Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-06 ApplicationJuly 27, 2006 Mr. John Lewis, P.E. Painter Lewis, PLC 116 S. Stewart St. Winchester, VA 22601 RE: REZONING #08 -06, SHAWNEE DRIVE PROPERTY Dear Mr. Lewis: Sincerely, T Candice E. Perkins Planner II CEP /bad Attachment C This letter serves to confirm action taken by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their meeting of July 26, 2006. The above referenced application was approved to rezone .94 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District with proffers, for office use. The subject property is located on Shawnee Drive, approximately 250 feet east of the intersection of Route 11 and Shawnee Drive, on the right side of the road, and is identified with Property Identification Number 63 -A -104 in the Shawnee 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. cc: Gene Fisher, Shawnee Magisterial District Supervisor June Wilmot, Shawnee Magisterial District Commissioner Robert A. Morris, Shawnee Magisterial District Commissioner Jane Anderson, Real Estate Mitchell Webb, LLC, 19 First St., Ste. 202, Berryville, VA 22611 Department of Planning and Development 540/665 -5651 FAX: 540/665 -6395 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 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. Planning Commission: Board of Supervisors: PROPOSAL: To rezone .94 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District with proffers, for office uses. LOCATION: The property is located on Shawnee Drive. approximately 250' east of the intersection of Route 1 1 Shawnee Drive, on the right side of the road MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 63 -A -104 PROPERTY ZONING: RP (Residential Performance) District PRESENT USE: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING PRESENT USE: North: RP (Residential Performance) B2 (Business General) South: M2 (Industrial, General) East: RP (Residential Performance) West: B2 (Business General) PROPOSED USES: Offi ce REZONING APPLICATION #08 -06 SHAWNEE DRIVE PROPERTY Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Prepared: July 11, 2006 Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins, Planner II Reviewed Action June 21, 2006 Recommended Approval July 26, 2006 Pending Use: Residential Use: Commercial Bank Use: Commercial /Industrial Use: Residential Use: Commercial Car Sales Rezoning #08 -06, Shawnee Drive Property July 11, 2006 Page 2 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have little measurable impact on Route 652. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Shawnee Drive Property rezoning application dated March 15, 2006 address transportation concerns associated with this request. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans 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 comment 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: Plan approval recommended. Department of Inspections: No comment Public Works Department: We have no comment at this time but reserve the right to perform a detailed review at the time of the site plan submitted. Frederick Winchester Service Authority: I believe that property would be serviced by the City of Winchester; sewer and water connection 1 believe are already installed to property. Sanitation Authority: This site will be served by Winchester City. Department of Parks Recreation: No comment Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided that states no residential units will be part of the rezoning, there will be no impact to the school population upon build -out. Historic Resources Advisory Board: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal review of the rezoning application by the HRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the properties nor are there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It was noted that the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley identifies the property as being located within the core areas of the First and Second Battles of Kernstown and the study area of the Second Battle of Winchester; however, due to the development in this area, it has been deemed to have lost its integrity. Frederick County Attorney: It is my opinion that the proposed proffer statement is generally in a form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, subject to the following comments: 1. I would suggest, for uniformity and easy- reference purposes, that the details of the zoning, owners, property, etc., be summarized at the beginning as set forth on the Rezoning #08 -06, Shawnee Drive Property July 11, 2006 Page 3 attached format. This format has been used in all recent proffer statements. 2. The heading "INTRODUCTION" should be deleted at the beginning of the proffer statement, as the content of the initial paragraphs is substantive paragraphs of the proffer statement. 3. The last sentences of the first paragraph, beginning with the word "Therefore" should be deleted, as the actual proffers are set forth in the itemized proffers. 4. In the second paragraph, I would recommend that the words "development of this property would require the owner to meet the conditions set forth in this document" be revised to state "development of this subject property shall be done in strict conformity with the conditions set forth below'. 5. The words "and the Code of Virginia should be added at the end of the second paragraph. 6. With respect to Proffer No. 1, as I was not provided with a copy of the Generalized Site Plan, the staff should review the site plan shown on Exhibit 4 of the Impact Statement to determine if it is sufficiently detailed to govern the development of the site. 7. Proffer No. 3 may not, in fact, be a proffer. If this development would require a commercial entrance and require the owner to install improvements required by VDOT, then this proffer is offering nothing beyond what is already required. It should be noted that I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for the rezoning of this specific property, or whether other proffers would be appropriate, as it is my understanding that that review will be done by the staff and the Planning Commission. Staff Comment: The proffers have been revised to reflect the comments provided by the county attorney. Winchester City Planning Department: No objections to the rezoning request. Planning Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) identifies this property as being zoned B2 (Business General), the property was then included in the County's comprehensive downzoning and was changed from B2 to R -3 (Residential General). The zoning changed to RP (Residential General) District on September 28, 1983 when the RI, R2, R3, and R6 zoning districts were reclassified. 2) 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 parcel for which this rezoning is being requested is located within the County's Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Urban Development Area and Sewer and Water Service Area define the general area in which more Rezoning #08 -06, Shawnee Drive Property July 11, 2006 Page 4 intensive forms of planned commercial and industrial development will occur. The Shawnee Drive property is located within an area that the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan identifies with an industrial land use designation. The applicant is requesting a B2 (business /commercial) designation which might be more compatible with the surrounding area. The site is located adjacent to an existing automobile sales facility (zoned B2) as well as existing RP residential property. Transportation The site will be accessed off of Shawnee Drive (Route 652) which is classified as a local road; the applicant has proffered to prohibit the site from being accessed off of Route 11. The traffic analysis provided with the applicant's impact statement shows that the relevant section of Route 11 has 17,000 average daily vehicles per day and Shawnee Drive has an average 5,200 vehicle trips per day. The site has been proffered to develop with a maximum of 9,000 square feet of office space which would generate approximately 100 trips per weekday. 3) Site Suitability /Environment The site does not contain any environmental features that would either constrain or preclude site development. There are no identified areas of steep slopes, floodplains, wetlands or woodlands 4) Proffer Statement Dated October 16, 2005 and revised on January 16, 2006, March 15, 2006 and May 9, 2006 Generalized Plan The applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan that restricts the development of this property to a 9,000 square foot office building. Access to Route 11 The applicant has proffered to prohibit access onto Route 1 1 This site will only be accessed off of Shawnee Drive Frontage Improvements A five foot sidewalk is proffered along Shawnee Drive Monetary Contributions In recognition of the impacts that may be realized by the community to the Fire and Rescue Services, the applicant has proffered a contribution in the amount of $1,000 to be paid to the Stephens City Volunteer Fire Company for impacts to fire control services. This sum will be paid upon receipt of the first building permit issued subsequent to the approval of the rezoning. Rezoning 1408 -06, Shawnee Drive Property July 11, 2006 Page 5 PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 06/21/06 MEETING: The representative for the applicant/owner commented that despite the fact the Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for industrial use in this area, he believed the parcel was too small for an industrial use. The representative said the parcel was not suitable for residential use and he believed office use was the most appropriate for this particular lot. A Commission member asked the representative if he had any direct conversations with surrounding neighbors about any issues they might have; the representative replied that he did not meet with the neighbors. There were no public comments made regarding the proposed rezoning. No issues or areas of concern were raised by the Planning Commission. The Commission unanimously recommended approval of the rezoning. (Note: Commissioners Thomas and Watt were absent from the meeting.) STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 07/26/06 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: This application is a request to rezone approximately .94 acres of land from the RP (Residential Performance) to the B2 (Business General) District. The property is located within the SWSA (Sewer and Water Service Area) as well as the UDA (Urban Development Area). The Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan indicates that the property should be used for industrial land uses, however, due to the subject site's location adjacent to the B2 and RP zoned properties, a rezoning from a RP zoning to a B2 zoning may be supported to continue the consistency and compatibility of the area. 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 all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. >l. (FOREMAN INVESTMENTS21.0 63 A 31 LIGHT, WILLIAM P SANDRA H 63 A 35 ROY, CLARENCE E JR DOROTHY N NUr Pons zoning 0 tit ab n w g o.( Street w N s.o N T. Res. 0 of (nom wgw.rnn Demo w wm Om. r.... Community 0.0.70 0 ...n. R.. ni m ...Sal o R.. Qr.n.. 0....i D.e S ...Sal :..60. D, Mama, .e.1*T0 M690an)Q(44e..a. ,D... Van wem v. D..,( ®Re(R9 R..r.rn.s D.. n aa IMpher Edw., RA(RU91FUY. Distr./ QMI N+wnr. rio an(R9.m.i0.num.m a®M Shawnee Dr. Property Frederick CogDyDept m Rezoning 08 -06 Flanning S Development 107 63 A 104) Wnthester. VA 22601 wow, CO.FREDERICK.VALS e. May 30. 2000 63 A 23 CREEKSIDE VILLAGE, LC 1.82 63 A 29 VALLEY AVENUE RENTAL PROPERI1ES,LLC 0.8B 63 A 30 FOREMAN INVESTMENTS, LLC 63 A 34 CARTER, MARY FRANCES 63 A 35 iR 8 DOROTH IV A AN., AAA.. et, R Asperses Shawnee Dr. Property Frederick County Dept Rezoning 08 06 Plannrng 6Devel °Pment imrvKem st =104') 'Mnchester, VA 22601,.. www CO FREDERICK VA US• May 30 2006 VALLEY AVENUE RERTALTPR02ER7ES.L C, 086 FCRENANINf_STMEN S LLC 075 f BETTYBARTON TRUSTEE ROY, CLAFENCE Shawnee Dr. Property ,,,,y Rezoning 08 06 ninn6Oevelo °N 107N KentS (63 A 104 r ter, VA K May 30 2006 To be =completed by Planning Staff Fee Amount Paid mber Date Received 5 PC Hearing Date �2 Zoning Amendment u1/�G BOS Hearing Date 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: PAINTE,2- LstilS, Address: I16, S. srswtcec 5T'. Wmc et.- E-2 VA. 2).6G 1 2. Property Owner (if different than above) Name: N\ 4chel13 u e.bb LLC_ hm Otto Address: 19 CasT 2o cav usE VA. QQ611 3. Contact person if other than above Name: t*hrl Lewis, P c 4. Checklist: Check the following Location map Plat Deed to property Verification of taxes paid 7 MAY a 2006 REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA items that have been included with this application Agency Comments Fees Impact Analysis Statement Proffer Statement 11 Telephone: S4o V-5 Telephone: Soo 955 4sno Telephone: 5 4 4 0 tclo2 3 ei a 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: i re. he 1 13 lee_bb LLC n 1, r)V) 6. A) Current Use of the Property: VNAri i B) Proposed Use of the Property: Q- STS'/ offlcr 7. Adjoining Property: PARCEL II) NUMBER USE ZONING '02 2241- tifiQt37i AT Ir' A ny. »nfn+E r ;Al VNtk,51 ',Ned FaM IL V 41NCthE FAMILV G3- A 2-5 Nw 3r,70 63 A- ze °°Hr1FIYcwL/ ynpus t- 8. Location: The property is located at (give exact location based nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers): 63 A 99 63- lon 63 lol 63- A Ib.Q 62-,6; (.0- A 105 (o3 103 1u4N OFF of RT. 1 rwiz) 5 NA1.+riET. 1212 Ng /EAsr SourltD 0.4 tNtFIZ -LT1oN I Z�I aN �,cn ae S I 1 l`Tt tt1 anI to LEWIN I wNT MED o�S. 12 Single Family homes: Non Residential Lots: 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. 9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number /o3- A 104 Districts Magisterial: High School: Fire Service: _TCPrivirS Crry VOL. FIZFteprMiddle School: Rescue Service AteNs Cory 6oL• Fee ocar. Elementary School: 10. Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. Acres Current Zoning Zoning Requested 0.44 �aa Total acreage to be rezoned 11. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed Number of Units Proposed Townhome: Multi- Family: Mobile Home: Hotel Rooms: Square Footage of Proposed Uses Office: S, Von Service Station: Retail: Manufacturing: Restaurant: Warehouse: Other: 13 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. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. Applicant(s)'.` Owner(s): S vnvr f1/4,,D- 14 Date: l I b 0 5 Date: Date: x'14 0(0 Date: Adjoining Property Owners Rezoning 15 Owners of property adjoining the land will be notified of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors meetings. For the purpose of this application, adjoining property is any property abutting the requested property on the side or rear or any property directly across a public right -of -way, a private right -of -way, or a watercourse from the requested property. The applicant is required to obtain the following information on each adjoining property including the parcel identification number which may be obtained from the office of the Commissioner of Revenue. The Commissioner of the Revenue is located on the 2nd floor of the Frederick County Administrative Building, 107 North Kent Street. Name and Property Identification Number Address Name 7. S. i.ANTO Property (o 4 r}9 Name YonN T ,'PM1r 1v R. Tuus-rcc. Property 2- -A- too Name (AorS+ n N brefiTFI of ViY1F�N /A. Property A /o Name Fi1ST N IT le NIFIL. 5h1K OF 5T7fb13o126 Property 1, Name t L', A. TAY T2 P 1-VAy E Property 43_ 6- Name Atha, l2tv/0 iZ JR. Property 3_4_705 Name ,FNS, Tier, C. TILL Property �3 L I _9 Name Property Name Property M;ddle riZa. ,M idA lcka 1/A ga (4s 31(0 VX-Ey 1 YtiMCHESTelz, Va. aa4 STAo WbN, IA. 24goa 112 W. ViNa ST. ps uiiC dA. aa4S7 3364 .SAAwrHEg Az. W1N6ffEsreig t/q. 226oz 3355 Slin.)1 4 W1r/cNcsr VA Zl _62 y7� Sii4 -*CICC µhNcWFSTER, VA aa662 #4677 0 n 1.03 Acres SOUTHERN BA KERY 539 Off 236.01 KATIE LANTZ to LINDEN VANN STICKLEY s a 56.3' SCALE I FEET 0 0 Boon 293 PACE 7 N 44° 0 WE MESSICK 263.5' The above lot, located on the South side of Road No. 652 a short distarce East of U.S. Highway No. 11, at Kernstown, and situate in Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County Virginia, is bounded as follows: Beginning at (1) a post in a fence comer on the South sid e of Road N 652, a corre r to the land of Stickley; thence with Stickley S 38 deg. 15 min. W 56.3 feet to (2) a post a corner between Stickle/ and the land of tte Southern Bakery Co., thence with the land of the Southern •Bakery Co.., S 39 deg. 01 min. W 236.0 feet to (3) a post in a fence turner; the nce with a new division line through the land of Katie Lantz S 62 deg. 13 min. E 153.3 feetto (4) a past in a fence corner a corner to Messick; thence with Messick and along a wire fence N 44 deg. 08 min. E 263.6 feet to 65) a postin a fence corner on the South sideof -Road No. 652; thence with the South side of Road No. 652_ N 51 deg. 02 min. W 174. feet to the point of begy nning containing 1.03 Acres more or less. Ri i c?Brd U Good Ric he rd U. Goode, Certified Surveyor May 17, 1963. VIRGINIA FREDER'.CK COUNTY, SCT. b —t doy of (02 TM. M ment or ling was produced to me an the Of wah c°dli ,Ca�e of pcknawudgment�ereto axe wm admitted rp, r 7, to record. to tD tD 0 3 Z N 0 0 0 h Z 7 411irprpraimr ..40000000006.4,._ e r one N K ST. �h w s. •ND .o. rs 104 7 FIRST NATIONAL BA OF STRABURG PIN 63 -A -102 1.20 ACRES ZONED B2 USE COMM. /INDU A. JAY JR. FRAY E. LOW PIN 63 -A -103 0.50 CRES ZONE) RP USE SIN E FAM. RES. 0- W Q O LLEY AVENLE RENTAL PROPERTIES, LLC. PIN 63 -A -25 0.50 ACRES ZONED RP USE COMM. /INDUST. COMMONV EALTH OF VIRGINIA PIN 63 -A -101 38 ACRES 7JNED 82 USE STATE GOVT. VALLEY AVENUE REM AL PROPERTIES, LLC. PIN 63 -A -28 0.41 ACRES ZONED B3 USE COMM. /INDUST. PHILLIP R. YOUNT PIN 63 -A -100 0.37 ACRES ZONED B2 USE COMM. /INDUSTR. c JAMES J. LANT DAVID R. MILLER JR. PIN :3 -A -105 0 •5 ACRES ONED RP USE SINGLE FAM. RES. JAMES C. DUSTI JILL LIKENS PIN 63C -1 -9 ACRES ZONED RP USE SINGLE FAM. RES. 0 100 Z O N M O E p/ vii -2 O) 0) U N 1 N N O CV +c 0 0 o O •c O O 6 O iii L to mmil 8 0 m w cc (1) m s E o PSI a o F co L o a Z w SURVEY: NA C.I.: NA DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: SEM 0506012 SCALE: DATE: HISTORICAL PROPERTY KEY 003 BRIGHTSIDE 009 OPEQUON PRESBYTARIAN CHURCH 007 KERNSTOWN BATTLEFIELD 021 WILLOW BROOK 487 TENANT HOUSE AT BRIGHTSIDE 971 HOPES ORDINARY 972 SAVAGE SEAL HOUSE 973 HOUSE IN KERNSTOWN 974 LANTZ HOUSE 975 HOUSE IN KERNSTOWN 976 3248; VALLEY AVENUE 977 LORING RITTER HOUSE 978 33281 VALLEY AVENUE 979 3400, VALLEY AVENUE 980 MERVEL ADAMS HOUSE 981 HANOVER HOUSE 982 HOUSE, RT. 11 SOUTH 983 HOUSE, RT. 11 SOUTH 984 VILLAGE AUTO SALES 1191 RUSSELL HOUSE #2 1192 RUSSELL HOUSE #1 1379 FLETCHER HOUSE NOTE: INDICATES A POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT SITE AS DENOTED BY THE RURAL LANDMARKS SURVEY REPORT OF FREDERICK COUNTY 1200 1200 0 j 0 O M U co 0 0 p p 3 c o LU .61 a v CC 5 c 0 N w tz O d E O L 1 p N U 0 E li w 0 0 z J w D w z o o z U W SURVEY: NA C.I.: NONE DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: SEM 0506012 SCALE: DATE: CURVE ARC DELTA ANGLE RADIUS TANGENT CHORD BEARING CHORD 01 18.39' 01'21'12" 778.51' 9.19' 556'54'26 "E 18.39' JAMES J. LANTZ DB.587, PG.396 TM 63 -A -99 1 I 1 Tax Map 63 —A -104 Existing Zoning: RP Proposed Zoning: 82— Highway Commercial District Existing Use: Vacant Parcel Area: 0.897 acres (39,073 sq. ft.) Proposed Use: Two Story Office Building Proposed Building: 40'x112' 4,480 sq. ft. x2 Building Restriction Lines: Front Yard Setback: Required— 35' Rear Yard Setback: Required— 0' Side Yard Setback: Required— 0' Maximum Building Height: Allowed— 35' Open Space Required: 15% 5,860 sq. ft. Open Space Provided: 48% 18,616 sq. ft. Building and Impervious Area Coverage: Building Footprint Area: 4.480.00 sq. ft. 1 PROFFER TM -63 -A -104 0.8966 ACRES Parking Requirements: Property Line Setback: Front Yard Setback Required— 5' Rear Yard Setback: Required— 5' Side Yard Setback: Required— 5' Spaces Required: Office: (1) per 250 sq. ft. 8.960/250= 36 spaces required Total Parking Spaces Provided: 38 (2) HDCP spaces included Loading Required— None TM -63 -A -100 N31°57'54 2 235.54' 1 S36 °5138= 22969' DAVID R. MILLER JR. DB.373, PG.431 TM-63-A- 105 111'54T 28.64' 0 O m 3 m 30' INTERPARCEL ACCESS EASEMENT V 0 in a) k0 Cn N N LzU owl A N r') 0 O) 0 I I LID N ClD O O p C 0' a to N 0 C "hill 11111111 1 1111111 W 1 n w w Z 0 Z z O w U SURVEY NA C.I.: NA DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: SEM 0506012 SCALE: 1' DATE: 5/10/06 P ce 1- 5 00 N0 0 °8 W W Z W 0 iX 0 U w w 0 Y QZNil U <go N Z IJ- W Planning Commission: Board of Supervisors: 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 June 21, 2006 July 26, 2006 PROPOSAL: To rezone .94 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to 82 (General Business) District with proffers, for office uses. LOCATION: The property is located on Shawnee Drive, approximately 250' east of the intersection of Route 11 Shawnee Drive, on the right side of the road. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 63 -A -104 PROPERTY ZONING: RP (Residential Performance) District PRESENT USE: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING PRESENT USE: North: RP (Residential Performance) B2 (Business General) South: M2 (Industrial, General) East: RP (Residential Performance) West: B2 (Business General) PROPOSED USES: Office REZONING APPLICATION #08 -06 SHAWNEE DRIVE PROPERTY Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: June 5, 2006 Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins, Planner 11 Action Pending Pending Use: Residential Use: Commercial Bank Use: Commercial /Industrial Use: Residential Use: Commercial Car Sales Rezoning #08 -06, Shawnee Drive Property June 5, 2006 Page 2 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have little measurable impact on Route 652. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Shawnee Drive Property rezoning application dated March 15, 2006 address transportation concerns associated with this request. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans 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 comment 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: Plan approval recommended. Department of Inspections: No comment Public Works Department: We have no comment at this time but reserve the right to perform a detailed review at the time of the site plan submitted. Frederick Winchester Service Authority: I believe that property would be serviced by the City of Winchester; sewer and water connection I believe are already installed to property. Sanitation Authority: This site will be served by Winchester City. Department of Parks Recreation: No comment Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided that states no residential units will be part of the rezoning, there will be no impact to the school population upon build -out. Historic Resources Advisory Board: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal review of the rezoning application by the HRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the properties nor are there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It was noted that the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley identifies the property as being located within the core areas of the First and Second Battles of Kernstown and the study area of the Second Battle of Winchester; however, due to the development in this area, it has been deemed to have lost its integrity. Frederick County Attorney: It is my opinion that the proposed proffer statement is generally in a form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, subject to the following comments: 1.1 would suggest, for uniformity and easy- reference purposes, that the details of the zoning, owners, property, etc., be summarized at the beginning as set forth on the Rezoning #08 -06, Shawnee Drive Property June 5, 2006 Page 3 attached format. This format has been used in all recent proffer statements. 2. The heading "INTRODUCTION" should be deleted at the beginning of the proffer statement, as the content of the initial paragraphs is substantive paragraphs of the proffer statement. 3. The last sentences of the first paragraph, beginning with the word "Therefore" should be deleted, as the actual proffers are set forth in the itemized proffers. 4. In the second paragraph, 1 would recommend that the words "development of this property would require the owner to meet the conditions set forth in this document" be revised to state "development of this subject property shall be done in strict conformity with the conditions set forth below 5. The words "and the Code of Virginia" should be added at the end ofthe second paragraph. 6. With respect to Proffer No. 1, as I was not provided with a copy of the Generalized Site Plan, the staff should review the site plan shown on Exhibit 4 of the Impact Statement to determine if it is sufficiently detailed to govern the development of the site. 7. Proffer No. 3 may not, in fact, be a proffer. If this development would require a commercial entrance and require the owner to install improvements required by VDOT, then this proffer is offering nothing beyond what is already required. It should be noted that I have not reviewed the substance ofthe proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for the rezoning of this specific property, or whether other proffers would be appropriate, as it is my understanding that that review will be done by the staff and the Planning Commission. StaffComment: The proffers have been revised to reflect the comments provided by the county attorney. Winchester City Planning Department: No objections to the rezoning request. Planning Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) identifies this property as being zoned B2 (Business General), the property was then included in the County's comprehensive downzoning and was changed from B2 to R -3 (Residential General). The zoning changed to RP (Residential General) District on September 28, 1983 when the RI, R2, R3, and R6 zoning districts were reclassified. 2) 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 parcel for which this rezoning is being requested is located within the County's Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Urban Development Area and Sewer and Water Service Area define the general area in which more Rezoning #08 -06, Shawnee Drive Property June 5, 2006 Page 4 intensive forms of planned commercial and industrial development will occur. The Shawnee Drive property is located within an area that the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan identifies with an industrial land use designation. The applicant is requesting a B2 (business /commercial) designation which might be more compatible with the surrounding area. The site is located adjacent to an existing automobile sales facility (zoned B2) as well as existing RP residential property. Transportation The site will be accessed off of Shawnee Drive (Route 652) which is classified as a local road; the applicant has proffered to prohibit the site from being accessed off of Route 11. The traffic analysis provided with the applicant's impact statement shows that the relevant section of Route 11 has 17,000 average daily vehicles per day and Shawnee Drive has an average 5,200 vehicle trips per day. The site has been proffered to develop with a maximum of 9,000 square feet of office space which would generate approximately 100 trips per weekday. 3) Site Suitability /Environment The site does not contain any environmental features that would either constrain or preclude site development. There are no identified areas of steep slopes, floodplains, wetlands or woodlands. 4) Proffer Statement Dated October 16, 2005 and revised on January, 16, 2006, March 15, 2006 and May 9, 2006 Generalized Plan The applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan that restricts the development of this property to a 9,000 square foot office building. Access to Route 11 The applicant has proffered to prohibit access onto Route 11. This site will only be accessed off of Shawnee Drive Frontage Improvements A five foot sidewalk is proffered along Shawnee Drive Monetary Contributions In recognition of the impacts that may be realized by the community to the Fire and Rescue Services, the applicant has proffered a contribution in the amount of $1,000 to be paid to the Stephens City Volunteer Fire Company for impacts to fire control services. This sum will be paid upon receipt of the first building permit issued subsequent to the approval of the rezoning. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 06/21/06 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: This application is a request to rezone approximately .94 acres of land from the RP (Residential Performance) to the B2 (Business General) District. The property is located within the SWSA (Sewer and Water Service Area) as well as the UDA (Urban Development Area). The Eastern Frederick Rezoning 408 06. Shawnee Drive Property June 5, 2006 Page 5 County Long Range Land Use Plan indicates that the property should be used for industrial land uses, however, due to the subject site's location adjacent to the B2 and RP zoned properties, a rezoning from a RP zoning to a B2 zoning may be supported to continue the consistency and compatibility of the area. Following the requirement for n public hearing, a recommendation by the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors concerning this rezoning application would be appropriate. The applicant should he prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission.