Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 02-02-94 Meeting AgendaFILE COPY AGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Old Frederick County Courthouse Winchester, Virginia FEBRUARY 2, 1994 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) Meeting Minutes of December 1 and December 15, 1993 ............. A 2) Bimonthly Report ...................................... B 3) Committee Reports .................................... C 4) Citizen Comments ..................................... D 5) Discussion regarding the 1994 Subcommittee and Liaison positions. (Mr. Watkins) ........................................ E PUBLIC HEARINGS 6) Conditional Use Permit #013-93 of HCMF Corp., for VanGilders Nursing Home to expand the existing convalesent-nursing home facility from 48 beds to 78 beds. This property is located at the end of Pennsylvania Ave., in the Stonewall District. (Mr. Miller) ......................................... F PA MISCELLANEOUS 7) Discussion regarding a proposal to revise the approved master development plan and site plan for Lake Centre. (Mr. Miller) ......................................... G 8) Videotape from VDOT regarding public meeting procedures. (Mr. Watkins) ........................................ H 9) Other (no attachment) MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Court House in Winchester, Virginia on December 1, 1993. PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were: James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman; John R. Marker, Vice Chairman/Back Creek District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; Manuel C. DeHaven, Stonewall District; Robert Morris, Shawnee District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; Todd D. Shenk, Gainesboro District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; Ronald W. Carper, Gainesboro District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; and George L. Romine, Citizen at Large. ABSENT: Beverly Sherwood, Board Liaison Planning Staff present were: Robert W. Watkins, Director/Secretary; W. Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator; Ronald Lilley, Planner II; Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Director CALL TO ORDER Chairman Golladay called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEETING MINUTES—OCTOBER 6 & OCTOBER 20 199 Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Carper, the minutes of October 6 were unanimously approved as presented. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Carper, the minutes of October 20 were unanimously approved as presented. BIMONTHLY REPORT 2 Chairman Golladay accepted the Monthly and Bimonthly Reports for the Commission's information. COMMITTEE REPORTS Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CP&PS) Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the CP&PS is working on the CIP requests for 1994. She said that CP&PS met with the County Administrator, representatives of the School Board, the Parks & Recreation Department, and the library on November 23 for further explanation of their requests. Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee DR&RS Mr. Thomas reported that the DR&RS had a joint meeting with the Top of Virginia Building Association (TOPVA) on November 30 to discuss the DR&RS's intent to modify the RP (Residential Performance) section of the zoning ordinance to require a mixture of housing types on certain size tracts of land. Mr. Thomas said that DR&RS had sent a proposal to the Board, through the Planning Commission, and the Board asked that the DR&RS review the proposal again with the TOPVA. Instead of the previous proposal's three categories, the TOPVA's suggestion of using areas of 10 acres or less, areas between 10-25 acres, areas of 25-50 acres, and areas 50 acres and greater was agreed upon. Mr. Thomas said that the group also discussed revising the internal buffering zones on a planned, mixed development area. He said that current buffer requirements make some of the developments cumbersome and removes some of the innovative designs that could be accomplished by a developer. Sanitation Authority (SA) Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the Route 522/50 line, connecting the airport, is scheduled to be put into service today. She reported that the James H. Diehl Water Filtration Plant will be dedicated at a ceremony on December 17 at 4:00 p.m; and when this system goes on line, the Authority will have the capability of pumping water from Stephens City to Clearbrook. Mrs. Copenhaver also reported that the Virginia Resources Authority is reviewing the financial feasibility of the Route 522 South Sewer Project. 91 Economic Development Commission ,(FDC) Mr. Romine reported that EDC is in the final stages of their recertification process. Mr. Romine said that this will be our community's third recertification. PUBLIC HEARINGS Rezoning Application #004-93 of Hunts Cycle Shack to rezone 1.05 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to B2 (Business General) for the sales and service of motor cycles and the sales of used motor vehicles. This property is identified as PIN #28-A-133 and is located eight miles west of Winchester on Northwestern Pike (Route 50 West) in the Back Creek District. Action - Approved with Proffers Mr. Tierney said that this item was tabled at the Commission's November 3 meeting. He said that the staff's recommendation at that time was for denial of the application based on concerns about location and the potential of setting a precedent of business zoning in rural areas of the county. He said that there was also some concern over the potential appearance of future uses of the property under B2 zoning, which was in part fueled by the vagueness of the proffers submitted by the applicant. He added that the Commission tabled the rezoning so that the applicant could fine tune the proffers. Mr. Tierney stated that the revised proffers clarify that the use of the property would be limited to motor cycle sales and service; a used car lot with no more than 12 vehicles for sale at any given time; and a residence. He further stated that the proffers also preclude the use of streamers, etc., to attract attention to the property, and limit any sign(s) to those permitted by the RA regulations in place at the time. Mr. Tierney added that the concerns about visual impacts have been addressed in light of the revised proffers, however, the staff still has concerns about precedent setting. Mr. Jessie Richardson, Jr., legal counsel representing Mr. and Mrs. Hunt, said that several persons were present to speak in support of the rezoning. Mr. Richardson said that the applicant feels that he has done everything within his power to make this a palatable proposal. Chairman Golladay called for citizen comments and the following persons came forward: Mr. Robert Shean, area business owner, came forward to speak in favor of the rezoning. Mr. Shean said that he remembers this property when it was in a run-down state. He 0 said that since Mr. Hunt purchased the property, the parking lot has been paved, the building resided, and the overall appearance of the property has improved. Mr_ Shean felt that Mr. Hunt was an honorable person and would carry through on his promises. Mr. Sam Hunt, brother and business partner of Gary Hunt, came forward and said that he and his brother were anxious to get the property rezoned because without it, they can not accept a used car or truck on trade for a motorcycle. Mr. Hunt said that the number of vehicles they have is limited by the size of their lot and he didn't think they would be able to fit more than 12 vehicles on the lot. Mr. Hunt added that used car sales would be a supplementary use to their motorcycle sales. He said that motorcycle sales was seasonal and they felt that used car sales would help to pull them through the winter until sales start again in spring. The Commissioners felt that the revised proffers addressed all of their concerns and upon motion made by Mr. Romine and seconded by Mr. Marker, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Rezoning Application #004-93 of Hunts Cycle Shack to rezone 1.05 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to B2 (Business General) for the sales and service of motor cycles and the sales of used motor vehicles as described by the application and plat submitted, subject to the following conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and property owner as follows: 1. Uses of the property shall be limited to the following: (a) motorcycle sales and repair; (b) automobile sales; and/or (c) residential. 2. No more than twelve automobiles shall be kept for sale on the premises and not under roof at any one time. 3. No flags, streamers or similar items designed to call attention to the property shall be posted on the premises. 4. Any sign(s) added to the premises shall comply with the RA zoning rules for sign(s) at the time of the addition. Conditional Use Permit #011-93 of White Properties for an off -premise business sign_ The sign will be situated on property identified as PIN #85-A-148 and located at the intersection of Fairfax Pike (Route 277) and Stickley Drive in the Opequon District_ Action - Approval Mr. Miller said that an on-site inspection of the proposed sign location and review 5 of the proposed drawing location seemed to indicate that this location and placement would not impact sight visibility of traffic exiting Stickley Drive onto Fairfax Pike (Rt. 277) and the staff would, therefore, recommend approval. Mr. Willis White, the applicant, said that this will be a five foot wide painted wood sign constructed onto seven foot high redwood posts, with lettering on both sides. There were no public comments. The Commissioners felt that the sign would meet required setbacks and distances from other existing business signs if installed in accordance with the submitted plan and upon motion made by Mr. Shenk and seconded by Mr. Thomas, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit ##011-93 of White Properties for an off -premise business sign with the following condition: The sign must meet all the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia. 1994 FREDERICK COUNTY_ COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN Action - Approved Mr. Tierney presented the 1994 Update to the Comprehensive Policy Plan and he reviewed the sections of the document that were updated by the Comprehensive Plans &. Programs Subcommittee. The Commission felt that the Comprehensive Policy Plan did an excellent job of presenting the current state of affairs in the county. They also felt that the plan would become an increasingly important tool for the Commission in deciding on actions they take in the future and, in light of that, a suggestion was made that some added emphasis be included regarding the intent for future development in the county. Concern was also expressed that the public may not be fully aware of the document and they felt that more effort should be made to educate the public and to involve them in the updating process. There were no citizen comments about the plan, Upon motion made by Mr. Romine and seconded by Mr. Wilson, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously M recommend approval of the 1994 Comprehensive Policy Plan as presented. DISCUSSION REGARDING OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS IN THE SUMMIT SUBDIVISION Mr. Carper said that he would abstain from discussion, due to a possible conflict of interest. Mr. Ronald Lilley said that his presentation was a follow-up to the subdivision application of Donald L. Bayliss for 28 lots on 10.7 acres at The Summit, which the Commission considered at their October 6 meeting. Mr. Lilley said that Mr. Bayliss's application included a request for exemption from the normal R5 open space requirement and that the County Planning staff forwarded the application to the Planning Commission with a recommendation for denial due to potential problems with water availability and uncertainties about open space issues. Mr. Lilley noted that the Planning Commission voted unanimously (with Carper abstaining) to recommend denial of the application to the Board of Supervisors until an acceptable master plan was presented and the water system was proven to have adequate capacity. Mr. Lilley stated that the application went to the Board of Supervisors on October 27 with a recommendation from the staff for tabling to allow time for the staff to complete research on the history of The Summit, the existing open space, the degree of vesting involved, and the water situation. He stated that the Board voted to table the application until their December 8 meeting, at which time they must act on the application. Mr. Lilley further stated that the staff has done considerable research and organization of the files on The Summit, along with a technical review of the applicant's request for exception from the normal open space requirements. He said that the water situation is being addressed separately through the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Office of Water Programs. Some of the highlights of Mr. Lilley's presentation were: The first section of The Summit was approved in 1970. It was zoned R2 (Residential General) which did not require a master plan or open space. The Summit property was rezoned to R5 effective November 1, 1973, which required developments to be done in accordance :with a master plan to include 35% dedicated open space. This R5 zoning applied to all 1,936.4 acres of The Summit property. After November 1973, it appears to have been understood that the then -current 7 zoning requirements would apply to new sections. In the June 1974 rezoning application that clarified that all 1,936.4 acres would be zoned R5, the applicant's Economic Impact Study stated: .All of these lands will simply be a continuation of the present concept of Lake Holiday Estates, Inc. and will not materially change the ideas that have been put forth and accepted to this time. They will-c-ontioug tQ comply with all of the z9ning reguirementS designated by R5 with regard to densities, Men spaces, land uses, and physical configurations," The total acreage of The Summit property is 1,936.4 acres (just over three square miles). Not including the proposed subdivision, there are presently 2,667 lots platted on 1,044.1 acres. This accounts for about 54% of the entire Summit property. The lake, golf course, beaches, and miscellaneous green areas account for about 27% of the entire development (or just under 34% of the presently developed area). The unplatted areas shown as belonging to Independent Mortgage Trust, now in the name of IFS Corp., account for about 14% of the entire property. The remaining 5 % is in the dam area, commercial area, and miscellaneous unplatted areas. There are no deed covenants which restrict the use of the golf course or other "green areas" to open space. Therefore, if such areas are to be counted towards any open space requirement, it should be made clear that they would remain as open space. The staff feels that unplatted areas belonging to IFS Corp. should not be counted as open space since they are not dedicated as open space, as the ordinance requires. Mr. Lilley next presented three options for open space requirements for The Summit: Option l: Since a case can be made that this development was expected to provide large portions of open space from its very beginning and the lot purchasers presumably expected as much, it could be argued that 35 % of the entire development should be dedicated as open space. That would translate to about 678 acres of open space when everything else was fully developed. If the lake, golf course, two beaches, and miscellaneous green areas were all counted towards the open space requirement, they would provide about 530 acres of open space, which leaves a shortage of approximately 148 acres. The unplatted IFS property, along with the dam area and a few smaller areas account for about 362 acres, so it is possible that 148 acres could be provided out of those areas. To apply this option, a master plan for the entire development would need to be submitted, designating the areas to count towards the 35% requirement. Option 2: Since 764 acres were platted prior to November 1973, when R5 requirements came into effect, the open space requirement should only be imposed on the remaining 1,172 acres that had not yet been platted. That would translate to about 410 acres of open space. Again, if the lake, golf course, beaches, etc. are counted towards the requirement, they would provide more n. than enough open space for the remainder of the development. Assurances about the golf course, lake, etc. remaining as such would be needed and a determination would need to be made about whether the existing open space located within the environmental areas would all be counted toward the required total. Option 3: A third approach would be a compromise between the previous two approaches. The existing "green areas," along with the lake, beaches, etc., could be dedicated as open space and the 35% open space requirement could be applied to the unplatted areas. Since the unplatted IFS property, along with the dam area and a few smaller areas total about 362 acres, roughly 127 acres of this would need to remain as dedicated open space if the remainder was platted for development. This would result in about 21 acres less open space than the first option would. Commissioners asked about the ownership of the lake and golf course and access to both. Mr. Carl Simms, the president of the Board of Directors of the Lake Holiday Country Club (LHCC) and president of the utility company, came forward to speak. Mr. Simms said that the LHCC owns the utility company, the lake, the marina, the roads (the first eight sections), the green areas, a couple hundred lots, and has control of the development. Mr. Simms said that LHCC is able to dedicate the green areas and the lake as open space. He said that he spoke with representatives of IFS Corporation and they are willing to give up some of their area to make up the approximate 127 acres needed. He said that the golf course is the only entity that is open to the public and all other entities are strictly limited for use by the residents of the Summit. Mr. Simms further explained that the LHCC is a non -stock corporation, consisting of 1700 property owners, which owns the utility company, the lake, the marina, the roads, a couple hundred lots and has control of the development. Mr. Simms said that IFS Corporation is the bank that owns property located on the south side of the lake and one section along Rt. 703 that was left by the developer after foreclosure. He explained that the golf course is owned by 30 property owners who are stock holders and have formed a corporation. Commissioners discussed whether or not the golf course could be considered as open space since the residents of the Summit could not freely access the area. Mr. John Lewis, design engineer for the Bayliss project, felt that development of a master plan for the Summit would be a long, arduous process. In regard to Mr. Bayliss setting aside 35% open space, Mr. Lewis said that the Bayliss property consists of approximately 10 acres containing 28 lots. He said that if 35% of the ten acres, which amounts to 3 1/2 acres, is used for open space, Mr. Bayliss would lose 11 lots and the project will no longer be viable_ Mr. Lewis said that it was possible that Mr. Bayliss could secure 3 1/2 acres at another location within the Summit and Mr. Lewis asked the Commission to consider that as an option_ 9 The Planning Commission recognized that development of a master plan and dedication of open space would take some time to accomplish, however, they felt it would not be in the county's best interest to let it drag on. The general consensus of the Commission was that Mr. Bayliss should be required to meet the 35% open space requirement. Since the ordinance does not require open space land to be contiguous with the land being subdivided, Commissioners felt that Mr. Lewis's suggestion would be a viable option; however, the property must be clearly identified and dedicated. Mr. Wilson stated for the record that this subject has been discussed at committee meetings and committee members were opposed to the practice of purchasing property at another location to meet open space requirements and felt it could set a dangerous precedent. Mr. Light brought the Commission's attention to the fact that as of four o'clock this day, the taxes on Mr. Bayliss's property were delinquent. Mr. Light said that he had a problem with the Planning Commission and staff assisting someone to develop a property in which the taxes have not been paid. He felt that the Commission's recommendations should be made after the property taxes were paid. The Commissioners felt that the two main issues that needed to be addressed were the water issue and the open space issue. Commissioners inquired if the entire acreage at the Summit could be served by the one sewer plant. Mr. Simms replied no. He said that only half the plant is currently operating and as development increases, they will have to bring the other half of the plant on line. He said that if the land on the other side of the lake is developed, another sewer plant will need to be built. Mr. Simms added that the State has approved water and sewer hookup for the Bayliss subdivision. Chairman Golladay called for citizen comments and the following person came forward: Mr. Fred Hamer, resident at The Summit, said that he did not object to Mr. Bayliss's subdivision, however, he felt some consideration should be given to the study of the sewer and water. Mr. Hamer said that there were terrible problems. He said that the system does not handle the sewerage between the houses and the processing plant. He said that the pumps constantly overflow raw sewerage directly into the lake with a heavy rain or heavy weekend use. He said that this problem has been occurring for the nine years that he has lived at The Summit. Mr. Harper said that last Saturday, the pump behind his lot ran over for 10-12 hours directly into the lake. He said that in the summer, he can not use his outdoor deck because of the heavy stench. Mr. Harper felt that adding more hookups to the existing plant would only increase problems. Some of the Commissioners stated that they would not support a project with to delinquent property taxes. The Commission wanted assurances that the property could be served by public water and sewer without burdening other property owners. They also felt that the additional land purchased to meet open space requirements should be one contiguous parcel. Mr. Shenk moved to support all three of the staffs options and recommended that these options be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. This motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously approved as follows: YES: Light, Copenhaver, Marker, DeHaven, Wilson, Romine, Thomas, Shenk, Morris, Golladay ABSTAIN: Carper Mr. Thomas next moved that the Commission place a moratorium on any future development at The Summit at Lake Holiday until a master development plan for the entire development is submitted and approved by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. This motion was seconded by Mr. Shenk and unanimously approved. (Mr. Carper abstained) Chairman Golladay requested that the staff look into the issue of entertaining subdivision and zoning matters on properties with delinquent taxes. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE STATUS OF THE ROUTE 642 REALIGNMENT PROJECT Mr. Tierney said that the Route 642 Project was initiated in May of 1989 when the Board of Supervisors approved a resolution for revenue sharing to straighten Route 642. He said that ultimately, the intention is to improve Route 642 from the overpass with Interstate 81 to Route 522. Numerous public meetings where held and during a public hearing in 1992, the Board endorsed one of many alternative routes for the realignment. Mr. Tierney said that design plans were sent to VDOT about one year ago and were tentatively approved. He said that subsequent to that, the County learned that if they wanted VDOT to participate in the right-of-way acquisition, the project would have to comply with certain VDOT requirements and would he required to meet new State stormwater management requirements. This meant that the design had to be redone to meet those stormwater requirements. Mr. Tierney said that redesign has now been accomplished, the plans have been resubmitted to VDOT, and the County anticipates approval. Mr. Tierney explained that most of the properties that the redesigned Route 642 would traverse are large holdings owned by developers. He said that the County has agreements from them that they will provide the necessary rights-of-way. There are three instances, however, where the proposed route crosses land owned by smaller, individual property owners. Mr. Tierney said that someone, either the county or the state, will have to purchase the rights-of- way from these property owners. He said that verbal agreements have been reached in two of these instances. Mr. Tierney said that the County's portion of the revenue sharing funds for the project were forwarded to VDOT in October of this year. The County is anticipating that actual construction of the project will begin this spring or summer, however, this depends on how quickly VDOT can acquire the necessary rights-of-way. Commissioners asked if the old Route 642 would remain in tact. Mr. Tierney replied that the old route would be cul -de -sacked, just east of its current intersection with Route 647. He said that this will allow those residents that live on 642 to continue to use the road. The Commissioners also asked if Route 647 would eventually be straightened with Oak Ridge Drive. Mr. Tierney replied that it would. He said that it will be a squared -off intersection and the southern portion of the intersection will move to line up with Oak Ridge Drive. Since this was an informational discussion item, no action was needed by the Commission. ADJOURNMENT p.m. No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 9:05 Respectfully submitted, Robert W. Watkins, Secretary James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Court House in Winchester, Virginia on December 15, 1993. PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were• James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman; Todd D. Shenk, Gainesboro District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; Ronald W. Carper, Gainesboro District; Robert Morris, Shawnee District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; Manuel C. DeHaven, Stonewall District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; and George L. Romine, Citizen at Large. ABSENT: John R. Marker, Vice Chairman/Back Creek District Planning Staff present were: Robert W. Watkins, Director; W. Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator; and Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Director. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Golladay called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES The first order of business was the consideration of the minutes of November 3, 1993. Upon motion made by Mr. Carper and seconded by Mr. Romine, the minutes of November 3, 1993 were unanimously approved as presented. BIMONTHLY REPORT Chairman Golladay accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's information. E COMMITTEE REPORTS Sanitation Authority (SA) - Mtg. of 12/15/93 Mrs. Copenhaver reported that all SA water transmission lines are in service from north to south and east to west. She said that the Southview subdivision is now receiving municipal water and the wells are off line. She reported that the James H. Diehl Water Treatment Plant, located in Stephens City, is scheduled for inspection on Monday and will commence operation upon Health Department approval. Mrs. Copenhaver added that by next week, there will be quarry water in the lines and the Sanitation Authority will be operating independent of river water. Mrs. Copenhaver added that dedication of the James H. Diehl Water Treatment Plant is scheduled for Friday, December 17. Economic Development Commission Mr. Romine reported that the budget and plans for the next fiscal year have been completed. WAIVER TO SHARED PRIVATE DRIVEWAY WIDTH BY HAZEL V. REHBOCK Action - Approved Mr. Miller said that this request is for a waiver to the width requirement of a shared private driveway owned by Mrs. Hazel V. Rehbock. Mr. Miller said that Mrs. Rehbock, an elderly woman, is being represented by Mr. and Mrs. Cockerham, who take care of Mrs. Rehbock and her property. He explained that Mrs. Rehbock wants to subdivide a 5.335 acre tract off her 76.36 acre property, zoned RA, for construction of a home by Mr. and Mrs. Cockerham. He said that Mrs. Rehbock will retain ownership of the lot and the house. Mr. Miller said that the problem is that the applicant has only a 14' to 16' width on an approximately one half mile strip of land used for access through the Gordon C. Hildebrand property to Cedar Grove Road. Mr. Miller said he believed that every effort has been expended by the applicant to acquire the necessary 50' right-of-way width; however, since this is not possible, the staff recommends that the request be approved with the restriction that the property be limited to division of just three lots. Mr. Miller said that the surveyor has agreed to place this wording on the plat. The staff noted that the ordinance allows for the division of three lots on a shared 3 private driveway; however, with the division of a fourth lot, a state -maintained road is required to serve the lots. The Planning Commissioners were concerned that problems may arise concerning use of the right-of-way because two parties were involved, possibly three in the future, and because of the length of this narrow section of right-of-way (approx. 1l2 mile). The Commissioners also debated whether or not this situation could be considered a "farm -tenant" operation and, therefore, subdividing a second lot would not be necessary. Mr. Allen Ebert, the applicant's surveyor, said that he would place specific wording on the plat stating that an easement is granted across the Hildebrand and Kirby properties to the 5.335 acre parcel so that there would be no question about access. Mr. Ebert said that this could also be specifically stated in the deed of dedication. Mr. Earl Cockerham felt that Mrs. Rehbock's property should be considered as a farm operation and he and his wife tenants because they maintained cattle on a 24-hour basis. After some discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission that possible future access problems could be alleviated if specific wording was placed on the final plat restricting further division of the parent tract to only one more lot unless the necessary 50' right-of-way was obtained. Upon motion made by Mr. Carper and seconded by Mr. Wilson, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve a request for waiver of a shared private driveway width by Mrs. Hazel V. Rehbock with the restriction that only one more lot can be divided from the parent tract unless the necessary right-of-way is acquired to permit construction of a state -maintained road. This restriction should be required on the final plat so as to become a part of the recorded instrument. RECOMMENDATION AND FINAL REPORT ON THE ALTERNATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT_. STUDY Mr. Tierney began by giving the Planning Commission some background information regarding the report and study. He said that this study originated in the winter of 1491 when the Planning District Commission applied for and received a 604B Grant through the State Water Control Board to look for possible alternative wastewater treatment systems that could be applied to three rural community centers in the county. He said that the three community centers chosen were Roundhill, Clearbrook, and Brucetown because they were somewhat representative of the other community centers in the county and it was thought that whatever technology was used for these could be applied elsewhere and also, these areas had a demonstrated need for improved wastewater treatment. Mr. Tierney said that concerns have been S expressed on all three of these areas for a number of years in terms of groundwater contamination. Mr. Tierney said that the reason for looking for alternatives to conventional large scale treatment systems were primarily cost and also the desire not to promote large scale growth in those areas. He said that subsequent to the grant, the county formed a Technical Advisory Committee to oversee the grant and resulting recommendations. That committee was made up of representatives of the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission, a citizen representative from each of the areas, a representative from the Health Department, the Sanitation Authority, the Soil Conservation Service, and the State Water Control Board. Mr. Tierney continued, stating that the first meeting of the TAC was held in November of 1991. He said that Mr. Stephen Dicks, with the EPA Small Flows Clearing House in Morgantown, West Virginia, presented some recommendations to the TAC on systems the county may want to pursue in the three selected areas. Mr. Tierney said that a septic survey of the selected areas was conducted July through October of 1992 and it was concluded that there was reason for concern for groundwater contamination. He said that following that survey, in January of 1993, an engineering firm, P.M. Brooks & Associates, was hired to study the selected areas and develop recommendations on possible alternative treatment methods. Mr. Tierney said that the report presented in the Commission's agenda is the result of P.M. Brooks & Associate's study and recommendations. Mr. Tierney reviewed the report with the Commissioners. He said that the report calls for the use of a central collection system for each of the core (densely populated) areas, which are characterized as small lots with little room for repair of existing systems. He said that from the central collection point, it would be possible to connect to a central sewer system (at Rt. 37 in the Roundhill area) or discharge into a designated creek (Brucetown, Clearbrook). The remaining larger lots could be treated on-site, either by repairing existing systems or installing individual discharge systems. The report suggested that some of the large lot areas may be suitable for using either spray irrigation systems or non -discharge systems. Mr. Tierney said that the overall cost estimate was $1.4 - $2.8 million for the Roundhill area and $1.9 - $2.5 million for the combined Clearbrook/Brucetown areas, depending on the actual systems used. Mr. Tierney stated that the report recommends that whichever system is used, it should be maintained and operated by the Winchester -Frederick County Service Authority. He said that Wellington Jones, the Engineer/Director for the Sanitation Authority, has stated that the best way to accomplish this is through a Sanitary District. The advantage is that assessed taxes could help to supplement fees for service and the Authority would own and operate the system. Mr. Tierney added that another advantage of using the Sanitary District was that the service area could not be expanded and, therefore, growth in the area could be controlled. 5 Mr. Tierney said that the TAC studied the consultant's report at length and they concluded that the report amounts to a first step in solving the existing and anticipated wastewater problems for the three areas, however, they felt that some key policy questions/issues needed to be addressed at this point. He said that the TAC feels that the issues needing resolved are: 1. Will the Roundhill area be permitted to tie into the existing sewer line lying just to the east of Route 37? 2. Will the Sanitation Authority accept the responsibility for operation and maintenance of the proposed collection and treatment systems? 3. Will connection to a system be mandatory? TAC believes that the feasibility and effectiveness of any of the proposed systems will depend greatly on the participation of the homeowners/residents within the study areas. Mr. Tierney said that another issue, somewhat outside the scope of this discussion, was whether the county would entertain the possibility of running waterlines to the Clearbrook/Brucetown area at the same time as the proposed central collection system. Mr. Tierney stated that there could be significant economic benefits in coordinating the two efforts. The Planning Commission felt that the consultant's report and the TAC's recommendations were a major step forward in the process for improved wastewater treatment in the three study areas. The Commission felt that the next logical step in the continuation of this process was for the Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee to study the policy issues and report back to the Commission. No other action was taken by the Commission at this time. THE PROPOSED 1994-1995 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN Mr. Tierney presented Frederick County's 1994-1995 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) as recommended by the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CP&PS) at their meeting of November 23, 1993. Mr. Tierney said that the proposed CIP contained 33 projects with a total cost of $87,986,001 which included an estimated debt service on all projects except the county offices (funding for this project is as yet undecided). He said that the total cost did not include Sanitation Authority projects or landfill projects, which are paid for out of fees generated. He explained that 51,724,700 of this amount would come from the county's general fund over a five-year period (not including debt service). Mr. Tierney said that the projects proposed for the first year would have a total county cost of $10,763,353 including estimated debt service for all projects, with the exception of the county offices. 1 Mr. Tierney summarized the proposed projects for the Commission. He said that the only new projects in this year's School Board request were the replacement of chillers at Aylor Middle School and Bass Hoover Elementary School and the replacement of a section of roof at James Wood. He said that the Parks & Recreation Department has proposed a new bicycle facility as their number one priority and the bulk of the cost will be funded through the ISTEA grant which the county received. Mr. Tierney said that this is the first year the Airport Authority has been included in the CIP. He said that the Airport Authority has their own CIP which is reviewed and approved by the FAA, however, many of their projects rely in part on county funding. He said that the airport projects include a taxiway relocation, land acquisition for and the construction of a T -hanger taxiway, and a lb -unit T -hanger. Mr. Tierney continued, stating that there were a number of new landfill related projects, including closure of two landfill sections, development of ten acres of new landfill space, construction of a leachate treatment facility, a composting/waste inspection facility, and the expansion of the citizen's convenience center at the landfill. Mr. Tierney stated that the Sanitation Authority projects remain essentially the same as last year. Mr. Tierney concluded by saying that a number of changes were made in the way in which projects were ranked as well as the information which was required from the departments submitting requests. Mr. Tierney reviewed the revised project request forms with the Commission and he explained the structured evaluation process which was developed by the Planning Staff and used to rate proposed projects. The Commission questioned the feasibility of renovating and air conditioning some of the elementary schools instead of using the money for construction of new facilities. They also commented that some of the debt service figures presented by the School Board seemed to be high. Other than these items, the Commission had no major problems with any of the proposed projects and had no changes to the priority listing. Upon motion made by Mrs. Copenhaver and seconded by Mr. Light, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously endorse Frederick County's 1994-1995 Capital Improvements Plan and recommends approval to the Board of Supervisors. 7 REPORT ON THE 1993 PLANNING COMMISSION RETREAT Mr. Watkins presented a report on the 1993 Annual Planning Commission Retreat for the Commission's information. ADJOURNMENT No further business was discussed and the meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Robert W. Watkins, Secretary James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman M E M O R A N D U M TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Robert W. Watkins, Secretary SUBJECT: Bimonthly Report DATE: January 21, 1994 (1) Rezonin s Pending: dates are submittal dates Twin Lakes 4/04/90 Shaw RA to B2/RP (2) Rezonin s Approved: dates are BOS meeting dates Woodside Estates Hunts Cycle Shack 01/12/94 01/12/94 Opeq BkCk RA to RP RA to B2 (3) RezoninCts Denied: dates are BOS meeting dates None (4) Conditional Use Permits Pending: dates are submittal dates Maria S. Yost 12/07/93 Gain Cottage Occup. -Public Account HCMF Corp. 12/17/93 Ston Convalescent & Nursing Home (5) Conditional Use Permits Approved: dates are approval dates White Properties 01/12/94 Opeq Off Premise Sign (6) Site Plans Pending: dates are submittal dates Wheatlands Wastewater Fac. 9/12/89 Opeq Trmt.facil Grace Brethren Church 61/n8/90 Shaw Church Flex Tech 10/25/90 Ston Lgt. Industrial Lake Centre 05/15/91 Shaw Townhouses Red Star Express Lines 05/24/91 Ston Whse. Addition Freeton 04/27/92 Opeq Townhouses Salvation Army 12/03/92 Ston Ofc/Housing 2 Franklin Mobile Home 11/30/93 Shaw Mobile Home Park Cliff Borden 12/07/93 BkCk Retail/Warehouse Southeastern Container 12/07/93 Ston Mfg./Warehouse Veterans Texaco Svc.Sta. 12/10/93 Opeq Addition Valley Proteins 01/05/94 Gain Utility Bldg Add. Winc.Reg.Health Systems 01/07/94 Shaw Medical Center Annex (7) Site Plans Approved: (dates are approval dates) Timber Ridge Res.Tmt.Ctr. 1/14/94 Gain Dormitory (8) Subdivisions Pending: (dates are submittal_ dates) Briarwood Est. 01/04/94 Stonewall (9) Subdivisions Pending Final Admin. Approval: (P/C or SOS approval dates Abrams Point, Phase I Hampton Chase Lake Centre Coventry Courts Freeton Village at Sherando Paul Negley Fredericktowne Est., Sec 8 & 9 Lake Holiday Sec. 1B 6/13/90 Shawnee 02/27/91 Stonewall 06/19/91 Shawnee 12/04/91 Shawnee 05/20/92 Opequon 06/16/93 Opequon 08/11/93 Stonewall 10/06/93 Opequon 12/08/93 Gainesboro (10) PMDP Pending: (dates are submittal dates) None (11) FMDP Pending Administrative Approval: (dates are BOS approval dates Battlefield Partnership 04/08/92 Back Creek James R. Wilkins III 04/14/93 Shawnee (12) PMDP Administ. Approved (dates are admin. approval dates) None (13) Board of Zoning Appeals Applications Pending:(submit. dates) Fred. Co. Sanitation Auth 12/06/93 Shaw 341front & 43'side expansion of Parkin - Mill Wastewater Trmt. Plan 3 Kerry Poche 12/08/93 Ston 1'8" front -existing house (14) BZA Applications Approved• (approval dates) None (15) BZA Applications Denied• None (16) PLANS RECD. FOR REVIEW FROM CITY OF WINCHESTER None E. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT - ACTIVITY REPORT #48 (Dec 16-31) 1. GIS & Maiming Digital tax maps are being updated and corrected by Chris Mohn, an intern to the Planning Department. Several problems and projects concerning tax maps that have been on hold are now being completed. The digital tax maps in Autocad format are being converted to .DXF files, which the GIS/ArcInfo Program will accept. Planning staff members are using Autocad and ArcInfo to produce the maps which will be used by the consultant to the Battlefield Task Force. Multiple layers of information are being researched and digitized into the system. 2. Public Education Lanny Bise spoke with the Blue Ridge Kiwanis Club on December 16 about planning efforts in Frederick County. 3. Violations Lanny Bise filed criminal charges on four zoning violations. He is continuing to update the department's violation database. E. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT - ACTIVITY REPORT #49 Jan. 1-15 1. Corridor H Bob Watkins attended the Corridor H Advisory Committee meeting. Among other topics, plans for a February 10 public meeting at Signal Knob Middle School in Strasburg were discussed. 2. Route 642 On January 11, Kris Tierney met with Mrs. Hack and her children, along with supervisors Smith and Sager, to discuss the 1.05 acres of land needed from Mrs. Hack for the proposed realignment of the Route 642/647 intersection. Mrs. Hack was offered the same per acre rate for her land as was offered to Mr. Sargent and Mr. Heflin. As of this date, Mrs. Hack has not responded to the offer. On January 14, Kris Tierney met with numerous representatives of VDOT and staff from G.W. Clifford & Associates to coordinate details of the final design for Route 642. 3. Other Transportation Issues Bob Watkins attended the Lord Fairfax Planning District Commission Transportation Technical Committee meeting. various issues were discussed. 4. Battlefield Task Force Bob Watkins and Mark Lemasters met with the Battlefield Task Force. Economic benefits and the ISTEA proposal were discussed. The Task Force decided to contact legislators and other parties to request support for the battlefield preservation efforts. Bob Watkins and Mark Lemasters conducted an on-site evaluation of the Grim Farm Battlefield site. Lanny Bise is working with Mark Lemasters to produce a battlefield sites inventory. 5. Other Historic Issues Bob Watkins and Kris Tierney met with representatives of the Historical Society to discuss publication of a book on historic structures in the County. 6. CTP On January 10, Kris Tierney met with Stan Hough, editor of the Frederick County Edition, to discuss the proposed CIP. 7. GIS and Mapping Evan Wyatt updated tax maps and zoning maps for publication and produced the Primary Road Improvement Plan Map. Both Mark Lemasters and Chris Mohn are producing Battlefield Plan Location Maps and Evan Wyatt is digitizing the zoning onto those maps. 8. Plans Review Evan Wyatt reviewed plans for Briarwood Subdivision, the Cliff Borden Retail Truck Parts Site Plan, and the Valley Protein Utility Building Addition. 9. Site Inspections Evan Wyatt conducted site inspections at the L & L Builders Warehouse addition, the Glaize Truss Plant Manufacturing Building addition, the Freeton Townhouse Development, and the Lakeview Townhouse Development Lanny Bise conducted a site inspection for Valley Bible Church. 10. Development Meetings Bob Watkins and Evan Wyatt met with Chuck Maddox to discuss master development plan requirements for a potential multifamily residential development on Greenwood Road, adjacent to Country Park subdivision. Bob also met with Chuck Maddox on several other new development proposals. 11. Comprehensive Plan Lanny Bise finalized work on the Comprehensive Plan. 12. Annual Report Lanny Bise is currently working on the department's 1993 Annual Report. J - MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Robert W. Watkins, Director SUBJECT: 1994 Subcommittees DATE: January 21, 1994 COUNTY cif FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703/678-0682 Please find attached a listing of the Subcommittees and liaison positions that were in effect during 1993. Staff has not been contacted regarding any changes and has none to recommend. RWW/slk attachment 1) I oi(h I-OLO(1U11 SH -CCI P.O. 13o\ 001 Winehcstcr, VA 22601 Winchcslcr. VA 212604 Committee Comprehensive Plans and Programs: Development Review and Regulations: Liaisons: 1994 PLANNING COMMISSION SUBCOMMITTEES Members Ronald W. Carper George Romine Manuel DeHaven Marjorie H. Copenhaver, John Light Todd Shenk Blaine Wilson Roger Thomas, Chairman Sanitation Economic Development City of Winchester Historic Resources Chairman Transportation Joint Transportation Joint Stephens City Planning Committee Battlefield Task Force Alt. WstWater Trmt Study TAC COMMITTEE MEETING SCHEDULE Worksessions HRAB Transportation City of Winchester Sanitation EDC Joint Transportation Joint Stephens City Planning Meeting Time 2nd Monday of each month 7:30 p.m. 2nd Tuesday of each month 7:30 p.m. Marjorie Copenhaver George Romine Ronald W. Carper Todd Shenk Roger Thomas Jim Golladay Marjorie Copenhaver/ Roger Thomas John Light George Romine 4th Monday of each month at 7:30 p.m. 3rd Tuesday of each month at 7:30 p.m. 1st Monday of each month at 7:30 p.m. 3rd Tuesday of each month at 3:00 p.m. 3rd Wednesday of each month at 5:30 p.m. 3rd Thursday of each month at 8:00 a.m. 5th Monday of each month at 7:30 p.m. 3rd Monday of each month at 7:30 p.m. (Meeting schedule for the Transportation Committee may change to the first Tuesday of each month) P/C Review Date: 02/02/94 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #013-93 HCMF CORPORATION Addition to the VanGilders Care Center LOCATION: From Route 11 North to Jackson Ave., right Pennsylvania Avenue to the end of the street. Property is on the left. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBER 54-A-32 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RP (Residential Performance) Convalescent/Nursing Home ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RP (Residential Performance), Land use - Residential PROPOSED USE: Convalescent and nursing home. 24 bed addition to the existing main building and a 6 bed addition to two existing cottages. REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation• Since this property is on a privately maintained street, this department has no comment. Ins ections De artment: Building shall comply with VA Uniform Statewide Building Code and Section 307, Use Group I (Institutional), of the BOCA National Building Code/1990. Other codes that apply are Title 28, Code of Federal Regulation Part 36, Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities. NOTE: Minimum type of construction permitted is 5-A, protected. Requires firewalls between old and new structures. Shall be completely sprinkled throughout. All building plans shall have a Virginia A/E seal. Fire Marshal: A 201 fire lane will be needed along the north side of the large addition for adequate access to the west side of the building. The existing hydrant on site is not shown on the sketch. Please show this hydrant and fire lane on site plans when submitted. Burning of construction debris is not permitted on site. Access for emergency vehicles must be maintained at all times during construction. If construction occurs during cold weather, use of portable kerosene or propane heaters will be strictly regulated by the Fire Marshal's office. All work shall comply with the applicable Use Group. Health Department: Health Dept. has no objection to conditional use permit. Sanitation Authority: I have no problem with building additions. I will need to review the site plan for this new work for water and sewer lines. City of Winchester: See attached memos from Tim Youmans, City Planning Director, dated November 11, Jessie Moffett, Utilities Dept., dated December 6, and L.A. Miller, Winchester Fire and Rescue, dated December 13. Planning Department: A convalescent and nursing home is permitted in the RP zone with an approved conditional use permit. This facility has been operating as a legal nonconforming use and cannot expand more than 50% in that status. A 50% expansion would allow addition of 3973 square feet and they desire to add 8974 square feet to the facility. The desired expansion is the force behind this application. The comments of Tim Youmans, Winchester Planning Director, are certainly worth mentioning and bringing to everyone's attention. Since the material presented is not an official transportation plan for the area, although a reasonable consideration, staff does not believe this can be allowed to significantly influence the decision on this application. Denying or requiring modification of this application based on an unofficial transportation plan could well be considered a "taking". The comments of the Winchester Public Works Director and the Fire Chief indicate that the current water supply from Winchester is probably not adequate to meet the demands of an expanded facility. Staff believes it would be reasonable to require the owner to have the system evaluated for water requirements and then upgrade the Winchester connection or connect to the Sanitation Authority system if additional water capacity is required. Fire protection would be a major consideration in making this determination. Pennsylvania Avenue is a Winchester street that is only maintained up to the Frederick County line. Basically this is the bridge that is south of the VanGilder facility. The facility is actually served by a private street which is an extension of Pennsylvania Avenue. The concerns of the Winchester Fire Chief are valid as far as there being somewhat of a restriction for ingress/egress to this property. This is simply caused by the location and configuration of the property and the deadend street. The applicant must be responsible for maintaining the street from the city line to the entrance to the nursing home facility. A site plan will be required for any construction on this site. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FEBRUARY 2 1994 PC MEETING: Approval with the following conditions: 1. A determination of water requirements must be made and any required upgrade or modifications must be addressed during the site plan process. 2. The owner must maintain the street serving this facility from the Winchester/Frederick County line into the facility. 3. A site plan for this facility must be submitted and approved prior to any construction on this facility. 4. Applicant must comply with all requirements of the state and county codes pertaining to nursing/ convalescent homes at all times. WING CITY OF WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA Rouss City Hall 15 North Cameron Street 1R GI�1 Winchester, VA 22601 703-667-1815 MEMORANDUM TO: Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator, Frederick County FROM: Timothy Youmans, Planning Director, City of Winchester RE: Conditional Use Permit- 1011 Pennsylvania Avenue DATE: November 11, 1993 I have reviewed the Request for C.U.P. Comments pertaining to the proposal by HCMF Corp to expand the Vangilder's Care Center at the above address. Because the City provides utility service and often serves as the first emergency response to this site, T_ have asked our Public Utilities and Fire and Rescue Departments to provide comments also. My planning comments are primarily related to transportation issues. In addition to the site having relatively poor street access, the site of this e.xpanded conditional_ use falls within an identified long-range roadway corridor extending Brooke Road west from its current terminus at Route 111`T to a ne�,i westerly terminus at Route 522N. The attached map entitled "Alternative 4, Long -Range Roadway Improvements, Winchester Area Transportation Study" and the aerial photograph depict this proposed new alignment. While it is premature to determine an exact alignment of this roadway, the length of this improvement and the pattern of existing develor_ment allow for fairly precise estimating of the alignment. Given this, there should be careful evaluation of the impact that approval of this conditional use will have relative to the transportation and landuse planning policies of the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan. This roadway corridor offers a major enhancement to access between Fort Collier Industrial Park and Route 522 North. Currently, trucks heading south on 522 must exit 522 and make a left turn onto Route 37, make a left off of Rte 37 Just east of where 37 and Rte 11 merge, make another left onto Rte 11 south in front of Crown_ Cork and Seal, and make a final left turn from Rte 11 into Ft Collier Tndustrial Park. The only alternative currently is to weave down through the City. While there is little concern over the compatibility of this use with adjacent landuses, I question the wisdom of intensifying any conditional use on this specific site. This concern is most closely related to the standards listed as 'C' and 'E' under Section 165-15 of the County Zoning Ordinance. Acquiring right-of-way for needed hiahway corridors has proven to be the most difficult and expensive element of roadway implementation- far exceeding the engineering challenges of roadway construction. Given this, it is troubling to encourage "exceptional" uses of land which will only delay the improvement or increase the cost. "THE APPLE CAPITAL" Wa-me Miller November 11, 1993 Page 2 Perhaps, as a ccupromise, the applicant can demonstrate how a two-lane roadway can be accommodatedalong the northerly end of the site while still allowing expansion of the use upon the remainder of the site. While it may be unreasonable to expect the property owner to dedicate all the necessary right-of-wav, far less contribute to the cost of constructing this future road, it would not be unreasonable to ask the applicant to design the expansion (buildings and parking) in a way that preserves a usable corridor for future acquisition and roadway construction at public expense with due compensation to the owner. Please call me if you have any questions regarding this response to the request for C.U.P. comments. Attachments N iGal a grepNe "aft In (set 7 11 61 O 500 1000 Z 4 ' ,�,.•..•...•Z 6 FUNDS TO BE A (A) PROVIDED BY 4 WINCHESTER MEDICAL Q REMOVE 81 ry CENTER -^ RAMPS to 50 7e. .A, A • � {B /. 7 / Winchester 4 ti 59 A/ 07 Q / 4 B+ra 4 I/ REMOVE rO INTERCHANGE A 1 4 , 11 �' 77 a Frederick n County LEGEND 2 OEVEIOPEq OR. 2 4 81 �� N STUOY AREA BOUNDARY S(e h• 6s.\ 4 N " """" IMPROVEMENTS ASSUMED p'• L TO BE IN PLACE FOR --: 1311Y��' 6a NO -BUILD CONDITIONS •� - 2 oT 4 14 22 IMPROVEMENTS TO ROADWAY ON N EXISTING AL!GNMENT X. 3b ROADWAY ON NEW ALIGNMENT XXXXXXXXX ROADWAY REMOVED 1 4 27" ...n•........ IMPROVEMENT TO CORRECT 4 EXISTING GEOMETRICOEFICIENCY 1 4 NUMBER OF LANES (Imues Bosh Oiradiona l • NEW INTERCHANGE NOTE: The Weailons of roadway RECONSTRUCT INTERCHANGE kvwansnu eh~ art the map are spprmlmua end lor pimm ig punme mly- (A) FULL CLOVERLEAF INTERCHANGE Route 77 Eatenelon (Emil keaum I. SWGLE POINT URBAN graphically shown for modeling purpwe DEFICIENT SEGMENT (B) WTERCHANGE mly. The I" WaWn wNl be deferrmred by a separate P.E. aludy conducted by -------DENOTES SEGMENTS TO BE REMOVED DIAMOND INTERCHANGE WITH Frederick Courtin c Jordon wah VOOT. FROM MODELED THOROUGHFARE SYSTEM (C ) FIVE LANE DECK ALTERNATIVE #4 LONG-RANGE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS WINCHESTER AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY Nur�`.t°Cr [a lUii (.ih""''ry'r'WQ On 1//V/!CS b F-�'. r n +K r j' { j j +♦ `moi„_ �4aL.�'� �3 '� +ir !� k' •y OZwsz ILt OPW• ' � � r Y rff "y. � o.. �Y�• w. ''�r_A: �,.��T:-`-may '2� •_i�_ � .??+. r � .i7 •r ..� i 5 '� q.1. -•-;f. 't �• r Cy,. a. fix,- ♦r -"i� \yg, -: A' 4 _ �� �.� i -s, g ! �'CR ' .ti ?YRsKi�� s' -, f t + "'1:,� '♦ - W � F' tZ v t � ` ;�� I JC�'sf . ,. . r,-�4 Vii• ��>'-_ � t'4 '-. '�' -- �+' ��� ..',a;. �' �r,��`� ✓ .,' ��' ' :kms �' - .�Ar;" `'� � , •. � +. �'►���.:fi�+.► ;rs� r.Pp � r �%YFd'�r» i.+� ► t 66. Nx MEMORANDUM TO: Wayne Miller FROM: Jesse Moffett 1� 1 DATE: December 6, 1993 RE: Conditional Use Permit, 1011 Pennsylvania Avenue Our review of the utility needs of the expansion of the Vangilder Care Center brings a few points of consideration. At the present time, the City does provide water service to the existing facility through an 1 1/2" water meter and also provides sewer service through the Pennsylvania Avenue lift station. Considering the development of further structures and consideration for fire protection, it may be in the best interests of the county to have the developer consider reconsidering his water supply and acquiring water and sewer service from Frederick County Sanitation Authority. It is my understanding that both water and sewer service is available through the county system immediately adjacent to this property. We bring this up due to the fact that there may not be adequate fire protectj'on to meet the developer's needs. If that should be deemed inappropriate, there would have to.Tine upgrading done from the intersection of approximately Locust Avenue and PennsylvaniaAvenueto the county line, providing an upgrade in the line for fire protection purposes. We will leave this to the developer's discretion. bhm Attachments J 7L Wimhester 3ire aid Rescue L. A. MILLER, FIRE CHIEF 126 NORTH CAMERON STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 EDDIE M. LILLIS, SR., CAPTAIN PHONE (703) 662-2298 FRANK E. WRIGHT, CAPTAIN FAX (703) 667.0118 TO: Tim Youmans, Planning Director Winchester Planning Department FROM: L. A. Miller __✓/✓, Fire Chief RE: Vangilder Care Center - Proposed Expansion DATE: December 13, 1993 I have reviewed the submitted information relating to the before referenced as well as made a site review. The following comments are based on these reviews. As the property is located within Frederick County primary responsibility for Fire & Rescue Services is Frederick County Station 13, Clearbrook Fire Company. However, as a practical matter a City Fire & Rescue Station has been requested to respond to this facility on a first call basis and due to travel distance is normally first to arrive on the scene.. The physical location of this property creates some potential difficulties as related to apparatus ingress and egress. The ability to ingress and egress may become particularly acute in the event of an incident requiring resident evacuation. Specifically, access concerns are created as the facility is located at the end of a dead end street which must be accessed by a bridge. The second concern relates to the water, supply for fire protection. The water main system and hydrant locations may be inadequate to provide water supply for either built in fire protection systems or fire department operations. I understand the facility is currently served by a 1-1/2° water main/meter and there is no main of significant size extending from Pennsylvania Avenue to the facility. Furthermore, the extension of a main from Pennsylvania Avenue to the facility will result in a dead end main. Jesse Moffett has addressed this issue and has suggested an alternate water supply. I appreciate the opportunity to address concerns as related to this facility. Should there be questions, please contact me. pc: File Submittal Deadline �c'`"� P/C Meeting BOS Meeting APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 1. Applicant (The applicant if the owner X other) NAME: HCMF Corporation ADDRESS: 2965 Colonnade Dr Roanoke, VA 24018-3541 TELEPHONE (703) 774-4263 2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties in interest of the property: Health and Equity Resources Winchester, 3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and include the route number of your road or street) 1011 Pennsylvania Ave. from Rt. 11 North Left on to Jackson Ave. Right, on to Pennsylvania, to end of Road property on Left. 4. The property has a road frontage of 380.01 feet and a depth of 209.76 feet and consists of1,601471 acres. {Please be exact) 5. The property is owned by Health Equity Resources of Winchersster, Inc. evidenced by deed froml)Vangilder's Care Center, Inc recorded 2)Fred Boyce and Brenda Whit6previous owner) in deed book no.1)6632)722on page 1)1222)34,5 as recorded in the records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, County of Frederick. 6. 14 -Digit Property Identification No. ��f -" 0a Magisterial District Stonewall. Current Zoning Residential Performance 7. Adjoining Property: USE ZONING North Residential Residential Performance East Pennsylvania Ave. --------- South Residential Residential Performance West Cumberland Railroad--------- _s -A i+- r..;+-1, +-},o Dlanninn Pant'_ 8 . The type of use proposed is kc— , - w i �-.. -1-- 1-11111 ' --r -- before completing) Convalescent and Nursing Home. 9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be constructed: Proposed 7,474 sq. ft. 24 Bed addition to the main building. Proposed 1,800 s . ft. 6 Bed addition to the two Cottages, This will connect them together. l0. The following are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to both sides, rear and in front of (also across street from) the property where requested use will be conducted. (Continue on back if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this application: (PLEASE LIST COMPLETE 14 -DIGIT NUMBER. NAME 5hockey & Howard and Address Martiansburg Pike Winchester VA 22603 Sons, Inc. - - - -0012-0 Property ID# Property 5400 -OA -00-0011-0 Mr. and Mrs. Jamie Address 191 Lee Ave. Winchester VA 22603 Lupton Property ID# 54000 -OA -00-0029-0 54000 -OA -00-0030-0 Harris & SInders Address 1625 22601 South Loudan St. Winchester VA Property ID# 54A-02-00-0001-0 Company Address 1007 Pennsylvania Winchester VA 2260. Collen Helsey Property ID# City tax Map #1141-1-130 Address Property ID# Address Property ID# 11. Please use this page for your sketch of the property. Show proposed and/or existing structures on the property, including measurements to all property lines. T CDVG(t6 LPOfI'.h nI FvN ADUT oN `� �ITi DN P�lelNS` L\WAIA 12. Additional comments, if any: This proposed contstruction will bring the total number of Beds to 78. The Square footaae will change from 7,947 to around 16_,921.. We are planingto renovate the existing property. When finished the residents will have more recreation space, a new kitchen, a new laundry and a new fresh atmosphere. Also, because the facility is larger it will require an increase in staff, which means more jobs to the local community. I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the governing body of Frederick County, Virginia to allow the use described in this application. I understand that the sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven (7) days prior to the first public hearing and maintained so as to be visible until after the Board of Supervisors' public hearing. Your application for a Conditional Use Permit authorizes any member of the Frederick County Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors or Planning and Development Department to inspect your property where the proposed use will be conducted. Signature of Applicant Signature of Owner Owners' Mailing Address Owners' Telephone No. 460 East 26th Street Suite 1 Erie Pa 16504-2802 814-453-5137 TO BE COMPLETED BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR USE CODE: RENEWAL DATE: '114 v .. 15 15A -24 28 6 Ilk zo 10 b ! J "� 4 46 r A of J S[� ol 81G A X32 G Q`� 2 smoke � 1 51 3 60 4A 59 80 58 A �_ _ 15 k5* CUP #013-93 PIN: 54-A-32 HCMF CORP, M E M O R A N D U M TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Proposal for Lake Centre DATE: January 18, 1994 COUNTY of FRFDFRICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703/678-0682 Mr. Chuck Maddox of G. W. Clifford & Associates has requested time to make a presentation to the Commission concerning the revision of the Master Development Plan and Site Plan for the Lake Centre project located at the corner of Macedonia Church Road (Route 642) and Chinkipin Drive. This property has a current approved MDP and subdivision for a townhouse development. The subdivision plats have never been administratively approved or recorded. The original developer has now sold the tract approved for townhouses to another individual who wishes to put apartment buildings on this site. These proposed apartments are intended to be sold for private ownership. Staff has advised that a new master plan and site plan will be required for this proposal. WWM/slk 9 North Loudoun StI-CC[ P.U. 13o\ 601 Winchcstcr, VA 22601 Winchesicr. VA 12-004 gilbert w, clifford & associates, inc. INCORPORATED 1972 Engineers Land Planners Surveyors Water Quality Analyses Corporate Office: 150C Olde Greenwich Drive • P. O. Box 781 Fredericksburg, VA 22401 • (703) 898-2115 Winchester Office: 200 North Cameron Street • Winchester, VA 22601 • (703) 667-2139 January 3, 1994 Mr. Robert Watkins Frederick County Planning Department P.O. Box 601 Winchester, Virginia 22604 Re: January 12 Planning Commission Agenda Dear Bob, Representatives from our firm would like to discuss informally, the Lake Centre Condos project with the Planning Commission at their January 12th scheduled bi-monthly meeting. You may recall, this site has been approved for 23 townhouses by both master plan and site plan subject to bonding; h ew owner desires to ask for a master plan revision to a changed us of 32 condo units. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, q 9 a C. E. Maddox, Jr., P.E, VP Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. CEM/kf cc Sarkis Satian, Satian Enterprises, Inc. BOARD OF DIRECTORS C `J Thomas J. O'Toole, P. E. Charles E. Maddox, Jr. P. E. Earl R. Sutherland, P. E. C P. Duane Brown, C. L. S. William L. Wright, Laboratory Director /j I 0 --- -- - — JOE NO 9 1 'i U AN' 1994 PROJECT SUMMARY Total Acreage = 3.4113 Acres Existing MDP Density = 6.74 TH's/Acre Proposed MDP Density = 9.38 Condos/Acre N Gilt�crt. W. Clifford ajid Assocjak--,. In(-- 2ngm—,, Lend Planner- Sur�ecOrs 75�-C IJldry (1reenw;0, Dr. 20U NcrtlCe7� r i_ Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401 =Inches mer, `.'irq�nc 2601 FREDERICK COUNM', X1)0 i VIRGINIA MEMORANDUM COUNTY of FREDERICK Dcpartmcnt of Planning and Dcvclopmcnt 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703/078-0682 TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Robert W. Watkins, Planning Director R,/j/l'kl SUBJECT: Public Meeting Procedures DATE: January 21, 1994 The staff will be showing a videotape from VDOT on public meeting procedures for your information. RWW/rsa 9 North Loudoun Slrcct P.O. BoK 001 Winchcslcr, VA 212601 Winchester. VA 212604