Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-05 ApplicationSeptember 15, 2005 Evan Wyatt Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 RE: REZONING #04 -05, SENSENY VILLAGE Dear Evan: This letter serves to confirm action taken by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their meeting of August 24, 2005. The above- referenced application was approved to rezone 49.70 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District and 24.09 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to RP (Residential Performance) District with Proffers; said Proffers reflecting the revisions which were accepted by the Board of Supervisors on August 24, 2005 (totaling 73.79 acres). The subject properties are located south of Rossum Lane (Route 736) and Twinbrook Circle (Route 867) of the Senseny Road corridor, and are identified with Property Identification Numbers 65 -A -49B and 65 -A -55, in the Red Bud Magisterial District. The proffer that was approved as a part of this rezoning application is unique to this property and is binding regardless of ownership. Enclosed is a copy of the adopted proffer statement for your records. Please do not hesitate to contact this office if you have any questions regarding the approval of this rezoning application. The Department looks forward to working with you and the applicants during the development of this project. Sincerely, 7 4 Gee (-A-C- v, Michael T. Ruddy Deputy Planning Director MTR/bhd e COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665 -6395 cc: 1 -lazel Lambert, 223 Rossum Ln., Winchester, VA 22602 Taylor Grace, LLC, 446 Fromans Rd., Winchester, VA 22602 Gina A. Forrester, Red Bud Magisterial District Supervisor Pat Gochenour and Marie F. Straub, Red Bud Magisterial District Commissioners Jane Anderson- Real Estate 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 FILE COPY Reviewed Planning Commission: 08/03/05 Board of Supervisors: 08/24/05 North: South: East: West: REZONING APPLICATION 1404 -05 SENSENY VILLAGE Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Prepared: August 12, 2005 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director 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. Action Recommended Approval w/ Proffer Revisions Pending APPPO`'Fn PROPOSAL: To rezone 49.70 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District and 24.09 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to RP (Residential Performance) District with Proffers (73.79 acres) LOCATION: South of Rossum Lane (Route 736) and Twinbrook Circle (Route 867) ofthe Senseny Road corridor. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Red Bud PROPERTY ID NUMBER(S): 65- A -49B, 65 -A -55 PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas) District and RP (Residential Performance) District PRESENT USE: Residential and unimproved. ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING PRESENT USE: RP (Residential Performance) RA (Rural Areas)/ RP (Residential Performance) RA (Rural Areas) RP (Residential Performance) Use: Use: Use: Use: Residential Residential/ Unimproved Residential Vacant Residential PROPOSED USES: 285 residential units (145 Single Family Homes and 140 Townhomes) on 73.79 acres at a density of 3.86 units per acre. Rezoning #04 -05 Senseny Village August 12, 2005 Page 2 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Route 657. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to this property. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Senseny Village rezoning application dated November 22, 2004, with proffers revised December 29, 2004, addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plan detailing entrance designs, drainage features, and traffic Clow data from the I.T.E Trip Generation Manual. Seventh Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right -of -way needs, including right -of -way dedications, traffic siunalization, and off-site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right -of way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Fire Marshal: There should be two site access points during land clearing and burning of land clearing debris will he not be permitted. Plan approval recommended. Greenwood Station Volunteer F &R Co.: Is there a plan to bring this subdivision out onto Sulfur Springs Road? Public Works Department: Please see attached leiter datedJarneary 12. 2005. anti .signed by Harvey E. Sfrai'snyder, Jr., Director of Public Works. Frederick- Winchester Service Authority: In my review of the rezoning application, the narrative for conveyance and treatment of wastewater indicates that this property will be serviced by the Parkins Mills Wastewater Treatment Plant. I believe this is in error and treatment would occur at the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility. Frederick County Sanitation Authority: No comment. Department of Parks Recreation: Required recreational units and open space to be reviewed upon submittal of that information. Staff recommends bicycle trails, providing circulation within the development and connections to Senseny Road and adjacent developments be included in the plan. The proposed monetary proffer of S1,166 for Parks and Recreation appears to be appropriate to help offset the impact this development will have on these county services. Winchester Regional Airport: While the proposed development lies within the airport's Part 77 surfaces and airspace, it appears that the proposed site plan should not impede operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided, it is anticipated that the proposed 145 single lhmily homes and 140 townhouses will yield 40 high school students. 37 middle school students and 100 elementary school students for a total of 177 new students upon build -out. Significant residential growth in Frederick County has resulted in the schools serving this area having Planning Zoning: 1) Site History Rezoning #04 -05 Senscnv Village August 12, 2005 Page 3 student enrollments nearing or exceeding the practical capacity for a school. The cumulative impact of this project and others ofsimilar nature,_ coupled with the number of approved, undeveloped residential lots in the area, will necessitate the future construction of new schools facilities to accommodate increased student enrollments. The impact of this rezoning on current and future school needs should be considered during the approval process. The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identifies both parcels as being zoned A -2 Agricultural. In 1981 Frederick County approved a request (RZ001- 81) to rezone the parent tract of 65- A -49B. 65 -A -49, from A -2 (Agricultural General) to R -3 (Residential General). Subsequently, the residential zoning classifications were consolidated into the RP (Residential Performance) zoning district. Consequently, Parcel 65 -A -49B maintains the RP zoning classification. The County's A -1 and A -2 agricultural zoning districts were combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding revision ol'the zoning map resulted in the re- mapping of the subject properties and all other A -1 and A -2 zoned land to the RA (Rural Areas) District. Parcel 65 -A -55 maintains this RA zoning classification. 2) Master Development Plan. The Glenmont Village master development plan. MDP 001 -83 was approved by Frederick County on 3/21/84 for the development of parcel 65 -A -49 into approximately 135 single family detached cluster units and 48 multiplex units. The master development was revised in 1989 to change the multiplex units identified in Section 7 to 21 single fancily detached cluster units. The Glenmont Village master development plan identified specific areas as open space and single family detached cluster lots and also identified the general location of the streets providing access to the residential lots. With the approval of the subdivision of Glenmont Village Section 6 on 4/21/88 lot 65 -A -49B totaling 24.09 acres was created. This parcel has remained separate from the Glenmont Village subdivision and is undeveloped until this time. The parcel was recently acquired by the applicant of' this rezoning. It is the intent of the applicant to incorporate this parcel into the acreage of the adjacent Lambert parcel and create the development known as Senseny Village. In order to maintain a general level of consistency with the design and layout of Section Eight of the Glenmont Village M DP, in particular as it pertains to the area immediately adjacent to the existing residential land uses located in Section 6 of Glenmont Village, it was determined that the applicant should prepare a revision to the Glenmont Village MDP specific to Section Eight to clearly demonstrate the proposed development of this portion of the property. The MDP is only for information at this point. The proposed master development plan is designed to meet the master development plan requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and to preserve an area of open space and woodland preservation adjacent to the residential properties along Glenridge Rezoning #04 -05 Senseny Village August 12. 2005 Page 4 Drive as a buffer. This is in the vicinity of the existing residential lots that could reasonably have expected an area of open space to be maintained to the rear of their lots. The design and layout of the proposed MDP has been translated into the generalized Development Plan for the Senseny Village rezoning to guarantee that the Senseny Village project, and therefore the parcel previously known as Section 8 of Glenmont Village, w iIl develop in substantial conformance with what is being presented to the County and the existing residents of Glenmont Village. Following the rezoning of'this property, the applicant will develop a master development plan that incorporates both parcels consistent w ith the proffered Generalized Development Plan. 3) Comprehensive Poliev Plan The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as the community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key components of community life The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. /Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. Land Use The parcels comprising this rezoning application are located within the County's Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Urban Development Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of residential development will occur. In addition, the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use map designates the general area in which the Senseny Village property is located for residential land uses. The average overall residential density of the Urban Development Area should not exceed three units per acre. More specifically. the Zoning Ordinance stipulates that properties which contain less than one hundred acres but more than ten acres should not exceed 5.5 units per acre. With the more urban densities envisioned for development in the UDA. the Comprehensive Plan seeks to ensure that special effort is made to provide the infrastructure necessary to accommodate the desired land uses and densities. Further, as land is developed in the eastern portion of the Urban Development Area. the Comprehensive Plan identifies the preservation of the stream valleys as environmental open space is an important goal that contributes to the protection of flood plains and water quality and provides a continuous system of green open space. Trattsporialion The Frederick County Eastern Road Plan provides the guidance regarding future arterial and collector road connections in the eastern portion of the County by identifying needed connections and locations. Plans for new development should provide for the right -of -ways necessary to implement planned road improvements and new roads shown on the road plan Rezoning #04 -05 Senseny Village August 1 2, 2005 Page 5 should be constructed by the developer when warranted by the scale, intensity, or impacts of' the development. Existing roads should be improved as necessary by adjacent development to implement the intentions of the plan (Comprehensive Plan 7 -6). Route 37 is a road improvement need that is identified in the Eastern Road Plan and is a priority in the County's Primary Road Improvement Plan. Accommodations for this new major arterial road should be incorporated into the project. Senseny Road is identified as an improved major collector road and is also designated as a bicycle route on the County's bicycle plan. New development in the Urban Development Area should only be approved when roads and other infrastructure with sufficient capacity have been provided. The Comprehensive Plan identities that a level of service "C" should be maintained on roads adjacent to and within new developments and that traffic analysis should be provided by the applicants to insure that needed road improvements are identified in order to maintain or improve upon the level of service. 3) Site Suitability /Environment The Senseny Village site has been identified as a site typical of the Martinsburg Shale Region with steeply eroded side slopes and reasonably level plain areas. This is an accurate identification that presents challenges when planning the development program for this property. A tributary of the Opequon Creek bisects the 65 -A -49B portion of'the property. This feature and its associated slopes and natural drainage ways warrant particular attention and may also provide an opportunity for enhanced protection of the riparian corridor. The application proposes development in the reasonably level areas and offers areas that will be set aside for environmental and open space purposes. 4) Potential Impacts A. Transportation Traffic Impact Analvsis. The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared for this application projects that the development of 285 residential units (145 single family detached and 140 single family attached residential units) would generate 2,668 vehicle trips per day. The report was developed with access to the project being provided along Senseny Road via Rossum Lane and Twinbrook Circle. The TIA concludes that the traffic impacts associated with the Senseny Village application are acceptable and manageable. The intersections of Rossum Lane and Twinbrook Circle along Senseny Road will maintain levels of service of C or better during the build out conditions. This is assuming the identified eastbound right turn lane at the intersection of Senseny Road and Twinbrook Circle is implemented. Rezoning #04 -05 Sensenv Village August 12, 2005 Page 6 Transportation Program. The Generalized Development Plan for Senseny Village delineates the general public road systems that will serve the residential development. The applicant has designed the public road system to discourage cut through traffic flow through Glenridge Drive and Twinbrook Drive from Sensenv Village. The improved Rossum Drive access to Senseny Road is emphasized as the dominant traffic Ilow for this project. A traffic calming measure at the Glenridge Drive connection would further facilitate this approach. The Senseny Village application has proffered to design and construct right turn lanes on Sensenv Road at the Rossum Lane and Twinbrook Drive intersections prior to the issuance of the lust huilding permit for the project. In addition, the application proffers to design and construct improvements to Rossum Lane to VDOT standards including curb and gutter, street lights and storm sewer also prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the project. Omitted from the general transportation program is an enhanced accommodation for pedestrian circulation along the reconstructed Rossum Lane that would provide access to Senseny Road and ultimately the adjacent residential developments. Internal pedestrian circulation should also be provided between the residential uses within Senseny Village. Consideration should also be given to additional frontage improvements along Senseny Road. In an effort to address the broader transportation needs of this area, the applicant has proffered a monetary contribution in the amount of $5.000 per single family detached residential unit and $3.000 per single family attached townhouse unit for improvements to the Senseny Road corridor and /or a proposed north -south connector between Senseny Road and Berryville Pike. This proffer may generate up to $1.145,000 and may be used as matching funds by Frederick County. The application has also addressed the future Route 37 right -of -way by providing for a right -of- way dedication consistent with the preliminary plans for Route 37. This dedication is identified on the Generalized Development Plan and would be available to the County at such time the County requests the dedication. B. Sewer and Water The Senseny Village rezoning proposal is estimated to require approximately 78,375 gallons per day of water usage and approximately 64,125 gallons per day of wastewater. The Frederick County Sanitation Authority will serve the property and the wastewater flow from the site will ao to the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Plant. The initial review of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority and the Frederick Winchester Service Authority offered no comment. Recent planning of /aris have identified that evolving nutrient reduction regulations promulgated by Virginia's Bay Program will have a significant impact on the permitted waste water capabilities of Frederick County. Both the Frederick Winchester Service Authority and the Frederick County Sanitation Authority are currently undertaking e forts 10 evaluate the Rezoning #04 -05 Senseny Village August 12, 2005 Page 7 regulations and. in conjunction with the UDA Study Working Group. proactively plan to address this issue. Requests for land use modifications should be evaluated very carefully in light oldie evolving nutrient loading regulations. C. Community Facilities The Frederick County Fiscal Impact Model is a tool that is used to identify the capital costs associated with various types of development proposals presented to the County. The projected costs to Fire and Rescue. Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, Library, Sheriff's Office and for the Administration Building are calculated and provided to the applicant for their consideration. The Fiscal Impact Model output for this project indicates a net fiscal impact in the amount of $8.987 per residential unit. In recognition of the impacts that may be realized by the community the applicant has proffered a contribution in the amount of $10.000 per single family detached residential unit and $8.000 per single family attached residential unit. The comment provided by the Frederick County Public Schools should be carefully considered when evaluating the application. The schools evaluation anticipates that the proposed 145 single family homes and 140 townhouses will yield 40 high school students, 37 middle school students and 100 elementary school students for a total of 177 new students upon build -out. Significant residential growth in Frederick County has resulted in the schools serving this area having student enrollments nearing or exceeding the practical capacity for a school. The cumulative impact of this project and others of similar nature, coupled with the number of approved, undeveloped residential lots in the area, will necessitate the future construction of new schools facilities to accommodate increased student enrollments. The impact of this rezoning on current and future school needs should be considered during the approval process. Recent planning efforts have identified that the J j elementary school anticipated to open in the fall of2006will open at its programmed capacity. This is based upon the transfer of students currently enrolled in area schools that exceed programmed capacities and the projected build out and occupancy of previously approved residential projects in Nye UDA. No additional elementary schools have been identified in the current Capital Improvements Plan for this general area of the UDA. 5) Proffer Statement (Dated June 14, 2005) A) General Development Plan. The applicant has provided a Generalized Development Ilan for the purpose of identifying the general configuration of street systems, residential land use areas, and open space areas within the Sensenv Village development. The GDP is also very helpful when addressing buffering of the adjacent residential uses. In particular, those located in Section six of Glenmont Village. B) Residential Uses. The applicants have proffered to limit the total number of residential uses to 285 dwelling units. Rezoning #04 -05 Senseny Village August 12, 2005 Page 8 No split has been proffered regarding the specific housing types. However, the residential land use areas have been delineated on the GDP. Further, the applicant has proffered to prohibit the development of Garden Apartments. The applicant has committed to a phased introduction of the residential units over a four year time frame with seventy units within the first three years and 75 units in the fourth year. This phasing approach specifies the calendar year in which the building permits may be obtained. It may be more desirable to have the annual allocation occur on consecutive years following the approval of the master development plan for this project. This would be consistent with several other recently approved rezoning applications. C) Transportation. The applicant has proffered a monetary contribution in the amount of $5,000 per single family detached unit and $3,000 per single family attached townhouse unit for improvements to the Sensenv Road corridor and /or a proposed north -south connector between Sensenv Road and Berryville Pike; right turn lanes on Senseny Road at the Rossum Lane and Twinbrook Drive intersections; improvements to Rossum Lane to VDOT standards; and the dedication of right of-way for the future Route 37 Eastern Bypass. D) Monetary Contribution. The applicant has proffered a monetary contribution in the amount of $10,000 for each single family detached unit and $8,000 for each single tinnily attached townhouse unit to mitigate the impacts to capital facilities as identified in the fiscal impact model. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 08/03/05 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Senseny Village rezoning application is generally consistent with the goals ofthe Frederick County Comprehensive Plan as described in the staff report. Elements ol'the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address specific components ofthe Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the Planning Commission should ensure that the impacts associated with this rezoning request have been fully addressed by the applicant. The Planning Commission should pay particular attention to the capacities and capabilities of community facilities needed to serve the planned and proposed land uses. 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. Rezoning #04 -05 Sensenv Village August 12, 2005 Paac 9 PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY ACTION OF THE 98 /03/05 MEETING: Four residents ofthe Glenmont Village subdivision came forward to speak to the Commission about the rezoning proposal. The first Ms. Valerie Pullman, representing the Board of Directors ofthe Glenmont Village Homeowners Association, said the I -IOA appreciated the outstanding cooperation they received from Greenway Engineering and, with the exception of a number of issues raised concerning the particular wording in the proffer statement, they supported the rezoning proposal. A few of the concerns regarding the wording ofthe proffer statement centered on guarantees for the preservation of the existing woodlands strip between the new development and Glenmont Village, a request for sidewalk installation on one side of Rossum Lane for pedestrian safety, and a guarantee prohibiting garden apartments. The other three residents of Glenmont Village were concerned that improvements to Rossum Lane would take away a considerable portion of their front yards and driveways, and concern was also raised about the potential for increased traffic on Glenridge Drive. Mr. Wyatt of Greenway Engineering agreed to modify the wording within the proffer statement to accommodate the concerns of the HOA, with the exception of the sidewalk on Rossum Lane because of the uncertainty about available space. Specifically, he said he would reference property numbers consistently throughout the document, which would eliminate any potential for apartment units within the project and include additional wording to guarantee the minimum 50 -foot woodland preservation strip between the rear property line and the townhouses. Mr. Lloyd Ingram from VDOT carne forward to address the residents along Rossum Lane who were concerned about losing a portion of their front yards and driveways. Mr. Ingram explained that all improvements to Rossum Lane would take place within VDOT's existing 50 -foot right -of -way. Chairman DeHaven pointed out that the residents may have been unknowingly maintaining a portion of VDOT's existing right -of -way over the years. Some members of the Commission voiced their concerns regarding the overcrowded schools in the Sensenv Road area and the inability to locate new schools within the UDA to accommodate the additional growth, the proximity of the county's landfill to the proposed new development, possible enactment of regulations limiting sewage flows into the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility, and inadequate transportation infrastructure. A motion was made and seconded to recommend denial of the rezoning, however, this motion failed by a majority vote. A new motion was made to recommend approval of the rezoning with the all of the revisions to the proffers as stated and agreed to by the applicant, to be coordinated by the Planning Department before consideration by the Board of Supervisors. This motion was seconded and passed by the following majority vote: YES (TO REC. APPROVAL. W/ PROFFER REVISIONS): Wilmot. Manuel, Triplett, Kriz. Ours, Thomas, Morris, Unger, Watt, DeHaven NO: Staub. Gochcnour (Note: Commissioner Light was absent from the meeting.) e g s 8 A 0:000 s u A ZZZZ 8 C0l00 REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning Staff.' Zoning Amendment Number "U5 PC Hearing Date g4Ats` Fee Amount Paid B' /C; 4Q9 Date Receive 3° 3 BOS Hearing Date 5 y joy The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicant: Name: Greenway Engineering Telephone: (540) 662 -4185 Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 2. Property Owner (if different from above) Name: Hazel C. Lambert Telephone: (540) 662 -0623 Address: 223 Rossum Ln., Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Taylor Grace, LLC Telephone: (540) 662 -4164 Address: 446 Fromans Rd., Winchester, VA 22602 3. Contact person if other than above Name: Greenwav Engineering Attn.: Evan Wyatt, AICP 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map Plat Deed to Property Verification of taxes paid Agency Comments Fees Impact Analysis Statement Proffer Statement I {Ir FREDEE C: COUNTY PLANNING DEVELOPMENT MAR 2 3 2005 Telephone: (540) 662 -4185 PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING 65B- ((7)) -10 Residential RP District 65D- ((1)) -1 Residential RP District 65D- ((2)) -4 Residential RP District 65D- ((2)) -5 Residential RP District 65D- ((2)) -6 Residential RA District 65D- ((2)) -7 Residential RP District 65D- ((2)) -8 Residential RP District 65D- ((2)) -9 Residential RP District 65D- ((2)) -10A Greenspace RP District 65D- ((3)) -4 -53 Residential RP District 65D- ((3)) -4 -54 Residential RP District 65D- ((3)) -4 -59A Greenspace RP District 65D- ((4)) -5 -71 Residential RP District 65D- ((5)) -6 -76 Residential RP District 65D- ((5)) -6 -77 Residential RP District 5. The Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned: Hazel C. Lambert, owner Taylor Grace. LLC. owner 6. A) Current Use of the Property: B) Proposed Use of the Property: 7. Adjoining Property: Residential and Undeveloped Residential Subdivision 65D- ((5)) -6 -78 Residential RP District 65D- ((5)) -6 -79 Residential RP District 65D- ((5)) -6 -80 Residential RP District 65D- ((5)) -6 -81 Residential RP District 65D- ((5)) -6 -82 Residential RP District 65D- ((5)) -6 -83 Residential RP District 65D- ((5)) -6 -84 Residential RP District 65D- ((5)) -6 -85 Residential RP District 65D- ((5)) -6 -86 Residential RP District 65D- ((5)) -6 -87 Residential RP District 65D- ((5)) -6 -88 Residential RP District 65D- ((5)) -6 -89 Residential RP District 65- ((A)) -50 Residential RP District 65- ((A)) -54 Residential RP District 65- ((A)) -56 Residential RP District 65- ((A)) -57 Residential RP District 65-((AD-60 Residential RP District 65- ((A)) -62 Residential RP District 65- ((A)) -63 Residential RP District 65- ((A)) -70 Residential RP District 65- ((A)) -86 Residential RP District 65- ((A)) -65 Residential RP District 65- ((A)) -71 Residential RP District 65- ((A)) -68A Residential RP District 65B- ((6)) -38 Residential RP District 65- ((A)) -72 Unimproved RA District 65- ((A)) -186B Residential RA District 65- ((A)) -186J Residential RA District 65 -((A)) -190 Unimproved RA District Note: Please also provide public hearing meeting notice to Clarke County as the subject property is located within mile of the Clarke County boundary line. Legal notice should be provided to the following address: Clarke County Planning Department Attn: Chuck Johnston, Planning Director 102 North Church Street Berryville, VA 22611 8. Location: The property is located at (give exact located based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route number): The 73.79 -acre site is located on the south of Rossum Lane (Route 736) and Twinbrook Circle (Route 867). Acres Current Zoning Zoning Requested 49.70 RA District RP District 24.09 RP District RP District with Proffers 73.79 Total Acreage to be rezoned Information to be Submitted for Capital Facilities Impact Model In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for the applicant to provide information concerning the specifics of the proposed use. Otherwise, the planning staff will use the maximum possible density or intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on Page 9 of the application package. Parcel Identification /Location: Parcel Identification Number 65- ((A)) -49B 65- ((A)) -55 Districts Magisterial: Red Bud High School: Millbrook Fire Service: Co 18, Greenwood Middle School: Admiral Byrd Rescue Service: Co 18, Greenwood Elementary School: Senseny Road 10. Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. 11. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed Single Family homes: 145 Townhome: 140 Multi Family 0 Non Residential Lots: 0 Mobile Home: 0 Hotel Rooms: 0 Square Footage of Proposed Uses Office: 0 Service Station: 0 Retail: 0 Manufacturing: 0 Restaurant: 0 Warehouse: 0 Other 0 12. Signature: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors' public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right -of -way until the hearing. 1 (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the bet of my (our) knowledge. Applicant(s): WCw Greenway Engineering Ev n Wyatt, Date: 3/ 17 /0S Owner Signature: REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA WIAk c2 P1c.tilX g_ Taylor Gra LLC Date Owner Signature: REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 3 -i -65 Hazel C. Lambert Date This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist treat 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 Planning Commission: 08/03/05 Board of Supervisors: 08/24/05 PROPOSAL: To rezone 49.70 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District and 24.09 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to RP (Residential Performance) District with Proffers (73.79 acres) LOCATION: South of Rossum Lane (Route 736) and Twinbrook Circle (Route 867) of the Senseny Road corridor. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Red Bud PROPERTY ID NUMBER(S): 65- A -49B, 65 -A -55 PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas) District and RP (Residential Performance) District PRESENT USE: Residential and unimproved. ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING PRESENT USE: North: South: East: West: RP (Residential Performance) RA (Rural Areas)/ RP (Residential Performance) RA (Rural Areas) RP (Residential Performance) Use: Use: Use: Use: REZONING APPLICATION #04 -05 SENSENY VILLAGE Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: July 21, 2005 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director Action Pending Pending Residential Residential/ Unimproved Residential Vacant Residential PROPOSED USES: 285 residential units (145 Single Family Homes and 140 Townhomes) on 73.79 acres at a density of 3.86 units per acre. Rezoning #04 -05 Senseny Village July 21, 2005 Page 2 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have signi ficant measurable impact on Route 657. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to this property. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Senseny Village rezoning application dated November 22, 2004, with proffers revised December 29, 2004, addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plan detailing entrance designs, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E Trip Generation Manual. Seventh Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to continent on all right -of -way needs, including right -of -way dedications, traffic signalization, and off -site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right -of -way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by. this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Fire Marshal: There should be two site access points during land clearing and burning ofland clearing debris will be not be permitted. Plan approval recommended. Greenwood Station Volunteer F &R Co.: Is there a plan to bring this subdivision out onto Sulfur Springs Road? Public Works Department: Please see attached letter dated January 12, 2005, and signed by Haney E. Strawsnyder, Jr. Director of Public [Yorks. Frederick Winchester Service Authority: In my review of the rezoning application, the narrative for conveyance and treatment of wastewater indicates that this property will be serviced by the Parkins Mills Wastewater Treatment Plant. I believe this is in error and treatment would occur at the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility. Frederick County Sanitation Authority: No comment. Department of Parks Recreation: Required recreational units and open space to be reviewed upon submittal of that information. Staff recommends bicycle trails, providing circulation within the development and connections to Senseny Road and adjacent developments be included in the plan. The proposed monetary proffer of' 1,1 66 for Parks and Recreation appears to be appropriate to help offset the impact this development will have on these county services. Winchester Regional Airport: While the proposed development lies within the airport's Part 77 surfaces and airspace, it appears that the proposed site plan should not impede operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided, it is anticipated that the proposed 145 single family homes and 140 townhouses will yield 40 high school students, 37 middle school students and 100 elementary school students for a total of 177 new students upon build -out. Significant residential growth in Frederick County has resulted in the schools serving this area having Rezoning #04 -05 Senseny Village July 21, 2005 Page 3 student enrollments nearing or exceeding the practical capacity for a school. The cumulative impact of this project and others of similar nature, coupled with the number of approved, undeveloped residential lots in the area, will necessitate the future construction of new schools facilities to accommodate increased student enrollments. The impact of this rezoning on current and future school needs should be considered during the approval process. Planning Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identifies both parcels as being zoned A -2 Agricultural. In 1981 Frederick County approved a request (RZ001- 81) to rezone the parent tract of 65- A -49B, 65 -A -49. from A -2 (Agricultural General) to R -3 (Residential General). Subsequently, the residential zoning classifications were consolidated into the RP (Residential Performance) zoning district. Consequently, Parcel 65 -A -49B maintains the RP zoning classification. The County's A -1 and A -2 agricultural zoning districts were combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re- mapping of the subject properties and all other A -1 and A -2 zoned land to the RA (Rural Areas) District. Parcel 65 -A -55 maintains this RA zoning classification. 2) Master Development Plan. The Glenmont Village master development plan, MDP 001 -83 was approved by Frederick County on 3/21/84 for the development of parcel 65 -A -49 into approximately 135 single family detached cluster units and 48 multiplex units. The master development was revised in 1989 to change the multiplex units identified in Section 7 to 21 single family detached cluster units. The Glenmont Village master development plan identified specific areas as open space and single family detached cluster Tots and also identified the general location of the streets providing access to the residential lots. With the approval of the subdivision of Glenmont Village Section 6 on 4/21/88 lot 65 -A -49B totaling 24.09 acres was created. This parcel has remained separate from the Glenmont Village subdivision and is undeveloped until this time. The parcel was recently acquired by the applicant of this rezoning. It is the intent of the applicant to incorporate this parcel into the acreage of the adjacent Lambert parcel and create the development known as Senseny Village. In order to maintain a general level of consistency with the design and layout of Section Eight of the Glenmont Village MDP, in particular as it pertains to the area immediately adjacent to the existing residential land uses located in Section 6 of Glenmont Village, it was determined that the applicant should prepare a revision to the Glenmont Village MDP specific to Section Eight to clearly demonstrate the proposed development of this portion of the property. The MDP is only for information at this point. The proposed master development plan is designed to meet the master development plan requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and to preserve an area of open space and woodland preservation adjacent to the residential properties along Glenridge Rezoning #04 -05 Senseny Village July 21, 2005 Page 4 Drive as a buffer. This is in the vicinity of the existing residential lots that could reasonably have expected an area of open space to be maintained to the rear of their lots. The design and layout of the proposed MDP has been translated into the generalized Development Plan for the Senseny Village rezoning to guarantee that the Senseny Village project, and therefore the parcel previously known as Section 8 of Glenmont Village, will develop in substantial conformance with what is being presented to the County and the existing residents of Glenmont Village. Following the rezoning of this property, the applicant will develop a master development plan that incorporates both parcels consistent with the proffered Generalized Development Plan. 3) Comprehensive Policy Plan The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as the community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key components of community life. The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 1 -1] Land Use The parcels comprising this rezoning application are located within the County's Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Urban Development Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of residential development will occur. In addition, the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use neap designates the general area in which the Senseny Village property is located for residential land uses. The average overall residential density of the Urban Development Area should not exceed three units per acre. More specifically, the Zoning Ordinance stipulates that properties which contain less than one hundred acres but more than ten acres should not exceed 5.5 units per acre. With the more urban densities envisioned for development in the UDA, the Comprehensive Plan seeks to ensure that special effort is made to provide the infrastructure necessary to accommodate the desired land uses and densities. Further, as land is developed in the eastern portion of the Urban Development Area, the Comprehensive Plan identifies the preservation of the stream valleys as environmental open space is an important goal that contributes to the protection of flood plains and water quality and provides a continuous system of green open space. Transport al iort The Frederick County Eastern Road Plan provides the guidance regarding future arterial and collector road connections in the eastern portion of the County by identifying needed connections and locations. Plans for new development should provide for the right -of -ways necessary to implement planned road improvements and new roads shown on the road plan Rezoning #04 -05 Senseny Village July 21, 2005 Page 5 should be constructed by the developer when warranted by the scale, intensity, or impacts of the development. Existing roads should be improved as necessary by adjacent development to implement the intentions of the plan (Comprehensive Plan 7 -6). Route 37 is a road improvement need that is identified in the Eastern Road Plan and is a priority in the County's Primary Road Improvement Plan. Accommodations for this new major arterial road should be incorporated into the project. Senseny Road is identified as an improved major collector road and is also designated as a bicycle route on the County's bicycle plan. New development in the Urban Development Area should only be approved when roads and other infrastructure with sufficient capacity have been provided. The Comprehensive Plan identifies that a level of service "C" should be maintained on roads adjacent to and within new developments and that traffic analysis should be provided by the applicants to insure that needed road improvements are identified in order to maintain or improve upon the level of service. 3) Site Suitability /Environment The Senseny Village site has been identified as a site typical of the Martinsburg Shale Region with steeply eroded side slopes and reasonably level plain areas. This is an accurate identification that presents challenges when planning the development program for this property. A tributary of the Opequon Creek bisects the 65 -A -49B portion of the property. This feature and its associated slopes and natural drainage ways warrant particular attention and may also provide an opportunity for enhanced protection of the riparian corridor. The application proposes development in the reasonably level areas and offers areas that will be set aside for environmental and open space purposes. 4) Potential Impacts A. Transportation Traffic Impact Analvsis. The Traffic impact Analysis (TIA) prepared for this application projects that the development of 285 residential units (145 single family detached and 140 single family attached residential units) would generate 2,668 vehicle trips per day. The report was developed with access to the project being provided along Senseny Road via Rossum Lane and Twinbrook Circle. The TIA concludes that the traffic impacts associated with the Senseny Village application are acceptable and manageable. The intersections of Rossum Lane and Twinbrook Circle along Senseny Road will maintain levels of service of C or better during the build out conditions. This is assuming the identified eastbound right turn lane at the intersection of Senseny and Twinbrook Circle is implemented. Rezoning #04 -05 Senseny Village July 21, 2 005 Page 6 Transportation Program. The Generalized Development Plan for Senseny Village delineates the general public road systems that will serve the residential development. The applicant has designed the public road system to discourage cut through traffic flow through Glenridge Drive and Twinbrook Drive from Senseny Village. The improved Rossum Drive access to Senseny Road is emphasized as the dominant traffic flow for this project. A traffic calming measure at the Glenridge Drive connection would further facilitate this approach. The Senseny Village application has proffered to design and construct right turn lanes on Senseny Road at the Rossum Lane and Twinbrook Drive intersections prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the project. In addition, the application proffers to design and construct improvements to Rossum Lane to VDOT standards including curb and gutter, street lights and storm sewer also prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the project. Omitted from the general transportation program is an enhanced accommodation for pedestrian circulation along the reconstructed Rossum Lane that would provide access to Senseny Road and ultimately the adjacent residential developments. Internal pedestrian circulation should also be provided between the residential uses within Senseny Village. Consideration should also be given to additional frontage improvements along Senseny Road. In an effort to address the broader transportation needs of this area, the applicant has proffered a monetary contribution in the amount of $5,000 per single family detached residential unit and $3,000 per single family attached townhouse unit for improvements to the Senseny Road corridor and /or a proposed north -south connector between Senseny Road and Berryville Pike. This proffer may generate up to $1145.000 and may be used as matching funds by Frederick County. The application has also addressed the future Route 37 right -of -way by providing for a right -of- way dedication consistent with the preliminary plans for Route 37. This dedication is identified on the Generalized Development Plan and would be available to the County at such time the County requests the dedication. 13. Sewer and Water The Senseny Village rezoning proposal is estimated to require approximately 78,375 gallons per day of water usage and approximately 64,125 gallons per day of wastewater. The Frederick County Sanitation Authority will serve the property and the wastewater flow from the site will go to the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Plant. The initial review of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority and the Frederick Winchester Service Authority offered no comment. Recent planning efforts have identified that evolving nutrient reduction regulations promulgated by Virginia's Buy Program will have a significant impact on the permitted waste water capabilities of Frederick County. Both the Frederick Winchester Service Authority and the Frederick County Sanitation Authority are currently undertaking efforts to evaluate the Rezoning #04 -05 Senseny Village July 21, 2005 Page 7 regulations and, in conjunction with the UDA Study Working Group, proactively plan to address this issue. Requests for land use modifications should he evaluated very carefully in light of the evolving nutrient loading regulations. C. Community Facilities The Frederick County Fiscal Impact Model is a tool that is used to identify the capital costs associated with various types of development proposals presented to the County. The projected costs to Fire and Rescue, Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, Library, Sheriff's Office and for the Administration Building are calculated and provided to the applicant for their consideration. The Fiscal Impact Model output for this project indicates a net fiscal impact in the amount of $8,987 per residential unit. In recognition of the impacts that may be realized by the community the applicant has proffered a contribution in the amount of $10,000 per single family detached residential unit and $8.000 per single family attached residential unit. The comment provided by the Frederick County Public Schools should be carefully considered when evaluating the application. The schools evaluation anticipates that the proposed 145 single family homes and 140 townhouses will yield 40 high school students. 37 middle school students and 100 elementary school students for a total of 177 new students upon build -out. Significant residential growth in Frederick County has resulted in the schools serving this area having student enrollments nearing or exceeding the practical capacity for a school. The cumulative impact of this project and others of similar nature, coupled with the number of approved, undeveloped residential Tots in the area, will necessitate the future construction of new schools facilities to accommodate increased student enrollments. The impact of this rezoning on current and future school needs should be considered during the approval process. Recent planning efforts have identified that the II th elementary school anticipated to open in the ,fall of 2006 will open at its programmed capacity. This is based upon the transfer of students currently enrolled in area schools that exceed programmed capacities and the projected build out and occupancy of previously approved residential projects in the UDA. No additional elementary schools have been identified in the current Capital Improvements Plan for this general area of the UDA. 5) Proffer Statement (Dated June 14, 2005) A) General Development Plan. The applicant has provided a Generalized Development Plan for the purpose of identifying the general configuration of street systems residential land use areas, and open space areas within the Senseny Village development. The GDP is also very helpful when addressing buffering of the adjacent residential uses. In particular, those located in Section six of Glenmont Village. B) Residential Uses. The applicants have proffered to limit the total number of residential uses to 285 dwelling units. Rezoning #04 -05 Senseny Village July 21, 2005 Page 8 D) Monetary Contribution. No split has been proffered regarding the specific housing types. However the residential land use areas have been delineated on the GDP. Further, the applicant has proffered to prohibit the development of Garden Apartments. The applicant has committed to a phased introduction of'the residential units over a four year time frame with seventy units within the first three years and 75 units in the fourth year. This phasing approach specifies the calendar year in which the building permits may be obtained. It may be more desirable to have the annual allocation occur on consecutive years following the approval of the master development plan for this project. This would be consistent with several other recently approved rezoning applications. C) Transportation. The applicant has proffered a monetary contribution in the amount of $5 000 per single family detached unit and $3,000 per single family attached townhouse unit for improvements to the Senseny Road corridor and /or a proposed north -south connector between Senseny Road and Berryville Pike; right turn lanes on Senseny Road at the Rossum Lane and Twinbrook Drive intersections; improvements to Rossum Lane to VDOT standards; and the dedication ofright- of -way for the future Route 37 Eastern Bypass. The applicant has proffered a monetary contribution in the amount of $10,000 for each single family detached unit and $8,000 for each single fancily attached townhouse unit to mitigate the impacts to capital facilities as identified in the fiscal impact model. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 08/03/05 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Senseny Village rezoning application is generally consistent with the goals of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan as described in the staff report. Elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the Planning Commission should ensure that the impacts associated with this rezoning request have been fully addressed by the applicant. The Planning Commission should pay particular attention to the capacities and capabilities of community facilities needed to serve the planned and proposed land uses. 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. Following the required public hearing, a decision regarding this rezoning application by the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address nll concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. cEn FREDERICK COUNTY CANNING DEVELOPMENT SENSENY VILLAGE REZONING APPLICATION Red Bud Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia TM 65- ((A)) -49B and TM 65- ((A)) -55 73.79 Acres Current Owners: HAZEL C. LAMBERT TAYLOR GRACE, LLC Contact Person: March 17, 2005 Evan Wyatt, AICP Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 540- 662 -4185 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Founded in 1071 WinchesLer, Virginia 22602 Telephone 540-662-4185 Engineers FAX 540- 722 -9526 Surveyors www.greenwayeng.com Pile #3924 /EAU' Rezoning Application Location Map Application Review Fee File 143924/EA W Special Limited Power of Attorney Agreement