HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-12 ApplicationDepartment of Planning and Development
540/665 -5651
v "GN FAX: 5407665 =6395
]738 I�
-August .1.9,'2013;
Mr. Gary Oates.
GreyWolfe, Inc.
1073 Redbud Road
Winchester; VA 22603
REc REZONING #09 =1.2 OF CLEARBROOK RETAIL ,CENTER
Dear Gary:
This letter- serves -to! confirm action taken by - the Frederick County Board' of Supervisors ,at their
meeting ,on August- 1"4, '2013. The Board denied the above referenced request to rezone, 14.53 acres
Trom RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers. The property is
located on Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), 70,0 , feet south of the intersection, with Cedar Hill Road..'
(Route 67.1.), o'.nting.Route 11 and Interstate 81 and 'is identified by Property Identification Number
33= A= 125,in'the. Stonewall Magisterial, District..
Section` 165 `102.04 of -the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum period of 12
months to elap"se'before the consideration of.ariother application for rezoning of substantially the
same land to the sanie zoning district designation.
Please, do not;.hesitate to contact this office if you have any questions regarding the' denial of this
rezoning application:
Sincerely,
Michael T. Ruddy; AICP
Deputy Planning. Director'
cc: . 'Mr. MohebatullA Vahidi, 794 Center Street; Herndon; VA 20170.
Charles S. DeHaven,• Jr., Stonewall District Supervisor
Stan Crockett; Stonewall District,.Plaming Commissioner _ -
Jane Anders on,..Real Estate
Commssioner`of Revenue
- MTR/pd
107 North`'Kent,Street,_Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5600
i.4.
Q96 z -
vq
� C
_
.Winchester, VA 226.03
• 'RE: REZONI.N.G #09=12: OF CLEARBROOK RETAIL CENTER
Dear Gary.
This .letter serves to confirm action taken by the Treder-ick County Board of Supervisors at their ,
meeting on August 14, 201'.3,: The Board denied the. above referenced request to rezone 14.53 acres
from RA `(Rural Areas) District to 92 (General Business) District, with proffers. The property is
L
Gated 'on Martinsbg rg Pike (Route .11), 700 feet south of "the intersection p with. Cedar .Hill Road
Route 67.1 , frontin Route 11 and lnterstate 81 nd i's ;identified b. Pro ert Identification Number
33 -'A 125" in the;Stonewall Magisterial District:
Section 1,65-102 04 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance requires. a minimum period of 12
months; to' elapse before the cons'iderat'ion of another :;application for rezoning of substantially the
same land t6 the same zoning district designation.
Please . .
ase do: not hesitate to contact this office if you "have any ,questions regarding the denial of this
rezonin a lication.
g' pp -
Sincerely;
Michael T! Ruddy,,AICP
Deptity� Planning- Director
cc Mr! Moliebatullah Vahi'di, 794 Center Street, perndon, VA, 2Q170
Ch�arles.�S. DeHaven Jr. Stonewall District .Su ervisor
Stan Crockett , Stonewall Di strict'Plannng`Cornmissoner
Jane' Anderson; Real :Estate
Commissioner of Revenue
MTR/pd
REZONING APPLICATION #09712'
CLEARBROOK RETAIL CENTER
Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors
Prepared: December 18, 2012
(Updated: February S, 2013, August: 2, 2013)
Staff Contact.- Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director
.Reviewed Aetion
Planning Commission: 01/02/13 ,. Public.hearing,beld; Action tabled 45 days
02/20/13- Denial
Board of Supervisors:. 08 /14/13 Pending
PROPOSAL: To rezone 14.53 acres from RA (Rural Areas),.District.to B2.(General Business) District
with proffers.
LOCATION: The property is located 700 feet south on Martinsburg Pike (Route It) of the
intersection'with'Cedar Hill Road (Route 67.1), :fronting Route 11- and Interstate 81.
UPDATE, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSIONFOR THE 08/14/13 BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS MEETING:
At the second_ Planning Commission meeting, for reasons summarized on page 10 of this report, the
Planning Commission recommended denial of this rezoning request. In, general, the Planning
Commission, expressed that the changes in the application didn't eliminate the traffic problems that
currently exist.and'believed that they will be exacerbated.by additional development. They questioned
if the timing was right for this project and whether it was reasonable to plan and'allow a project to be
built which may cause problems and inconvenience to the adjoining, residents.
Prior to the second Planning Commission meeting, February2, 2013, the Applicant revised their proffer
statement (dated January 28, 2013) in an attern t to address input they received during the initial
Planning Commission meeting and.at a follow up meetingwith`the neighbors. Proffer'5.b..and.5.c. were
added to the modified - proffer statement to address future interparcel. access and timing of construction
activities on the site.
Since the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial, the Applicant has revised their proffer
statement, most recentlydated June 5, 2013. The revised proffer statement offers a cash proffer.in lieu
of the Hopewell- Brucetown. intersection design (proffer l .e,).
Previously; following a public hearing on January 2, 2013, at which four-Tneighborsaspoke in opposition
to the request,'The,Planning Commission tabled thesequest for 45 days. This wa&toallow the, applicant
time to clarifythe perceived disconnect between the LOS within the TIA and the maximum daily trips
proffered, and' in addition, to allow time -for'the applicant to carry out more. discussions with the
adjoiningproperty owners on the impacts to their properties. It had also been pointed out by staff that
Rezoning;, #09 -12 Cearbrook Retail'Center 1.
Augusf2, 20.13
Page 2
the Applicant's proffered approach of studying and engineering plans for improvements to the
intersection ofRoute.11 and Hopewell:and Brucetown Road's was similar to the approach proffered
.with Rezoning 18-06 of Woodside Commercial.
The B2, Business General,;laind use proposed in this rezoning 'is,consistent with the Northeast Land Use
Plan. The Applicant has made efforts to address the. impacts associated with this request and the
adjacent properties have been considered to a greater, extentin this.rezoning application when compared
to ;the previously unsuccessful application for this property, Rezoning 409 -07.
With.regards to the transportation impacts, it is recognized that 'the ,Appl`icant has provided proffers
aimed at addressing those, impacts identified in the immediate vicinity of the site. However, the
Commission evaluated if'the Applicant's proffered approach of studying and engineering plans for
improvements to the ;intersection of Route 11 and Hopewell -and Brucetown Roads sufficiently
addresses the impacts identified ..at this intersection. An acceptablclevel ofFservice (Level of Service C
or better), is not .achieved at this,-,intersection as identified in the Applicant's TIA. Ultimately, the
.Planning Commission M,not believe this applficationadequatoly addressed the,impacts associated with
the request.. As stated, the Applicant has since further modified theprofferssto offer a cash profferin the
amount of $75,000 in.aieu of the .Hopewell- Brucetown intersection design.
Fi
of Supervisors would 6e appropriate. The: applicant should be prepared to adeauately address all
Rezoning #09, -12 Clearbrook.Retail Center
August.2, 201
Page 3
•
This report is prepared by -the Frederick County. Planning Staff to provide information to the
Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this
.application. It may also be useful to others interested ,in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues
concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report
Reviewed Action
Planning Commission: Q1 /02/13 Public hearing held;; Action tabled 45 days
02/20/1 -3 Recommended. Denial
'Board of Supervisors: 08/14/13 Pending
PROPOSAL: To rezone 14.53 -acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to 132 (General Business) District
with proffers.
LOCATION: The property is located. 70.0 feet south on Martinsburg Pike (Route 11) of the
intersection with Cedar Hill Road (Route 671), fronting Route 11 and Interstate 81.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 33 -A =125
PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas)
PRESENT USE: Residential and agricultural
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
North: RA (Rural Areas)
South: 133 (Industrial Transition)
East: 133 (Industrial Transition)
RA (Rural Areas)
West: RA (Rural Areas)
User
Residential
Use:
Vacant;
Use:
Vacant -
Residential
Use:
Agriculturalllnterstate 81
Rezoning #09 -1 -2 Clearbrook'Retail Center
August 2; 20:1.3
Page 4
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Dept. of Transportation:. District Planning' has completed our review of the subject TIA (2nd
submittal dated 9/17/12), and find's that our previous comments have been adequately addressed.
Fire. and Rescue: Plans approval .recommended.
Fire Marshal: Plans approved.
Public. Works Department:: W&haveno comments related to the proposed rezoning. Consequently,
Public Works grants our approval, of the proposed rezoning.
Department of 'Inspections: No Comments.
Sanitation Authority: The :Frederick County Sanitation Authority offers comments .limited to the
anticipaied.impact /effect upon the Authority's public, water sanitary sewer system.and the demands
thereon. The parcel, is'inAhe: water and sanitary sewer area covered by the Authority. Based on the
anticipated usage; water °capacity ispresently available.' Sanitary sewer treatment capacity at the waste
water treatment plant is presently available. Conveyance capacity will be contingent on'the applicant
perfoi"'ming.atechnical analysis-of the existingforce main., Both wat&and sanitary sewer facilities are
located within a reasonable distance from this site.
Service Authority: No comments.
Frederick- Winchester Health. Department: No objection if-public waterand sewer are provided and
the sewage disposal system easements are protected by a'20' buffer.
Parks & Recreation: No comment.
Winchester Regional - Airport: The proposed rezoning'requesthas been reviewed and,ii;appears that, it
wil'1 not-impact operations. at the Winchester Regional Airport.
Historic' Resources Advisory .Board: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the
proposal does not significantly impact historic _resources and it is not necessary-to schedule �a formal
reviewAofthe rezoning application bythe HRAB. According to the Rural,Landmarks Survey, there are
no significant historic structures located on the property not are there any possible historic districts in
the vicinity. It was also noted that "the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the
Shenandoah'Valley.does identify a core battlefield within this area.
Frederick County Public. Schools: FCPS offers no comments.
• •
Rezoning 409 -12 Clearbrook Retail.Center
August 2, 2013
Page 5
Frederick County - Attorney: Please see attached letter dated June 26, 2012, from Roderick B.
Williams, County Attorney.
:Transportation: Included within" attach_ ed memo. (page 2) dated June 22, 2012, from Michael T
Ruddy, AICP, Deputy.Planning Director.
Planning Department: Please see attached memo dated June 221 2012; from Michael T. Ruddy, AICP,
Deputy Planning Director.
Planning & Zoning:
1) Site History
The originalFrederick County zoning map (U.S.G.S. Inwood Quadrangle) identifies the subject.
parcels as being zoned A-2 (Agricultural General). The County's agricultural zoning districts
were subsequently combined ,to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an
amendment to °the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding
revision of the zoning,magresulted in the re- mapping.of the subject property and.all other A -1.
and A -2 zoned land: to the RA District.
In 2009, The Board of Supervisors, following a unanimous•recomniendation of denial from the
Planning Commission, denied Rezoning Application #09 -07 for the same property-primarily for
the following reasons. The Commission and Board members expressed concern that
transportation impacts demonstrated by the TIA :for this particular location were not fully
addressed or mitigated by the applicant's proffer. In addition, the project would not provide a
LOS "C" or better at'the two •major intersections on Route ;1 '1„
2) Comprehensive Policy. Plan
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan is -the guide for the future growth of Frederick County..
The 203.0 Comprehensive.P•lan is an official public document that serves as the community's
guide!for making decisions regarding..development, preservation,,public facilities.and other key
compgnents of community" life. Thel primary goal of this plan is to` protect and improve the
living environment. within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies, used to
plan.for-the future physical development of Frederick. County.
:Appendix I, -the' Area.Pl'ans, of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan; sthe primary implernentation
tool arid will be instrumental to'the future planning efforts of the County.
Rezoning' #09142 C1'earbrook Retail Center.
August 2, 2013
Page 6
Land 'Use:
The parcel comprising"this rezoning application is located within the County's Sewer and Water
Service Area (S WSA) and the site'is within the limits of the Northeast.Land Use Plan. The plan
designates the site for business use. 'The B2 zoning request is consistent with the Northeast.
Land Use.Plan.
Site Access and Transportation:
Plans for new development should provide for the right -of =ways necessary to implement
planned road improvements'and.inew roads.shown on-the roadaplan should be�constructed by the
developer when warranted: by the scale, intensity, or impacts of the development. Existing roads
should` be,im I P roved as necessary by adjacent development to` implement the intentions of the
plan.
The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan does include this portion of the
County. The Northeast"Land Use Plan:calls for`Martinsburg Pike to be.improved to a four -lane
facility. Also in the vicinity are identified improvements to the interchange with Interstate 8
and the potential realignment of Brucetown Road, with the road plans identifying a potential
connection north of its, current location, across Route 11 from the proposed access to this site.
The Plan states that, proposed industrial and commercial, development should only occur if
impacted roads function' at Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. The Level of Service
at the nearby Route 11, and _ lopewell Road intersection falls below this expected Level of
Service. The Frederick 'County Bicycle Plan designates Route 11 as a short term designated
route.
The Northeast Land Use Plan discourages individual lot access on the Martinsburg Pike
corridor, encourages inter- parcel connections, and recommends adequate :screening from
adjoining land uses and recommends greater setbacks and buffers and screening along
Martinsburg Pike. Pedestrian accommodations have been addressed with this project with the
construction of a bike and pedestrian path along Route 11.
3) Site Suitability/Environment
The, site- doesnot.contain any environmental; features.thatwould either constrain orpreclude.site
development. There are no- identified areas of steep ,slopes, floodplains or'woodlands. This
area, is also 'known for karst topography. The Frederick County Engineer has previously
identified that a detailed geotechnical analysis will be needed as part of.the detailed site plan
design.
4)� Potential Impacts
The application's; proffer°statement limits thefamount ofacreage -that is available for commercial
development fo 7.5, acres and "further.limits the development.b..y capping the maximum amount
of average daily vehicle trips to 5,734.
Rezoning, #09-12 ClearbrookAetail Center
AugUSc2,.2013_
Page, 7:
Frederick County Transportation Comments:
Mr':- Bishop, Frederick County Transportation Planner; 'has - expressed that the Applicant's
recognition of off -site transportation impacts is appropriate, The Applicant's proffer to provide
engineering services to address "the potential realignment of Hopewell and Brucetown Roads
with Route I 1 is a positive step to addressing the failing,. level of service in this `location.
However, consideration 'should be given to speeding up the, time: frame for completion of this
project to less than.36 months,; In addition, it may be worthwhile,includingAri evaluation-of the
realignment that directly aligns with the access to `this area of commercial development.
'Transportation'had.also commented thatthe Applicant's proffer to contribute a "fixed amount.of
$100,000 towards the construction of a roundabout at this location should a signal .not be.
installed, should ,be evaluated: In cases this amount is insufficient to construct roundabout
intersection improvements, the Applicant should consider constructing this improvement
outright, if warranted.
S) Proffer Statement — Dated April 24, 2012 and revised on October 23.,, 2012
A) Generalized Development-Plan
The Applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan. The Plan identifies the
areas :of development and :recognizes the existing drainfields located on .the property
which serves., the adjacent; residences. Disturbance in and around this area would'be
prohibited consistent with the GDP.
B) Land Use
The application's, proffer statement limits the amount of commercial development to
that which generates;'less than the 5;734; AverageDaily Trips as presented in.the TIA.
The Applicant: further prohibits the- development;of Truck Stops —Retail as defined in
SIC 5541, and Adult'Retail.
The. Applicant has provided additional landscape, screening. above that required by
ordinance, adjacent to the neighboring residential properties..
The ;Applicant has proffered a split, rail fence along Route 11. The, other corridor
enhancement,-proffers maybe considered redundant as the. Applicai t,on the GDP has
'identified-this.as;.ari undeveloped stormwater management area.
C) Access, Management,.,
Access to the property will riot be directly to Route 11. Rather; the adjacent property
will be used to provide inter - parcel accessibility. This property is known as the
Clearbrook Business Center.
Rezoning .#0942 Clearbrook Retail Center
August 2, 2013
Page 8
D) Transportation
The proffer statement provides for right= ofnway dedication along Route 11 and the,
construction of a 12 foot - travel lane across the frontage of the site along Route. l l . It
should be clarified that this improvement would be�extended along the frontage of
the adjacent property to the South which will be4he only access to this 'site as part
of the. initial development of the site.
The application addresses,the intersection, of Route .11. and the site by proffering into a
signalization agreement for .a traffic light -at the intersection. The proffer enables the
Applicant to -apply,a;monetary amount :to this intersection, should a roundabout be the
intersection of choice based on the 'Eastern Road Plan. In case this amount is
insufficient to.construcCroundabout intersection improvements, the Applicant
should consider constructing this improvement outright, if warranted.
The application addresses the intersection.of Route -1 1 and Hopewell Road, Route 672,
by proffering to present the County with a feasibility: study and engineered road plan
for the realignment of Brucetown and Hopewell Roads -at Martinsburg Pike, the general
scope and location ofthe study being depicted on exhibit A of the proffer ,statement.
The Planning Commission should evaluate if this approach sufficiently addresses
the impacts'identified at this intersection.
E) Community Facilities
This application proffers a monetary contribution in,an amount of $0.1,0 per, building
square foot;for Fire and Rescue Services.
STAFF `CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 01/02/.13 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING':
The B2, Business General, land use - proposed in this rezoning is consistent -with the Northeast Land Use
Plan. The,impacts associated with "thi'srequest have. generally been addressed; by the„Applicant and the
adjacent properties have been considered to a greater extent in this rezoning application.
With regards to th_e transportation impacts, it is recognized that the, Applicant, has' provided proffers
aimed at addressing `those impacts identified' in the immediate vicinity of the site_. However, the
Commission,.should evaluate�ifthe Applicant's proffered approach of studying and-engineering plans
for improvements to the intersection of Route 11 and Hopewell and' Brucetown Roads sufficiently
addresses the. impacts identified.at,this intersection. An acceptablelevel ofservice (Level of Service C
or better), is not achieved at'this inte.rsection.as identified in the Applicant's TIA.
Followinz the required public hearing, a recommendation- reQardina, this rezoning application to
the Board of Supervisors, would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately
address ait concerns raised by the Planning Commission.
Rezoning #09-12 Clearbrook.Retail Center
August2;, 2013
Page 9-
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY &.ACTION OF THE 1/02/13 MEETING:
Four adjoining property owners spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning. They believed the
commercial retail center next,to them would devalue their residential properties and negatively•affect
their.qualityof life. Some said their access for the granted easement to the.inter- parcel connector road
Was blocked by neighbors' existing drainfields, driveways; and park. king areas. The residents expressed
concern they would notbe;able to.sell their residentially- zoned;properties because they were surrounded
by.commercial development and they could not afford to rezone their properties to commercial. There were concerns about additional traffic congestion and that-the LOS at Route 11 and Hopewell Road
falls below LOS "C." One property owner believed the traffic signal at Brucetown and Hopewell has
negatively impacted Route 1 I. and has created a situation where vehicles are caught stopped on the
railroad tracksgoing south on Route 11; there were also negative commentsabout the misaligned traffic
signals. on. Route I I at Redbud Road. They did not think'it was practical to install yet another traffic
signal. Concerns were expressed that existing residential. drainfields, as. well as well water, may be
.negatively impacted from the commercial development. Residents said they were not inclined to hook
up to public water and sewer, because it was so costly.
A Commission member raised an issue about the incompatibility between the applicant's estimated
ADT based on peak hour, traffic in 'the TIA and the applicant's proffer statement which limited the
amount ofdaily trips: The issue. was the proffered daily trip generation was a rather high number, but
the TIA was based on about:one tenth.-of that number, resulting in the incompatibility between the two
calculations. The Chairman commented that thetransportdtion impactswere the initial.dilemma for this
property and she asked the applican't'-how this application is attending to those issues brought forward
by the Board of Supervisors. 'The applicant replied this submittal differed from.the original because 'it
uses an inter= parcel connector for access to the property; the access is moved further south on
Martinsburg Pike, away from- the intersection of Cedar Hill `Road and Martinsburg Pike.
Other'questions from.the Commission included the appropriateness of the dollar amountproffered for
the traffic signal; verif cation that any modification to the MDP would, require re- submittal for review
by the Planning Commission; how the ,proffered limitation on theADT would be implemented on the
site; and the appropriateness of the applicant's approach of proffeting,a feasibility study and engineered
road plan for the realignment of Bruceiown and Hopewell Roads at Martinsburg Pike.
A motion was made,; seconded, and unanimously passed -to table the rezoning;appl cation for 45 days" n.
order to allow ,the applicant time to clarify the disconnect "between the LOS within the TIA and the
maximum daily trips proffered; and, in addition, to allow time for the- applicant, to carry out more
discussions with the adjoining property owners on the impacts to their properties.
(Note, Commissioner Oates abstained from all discussion and voting on this application.
.Commssioners'Crockett and Lemieux were absent from the meeting
Rezoning . #.09 -I2 Clearbrook Retail Center
August -2,`201'3,
Page 1.0
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY &ACT,ION OF THE 2/20/13 MEETING:
Five - adjoining- property owners came forward to speak in opposition to the:rezoning. Most of them did
not see an improvement in,the revised application and proffers over the last version. They believed the
.financial, burden of the offered easements fell :upon the adjoining residents: Some did not want to
connect to County sewer and water services because of the cost. Concerns- remained about access for
the applicant's parcel, pr marily;how and where it would be achieved. Adjoining residents were
concerned about the negative impacts from business development to their quality of fife. A request to
the applicant for a dump site to be removed was not, accomplished: They, were concerned about the
impacts * of increased traffic, congestion in an area that already had .traffic- problems. They were
concerned that no specific-types of businesses were designated and` they. speculated the applicant only
wanted to sell the - property 'after it was rezoned. They questioned the logic of potential customers
driving through 133` -zoned property to get to B2 -zoned property.
The applicant's representative explained p. lained that legal access has been established for this, property through
a previous rezoning of a parcel io the south (.Clearbrook Business Center): with proffers on record. He
roffer allow
said the
p s this applicant to come across thepropertywith a shared inter - parcel connector
out to Martinsburg'Pike and this is what the applicant intends to do: If the Clearbrook Business Center
does not develop beforeAhe,ClearbrookRetail Center, the owner of the Clearbrook Retail Center would
build the Wes -Luke Drive connection and the Lauren Way connection.
'Members of'th -e. Commission believed the. developer had cleared up some of the inconsistencies in the
TIA, but the clarifications .of those discrepancies didn't eliminate the traffic problems that currently
exist,and which will be exacerbated'by additional development. They questioned if the timing was right
for this project and whether it was reasonable to plan and allow a.project to be built which may cause
problems and inconvenience' to the adjoining residents. Other Commission members said. to some
degree, even with the limitations of..the project, this rezoning was an.open- ended land use equation; it
will have a.significant impact on existing residents and.itwas premature,;given.the conditions discussed
so .far; particularly with regard to transportation. A Commission. member stated that when considering
this project and how the use may interact with existing residents, and;also how it will contribute.to the
conditions and the surrounding community; the Commission. needs to know more -to be able to feel
comfortable and.confident with supporting development of this siw at this'point.in timer It was thought
it maymake adifference in 'the future to have abetter idea_ of what particular usewas,anticipated at this
location.
A motion was" made,,,seconded,:and passed by a majority vote to recommend- denial of the rezoning
application. The majority vote was:-
YES' (TO'RECOIV MEND DENIAL): Mohn, Triplett, Madagan, Thomas, Wilmot, Crockett, Crosen, Unger
NO. Kenney, Manuel, Ambrogi
ABSTAIN: Oates
Rezoning 9,09 -12' Clearbrook Retail Center
August-2, 2013
Page I 1
Follo.winz the reguired'publichearinQ„ a decision, regardine this rezonino•application by the Board
of Supervisors •would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all
v
CD
0
M1 (Industrial, Light,Dlstrict)
M2 (Industrial, General District)
MH1 (Mobile,Home Community District)
MS (Medical Support District)
OM (Office - Manufacturing Park)
R4 (Residential Planned Community.D'istiict)
R5 (Residential Recreational Community District)
RA (Rural Area District)
RP (Residential Performance District)
f4 s
f:
It \-
{. �4 J
REZ #09 -12
Clearbrook Retail Center
14.53 acres from RA to B2
PINS:
33 -A 125
Note:
Frederick County Dept of
Planning Development
t
107 N Kent St
1'07 N
Suite 202
Winchester, VA 22601
540 - 665 - 5651 -
Map Created: December
10, 2012
Staff: mruddy'
0 0.0425 0.085 0.17 Miles
(l GREYWOLFEr INC.
-114 OZ., 10.73'.REDBUD ROAD • WINCHESTER, VA 22.603
(540)166,-Y-2001 • (546)'545-4001 FAX
GREYWOLFEINt AOL.COM `r
Michael Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director June 17, 2013'
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, VA 22601
Subject: Clear Brook Retail Center
Mr. Ruddy,
The letter is to inform you'the application for the rezo "nin,g is ready to move
forward with a public hearing before the Board of Supervisors. Attached is a revised
proffer statement that offers. a cash proffer in lieu of the Hopewell- Brucetown
intersection design.
Thank you,
Val
Gary R. Oates, LS -B, PE
GreyW Ife, Inc
J U N 1 7 2013
Rezoning
Property:
Record Owner:
Project Name:
Original Date of Proffers:
Revised Date Proffers:
.Magisterial District:
•
RZ # 08 -12
Area: 14.53 acres
Tax Parcel 33 -(A) -125
Mohebatullah Vahidi
Clear Brook Retail Center
April `24, 2012
October 23, 20.12
January18, 2013
June 5,2013
Stonewall.
Pursuant to Section, 15.2- 2296.Et. Seq. of the Code of Virginia, 1.950, as
amended, and the provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance with respect . to
conditional zoning, the undersigned owner hereby offer the following proffers that in the
event the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall approve Rezoning,
Application #08 -12 for rezoning of 14.53 -acres from the RA District to General Business
(B -2) District, development of the subject property shall be done in conformity wiih'the
terms and conditions set, forth herein, except to the extent that such terms and conditions
may be subsequently amended or revised by the owner and such are approved by the
Board of Supervisors in accordance with the said Code and Zoning Ordinance. In the
event that such rezoning is not granted, then these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn
and have no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon this owner and their
legal successors, heirs, or assigns.
The Property is more particularly described as the land conveyed to Mohebatullah
Vahidi from Akhter Sayef and. Gous Ahmed as recorded in the Frederick County Circuit.
Court Clerk's Office as instrument #0500.12825 dated June 15, 2005. ,
•
Proffers:.
1. Transportation
a. Access -
i. Access to the Property from Martinsburg ?ike (US Route l 1) shall be
limited to the inter - parcel connector as proffered in rezoning #01 -06 of
the "Clear Brook Business Center ". The connector will be built to
VD'OT standards, conform to the Frederick County Comprehensive
Plan, and be dedicated to the County for public use.
ii. The owner hereby proffers to enter into a signalization agreement with
VDO.T for a traffic light at the entrance of the "Clear Brook Business
Center" and Route 11. The fight will be installed at the expense of the
owner at such time as VDOT determines it is necessary; however, no
>
sooner than a Master Development Plan has been approved.
1. The Frederick County Comprehensive Plan indicates this
intersection may become a round -about in the future. If the
traffic light has not been installed when sufficient right of way
has been acquired by the County for.the round - about; then the
owner will apply $100,000 to the construction of the,-round-
about in lieu of `the traffic light. This $100,000 will be given
upon request of Frederick County; however, no sooner than
receiving an occupancy_ permit for the first building constructed,
on the Property.
b. Turn Lane and Pedestrian Access
i. The owner hereby proffers to construct a 12' lane onto Martinsburg
Pike, Route 11, along the site road frontage. This +/ -2317' long lane
` will be' built to. VDOT standards. This will be butlt'prior to receiving
anyfinal occupancy permits on site..
ii. The owner hereby proffers to construct a 10' paved hiker /bike trail
along the Property's frontage with Route 11 and along the proposed
inter- parcel road.: This will be built prior to receiving any final
occupancy permits on site:
2.
c. Interparcel connections
i. Upon construction of the inter- parcel connector with "Clear Brook
Business Center ", the owner will allow all adjoining properties an
inter- parcel connection via private ingress - egress easements through'
driveways or travel aisles within parking areas. The easement locations
will be determined subject to approval of the.Frederick County .
Transportation Planner. This purpose of this proffer is to allow the
adjoining properties the ability to rezone in the future and eliminate.
their direct access to Route 11 and Cedar Hill road (Route 672) per the.
Frederick County Comprehensive,Plan and VD.OT Access
Management Standards. Note proffer 5.c.
d. Right of Way and Easement Dedication
i. The owner hereby proffers to dedicate to the Commonwealth of
Virginia a strip of land twenty feet (20') in width along the entire
frontage of the Property along the Martinsburg Pike (Route 11) Right
of Way. This dedication will take place prior to any site plan approval
or upon, request of Frederick County.
ii. The owner hereby proffers a 20' drainage, pedestrian, and utility
easement along the frontage of Martinsburg Pike, Route 11, to
Frederick County. The owner will. retain the right to place the
proffered split rail fence (see item 6 -A) and monument sign (see item
6 -C) within this easement. This dedication will take place prior to any
site plan approval or upon request of Frederick County.
e. Contributions for Road Improvements in recognition of off-site transportation
impacts.
i. The owner hereby proffers $75,000 to Frederick County prior to the
fir st. occupancy permit. This money may be used for Hopewell and
Brucetown Road intersection alignment or any other transportation
need as determined by the County.
3
2. Fire & Rescue — Monetary Contributions
a. The owner hereby proffers a cash contribution to Frederick County for Fire
and Rescue purposes, of $0.10 per building square foot to be disbursed to the
Frederick County Fire and Rescue Department, to be paid prior to each; final
site plan approval. The term "building square foot" shall be the combined.
floor area for each story.
3. The owner hereby proffers that the Average Daily Trips shall not exceed 5;734 as
presented in the accompanying Traffic lmpact. Analysis by Stowe, Engineering, PLC.
4. The owner hereby proffers that the following uses shall be prohibited on the Property:
a. . "Truck Stops- Retail" as defined in SIC 5541. All other uses within STC Code
5541 are acceptable_ when all adjoining properties no longer are zoned-RA.
This does not apply to properties west of I -81 or east of Route 11.
b. Adult Retail
5. Considerations for neighboring residential properties:
a. The owner hereby proffers to install an additional row of evergreen trees for a
total of four rows in all areas required to have a "full screen zoning buffer"
per the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance at the time of site, plan approvals.
b. The owner proffers that outdoor construction activities will not begin prior
7:30 AM and will conclude no later than 7:30 PM.
c. The owner proffers an inter-parcel connection' with the neighboring residential-
Jots when those properties are rezoned to commercial and the drainfield
easements shown on the GDP are extinguished.
6. .Corridor Enhancements to be completed by prior to the first occupancy permit.
a,, The owner will construct a split rail fence along the road frontage of Route 11.
b:" The owner. will not, allow any parking spaces or outdoor storage to be
constructed within 50' of Route 11. Any required fire lanes within:this area
will be grass paved.
c. The owner will.require each building facade along Route 11 to be constructed
.of wood, vinyl, glass, masonry, or stucco. However, metal siding will be
allowed within the business park and on all sides not facing Route 11.
M
7. The Generalized Development Plan by GreyWolfe, Inc.., is attached to, and hereby
made part of, this proffer statement. Soiree aspects of this plan to note are:
a. The preservation of the neighboring drainlield easement surrounded by a non-
'disturbance buffer twenty -feet wide. This buffer will remain in place until
such time as an easement. may be extinguished.
b. The prop_ osed road parallel to I -81 labeled Wes -Luke Drive shown on the
GDP as depicted by the 2030 Frederick County Comprehensive Plan.
The conditions proffered above shall be binding upon heirs; executors,
administrators, assigns,; and successors in the. interest of the, owner and. owner. In the
event the Frederick County Board,of;Supe'rvisors grants thise rezoning and accepts the
conditions; the proffered conditions shall apply io the land rezoned in addition to other
.requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code.. and Ordinance.
Respectfully Submitted:
By: .� -W44W 6 = a-/ 3
Mohebatullah Vahidi Date
Commonwealth of'` i.rginia,
City /County of /0 y Dour.) To Wit:
The foregoing instrument was,acknowledged before me this J,-), day of ,20
By 0 061�-Tu��A6 Vq 61 -0
N tary Pub is
my Commisslon Expires_.
JENNIFER RIGALT
NOTARY PUBLIC
COM,MONWEALTM OF VIRGINIA
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JAN. 31, 2017
COMMISSION4 7539102
5
���
11�� Q
Cs�
•
M.
m
Clear gook �eta�l Ce�n�ter
G r�eywo f�e, in
A'
v PnP a P d Development P lan
n and Coul r
and urve, i
1073 Redbud Road
- 200. W nchester, /A.22603 540
oa o
ID
NJ
GreyWolfeinc @aol.com (540),545 =400
Y
i
'.l
I
i
I
AMENDMENT
Action:°
PLANNING COMMISSION- February 20, 2Q 1;3 - Recommended Denial
BOARD OF SUPE'RV'ISORS August 14,.20;13 ❑ APPROVED; ❑ DENIED
AN' ORDINANCE AMENDING
"THE ZONING-DISTRICT`1VIAP'
REZONING #.09 -12 OF CLEA.RBRO.OK RETAIL CENTER
WHEREAS;.Rezoning #09 -12 of Clearbrook Retail Center; "submitted by Gre 4Wolfe, Inc.,, to rezone
14.53 acres from RA (Rural.Areas) District to B2 (Business G°eneral)kDis rice for'Commercial Retail', use;
with proffers dated October 23, 2012', last revised, on, June -5`, 2013,: was considered. The property is
located on'Martirisburg Pike ;'(Rt: 11),. 700 feet south of the; intersection with Cedar Hill. Road (Rt. 67 1),
fronting Route 11, and I =9L The, property is further identified with P.LN. 33 -A -125 ;in the Stonewall
Magisterial District.
WHE.R.EAS, the Planning COrnmission,held a pubtic hearing on this rezoning on January 2, 2013, and
tabled the request krl 45; days,,,and held a public: meeting .on;February 20,, 2013; and recommended
denial of this request; and
WHEREAS'°the.B'oard of Supervisors -held a public hearing. on th s rezor rig on August 14,201'3.; and
'WHEREAS., the, Frederick U6unty 1Boardaof'S'upervisors finds the, approval!of this rezoning; -to be in
PoliesPi interest of the pulil,c health, sa, fety, wet "fare; and in, conformance with, the Comprehensive
Y
NOW,,'THERE-FORE,BE:.,IT O=RDAINED liy'the Frederick. County;Board.of Su p ervisors that
Chapter 165 of ahe Frederick County ,Code Zoning, ;is amended to. revisetithe• Zoning Distr "ict Map. to
- rezone 14,53 ,acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (Business .General) District, `for Commercial
.Retail use. Thesconditio isv01untarily .proffered' in writing by'.ihe applicant and -the, property owner are
attached.
{ f
This ordinanc - shall'be na effect .on the date 4 adoption..
P;asse'd this,l,4th day. of_Au ust,.2013 by the
following recorded rote:
• • y g
Richard. C. Shickle, Chairman Gary A: Lofton
I
{
Robert A. Hess Robert W: Well's;
Gene E. Fisher Charles S.:DeHaven, Jr.
Christopher E. Collins
3
PDRes #`17- B,
A COPY ATTEST
John R Riley, J,r;
Frederick Couniy, Administrator,
Mike Ruddv
From:
R'od''Williams
Sent:.
Thursday'. Jul y'11.,.20131:1.1 PM
To.:
'Gary Oates'
C,c:
Mike Ruddy
Subject:
RE Clearbrook Retail Center Rezoning"
Gary; -
realize that I still ,needed to close theJoop on this. I have reviewed the 'revision andit; is
legally sufficient as,a.;proffer statement'.
Rod
Roderick B. Williams
County Attorney'
County of Frederick, Virginia
107 North Kent Street, 3rd Floor
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Telephone:. (540) 722 -8383
Facsimile- (540) 667 -0370
E =mail rwillia'a- co.frederick.va.us.
From Mike Ruddy
Sent: Thursday, June 20;,2013; 4:25 PM
To: 'Gary Oates'
Cc: Rod Williams
Subject :, Clearbrook. Retail Center Rezoning
Gary.
Thanks for the letter informing us that the above referenced rezoning application'is ready to!move forward with a public
hearing ih front of the Board' of Supervisors. By copy of this email', I am forwarding,a copy of the revised proffers to' Rod
Williams, County Attorney, for fis review of the minor change in'the proffer statement. At thistime, the August 14
Board of "Supervisors meeting .will be the next available public hearing:meeting:this request could be scheduled
Thanks. -
Mike.
2
.f
Rezoning:` RZ I# Oq' -,12 .
Property; Area: 14.53 acres
Tax Parcel 334A).7425° _
Record Owner: Mohebatullah, Vahidi
Project Name Clear Brook Retail Center ".;
Original, Date of Proffers:, April 249 2012-
Revised.Date Proffers: October 23, 2012
r
January 28, 2013
1Vlagsterial District: Stonewall
Pursuant to Section,,! 5.2 -2296 Et. Seq, 'of the Code of Virginia, 195.0 as
amended, and the provisions of the Frederick °County Zoning Ordinance with respect to , :>
conditional zoning, the undersigned owner hereby offer the following proffers that in the'
event the Board. of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall, approve Rezoning,
Application #0.8_42 for -.rezoning of ,14.53 -acres from the RA District to , General Business
(B -2) District; development of the `sul j'ect,property shall be done: in conformity -with the
terms and conditions set Torth here'i`n, except to the extent that such terms and :conditions
may be subsequently amended or revised. by the owner and such. are" approued,`by the
Board of Supervisors in accordance with the said Code and Zoning Ordinance..In the =`
event that "such rezoning is not granted, then -these proffers shall be deemed- withdrawn
- and.have no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be; binding upon this owner an
their:
leant ,
cnr.reccorc heirs or.. aceionc•
- -• .. � � y
P. Interparcel connections
i. Upon construction of the inter- parcel connector with "Clear Brook
Business Center" -the owner, will allow all adj oinin g properties :an
inter =parcel connection. via private ingress - egress; easements through
driveways or travel 'aisles °within parking areas. The easement' locations. -
will be determined,subject to •approval of the Frederick County,
Transportation Planner. This purpose: of this proffer is to allow 'the -
adjoining ,propert'ies `the, ability to. "rezone in the future and eliminate
their direct access tor.Route 11 and Cedar Hill road (Route.:672) per the
Frederick County Comprehensive Plan and VDOT Access
Management Standards.
.
d Right•of`Way °and Easement _
_ t Dedication _ r
i. They owner" hereby pr p offers' to dedicate to the Corimoriwealth of
Virginia a strip of land twenty :feet (20'') in width along the entire.
. g y Property
o p y_ g Martinsburg Pike (Route, Right,
of Way. This d d at on will take place prior o any site p lan approval
al
r.
or upon request of'FrederickCounty.
ii. The `.owner hereby proffers 'a,20' drainage; pedestrian, and utility
easement, along the fr`ontagetof Martinsburg Pike, Route a, to
Frederick County. The ownerwill retain the right to place the '
proffered.spl t rail fence (see item 6 =A) and rnonument;sign (see `item: ,
6 -C) within this easement: This dedication will take! place - prior. to any
site plan approval or upon% request of Frederick County. -
e. Contributions Tor Road Improvements in recognition of off -,site transportation
impacts. The .engineering services will begin prior to the approval of first site
plan or upon request by Frederick County; whichever, comes first; ,and be
completed within 36 months.
i_. The owner hereby proffers to present the. County with a Transportation "
Feasibility Study and Engineered Road-,Plans for thexeal 'gnment of
Brucetown and Hopewell Roads (Route 672) at Martinsburg Pike. The
design, will extend 300' south on Martinsburg.Pike from the
intersection with Hopewell Road; and be bounded by the Interstate -
Ramps to the west,, Winchester and Western Railroad to the north and
'the Clear Brook Fire, Station to the east, and is subject to.approval. by
VDOT.. A diagram of this area,for the. 'intersection d'esign'is', atta hed.
and labeled as exhibit «A "'
3'
2. 'Fire & Rescue — ,Monetary Contributions
a.. The owner hereby a cash contribution to Frederick County fofFire
and Rescue purposes,. of $0.10 per building square foot -to be disbursed to the
Frederick County Fire and Rescue Department, to be paid prior to each Ainal `
site -plan approval: The term "building ,square foot" shall be the combined:
floor area for each story.
3., The owner hereby proffers that the Average Daily. Trips shall not ,exceed'5,734 as
presented in the accompanying Traffic Impact. Analysis by Stowe Engineering;, PLC'..
4: The owner hereby proffers that the „.following uses shall be prohibited on the Property:
a. "Truck Stops - Retail''' asl def"ned.in SIC: 5541.All other uses within "S1.0 Code
= 5541 are acceptable, when all adjoining: properties .no longer are, zoned- R_ A: .
This does not, apply to properties west of I =81. or east of Route 11.;;
b: Adult Retail
5. Considerations -for neighboring residential. properties
a. The owner proffers roffers to install an additional,row of evergreen.trees! fora.
-°
total of four rows in,all areas required to have a "full'screen.zoning buffer”
per the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance at the time of site plan:approvals:
b. The owner proffers that outdoor construction activities will not'begin prior'
7:30 AM and "will conclude no later than 7:3`0 PM.
e. The owners proffers an inter- parcel connection with the neighboring
residential lots when those properties are rezoned. to commercial': and the;
drainfeld easements shown, on the G'DP are extinguished. "
°6. Corridor Enhancements. to be completed by pr "ior"to the first occupancy permit. .
a. The owner- will construct a split rail fence along the road frontage,'of Route .1.1,, =
b. The owner will not allow" any parking spaces or outdoor storage ao'be.
constructed within 50 of:Route I1..Any require - fired fire lanes; within this area.
will be grass' paved.
c. The owner will require each building facade along Route 1.1 to be constructed
of wood, vinyl, glass, masonry, or stucco However .metal siding will be
allowed within the business park- and on all sides not facing Route 11,.,
s
t.�
i
VA• - -
z \
\\
VA
6 � \
W.
- w
02
1
;r !�i r..
Impact, Statement
For consideration of - Rezoning the. lands for the
Clear Brook Retai• Center
8.ton.ewafj,'Nj-ag1'Steri'a1 District
Frederick County, Virginia
April 24,'20'12
Tax Map Number
3340,12-5
-Total Nrela- 14.51 acres
Owner of Record;
MoKebatullah Vdhi , diL
794 Cenfer Street
Herndon, VA 20,1i'70
(703) 471 -0801 ofc'
Contact:,
.Gary .R. Oates, LS-B, PE
Grey Wolfe, Inc.
1073; Redbird Road
Winchester,, VA 2260J�
(5.40).667 -2001 . - bf(
(540) 545-4001 fax
S
Sbrroundin'g: Properties
The site' i's bounded by Interstate 8;1 to the west and Cle_ar,Brook Business Center;
(B -q`) to the ;south.. The northern, portion of the Property i bounded - by residential lots
fronting ,CedarHill. Road (Rt.671)'and two residential lots' and Martinsburg Pike (Route
11) to the, east. All parcels are i °ntended to become .commercial` as indicated by the
Comprehensive Plan.
Traffic ,Impact and Analysis
Report by ,Stowe Engineering is available upon request if not already provided:
Sewer Conveyance and Treatment.
The.FCSA has 0" sewer force main along Route 11.71 s'retail- commercial =
development is expected er
to.genate 1_30 gallons /day /1000 sf'for a total of-115,600 bpd.
The applicant will build a, sewe' pump station to be dedicated to the FCSA -if the
Authority deems it necessary. Otherwise, if there, area limited number of users,; they will
'install ,individual grinder pumps `to be maintained privately.
Water Su
The FCSA,`has a :1,2" water, main along Route 11. This, development `is expected to
generate 130 gallons /day /1000, sf for a total of 1%5 7600 :gpd.
Drainage
The stormwater runoff drains to 'Martinsburg Pike to the east. The applicant will
be.reduired to °irriplement'. $'MP's and other devices to meet the Commonwealth. of
Virginia's requirements as required by D:CR.
Solid Waste Disposal
The Civil :Engineering Reference Manual, 4.`f' edition, uses 'a, rate of 5.4 cubic
yards per 1;000 square feet 'of floor.area. A 1.20,000 sf development will yield. 648 cubic
yards per year. The- solid waste will be transferred to the Frederick County Landfill,
Facility'by-private, li'cense'd commercial carriers..
Historical. Impact
ThereL are; no historically significant structures or features present.
Educational Impact
This ,development will not create additional "students for the schools.
7
N � �
Vd f006-S65 (065) wooyoeaoujojjoMA-q
dO f00Z L99 (Ob5) E09ZZ V/1 '-Jalsayou!M Ue azi paaua �dJ Uc9Lt1dO1c9Ac9(7 p .� D �peob pngpoa FLOI -"
6uilinsuo' pue 6uiAan-inS pue�
':)ul aajuaD #eJay yooig aaa /j J
Q U t
Po lull
f -"'r
1
:2
I
I
I �
I I
I�
I�
Cr
2
ti
h
C
Z
I
I I
I
4
I�
1�
O
x
z
0
Cl
I
/O
I �
1
I
I _ `
1
�
W �
I
1
m
� r
�
h
Woo
'2
Q�
I
I
i
��
c
L
.J
c7
r
v
v
4
I
I '1
u '
' I
1
I
C
C
e((
J
0
,1
1 ,
� r
�
I
1 �
v
v
4
I
I '1
u '
' I
1
I
C
C
e((
J
0
I
COUNTY' of FREDERICK
DepmenoPaart d Development
540/6,65-5651
FNX ,540/665= .6395
TO: Gary Oates.
GreyW61fe; •Inc.:
FROM: Michael `T. Ruddy, AICP
a}
r}Pn�w L�lrector
RE Rezoning Cmme
onts' Vahid:i — Clearbrook Retail Center Rezonin g
DATE: June 22; 2012
The following comments are offered regarding the Vahidi, — Clearbrook _Retail, Center,
:
Rezoning Application. This .
is are a nest to rezone 14,.53 acres from 'RA, (Rural Areas) to
Bo B (. usiness', General) with; - Proffers. The review is' generally' based upon the proffer
statement dated April 24-,,.;20,1'2, and the Impact .Analysi's Statement also dated April 24,
20'12
Prior to formal' :submission to the County
review ab ' p lease ensure that these com
ments and 'all
comments are, adequately
addressed. At--am in'imum, a letter descr.bing
how each of the .agencies and their comments have Been, addressed should be inc) udedas
Part of the .submission. -
General'
DIAaSe . "' L.. that ;all th� n( cwou; ` app
lication maieria'�S u c Jii'Ui j.- -teU w'xtll
- y ,
application: Considefineluding the additional Parcel Containm the existing.
2'. The' submission fee for" this application would total $11,453;0'0, based upon
acreage of 14'.'5'3 acres; ;plus ithe appropriate;;amount forxpublic. hearing signs.
Land'Use
T)
The 2030 Comptehensive ;Plan and the Northeast Frederick Land. Use Plan:
provide guidance. on, the `future devc1- , Ont of the property: A PP end Y;.Lineludes
,
the Northeast 'Land Use Plan as an approved, Area Plan.
2) The,,roperty�is located',within the SW-'SA.
3;) The: 2030 Comprehensive Policy Plan., identifies the general area surrounding this
property with °a commercial land use designation. , in general, the proposed
commercial 'land use designation for this property, is consistent with this
commercial _land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan.
107 North: Kent-Street, Suite 202':
Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 ..
'Vahi'di Cl'earbrook`Retail' Center Rezoning Comments
June -22, 2012,
Page. .2
Impact Anal lysis ,S:tatement�
Please address the following,: items from the Impact; Analysis Statement prepared .for "this
Application.,
t) The Impact Analysis states 'that 'there are existing drainfields in easements; for
neighboring properties ':that will be left untouched. This is also depicted' on the
Generalized Development; Plan.
i. This preservation should be addressed in the .proffer statement text.
H. The Generalized, Development Plan_ should be incorporated
specif cally into- te proffer statement.
Transportation
The following transportation: comments have been provided by John Bishop, County
Transportation Planner, and should be considered as the County Staff s,`positiori on .this
component of the :rezoning.,
y g
1;, Why would the, Applicant full fund a, traffic si nal' ,(proffer. l,a, :ii), but only
contribute 1.,00,000�ta.the roundabout. This needs to be equal value, or they could
just cons&u:cvit.outr ght _
1 I
" think the - proffer -to desig n ihe4foadway improvements at Bracetown Hopewell is,
s:
a good
one, but ;I'd like additional language that they would design through
VDOT approval „
Proffer Statement _
,
1�') Exhibit A — a diagram'for- the area for the intersection design should be provided
with, the proffer sta'temenf. =
2) The proffer, statement, would preferably 'read "to Frederick 'County for Fire abd
Rescue Purposes''.
In conclbsion,, please ensure that the above comments, and those offered by the reviewing
agency, are, addressed:
GREYWOLFE, INC.
iQ 540E ESTER, VA 226,03
DBUD ROAD • W�INGH ,
( ) 6'67- 20.01 •� (540).;54,5 - 4001 "FAx
Cj GREYWOLFEINC@AOL.COM �n "
Mike Ruddy Fredrick County Planning 0ctober:16, 2Q12"
107 North Kent Street
`Winchester, VA 22601
Subject; "Clear Brook Retail Center
Mr. Ruddy;
This into provide -a written response to your'comments.from June, 2,2, 201 2
Although ,I resolved these with John. Bishop and yourself verbally, 1 thought a written.
response for th:e files would be appropriate.
Impact .Statement
The GDP and d.rainfie'id easement preservation. have 'been ad;ded.to` the .proffers'. ..-
Transportation
9 9
2. The fu'Ily funded li ht si "nal for this intersection was estimated to be $100;OQO;by
the traffic engineer since'this is a simple "Tee," intersection. That is way "the,
proffer offers :a $100.,0.00 contribution for the alternative `round -a ,bou.t
The language to ,insure the design is approved by VD;OT has -been, added to-,the
proffer.:.
Proffer Statement
4: `Ekhibit A has: been added to the proffers.
9'
funds has been 'corrected-,
5. The wording, for 'the Fire and Rescue fun_ -
Thank you,
Gary .. `Oates, LS =B', :FE
Gre olfe, .Inc
r
i OCT 1 8 2012 ,
z
FHc
Pl /ai! tr� �E�OUNfIEII�T
__ .._ ..
June 26, 2012!
VIA 'FACSIMILE =(540) 545- 40.0.1— AND REGULAR MAIL
COUNTY of FREDERICK
I
Roderi&,B.'Williams
County Attorney
540/722-8383
,Fax, 540/6617070,
rw,i_l1_ia@co.fredefick._va:us,
Gary R. Oates, LS-B,"PE
Greffolfe, Inc--
1073 Redbud Road
Winchester, Virginia 22603
'
Re: Application,
33 -A-125(l
91 p ation, Parcel Number he "Property "),
Owned by Moh,014tullah Vahidi — Proffer St;A,ementdated' April 24,.2GJ2-
Dear Gary:
You have sLibmittedtlo Frederick County for revibwwa ptoposedproffer statement dated
April 24, 2012 the "Proffer. Statement" ) for the ,propos-ed r6zohffi of 14.53 acres, constituting,
property of Mohebatullah, Vahidi:,; Parcel Identification Number 3'3- A-125, rorn -the; RA (Rural
Areas),'District'to the,_132 (General Business) District, in the Stonewall Magisterial District-. 'I
have now reviewed the Proffer Statement and it is my, opinion ,that theProMr Statement, would
beAriz; form 10 meet, the requirements of 'the Frederick. County Zoning Ordinance and the Code
of Virginia, and would bele&Ily sufficient as a,, proffer ',statement;,subjQc.t, to the,followirig'.-
comrhenN*
1. The term"Proffer Statement; should generally. be
_4pp
.,Ijc
within the text of., the Pro,f
changed d
ge... to "owner 'This m An updated prac ice, to ensure clarity with respect'to the
fac,t,thiit-the proff6r obligations are those of the owner, and not of the applicant-, and
-'!a d
fuivW,i'ththe an
2. For clarity,,-fliroughotit thO'Proffer Statement, the best practice would be to referlto the
gropefty,proposed to be rezoned, as the "Yroperty". instead of variously as "the
subjedt-prbpertie&"';. "this: property", "the 14.53 acre propert"', and the like.
y
31,
Proffer fi.q:ii.,:Concerriillg the,, scenario, of the $ I..KOQ,000- proffer -for the construction
of a, r
- jundAbout, the P , roffer should use u.more.definite triggering. event, such as
issuance,,of,a buildihg�permft, rather than "after the first, buildifig:is constructed".
4. Proffer Lb,.ii. — Thid Proffet'should state; a defihite:time that the trail ,construction
obligatidii will Vest. Also, it rnay be helpful: to clarify that the'trai'l construction Will,
be along, the Propef`tv' so frontage along; Route:I I and thd inter-parcel road.
107 North ,Kent Street Winchester I 260'1
Irg'inia! 2
U
'Gary R. Oates;, LS- B,..PE
Juni :26, 201'2
Page' 2
5. Proffer -1,.d c,= The Proffer should state,a ,definite time that the easement dedication.
will occur ; .
6. Proffer 1.ea. —This °Proffer refers to ari.exhibit.fegardingjhe Route l,l /Hopewell
RoadBrucetown Road,intersection, but I did not,see such an exhibit among the
materials I received. The: exhibit would need' to be included with the Proffer"
'Statement.
7. Proffer 4.a, —The Proffer - should clarify regarding whether. the condition is lifted
upon the first to occur of al adjoining properties no'longersbeing zoned RA or all
l
adjoining properties no' longer,contaming resident al use. Also,
the Proffer should
Clarify regardirig«the'lengih.of an y lapse required before aproperty is considered as
r ;;,_. �i, . coffer might clarify°that'the
no longer c titainingt a resi enliar use. r inll�.y, lltf M _
condition does .not involve any properties located.to the west .of.Irite "rstate 81.
8: Proffer. 6.a. — The Proffer, should clarify,re,garding .., th. rthe' fence will be just
along e Route -1. 1 frontage or also -the internal road frontage,
n a the
to the. adjoining properties listed' n the; materials you -have provided-,
9: In ad
notification of the rezoning applcati °on, if the application is filed; will also need,to be
sent to thef owners of any ro ernes across Interstate V 8'1 from the Property. See Va.
- y p- p _ -_
Code § 1 =5.2- 2204,(B) (requiring notice to owners "of all abutting property and
property immediately` across °,the street or road'from the property affected").
I have not reviewed the gsubstance of the proffers .as to `whether the proffers are ;suitable
and appropriate: for this specific development, as, it is. my ,understanding that that reviewwill be
done by staff and the,Plannirig Commission. „
Sincerely yours,
oderick -B. Williams;
1-y
A. µ
.,
cc S
;Mi'chael :Ruddy, AICP; Deputy Director of Planning and :Development
' _ � � " I ADJQINING PROPERTY OWNERS �
Owners of property adjoining the' land wldbe notified ofthe,Planning Commission` and,the Board of
_Supervi'sors meetings.. For the pr se'of this - application, adjoining property°i's any'`proper_ty-
` a'b"iittin the -re_ uested ro er on the :side or,rear. °or, 'an. ro ;er directly!across a public
g. 9 p P tY` ' Y P P t3
aright =of -way; a 'private: right „of -way; :or a watercourse from tlie; reque "steel property. The
applicant is?required' fo obtain the ".following in"forniation, on each adjoining property including'the
parcel ;identi`fication =number which may be, obtained` ;from; the off ce,. of the Commissioner of
'n Revenue. Then C,ori�iyiissioner of4he, -Reve u4e- is located on the. 2nd floor of the Frederick County
AdmzrYistroti5ve- Building, 1 >07 N ",orth -Kent Street.
Name and Property,;Identification`Number
Address
Name R &J Land levelop,ment , ;LLC'
1631 Re'dbud Road
Win:oh°ester, rgin`ia 22603
Rroperty: # 33 =:(A) -1.2.3
Pame Elaine MaGee:::
3703, - Martinsburg Pike
Cleear Brook; Virginia 22624
roperty # 33- '(A) -125A -
Febra Driver
3721 ,M:ardh%Wrg Pike
Clear Brook, Virginia 22624
# 33 -(A) ;25'8
Name Philip Martin,
R -0, Box 113'
Brucetown, Vi`rgin`ia 22622
Property- #33, (A)=125C-
Name.Mr'. &. Mrs. -Ma' -k Regan
2000 Cedar Hill-Road
Clear Brook', Virginia 22624
Property #33- I(A,) -1251D
Name M'r. & Mrs." Daniel S:chall
2042 Cedar. Hill ,Road
Clear ;B:rook:, Virginia 22624
Property'# 3-37(A)- 1,25E
NameSilverVl/olfe, LL;C
107:3 'Redbud _Road
Winchester; Virgi'nia.2 -603
Property #`33- (A)= 1�24A,
Name Frederick Stron`ko
3656 Martinsburg ;Pike
l
is 2
Clear Brook; `Virgin 2624
Property;
-Name BrAdl,ey Blain, ' '
35 Flatt
Rochester, New-York 14623, ,
Property: K8 37,(A _
1S
l� .�oG Special, Limited Power of Attorney
4 County of, Frederic " "k, Virginia
Frederick Planning W,ebsi'te www.co.frederick.va.us
Department. -of Planning & Development, County of`Frederick,'Vrgina
107 North, Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. 22601
Phone (54:0) 665. 565.1 Facsimile (540) 665- 6395'
Know All -Men By These,.Presents:'That I (We.)' "
(Name) M_ ohebatullah'Vahidi (Phone) (703) 471.0801 ~
(Address•) 794 center Street; Herndon, VA 20170
the owners ' of all those tracts or` a'rcels of land "Pro eft '' convey ed to me us b '•deed recorded in the
(, .) p (. � P y) Y ( ), y
Clerk's Office, of'the Circuit.Court of the County of Frederick,,Virginia,'by' -
Instrument No., 050012825 on.Page
and is described as
Parcel: Lot- Block: Section: Subdivision: 33-(AY-125
do hereby make;; constitute and, appoint:
(Name) Grey.Wolfe, Inc. - Ga y'R. Oates, L'S -B, PE, Tim Stowe;, PEi (Phone:) 540 -667 -200;1
(Address) 1073 Red6ud Road, Winchester, Vir g i n'
ia, 22603
To act as my true and lawful attorney-in =fact for and in my (our) narrfe place and stead with. fall power and 4
authority I (we), would have if acting-personally to file 'planni�lg. applications for my;(bur) above described,
Property , lncludmg'.:
Rezoning (including proffers)
Conditional Use Permit
Master Development Plan- (Prel'iminaiy atfd;Final)
Subdivision
Site Plan: _
Variance or Appeal.
My attorney -in -fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments 46 previously
approved proffered - conditions except as follows:
This authorization shall expire one year from 'the day -it. is signed, .or, untiI It is otherwise rescinded or,modifed.
In witness thereof; I (we,) have hereto set my (our) hand ;and seal this _ day of —r 20 ;
Signature(s), r!,
State of Virginia, City /County Of / E'j(' To -wit:
a Notary Public in and for" the jurisdiction aforesaid;
certify that the person(s) who igned to the' foregoing instrument gersonally appeared before me and has
acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid thus- X. day ofd, 20:
VV
G` a a! IrfB o n Aston E pires:
Notary ublica �� Public
Y Notary
OF'
commonwealth ofVir inia
'res. =
7159
Oommission;l0 #3
Traffic Impact Study
P
Clearbrook Commercial
Center .
TJ
TIMOI)VYS'. STCJV�'
N6.2192
�. CS 2
November 4, 201,1.
P
Prepared .for
'GreyWoife, I,nc.
P
1,073 Redbud Road
Winches_ te', `VA.22603 -4757
P
Q
1 "
Prepared bky,
Stowe E.Rg,i'n tiering, `PLC
,220 Sery ceberry Court
Stephens City,, V 22 655
Center .
TJ
TIMOI)VYS'. STCJV�'
N6.2192
�. CS 2
Executives Summary
ClearbrooktCommercial' fente(s requesting rezoning of; °14.53 +/- acres from:'Rural Agriculture to° B-2
Business for tfie�development of 120;000'square feet ofletai1.space. Thisehange'wiII contribute
addition Jilt raffic into the;roadway,network, therefore, this'Traffic Impact Study was prepared to
eyaluate:th,ose °traffic impacts.
' The proposed r, "ezoning is'aligned..with theNorth EastIand;Use Plan /Comprehensive plan, which
designates the subject property.for business use.
The intersection analysi's f Hope,well;arid;B'rucetown Roadslwifh ,Martinsburg,Pike.sho.w18'LOS off in
the de "sign year 2020. A planned regional project to align the intersections of Hopewell and'Brucetown
y II. proffer o participate
Roads is planned t&6 liminate this situation Clearbrook Commercial,Center Will
financially in that project, which will beneededregardless ofthis'proj ecf. With that regional
improvement in place, the transportation im_ pactsiof this rezonin&are: believed to be manageable and
acceptabie °;fbrthis project.setting.
~
. .
TOYIeW
� ^ . .
Exec u�Y�Sunhm�ry—..`'_.`,`,:===-==`^,='~.",�=='�_,�==ss^==.===—''=_--..1
- .
Appendices -------..�----.,_,=,,*_`,==�==�,.==`_`^_=='=,=,��
� `
�
|�trodu�tkz�.----.---..— _._..,,—,_--_—,_,=_,==,==='=`��_^=,,^__^"--.--_+==--�,4
^ ' `
"=-='^—.---------'------------.=,',,,�=^_+^.j4
�
`..... =.=—^................................................................................................. ,_,,,_,`=.,=4
Yackground. `I==�=^==```,=``-'""—''--=—',=`---------------..~4
'
Transportationhnpxovenlbgts Planned _',=_=,=,====,^_==_ `,^~=.^.=_==^=_=.._=_'=.`=,4
DovelOnne�htDesccp%�n---------------------�--_--�`,.,=`.,,',~—= ...................
4 '
She _+==^=�=,,�=='`—..—_=.-------------------._—.—_'_,==-,4 '
. �
ofthe- ^ Parcel ~. —^,^=,='==_ ...............................................
.
5
`
General' e,p'/ ,�'e=,�-'=�=.--`^_'' ................... ` =�S
L�c�t�n� n�nd -----,__,,',==,,,,=`,.,`,,=_.=,~__�+,=_,=_-S
^ '^ 'kan a----------------^---.�--.,--,.5
WhensiVe
�
Currerit==.^ .`-- .......... ....... ................................................
6
^
�tudY/\�s� .^..,,*^,.-=°^==,-=`,.^-.==/=.`==^=.=====,==.',==,=-----..— .......
7,
Stu.......
Proposed and Existing Uses =,�=.� =.=='=,�-,`..�==,`-�=� `==,�-^','~.^�-.—..° 7
Existing '
Usb� .............................. ...................................... .............. ,==,,�_=.==_=== .................... "7
ProposedAccess.� .................................................................................................. __,,=,=~7�
Nearby _----------.----.------------------_.`7
�
Existing`=^°. ,..+^`.. +...=�.=`,= ............. .............. 7
Existing Traffit�CohditiohsIOII --------.--'---------------.—=—==`—``=.,^~'.g
'
..
Data .-----------9
Anatysis �
..===...*,=,='.======,= ... ^-==--,.=`= ..................................
*�`��="=-,`=`.',=+/q
I tkoh& 0 14Y------------------------_.".�_,,==,,=—�1
) --�--..,=`=_=`*`,=''==-`'—^—`-_---- ........... ,........ —^................................................ 11
'
' ^°=.'`=`= ...... ^^,=.= ........................................ 13
/ Tho ' +=."°_-~~_,^_,,+"°,,=,==..,-`_..-13
� - � ` ' '
TO/ ==,,=�^,=�=,`�=_=.,^_~=_r_, .......................... ...... ,_='_+.�====�=13,
' kU��Ot�o �`�-.~°=~,= ,`�-'v`-`"°,=..=;"^^-v�-=�,-',^*==-..--~===== ... 14
'
^
—/
Analysis ..::............ .................... ...... !.,.. 14
f'
Recommended Roadway' Improvements .. ....... .. ..... ... _ :16'
Design Y. — 'r (2020) ..,.., ....... ................ 17
-b _ ..
} Analysis .._:: _ ....::., :...........:. ...:.................................................... ............................... 17
QueueAnalysis : .....::. ........ ......... .......:: ::.-..:::.-...:....:::....:...::.....:...... .........................:...19
L; Pedestrian and Bicycle Traffic,,.... ..:. ....... .:..::..: .. ...... .......... .........19
1 Conclusions..: ,. 19
Appendces
Appendi",
Appendix B'
Appendix'C
Appendix; D
Appendix E
Appendix F
TrafficroCounfi Data
Traffic Signal Timings
Synchro'L05 an'd Queue Reports:
HCS Diverge & Merge. Reports
Pre- Scope;of'Work Meeting Form,
Cost Estimate,
lAtroductid n-
01
Put-
p Q---,s e
This Traffi c,lrnpag $tqdy,has.b een,prepare to supp&f:ffi
e req u0st.for the: rezoning
pf".the property
,R-noWqps'CleArbr k'CoqMercial teht& ,The,peoiect�will develop 120,Oa0 sq ua re, feet: of retail business
space on i
the lo�roper ty,
Study'Obi etti'ves
The objectives of thisstudyarp to determine:
1-. The impacts on traffic operations may occurWft.hin the study 4rea,asa resultoftonstructing a
commerci-al-developMent.
,2. FUtUre-c6nnectivity,to peclestri@nand bicycle facilities that may re-sultlrbrft the cohstruttion of t - he
commercial development.:
Bae-kg.,r,,'oti,iid,;Iti,format on,-
Tr,angpoet,at,i'ofi htnt)VbVement,s:,Assum,ed
The fojIbWin
&tra n s
pOrtatidn irnpr(5VeMehtSWeee assurned to be in place with. the, proposed commercial
development:
1. A cb nti n'Ub us! a ux i I ia ry/right tarn- iqqe;p long the fro M, of Alhe'p rope rly,
2, A traffic sign.al;a.i°the!er.�tr8fnc6 toIr the site when warranted.,
;3. PdVorfnent marking modificafionsipeeded to useithe,�cente,r'`l.ane :as7a�left�turh lane at the site,
,entrance.
Transportation 'Improvements, Planned
A reView'ofIhe VDOT'-8ik,'Veaf-Itfio-r6'v'emeht Plan showed no planned construction projects, in the
vicinity of-'I'lie,proposed rezoning.
A. review; of t - he 2009-2010 Secondary '.R'pao,improvement, Plan 'for - Frederick 'C-6uhty,, VA, displayed a
proposed .rriaj I orIMprovement project on'Brucetown, Road (Route, 612) from i%, intersection with,
M'a-rf'ih-$b.6ig, Pike - (Route 1-1)' eastward for0.35 miles. The proje-6tiis,u-n.sc,he,dU,Ied,'ih,°th,e plah;'T , his project
isJUtt,,so'uVi'oftth'
e si e on:,w ich, thisi project is proposed.
A' regional roadway i-'---
mproyernen t projett'is- also being planned by Freclerick'County Theiproj c
�.gIigh,the;ribter'SBC-tions,,of"Ho"peWe[ I
wid,:Brucetown Roads on Martinsburg,,P.ike.,This.,pr,6jerc-t, will
e,[iMinbte',thLa current ",Iafh6constructions -and greatly impro,yp°the,flow,qf traffic. thr,o,ug,h,th'e,'iht-6rsec-tidn.
DevelopMt-nt D'escripti'on
Site lo'catf on:
,
The §dbjett-'Oe.qJpeftyIS- i'O'catedwestof US'Route'll (Martinsburg Pike), and soqth
' . I - - -- of Cedar HiII Road::
Figure 1 shbws the location of the; property,
3
7 Property Loo,dqn Map
V
_4
tJ
V,
P
n
P,
�e,'
"9
J,
FigqF6 I Pr6perb ion Map,
- _y
Do-S,cripfi6n of the, Pared
The, prope rtyo n,which! ClOa rbrbbk Commercial Center is,planned:is 8'-14.53 acm tract with frontage,on
Route ll,Apegqriing isbeing,sought1br,allrbf the ptoperty7f6rtoffs,truc-i,16hvof?r6iail'businesses.
General Terrain Fe'A-Wre's
The site ,jqd,surr..oundingi,aee.ashave gentle grades W.ith,g,lb.pLs',.-thatr' 'draln to , thoeast. 1-81 runs north-
south adjacent to Westernpropgr y boundary ry of the, r6miii rg a rea,
The sb bje ct, po perty is; I oca 'ted iq'the5toh wal[Magisterial,distekt, Fredeti&Cointy, VA.
'Compre - hensfye
. -' Phan 'R' ecom bhdatiofs
.
Th&2610 North6Ast Frederi Land Use Plan update ofthe, F�ederickCountyVl o mp-rIe '- he`nsive Plan ,calls`
for
the sub , jentproperty - tb, bedeveloped With a, business land' use. Surrouhding,prbpi�fti6s ire-als�o
09
dqsignated , as,bUs_ihbssland'Use-. Piguke 2'highlights the subject property on the NorthOpstfrederitk
WnOlvse:Pfaq map.
4
r
��.F
\" - _
r 4d S
4''•+edi� yR� eli 1
5 J=
r i
ei
r
��.F
\" - _
5 J=
2
=
/
0O0
=g
! ■i attar,.
! �� eel ■ [,
h G "_
«P��z'
�t $.��a 1
i4 c�
r
��.F
\" - _
Fbr-th6:NFOjmds 6,, Study the, limits of
the study area extend, east to Martinsburg
Pike,,*,est t61,81, north to CLdar�'Hii llAddd, Road,,and'south to Hopewell Road.
Th,&,&are"no, additional majcirAihtersecii6ns' within '2000 feet"Of the site that --were not includ
ed i6 the
study.
Propos,ed and Existing Uses=
ExistingUse
The exisfing,site is a. house wiih;,seveierafout buildings.
Proposed Uses & Access,
The, proposed use fortbe, prooertV,'is retail d6Velopment.
Access tolhe�,siteWil I Ibe oeovid' e. viva �.A pr.offefed; ihter-.parcel. connector Qn,the pr.operty to the south,. A
- - -
aew,sigh'aIiz'ed ihtersecti6m6n Route 11 Willbe cori'tteucEA 6n,AK6,propert -Y to the south, approximately
1050 -.f6etso,Uth-,df,'the unsigrialized intersection .on CedarflillAoid. This'intersection W 'ill, provide access
to'thto'O,pareels, i ndiud ingAhe; Clea rbr,,odk.( ni fneftialtenter.
0
N6a:rby Uses
The exis , ting,land uses near the pr . oposed isite are-
6 'North - Residential
0 West.— 1-81 and residential
0 South— Vacant .(zoned
• East =,Vacani (zoned" 134)
`Existing Roaft4ys
Figqre•4 shows _ ,the,existing e
bad.Waysin the subject property, The:typica(settibris for the roadways in
the vicihity ofihe project�ar6,deserfbedzas,
Martinsburg Pike is'a, rural arterial roadway with, one Ian in each direction and 'a variable direction
turn, lane jn`the center.
o ers an'd no turn,la6L&s 4n,fhe' inter ectibris.
Hop�p,,W,ell'Rciad�isizi-rufal�t alane,roadwaywithsh uld
• Brucetow - n,R Road is rural tWd..Iane roadway wjth:shouldersl and no turn lanes lin the: intersections.,
Cedar Hill. R d� is,,a, rural ,lane, With shoulders anrd'ho,- e in intersections.
pa( turri. Ian 5 the in'tL
Cedar .Hill Road , is'-a,rU'r-a'l,tW,6,lane;roadw.ayWi.th shoulders a'rfd no turf i,lanes lhAhe-Antersectibris.
Woodside, k6ard' is a Nral,&Vii surface two. laqe roadway,.
The I"9framps!, are -.sihgIei ane:ra.mp$ With,sh-oulders.
Future Transportai-ion.linpriD.Vem6nts
cip
The°s4l�jeci pfj fort -1"f Cated in-the Virginia De artmerit dffeamoortatidWs Staunton.District 'a cl,
Y15 0
Edinburg R.esidLz'n(fV°a-rea,of'resp.qpsibil.i.ty.,A reviewofthe VDbT Six year Improvement Plan showed no
planned construction projects in, theit-inVi i ity'cfthe proposed rezoning,.
I
Li
R
av
jT it
IN
A
r-
The' Vir inia Department of Trans- ortation continues to
g^'. p p plan for'improvements on 1 =81 Construction of
the planned improvementsisryunscheduled.
A. review of the�2009-2010 Secondary "Road Improvement Plan'for Fr "ederick.Gounty, VA displayed a
pro posed-,major improvement projection Brucetown 'Road.(Route�672),`from' its intersection with;
Martinsburg Pike; (Rbutell);eastward for 0.35 miles, Theprojeet is unscheduled in the plan. ;
T,f e:2010 Northeast Frederick. Land r.Use Plan update of the,Fredenek County Comprehensive Plan
,indicates long range projects that are, planned to be implemented as land .uses intensify in,this area;of
the county. The 'long range,roadway improvements planned i'n °the - vicinity ofttis,project inelude`the
realignment of Hopewell ROad`to Brucetown Road; and the widening of Martinsburg,. Neither project is
scheduled orfunded.
8
Existing Traffic .Conditions' 2011
Data 611-ectfon,
To7 analyze j EexMft
'irafficc prd-i, ti ons , p a hourlurninR, mave'hert-counts were'peefohmed at five
intersections uftderswdyr,
These are:
f;S1813'eampsland'
Hopewell: Road;
• `I'_8VNB' Ramps4nd Hopewell Road
• -M
aft,insburg Pike and popipwell R
Road
Martinsburg Pike! and Bbic0l -own 'Road
• 'M-ar,.tinsb-UrgPike,,at,,Cedar�Hi.11 Road
24,h our classified -tr6fficco,ppt5,kWLite,ariso conducted onHdoLs-,we'li R &andlo - tell.These�c unts;are,
go U 0
in.cl.'udL-.d in Appendix A of ',this repo'
,A 'K factor' was applied,to
- the M.pea k'
hour volumes to obtain the aVera"g&ahhuaI,dail _ . t
affic,(AADT).
The,V factorvaried depending upon roadway. The 'V factor for H6peWeIIRojd was,de termined
from
the intersection. and 24 hour t6unts!perforr"d for this report_ te'll.:insufficient data Was
obtained 'in the, 24 h c0rc zou'rit to, compute a"Y factor, therefore, th-e, repo(ited VIDOT V factor'Was used.
The V factors used are:
o Hopewell Rd:. —0, 686
!v Route 11 —.,0'.'093,,,
Raw courit-,daita was'smoot edan)d b labfedias needed.
-,-h - a
Analysis
The existin&AM ; and PM peak
Hour
. fiou
rintersection
- ,turtnihg;move.monts were'analyzed usingthe Synchrb
7.0 traffic modelfing so ft wa re.7he existirg"pea k
h- 'are S. ownAn -5, the
our traffic vQ10mes,' 'h figure existing
lane geometry 'a rid l6e I's'.bf service a re 's-
shown Jn figure 6, a djhe:,modelirvg,resol I m (levels of service and
delays 4nd95%.4ueULS'Iengthl) are sw ,46 n form in Tablel..
, .
0
SC
f0
tl!
a
w
J
U.
0• �.
O
r
r G',
o a��
G� O
L :V
ago
e�
,U
0
0
o.
Y
cu
a.
a
L
o
M
Y
M,
a)
CL
� C
a O
�a
w
C C
U
c ;
a
a
U
�U
o .
o'
i.
bA V',
SIB UT /R
:1.
Tabfe.1.2011 EXMing`fevels: Of Service,: Delays an
95 %•Queue:
Cength
Intersection,
Type: of,
:::iL�W�
Peak' Hour
j
FW Peak Hour
Control:
OS Delay
Queue
LOS`
Delay
Queue
(se( )
,(feet)
(sec)
(feet)
+
EB.
Thru
East -West Hopewell Road (Route 672)'
EB
RT
North -South 181 S
_ B,ramps
Un.signalized
Wg
LT
A
5 9
6
A
3.8
4
VNB;
Thru
SB
UR/T
B
111.9,
17
B
12.1
14
EB
Thru
fast West: Hopewell Road (Route!672)
1.
EB
LT
A
1; 9
2
A
2.0.
2 <'
North- South: 1 =81 NB ramps
Unsignalized
WB
RT.'
WB
Thru°
NB'
UR/T
-A
96
6
B
1'0.5'
13
EB
UR,
E'
57:3
143
E
58:7
205
West :`Hopewell Road (Route
NB
LT
C
24'.4'
39
&
19.3;
60
.6172j
North South: Martinsburg' Pike (US 11;)_
Signalized
NB
Thru
C,
31.3
109
G
34.0'
399
SIB
RT
-
SB
`Thru
A
03"
0.
A,
03
0'
WB
UR'
D
43.8
11:8•
D
46.8
121
West: Brucetown Road'(Route 672)
NB!
RT
North -South Martinsburg'Pike (-8 11,)
Signalized
NB
Thru
A
0'1
0
A
;0.4
331
SB
LT
B,
16T
18;
C,
21..2
21
SB'
Thru
C
30.5
179"
C
28.4;
161
West Cedar Hill Road. (Route 671)
WB ffjR
B'
12:3
1
B
14:2
2'
East Woodside• Road (Route 671)
Unsignalized
EB L/T /R'
B
10.2
,
,7
B
11.6
5
North- South:.Martinsburg Pike (US,1�1)
NB' UT /R
A
7.7'
1
A
7:8
4
SIB UT /R
-
Back round TrafficCond>it;tons 201J)'
Background traffic conditions in•2014 are those that
: are expected td, existxwitF11out the proposed
rezoning,and associated development.,These were! established by growing the; existing 3011,traffic at
Sfauntorr Distract"he build out'year of2014. The growth factor, of 1.5% was determined by VDOT
1.5% per year to t
m th.e ro`ect area, Traffigon aal °roadways imthe'study area'was, antiapated growth in, traffic volumes
Plannin staff,and is based on the historical anda
p J grown at this, rate. The roadway
network,is unchanged from the';Ezisting.Condtions (2011 - conditions).
Orie ofFier development p,rojeci`s seeking >a reigning, but constr" "action of the protect is in the future and
therefore it was also considered �in the: background. t_raffie volumes. The traffic associated with the
Project wasobtained fro m,the;ITE Trip Generation manual. The result is;s'howrrin Table 2..
Table 2 O•ther'Developments Contributing to'Background Traffic -
Avg; AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Feta se ITE Daily
Code, Trips Total ln. Out Total
moan ; In Out T
00 sq ft); 814 35:5 1,556 1'17 1.26 243 100 78 178
�... t w /,drive thou
934 4:5 2,23 3 126 12:1 24;7 109 1'01 21,0
Total; 3,789' 242 247 489 209 179 388
i
r
pass -by Trips '@
25 %; (code 814 -
-389`
-29
-25
-20
pastby trips @,
40% (code ;934)
-893
-50.
-48
-99
-44
-40
-.45
-84
Total' New Tri s
2;507`
163
167
330
14:0
11,9
260
Analysis
The 2014 Background AM and PM,peak hour iraterseefion turning movements were analyzed using the
Synchro; 7 0 ^traffic i,hodeling5softwaee The peak traffic volurnes.are shown iri fgure 7,,and the lane
-
geometry and evel,of service are shown lift Figure 8. The modOing'resulfs (levels§of',se"rvice, delay and
95 %:queue) a_re;tabulated in Table 3.
o
Y
fC
N
a
a
O
..
oN
_
�1�.•,,
..(Z,�
v
.
ra(z)z
a
:(EZW
N
M1
H
�
ou
o
�
Y
LLB W
f
�
1d
0
er'`e���
N �• �
o� c'
4 ew
m
Lo
Se
rt),
P7
4,4
off
d-F
ri*
LLI
-j
U
V
0
Table.3,2034iBackgrou6d:L"evel of Service 'Decay, snd <95% Queue Lengfh.
T
Intersection' ype of
AM' Peak Hour
PM Peak;Hour
__
Control
LOS' Delay Queue
LOS' D'ela "y
Queue:
RT
(sec) (feet)
(seC)
(feet)
EB
Thru
East -West Hopewell =Road (Route -B x2)
EB
RT
North South 1 -81 SB ramps
llnsi nalized
g
WB.
LT
A
6.3'
9.
A
4.6
7
W&
Thru,
SB
L%R!T
C
1`5:7
31
B
14.2
22.
EB
Thru
East West: Hopewell Road (Route 672)
EB
.EB
LIT.
A.
1;.2
2
A
1,.3
2'
North - South; 1 -89 NB ramps
Wg
RT
WB
Thru
NB
URJT'
B'
1;0.6
13
B
11.1
19.
EB
UR
D
48.161,
179
E
77:8
308
West:' Hopewell Road) (Route 672)
NB
LT
t31
-1,0117- _
109
'C.
20.8:
128.
_
North South: Martinsburg Pike (US 11)
Signalized
9
NB
Thrua
C
24.1
140
D
35':4;
492
SB
RT
SB
Thru
A
03
0
A
0.3
0
'WB,
L/R.
D
49.7
152
F
82:0
212
Brucbto,Wn Road (Route. 672)
NB
RT '
NWest,
orth- South: Martinsburg Pike (US T1),
Si nalized
9-
NB'
Thru
A
6 2
'0
A
0.4:
13;
SB
LT
G:
23:9
2:1
C
22.3
25
SB
Thru.
C'
34;2'
207
G
30'.7
209
WB
L/T /R
$
10.4
9,
B
14.0
2
West., COOT Hill Road (Route 671),
East , Woodside Road (Route' -671:)
Unsignalized
EB
LLT /R'
B
10.4
6
B,
11.9
5
North - South: Martinsburg Pike (US' 11).
NB.
L/ -IR
A
7:7
1
A
7 9
4
SB
L/T /R
A.
T6
Q
A
8.2
0
r
Trip 'Generatiori & D'istribution
Trip Generation,
Trip gg"rpjjo for the planned uses was developed from ttie, ITE Trip, Generation Manual, 7tn edition
based on the proposed land uses. The full. build- oaofthe project is planned "to,occurby the year. 2014.
The.land uses.and, res.ulting,trips generated by the project a're summarized in Table 4.
Table 4Trip Generation
Trip Distribution
Trips generated by'the:d`evelor)ment =`were assigned to'the'roadwav,networi(,based on a distribution
developed with representatives ,,from V,,.DOT and Frederick County during'the scoping me=eting ,The trip
distribution percentages are shown Ih ;figure 9 and`the assignment of "the new Arips being generated are
shown in figure 10.
AM Peak- ,Hodr•
PM Peak Hour
I'
Land;Use: ITE ;Amount
Code
in Out Total
In; but Total.
Trips
Shopping 'Center 820 120
107
68'
17;5'
J39
367
706
'7,645
pass -by fops @25% (code.82Q)
-27
=,17
-44=
-85;
792
=.177
-1;911
Total•tJew Tri s ..' i80
51•
131
254,
75
530
5;734
Trip Distribution
Trips generated by'the:d`evelor)ment =`were assigned to'the'roadwav,networi(,based on a distribution
developed with representatives ,,from V,,.DOT and Frederick County during'the scoping me=eting ,The trip
distribution percentages are shown Ih ;figure 9 and`the assignment of "the new Arips being generated are
shown in figure 10.
AM Peak- ,Hodr•
PM Peak Hour
Avg. Daily
Land;Use: ITE ;Amount
Code
in Out Total
In; but Total.
Trips
Shopping 'Center 820 120
107
68'
17;5'
J39
367
706
'7,645
pass -by fops @25% (code.82Q)
-27
=,17
-44=
-85;
792
=.177
-1;911
Total•tJew Tri s ..' i80
51•
131
254,
75
530
5;734
Trip Distribution
Trips generated by'the:d`evelor)ment =`were assigned to'the'roadwav,networi(,based on a distribution
developed with representatives ,,from V,,.DOT and Frederick County during'the scoping me=eting ,The trip
distribution percentages are shown Ih ;figure 9 and`the assignment of "the new Arips being generated are
shown in figure 10.
a.
w
J
Q'
N
O
F-
F-
0
Z
�U
C� a�
O '^C
D
A c
c: ,U
W fU.
o �
U
co
A -
X�
N'
o
�a
Z
��
00
�� U
�!
.r"
�' iw
F'
rte'
,^
�
}
r"
�.
i
t��
�1
C' '�
��
�; �„'
',vr.,
a :�,,
o .a�,
�'
/� ;FO'
\i/
f
i
O ,�
� C
`
�: .o
z; s
D .a
C.0 :.
W
^.
U
2 -0 I4 "Build out Conditions;
The, ,2O14; Build- out,con "ditioos combines the background: traffic'foreca "sted fo "r.�the year 2014 , and`the,
traffic that,;is forecasted ;to result from;;thee developmenf of`this project The total of'th'is traffic is called,
ttie° uild:'outrcondition�and is•planned to occur in the year 20.14:
An'atysis
The. 2014 build =outAM -and PM, peak,hourintersection turning movements, were analyzed using the
Synchro Z.O`traffic..modeling <so.ftware. The peak traffic volumes are shown in Figure; ll,;and the lane
geometry and level of "service are shown iin Figure =l2. The modeling res ults (levels of service, delay and
,95% queue) are tabulated in Table 5-.--
20
,� ISB1921��
b
672
1ti
° aa.
' FZ—
k
J
1W =
U`.
w
q$
CC`
__
N
f°
:
a'
'.
2
LLI
cc
In
Z'
d
Ca
,•
_
•
Geda'
O
G
O
�a
a
u
1
�
e
�
,� ISB1921��
b
672
1ti
° aa.
1ti
° aa.
' FZ—
k
J
1W =
U`.
w
q$
CC`
__
U
m
LJ
N
N
i
O
S
Y
f0
G1
a
a>
i
2
6F
�
u.
o
t
a_ �
Y b m'
D
r�
v
I
M
N
N .�.
HFL
�,t
36
W
J
Q '
CU
Ln
O
H
O
z
N
N
i
23'
Table:5 2014: Build -out Level of Service far'5cenaria
1,
Delay,�and;
95% Queue Length
AM Peak• Hour
_ PM ;Peak Hour
lntecsectiom
T e of
YP_
Control;
LOS:
Delay
(see)
Queue
(feet)
LOS '
.-
delay
('sec)
Queue
(feet)
EB
Thru
EB
RT
East -W st: Hopev✓ell, Road. (Route:672)
Unsignalized
WB
LT
A
6 5
1'0
A
5':5
12
North- South' 1 -81 SB, ramps
1%WB
Thru
SB
L/RM
C
17.8
43
D
25.7
73,
EB
Thru
EB
LT
A
1.1.
2
A
1.1
2
EastrW6st:2 Hopeweff Road, (Route -672)
"mps
Unsignalized
WB
RT
.North= SOuth:'I -81 NB ra
WB
Thru
NB
L /RR'
B
11;0
1;7
B°
1' 3,4
38'
EB
L %R
E
62',0
297
F
50619
626
NB&
LT
C
221.5
122
B
19.6
'118
West: Hopewell' Road (Route 672)
'
Sign, alined
NB
Th "ru
C
29.6
159
D
42.4
'541
Nor - South: Martinsburg Pike (US -11)
:SB
RT
SB
Thru
A
0:3
5`,
A
0:4
50
WB
L /,,R
E
60:9
1,83
D
53.9'
1:60
NB:
'RT
West. Brucetown .Road �(Route'672),
Si h-alized
g
NB
Thru
A
0 2
0:
A
0.1
0
Noith- South: Martinsburg Pike (US 11`,)
C
26
24
C
22.7
33
SB
LT
-5
SB
Thru
Q
42:7
264
C
48.1
447
WB
LIT /R''
B,
11,:.7
2
D
;25:2
9
West Cedar Hill'. Road (Route 671)
EB,
Lf/R
B
10.6.
8
B'
12.3
10
East Woodside Road (Rouw671)
Unsignalized
A
7.8
1
A
8.1
6
North= South: Martinsburg P ke•(pS 11':)
NB;
UT /R'
`0
S&
Lrr /R
A
7.6
0`
A
8.3
EB
L
C
24.8
X34
B
f&A
90
EB
R
G•
23.3:
23
B.
16.,&
43'
NB,
LT
C
25::3
73
G
26A
205.
West Site.Entrance
Signalized
NB
Thru
A
3::0
34
A
6.4
123
North: - South: Martinsburg' Pike (USA 1)
A
-12
B'
1"8:1
123
SB
RT
95;
SB
Thru
A
74
1`00
B,
14:9'
29,
23'
RecoMfiended, 6
RoadW
4y fm"proVeM6ntsi
The'primitar'y effect on e' J' n, entified . in the traffic modeling,' _h
aiffli c 6 p' . �
ISVecumuativer
effect .6 f I64,grdwth in
0roel other 'planned developments. This
arcc-Li"Mulated traffic on the width rest Roads;); w restricted roadways (Hope.Well Bruc6to.,Wh
in a,LOS of
Ff6 rthe H'Qp'i?w6l_l Rd and Bi-rucetown. Road 5pprch6d "
0 1- to Mjrti'ns_burg'Pike'Jn1th.'e
design year, 2620. Traffic ,,,congestion ha's't long been a problem this n
UET- sOctio i ,an d Frederick
Courity;has begun lQngrange, P :Ianninor improvements 'here
, . &f There are no prac tical' short
:
terffi:So lutionsto:thi�':problem,,wh'ch:'s ��Whya,more.fe�gional's6lUtio There
is
beingd
0.06p
ed. Sirte, there gi6nal irprov&bO n will expeh siy6 and involve right way acquisition from
potentially: UnWill
-.i!',gPrOj'i�c-t"PairticiPants', `it is recommended that, U'eatbr6& Commercial
Cerfterm�ake,afinafinciai contribliti* ese'ir tfor b
i o n, to, fh� vem4
catry'aut the n0eded'improvemen'ts . _nt5to,help the c ty �and VDOT
Approaches . in two otlyer,inte
T;$,Ocfions' report'a LOS of b in the design year 20,20; These are the.
5R81off':.rjmpat: Hopewell Ada 13 Wood ide 8,81 off
Rd . t h 0,,W
5 RdatMartin-sburg-Rike. TheS,
ramp carriies'171 vehicles �sinth
'ePM,peA hour with -17 % trucks I and .a 28.8,sec b nd . : average.
delay. Tbe_queue ,atYS,
is r-eported,
to be i84' long; So there` ispoi i'ffi0actQpjhe:maMfine traffic
operations.
The Woodside Road a0pr6acb,carri'ds i5' vehicles, rifhe>PM pea'k-hou rwith''an, aye rage
delay of'28,4,se.qon_ds. Whilo,,the.t_approa�chLOS of U is' less Afian. the desired LOS, of -C, all other
approaches. in both #gersec- id"ns -,at,eithe(LO - '0., The,effirilmat impacts
opeple S A org in .202
to traffic operation'5resulting , f r.6 M!
the LOS' of D in. these approaches; i' that atthese
IPT'erse�ctioOshouldl be, teevaluat � ta future time as more development -t
od �a ev6ld
pmen occurs. As for now,
no"WroVern6rits-a d
rp propose
There are improvements that;arre: zip- e entrance for at th L is development., These are::
1. DeYelqpMqnt. of 'a traffic,signja,[ at th 0 ihitersel(tibri,of Martinsburg Pil(L* an d, the proposed
commercial entrance,, '!thetifnei when warranted.
2.: t6h'struction� of a� d
dhtihupus"ri&tUrn'l, ne in .the southbound direcf"
lon,alon the;
Orb -rt,'-'f- 91
pply rontpgp�.� Th'i0ahe rnigh.tr be, used as ifuture 6a' -
sit- laine w a n e
hen,M' rti"s.bqrg,Pik
is widened'.
37 InsplUn6w pavem eht enar 'kin
gs.orf Martinsburg Pike; to properly direct ttraff- it:at'the new
ic:
te'aff , Sign9l.
Design; Year ,(ZQ2,0 ) ,
The.d'esign year, forfthe,projecf !is six years beyond'the,completion +of the'project,�Which in this case. is the
year 2020; -
Analysis
The 2020 D'esign;YearAM;and PM peak [W-Y tersection,turning movements were analyzed using'the
r Syrichro 7:04raffic,modelingsOftW re , POk traffic volumes are shown in Figure 16, and'the lane
geometry and level of service are shown ;in Figure 17. The rhodelingtr sults'(levels of "se_rvice,,delay and
95 %:;queue) are tabulated' in Ta_,ble, 6.
sP�
C
P.
fp Y"
O4
X C,,
P
P�
A
lA
"6
I
Y
P.
A
b
e
A
y.'
d.
A
y.
A
7
O'
2
Y
N'
�
f
w
z�
o
c U.
UV.,
�I I'
'C.<
T t
ry.
YV
z�
H
w�I
,C
„ti
isl
�
6�1
R 11a;3i
M U
ee
Q
_
U
-a1
i
;,^
— ;,
AJ✓/ ' 461106
�ml•
�.
..
911981��1
-
39111)''7j�
sP�
C
P.
fp Y"
O4
X C,,
P
P�
A
lA
"6
I
Y
P.
A
b
e
A
y.'
d.
A
y.
A
7
O'
2
Y
c
N
N'
0;
~
w
z�
o
c U.
UV.,
'C.<
T t
ry.
YV
w�I
,C
ao U`
isl
�
•
0
N �e
R 11a;3i
M U
ee
Q
_
U
c
N
o:
N
O'
Y
f0
d!
a
a
0
P, M.
CL
O
powQ
r�
.
Y,
d UiJ'1 �i�
�i �Uil iq
Y
� y
U
0
Elf\
� i.i. •
.
a
o
_
N
N
7
� U
a'
o:
a
Table +6 2020 Design Year Level of Service, belay, and 95% Queue Length
Type of
AM. Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
LOS
Delay I Queue
LOS Delay Queue
Intersection Control
123
EB
(sec) (feet)
(sec) (feet)
EB
LT
EB
Thru
33
C
34:6
123
EB
'RT
East- .West: Hopewell Road' (Route 672)
25.7
EB
RT
29.6
52
West: Site Entrance NB
Signalized
LT
C
33.0
North- South: 1 -81 SB ramps
Unsignalized
WB
LT
A
6.5
11
A
5.5
13
WB
Thru
A
1.1
36
A
4.0
195
SB
RT
SB
UR/T
C
19.2
49
D
28.8
84
A
7.1
EB
Thru
14.8
175
East -West: Hopewell '.Road (Route 6Z2)
EB
LT"
A
1.1
2
A
1.1
Z
North- South: 1-81 NB ramps
Unsignalized
WB
RT'
WB
Thru
NB
UR/T
8
11.2
19
B
13.9
42
EB
L/R
E
66.'9
,336'
F
98.7
688
West: Hopewell Road (Route 67.2)
NB
LT
C
25.3
136
C
34.2
185.
North- South: Martinsburg Pike (US, 1)
Sig nalized
NB
Thru
C
32.9
186
E
74.0
772
SB
RT
SB
Thru
A
0.3
0
A
0.4
3
WB
UR
E
711.1
203
F
152.0
334
NB
RT
West: Brucetown Road (Route 672)
North - South -..Martinsburg Pike (US 11)
Signalized
NB
Thru
A
02
0
A
0.3.
25
SB
LT
G
20:7
'28
C
28.3
48
SB
Thru,
D
35.8
296
D
52.8
440
WB
UT /R
B
12.1
2
D
28.4
1.0
West: Cedar Hill Road (Route 671.)
East. Woodside, Road (Route 671)
Unsignalized
EB
L/T %R,
B
10.8
8
B
12.8
11
North - South: Martinsburg `Pike, (US 1'1)
NB
L/T/R
A
7.8
1
A
&.2
7
SB
L/T /R
A
7.6
0
A
8.5
0
EB
LT
C
27.4
33
C
34:6
123
EB
'RT
C
25.7
22
C
29.6
52
West: Site Entrance NB
Signalized
LT
C
33.0
53
C
33.2
136
North- South: Martinsburg Pike (US 11:)
NB
Thru
A
1.1
36
A
4.0
195
SB
RT
A -
9.3
15
B
17:7
35
SB
Thru
A
7.1
131
B
14.8
175
Queue- Analysis
7
At signalized intersection; a queue f
cirms while vehicles wai.fto,advarice..An anal 5iswas performed to,
_y
�(V�lu-atci,fh-0"backl,of,�,t,.he qu'e,Uefor 'thi�.50'th,and,95th _grceniilebf7t4-. ueue.Tbe5Oih �e n
_p e',4
.,.,p#rc Aile
makimum, queue is the maximum b6d, of queue on A foicalArafficsignal,c c-lO-_. ,The:95th pert entIl e
maximum queue is the, m'6ki'nOMbatkaof, , ueue,with95thpercentii6traff-'icvolumes,when traffic does
hot moVefor two, signal tycl6s: The ;qpe u6stas_s_otiatiM. W.j - tff the 95th percentile maximum qUeue- are
shown in T.ables,I, 2, 5 �6, 1, iand4..
As tr#fic v lu
-o - mes increase,.o r t4ne,Ib associated turning rnovOTh6
ve e queue assb'tiatL
I - movements will'increase as
will the" queue associated with,the thru moVement,that opposed the jeft: turn move rneht. This-is
reflected.in the,,Deslgn Y6artanalysis.
Pedestrian and 11ficycle, Tt-Affi-F
To, identiN,;any previously planne,c, oce sfe_ia n and/or bicydef6(ilities In,the project a_r a,the
Winchester-Frederick County MP01kciand Pedestrian Mobility PlabIwas reviewed. This,plan depicts
plarfm , rig level conceptsfO,bit- 'le arid'Pedestrian f ili I ties,- Withn'One. beirigi shown -1. in .. the immediate
yc e:
vicinity 7 icinity ofthis project. N 'new I ro bs I hown.
On-site facilities' will be planned to,accommbdate bicycl64ahcI,p" pedestrian trian movements on;site, and
provisions will be rnade'fbtfutbre connections e,to,the, site.,
ns to,,off sitefraiis which rn'ay�cor
Conclusions
The-,Clegbrook,,Commercia Center rezoning Will tontribute'a-ddiflohal traffic into intersections along
Martinsburg Pike; and H
ppewel[Rdad at l-81.'the,Marti-ns.b.utg ,Pike.:i'ntersetti6rts,of Hopewell Road and
BfUc6town'Roa,dI'rep.Ort'a dif-Fin the,d'6sign;year 20M.' The 'reined' ' o 'this ;pro _ le
m is large n.scale
and*tost,,,and is being pqrsued,asiaxOgi 0 nal"transportafionAmpro- - vemen by Frederick
County. It,"is
recommended thaf'Clearbro k, Conrlirnercial Center, artidpate.,fin;4 `41
p nci - ly, in this projectjo, eliminate this
congested area.
A.ie*tr ic"-signa I should, be installed; at the entrance to the site,,Olong, Witfi the associated turn lanet
and ,pavement ,mark' ing, With the Jre- ementscliscussed'her6irif
Vona improv the transportation ,'impacts
6,fffii I s - rezoning , ,a are re believed lo'be'ftarage dble;andl acceptable for this p, r j 6ct-,sktihg.
29
REZONING APPLITION #09 X12'
'
JC C A
°CLEARBROOK:RETAIL CENTER
w -Staff Re ort for th Plannm Commission
�. P.°
w r.
• - � „
" " "' Staff Contact: Michael T. `Ruddy AICP, .Deputy Planning Director
Reviewed Action
;Plamm�g;`Comm�ss�on `01 /02/ 1`3 Pending
Bea` 01,/2311:3 Pending,
rd of Supervisors:
PROPOSAL:` Tosrezone T4.53,aeres fromPRA (R ural.Ar"eas)'Oistr ct to B2- `(GeneraMusiness)�Di'strict
with proffers:
LOCATION•, The property, is to "cated '700, feeV south on Marf ins biirg Pike (Route 11) of the.
' ;intersection wit h Cedar Hill Road,( "Route 671); 'fronting Route 11 arid, Iri`terstate 81
EXECUTIVE 'SUMMARY' &- STAFF CONCLUSION FOR, TH 0`i %0— h3 PLANNING
k COMMISSION MEETING:
The A2, Ausiness G-eneral;,land use proposed in this rezoning - s; consistent:with the:Northeast '-Land Use
Pfan', The impactsrassoc`iated :with this request have; generally °been addressed by`theaApplicant and the
ddjacentpropert es hake been corisidered-to�a greater extent``in this,rezoni'ng application.
With regards to the ;trans portation <impacts, rt is recognized that the; Applicant; has -provided proffers
alined at addressing 1, hose mpacts; °° `i`dent'ffed in the ,irnmediate vicinity ;of the: site. Ho "wever, the
Commission should evaluate +i "f the Applicant';s proffered approach of studying and engineering plans "
rim r v mterseeti'on. of °Route.l.1 ;and :Hopewell and Br..ucetown .Road's' sufficiently'
addresses the impacts' identified at this mtersecfion. An,acceptable'level of_service (Lev - Tof Service .0
or 1?etter) , is not achieved at ',this intersect "i'on,as'identif ed in_ the Applicarit''s TIA.
RezoniifWA09 142 ClearbrookRetail Centel ,
h
December, .18,'20'12
This report ,is prepared Gy' the`Frederick 'County Planning Staff ,to provide .inforrriafion to the
. Planning Commission and ;the Board of Supervisors fo assist, /ein in making a decision: on this
application: It,may. lso be,- auseful4b others. interested in, this zoning mailer.. Unresolved' issues .
concerning. this appl cation,are noted Gy;ataff'where relevdnt throughout this staff report.
"Reviewed- Action.
_
;Planning Commission , `01/02713. .-Tending,
Board of''Supervisors: 01/23%13 Pending,
PROPOSAL: To rezone 1.4.53 acres °from RA (Rural- Areas)`Distr etto $2;(General Business) District
with proffers:
LOCATIONS The property is - located 700 feet ;south on Martinsburg .Pike (Route l.) of the
ihterseeti'on with Cedar Hill Road (Route ,671) ,fronting .Route I t and li terstate' 8:1;.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT:; Stonewall
PROPERTY ID NUIVIBERv 33. -A425
PROPERTY ZONING RA (Rural,Areas)
PRESENT USE. Resident'' %al and agricultural
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING &,,PRESENT"tJSE'
N,orth..RA (Rural Areas) Use Residential
South, B3 TIndustrial Transition); Use: Vacant:
East B,3,(Industrial Tra sitiori) `]U§e Vacant
'RA (Rural Areas) Residential:
West: RA (Rural'Areas) Use , Agricultural /Interstate $1
_ Reaonin cook:Ret'ail Center ' .
Page 3 x
REVIE'W-EVALUATIONS'•
Virginia Dept: of Transportation:" District Planning has completedlliour review of the;subject TIA (2°-a
submittal ;d''afed 9/4;771:2); •and`finds,.that our previous comments' have been adequately:addresse& ..
`- • Fire, and Rescue: Plans approval recommended.
Fire Mlirshal: Plans approved'.
Pubhe Works Department: = We; have no, comments related to the' proposed rezoning. Consequently,
Public Works: cant's our approval,of the proposed rezoning.:
g. _
Department of'hnspect- ns:°
' Sanitation Authority The ;Frederick County Sanitation Authority offers comments `limited to.ahe
anticipated impact /effect upon the Authority's pii c.,water and sanitary sewersystem and the ,demands
-thereon., The_.parcel ;is`m the;•water and;sanrtary sewer area ;covered: by: th'e Authority: Based on the
anticipated usage, water capacity is�presently available. Sanitary sewer'. treatment capacity atthe=waste
water treatment plant, i`s presently available. Conveyance capacity will be;`conhngent ori`the applicant'
1 performing,; technical analysis of the exist nggforc6main. Both water and,sanitary sewer facilities :are
located wthm�a reasonable {distance `from, this site:,
Seryice:Author "ty: •:No comments.,
Frederick ;.Winchester:HealthDepartment No'obj;eetion`i'f:.publc water °and sewer are provided and
the; sewage disposal system easements ,are protected by a 20' buffer..
Parks &.I2ecr',eation N ,cornrnent
j. p : P _ g` q . PP
Winehest'er Regional - Airport The, osed�rezonm ;re nest has been reviewed and;i't °a ears that °,it
w:i'll not i hW hesterReglAirpok. mpaf operations at
Historic Resources Advisory Board Upon• review -�of the ;proposed rezoning, i"t,appears that the
proposal•. dbes.no't sigriificaritl im act,.histonc resources and it is. not necessa , to schedule,; ;, formal
y P ry .
rks Survey, there are
review of the rezoning application by the HRAB,' Aco*ing to the�k& L'andma
,no;sigmficant; historic structuresi'located on the property nor are there any possible historic n'
districts
the viem by It�was also noted that ,the National, Park Service S;iik& of Civil VWar Sited °in thc,
Shenandoah Valley does idei tify,a.core.battiefield within this.area.,
Frederick;County Pulilic Schools:. FCPS offers no comments:
Trederiek 'County Attorney. Please see attached Getter dated June= 26; - 2012, from Roderick B.
'Williams; Ebunty.Attorney.
Transportation: Included wAin attached memo (page 2
) ,dated June ° 22„ 20.12, from Michael T.
Ruddy„ AICP; Deputy;Plann ng Dr "ector.
Planning Department: Plea8e see attached memo,dated June 22, •20.12, from Michael T Ruddy;:A °ICP„
Deputy Planning, Director:
Planning: & 'Zoning:
Site History?
The original Frederick:Courity zomng °map S. Inwood Quadrangle) identifies thesubject
parcel's as be ng',zoneO A 2; (Agricultural. General). The C "ounty's,agricultural zoning, districts
were subsequently combined "to form the RA, (Rural Areas,)' District upon adoption' of an
amendment to the Frederick ;County Zoning Ordinance Or FO', 1989. 'The: corresponding
'revision of the:zomng map, resulted in the re- mapping of the LLsubjecVproperty and all other A -1
and A -2 zoned land to the AA Distr,.ict.
-. In '2009,. The Bdard ofSupervisors; following. a unanimous recorrimendation of denial, from the
Planning Comm 'ssion, denied Rezoning Application RZ #09 -07 forihe same property primarily
for the following; reasons, The Commission and 'B'oard member expressed concern that
transportation,'rripacts 'demonstrated by the TIA for' this 'partictlar aocation were not fully
addressed or mitigated'by,the applicant's proffer. In addition; the projecrwould;.not provide a
or- better at the two in "or'intersections on Route a'1:..
21 Comprehensive Polcy'Plan „
The 2030'. Comprehensive Plari. is the ,guide for the 'future growth of ,Frede.rck County.
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan is an official pulilic document that'serves`:as,the� community's
guide for -mak rig decisions regarding development, preservati'on,,public „facilities and other'key
components of community,3l fe 'The.priniary goal of`this plan i's top ptec`tand; improve the
hiring enuirontnentwithin Fredenck County. It °is in essence a composition ofpolicies :used to
plan for the future physical development .of Frederick Counnty.
Appendix, l; ,the Area, Plans;,, of the _2030 Comprehensi- ue:Plan,, is, the pr -imary implementation
tool and will be instrumental` "to :the,future plarining efforts of °the''County.
Rezonin g; #09 12 Clearbrook Retail Center
December `1`8, 50`1'2
Page 5
Land `Use.
The parcel comprising this rezoning app'licationis located within the County''s >Sewer and Water
Service4Area'(SWSA, Fhhdthe site is wfthin"thell mits.,ofthe Northeast Land Use Plan. The plan
designates; the site ,for: business use. The; B2.;zoning, request i`s consistent with the Northeast
Larid`u' e Plan.
Site A'ecess' and Transportation: .
Plans for new developm`erif should provide for:. the; right -d: ways necessary to ifnplement
P
la' d.roadFirriprouement"s-pandrnew roads shown on the ,,road planoshould'� be constructed, by -the
,developer when warranted by'the. scale; intensity, or` impacts °of -the development:;Existing.roads
should be m provedaas necessary by adjacent °development to 'lenient the ntentions of the
plan.=
The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive ,Policy Plan. does include, this portion of`the.
County: `The Northeast.Land Use Plan calls forMart nsburg Pike to be improved to afour -lane
facility Also n the � einiware identified improvements to the interchange with Interstate 81
and tliepoteritial €reatignrrient of llfucetown Road, with the.. road. Plans identifying °a potential
lfconnection north of'its current;location, acrossRoute;1 rom the proposed access to this site..
The Plan. states that proposed .industrial and commercial development. should 'only 'occur if ,
irnpacted roads functron:at Level of Service (LO;S) Category'C or better. The Level of'Service
at the _nearby` Route 1'1 and Hopewell Road ;iiterseetion ;falls, below this ,expected •Level of,.
Service The: Frederick County Bicycle Plan designates Route 11 as, ',short- term designated
route.
The, -Northeast -Land `Use. Plan discourages :'individual lot ;access'; on :the Martinsburg Pike.
corridor; .ericorages 'inter- parcel connections; , and recommends adeauate screening, from. ,
adjorning: land - uses and recommends greater' setbacks, and buffers acid screening along.
Martinsb urgPike. Pedlestfia ,accommodations have been addressed with: °this project_: with th -e
-construction of . a bike ,arid pedestrian path along, Route ft.
. 3:) Site Suitaliilify /En�ironmerit-
'T,he site,does`not contain any environ nenfal features that would erther'coristrain orpieclu&sfte
development'., There are no 'i`dentif ed -areas of steep fl-- fl - dplaih - or woodlands. 'This
area 'is� -1`so,, known Tor karst;. topography. The Frederick County' Engineer has preciously
identified that a-,deta led geotechnical analysis will be needed ask part of the detailed site plan
k design:
4) Potential; Impacts
The a yli "catrons ro
ffer.statement limits the`4amount of.acreage that is available `for;eorrimercial
` pP , ,. p
development to 7 -S acres and;further`limits "the d'evelopment'.by capping the maximum. amount
of `,average darlyvehicle trips to 5,734;
'-R`ezonmg ,*04, 12. Clearbrook R t.aiYCenfer ,
' December '1N8; 20 T2':
Page 6
.Frederick County Transportatiori, C`ommenfs ,
Mr: Bishop; Frederick County Transportation. Planner, .has 'expressed, that the .Applicant's
recognition o. off -site transportation impacts is;appropriate.. The.Applicarit's proffer"to provide
engineering, seMcesto address the potential .realignriment �of�Hopewell:and Brucetown'Roads
with Route 11 +is, a positive step to addressing; the -failing; lcV.cI of, service :in this location.
However; consideration should be ;given to speeding up the, time frame for completion 4, this -
'61 months In ddin it y be worthwhile ,,inc.l'udifig -an,evaltiatioh of the project to ,less than 3
realignment that directly "aligns with the acces "s• to this area of commercial ,development.
Transportati'on;had'.afso '' `ommented that-the,Applicant-'s proffer to contr bute a fixed amount of
$1:00,000 towards the construct`i'on :of' a roundabout,at this' location should a .signal not be
installed, should be evaluated. In case this, amount is insufficient to construct roundabout
+ ;intersection impro�emerits; the Applicant should consider constructing this improveinent
outright, if warranted;
5) Proffer Statement.— Dated, Apri1=24, 2012 and rev'i'sed on Octobe-r'23, 2.012
A) Generalized Development Plan.
The App licant-has proffered a G'eneralized,Developthent Plan. The.Plan;identifi es" the
areas of develo meat and reco nizes `the •existin ; drainfields located
p g g _ _ _ on the, property
which.,serves the adjacent residences; DisIuiWm e r,4nd around`this area would be
prohibited ,consistent.withahe. GDP.
B) Larid Use;
The apphcaf on'�s proffer statement limits the ;amount, of commercial development to.
that which generates less than the 5,73'4 Average Daily Trips aspresented in the TIA.
The Applicant further prohibits the development of Truck -Stops Retail as defined 'in
SIC5541, and Adult Retail:,
The Applicant .has provided ,additi`onal 'landscape ,'screening above that required by
ordinance, adjacent to .the neighboring residential'- properties'.
The Applicant has. proffered a split rail - fence al. _ng Route l 1. The other: corridor
enhancernen"t. proffers may be,.considered redundant as,ihe,Appl'ieant on the GDP has
identified this as arr:undeveloped;storrnwater management area:
C) Access Mara eg merit.
Access, to the `property will not be directly to. Route; l.1.. Rather; the adj acent property
will be, used to provide - inter- parcel .accessibility; This_ property is _known as the
LL. Clearbrook business: Center.
j
Rezoning #09 12 Clearbf6ok Retail' - enter `
D&einbet ,tg� 20-1'2 ,
u page; _
- D) Transportatiori
w aThe :proffer statement provides ;for right -ofway dedication along Route 11 and the
construction of a f2''foot travel lane across :the -frontage: of-the site along Route 'l 1, It
should Wbe clanfied. that.this improvement wpuld`he extended along the frontage of
p
the ad acerif roper' to the, SoutkcWh ch�will be tthe only access to this site asp part
,of hi initial- ment, of the ,site..
The applicaton;addresse`s °the °intersection of Route 1' 1 and the site by proffering into a
;sign dIization,agreement for z traffic lightat-.the,inters(ction. The proffer enables >the
A licant to a 1 ; q moneta
pp pp y ry.amount to this intersection ishouldu roundabout be the
intersections ;of choice 'based on the .Eastern Road'' Plan. In case this amount his
insafficienf.to coristructyrougndabout mtersection'improvements,rthe Applicant
should. consider constructin rthis improvement outright, if warranted. I The ap 'I" iIonaddres•ses the intersection of'Route 11, and;;Hopewell.Road, Route 672,
by proffering'to -present'thertbunty with a'feasibility study�and engineered•road,ptan
"for the.realigmm iit of Brucetown and Hopewell Roads at M'M rfinsburg Pike, °the;general
scope and locationof the;,stud ' being depi;ted on exhibif A of the proffer statement:
- The Plarinin,g Commission,should evaluates f thi's approach sufficiently addresses
-r
the, impacts'identified at thisIntersection.
E) _CommunityTacilities�.
This application proffers a;nionetary contribution in an amount of $0.`1`0!per'building
or Fied Rue Services. squarexfoof f
A . C. ON; CLUSIONS', FOR.T...HE'0.1/02 /13''PLANNING COIVIlVIIS
ST 'FF SION' MEETING•
ThcB2; Business.General,larid use proposed i'ri this e zon ing,isFconsisfenf withaheNortheast Land U "se.
Plan: The _i npactsiassocidi d with tl is,req e 't 'have generally been addressed'by'the Applicant and,the
adj`acemTroperti'es have been :considered;to a,greater,extent inahis rezoning apptication.
With regards to the tral spo .4thon impacts; it i`s. recognized that the Applicant has provided proffers
aimed .at. addressing 4,hose impacts identified. in the immediate vfc nity of the ;site.; However, the; 1-1
Commission should evacuate f,� the,Applieant's proffered approach of studying and en
911 neeririg plans
` for improverrients to:,the' intersection of Route 11 'and Hopewell and .Bruce "town Roads sufficiently
addresses °the impacts�id'ent fied.at this mtersection. An acceptable °level of ervice (Level of, S'e vice C
or better,), `s.n`ot "achieved atalis intersection as` identified "in:the:Applicant''s TLA,,
Following the required pu6lic4earing a recommendation rekardink this rezoning •apoliea'tion: to
the -Board of Superv"isors'would'be `appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to,adeguate&
address Wtc_6ncerns raises
Im.
a)
XV4 rook-565 (Ol'5)
�O' IOOZ -[99 %b5) E097z V l ,a?say-Wm
RAM pnqpad
6u p£LOT
- -
ua/d JUaWdOlaAa azr paa:ua.
N
';
�o a
=N.
p�nsuo� pi ne buiXan.ln ue -
S
Sp l
I
aalua,) #ejay oo,jg JP C913
w
y
a
I
CL
o
ca
I
I
L
I
I i
I
I
_ I
J 4 � f
50' BRL
1
1 I
,
13
LlLti
lot-
r �
r
I I
Tj-
-
a ' I
WO
m
I
I E
I
! F
I f I e
j j I
I
I
Ow
uq
m�
�o
i
W�
C
U
4i N
a.
�o
�o
m�
C
a,
I
Avm'mgbnr
--------------------------------
-------- _--------------------------
I
�I
I
'I
,I
I'
i
3
'r
� F
s�
,Y; I
a�
I
iyy i
1.
, I
I
j.
I
I
C
rO
�l
a