HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-13 Application3
December 17,20.1-3
.Mr. John Lewis.
Painter - Lewis, P.L.C.
817" Cedar Creek Grade; Suite 120
Winchester, VA 22601
RE: REZONING #03 -13. MADISON VILLAGE
PINS. 64 -A -18
Dear John:
Q.
o
COUNTY of -1
Department ;of Pla_ nnirig and Development
540/665 -5651
FAX; 540/665=6395
This letter serves to confirm action taken by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their meeting on
December 11, 20113. TheRabove- referenced.application was approved to rezone °51.26 acres from RA (Rural
Area) Districtto 46.26 acres of RP (Residential Performance). District and to 5 acres of B2 (General. Business)
Di"strictwith proffers. The property, is located on the west side.of Route, 522, approximately 1,0:00 feet south of
the intersection of Route 522 and Airport Road.
The proffer statement, originally dated April 22, 2013, with final revision date�ofDecember 11, 201.3, thatwas
approved as a part of this rezoning application is unique to the. above referenced properties and is,binding
regardless of ownership. Enclosed "is a copy of the adopted proffe_r=statenientfor your records. Pursuant to
§165 102; 06E, the County Attorney will present the written proffer to the Frederick County Clerk of
Circuit Court'for recordation.
Please do not hesitate "to contact:this office if you have any questions regarding`the approval of this rezoning-
application.
Sincerely,
(/L(�: /_ 01L 7 "./
Michael-T. Ruddy, AICP
Deputy Director
r
MTR/pd.
Attachment
cc: Gene Fisher, Supervisor Shawnee District
Lawrence Ambrogi and H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District Planning Commissioners
Jane Anderson, Real,Estate
Ellen Murphy, Commissioner of _Revenue
Rod "Williams, County Attorney w/Proffer and Resolution
Madison 11, LLC, 558 Bennys Beach Road, Front Royal, VA 22630
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000
December 17; 2013 ,
Mr: John Lewis ,
Painter-,Lewis, P.L.C';
817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120.•
Winchester, VA '22601 .
RE: REZONING #03 -13 MADISON VILLAGE
PINS: 64 7A -18:
Dear John
This;. letter serves to iconfirm, action taken by °the Frederick "County, Board of'Supervisors at their meeting on
.Decembe.r 1.1, 2013. The above- referenced application was approved to rezone 51.26 acres from .RA (Rural.
Area) District to 46.26 acres ofRP °(Residential Performance`.) -District and to 5 eres.;of B2 (General Business)
Districtwith,proffers. The property is located on the Nvestside�of Route 522,:approximately 1,000 feetsouth;of
the intersection of Route 522 and Airport Road.
The proffer statement, originally dated April22,:2013, with final revision date ofD.ecember`1.1, 20`13, that
approved as a part of this, rezoning application'is unique to the above referenced properties and. is binding
g
regardless of ownership. Enclosed ' i -s a copy of the adopted proffer statement for your recgrds: Pursuant to
§165.-102.06E, the County, Attorneywill,present-the.written profferIto the.Frederick County Clerk of
Circuit Coart• o, r recordation.
Please do not fiesifate to contact this, office if you have any questions regarding the approval of this rezoning
application. .
:Sincerely,
Michael T. Ruddy, AICP
Deputy Director
MTW,pd -
Attachment
cc: Gene Fisher, Supervisor Shawnee.DiArict
Lawrence Ambrogi and.H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee,.District Planning, Commissioners
Jane Anderson, Real Estate
Ellen Murphy; Commissioner of-Revenue
Rod Williams, County Attorney w /Proffer. and Resolution
Madison 11, LLC, 558 Benny , Beach Road, front Royal, VA 22630
REZONING APPLICATION' #03=13
Madison Village
Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors
Prepared: December 2, 2013
Staff Contact:; Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director
Reviewed Action
Planning Commission: 08/21/13 Publichearing; Action tabled 90 days
11/06/13 Public 95 Approval'
Board of'S.upervisors: 12/11/13 Pending
PROPOSAL: To rezone 51 -26 acres from RA (Rural Area) District to 46.26 acres of RP (Residential
Performance) District and to 5, acres of B2 (General Business) District with proffers.
LOCATION: The property is located on the west side of Route 522,�approximately 1,000 feet south of
the; intersection of Route 522 and Airport Road.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & PLANNIN,G COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR THE
12/11/13 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING:
Following a public hearing at their November 6, 2013 meeting, the Planning Commission voted
unanimously to recommend approval of the Madison Village Rezoning request, R7-#03 -13. Previously,
the Planning Commission tabled this application for 90 days at°their,08 /21/13 meeting. This provided
the Applicant time to address the items discussed during,the Planning Commission meeting, including
the extension of the roads to the adjacent properties in a timely manner, and the establishment of a
minimum residential density consistent with the*Comprehensive Plan. It also provided an additional
opportunity -for the Applicant to meet with the adjacent property owner to come to an agreement over
access issues (at the time of the meeting, the Applicant.and adjacent property owner had met on:sev.eral
occasions but had not yet come to an agreement).
The Applicant. revised their proffer statement (dated September 5, 2013) to address the two items
identified by staff, More specifically, the Applicant modified their proffer, statement to provide for a
minimum number- of four hundred. twenty (420) residential units; this would. ensure' a minimum
residential density of approximately eight units per'acre, and to include triggers for the completion of
the identified public .road connections to the west and to the south by the 3.12 th'residential.occupancy
and the 420th residential occupancy, respectively. -
The Madison Village rezoning application is generally: consistent with future land use designations of
the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Seriseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Area&.Plan Which Provide
guidance on the future development of the property.
Confirmation of the issues identified in the staff report, and any further issues raised by the Board �of
Supervisors, should be addressed prior to the decision of the Board.
Rezoning:-#08-13 Madison Village
December 21 2013
Page 2
•
Following°the. required public /fearing, a decision,reQardink this rezoninz application by the
Board of Supervisors' would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adeguaielh
address all concerns.,raised by the Board of Supervisors.
Rezoning, 03 =13 Madison Village
December 2s 2013
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 ntay .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: 08/21/13 Public hearing; Action - tabbed 90 days
11/06/13 Public.Hearing; Approval
Board of Supervisors: 12/11/13 Pending
PROPOSAL: To rezone 51_:26 acres from RA ,(Rural Area) District to 46.26 acres of RP (Residential
Perfonmance) District and to 5 acres of 13.2 (General Business) District with proffers..
LOCATION: The property is on the west side of route 522, approximately 1,000 feet south of the
intersection of Route 522 and Airport . Road.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee
PROPERTY ID NUMBERS 64 -A -18
PROPERTY ZONING: RA.(Rural. Area)
'PRESENT USE: Vacant /Agri cultural
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
North: RP (Residential.Performance)
South: RP (Residential Performance)
East RP (Residential Performance)
92 (Business General)
West: RA_ (Rural Area)
Use:
Vacant (Russell 150)
Use:
Residential /Vacant
Use:
Residential`
Vacant
Use:
Vacant /Agricultural
• 9
Rezoning;; #03 -13 Madison Village
December 21, 2013
Page 4
REVIEW EVALUATIONS,:
Virginia Dept. of Transportation Please see attached comments..
Fire and Rescue: Plan approved.
Public Works Department: Indicate the location of -the existing overhead power lines on the
generalized development plan and future MDP. We anticipate -that the private development will be
served by a private waste hauler.
Department of Inspections :. N/A
Frederick County Sanitation. Authority:: Per your•request, a..review of the proposed rezoning has
been performed. The Frederick County Sanitation Authority offers comments: limited to the anticipated
impact /effect upon the Authority's public water and sanitary sewer system and the demands thereon.
The parcel is in the water:and sanitary sewer area served by the Authority. Based on the anticipated
usage, water capacity is presently available..: Sanitary sewer treatment capacity at the waste water
treatment'plant is also presently available. Conveyance capacity and layout will be contingent on the
ap p licantperfonning a technical.analysis the existing sanitary sewer system within the area-to he served
and. the ability of the existing conveyance'systetn to accept additional load. Both water and sanitary
sewer facilities are located within a reasonable distance from this site. Please be aware that the
Authority does not review or comment upon proffers and /or conditions proposed or submitted by the
applicant in support of or in conjunction with this application for'rezoi ing, nor does the Authority
assume or undertake any responsibility to review or comment upon any amended proffers and /or
conditions which the.Applieantm'ay hereafter provide to Frederick County.
Service Authority.: No comment
Frederick- Winchester Health Department: N/A
Parks & Recreation:_ . Rezoning application appears to contain verbage which address the County
Development Impact Model.
Winchester Regional Airport: No comments.
Frederick County ,Attorney: Please see attached letter dated May 14, 2013, from Roderick B.
Williams, County Attorney:
"Erederick.County Public School: Please see attached letter date June, 28, 2013; ftoM.K. Wayne Lee,
Jr., LEED GA'
Planning Department: Upon review of "the proposed rezoning, it appears that the proposal does not
Significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to .schedule review of the rezoning
Rezoning, #03 -13 Madison Village
December 2: 2013
Page 5
application by'the HRAB.. According to the rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant;historic
structures located on the property. nor, are there�any possible histori c districts in the vicinity. It was also
noted that the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not
identify a core battlefield. within this area.
Planning &,Zoning:
1) Site History
The property is currently _zpned,RA (Rural Areas) and has historically been used for agricultural,
and residential land, uses. The original Frederick County.Zoning for this property as identified
on the Winchester Quadrangle is Al (Agricultural general). In 2012, a single five acre lot'was
subdivided from this parent tract adjacent to Route 522 which contained the existing residential
land use. Directly to'the north of this site is the Russell 150 property which was rezoned for
residential and commercial land uses in 2006. Two smaller B2 (Business General) properties
adjoin this site at its'proposed' entranceto Route 522. These properties, the Shepherd Properties
were rezoned at around the same time.
2) Comprehensive Policy Plan
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan is the guide. for the future growth' of Frederick County.
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan-:and the Senseny /Eastern Frederick 'urban Areas Plan provide
guidance on. the .future development of the property: Appendix I includes the
Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan as an approved Area Plan.
The property-is located,in the UDA (Urban Development Area) and the SWSA (Sewer and
Water Service Area).
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies the general area surrounding this property with a
high density residential. land use designation. In general, theTroposed residential designation
for this property is consistent with this residential land, use designation of the
Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed;residenti'al density 'is consistent with the residential densities of the RP section
of the.Zoning'Ordinance =Which was recently updated in implementation of the
Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the i= ntroduction of a small area of commercial. land use
provides fora mix of uses. in conjunction with each other, also an element of the 2030
Comprehensive Plan.
The CIP (Capital Improvements:Plan), a component of the Comprehensive Plan, has
identified, the - general area of this property, along Route. 522,south, as,a location for a smaller
scale parkthat would be-designed to serve the anticipated additional residents in this area.
• •
Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village
December 2.100
Page 6
3) Site Suitability /Environment
The, property is well suited to future development. It is relatively.open, flatland with small. areas
of slopes and wetlands associated with drainage across the site. The site does contain a pond on
the northern property line, close to the entrance road to the` site. This pond will be preserved
during the development ofthe site and used as a recreational feature.
Access to the site will be directly to Route 522 via.a.new public street entrance designed f6fthe
project. This new public street will contain`bi cycle, and pedestrian accommodations-as called for
in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. This public street will be extended to provide access to
adjacent properties as the.development progresses -It should be,satisfied that the extension of
the public street network occurs in a timelyrnanner and keyconnections are madeto adjacent
properties.
4) Potentiallmpacts
Transportation.
The Frederick County Eastern `Road Plan recognizes Route ;522' as an improved major arterial
road. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan recognizes a minor collector road thatruns east -west
from Route 522 over to future Warrior Drive: Interparcel. connections are, also a potential as this
project develops, in parficular, to the property to the. south.
Recent traffic volumes on Route 522 in the vicinity of the site showed the average annual daily
traffic was 15,220, vehicles per day. The Applicant's TIA projects traffic on Route 522 to be
26,585 vehicles per day in 2026.
The proposed impacts to Route 522 at the site entrance will be; significant. The.proposed project
will have a.single entrance on to Route 522. In order to mifigate,the impacts of the project, the
Applicant will _implement the following improvements Installation of a traffic signal at the
proposed entrance and right and ,left turn lanes on Route 522, dual eastbound left turn lanes
from the project entrance, and a roundabout internal to therproject at the commercial. area. The
Appl'icant's TIA further addresses. the traffic impacts of this project.
School's.
This development,,along with other anticipated developments, will.require construction of new
schools 'and support facilities to accommodate increased student. enrollment. The Applicant is
addressing this impact through their recognition of the County's Development Impact Model
values-which provides a value for the capital impacts of the proposed - development.
The.Applicant; is addressing the other capital impacts identified in the development impact
:model by proffering the appropriate values to mitigate any potential impacts.
Rezoning #03,`13 Madison Village,
December 2, 2.013
Page 7
5). Proffer Statement— Dated April 22 -, 2013 (Final Revision dated September 5, 2013)
A) Generalized Development Plan
The applicant has provided a Generalized Development Plan for the purpose of
identifying the general configuration of the street providing :access to and'through the
project, residential and commercial land use.areas, and improvements at the Route 522
entrance. The GDP also shows the location of potential roundabouts internal to the site
and'bicycle and.pedestn'aii accommodations.
B) Land Use
The applicants have proffered a limit to the total humbe"r of residential units to six
hundred forty (640).
- The Applicant 'has modified their proffer'statement (dated. September 5,
2013) to provide for a minimum number of four hundred twenty residentiai
units :(420). This would ensure a minimum residential density 'of
approximately eight units per acre.
C) Access Management
The applicant has proffered the signalization of the - intersection of the site driveway
and Route 522: In addition, the Applicant .has 'proffered five ''initial transportation
improvements and right of way dedication to support the sites access. Bicycle and
pedestrian -facilities are also proffered internal to the .project along the public roads.
D) Transportation
The Applicant has also proffered to cons truct,the internal road system as shown on the
GDP which includes interparcel access and connection s.to:adiacent properties. Proffer
;6 a) and b) detail. the extension of the public road system to the adjacent properties.
-
The Applicant.has ,modified their'proffer statement (dated September 5,
2013) to include; triggers for the completion of the identified public road
connections, to the °west and to the south by;the,3.121h residential occupancy
and.the,420 "'residential occupancy, respectively,.
E) Community Facilities
The Applicant has proffered a monetary contribution to community facilities to offset
the impact of the residential development. The amount. per single family -detached,
attached, and multifamily dwelling unit is consistent with. th_ e. County's D.eyelopment.
lmpact Model values for 2013. The Applicant has.proposed an alternative payment:
program for themulti'familyunits which.is generally acceptableto the County. Attorney
and Staff. The;Applicant, has also included a provision for axeduced.contribution in the
case of any age restricted components of this development, proffer 10..
Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village
December 2, 2013
Page 8
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 08/21/13 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
The Madison Village rezoning ,application is generally consistent with future land. use designations of
the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Areas `Plan which provide
guidance on the future development of the property:
A couple of elements of the rezoning application have been.identified that,should be carefully evaluated
`to ensure that they fully address the impacts associated with this rezoning request. The Planning
Commission should pay particularattention to the transportation impacts; in particular the extension of
the roads to the adjacent properties is proffered at the time of the Master Development Plan for the
project. Specific commitments as to the timing of these extensions are not proffered. Also, it is
important to recognize that there is no minimum limitation placed on the development to ensure the
more intensive developme "nt of this site.
Confirmation of the issues identified in the staff report, and any issues raised by the Planning
Commission, should be addressed prior to the decision of the Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY & ACTION OF THE 8/21/13 MEETING:.
Commission members had questions regarding the anticipated impacts on local schools and whether the
project would be developed in phases. It was observed from the TIA that the north - bound, left -turn lane
Level of Service would drop to.Level D' at build out, and the applicant was asked what methods would
be used to mitigate this situation. A Commissioner asked what recreational" aspect was anticipated in
working with the Frederick County Parks & Recreation.Department. In addition,, an issue was raised
regarding the density and the land use designation. In reviewing the GDP and the proffers; a
Commissioner observed the documents were fairly generic with residential use and didn't provide the
Commission withany assurance the project would be a mix of single-family attached and multi- family.
There was concern about the applicant's rational for_not designating on the GDP or by proffer that this
project would be a,mix of single- familyattached and multi = family., so there would be consistency when
the MDPsis submitted and no question concerning the housing type.
An.adjoi- ing property owner;,Mr. Michael Shepherd came forward to speak during the public comment
portion ofthehearing. Mr,.Shepherd owned.two adjoining parcels.(P.INs.64 -A -14 and 64-A-1.5 which
were rezoned to B2 (Business General) by the Board of Supervisors on,.April 14; 2004. Mr.. Shepherd
w
said he recently learned that Madison, LLC ill need to vacate his properties' entrances -and: exits and
grade,the front ofhis property-to meet sight distance requirements for VDOT. He ",said he contacted the
applicant :for the purpose of arranging a land swap,in exchange --for his frontage. He,also desired for the
applicant,.;to extend their deceleration lane approximately 100 -120 feet-for access into hisproperty. Mr.
Shepherd, saidhis two parcels are legally separated and he was concerned,h'is southernmost parcel
would be left with no exit. In addition, he said there is. a spite strip .issue to the south, where his
connector road comes in- from.Rt. 522; he ,said the applicant .has a. "small portion of land between their
road and his, southernmost. boundary which is not significant enough to act as a buffer. Mr.. Shepherd
would .like for the:ap,plicantto.increase the distance there slightly. Mr. Shepherd said at:this time', no
.agreement on any of "these issues has been, reached between him and the applicant.
Rezoning #03-5 3' Madison Village
December 2, 20.13
Page 9
Discussion ensued between the staff the Commission, and the applicant's attorney as to whether or not
'an agreement between the two landowners should be reached. prior io rezoning. The Planning Staff
believed the access would be accoinmod'ated. The Planning Staff reported the applicant improved their
proffer statement to insure those °road connections would be done with the first phase of development
prior to occupancy, to ensure the access would not only be there for the applicant'sproject,, but also for
the two commercial properties as well.
The Staff pointed out the public hearing sign had not been posted on the property for a '-few days and
believed it would be appropriate to postpone a decision until the property'could be properly posted to
meet legal requirements.
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to table the rezoning for 90 days to allow the:propertyto
be properly posted with a public .hearing sign. (Commissioner Oates abstained from voting;
Commissioners Madagan and 'Marston'w.,ere absent from the meeting.)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY : &• STAFF CONCLUSION, FOR THE 11/06/13 PLANNNG
COMMISSION MEETING:
The Planning Comm ssiontabled this application for',90 days�at your 08/.21 /13 meeting. This provided
the.Applicant time to address the items discussed during the Planning Commission meeting, including
the ,extension of the .roads to the adjacent properties in ,a timely;manner, and the establishment of a
minimum residential density consistent with .the Comprehensive Plan. It also provided an additional
opportunity for the Applicant to meet with the adjacent property owner to come to.an agreement over
access issues. Finally,, this also allowed the site to be posted again and the public hearing to ,be
adequately noticed.
The Applicant revised their proffer statement (dated September .5,. 2013) to address the two items
identified.bystaff More specifically, the Applicant has modifi ed their proffer statement to provide for
a minimum number of four hundred, twenty (420) residential units; this would ensure a minimum
residential density of approximately eight units per acre, and to 'include triggers for the.comple_tion of
the identified-Apublier road connections.to the west and to the south by the'312`h residential occupancy
and the 420`h residential occupancy; respectively. At the'tirne this report was made, the Applicant and
adjacent property owner`have not come to, an agreement.
The Madison. Village rezoning application is generally consistent'wi"th future land use designations of
-the 2030 Comprehensive Plan 'and the. Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan which provide
guidance on the future development of the property.
Confirmation- of the issues i'denti'fied in the staff report', and -any further issues raised by the Planning
Commission, .should. be addressed prior to the decision of the Planning'Commission.
Eollowinz the required public hearink,- a;recommendation: re ardin, this�rezonin,- application to the
Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village
December,2, 20.1 -3
Page 10
Board of Supervisors would appropriate. The applicant should be prepared.to adequately address all
concerns raised by the Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY & ACTION. OF THE 11 /06/13 MEETING:
Mr. John Lewis with Painter- Lewis, P:L.C. and Mr. Benjamin Butler, attorney; were representing this project.
Mr. Lewis said they have worked on the fouHssues raised by the Planning Commission: Thefirstissue, regarding
the minimum density, was resolved by placing the minimum and maximum,densities, which are: in conformance
with the Comprehensive Plan, within the proffer statement: The second issue, the timing of construction of the
internal roads, is detailed within the proffers and is tied to. the various, phases of the project. The third issue,
.regarding-the disappearance of the public hearing sign,.has been resolved and the sign has been reposted and is
visible- today. The fourth issue, obtaining a grading easement to facilitate the construction of their entrance from
Route 522, has not yet been resolved with the adjacent property owner. Mr. Lewis said two draft agreements have
been exclfanged,, but no:resolution leas been arrived at this time. He said it was incumbent upon the applicant to
reach an agreement in order for this project'to move forward. Mr. ,Lewis requested the Planning Commission
forward a favorable'recomiriend'ation to the Board of Supervisors, on this�application in its current state.
Mr. Michael Shepherd, the�owner of the two 132 -zoned lot's _adjacentto the Madison Village project, to the south
and west, said no final agreement.has,beenxeached regarding the' access anelieasements. He had filed a site plan
for- hi's properties. prior 'to the last public hearing, and he, was prepared to move forward with his plan. Mr.
Shepherd was not opposed to the Madison Village project,as a practicalxnatter;,however,,he said the outstanding
issue'ishow the,road couldgo i'n,without grading'easements and his buildings so close to.the,edge of his property.
The Chairman commented the original application had a number of types of residential units and asked if
tha "t -dame variety was present in °this revised submittal. Staff replied the minimum number of residential units has
been established in the proffer at 420 and the iriaximmn at 640; all housing types are represented.
There were no citizen comments:
Commission tneinbers discussedwhether approval of the rezoning'should be' contingent on an agreementbeing
reached between the applicant and the adjoining property.owner. From the Planning CoinmissioWs;obligation in
terms of the application materiaN. :and the proffers, they believed, the General Development Plan provided the
locations where those access points should he provided to ensure there is nterco_nnectivity;. however, it was
incumbent on the two property: Owners to work out a mutually - agreeable arrangement to facilitate that. They
believed ihis,was,a private element and the Commission and staff-had done what it can do and should do to ensure
the framework is there. It; was also recognized this rezoning application was in compliance with the
Con prehensive Plan and Frederick County Codes. The Planning Coininission voted unanimously to-recommend
approval.
(Note: Coininissioner Oates abstained from voting; Commissioners Dunlap, Kenney, and, Madagan were absent
from the., meeting.,),
Rezoning #03 =13 Madison Village,
December 2, 2013
Page H.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR THE
12/11/13 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING:
Following a public hearing, at "their November 6; 2013 meeting,, the Planning Commission voted
unanimously to recommend approval of the Madison Village Rezoning.request,,RZ #03 -1,3. Previously,
the Planning Commission tabled this application for 90 days at their 08,,/21 /13 .meeting. This provided
the. Applicant time to address the itemsdiscussed during the Planning Commission meeting, including
the extension of the roads to the adjacent properties in a, timely manner, and the establishment of a
minimum residential density consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.:1_t also provided an additional
.opportunity for the Applicant to meet with the adjacent property owner to come to an agreement over
access issues (at the tune of the,meeting, the Applicant and adjacent property owner had met on kveral
occasions but had not yet come Wan agreement).
The Applicant revised their proffer statement (dated ;September 5, 2013) to address the two items
identified by staff. More specifi cally;, the Applicant, modified their, proffer statement to provide for a
minimum number of four hundred twenty .(420) residential units;; this would ensure a minimum
i
residential density =of approximately eight units per acre, and to include triggers for the completion of
the identified public road, connections ,to the west and to thei south by the 3'12`" residential occupancy
and the 420th residential occupancy;, respectively.
The Madison Village; rezoning application is generally consistent with future land use designations of
the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the,,Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan which provide
guidance on the, future development. of°the, property.
Confirmation of the issues identified in the staff report; and any further 'issues,raised by the Board of
Supervisors, should be addressed. prior to the decision of the Board.
Following the, required public, hearitw a. decision reearding�tljis
ors would be,'appropriate. The applicantshould be prepared to
address all, concerns. raised by the Board of Supervisors.
64 A 12
11
y
.r
41-
4
t r4
Applications �; � 4 �'�8r♦ k.
Parcels 1r
Building Footprints ,
B1 (Business, Neighborhood District)
B2 (Business, General Distrist)
B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District)
EM (Extractive Manufacturing District)
HE (Higher Education District)
M1 (Industrial, Light District)
M2 (Industrial, General District)
MH1 (Mobile Home Community District)
• MS (Medical Support District)
OM (Office - Manufacturing Park)
4W R4 (Residential Planned Community District)
4W R5 (Residential Recreational Community District)
RA (Rural Area District)
RP (Residential Performance District)
w
64C7A I-
64C�
WESTWOCGRINDSTONE
64C A 1�
14,5011P
PRESTON
r 2 15
Frederick County Dept of
64C A
S 16A
PLACE
64C 2
107 N Kent St
28 r
Subdivision
- . o A '6�s
` 64C2 71 64C 2 I�
"22
1
540 - 665 - 5651
-- 64C26 64C21�
LuJ
Staff: mruddy
64Ci2 .5 64C 64C
:2
�5 ■
64C 2 4
mZ
•
//��
64 n117 64 A ►4
64C 2
f; ti
64.22
64 A 18A
■
• 64C 2I� 6
.� [64�A 43� ■
64D A 1 r ■ ` A 42
Q3QfK1
�
64D A3
64D_A 4
6dD A 5 - 64 2 A bq. p q Subdil
i64D A 6=
'•. e�►c�i
�l•J
w
64C7A I-
64C�
WESTWOCGRINDSTONE
64C A 1�
REZ # 03 - 13
Note:
r 2 15
Frederick County Dept of
64C A
S 16A
Planning & Development
64C 2
107 N Kent St
28 r
Suite 202
e
- . o A '6�s
` 64C2 71 64C 2 I�
Winchester, VA 22601
1
540 - 665 - 5651
-- 64C26 64C21�
Map Created: July 30, 2013
Staff: mruddy
64Ci2 .5 64C 64C
�5 ■
64C 2 4
•
//��
64 n117 64 A ►4
64C 2
f; ti
64.22
64 A 18A
■
• 64C 2I� 6
.� [64�A 43� ■
64D A 1 r ■ ` A 42
64D A.2
-r� �dAd1
64D A3
64D_A 4
6dD A 5 - 64 2 A bq. p q Subdil
i64D A 6=
WESTWOCGRINDSTONE
REZ # 03 - 13
Note:
Frederick County Dept of
Madison Village
Planning & Development
PINS:
107 N Kent St
64 - A - 18
Suite 202
e
RA to RP (46.26 Ac.)
Winchester, VA 22601
RA to B2 (5 Ac.)
540 - 665 - 5651
Map Created: July 30, 2013
Staff: mruddy
0 212.5 425 850 Feet
Proffer Statement
Madison Village
Parcel TM #64 -A -18
RA TO RP /62 WITH PROFFERS
Rezoning M
Property:
PARCEL ID: 64 -A -18
Area:
51..26 acres
Recorded Owner:
Madison Farms, LLC
Applicant:
Madison 11, LLC :.
558 Bennys Beach Road
Front Royal, Virginia 22630 "
Project Name:
Madison Village
TM #64 -A -1,8
Magisterial District:
Shawnee 'Magisterial District
Original Date
of Proffers:
April 22, 2013
Revision Date:
July 1.2, 2013
September 5, 2013
Prepared _by:
PAINTER- LEWIS, P.L.C.
817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120
Winchester, VA 22601
Tel.: (540) 662- 5792
email: office @paintedewis.com
glob Number: 1201007
� Cf
PROFFER STATEMENT
Madison Farms, LLC- TM #64 =A -18
Pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Frederick, County, Zoning Ordinance, the
undersigned ;applicant proffers that in the event, that the ,Board of Supervisors of
Freder:"ick Countysl all approve: Rezoning Application.4# for the rezoning of
parcel TM #,' 64-A -18 from RA -to RP /B2' wiith proffers; the, use and development of th, e
subject property shall ;begin strict conformance with the following conditions set forth in
this proffer 'except. ,ta the, extent that such conditions may be subsequently amended or n�
revised by the ownerand-such..are approved by, the2 Board of'Supervisors in accordance
with .the Code: of Virginia, and the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance.. These proffers
shall be binding on the owner.and their legal_ successors. or assigns.
PROFFERS
Generalized :'PevelopmeritPlan.
The owner proffers .to develop the property In general conformance with the
Generalized Development Plan (GDP) dated .7/2/13, identified as "Generalized
p_ a A,`1'8, 5:1:26 Acres" and which, is attached to the proffer
Develo ment, ,P -Ian TM #64
statement, for the. purpose, of identifying the proposed zoning changes to the parcel, the
general location and form ofi the` parcel access, and improvements to Route 522.
Approximately five ,acres will 'be rezoned to B2, Busin.ess General District, and
approximately 46.26 acres will be rezoned to RP, Residential. District.
Attached to the proffer staterrfent' is..a "Plat of Rezoning" dated July `1, 2013 which
delineates the,proposed zoning:areas.
2) Res` deniiai Dens''ity'
The' owner proffers to limit the;maximum, number of residential units to :six hundred forty
(640).. The owner °proff ers to ,,limit the- minimum number' of residential, units to four
hundred twenty (420)..
3.) Right of Way. Dedication.:
The, owner proffers to dedicate. a ten foot strip of land 'alon'g the frontage of .Parcel TM#
6.4- A -1'$; o the Virginia Depart ment of Transporta_ tiop for the; purpose'of facilitating future
improvements to Rou,te:522. This .dedication will occur prior to. the issuance of any
occupancy permit for the;property.:
4;) In'itial "Transporfatiorn Improvements
Th ffe
, e owner prors` to dedicate 'the necessary- land for road improvements land; to
construct- the! internal road system as generally shown' on 'th'e GD;R. Implementation of
certain' :of .these, improvements as a "pproved by VDOT and' Frederick County will be
complefed prior to 'the issuance of any occupancy permit for =the property. These
.impro,vementsvill include:
a), The design and; construction, of a right turn .lane southbound on Route 522` into
the parcel;;
page 2
C
PROFFER, STATEMENT
Madison Farms, LLC- TM #64 -A -18
b) The design of one northbound left turn lane on Route 522 into the parcel;
c) The design and construction of a full movement public street entrance into thee,
property including one west bound lane, two eastbound left turn lanes, one east
bound right turn lane, 'and bicycle /pedestrian facilities
d) The design and construction of a roundabout at the western limits of the
commercial area unless it is determined by the Virginia Department of
Transportation that an alternate intersection design is required.
e) The design and construction of a public street to the northern limits of the parcel
to allow connection, to Parcel TM #64 -A -1 2 as generally shown on the GDP.
5.) .Interparcel Access
The owner agrees to provide the necessary ingress and egress easements to allow
vehicle access for the benefit; of Parcel TM #64 -A -14 and Parcel TM #64' -A =15, to and'
from the public roads described in Items 4.c and 4.e above subject to approval by the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
6) Other Transportation Improvements
a.) A public road will be extended to the western limits of the parcel to allow future
connection to Parcel TM #64 -A -124 as generally shown on the GDP. The road wilt
include the design and construction of a roundabout at the intersection of the proposed
roads unless it is determined by the Virginia Department of Transportation that an
alternate intersection, design is required. Construction of this road will be completed
before the three hundred.t'welfth (3'12th) residential unit receives an occupancy permit.
L) A public road will be extended to the southern limits of the parcel to allow future
connection to Parcel TM #64 -A -21 as generally shown on ,the,GDP. Construction of this
road will be completed before the four hundred twentieth (42oth) residential unit receives
an occupancy permit.
7.) Route 522 Traffic Signal
In the event that the Virginia Department of Transportation notifies the owner that a,
warrant study is required at the 'intersection of Route 522 and the access to the parcel,
the owner hereby proffers to complete said warrant study within three months of the
notification: If, after reviewing the warrant study, the Virginia Department of
Transportation, notifies the owner that a traffic signal is warranted at the intersection of
Route 522 and the access to the parcel, the owner hereby proffers to undertake and
complete the design. and construction of the traffic signal within one year of the - signal
warrant notification.
8.) Bicycle /Pedestrian Facilities
The owner proffers to install bicycle and pedestrian facilities generally along the
proposed public road routes and as part of the construction of said roads. Construction
'details and 'phasing will be submitted as part of a Master Development Plan for the
project
page 3
• •
PROFFER STATEMENT
Madison Farms, LLC- TM #64 -A -18
9.) Residential Development Impact Offset Contribution
a. Single Family Detached and Single Family Attached: The owner proffers to pay
to the Treasurer of Frederick County, Virginia the amount of $19,600 per single family
detached dwelling unit and $13,062 per single family attached unit prior to the time, that
,the Certificate of Occupancy is issued for each unit:
b. Apartments — The 'owner proffers to pay to the Treasure of Frederick County,
Virginia the: amount of $11;339 per apartment unit_ in accordance with the following:
Payment of the amount determined will be made promo the time of the issuance ;
of the Certificate of Occupancy for each apartment building in a Phase and as follows-
(i) Ten (10 %0)' Percent of the amount determined in cash or its equivalent;
(ii) The Balance ofthe Impact Fee in the form of a bond, :secured by cash (or
its equivalent) or by a letter of credit from County approved financial
institution -, payable five (5) years from, date; and, payable to the.Treasurer
of the County of Frederick, Virginia.
10.) Age - Restricted Residential Development Impact Offset Contribution
a. Single Family Detached and Single Family Attached: The owner proffers to pay
to the Treasurer of Frederick County, Virginia the amount of'$2';869 per single family
detached dwelling unit and $2,181 per single family attached unit prior to the time that
the Certificate of Occupancy is issued for each unit.
b. Apartments — The owner proffers. to pay to the Treasure of Frederick County,
Virginia the amount of, $2,187 'per.apartment unit in accordance with the following:
Payment of the amount determined will be made at the time of the issuance of
the Certificate of Occupancy for each apartment building in a°Phase and as follows:
(i) Ten (10 %) Percent of the amount determined in cash or its equivalent;
(ii) The Balance of the Impact Fee in the forma of bond, secured by cash.(or
its equivalent) or by a letter of credit from County' approved financial
institution', payable five (5) years from date; ,and payable to the Treasurer
of the County of Frederick, Virginia.
11) Property Owners Association
The residential development will be made subject -to a. Property Owners Association
(POA) that shall be responsible for the ownership and maintenance of all property areas
not privately owned or dedicated to public agencies. The POA shall be provided other
responsibilities, duties, and powers as are necessary and customary for such
associations,. In addition to other responsibilities as assigned, the POA, shall be
responsible for solid waste disposal programs and the maintenance of streets, parking
areas, buffer areas, recreational features, Lighting and landscaping.
page 4
PROFFER STATEMENT
Madison Farms, LLC- TM #64 -A -18
The conditions proffered above shall be binding on the heirs, executors, administrators,
assigns, and successors in the interest of the' owner. In the event that the Frederick
County Board of Supervisors grant this rezoning and accepts these proffers, then these
proffers shall apply'to the land rezoned in addition to the other requirements of the
Frederick County Code.
Submitted y;
O Behalf f adis LI' LC
City /County of t' Commonwealth Of Virginia.
The foregoing instrumen was acknowledged before me this ( day of
''201' J .
Notary Public
Notary Registration number: �`3 ,
My Commission Expires Septenbo §-A, 1818
My commission expires:
page 5
5
:4=Vf ®1: 10; IVWAIJJN[OfAINI$
�Ar T V-1
t:
ta
! x RU!
! a r p E a l
� � s4 •d f �. Ytl•W b lij� kv „�' A'
RIM
-6� mgm
ldy� t :u"x -rT ✓.& i MC'CI
- r • � nt �. 4 «a> � ;�.. estwooq Dr G•in �, � G �f.rf> Jy��.' .
7AlNTF61_11 FW(•v 16
AMENDMENT
Action:
PLANNING CbM1V1ISS10N% November 6, 2013 - Recommended Approval
BOARD OF S'UP.ERVISORS` December l 1, 201,3' U APPROVED El DENIED
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
THE Z'ONIN'G DISTRICT `1VIAP
REZONING #03 =13 OF MADISON VILLAGE
W14E'REAS; :Rezoning #03` -13 of Madison Village, submifted_by Painter. -Lewis; P L.C.,,to rezone 51.26
acres from RA (Rural Areas) Distriet to 46.26 aeres,of,RP (Residential' Performance) District and 5 acres..of
B2 '(,G'eneral .Business)' - District with proffers dated Apri1 22„ -2013 and last, "revised on. September 5, 2013
a was• considered: The, property'is,located on the west side of Route 522',. approximately 1.,000' feet south of
the -'intersection.of Route 522`and Airport: Road. The property is further identified with R.I.N. 64- A -:1.8 in
the Shawnee Magisterial District
WHEREAS; the.Planning,Commission held a public' meeting,on`this rezoning on August 21, 20,13
and a public hearing on Novemb.of:6; 2013 ; and
WHEREAS, ;the Board,of Supefv sors held a publie:heari:ngon_ this rezoning on December 11;, 2013;
and
WHEREAS,, the Frede_ff Count, Board of Supervisors` find's the =approval of tl is °rezoning to be in
the bpsf interest ;of the publicr`health, safety; welfare; an'd in conformance with the: Comprehensive
Policy.Pla
NOW; THEREFORE,,,B IT'. ORDAINED' by the Frederick Coiunty Board of S ipervisors, that
Chapter, 1:65 of the Frederick' Count -y Code, Zoning, is amended to ;revise the Zoning District 'Map to
rezone 51;:26, acres `from (Rural, District to 46 26.acres of RP (Residential, _Performance)
District ,and 5 acres. °of B2e (General Business) District with 'proffers: -The, conditions 'voluntarily
pr-,offered n.writing by the applicant; and' the property owner, are attached,.
PDRes: #0,0 -:13.
This ordinance shall be, in effect on, the date of adoption.
Passed this l °lth day of December, 20B bythe following;record'ed vote:
Richard C. Shickle, Chairrnan, Gary A. Lofton
Robert A: Hess Robert W:, Wells
Gene. E: Fisher Charles, S.;DeHaven; Jr:
Christopher E. Collins
A COPY ATTEST
John. R. Riley; Jr.,!
Frederick County Administrator
` � C
tiG O -
_ COUNTY of REDEItIC
,Roderick B. Williams
County Attomey.
17J6
540%7 -22 -8383
Fax 540/667 -0370
E-mail:
rwAIia@co.frederick.va:.us
May 14, 2'0:13
VLA E`- 1YIAIL — offcennairiferlewislcom —AND REGULAR MAIL:
John C. Lewis,, R.E.
Painter- Lewis;, P.L.-C.
81:7 Cedar Creek, Grade, S4iitel20
Winchester, Virginia,22604 ;
= Re Rezoniti Application NUdison Farms LLC pjroperty ,
Parcel, Number 64=A --18,, consisting of''51..2f acres _ -
= Proffer :S'tatement dated' April 22, .2013 -
-
Dear John:
You have submitted ito Frederick County for reviewlhe above referen
ced proposed ,
proffer; statement (the: "Proffer Statement ") for'the, proposed. rezoning, of the indicated property
(the "Property ") in the Shawnee Magisterial District, from the RA (Rural Areas', District to the
RP (Resi.dential Performance),District (part),subjectto proffers; and - to,the B2 (General'
Business) District (pant), subject tq proffers::I have now reviewed, ;the. Proffer Statement and`it is :>
my opinion that the !Proffer, Statement would 'be in a form to meet the requirements .of ,the
-
'Frederick- - County Zoning Ordinance -and the Code - of "Virginia, an&Would be legally sufficient as
a proffer statement, subject to the, following comments: a
L The rezoning generally,:Proffer 1, and the: Generalized Develo p ment;Phhi With the, ,
owner now ro - osin a split Zoning of ther.Pro ert . art,to be RP arid` art to be B2
p _.p g p g p_ Y, P P
the County ;will need an,actual metes and :bounds delineation of the respecti -ve
proposed.zoning areas, as part of the apph'cafi °on:for this - rezoning. This is the only
means to ensure sufficient definiteness as to ' rezoning action tat maybe
approved..
2.;_ Proffer 2 '!Staff:will want to confirm that-the proposed;RP part offhe Property is
capable of being developed with us- many 'as 640 residential- units, after giving
consideration to; among other°. things,, density requirements, ,open space requirements;.
and;iiifrastructure needs. Also,; to the extent that the Property cannot',accornmodate
640 residential units, consistent with:the,Zoning Ordinance- and any other applicable
limitations .`the'`owrier should be aware that a`proffer statement can in no way operate
107 North Kent Street, `Winchester, Virginia 22601
i
i
,1
John C. Lewis, _RE• •
May 14, 2013
Page 2
to override ordinance limitations by, for example, allowing any greater number of
residential units-.
3. Proffer '3 — The proffer might better state that the dedication will occur prior to
issuance of any occupancy, permit, for the Property.
4. Proffer 4 - For clarity, the proffer might also state that the owner will dedicate the
necessary land for the road 'improvements, in particular with respect to those abutting
Route 522 and /or in the vicinity of the site entrance intersection. Also, the proffer
might better state that the improvements will be completed. prior to issuance of any
occupancy permit for °the Property.
5. Proffer 4c,—. For clarit y; the proffer might better "indicate That the improvements will
be located at the intersection of the development access with Route 522.
6. Last paragraph, second line — "In the even" should be "In the event ":
I have not reviewed the, substance of the proffers as, to whether the proffers: are suitable
and appropriate for-this specific development, as it is my understanding that that review will be
done by,staff and the Planning Commission,..
Slncer ours,
Roderick B. W
_County Attorney
cc; Michael Ruddy, AICR Deputy Director of Planning and Development (via e-mail)-
„n
Fred e ric County-Pubti Schools
-' to f `i�€�iur aN Sl:u.dcit is c.f1 #' ;8t_C i�C 1'1? E i� di cii 3f t "1
K Wayne Lee, Jr. LEED GA . Coordinatorof'Planning and,Nvelopment • leew @frederick.k12':va:us
June 28, 20:13
Mr. John Lewis
Painter - Lewis, P.L.C.
817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120
Winchester, VA 22601
Re: Madison Village Rezoning
Dear John:
Frederick County Public ,Schools has reviewed the Madison Village: rezoning application
submitted to us on May 7,, 2013. We offer thefollow.ing eomments
1.: The cumulative ,impact of�this developmentand other developments in Frederick County
will require construction of new schools and. support facilities to accommodate increased
student enrollment. 'Based on the proposed 12.5 unit,per acre maximum gross density,
the maximum densities allowed.for single- family attached units and multifamily units,
and the maximum proposed number of units of 640, we estimate that,there will be: a
maximum of 384 townhomes and 256 . apartments in this development. These units will
house 187 students: 50 high school students, 45 middle school students, and 92
elementary school students. In order to properly serve these additional students,
Frederick CountyPublic Schools would spend $1;952;000 more per year in operating
costs (or $3,050 per imit-per year) and $7,168,000 in one -time capital expenditures (or
$11 ;200 per unit). You will find, enclosed with.this letter, a more detailed assessment of
the estimated impact-of Madison Village on FCPS, including attendance zone
information.
Please feel free to contact me at leew e,frederick.kl`2.va.us or 54.0- 662 -3888 x88249 if'you have
any questions or comments:
Sincerely,.
1
K. WayneLee, Jr., LEED GA
Coordinator of Planning -and Development
enclosure.
cc: Dr. David Sovine,, Superintendent of Schools
Mr. Ahbert Orndorff, Assistant Superintendent:for Administration
Mr. John Grubbs; Transportation Director
1415 Amherst Street www.frederick.kl2.va.us 540- 662 -3889 Ezt,' 88249
P.O. Box 3508 540 662 4237 fax
Winchester, Virginia 22604 -2546
O cn
U o.
N
w
O
N
F•ti
� N
o
ti
U
cl
Z Q
cn
c
U
c
;m541 c
a;
i
a a
o
b w
Q
a
L O
N
O
00I
0
a�
F� E
E
W-4
o
ee
� a
�
w
C7
Eo
xC;�:cz
H
o; a
o � o
0
U:
U
o
N
6> Cl
�10
7t
00
O
�•
M
O
'`O
x
oa
N
v a w
o
°o.
N
M
�•
U
o
0
°^
v1
CD
00
0
o
O
00
O
a a
N
Goo
O
vD
wUU
V•
�
�
A
�
y
;0
U
�
M
4
N
W
e
'.S
fd4
O'
000
W.)
O
M
(V
�O
O
U
;
,o
x
i
o
Q
Q
0
0
F� E
E
:'
o
ee
U
xC;�:cz
H
i
o
0
0
o0
ee
U
0
U
o
N
COO
r/1
ol
00
O
�•
M
O
'`O
x
N
o
°o.
o:
U
o
0
°^
v1
v
00
0
o
O
00
N
Goo
O
vD
wUU
V
A
�
;0
U
�
M
4
N
W
e
'.S
fd4
U
;
O
U
o
Fz,
o
Q
'U
�
CC
C.
U
a
�
o
.a
ti
a
.a
un
:Ey
i
i
.r
.... ! '
*
- a:RI L <a;°�Ii'�U' E1['.i'lvi_cR�•rI,O� I +�ol�%ry . .
rI2EDL,RIC1{ �:�lli�IT•Y,. VIRGI��TSI1;1
f« lie c r�i�fjzlelecl j��; 1'lcr�at?rr,�g .Staff.
I eeAi�iociiit Paiet �� 5 l
Zoning rinlcndment tjumber. Date Rec6,,ved 1
PC Flearin Date,
C1ieelclist Check t} e: >alF win�,itezl�s'tliat have?b&ii. iidtided witlr.this applicatio n
o- ca ioh,map X A ertcy Cc�t�a:rnents X
I'l'af -X Pees X .
Deed to X Impact Analysis S "tatch -ibn:t X.._
.—
Vei'ifitp.atioil-of taxc s' :aid X 1'icil -fe St';itaiietit X
� 19
0 -
% --f-he.foll6ving infofniatibn should lie jh•ovi'iled acco Airy ,,
to; the type,of'i woning
proposed
Nun !..b..e.r-b.f'Qnj..ts. ?'roOos'ed
Single 1--' anlily homes: Tbwnhonic:- -160 Miflti-Fatnily: 480
Non-Residefitial Lots,` Mobile Home: - Hotel.Rooms:
SduftreTootauye-of Prol)6sed..Uses
office. ScNice Stdti*oli:;,
Retail! Man6fitchirin
a
'Restaurant- Warehouse:_:
Other
to.. Signthl re':
I (WO), the LlndersiOI'ed, do hereby respectfiilly. male ,ap I' 1catio n an( Lpetition the, Frederick
County Bo "T FS --t- the zoi.ii.iia..Ot-'dihqr�ce,,q'tid-to change the',zon I in - g-ma - p
,qr.c o uperivisors o, amend
of Frederick, CoOrify, Virgiflia, J {eve) atithotize ,r-r*,cdetio'k County ,officials to enter the
property flof site --inspettidn---p
pi.poses
h I appltcatiocr is -s'-ubmfttCd:.I1Iu.st be: placed at
the fr pf0p 'line �qvlea�t s
pqt ert even. days:l)liof to..'Oicl'l"lrlliii.iii.ci-,CbI 1,1 iss 0 1 publictffm-itig
and'thC%BbarC Of " Super tv"I'80 J s' P6 blicIiea6if2 and niaintailiedsbias t6-be visible, from the road
right -of way until the h6dririg.
I (ye) hereby certify, that this I:ap"6lieation and its.a&onipan-ving, -materials are true an�
acctuateao the bcst.,6ffny.(ou vv I e d ge.
APPIJ.cant(s):
121
Date:
Date...
Date
A tl�oining3 t'r o e,t ty O."W"I e, rs.
Rczo l n`g
O viieis;��f j�roj�crty adjeiIlip, thy la»-d �vijjlt,bo notitted oftlie t'laililin,7;Cotiimission.,u7d the Board of
Stil?er- Visors rnce ngs._ I cat th'e l�«rpc se c�C tll�s al�plicatloi , adj'oinit� property is, tfn propertv"
icl utt ttg the requcgtecl property on'tfi'e side or rcar,oi�;anyjiroper.ty clitectty n ross.a pulzlic
night- ofkway, a private rJ l t of_�v1y, ,or a ivitterc�urse; #'rom t1i'e ;rctiae §tcil property The
ap }�Iicarit`i_s tequ ecl to obtainthc.follo� vii vil��riiaat'ion:on c�lcl acijo�tring I�col�trt�J i'ncIkid'iiic,ttl
liar I ad'r>nttf_uation- r ti7liber ` «Whirl m y° be, obtained fi;om tllc offrcei o1' the Conat��issiotiei o€
Revenue 1 he C'c�ftirni.�srurter:of 7lie' IZev�irre is lr�c�rteil gin. tlrc 2�7c1 f1Unt �f t7c 1- =.'ecJr tck C'orrnt}
Adwiini.siraflve Baildina 1'07 ?or.ths -Tent Slr&et
'Name «riot I't ri.perty 'Iciex�tif "u atxon. i!1��mbcr �1 cidrtiss; -' y' -- - -I .
I�r� nc EFG Investments, L'LC 340 W. Parkins` Mill' Road
- 1inchester, VA 226.02'
< Properly -#, 64- A -123A 63 A=:1,24
„� R 150 SPE, LLC. 621 E Pratt Street, Suite 600.,
Baltimore, MD 21202-
Pro c,t T 64 -A -12 =
DtaBrueler Enter rises LLC 1.686 S. Pleasant Valle Road
~{ante p Y
JlUin:che'ster,'VA:22601'
' 64 -A -
P, opcnv ,, - 21 -
Na,tae, Thomas Bentley 1014 Front Royal Pike,
Winchester, VA 22602
64 A 1,8A
Property :. '
Na,he_ Cleveland Michael Turner '201 Vine Lane
Winchester„ VA, 22602
Prperty i 64D -A -3
Na
Inc Jesse Willard Riley, Jr' 980 Front Ro al Pike.
Winchester, 'VA 22602
Property ~t 64 -A =17
�liamc Michael-b. Hockrnan 910 Front Royal Pike
- = "Winchester, VA 22602
pfd ---- r 64 -A -16
ti,113e J'anet,A. Embrey Gillespie;. 961 Front Royal Pike
Winchester; VA226,02
Props rty 64C 2 4, 64'C -2 -5:
Dona Lee Dewitt, Trustee 949 Front Royal Pike
Wlnchester,, V.A22602
Name and. Property Identification Number
Address;
Name:Junxuan':.Zhou :Guliani
937 F anfiR ya1::1?ike
1Winchester, VA 22602-
.Pi e #.64 2.7
P rty,
NameRobert E &:Judy, C. Wallace
92.9.: Front Royal Pike
Winchester, VA.22602
6402-8.
Property # ..
Name Michael D. Hockman
910 Front Royal Pike
Winchester, VA 22602
Property # 64 -A -16
Name Howard F. Sharp, Jr.
921 Front Royal Pike.
Winchester, VA 22602
Property`# 64 "C -A -16
Name Montie Gibson, Jr.
'2508 Wilson Boulevard
Winchester, VA 22601
Property # 64C=AA3A
Name Michael S. & Cheryl Shepard
179 George Drive
Winchester, VA 226:02
Property# 64-A -15, 64 -A -14
Name'
Property#
Name
Property #
Name
Property #
Name.
Property#
Name
Property #
Name
Property, # .
Name
Property #
Name
Property #
16
•
REZONING APPLICATION
Madison Property - TM #64-A-18
7. Ad scent Property
PARCEL ID NUMBER
USE
ZONING
OWNER
63- A -1;23A
vacant
RA
EFG Investments, LLC
64 -A 712
vacant
RA
R -150 SPE LLC
63 -A -124
vacant
RA
EFG Investments`, LLC
64 -A -21
vacant
RA
Dubcueler`Enterprises_, LLC
64-A-1 8A
residential
RA
IThpmas Beatle
'64D-A -3
residential
RP
Cleveland 'Michael Turner
64 -A -17
residential
RA
Jesse Willard R Hey Jr
64 -A =1'6
residential
RA
Michael D. Hockman
64C 72 -4
vacant
RP
Janet A. Embrey Gillespie, Trustee
64C -2' -5
'residential
RP
Janet A Embrey Gillespie, Trustee
64C -2 -6
residential
RP
Dons LeeDewitt,, Trustee
64C -2 -7
residential°'-
RP
Junxuan Zhou Guiliani
64C -M
residential
RP
Robert E. & Judy C. Wallace
64 -A -16
residential
RA
Michael D. Hockman
64C -A -16
residential
RP
Howard F. Sharp, Jr
64C- A -1 3.A
vacant
RP
Montie Gibson, Jr
64 -A -1:5 lvacant
B2
Michael S. & Cheryl S- hephard
64-A-1 4 ivacant
B2
Michael $-. '& Qheryl Shephard
1V
`% 1
Y-1
CITY OF z
'STER
F
45
47
/z.
7, lk 00
K v
I
\ SITE
I I
:%' - X00 ' ,:�,
East Si
Awp�t
Irle . PROJECT: SURVEY:
IMWPAINTERIIIIIIILEWNIS, P.L.C. COUNTY NA
1�1.6, 'Noi-th� Brcddbckt rS treet LOCA'nONI MAO DRAWN BY; JOB NO::,
P-L 1201007
p 9 'Winchester, Virginia 22601 TM#64—A-18 -
telephone (540)6'62-5792 SCALE:, DATE:
11"=260d' 10/23/12
Facsimile (540)662-5793
CONSULTING- SHEET2.
ENGINEERS Email office@painterl'ewis.com
la
pIa:l 1LgnitCi "Iot• o'.l�ffe,°t�
U : I
ig rred'et fek PI'Antiii ��4'eb' Otte. 4 ti i llt 4t;' �.i ,
I
I)epai tilient of l'launuig &z U�� eI ,nhnlent, Coiut "t5 of Fiectel iel , Vtl giilia, _
407 North I {ent Street, Suitc.2Q2 1Vinchester, Vugiuia -22601 -
'Facsl n}le, 540- 665` -6395 Phone 540 G6y >(:qT
Know All ,Me }t !3ti< Tliose;;Pl esc i t; Tl dt i (W e)'
Madison II, LLC 540 723 -9869
(Maine) _ _ (.Phone) _:.
AddlESS 558 Bennys Beach Road, 'Front Royal, VA 22630
.the owher(_s),o'f all hose tr cks ur parcel's of`land (•.Projperty "�), conveyed to a ie (us ?). by � deed i rated in -
tl e Clelk's =Office of fhe Cuccii ,C'ourt of the Gamily Of zederick Virg ihi,i by
TnstrcunenfNo: 130007746. oic Pane 0140. , and is,described.as
PaiceL Lot;_ 1 lock ' Section: Sti v'islo
T._
dog lieleiiyiiirhe; c_r�»stitute anc(,a}ipailit: -,
Painter -Lewis P.L.C. 540 -662 57.92
�.-
817 Cedar Creek Grade,, Suite 12b,'Winchester,'VA
!'b act as my tl`ue arlci;l "aiifill attotlleytll:- tael:':fQl and'lll Itlyr(oill) name, place anci sticacl witli frill power"
;arid. - authority I (zVq) Would have if I'etma p rsonally to 'fik-plainifln ap Ticatlous for my (our) abo}(,
8esdri4cd Pr.operty;-ii!clTulin};":
X " Rezoti ng.(iuCluding*Pioffer-s)
Conditional Use Pertifli
i4'taste �llef�cln{�tixettt� _Plan; &e.dhohiary alld , Fin-al).,
_ ubdIVi;910111
Site"P,la,n.
V it ranee orAliI weal'
Colniirelieits <<c Policy Plai,r3metiilnlert , , - i'
NTy;at#ohiey -in -fact sfial!- =liave tlw :autl oiiiy to' offet-,prdffeked,coi.iditio.ii8 sale} to, lnake= anicudments to
}previously al)proved proffer6ld coiiclltions,exc6l t.as,'fb'llow.s,:
This authci Matron- s}aall etiplic dire }Jea'r from•tlte clay It is'signecl, iii .until' it rs atlierti ISOe rescincled oi'
naod�riaed. - �h
IN
In Xv "rtness thercof;I )'_i1 re, ei� ill % of amid and seal "this �z clay of_
Sgnatnrc(s} 0�a ,
State,ot vi `m' "Crty /County o _ , To- ��rit: _ v �E�\ 3
a 'Notary Public in and rO tli��a iotsl,ld
aforesaid feerUl } „rlatthe;}erson(5),�ihosrLne�l to the fore Z'oni;lustrultte►tt persemallj ap}3�z3 /L11�nF�`
Gintl- has:” tcItno«:ledgecl the same Fefoi.e �tle ia� :the jurisclicllon aforesaid this 1 Z�clay of
L.+�t lc9V✓..... u. j1y Coi,,�nissiOi �tp ies .
_ - _ _
-
Re4'sed;3lI7J4b ,y
W, COU)
w
C) <
Q
- - -- J L
Q
c
W
w W
o C�
CL
CATION
®.
LdJc_ a N
- I �•flmwood Road
uj N E
r TM #s4.-,
ED t N `n a ❑ Q c�r) U-) .
6a PUBLIi I �� I I �. - N N N N
CONNF_ -- a z `°
Of
. 13 \ :u "j ° a
o U @) mj W METE N W Q
�"Pd� � w
!croft Rood U -
O O
I]' pU T u'
�a w l
CL
00
zV)
- ,o
Z „
oz
oO �w
SURVEY:
�• -- FREDCO NA
DRAWN BY:
JOB NO.:
- ' o 300 P —,L L. 1201007
300 SCALE: DATE:
0 - SHOWN 7/2/1"3
SHEET:,
Scale in Feet
0
j.
\� m Z co I %
m n A j
o D %.
❑
U)
1 �• m
ZME
y
Z r it ll �� Z
M 0 tl
`t. \ ` C
n L� D
D° m
G. c tilt
CD
m ( -i
1 C CF
1 jf
TTT
z 010
Z CE
Z`��
0-1 N
I 3 i
of i IaI, d a �uo — — — — ;
,. T ,
ZZ5 T:W a c j
i
p A X w I I.i I I m ;--I co ?� n
M. 89 Qp I I J o °o j d;x -.4 n m, .= K
o r' 0 -A Z o�
Rt. 786 - D �. :�. /
i — Qom_ _< Z D, D D D
Z M? i
n.
o,2 m r
t
�n
E?
M ,o D m A PAINTER -LEWIS P.L.C. PROJECT:
`?
° Z GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT
817 CEDAR CREEK GRADE, SUITE 120
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 2260,1 PLAN
Teiephore: (540) 662 -5792 TM #64 -A -1'8
°> 0 z z n CONSULTING' Facsimile: (540) 662 -5.793 51.2 ACRES
ENGINEERS Email; office®painterlewis.com
Q o0
a
n o
Ma
n + �! ti4` X
O C..-q O
Z ai3
Z r ,+ :� z_
m
Ono` S m ? �} N p
m m; y
l`r I
co
_ I I 1 r
om
ZWE
O.D
v.
UUU
o C, >' -
I o, ob i i �, � 4�,L� � •� a N , -- -�__
-
�; oa }uoa -
a
zz5 =
I' �, ) M � A = ca
m i
D m
J d p i /.o --I -n m �
Rt. 786 ��Z n D D
Z M O— �I —m m r o m m/
o
LJ� J�o7 3' Z
�J \
♦
0
u,.
m z a: m > w '
PROJECT: -LEWIS P.L.C. z o PAINTER GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT
817 CEDAR .CREEK GRADE, SUITE 120
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 PLAN
o m Telephone: (540) 662 -5752 TM #64 -A -18
_n, ° O:z z� CONSULTING Facsimile: (540) 662 -5793 .51.2 ACRES
oO
,u`m ENGINEERS Email. office @painterlewis.com
a :-
m O
Oc3
O M Z
Z m'
� a
n o
Ma
n + �! ti4` X
O C..-q O
Z ai3
Z r ,+ :� z_
m
Ono` S m ? �} N p
m m; y
l`r I
co
_ I I 1 r
om
ZWE
O.D
v.
UUU
o C, >' -
I o, ob i i �, � 4�,L� � •� a N , -- -�__
-
�; oa }uoa -
a
zz5 =
I' �, ) M � A = ca
m i
D m
J d p i /.o --I -n m �
Rt. 786 ��Z n D D
Z M O— �I —m m r o m m/
o
LJ� J�o7 3' Z
�J \
♦
0
u,.
m z a: m > w '
PROJECT: -LEWIS P.L.C. z o PAINTER GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT
817 CEDAR .CREEK GRADE, SUITE 120
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 PLAN
o m Telephone: (540) 662 -5752 TM #64 -A -18
_n, ° O:z z� CONSULTING Facsimile: (540) 662 -5793 .51.2 ACRES
oO
,u`m ENGINEERS Email. office @painterlewis.com
a :-
AMENDMENT TO PROFFERS
MADISON VILLAGE
PARCEL TM #64 -A -18
The following amendments are proposed to the proffers heretofore made by the Owner:
I. Section 4 of the proffers would be amended to add the following statement at the
.beginning of the paragraph:
"Owner must obtain adequate access to "pie reads as approved by VDOT for
the rezoned parcel."
II: There will be7 added to Section 11, Property Owners Association, the following;.
.proffer:
The Owner agrees 'to fund the POA in a sum of Five Thousand .Dollars
($5,000.00) in order to facilitate the POA's operating costs upon" the transfer 'of
control of the POA from the Developer to the third party property owners.
(NC�'oGtivi c�dQ a + l��S ✓vie -e' w� 1,?'r
120-5
E: 2013 NewFiles\2013 -0029 Madison Village\Amendment to Proffers
0 0
AMENDMENT TO PROFFERS
MADISON VILLAGE
PARCEL TM #64 -A -18
The following amendments are proposed to the�proffers heretofore made bythe Owner:
I. Section 4 of the 'proffers would be amended. to add the following statement at the
.beginning of the paragraph:
jZc,Jr�: sZ.Z
"Owner must obtain adequate access to p ie ,reds as approved by VDOT for
the rezoned parcel,,
I_L There will be added to Section 11; Property Owners, Association, the following
proffer:
The Owner agrees to fund the P:OA. in a sum of Five Thousand Dollars
($5,00.0..00) in order to facilitate the POA's operating costs' upon the transfer of
control of the'POA. from the Developer to the third party,property owners.
�,� � 5 � 5 -�- � r���✓ � �-y� `i�%`-� was
0
cc T i'G�t, 1U5 ✓ve U" 12'� r'13
10
+%16 a, VJ 1205
rzl �z, r.3
E: 2013 New Files\2011-0029 Madison Village\Amendment to Proffers
Prepared by:
1 s•
PAINTER-LEWIS, -P-.L.C.
817 Cedar Creek Grade,, Suite 120
Winchester, ter, VA 22601
Tel.,:, (540) 6,62-5792
email: office@pa'interiewis.com
Job Number-.- 1201007
a n
Proffer Ste' t emeftt
MadiSo- Village
Parcel TM#64-A-413
RA TO RP/132 WITH PROFFERS
Rezoning #:
Property:
PARCEL ID-. 64-A-18
Area:
51.26 acres
Recorded Owner:
Madison Farms, LLC
Applicant:
Madison 11, LLG
5_58 Rennys Beach Road
Front Royal, Virginia 22630
Project Name:
Madison Village
TM#64-A- 18
Magisterial District:
Shawnee Magisterial District
Original Date
of Proffers;
April 22, 2013
Revision Date:
July 12, 2013
Prepared by:
1 s•
PAINTER-LEWIS, -P-.L.C.
817 Cedar Creek Grade,, Suite 120
Winchester, ter, VA 22601
Tel.,:, (540) 6,62-5792
email: office@pa'interiewis.com
Job Number-.- 1201007
PROFFER STATEAT
Madison Farms, LLC- TM #64 -A -18
Pursuant', to the applicable.. pro Ivisions. ,o;f the- Frederick County, Zoning Ordinance, the
undersigned applicant proffers that yin the event-- that the Board of Supervisors of
Frederick County shall. approve Rezoning Application # for the rezoning of
parcel TM# 64 -A -18 from RA: to RP /B2 with proffers, the. use and development of the
subject property shall be ,in strict conformance with the, following conditions set forth in
this proffer except to the extent that such conditions may be subsequently amended or
revised by the owner and such,are approved by the Board of Supervisors in accordance
with the Code of Virginia _and the =Frederick County.Zon'ing Ordinance. These proffers
shall be binding on the owner. and their legal successors or assigns.
PROFFERS
1.) Generalized Development Plan
The owner proffers to develop the, property in general conformance with the
Generalized. Development "Plan (GDP) dated 4/9/13,. identified as "Generalized'
Development Plan TM . #64 -A -18, 51:26 Acres and which is attached to the proffer
statement, for the purpose of:identifying the proposed zoning changes to the parcel, the
general location and form of the parcel access, and improvements to .Route 522.
Approximately five acres will be rezoned to B2, Business General District, and
approximately 46.26 acres will be rezoned strict
to RP Residential Performance Di
Attached to the. proffer . statement is a Plat of Rezoning dated July 1„ 2013 which .
delineates the proposed zoning areas.
2.) Residential Density
The owner proffers to limit the total number of residential units to six hundred forty;
(640).
3.) Right, of'Way Dedication
The owner proffers to dedicate a.ten foot strip of land along the frontage of Parcel TM#
64 -A -18. to the Virginia Department of Transportation for the -purpose of facilitating future .
improvements -to Route 522. This dedication. will occur prior to the issuance of any
occupancy permit for the property.
4.) Initial Transportation; Improve "meats
The owner proffers to dedicate the necessary Land for ,road improvements and to
construct the internal road system as generally shown on the GDP. Implementation of
certain of these improvements. as approved by VDOT and Frederick County will. be
completed prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit for the property. These
improvemerts will include;
a) The design ,and construction of a right turn lane southbound on Route, 522' into:
the parcel;
b) The design of'one northbound left turn lane on Route 522 into the parcel;
page 2
PROFFER STATEST •
Madison Farms, LLC- TM #64 -A -18.
c) TheAesign and constructio
0 1 n of a full movement public street entrance into the
property including one.west bound lane, two eastbound lefts turn lanes, one east
bound right turn lane, and b.i(ycle %pedestrian facilities-
d) The' design and construction 0. f .a roundabout at the western limits of the
commercial area unless it is determined by th'e: Virginia Department of
Transportation that an alternate intersection design .is required.
.e) The design and construction of a public street to: the northern limits of the parcel
to allow connection to, Parcel TM #64 -A -12 as generally shown on the GDP:.
�e
5.) lnterparcel Access
The owner agrees to provide the necessary ingress and egress easements to allow
vehicle °access for the benefit. of Parcel TM #64 -A -14 and Parcel TM #64- A -1'5, to and
from the public roads described in Items 4.c and 4..e. above subject to approval by the
Virginia .Department &Transportation.
6.) Other Transportation Improvements
a.) A public road will be :extended to the western limits of the parcel to allow future
connection to Parcel TM #647A -124 as generally - shown on the GDP. The road will .
include the design and construction of a roundabout at the intersection of the proposed
roads unless it is determined by the Virginia Department of ' Transportation that an
alternate intersection design is, required. Construction details and phasing will be
submitted - -as part of a Master Development, Plan for the project.
b.) A public road, will be extended to the southern limits of,,,. the parcel to allow future
connection to Parcel TM #64 -A -2.1 as generally shown on the GDP. Construction details
and phasing will, be7 submitted as. part of a Master Development Plan'for the project.
'7.) Route 522 Traffic Signal'
In the event that 'the Virginia Department of Transportation notifies the owner that a
warrant study is'requir.ed at the intersection of Route 522 and the ,access to the parcel,
'the owner hereby proffers to. complete said warrant study within three months of the
notification_ If; win -
after revieg the warrant study, the. Virginia Department of ,
Transportation notifies the ownerth'at a traffic signal is warranted at the intersection of
Route 522 and ,the access,. to the. parcel, the owner hereby proffers to undertake and
complete the. design and construction of the. traffic signal within one year of the signal
warrant. notification.
8.)- Bicycle /Pedestria`n Facilities
The owner proffers, Ito' install bicycle and. pedestrian facilities generally along the
proposed :public road routes and as part of the construction of said roads. Construction
details and phasing will b_ e submitted as part of 'a Master Development Plan for the
project.
page 3
PROFFER STATNENT •
`Madison Farms,, LLC- TM #64 -A -18
9,) Residential Development lmpact:Offset Contri bution
a. Single' Famil_y.Detached' and :Single Family Attached: The owner proffers; to pay
to the Treasurer of Frederick County, Virginia the amount. of ,$,19,600 per si'ngle,family
,detached' dwelling unit and $13,062 per single family attached unit prior to the time that
the Certificate of Occupancy is issued for each unit.
b. Apartments The owner proffers to pay to the Treasure of Frederick County,
Virginia the amounts determined by the then current Frederick County Impact Model for
each of the Respective Phases of the Project.
Payment of the amount determined will be made prior to the time of the issuance
of the Certificate of Occupancy for each building in a Phase and as follows:
(i) Ten (10 %0) 'Perce,nt of the amount determined 'in cash or its equivalent;
(ii) The Balance. of the Impact Fee in the form of a bond; secured by cash. (or
its equivale_ nt), or by a letter of credit from'C.ounty approved financial
institution, payable five (5) years from date, and. payable to the Treasurer
of the County of Frederick, Virginia.
U.) Age- Restricted,'Resi:dential Development Impact Offset. Contribution
a Single Family Detached and Single Family Attached; The owner proffers to pay
to the Treasurer of Frederick County, Virginia the.amouritof $2;869 per single family
detached dwelling unit and ,$2,181 per single family, attached unit prior to, the time that
the Certificate of Occupancy ,is issued .for each unit.
b. Apartments — The owner proffers to ,pay to; the Treasure of Frederick County,
Virginia the amounts determined by the then current-'Frederick County Impact Model
less the. school impact amount foreach of 'the Respective Phases of the Project.
Payment of the amount determined .will be made at the time of the issuance of
the Certificate of Occupancy for'each building in a Phase and as 'follows:
(i) Ten (10 %). Percent of the amount determined in cash or its equivalent;
(ii) The Balance of the Impact Fee in the form of a bond, secured by cash (or,
its equivalent) or by a letter'of credit from County approved financial
institution, payable five (5) years from date, and payable to the Treasurer
of'the County of Frederick, Virginia.
11.) Property Owners Association
The residential development will be made subject. to a Property Owners Association
(POA) that stall be responsible for the ownership and maintenance of, all property areas
not privately owned; or dedicated to public agencies. The POA shall be provided other
responsibilities, dufies, . and powers :as are necessary and customary for such
associations. 'I'n addition to other responsibilities as assigned, the POA shall be
responsible for' solid waste disposal programs and the maintenance of streets, parking
areas, buffer., areas, recreational features, lighting ,and landscaping,
page 4
PROFFER STATEAT
Madison Farms, LLC- TM #64- A -1,8:
The conditions proffered above shall bebinding on the heirs, executors, administrators,,
assigns, and successors in the interest of the owner-.' fn the event that the Frederick.
County Board of Supervisors grant this rezoning .and accepts these proffers, then these
proffers shall apply to the land rezoned ;in addition to the other requirements of the
Frederick County Code.
Submitted By:
On B ha f Madiso L[, L
City /Countyofi'i'C' ++�'l , Commonwealth Of Virginia..
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 1 Z day of
Jt l
0i�i
Nota o y'
x Public _
3b1 1 9 No'
Notary Registration number: 3J'l. 1 _ ;r�coMM•ExP'aES
3 * � .
My commission expires: 0rrA
u+iiinnl�
�f ..
page 5
Pursuant to the .applicable provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance; the
undersigned applicant proffers that in the event that ther Board of Supervisors of
Frederick County shall "approve Rezoning Application` #, for the rezoning-of
parcel TM# 64 -A -18 °from RA to RP /82 with proffers; the use and development of the
subject..property shall be in .stri'ct conformance with the following conditions set. forth in
this proffer except to the; extent that such conditions may bpi subsequently, amended or, .
revised by`.the owner and, such are approved by the Board of Supervi'sors'in accordance
with the Code of Virginia and the Frederick County Zoning; Ordinance. These pro
.ffers
shall be binding on' the .owner and their legal successors. or 'assigns.
PROFFERS
1;.) Generalized Development,Plan .
The owner proffers .to' develop the property' in general :conformance 'with the
Generalized Development Plan (GDP) dated 4/9/1.,3, identified as "Generalized
Development Plan TM #64 -A-18, ,5116 Acres" and which 'is. attached 'to; the proffer
statement; for the purpose of identifying the proposed zoning changes to, the parcel, the
general location and form of the parcel access, and. improvements to Route 522.
Approximately five acres will be rezoned to B2, Business' General District, and,
)approximately 46.26 acres will be rezoned to RP; Residential Performance District...
Attached to, the proffer statement is a "Plat of Rezoning" dated July 1, 201:3 which „
delineates, the proposed zoning areas. o-
2.) Residential Density
The owner proffers.to limitthe maximum number of residential units to six hundred forty.
.(640,). The ,owner proffers to limit the, minimum number ,of residential units to four
hundred twenty, (420)'.
3.) Right of Way'Dedicatio:n
The owner proffe rs to dedicate a ten foot strip of land along: the frontage of Parcel TM #,.
64 -A -1,8 to the Virginia Department of Transportation for the purpose of facilitating future
impnovernents. to Route 522. This .dedication will occur prior to the issuance: of any
occupancy permit, for.the, property.
4,) Initial Transportation „Improvements
Th-e owner proffers to dedicate the necessary land for road improvements and to
construct the internal road system as generally shown on the GDP. Implementation of
certain of these improvements as approved by VDOT and Frederick County will be
com Leted
prior ;to the: issuance o.f, any occupancy permit. for the property. These
p
improvements will include:
a) The design�and construction 'of a right turn, lane southbound on Route 522 into
the parcel;
V e
Page. 2.
r;
Reviewed Action,
Planning Commission :, Q8/21/13 Public:: hearing;. Action tabled 90. days
•�
11/06/13 'Pending :(Public hearing necessary)
Board of Supervisors: 1.2/1.1413. Pending
PROPOSAL: To rezone 51 26 acres from RA (Rural Area)' Districtto 4626 acres of.RP (Residential
Perfdrmance) District and to 5 acres of B2 (General Business) District with proffers.
LOCATION: The property'
roperty is"located on the west side of Route 522,.approximately 1,000. feetsouth of
the intersection of Route 522 and Airport Road.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 11/06/13 PLANNNG
COMMISSION MEETING:
The Planning Commission tabled this application for90 days -at your 08 /21 /13�meeting' This provided
the Applicant time to address the items discussed during the Planning Commission meeting, including
the extension of the roads to the adjacent. properties in a timely manner; and the',:establishrnent of a,
minimum residential density consistent, with the Comprehensive Plan. It also °provided an additional
opportunity for the Applicant to, meet with the adjacent property owner• "to come to an agreement over
' access, issues. Finally, this also allowed the site to be posted again and the public 'hearing "to be
adequately noticed.
The Applicant revised their ;proffer statement (dated September 5, 2013) to,. address {the two items
identified:by.staff. More speci'fi'cally, the Applicatifhas modif ed.1heir proffer statement to provide for
a minimum number of four hundred twenty (420) residential units; this would ensure a. minimum
residential density of approximately `eight units per acre, and to include triggers for the completion of
� the identified puc bli road connections to the west and to tthe- south by the 3,12x" residential occupancy
and the 420`" residential occupancy; respectively. At the time,th s report was made, the Applicant and
adjacent property owner have not come to an agreement.
The Madison Village rezoning application is generally consistent with future land use designations of
the,20`0 .Comprehensive Plan and the Seriseny /Eastern Frederick Urban .Areas Plan which provide
guidance on the future development of the. property,
Confirmation of the, issues identified in the staff report, and any further issues raised bythe�Planning
Commission, ,should be addressed prior to the decision of the Planning Commission.
1 -
Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village
October 21, 2013
Page 2
Followinz the required public'.hearinz, a recommendation rezardink this retonink application to
the -Board of Supervisors,would be�appropriate.. The applicant` =shouldhe prepared to adequately
address all. concerns raised by the Plann nm Commission.
r.
Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village
October "'21, 26131
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: 08%21/13 Public hearing; Action - tabled 90 days
11/06/13 Pending (Public hearing necessary)
Board.of Supervisors: 12/111/13 Pending
PROPOSAL: To rezone 51..26'acres from RA (Rural Area) District to 46.26 acres: of RP (Residential
Performance) District and to 5 acres of B2 (General Business) District with proffers.
LOCATION: The property is on the. west side of 'route 522, approximately 1,000 feet south of the
intersection of Route 522 and.A'irport Road.
MAGISTERIAL,DISTRICT: Shawnee.
PROPERTY .ID's NUMBERS • 64 -A -18
PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Area)
PRESENT'USEs Vacant /Agricultural'
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
North!
RP (Residential Performance)
Use:
Vacant:(Russell 15:0)
South:
RP (Residential Performance)
Use:
Residential/Vacant
East
RP.(Residential Performance)
Use-
Residential
B2 (Business, General)
Vacant
West:
RA. (Rural' Area)
Use:
Vacant /Agricultural
Rezoning #03 13.? Mi di "son Vllage
October 21,:2013
Page 4
;RE'VIEW EVALUATIONS: .
Virginia Dept. of:Transportation , Please'see.attached comments:
Fire and Rescue: Plan approved:,
Public Works Department: lndiOdte7 the location of the .existing overhead power lines on the
generalized devetopment plan and sfuture MDP. We anticipate that'the private development will be'
served by a private waste hauler;
Department of Insneetions: N/A
Frederick County Sanitation Authority,:. Per your'request; a.review of`the, proposed vzoning,hm
- beemper-formed. The Frederick County. S' aiiitation, Authonty ,offers;comrnents.limited"to the�anticipated..
impact /effect upon the Authority's,publi'c water and sanitary sewer system, and the demands thereon.
The parcel Js in tike water, and sanitary sewer area .served by,t_he Authonty: Based on, the anticipated
.usage; water capacity is presently available: Sanitary sewer treatment capacity at the waste water
treatment plant is,also presently availablee.. `Conveyance capacityand -be contingent on the
applicant per- forrriirig a technical analysis he =,existing;sanitary ewer system within the area to be served
and °the: ability .of'the existing oonyeyance system to accept additional load,. Both water and sanitary
sewer facilities :are 'located within, a ;reasonable distance from this site. Please be aware that, the,
Authority, does ,not review or. corn rent upon.proffers and /or condi't ons proposed or submitted .by =the
a ,plicant,in support' of or -in conjunction with this application for rezoriirig, nor does the Authority
assume or undertake any responsibility.'to review or comment, upon any amended proffers and /or
conditions wtii`ch the Applicant may hereafter provide .to Frederick County.
,Service Authority No cornhient,
Frederick- Winchester Health Department: N/A
R c pin g a pp li cation appears to contain verbage which address the County
Developmnt . I p at Model
Winchester .R"egional Airport: No comments.
Frederick; County Attorney: Please see attached letter dated .Nlay 14 2013, from Roderick B.
Williams; 'County Attorney.
Frederiek,Counri PtibIk Sehoo"l: Please see attachedletter -date June 2$,..20.13, from K Wayne Lee;
Jr.,..LEED° GA
Planning_'Department: Upon review of;the proposedrezoning;'itfappeats that the proposal does not
Significai tty impact historic resources and it is not necessary to; schedule review of the rezoning
0
Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village.
October 21, 2613
Page, 5,
application,by the HRAl3. According to thexural Landmarks ;Survey, there.are no significant historic
.structures located on.the property nor 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 not
identify a core battlefield within this area.
Planning & 'Zoning:
1.) Site History
The property is currently zoned RA (Rural Areas) and has.historically been used for agricultural
and residential land uses. The original. Frederick County Zoning forthis property as identified
on the Winchester Quadrangle is_Al ( Agricultural general).'In'2042, a single five acre lot was
subdivided from this parent tract adjacent to Route 522 which :contained the existing residential
land use. Directly ,to ,the north of`this site is the Russell 150 property which was rezoned for
residential and commercial 1'and uses in 2006. Two smaller B2 (Business General) properties
adjoin this site at:its proposedentranceAo Route 522. These properties, the,Shepherd Properties
were rezoned at around, the .same time.
2) Comprehensive Policy Plan
The 2030'Comprehensive`Plan is the guide for the future growth of Frederick County.,
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan provide
guidance on the -future development of the property. Appendix I includes the
Se.nseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan as an approved,Area Plan.
The property i's .located `in the: UDA. (Urban Development Area) and the SWSA (Sewer and
Water Service Area).
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies the general area surrounding this propert y with a
high.density residential land use,.designation. In general, the proposed residential .designation
for this property is consistent with this residential land use designation of the _
Comprehensive .:Plan.
The; proposed residential density is consistent with the residential densities of the RP section
of the.Zoning Ordinance which was recently'upd'ated in implementation of the
Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the introduction of a small area of commercial .land use
provides for a.mix of uses in conjunction with each other, also an element of the 2030
Comprehensive. Plan.
The CIP (Capital Improvements Plan), a component of the Comprehensive Plan; has
identified.the general .area of this property; along Route.-522 ,south, as a location for a smaller
scale park that would be designed to serve °the anticipated additional residents in.this area.
n
Rezoning' 403,'A l Madison Village
October 21,, °2013
A Page 6
3) Site- Sui "t ability/Enyronment
The property is well suitedtto future development. It is relatively open,:flat land with small areas
of slopes and wetlands associated with drainage acrossthe site Tlie'site does contain a pond on
` the northern property, line,, close to the entrance road to the: site., This - pond will be. preserved
during the development of -the site and used' as a recreational, feature:
Access to the site wi'l be directly to Route,,-5 22 via.a,new public street entrance designed,for the
project. This new publtc street will contain bicycle acid pedestrtan:aecommodations:as called'for
in the, 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Thin public street'wilt be: extended to provide :access to
r_
adjacent:properties•'as,the development;progresses. It should'be'satisfied that the extension of
the public street network occurs in a timely manner- and key connections are made to adjacent.
properties.
4) Potential Impacts.
Transportation.
The Frederick County Eastern Road.Plan recogrizes Route�522 as anJmproved major. arterial
road,.:In addition, the, Cornptohensive Plan recognizes a minor collector road that runs east -west
from Route 521.over to future Warrior.Drive..lnterparcel coniiectionsrareFal'so a.potential asthis
project develops, in particular; to the.propertyto the south..
Recent traff cvolumes on.RouteS522 in the vicinity of the siteshowedtheaverage annual daily
traffic•.was 15,220 vehicles per. day. The Applicant',s TIA projectstraffc on Route 522 to . be
26;585 vehicles per,day in `2026:
' The proposed i pacts`to Route 522 at the site entrance wilI'be si'gnif cant: The proposed.project
will have •a single eritrance`on to Route 522. In order to mitigatethe. impacts .of the ,project, the
Applicant `will iniplement..the following improvements; Installation„ of a traffic signal at the
proposed entrance dnd.riAVari left.tiirri: lanes on,Route:522; dual eastbound left turn lanes
from the�project entrance; aril a roundabout internal to-theproject at the commercial area. The.
Applicant's TIA further addresses, the traffic impacts; :of this. project.
Schools.
` This development; along with other anticipated deyelopments;, will require construction of,new
f :.
schools and support facilities to accommodate increased student; enrollment: The •Applicant: is
addressing this- impact through their recognition of the Co_unty's� Development Impact- Model
values which provides, a value for the capital impacts Of 'the! proposed development,
The. Apphcant 'is 'addressing the other, capital .impaets, identified in the: development; impact
model by proffering the appropriate values to mitigate,any'p "otential impacts.•
Rezoning #03 13 Mad ison'Villagei �
October 21:', 20.1.3
Page 7
5) Proffer Statement`.= Dated April- 22,`2043 (Final Revision' dated: September 5, 2013)
A) Qeneralize&Dgvelopmer(f Plan
The applicant ,has provided, a. Generalized Development ,Plan for the purpose
identifying tho general configuration of the street providing access -to and through the
project, residential and commercial larid.use areas,<and improvements atthe Route 522
entrance Th'eGDP, also `shows ihe.location of potent al.roundabouts internalto the site
and bicycle and pedestrian accommodations.
B)' Land Use
The applicants have proffered a,lmit`to the, total number of residential units to: six
hundred forty (64:p): It s.mportant'to recognize thatethere is no minimum limitation
placed on t/ e,deyeloptneni to ms-are "the more, intensive development of this site.
The Applicant has modified "their- `proffer statement (dated September 3;
2013) ' to provide, for a minimum number offour'hundred twenty residential
units. (420). This Would. :ensure a minimum residential: density
approx'iitiately eight units per acre.
C) Access'Maria" eg inept`:
'The applicant, has;proffered the signalization of the intersection of the site�driveway
and Route 522: In, addition, the Applicant has proffered five initial transportation
improverner is and. right of way dedication to •support° the sites access °. Bicycle and,
pedestrian fac hties c olso proffered internal to the project. along the public roads.
D) Transportationn'
The Applicant "has a1 "s6proffered3to construct; the internal road;system as shown on,the
GDP which' includes'iinterparcel;access' and, connections }to adjacent properties: Proffer
6. a) and b) detail the extensic n of the,-public road system to the adjacent properties: Itis
important to recognizethdt the extensionrof these - roads; to Mead` �acent propertievis
proffered at the, time of the My stet Development' Plan for the project. Specific
_
c6nzmitnients'.as-to. the timing of these; extensions arenot.proffered.
The Applicant has.modified their profferRstatefiv&it ( daated ,September _3,
2013): to include triggers for, the, completion of the identifie# public road
cognections,fo the west -and to .the south.bythe 31`2th.residential occupancy
and`.the 420'n, residential occupancy; 1r6pectively.
E)
Commumty . Facilities.
The Applicant has proffered a. monetarycontribution, to community facilities to offset
the impact -of the, ;restdent'al development. The amount per single family detached;,
attached; and multifamil "y dwelling unit is consistent wt&`the'Countys: Development
'Impact Model values, for 2013. The Applicant, hassproposed an ,alternative. payment
program' for,the. multifamily units which is; generally <acceptable to the County Attorney
Rezoning #03- '3 !Madison Village
October 21, 2013
Page 8
and Staff. The Applicant has also included a provision for a reduced contribution in the
case of any age restricted,components of this development, proffer 1`0'.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 08721/13 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
The Madison Village rezoning application is generally consistent with future land .use designations of
the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan which provide
guidance on the future development of the property.
A couple of elements of the rezoning application have been identified that.should be carefully evaluated
to ensure that they fully address the impacts associated with this rezoning request. The Planning
Commission should pay particularattention,to the transportation impacts; in particular the extension of
'the roads to the adjacent properties is proffered at the time ofthe Master Development Plan for the
project. Specific commitments as to the timing of these .extensions are not proffered. Also, it is
important to recognize that there is no . minimum limitation placed on the development to ensure the
more intensive development of this site.
Confirmation of the issues identified in the staff report, and any issues 'raised by the Planning
Commission, ,should be addressed,prior to the decision of the Planning. Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY & ACTION OF`THE 8/21/13 MEETING:
Commission members had questions regarding the anticipated.impacts.on local schools and whether the
project would be developed in.phases. It was observed from the TIA that the north- bound,,left =turn lane
Level of Servicewould drop to Level D at build.out, and the applicant was asked what methods-would
be used to mitigate this situation. ,A Commissioner asked what recreational aspect was.anticipated in
working with the 'Frederick County-Parks & Recreation Department. In addition, an issue was raised
.regarding the density and the land use designation. In reviewing the GDP and the proffers, a
Commissioner observed the documents, were; fairly generic with - residential use and didn''t provide the,
Commission with any assurance tho:project would be a mix of single- family attached and multi - family.
There was concern about the applicant'srational for'not designating, on the GDP or by-proffer that this
project would•be a mix of single-family and multi - family, so there would be,consistency when
the MOP is submitted-and-no question concerning the housing type.
An adjoining property owner, Mr. Michael Shepherd came forward to speak during the public comment
portion ofthe hearing.; Mr. Shepherd owned two adjoining parcels(PINs.64 7A -14 and 64- A -15) which
were rezoned to B2 (Business General) by the Board of Supervisors on April 14, 2004. Mr. Shepherd
said he recently learned that;Madison, LLC will need to vacate his properties' entrances, and exits and
grade the front ofhis proper y-to meet sight;distance requitements'for VDOT. He said he contacted the.
applicant for the purpose of arranging a.land swap in exchange for his frontage. He also desired for the
:applicant to e'xte'nd their;deceleration lane; approximately 100 -120 feet for access into his property. Mr:.
Shepherd said his 'two parcels are legally separated and he was concerned his southernmost parcel
would be left with no, exit. In addition, he, said there > is ,a- spite strip; issue to the south, where his
connector road comes in from Rt. 5'22; he said the applicant has a small portion of land between their
Rezonin' #03-13 nladi "son Village;
g
Oa6ber. 21;.20:1'3,
Page 9
road and hi§ :sbuihemmost.boundary, which is riot sign ficant, enough •to act .as, a buffOr.. lVlr. Shepherd,
would`Pike for the applicant to increasethe distance there slightly:, 'NIr. Shepherd said at this time,,:no
agreement on any of these :issues has'been reached betweeri:hirri and the applicant.
Discussion ensued between the staff; the�Commission, and the_appl'icant's attorney as to whether or not
an agreement between the. two landowners should be' reached prior to rezoning.. The Planning Staff
believed the access would be accommodated. The Planning Staff reported thelapplicant improved their
proffer statement to. insure those road :connections would be done with the;first phase of development
priofto occupancy,.to ensure the access would not only be there for,the applicant "s,project, but also-for
the "two commercial propert`es'as well:.
The Staff pointed outthe p i lic, hearing sign had not been posted, on the:properfy for ,; few °days and
...
- believed it would be =appropriateto postpone a decision untilthe property'could be proper`ly°posted.to
meet;l_egal requirements.
The:Planning Commission:vote&unanm'6t sl`y to table: the rezonning for"90`days to,allow the property to
P p Y p p g 'g
be ro erl osted, with .a ublie hearing sin Commissioner, Oates abstained from voting;
Commissioners Madagan and :Marston were, absent from the meeting.)
EXECUTIVE; SUMMARY- &• STAFF :CONCLUSION FOR ' THE: 11/06/13 PLANNNG
COMMISSION, MEETING-.
The Planning- Commission tabled this ;application' for,90 days. at your 08!21.%:13 meeting,; This provided
the A licant time to:address :the items discussed during the Planni'rig Commission meeting; including
the - extension of the- roads to .the. adjacent; properties in a timely` mangier, and the establishment of a
minimum residential density,consisterit with the: Comprehensive Plan. It also provided an.additional
opportunity- for.'the Applicant to•meet with the adjacent'property owner to come an agreement:over
access issues: Finally; this also allowed' 'the site to be posted again and the public hearing to be
adequately noticed.
The,A plicant;yevi:sed, lh&ir pr6der statement (dated ;September 5, 20134 to address. the two items:
identified bystaf . More specifically, thebApplicant has modified their proffer statement to provide for
a minimum, number of four,'hundred twenty (420,) residential units; this would censure a ;minimum
res dential
i density of `approxmately.eight units per acre, and to include triggers _.for the completiom'of
the' ideritf ed pubhcroad connections to °the west and to the south by-the 3.12'" residential occupancy
and`the 420`" residential xocc.upancy,,respectively. At the tiniethis report was made, the Applicant and
.adjacentpmperty owner.haVe not come to an agreement.
The Madison Village rezoning:applicationzis generally consistent with future land.use designations' of
the 2030` Comprehensive `Plan and the S:ensenylEastern Frederick Urban; Areas° Plan °whic'h provide
guid`ance,on the future development of.'the property.
Rezoiiing #Q3 -1;3 Madison; Village
October 21" " 2013
Page 1'0
Confirmation- of the' issues 'identified in' the staff report, and any, further issues:raised by the. Planning-.
Commission, should' be addressed prior°to the delis on, of the Planning Commission:
q
REZQNING APPLICATION #03 =13'
Madison Village
w ®� Staff .R6porf 6r- h'e PIanhing "Commi S40 n
�s Prepared: August 5, 2013
Staff Contact: Michael T: Ruddy, AICP, DeputyPlanning Director
173R
Reviewed Action,
Planning Commission: 08/21.70 Pending,
'Board of Supervisors: 09'4'143 Pending;
PROPOSAL: To rezone, 5.1.:26. acres from RA;(Rural Area) D strict.to.46 2'6. acres of RP (Residential.
Performance) District and to 5 acres of B2' (General Business) District, with proffers..
LOCATION: The property=is' located on the west side,of Route 522;vapproximately L000 feet south of
the intersection of Route, 522. and AirporC Road.
a
EXECUTIVE'_ SUMMARY' & STAFF "CONCLUSION FOR 'TAE 08/2.1/13 PLANNING
COMMISSION,MEETING:
The Madison Village itezoning,application::is generally consistentmith future land use designations of
-the 203.0 Comprehensive Plan and thei Senseny /Eastern Frederick. Url an Areas Plan which provide
guidance,on the future development. Of the property.
A- .couple of elementsof the:rezoning appleationhaveheen d'entif ed..that should be, carefully evaluated
to ensure tliaf they fully address 1the, impacts ,associated with this; rezoning request. The Planning
CommissionshQ14 pay partioul'ar'attention to`the.transp „ortation impacts,Fin. varticular,'tl e extension of
thexozcds,'W the, ,adjacent properties pis proffered' at the time of 'the Master Development Plan for the
project. Specific comniitnients as,• to the timing of these extensions are not proffered. Also, 'it -is,
important to :recognize there is no minimum limitation placed on” the, development to ensure the more'.
intensive- }development; of this' site „•
Confirmation of the issues ,denti`fied .in 'the staff report,, and any 'issues raised b_y the 'Planning
Commission, should lie addressed prior io the decisionof the`Planning Commission..
the. Board. of Supervisors would'be 'appropriate. The;,apt licdi�t'sl ould.be prepared'to adequately
address all`concemn raised by t/ie ±P.lanninQ Commission.
Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village
Augustus, 2013
Page 2
Th�*s report is prepared by tfie Frederkk County Planning, Staff to provide information to, the
area
Phis
Commission andihe, 'B'o'iik-d.iof., Supervisors, ,toassist them in making a decisi6n:,on this
ap ylicafi on, k may be useful to others interested in this n after.'Unresolved iss es
concerning i this applicflton are "noted-fi.ystaff whetekeh?Vant throughout this staff report.
_
Reviewed. Action
Planhfifg CO-tnffiission: 08/-21/13" Pending_
dmg
Board of Supervisors:. 09/11 /,,13, Pending
PROPOSAL: 1 To rezone acres Tiom-IRA, (Rural A,&) D istrictlo., 4,626'acres; of RP (Residential
Performance) District and to 5 acres of B2 (General Business) District' with proffers.
LOCATION:, The proper tyyis oiiIhe west,side: of Route 522; approximately 1,000 feetsouth of the
intersection of koute,522 and AirporCRoad
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee
PROPERTY ID 64 ':�
I 4= A48
PROPERTY ZONING. RA (Rural Atea);
PRESENT USE -�. Vacant /Agricultural.
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
North-;, RR (Residential Performance) Use Vacant (Russell 1,50)
South: RP (Residential Performanc
�e) Use: ResidenfidINacant
East RR (Residential Performance) Use.; Residential,
B2:(j3u-§iness I General) Vacant
West: RA (Rural Area) Use: I Vacaht,/Agficultura I
Rezoning #03=13 Ma&on`V llage
August S, 2013
Page:.-3
'REVIEW EVALUATIONS: -
Vieginia,Dept..ofTeansportation Please see attached.e-mailddtedJunell,2013,from.11lattSmith,-
te
'DOT an( fa Jul 3, 20,13 e' -maal rom: Tin Stowe to Matt Smith, VDOT
Y f
,F,ire an'd "Rescue :.Plan approved.-
Public Works Departments Indicate °the location of the existing overhead power lines on the
generalized, development plan and; future ;MDP;: We anticipate `that `the private development will be
served by a private waste-
Hauer:-'
Department of lnspections N/A
Frederick County Sanitation Authority:, .Per,yo& request, a review of the proposed rezoning has
been performed. The Fred, e r County ,S'anitat on Authority`offers;comrnehis limited.to the anticipated
impact /effect upon; the- Authority" s, public water and sanitary sewer system .and the demands; thereon:
The parcel is in °the. water ,and _samtary.sewer area served by the Authority: Based on the anticipated .
usage; water capacity :is presently available: Sanitary sewer treatment capacity at the waste water
treatment plant is, also preseritly;available. Conveyance capacity, and layout.will be contingent on the
applicant °performing a; techn cal;analysis: of the existing sanitary, :sewer, system within "the .area �to be
served and the Lability of .the ,existing conveyance system, to accept .additional. load,, Both water and.
sanitary sewerfacilities are;locate&within a °reasonable distance from this,site. Please be.awarethatthe -
Authority, does .not review or comment. upon proffers:arid /or conditions proposed or submitted by the
applicant in support of or., °in conunetion`with this -application forrezoning, not does the Authority
assume or undertake; any responsibility o review or comment, upon any amended proffers and /or
conditions which the Applic_ant may hereafter provide to Frederick:County:
Service Authority: No 'comments:
Frederiek - Winchester. Health Department: N/A
,Parks,•& . Recrea io' 'M Rezoning -apptwation'appears' to contain verbiage which addresses the County
Developmenf I'mpact 1 odelh:
`Wine-hester_ Regional.Airport: No,carnmerits.
Frederick'County. Attorney:: Please see attached letter dated 'May 14, 201 -3, from Roderick B,
Williams; County Attorney;
Frederick County.Public Sehool :; Please 'see attachedaetter dateAne 28, 2013, from K. Wayne. -Lee;
Jr.; LEED GA.
Historic Resources Advisory Board: Upon review of theTroposed_rezon ng,,. t;appears theproposal
does not _significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary -to schedule ,review of the
Rezoning: #03- 13,'Md ison Village;
,Auggst,5, 2013
r Page, 4
rezonin g �a pp i caon by the H'RAB:: . According to; "the Rural Landnarks1,S:1irvey, there are;no significant
historic ;structures) locafed.on` the, property °nor are there:any po:$ iI le historic districts in'the vicinity. It
was also noted that the National Park Service Study of'Civil War Sites in,the Shenandoah Valley does
not identify a core battlefield within this.: area.
Pl'annirig & Zoning
1`) Site.History,
The. property;is'currently zoried,RA (Rural Areas) and--has historically beenused foragrieultural
and residential lan&uses The original Frederick Courity.Zoning for this property as identified
on the Winchester Quadrangle is Al (Agricultural General). ,1n2012, a single five-acreJot was
;subdivided from _.thisparent��tract.adiacent.to Route 522whi6h ocnfaiiiedlhe existing.residential
land use,. Directl "to ;the north of'this5 site ,is the .Russell '1 SO property °which was rezoned for
:residential and :commercial land uses^ in'200.6. Two smaller B2 (Business General). properties
401, ..thisxsite at its proposed entrance to Route 522. These properties, the She pherd`Properties
were rezor d'ai around ihe',same Time.
2) Comprehensive Policy Plan
The 2030 Comprehensive; Plafi:N the guide for the .futuyvgrowth •of'Frederick County:
The 2,030 'Comprehensive Plan and the Senseny /E'astern Frederick Urban.'Areas Plan provide
guidance on the- .fdture�development of'the property. Appendixal includes the S efts eny /Eastern
Frederick Urban Areas "Plan as�an approved. Area Plan.
The property is located in the `UDA (Urban; Development Area) and the SW, SA (Sewer and
Water Service Area).
The 2:03;0 ComprehensivePlan identifies the general ;area ,surrouiiding this property with;a high
densityresidential lan use3de - ignation- In the`proposed.res dential des gnation,forthis
property isconsisient with. this residential land, use designation .of "the .Corriprelerisive Plan..
„ -
The proposed resikiiiial.density. s eons stent with the resid=ential d'ensit'ies :of the,RP - section of
the, Zoning °Ordinance; which was recently updated ;in implementation. of the Comprehensive
Plan Ihwaddition. the; introduction�of a sinall a,of commercial land use provides for a'mix of
usesiri conjunction with each.other, also an- eleinent "of the 2030 C'omprehen "sive Plan,.
The CIP,(Capitat ri proveiYients - lan)`, a.component ofthe ComprehensivePlan,.'has identified
`the;general area, of this., property, along Route .5'22 South, as a location for a smaller scale park
that'would ,lie designed to serve the anticipated additional.res dents in this, area.
Rezoning #03 -13' Madison Village
August 51 2013
Page 5
3) Site Suitabilif /Environmei t
The property's well suited;io`future,developineiii. It is relatively °open, flatland with small areas
of'sfopes and�wetlands associated wAhArainage acrossthe site: The site;does,contairi a pond'on
the .northern property, line, close,,to the entrance road tothe site. This pond will be preserved
during; the development ofthe site and used as a recreational feature,
Access to the si'te'will be�directly-to, Route 522 via a new pub'l'ic street entrance designed for the
project .. This new publ'icnstreet =wi'll contain,bicycle and_ped'estrian accommodations as called for
in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan., This public street will be .extended to provide access to`
adjacent properties .,as thetdeueloprnen"t progresses., It shouI'd be, satisfied that the - extension of
the public' street network occurs in a timely mangier - and key connections are made to adjacent
'properties.
4) Yotenfal.Impacts
Transportation.
The Frederfok County Eastern Road Plan. recognizes. Route 522 as, an improved.majbr °arterial
road In�addifion, the "Comprehensive; -Plan recognizes, a minoncollectorroad that runs. east -west
'from Route 522:over t_o future Warrior Drive. I"nterparcel connections are also a potential as this
project develops, °in particular, to -the property °to. the south.
Recent traffic volumes on,Route`522in.the vicinity of the site showed;the average annual daily
p Y Pp P J
traffic was 1.5;;220 vehicles` .er day, The A leant s
TIA � , ro ects traffic on Route 522 to be
26,585 vehicles per day'in'2026.
The proposed impacts�to Route522,atihe site €entrance wilfbe, significant: The proposed project
` will have,a,singl'e entrance on to -Route 5221 .In order to mitigate the impacts ofthe project; the
Applicant will `implement the, following ,improvements: Installation of a traffic signal at the
proposed entrance and 6' 9 hf,. and. left turn.lanes .on.Route,52.2; dual eastbound left turn lanes
from° thesproj `ect,entrance;;;and.wroundaboV internal to °the�Ject at the commercial area. The
Applicant's TIA further addresses the traffic impacts; o"f this, project.
S`ehools.
p .
This deuelo ment, along with other anticipated developments, will require; construction,ofnew
schools and supportfaeifiiies`to accommodate increased.sfudent enrollment. The Applicant is
addressing th's ;impact through their recognition, of the Co.unty''s Development Impact Model`
values. which provides a yalae for: the capital impacts .of the proposed development..
,The Applicant; `is, .addressing the other capital impacts identified in the development impact .
m'odeli,by proffering the appropriate values to mitigate Any potential impacts.
Rezoning #03,43, Madison Village
August's', 20131
" Page -6_
..
5) Proffee Staiement—
A);
Generalized Development' Plan.
The applicant has. provided ,a Generalized Development Plan, for the purpose of
i'dentifying,the general configurati'on.of the s'reet;providing access to and through the
p "roject, residential andicommercial landuseareas, and'improvements at the Route 522
entrance. Thei GDP?al'so shows the location Of potent tial roundabouts -. .:internal to the site
and bicycle.,and pedestrian, accommodations.
B)
Land Use
The applicants have proffered a limit, to the, total; number of residential units to six
hundred forty (640) It is ::important to.recognize, there'i's'no minimum `limitation
placed, on the developinent.io, ensure -the more;.lntenSi've. development of this` site.,
C).
Access!'Mana eg ment
The. ,applicant has proffered the, signalization of `the :intersection of the,• site driveway
and Route;522.1n addition, the Applicant has profferedF fiue� initial, transportation
improvements and; right =of way dedication to support thje• site''s access. Bicycle and
.ped`estrian facih`ties are also proffered internal to-the project along the,public roads':
' D)
Transportafion
The -Applicant bas also proffered;to constr actthe internal road system `as shown on the,
GDP Which 'includes inteiparcel access and. Connections ,,to•adiacentpropertles. Proffer'
6 a) and b) detail the extension of the public -road system to the adjacent;properties. It
_. s
is important 'to recogriizeahe extension of these roads fo�the adjacent properties is
proffered atjhejime'of the Master Development Plan. for the project. Specific
cotnniitments as fo`the'tim. iniz of these extensions, are not proffered.;
E)
CommumtVSacilities
The Applicant has, proffered a monetary contribution, to' community facilities to offset
the 'impact of,'the° residential development. 'The amount, per single family detached,
attached, and nulfifimily dwelling unit is consistent with `the County § Development
Impact° Model. values for' 20,13. The Applicant has proposed an..altemative payment
program forthe °multifamily units which.,is generally acceptable to the County;Attorney
and Staff. The, plsicant has also included a provision forfa reduced corifributioin in.the
ease of any_age restricted "components of thin devel ,'pment, proffer ;16.
Rezoning: #03 =13 Madison Village
August,.5 „20:13
Page 7
STAFF CON_CL•USI'ONS:�EOR'' THE' .08 /21/1°3 PLAN NING;'COM ISSION MEETING:
The Madison Village rezoning application_ is generally =consi'stent with future land use, designations of
the 203,0 Comprehensive Plan and; the Senseny /Eastern :Frederick, Urban ,Areas Plan* which provide:
guidance on, the future development of the propert y:
A couple ofelements of the rezoninng application have been'identified`that should be�caref illy evaluated
to ensure they' fully address the impacts associated. with this rezoning request: The Planning
Commission should.pay particular�.attention to the transportation impacts,;', particular the,extensioin.of.
the roads to the adjacent properties is proffered at the' time ;of the.Masier' Development Plan for the
project. Specific comrnifinents as to'the - timing of.these 'extensions are: not, proffered. Also, it is
important,.to, recognize there is no. minimum limitation placed; on the developmorit to ensure the more
intensive, development of this site -,
Confirmation of the issues; identified: in the staff report, an' d °an- y 'issues raised by the Planning
Commission, ahould. be addressed' prior to, the decision of the Planning Commission.
n.
°puhlic hearink, a recommendation,re aeding Ih' s �rezoninz,aptilication to .
the Board,of Supervis` `ors -would 6e appropriate. The: applicant"shd'tild'.be,prepared Ito adeauate1v
address all concerns raised by thePlanWho. Commission.,
f
'>
.�
y ;,:.
.. ..
',5fl'
r i. 'i
' - �=
.. _ 1.
_
.. ��
r ,1
I Wl, A 11,47kl
ph(' m
Ljaw
Io 7;;nn--
40 Ic in
I a h ILU§
J
*CC
Yry
id
I
POP-
CD,
. C)
e ,
•
Niel
j J
if
pit
� • N •' ! ` '
♦ !fit �� � �'% � " ^ ✓1 I a� �
.w �� irk •t. ;�;., . , !
I
aw i
I
--.L
CD
CD
i
J.
t
"c
m
►�
,J t .,
1
�` d.• {: i'rM 1. . -
a
'
:�� � '- ; • �• eta ��:. k-
4
i
i
N a 2
OREZONING APP,LIC ON
Madison Property - TM# 64 -A -18
•
c ,
'A7 /01: 11: It"i,\JJNIOq'w010
7 ,.
Ir
r
ELK ape : s�1r s:4 . -BBB ilPOfl3RUv
�� f �• ti - a ���. �/ t �riV `+,` � , t Via, � `�..T
l ! /�( ♦e ,• ..•ems ° Z N.; "� 7
r{
3' {. " xZ
pi
r
xn
0 4v ,�Y. i r S .��x w rt 'i`'� _ � oC1•RU -�- +s •'• � C ��
JF s a w, u Y3 P t1 '4
��, >,�', !�' z� e "�,i �`� -E 4 a, ti e �' , ;, nay c t, , p� �tu���l,�ay�? p '•'�.�;y
, c '� "•s u x �. i +n. 'Westwood [D G ind}
Lost ■NTFfl_■ FMYNWAIK V
REZONING APPLICION
Madison Property - TM# 64 -A -18
Table of Contents
Section Contents
1.. Application, Adjacent Property Owners
2. Location Map
30 Special , L m,ited Power of Attorney
4. Parcel Deeds and Plats
5. Current Taxes Paid Record
60 Impact Analysis Statement
7, Proffer Statement
8. Agency Comments
90 Traffic Impact Analysi's
y _..
J•
REZONING APPLIcgION
Madison Property.- TM #'64 -A =18