaf Place provides a mix of land uses within its boundaries.
Plan 1.1: Cloverleaf Place is comprised of three unique land use
areas; these are as follows:
The Mixed Use Village is strategically located along Midlothian
Turnpike to ensure visibility for businesses, create a sense of
curiosity for those traveling along US 60, and to provide a buffer
between the busy turnpike and the residential and open spaces
located on the back portion of the site.
Figure 12: Cloverleaf Place Land Use Plan
Legend
Mixed Use Village
Civic & Open Space
Single Family Residential

The Civic and Open Space is located in the south western back corner of the site, making use of the
reserved land along the power and gas easements. In addition, this area is a prime location
for a stormwater management pond as the site drains toward a small perennial stream located
in the far south western corner of the site. Finally, the open space provides a buffer between the high
density uses located in the Mixed Use Village and potential, future residential developments
on the adjacent site.
Mixed Use Developments
The Single Family Residential area is located in the south eastern corner of the site, matching existing
residential uses on the adjacent site.
Currently, the site is designated as a Regional Mixed Use Area and supports this combination of uses.
Objective 1.2: Buildings within the Mixed-Use Village are made up of a wide variety of structures, which lend
themselves to a range of commercial, office, and residential uses within each building.
Plan 1.2: The mixture of uses within each building within the Mixed-Use Village ensures constant
activity and creates a synergy between businesses and residents. The recommended mix of uses, based
i. and ii.
on the total square footage of Cloverleaf Place is 50% residential, 30% commercial, and 20% office.
Objective 1.3: The type of uses, whether retail, office, residential, or civic, is a carefully balanced mix that
compliments one another and stimulates activity throughout.
Figure 13: Avalon Park, Orlando, Florida.
This high density, pedestrian-oriented development
offers retail uses on the ground
floor and living and/or office uses on the
upper stories. a.
Plan 1.3: The mix and types of uses should be such that an economy of scale is created, which
fosters the long term growth of the businesses within Cloverleaf Place. The benefits of such
convenience would further guarantee the longevity of leases and lend to the long-term success of
Cloverleaf Place. A potential economy of scale could include a mix of architecture firms, engineering
firms, construction firms, (office use), printing shops, technology services (retail), and daytime
restaurants (retail). In addition to these, general merchandise retailers, banks, and grocery stores
would thrive as lunch-time and after work errand destinations.
Residential uses are placed in buildings with the least amount of potential conflicts or separated from
such conflicts by other uses according to floor. For example, residential above a restaurant is less likely
to be as successful as, say residential located above an office.
Figure 14: Garvey Villas, Monterey Park,
California. This mixed use project offers
22,000 square feet of retail space and 98
condominiums. b.

Objective 1.4: Businesses within Cloverleaf Place provide a balanced yet diverse mix of commercial and professional
services for both the community and the Richmond region.
Plan 1.4: The Cincinnati-based Kroger Company operates its largest grocery store, Kroger, in the
Mixed Use Village along Midlothian Turnpike. Kroger acts as the anchor tenant for Cloverleaf Place.
As a result, many similar national chains are located near Kroger to take advantage of the store’s large
consumer base. In addition to these, many local businesses are located throughout the Mixed Use
Village providing a plethora of retail options.
Potential Business and
Office uses
Based upon the market analysis iii. and visual analysis of commercial influences, Cloverleaf Place
could support several uses currently under-represented in the eastern Midlothian area. These include
banks, alcohol and tobacco stores, technology sales and services, and sporting goods retailers. In
addition, eating and drinking establishments were listed as a primary reason most customers visit the
corridor, according to surveys conducted for the market analysis. General merchandise retailers were
also suggested by the market analysis as a potential use for the area.
Professional services, such as law, medical, financial, and real estate firms are located throughout
Cloverleaf Place, offering a variety of services for local and regional consumers.
The number and type of businesses is monitored to ensure customer satisfaction and business
retention.
Objective 1.5: Complementary businesses are clustered together to stimulate cross-shopping opportunities.
Plan 1.5: Developing concentrated nodes of complementary uses stimulates cross-shopping,
allowing businesses to reach a larger consumer market, and offering users extended enjoyment of
Cloverleaf Place. Cross-shopping also encourages walk-ability and a lively streetscape.
Visual analysis completed March 2008 by author.

Density
Goal II: Cloverleaf Place is built compactly in a clustered design to encourage walk-ability, enable a
more efficient use of services and resources, and to allow for larger tracts of open space.
Density and Proportion
Objective 2.1: Buildings within the Mixed-Use Village are built with a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) between 1:1 to
5:1 with 100% lot coverage.
Plan 2.1: The FAR is the ratio of the total building floor area to the total lot area. iv. These densities
allow for buildings to be built close together, often sharing walls, and without setbacks from the
sidewalk.
Objective 2.2: The Mixed Use Village of Cloverleaf Place is designed along a modified grid system.
Plan 2.2: Concentrating growth within a relatively small space encourages commercial and social
interaction.
Urban Design
Goal III: Cloverleaf Place is designed as a traditional, pre-World War II pedestrian-oriented neighborhood,
which incorporates quality architecture, cohesive design elements, and safety.
Objective 3.1: The proportions of Cloverleaf Place – the height of the buildings relative to the width of the
space – are between 1:1 and 2:1 to create an intimate pedestrian atmosphere. vi.
Plan 3.1: Scale is essential in creating a pedestrian-oriented atmosphere similar to those built during
the pre-war period. This makes the space more manageable for the user and illustrates the disparity
between Cloverleaf Place and other developments along Midlothian Turnpike.
Objective 3.2: All buildings are oriented toward the primary streets within Cloverleaf Place and constructed
with minimal setback to reinforce the traditional street wall.
Plan 3.2: Buildings that are built directly to the sidewalk encourage street activity and interaction with
surrounding uses.
Figure 15: Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is the ratio
of the total building floor area to the total lot
area.
“Now the great function of
the city is to permit, indeed
to encourage and incite, the
greatest potential number of
meetings, encounters, challenges
between all persons,
classes, and groups providing
as it were, a stage upon
which the drama of social
life may be enacted, with
actors taking their turn as
spectators and the spectators
as actors.” v.
- Lewis Mumford
1:1 Height-to-Width Ratio
2:1 Height-to-Width Ratio

Objective 3.3: Architecture is of the highest quality and includes unique architectural details.
Plan 3.3: The architecture of Cloverleaf Place is of the highest quality and emphasizes excellent
building materials, craftsmanship, and design. Beauty, aesthetics, and human comfort are necessary
components upon which the success of Cloverleaf Place is dependent. Careful attention to detail is
easily marketable and guarantees the longevity of the neighborhood.
Architectural details include cornices, roof overhangs, lintels, sills, molding, brick patterns, shutters,
entrance decoration, and chimneys which add materials, textures, and colors to the architecture and
divide or define the structural mass.
Architecture & Streetscape
Figure 16 : Example
of Victorian
architectural
details.
Objective 3.4: Buildings, streetscapes, and public spaces exhibit a sense of design cohesion.
Plan 3.4: Building facades, public spaces, and streetscapes should use compatible and complementary
materials, colors, architectural styles and features.
Objective 3.5: The streetscape of Cloverleaf Place enhances the pedestrian environment with street trees,
pedestrian-scale lighting, streetscape furniture, signage, and appropriate screening methods.
Plan 3.5: Appropriate landscaping is used to clearly define pedestrian walkways, create a sense of
enclosure, and to soften the appearance of the built environment. Street tree species are selected for
performance in urban situations according to their root structure, mature height, branching
tendencies, leaf size, and blooms and/or fruit.
Pedestrian-scale lighting achieves light coverage along the sidewalks and parking areas; its smaller,
historically replicated scale maintains the pedestrian scale of the development.
Streetscape furniture, such as benches and waste receptacles, are appropriately styled and scaled
to complement building architecture and to reinforce the character of the streetscape.
Streetscape furniture and streetlights coordinate with each other in style, color, and finish.
Signage fits the architecture and scale of the buildings. Signs do not obstruct architectural elements
or details that define the building’s design. In addition, signs are placed so that they are sensitive to
the adjacent businesses and their corresponding signage. The sign’s message is easy to read and direct;
only containing minimal information. Sign colors relate to and complement the materials and color
scheme of the building. Signs are not freestanding and must attach to the business.
Screening methods both shield the consumer from unsightly, albeit necessary, uses such as trash
Figure 17: Streetscape elements include street
trees, pedestrian-scale lighting, street furniture,
and appropriately scaled signage.
Figure 18: Street
furniture in Austin,
Texas plays upon
the idea of
traditional
streetscapes while
incorporating public
art. c.

eceptacles, dumpsters, and building mechanical equipment as well as maintain the safety of the site.
These fences and screens are consistent with the design, materials, colors, and textures of the adjacent
buildings.
Housing
Objective 3.6: Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles enhance the safety of
residents and visitors to Cloverleaf Place.
Plan 3.6: CPTED techniques deter crime by creating visual and perceptual borders that promote
the community as well as define defensible spaces. Prominent access points, including gateway
signage and installations at major intersections, add to this perception of a definable space. Adequate
lighting in public and private areas additionally provides a sense of safety and security. Building
orientation and narrow setbacks also assist in the surveillance of the area. Additionally, proper
maintenance of public and private property conveys the message that occupants are concerned with
activities that occur within Cloverleaf Place.
Objective 3.7: Service and utility lines, with the exception of the existing electric towers, are buried underground
in order to maintain an aesthetically pleasing environment for the user.
Figure 19: Townhouses in Washington
Square, New York City.
Housing
Plan 3.7: Exposed power lines ruin the aesthetic appeal and the image of Cloverleaf Place as a ‘green,’
energy efficient development.
Goal IV: Cloverleaf Place is a neighborhood with a range of housing types that provide opportunities
for a wide variety of people.
Objective 4.1: Cloverleaf Place provides a mix of housing stock.
Plan 4.1: Housing in Cloverleaf Place is comprised of multi-family apartment units, condominiums,
and single family attached town homes. The multi-family units and condos are located within the
Mixed Use Village; typically above ground-floor retail space. These units may share a building with
both retail and office uses. Townhouses are located in the Single Family Residential district, in the
south eastern corner of the site. Offering diverse housing choices to potential residents makes
Cloverleaf Place marketable to a larger and more varied consumer base.
Figure 20: Apartments in Tampa, Florida
located above ground floor retail uses.

Objective 4.2: Cloverleaf Place provides potential residents with multiple ownership opportunities.
Plan 4.2: Residents have the opportunity to either rent or own property. Rental units would consist
primarily of apartment units but could include a few town homes depending upon market demand.
Senior & Affordable Housing
Objective 4.3: Cloverleaf Place specializes in senior housing.
Plan 4.3: Senior-housing has become increasingly necessary as the Baby Boomer generation
continues to age. Cloverleaf Place specializes in housing for independent seniors throughout the
neighborhood; housing opportunities include single-floor apartments, condominiums, and multistoried
townhouses. Cloverleaf Place is ideal for seniors in that it provides low-maintenance
housing options, close proximity to shops and parks, and does not require the ownership or use of
an automobile. Seniors may walk or ride (in wheelchairs or motorized scooters) to shops and
entertainment venues throughout the neighborhood. In addition, those unable or unwilling to drive
may utilize the services of the multi-modal transportation hub to access points throughout the
Richmond region and beyond.
Objective 4.4: Affordable housing provides households with lower income levels the opportunity to live in
Cloverleaf Place.
Figure 21: Senior housing includes singlefloor
layouts as well as multi-storied town
homes to appeal to a variety of people and
needs.
Plan 4.4: To foster a diverse range of people, Cloverleaf Place maintains fifteen percent of housing
as permanently affordable. Households with an income level not exceeding eighty percent of the
median household income for the Richmond area qualify for consideration. vii. These affordable units
consist of apartments, condos, and single family townhouses.
Green Space
Goal V: Meaningful green space promotes the health, vitality, and character of Cloverleaf Place.
Objective 5.1: John H. Marks Park is a community park located in the Open and Civic District.
Plan 5.1: This community park, named after the site’s original owner, carnival owner John H. Marks,
provides ample shared green space for Cloverleaf Place residents and users, alike. For residents, the
park acts a shared, maintenance free yard. For users, the park is just that, a community park meant for
all citizens.
See Appendix for details on the Moderately Priced Dwelling Units (MPDU) Program,
Montgomery County, Maryland.
Figure 22: Twenty-five percent of all American
households face severe housing challenges,
including insufficient funds for monthly
rent or mortgage payments, maintenance,
and repairs. These 30 million households
include not just the poorest and those without
jobs, but also teachers, librarians, firefighters,
health-care workers, and many others who
make significant contributions to our communities.
Figure 2 illustrates the location of
affordable housing within mixed use
buildings. d.

John H. Marks Park provides a balance between naturalized areas, trees, gardens, and water features.
A large pond acts as both a stormwater management tool and attraction for guests. The pond is
surrounded by a boardwalk for safe and easy access to the water’s edge by all users.
Green Space
Objective 5.2: The Floating Garden is a system of inter-connected public roof gardens within the Mixed Use
Village.
Plan 5.2: The Floating Garden works as both a unique attraction for visitors, business owners, and
residents as well as another means of achieving sustainability. Bridges, walkways, elevators, and
stairs connect a series of rooftops within the Mixed Use Village. Each roof within the Floating Garden
is an intensive green roof, with soil depths that support large plants, conventional lawns, gardens and
small water features. The park is a series of outdoor “rooms” that are defined by the building’s height
and location. Landscaping is used as a tool to further delineate the space and evoke certain feelings
and emotions.
Those roofs not used as part of the Floating Garden are self-sustaining extensive green roofs, which
are built with a very thin layer of soil and drought resistant plants.
A visitor to the Floating Garden feels as if they are in the midst of a field high above the noise and
activity below. The varying heights of the buildings create a sense of undulation, similar to natural
topography. Views of John H. Marks Park, the pond, sculpture garden, and community garden are
seen in a new perspective from the Floating Garden. The architecture of the civic use and some
sculptures utilize this additional perspective to convey different meanings from those felt by those on
the ground.
Buildings within the Mixed Use District are constructed to sustain the additional weight of the green
roof system. Load bearing capacity is based upon the roof’s designation as either an intensive or
extensive green roof.
Civic Space
Goal VI: Cloverleaf Place incorporates a civic use to connect residents and users to the larger community
and to continue the public private partnership which exists between Chesterfield County and
Cloverleaf Place.
Objective 6.1: Chesterfield County incorporates a civic use on the grounds of John H. Marks Park.
Plan 6.1: Due to the specific nature of the site, the type of civic use is limited to those which would
Figure 23: Park of Průhonice, Czech Republic
is considered a masterpiece of the natural
landscape style. e.
Figure 24: An
intensive
green roof atop
the Coast Plaza
Hotel in
Vancouver, British
Columbia has the
appearance of a wooded forest. f
Figure 25:
Rockefeller
Center roof
garden
atop the British
Empire
Building
overlooking Fifth Avenue. g. Figure 26:
Ford Truck
Co. extensive
green roof in
Dearborn,
Michigan.

maintain the overall environment of Cloverleaf Place; that of a traditional, pedestrian-oriented
community based upon the principles of sustainability. As such, several types of civic uses could be
successful within the environment; notably a museum or a branch of the Chesterfield County Public
Library.
Civic Uses
This building is a landmark attraction that utilizes innovative architectural design, materials, and
technologies. Situated within John H. Marks Park, the building is reminiscent of Le Corbusier’s
buildings rising out of fields. To maintain this feeling, parking and street access are discretely hidden
below and behind the structure.
Objective 6.2: Chesterfield County and the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts (VMFA) collaborate to create a
Sculpture Garden on the grounds of John H. Marks Park.
Plan 6.2: John H. Marks Park incorporates public art in the form of a Sculpture Garden sponsored by
Chesterfield County and the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts. Works are commissioned by national,
local, and student artists. This garden provides a unique public attraction within Cloverleaf Place that
draws a variety of visitors from across the region.
These permanent and semi-permanent installations raise consciousness about the world in which we
live while creating a stimulating environment and triggering creativity and discussion.
Objective 6.3: A community garden, located within John H. Marks Park, encourages Cloverleaf Place residents
as well as nearby community members to participate in their community and its natural environment.
Plan 6.3: The community garden provides garden space for Cloverleaf Place’s residents and
employees as well as for members of the local community. The community garden provides a number
of opportunities for those interested in gardening but do not have the resources or knowledge to
practice. Users may rent plots within the garden and green house, participate in gardening classes and
seminars, and have the opportunity to sell their produce to the restaurants located within Cloverleaf
Place.
Virginia Commonwealth University’s Master of Fine Arts: Sculpture is ranked first by US News and
World Report, January 2008. viii.
Figure 27: Seattle Public Library. h.
Figure 29:
Olympic
Sculpture Park
Seattle, WA. j.
“[The] arts are a powerful
economic force, and act as a
magnet for tourism. Even more
important, they help educate
and inspire our citizens and
stimulate creativity in the
workplace and in our schools.”
ix.
- J. Clayton Hering
Pres. Northwest Business for
Culture and the Arts
Figure 28:
Le Corbusier’s
Cartesian skyscraper
was a
model for his La
Ville Radieuse. i.

Sustainability
Sustainability
Goal VII: Cloverleaf Place is a sustainable neighborhood which achieves an on-going balance between
the total resources consumed and the total resources created.
Objective 7.1: All construction optimizes ‘green’ technology and design.
Plan 7.1: ‘Green’ technology is that which is appropriate to the environmental, cultural, and
economic situation for which it is intended. By using appropriate technology, Cloverleaf Place
requires fewer resources, as well as lower costs and less negative impacts upon the environment.
Utilizing “green” building technology and Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
standards guarantees a clustered development that encourages socialization and allows for larger
tracts of open space, stormwater run off infiltration, and recreational areas.
Objective 7.2: Materials and resources optimize energy efficiency.
Plan 7.2: Sustainable materials, products, and equipment are used in all construction of
Cloverleaf Place. Durable products and construction materials are used to ensure longevity and
enable low-maintenance. Locally produced building materials are used for all types of construction
and, whenever possible, building products made from recycled or salvaged building materials are used
to conserve natural resources. Cloverleaf Place utilizes responsible wood supplies in an effort to
protect natural ecosystems, minimizing the use of pressure-treated lumber. High-efficiency heating
and cooling equipment is used within all buildings; high-efficiency lights and appliances and waterefficient
equipment also help minimize wasted energy.
Objective 7.3: A system of extensive and intensive green roofs top the buildings within the Mixed Use Village.
Plan 7.3: The green roof system of Cloverleaf Place appears, to the visitor, as if the natural
environment has simply been lifted up and the buildings have been moved underneath. The green
roof system allows the entire development to have the quality of a park-like atmosphere, rather than
one of a built environment. Normally neglected roof tops become living roofs. The green roofs link
the “green” buildings to their surrounding environment and supply an image of the sustainable
concepts behind Cloverleaf Place.
Figures 30 and 31:
California Academy of Sciences, Golden Gate
Park, San Francisco, California.
Architect: Renzo Piano
The building includes a two-and-a-half acre
living roof, solar cells that produce between
5% and 10% of the museum’s power, and
a computer regulated cooling system that
opens and closes windows to cool the museum
with only untreated outside air. Currently,
the project is under consideration for LEED
Platinum certification. k.
Green roofs help manage stormwater, heighten air quality, conserve energy and reduce the urban heat
index. This green roof system not only aids in the goal of sustainability but also acts as a unique
neighborhood asset and regional attraction.

Objective 7.4: The amount of impervious surfaces is limited to manage stormwater runoff and heat gain.
Plan 7.4: Impervious surfaces are typically constructed surfaces - rooftops, sidewalks, roads, and
parking lots - covered by impenetrable materials such as asphalt, concrete, brick, and stone. These
materials seal surfaces, repel water and prevent precipitation and meltwater from infiltrating soils.
Soils compacted by urban development are also highly impervious. Impervious surfaces allow many
types of pollutants, derived from a variety of sources, to accumulate upon them. Many of these
pollutants are subsequently washed into water bodies by storm water runoff, severely degrading water
quality. This type of pollution is known as non-point source water pollution and is linked to land-use
activities. Water quality problems increase with increased imperviousness and intensity of land use.
Impervious surfaces may be limited by installing pervious materials, which allow for stormwater
recharge, on all surface parking areas, including on-street parking zones. The green roof system also
aids in this objective.
Objective 7.5: Landscaping optimizes outdoor environmental quality.
Plan 7.5: Landscaping in Cloverleaf Place provides an attractive environment in balance with the
local climate and requires minimal resource input. Sustainable landscaping, an approach to
landscaping that emphasizes plant health, soil health, water quality, and resource conservation, has
an appropriate design that is functional, cost efficient, visually pleasing, environmentally friendly and
maintainable.
Sustainability
Figure 32: Eco-Cement Porecocrete Porous
Pavement. Porecocrete porous pavements
mimic nature. They are pavements with lots
of holes in them and with subsurface drainage
capability, usually with a capacity to store
water underneath or in a reservoir. Surface
runoff water either soaks into an aquifer
in suitable terrain or is captured above an
impervious layer and drained preferably to
underground storage for further use. l.
Native vegetation is used throughout Cloverleaf Place so plants are compatible with natural
communities and are not invasive. Water conservation is promoted through the use of rain barrels
on buildings and the application of water-saving methods such as drip irrigation in open spaces. The
least toxic chemicals and fertilizers are used, and avoided when possible.
Objective 7.6: Reduce reliance on privately-owned automobiles.
Plan 7.6: The design of Cloverleaf Place reduces the dependence upon the automobile. Its compact
design, pedestrian scale, and internal connectivity make the neighborhood easily walk-able for most
users. A multi-modal system is promoted through the accommodation of pedestrian infrastructure.
Transit use is easily accessible via the multi-modal transportation hub located in the Mixed Use
Village.
Figure 33: The Rain to Recreation Program in
Lenexa, Kansas introduces native plants into
suburban landscapes in an effort to restore
the native habitat. m.

Objective 7.7: Cloverleaf Place encourages its businesses and residents to participate in a sustainable lifestyle
by offering an on-site recyclable service in the form of a community recycling center, located in the Mixed Use
Village.
Plan 7.7: Recycling prevents the waste of potentially useful materials and reduces the consumption
of fresh raw materials. Recycling reduces energy usage and air and water pollution by reducing the
need for conventional waste disposal, and lowering greenhouse gas emissions as compared to
virgin production. The Cloverleaf Place recycling center collects traditional recyclable materials,
including glass, paper, and plastics, as well as biodegradable waste, such as food. These are collected
from the residents and businesses located in Cloverleaf Place as well as by nearby residents. The bio
degradable waste is used as compost to fertilize the community garden, John H. Marks Park, and the
Floating Garden.
sustainability
Figure 34: Washington County Recycling Center
in Chipley, Florida.
See Appendix for more detailed reports on the compost process.
Figure 35: An active compost heap.
Composting is the controlled decomposition
of organic matter. Rather than allowing
nature to take its slow course, a composter
provides an optimal environment in which
decomposers can thrive. To encourage the
most active microbes, a compost pile needs
the correct mix of the following ingredients:
* Carbon
* Nitrogen
* Oxygen (in the case of aerobic composting)
* Water

9
8
10
5
6
2
4
7
5
1
3
Midlothian Turnpike
Figure 36: Cloverleaf Place Illustrative Plan
1. Mixed Use Village 9. Civic Use
2. Multi-Modal Transportation Hub 10. Single Family
3. Kroger Residential
4. Recycling Center
5. Parking Garage
6. John H. Marks Park
7. Community Garden
8. Sculpture Garden

Figure 37: Aerial View of Mixed Use Village.
Figure 37 illustrates pedestrian and automotive movement through the Mixed Use Village. While Cloverleaf Place does accommodate automotive traffic, its
primary objective is to foster a pedestrian-oriented environment. The network of sidewalks allows users to move through the space unhindered. Medians, traffic
circles, and on-street parking act as traffic calming measures to ensure pedestrian safety and enjoyment.
Parking has been provided in the form of several surface lots, two parking garages, and diagonal on-street parking along most primary streets.
All surface parking is heavily landscaped to hide the cars and maintain the park-like atmosphere of Cloverleaf Place.

Figure 38: Aerial View of John H. Marks Park and Single Family Residential District
From this vantage point it is clear that John H. Marks Park acts as the shared yard for the single family residents of Cloverleaf Place. Yet park access is not
limited to homeowners but open to all members of the community. The benefit of a community park is that it creates an interaction between citizens amongst
themselves as well as with nature.

Figures 39 and 40: Mixed Use Village
The scale, density, pedestrian-orientation, and streetscape make
this entrance reminiscent of traditional Main Street America.
More parking has been added to accommodate the growing use
of automobiles.

Figures 41 and 42: Floating Garden
Visitors to the Floating Garden ascend the buildings via stairs or elevators located
on the building’s exterior. This provides public access to the garden from
the outside while accommodating private uses within.
From this vantage point it is possible to see the many bridges and stairs which
connect the roofs to form one complete roof garden.

Figures 43 and 44: John H. Marks Park
John H. Mark Park provides ample green space for both residents, employees,
and visitors. The park houses a large stormwater management pond as its
primary water feature. In addition a large civic use, community garden, and
sculpture garden are also located within the park. By situating the park in the
south western corner of the site we are able to utilize the land beneath the power
lines.

Figures 45 and 46: Single Family Residential
Single family attached units are located in the south eastern corner of the site, overlooking
John H. Marks Park. The houses are placed close together to maintain a traditional
neighborhood density. The park serves as a shared, maintenance-free yard for
all of Cloverleaf Place’s residents. These single family homes are accessed by alleys and
small secondary streets. Parking is located within attached garages and on the street.

Figure 47: John H. Marks Park Community Garden
The community garden allows residents to re-connect with nature while learning about sustainable gardening methods and techniques. The community garden
and green house are located in the far western edge of John H. Marks Park.

Connectivity
Goal VIII: Cloverleaf Place boasts connectivity both into and within the site that is efficient, pleasant, and safe for pedestrians and automobiles.
Objective 8.1: The transportation system both inter-connects with existing streets as well as plans for future connections to adjacent sites.
Plan 8.1: While Midlothian Turnpike continues to be the primary means of access to the site, additional connections have been made in order for
residents, delivery trucks, and excess traffic to quickly and efficiently access Cloverleaf Place. The two existing entrances at Midlothian Turnpike are
the primary entrances into the site. Interior streets connect to Granite Springs Road, the former back entrance of the mall, and to Starview Lane. In
addition, a truck entrance is located along the western edge of the site, along Midlothian Turnpike.
Objective 8.2: Entrances into Cloverleaf Place are marked by gateways.
Plan 8.2: Primary entrance points, or gateways, into Cloverleaf Place incorporate pleasing urban design and well-maintained landscaping. They are
well-lit at night to convey a sense of security and welcome. Gateways provide visual cues to users and travelers along the US 60 corridor that
revitalization has occurred. Two large gateways are located at the two Midlothian Turnpike entrances; smaller gateway signage is located at the
secondary entrance points located at Granite Springs Road, the former back entrance of the mall, and at Starview Lane.
Objective 8.3: The transportation system includes vehicular and pedestrian circulation within the site.
Plan 8.3: The street network within Cloverleaf Place is designed as a modified grid system. Two Main Street-like corridors move traffic from
Midlothian Turnpike into Cloverleaf Place. Traffic circles at the intersections of the “main streets” and the east-west corridor help to facilitate the
flow of traffic along the main corridors of the space while creating an aesthetically pleasing element for the user.
Traffic traveling through the Mixed Use Village can travel along several primary north-south streets (such as the “main streets) as well as along a few
east-west connectors. All streets, with the exception of the alleys are designed for two-way movement. Intersections of secondary streets are
regulated by stop signs.
Pedestrian movement through the space is facilitated through a network of sidewalks and walking paths. Most sidewalks are situated adjacent to the
street but some, in the Mixed Use Village, provide access between buildings. These sidewalks are brick, tree-lined, and no less than eight feet in
width.
Walking paths are located throughout John H. Marks Park and the Floating Garden. These provide movement through non-vehicular spaces. They
are five feet in width and lined with pedestrian-scale lighting. The paths within John H. Marks Park are paved while those in the Floating Garden are
made of natural materials.
Well-marked crosswalks with brick paving and pedestrian refuge medians offer clear and safe features that aid in pedestrian circulation throughout
the area. Way-finding signage also provides clear directions to major destinations within the neighborhood such as parks and various stores.

Legend
Primary Streets
Secondary
Streets
Alleys
Gateway
Crosswalks
Truck Entrance
Granite Springs Drive
Multi-Modal
Transportation
Lane
Midlothian Turnpike
Boulder Parkway
Figure 48: Cloverleaf Place Circulation Plan

Objective 8.4: Traffic calming measures reduce the negative impact of motor vehicle use while creating improved conditions for the pedestrian environment.
Plan 8.4: In order to slow traffic moving through Cloverleaf Place, the streets are paved to resemble cobblestones in both sight and texture. This
rough texture is differentiated by the smooth pavement along Midlothian Turnpike, sending a signal to the driver that this is a distinct place in which
traffic is not encouraged to move swiftly. The pedestrian-orientation of Cloverleaf Place is reiterated in the use of raised brick paved crosswalks and
well demarcated pedestrian crossing points; drivers are forced to move slowly across these jarring physical obstacles. In the Mixed Use Village, the
“main streets” are divided by large medians. These medians block cross traffic and force all traffic to utilize the traffic circles to change direction.
Finally, on-street parking ensures that drivers will drive slowly through the Mixed Use Village as it resembles a parking lot rather than a street.
Objective 8.5: Adequate parking is provided on-street as well as in landscaped surface lots and ‘green’ parking decks.
Plan 8.5: In order for businesses to thrive in the auto-dominated environment of Midlothian
Turnpike parking must be near the entrance, easily accessible, and ample. Diagonal on-street
parking is located throughout the Mixed Use Village in order to meet the parking needs of both
commercial and office uses. Parking along the “main street” is provided both adjacent to the
street wall as well as in a median parking lot. Overflow, employee, and resident parking
is located in two ‘green’ parking decks, situated behind the “main street.”
Parking for Kroger customers is located in a large surface lot located in front of the store yet
hidden from Midlothian Turnpike.
All surface parking is paved with a pervious material in order to facilitate stormwater recharge.
In addition, all parking is landscaped to continue the design and sustainability concepts behind
Cloverleaf Place.
Figure 49: Landscaped on-street parking and one
of the ‘green’ parking decks (red building).
Parking within the Single Family Residential District is provided on-street as well in attached garages, accessed by one-way alleys.
Parking for the civic use is located under the building.
Objective 8.6: A multi-modal transportation center provides a central location for public transit and taxi service.
Plan 8.6: Public transportation provides a unique opportunity to connect Cloverleaf Place to the greater Richmond region. Public transportation
allows those without vehicular access the ability to move to and from the site. This is especially important for those senior residents who may no
longer drive.
A multi-modal transportation hub, located in the Mixed Use Village, provides a central location for both the GRTC bus stop as well as for a taxi
stand. Taxi service provides access to those areas of Richmond not currently served by GRTC. This hub looks to the future growth of the Richmond
region and foresees increased reliance upon public transportation as the roadways no longer meet the increased demand of an ever-growing

population. In addition, this transportation hub provides an inviting and safe environment for those waiting for service. Finally, the location of the
transportation hub allows for minimal bus movement through the site, away from residential areas, and a continuous route from entry to exit, with
out turning around.
Figure 50: Multi-Modal Transportation Hub
This hub is located in such a way that buses can easily access the site without disturbing the “Main Street Corridor” or the single family residential district. In
addition, passengers are dropped off and picked up closest to the largest use. Finally, this innovative ‘green’ design and strategic location alert visitors to Cloverleaf
Place’s emphasis on sustainable design and the importance of the environment.

Implementation Strategy
The Cloverleaf Mall Site Development Plan is an alternative design concept for the redevelopment of the site of the former Cloverleaf Mall in Chesterfield
County, Virginia. Before a project of this scope is designed a detailed market analysis is performed to determine current market need and un-met demand.
The findings of the market study not only direct the design of the master plan but also guide the development process by specifying those resources necessary
for development to proceed. These required resources include a group of investors, a substantial bank loan(s), and support from the jurisdiction. The Cloverleaf
Mall site is re-zoned C-3 Community Business District to allow for community-scale mixed-use projects containing commercial, office, and residential
townhouse/residential multi-family uses.
Once the developer and the county have chosen to pursue this master plan design a general pro forma is completed to determine the financial feasibility of
the plan. This pro forma analyzes the project’s cost-return ratio by comparing the cost of construction, according to square footage and type of use, to long
term returns. For such a large project, this cost-benefit projection is extended to thirty years. When the development team concludes that the Cloverleaf
Place concept is not only financially feasible but one that offers a high rate of return steps will be taken to pursue this master plan design.
It is the developer’s job to bring the necessary resources together to move the project from a design concept to reality. Once the appropriate resources are in
place, the developer begins the construction phase by enlisting the services of architects, engineers, and construction firms.
The scope of Cloverleaf Place is such that development is phased over the course of several years to make the project financially feasible. Phase One is the
construction of the Mixed Use Village. Once completed, construction begins on the Open and Civic Spaces. With the Mixed Use Village open to the public,
the development team begins receiving a return on their investment while construction continues on the second phase of the project. Finally, Single Family
Residential is completed as the third and final phase of Cloverleaf Place. Because the Mixed Use Village includes many housing units and options, single
family residential is postponed to the last phase of development. Once complete, those living in the Mixed Use Village become potential buyers for the new,
larger floor plans. In addition, the reputation of Cloverleaf Place has spread throughout the Richmond region inspiring many to move into such a unique and
convenient neighborhood.
Cloverleaf Place’s property management team is responsible for regulating the mix, type, and location of businesses located within the development. Subsequently,
the team is responsible for business retention and recruitment. In addition, the property management staff also manages rental units, the condominium
association, and single family residential sales. Finally, the property management team manages the maintenance of the Floating Garden and extensive
green roof system.
A security force patrols Cloverleaf Place, John H. Marks Park and the Floating Garden to ensure the safety and the well being of its users.
Chesterfield County manages John H. Marks Park, the civic use, the community garden, and the recycling center. The county works in partnership with Virginia
Museum of Fine Arts to manage the sculpture garden.

Alternative Development Concepts
The following suggests alternative design concepts for future study:
The southern portion of the property, currently designated as Civic and Open Space, is developed similarly to the Mixed Use Village to
maintain a high level of density throughout the site. This extended Mixed Use Village continues the uses, scale, density, and sustainable nature of
Cloverleaf Place. John H. Marks Park is relocated to another, less desirable location, possibly within the southern adjacent site. The Floating
Garden system is continued throughout the extended Mixed Use Village and acts as both a public park and a maintenance-free yard for residents. In
addition, the sculpture garden and community garden are re-located to the enlarged Floating Garden. The land beneath the electric towers is
designated as either additional parking for the Mixed Use Village or as a greenway leading to the relocated John H. Marks Park, located on the
adjacent site.

Conclusion
The site of the former Cloverleaf Mall remains as a symbol of the ever-evolving urban landscape. From farmland
to 1970s suburbia, the site has become an increasingly integral part of the Richmond landscape. Now located at
the intersection of two major roadways and along the city-county border, the site is once again ready to be redeveloped
for the future.
The Cloverleaf Mall Site Development Plan offers one alternative design concept which incorporates the characteristics
of traditional pre-World War II neighborhoods with the latest ‘green’ technology all the while accommodating
for modern needs. By doing so, the plan not only re-introduces the site back into the urban fabric using
traditional methods but simultaneously returns the land itself to its nearly natural state using the newest technology
while providing for human mobility. It is hoped that such initiative may trigger reinvestment and potentially
turn the eastern Midlothian Turnpike corridor into a district which boasts automotive and pedestrian design
concepts, environmental integrity, and connectivity.

End Notes
History
1. A History of Roads in Virginia: The Most Convenient Ways. Virginia Department of Transportation: Office of Public Affairs. Commonwealth of
Virginia. October 2006, 6.
2. Ibid., 13.
3. Maloney, John and Ann Holiday, “Mall Planted Seed for Area’s Growth,” Richmond Times Dispatch, August 16, 1992, Sec: Chesterfield Plus, P-1.
4. Ibid.
5. Wagner, Wendy, “Growth of Roads has hit a Pothole or Two – Entrance to Mall off Chippenham Would get Different Treatment Today,” Richmond
Times- Dispatch, August 16, 1992, Sec: Chesterfield Plus, P-5.
6. Maloney, John and Ann Holiday, “Mall Planted Seed for Area’s Growth,” Richmond Times-Dispatch, August 16, 1992, Sec: Chesterfield Plus, P-1.
7. Wagner, Wendy, “Growth of Roads has hit a Pothole or Two – Entrance to Mall off Chippenham Would get Different Treatment Today,” Richmond
Times Dispatch, August 16, 1992, Sec: Chesterfield Plus, P-5.
8. “Cloverleaf Mall to Open,” Richmond Times-Dispatch, August 13, 1972, Section C-1.
9. “Outside and Inside,” Richmond Times-Dispatch, October 16, 1975, Section C-1.
10. “Mall Marks Grand Opening,” Richmond News Leader, November 6, 1975, 25.
11. Wagner, Wendy, “Growth of Roads has hit a Pothole or Two – Entrance to Mall off Chippenham Would get Different Treatment Today,” Richmond
Times Dispatch, August 16, 1992, Sec: Chesterfield Plus, P-5.
12. Ibid.
13. Maloney, John and Ann Holiday, “Mall Planted Seed for Area’s Growth,” Richmond Times Dispatch, August 16, 1992, Sec: Chesterfield Plus, P-1.
14. “Louisa Man Pleads Guilty to Shooting Woman with Pellet,” Richmond Times-Dispatch, June 3, 1986, Section: Virginia, 4.
15. Cruickshank, Mary Stuart, “Chesterfield’s Surge is Shifting Direction,” Richmond Times-Dispatch, October 27, 1986, Section: Area, C-3.
16. Potter, Bruce, “Support Urged for Bus Service on Midlothian,” Richmond Times-Dispatch, December 16, 1986, Section: Area, 15.
17. Maloney, John and Ann Holiday, “Mall Planted Seed for Area’s Growth,” Richmond Times Dispatch, August 16, 1992, Sec: Chesterfield Plus, P-1.
18. Kass, Carol, “Cinemas Lift Curtains Lavishly,” Richmond Times-Dispatch April 1, 1988, Section: Weekender, B-1.
19. Potter, Bruce, “Virginia Overland Wins Approval for Powhite Commuter Bus Runs,” Richmond Times-Dispatch, September 30, 1988, Section: Area,
15.
20. “Metro Log” Richmond Times-Dispatch, February 13, 1989, Section: Area, 24.
21. Robertson, Hugh, “Transforming Turnpike – Plans Under Way to Beautify Chesterfield Artery,” Richmond Times-Dispatch, August 12, 1989, Section:
Area, 15.
22. Wasson, Bill, “Bottleneck to be Uncorked,” Richmond Times-Dispatch, December 2, 1989, Section: Area/State, 1.
23. Smith, Randolph P., “Jury Recommends Life for Rapist” Richmond Times-Dispatch, June 6, 1990, Section: Area/State, B-1.
24. Batts, Battinto, Jr., “Gunfire Hurts Two at Theater” Richmond Times-Dispatch, August 2, 1991, Section: Area/State, B-1.
25. Gore, Mollie, “Newest Area Mall Plans it’s Opening” Richmond Times-Dispatch, September 22, 1991, Section: Business, E-3.
26. Maloney, John and Ann Holiday, “Mall Planted Seed for Area’s Growth,” Richmond Times Dispatch, August 16, 1992, Sec: Chesterfield Plus, P-1.
27. Smith, Randolph P., “More Cooperative Efforts Taking Hold – Cities, Counties Find Imaginary Line Often can get in Way” Richmond Times-
Dispatch, April 4, 1993, Section: Area/State, B-3.

28. “Chain Closing Cloverleaf Store” Richmond Times-Dispatch, June 20, 1993, Section: Business, E-3.
29. Gilligan, Gregory J., “Sears to Build Chesterfield Store – Tenant Would be Fourth Major Department Store at Shopping Mall” Richmond Times-
Dispatch, September 20, 1994, Section: Business, C-1.
30. Bowes, Mark, “Fire Said to Start in Trash Bin – Suspects to have Test – Replacement Transformer Due at Cloverleaf Today” Richmond Times-
Dispatch, 10/14/1995 Sec: Area/State Pg. B-3.
31. “Week in Review” Richmond Times-Dispatch, September 1, 1996, Section: Business, E-2.
32. Hawkins, Stacy Adams, “Life Now Mixes Grief, New Responsibilities” Richmond Times-Dispatch, November 18, 1996, Section: Area/State, A-1.
33. Gilligan, Gregory J., “Liquidation Company Selling Goods Bought from Closed Luskin’s Stores” Richmond Times-Dispatch, December 16, 1996,
Section: Metro Business, D-3.
34. Hickey, Gordon, “Mall is Haven for Teens” Richmond Times-Dispatch, December 17, 1997, Section: Chesterfield Plus, M-1.
35. Gilligan, Gregory J., “Regency Takes the Biggest Hit – Taubman Expected Drop Linked to New Mall – Two Other Sites Fared Better.” Richmond
Times-Dispatch, September 5, 2004, Section: Business, D-1.
36. Jones, Will, “Help Proposed for Aging Corridor – Plan Suggests Public-Private Marketing Group” Richmond Times-Dispatch, March 9, 1998, Section:
Area/State, B-1.
37. Hickey, Gordon, “Kaine Wants Bus Service to Extend into Counties but Council Plan is News to Chesterfield Leader” Richmond Times-Dispatch,
August 19, 1998, Section: Area/State, A-1.
38. Chesterfield County, Virginia, www.chesterfield.gov, “Cloverleaf Mall Project,” http://www.chesterfield.gov/CommunityDevelopment/Revitalization/
cloverleaf.asp, (January 15, 2008).
39. Hickey, Gordon, “Kaine Wants Bus Service to Extend into Counties but Council Plan is News to Chesterfield Leader,” Richmond Times-Dispatch,
August 29, 1998, Section: Area/State, A-1.
40. Jones, Will, “Hearing on Bus Expansion Spurs Flaring of Emotions Speakers Divided on Plan for Lines into Chesterfield,” Richmond Times-Dispatch,
February 16, 1998, Section: Area/State, A-1.
41. Jones, Will, “Mall Roads Upgrade Studied – Cloverleaf Access Among the Issues to be Considered,” Richmond Times-Dispatch, November 29, 1999,
Section: Area/State, A-1.
42. Fischer, Meredith, “Cloverleaf Officials Want Off-Track Parlor – Chesterfield Sets Hearing for June 20” Richmond Times-Dispatch, May 17, 2000,
Section: Area/State, A-1.
43. Shepherd, Lauren, “Southside to get Off-Track Betting Parlor – Colonial Downs Expects October Completion” Richmond Times-Dispatch, August 29,
2003, Section: Area/State, B-1.
44. Fischer, Meredith, “GRTC Expands to County –Van Service to Connect Chesterfield Downtown” Richmond Times-Dispatch, May 13, 2001, Section:
Area/State, B-1.
45. Perilli, Jennifer, “Mall Timeline” Richmond Times-Dispatch, www.inrich.com, January 16, 2008, (February 15, 2008).
46. Gilligan, Gregory J., “Regency Square’s Sales Take a Hit – In the Shadow of its Newer Rivals, Venerable Mall has a 17 Percent Drop,” Richmond Times-
Dispatch, December 11, 2005, Section: Business, D-1.
47. Chesterfield County, Virginia, www.chesterfield.gov, “Cloverleaf Mall Project,” http://www.chesterfield.gov/CommunityDevelopment/Revitalization/
cloverleaf.asp, (January 15, 2008).
48. “The Week in Review” Richmond Times-Dispatch, December 29, 2002, Section: Business, D-2.
49. Fischer, Meredith, “Chesterfield Seeks New Life for Old Site – Redevelopment Search Proposed” Richmond Times-Dispatch, July 23, 2003, Section:
Area/State, B-1.

50. Gilligan, Gregory J., “Regency Takes the Biggest Hit – Taubman Expected Drop Linked to New Mall – Two Other Sites Fared Better,” Richmond
Times-Dispatch, September 5, 2004, Section: Business, D-1.
51. Gilligan, Gregory J., “Regency Square’s Sales Take a Hit – In the Shadow of its Newer Rivals, Venerable Mall has a 17 Percent Drop,” Richmond Times-
Dispatch, December 11, 2005, Section: Business, D-1.
52. Ibid.
53. Gilligan, Gregory J., “Cloverleaf’s Sears Building Bought,” Richmond Times-Dispatch, May 17, 2004, Section: Metro Business, D-3.
54. Jones, Will, “Two Will Direct Efforts to Revitalize – Chesterfield Names Directors to Work on Cloverleaf, Other Areas,” Richmond Times-Dispatch,
May 28, 2004, Section: Area/State, B-1.
55. Ibid.
56. Jones, Will, “Bank Takes County’s Offer for Cloverleaf – Church that Wanted to Mall Will File Suit to Block the Purchase,” Richmond Times-Dispatch,
August 13, 2004, Area/State, A-1
57. “Week’s End” Richmond Times-Dispatch, October 16, 2004, Section: Editorial, A-12.
58. Walker, Julian, “Chesterfield Official Has Plenty on Plate – New Economic Development Chief Starts Jan. 30 but Multiply Projects Await Him,”
Richmond Times Dispatch, December 23, 2005, Section: Area/State, B-3.
59. Gilligan, Gregory J., “Regency Square’s Sales Take a Hit – In the Shadow of its Newer Rivals, Venerable Mall has a 17 Percent Drop,” Richmond
Times-Dispatch, December 11, 2005, Section: Business, D-1.
60. Chesterfield County, Virginia, www.chesterfield.gov, “Cloverleaf Mall Project,” http://www.chesterfield.gov/CommunityDevelopment/Revitalization/
cloverleaf.asp, (January 15, 2008).
61. Southall, Amanda, “Cloverleaf Mall Redevelopment Plans Move Forward,” www.MidlothianExchange.com, January 29, 2007, http://www.
midlothianexchange.com/newsarchives/archivedetails.cfm?ID=584 (February 15, 2008).
62. Gilligan, Gregory J., “Midlothian Kroger will be largest in Virginia.” Richmond Times-Dispatch, February 26, 2007, Section: Metro Business, F-3.
63. Walker, Julian, “Zoning bid looms in Chesterfield - A 5,000-home proposal will be heard by planners and supervisors soon,” Richmond Times-
Dispatch, October 16, 2007, Section: Area/State, B-2.
64. Walker, Julian, “Deferral could affect Cloverleaf project Chesterfield didn’t OK deal, and sales price of land expired,” www.inRich.com, Nov 16, 2007,
(January 15, 2008).
65. Ibid.
66. Ibid.
67. Kelley, Gail, “Last 12 tenants to be out by Feb. 29 Demolition will make way for multiuse project” www.inRich.com, January 16, 2008 (February 15,
2008).
68. Hester, Wesley P., “County to buy land for project Deal for Cloverleaf Mall land will enable mix of retail, office, residential” Richmond Times-Dispatch,
www.inRich.com, Jan 24, 2008, (February 15, 2008).
69. Southall, Amanda, “Cloverleaf Mall Redevelopment Plans Move Forward,” www.MidlothianExchange.com, January 29, 2007, http://www.
midlothianexchange.com/newsarchives/archivedetails.cfm?ID=584 (February 15, 2008).
Previous Plans
i.
The Eastern Midlothian Plan. Chesterfield County, Virginia. April 22, 1998.
ii.
Analysis of the Potential for Activity in the Eastern Midlothian Turnpike Study Area of Chesterfield County. The Chesapeake Group, Inc. April 1996.

iii.
City of Richmond’s Master Plan 2000 – 2020. City of Richmond Department of Community Development, Division of Comprehensive Planning.
November 2000.
Land Use
i.
The Eastern Midlothian Plan. Chesterfield County, Virginia. April 22, 1998.
ii.
“Midlothian Planning District.” City of Richmond’s Master Plan 2000 – 2020. City of Richmond Department of Community Development, Division of
Comprehensive Planning. November 2000.
Zoning
i.
Chesterfield County Code of Ordinances - Subdivision and Zoning. Chesterfield County, Virginia. Zoning Ordinance Last Revised: 12/05/07; Revision
includes amendments adopted through: 11/28/07. Subdivision Ordinance Last Revised: 11/15/07; Revision includes amendments adopted through:
11/14/07.
ii.
Ibid., § 19-150 – 156.
iii.
Ibid., § 19-157 – 163.
iv.
Ibid., § 19-164 – 170.
v.
Ibid., § 19-171 – 178.
vi.
Ibid., § 19-95 – 100.
vii.
Ibid., § 19-64 – 69.
viii.
“Chapter 114 Zoning.” Code of Ordinances of the City of Richmond, Virginia. Adopted: July 26, 2004. Amended: October 22, 2007.
Circulation
i.
2006 Virginia Department of Transportation Daily Traffic Volume Estimates Including Vehicle Classification Estimates (where available) Jurisdiction Report:
20 Chesterfield County, City of Colonial Heights, City of Richmond. Virginia Department of Transportation – Traffic Engineering Division in Cooperation
with United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administrator. 2006.
ii.
2006 Virginia Department of Transportation Daily Traffic Volume Estimates Including Vehicle Classification Estimates (where available) Special Locality
Report: 127 City of Richmond. Virginia Department of Transportation – Traffic Engineering Division in Cooperation with United States Department of
Transportation Federal Highway Administrator. 2006.
iii.
2006 Virginia Department of Transportation Daily Traffic Volume Estimates Including Vehicle Classification Estimates (where available) Jurisdiction Report:
20 Chesterfield County, City of Colonial Heights, City of Richmond. Virginia Department of Transportation – Traffic Engineering Division in Cooperation
with United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administrator. 2006.
iv.
2006 Virginia Department of Transportation Daily Traffic Volume Estimates Including Vehicle Classification Estimates (where available) Special Locality
Report: 127 City of Richmond. Virginia Department of Transportation – Traffic Engineering Division in Cooperation with United States Department of

Transportation Federal Highway Administrator. 2006.
v.
The Eastern Midlothian Plan. Chesterfield County Planning Department. Adopted by the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors April 22, 1998.
vi.
2006 Virginia Department of Transportation Daily Traffic Volume Estimates Including Vehicle Classification Estimates (where available) Jurisdiction Report:
20 Chesterfield County, City of Colonial Heights, City of Richmond. Virginia Department of Transportation – Traffic Engineering Division in Cooperation
with United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administrator. 2006.
Demographics
i.
US Census 1990 and 2000, Summary Files 1 and 3. www.census.gov.
ii.
United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Consumer Price Indexes,” www.bls.gov/cpi/. (March 1, 2008).
iii.
Ibid.
iv.
The Chesterfield County Demographic and Economic Profile. Chesterfield County Planning Department. May 2006.
v.
Ibid.
vi.
Population Projections for the PDC & the Richmond-Petersburg MSA. Richmond Regional Planning District Commission. September 30, 2003.
Surrounding Uses
i.
The Eastern Midlothian Plan. Chesterfield County, Virginia. April 22, 1998.
ii.
Long and Foster Realty. www.longandfoster.com. (March 5, 2008).
Environmental Conditions
i.
Chesterfield County GIS Topography Layer, 2008.
ii.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment: Cloverleaf Mall. EEE Consulting, Inc. for Chesterfield County Office of Environmental Management. September
2004.
iii.
Ibid.
iv.
United States Department of Fish and Wildlife. “Wetlands Geodatabase.” http://wetlandsswms.er.usgs.gov/Google.html. (March 5, 2008).
v.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment: Cloverleaf Mall. EEE Consulting, Inc. for Chesterfield County Office of Environmental Management. September
2004.
vi.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Window to My Environment.” http://134.67.99.109/wme/myWindow.asp?requestTimeout=300&xl=-77.4
95696&yt=37.514584&xr=-77.447369&yb=37.478338. (March 5, 2008).
Market Analysis
i.
Analysis of the Potential for Activity in the Eastern Midlothian Turnpike Study Area of Chesterfield County. The Chesapeake Group, Inc. April 1996.

Plan
1 City of Chesapeake, Virginia Design Guidelines Manual, City of Chesapeake, Virginia. May 15, 2007.
2 Stark, Robert L. “Expert Analysis: Mixed Use Density Yields Urban Excitement,” Retail Traffic, August 1, 2005. http://retailtrafficmag.com/
mag/retail_mixeduse_density_yields/. (Accessed April 25, 2008).
3 Analysis of the Potential for Activity in the Eastern Midlothian Turnpike Study Area of Chesterfield County. The Chesapeake Group, Inc.
April 1996.
4 New York City, Department of City Planning. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/zone/glossary.shtml. (Accessed April 25, 2008).
5 http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/downtown/downloads/dg012-020.pdf
6 Hedman, Richard. Fundamentals of Urban Design. (APA Planning Press, 1985), 58 – 60.
7 Moderately Priced Dwelling Units (MPDU) Program, Montgomery County, Maryland. http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/dhctmpl.
asp?url=/Content/DHCA/housing/housing_P/mpdu.asp (Accessed April 26, 2008).
8 “Best Graduate Schools. ”US News and World Report, 2008. http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/grad/art/sculpture.
(Accessed April 27, 2008).
9 Project for Public Spaces. “ How Art Economically Benefits Cities.” http://www.pps.org/info/pub_art/art_impact. (Accessed April 27, 2008).
Plan Images
a. Siebein Associates, Inc. “Portfolio: Conference Centers and Multi-Purpose Facilities.” http://www.siebeinacoustic.com/Portfolio%203.html.
(Accessed April 27, 2008).
b. City of Monterey Park, California, Department of Economic Development. “Upcoming Redevelopment Projects: Garvey Villas.” http://www.
ci.monterey-park.ca.us/home/index.asp?page=1426, (Accessed April 27, 2008).
c. Terrain.org. “Unsprawl Case Study: Austin, Texas.” http://www.terrain.org/unsprawl/19/ (Accessed April 27, 2008).
d. National Building Museum. “Affordable Housing.” http://www.nbm.org/Exhibits/current/Affordable_Housing.html (Accessed April 27,
2008).
e. Průhonický park. http://www.parkpruhonice.cz/?onas. (Accessed April 27, 2008).
f. Michigan State University, Department of Horticulture. “Green Roof Research Program.” http://www.hrt.msu.edu/greenroof/ (Accessed April
27, 2008).
g. Newyorkology.com – A New York Travel Guide. “Rockefeller Center Roof Garden and More Open House.” http://www.newyorkology.com/
archives/2006/10/rockefeller_cen_7.php (Accessed April 27, 2008).
h. e-Architect.com. “Seattle Public Library.” http://www.e-architect.co.uk/seattle/seattle_public_library.htm (Accessed April 27, 2008).
i. New York University. “Le Corbusier, Images from The Radiant City.” http://www.nyu.edu/classes/reichert/sem/city/lecorbu_img.html
(Accessed April 27, 2008).
j. Seattle Art Museum. “Olympic Sculpture Park.” http://www.seattleartmuseum.org/visit/OSP/default.asp (Accessed April 27, 2008).

k. Tyrnauer, Matt. “Natural Phenomenon,” Vanity Fair, May 2008, 242 – 245.
l. Gaia Engineering. “Global Sustainability Alliance – Porecocrete.” www.gaiaengineering.com/technical.porecocrete.php (Accessed April 27,
2008).
m. Rte.50.com. “Environmental Issues - Rain to Recreation.” http://www.rte50.com/environmental_issues/index.html. (Accessed April 27,
2008).
n. Washington County, Florida. “Recycling Center.” http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.washingtonfl.com/
recycling%2520center/DSC00111.JPG&imgrefurl=http://www.washingtonfl.com/recycling%2520center/recycling.htm&h=1704&w=2272&sz=1
618&hl=en&start=57&um=1&tbnid=FivsraKK6GSxaM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Drecycling%2Bcenter%26start%3D40%2
6ndsp%3D20%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN. (Accessed April 27, 2008).