Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-06 Applicationro July 3, 2007 Mark Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator Planning Department County of Frederick RE: Rezoning Application #10 -06 of Albin Center Mark, Please consider this a formal request to withdraw from consideration, Rezoning Application #10 -06 of Albin Center for David A Linda W. Hicks (TM #42 -A -249). Sinc c v Michael M. Artz, L.S. JUL 3 2007 �1 Artz Associates, P.L.C. 16 at Piccadilly Street Winchester, VA 22601 540 -667 -3233 540 -607 -9 I bb (Fax) Toll free 500-755-7320 mikeartz @shentel.net REZONING APPLICATION #I0 -06 ALBIN CENTER Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: September 1, 2006 Staff Contact: Susan K. Eddy, Senior Planner 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: September 20, 2006 Pending Board of Supervisors: October 11, 2006 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 2.07 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District. with proffers. LOCATION: The property is located on the east side ofBryarly Road (Route 789) approximately 800 feet south of the intersection with Burnt Church Road (Route 678). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 42 -A -249 PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas) District. PRESENT USE: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING PRESENT USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) South: RA (Rural Areas) East: RA (Rural Areas) West: RA (Rural Areas) PROPOSED USES: Commercial use Use: Residential CUP Cottage Occupati on for a Hair Salon Use: Vacant Residential Use: Undeveloped Use: Residential Rezoning #10 -06 Albin Center September 1, 2006 Page 2 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have a measurable impact on Route 789. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is conditionally satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Hicks Office 11 application dated April 10, 2006 addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. VDOT is satisfied with the proposed entrance to the subject site from Route 789. VDOT will consider the right out only access point to Route 522 South. After careful consideration of the use of U -turns along a high speed primary route such as Route 522, with the major goal of moving traffic rapidly, VDOT has determined it would not be appropriate to encourage a situation where vehicles are making a U -turn on the high speed roadway. There is an acceptable crossover already at Route 789. With some improvements to the decel and storage lanes at the crossover at the intersection of Route 789, VDOT has determined this is the safest and therefore preferred method for the traveling public to access this proposed project. If the developer chooses to accept the primary access to this site to be from Route 789 and the possible right out only onto Route 522, VDOT will support the rezoning. 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 General Manual, Sixth 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. Public Works Department: We have completed our review of the proposed rezoning request for the Hicks' Office II project and offer the following comments: 1. Refer to Traffic Impacts on Page 1: Explain or clarify the intent of the right in/right out entrance on Bryarly Road. Indicate if this requirement is intended to prohibit left turns from the site onto Bryarly Road and left turns from Bryarly Road into the site. 2. Refer to Sewage Conveyance on Page 2: Provide a copy of the Virginia Department of Health approval letter for our records to verify the adequacy of the soils /drainfield to support the intended use. 3. Refer to Drainage, Page 2. Stormwater drainage will be an important issue to developing this site. Offsite drainage improvements may be required depending on the impacts created by the proposed development. It appears that the existing topography serves as a very large detention/retention basis significantly minimizing the downstream impacts. Changing the routing and time of concentrations may adversely impact the downstream areas. The discussion indicates the use of an underground detention/infiltration facility. Frederick County prohibits the use of infiltration galleries especially in karst areas. The discussion of the drainage needs to be expanded to address the above issued. 4. Refer to Water Supply, Page 2: Indicate the proposed location of the well referenced in the discussion. 5. Refer to the Proffer Statements Under Structural Development. C.1: Under statement number 1 the applicant proffers to limit development on the parcel to a maximum of 40,000 square feet. This conflicts with the 23,000 square feet of development referenced under Traffic Impacts, page 1 of the impact analysis. Resolve this conflict. Rezoning #10-06 Albin Center September 1, 2006 Page 3 Frederick Winchester Service Authority: Not serviced by public utilities. Sanitation Authority: We do not serve this area. Frederick Winchester Health Department: Health Department has no objection to the rezoning request as stated. 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 buildout. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed rezoning request has been reviewed and it appears that it will not impact operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. 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 enclosed format. This format has been used in all recent proffer statements. 2. The staff should review the list of land uses for which the property is to be limited in Proffer A to confirm that all the uses are permitted uses in the B2 District. Also note that "general retail" is one of the land uses which would be permitted. 3. In Proffer C2, it purports to limit the structural height to 60 feet. It is my understanding that the maximum height permitted in the B2 District is 35 feet. 4. In Proffer C4, which proffers to develop the structure in "substantial conformance' with a particular rendering, the rendering should be referenced in the proffer as being attached to the proffer, and the rendering should be attached. 5. A clerical correction needs to be made in the second line of Proffer D, to correct the beginning of the line to state "...to two (2)... 6. In Proffer F the timing ofthe payment ofthe proffer should be clarified by providing that the cash payment will be made at the time of the issuance of the first building permit, in the event more than one building permit would be required for the development. 7. I note that there is no Generalized Development Plan referenced in the Proposed Proffer Statement. Therefore, the layout of improvements on the property and the specific location of entrances is not limited by the proffers. 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. Historic Resources Advisory Board: The Frederick County Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) considered this rezoning proposal during their meeting of June 20, 2006. The HRAB reviewed information associated with the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey Report as well as additional information associated with a previous site visit by staff, Maral Kalbian and David Edwards of the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. The subject parcel was the site of one of the older houses in the Albin Community Center (DHR #34 -543), which as demolished sometime prior to review by the Historic Resources Advisory Board. The now vacant site is adjacent to another older structure in Albin (DHR #34 -542) which has been preserved and is not used for commercial purposes through a conditional use permit which was granted by the County. The site is also in close proximity to the Rezoning 10 -06 Albin Center September 1, 2006 Page 4 Edwards House (DHR #34 -545) and the Faith Revival Center (DHR #34 -544). While the structures adjacent and near the subject site may not be listed individually as "potentially significant it was determined in April of 2004 that the Albin Rural Community Center is potentially eligible as a historic district as a whole collection. The application states that the applicant proposes to construct a two story office building, which would consist of approximately 20,000 square feet (not to exceed 40,000sf) on this 2.07 acre parcel, which could potentially be as tall as 60 feet. The HRAB feels that this proposed development is completely incompatible with the character and context of the Albin Rural Community Center and therefore cannot support the application as submitted. The HRAB recognizes that all of the adjacent buildings are contributing structures to the potential Albin historic district. If this property is developed for commercial use, the HRAB suggests the following be considered to mitigate impacts on historic resources: Building Layout: Given the size of the surrounding structures and all the other structures in the community, a building that is 20,000 (up to 40,000) square feet in size will be out of place in this community; a smaller structure (or structures) would be more appropriate. The use of multiple structures on the site that do not exceed 2,000 square feet is encouraged so that the development would blend in with the community. Proposed Zoning District: The rezoning application proposes that the zoning be changed from RA (Rural Areas) to B2 (Business General). The HRAB believes that the proposed B2 is too intensive for the existing community and recommends that the application be revised to request the B1 (Neighborhood Business) Zoning District. Building Schematic: The design concept for "Alban Center" that has been proffered for the site does not fit in with the surrounding community. A schematic that fits in with the community and utilizes materials that are found on structures in the community should be designed and utilized. Height of Buildings: The applicant has proffered a building height of 60 feet, which is what the Zoning Ordinance permits for offices in the B2. This proposed building height will completely dwarf every structure in the entire community. The HRAB suggests the applicant consider a building height that is more compatible with surrounding land uses, such as 25 feet. Archeological Study: Since the site was demolished without an inventory completed for the historic structure, a Phase I archeological study needs to be done for the site. Planning Department: Please see attached letter dated May 12, 2006 from Susan K. Eddy, Senior Planner. Planning Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) identifies this property as being zoned A -2 (Agriculture General). The County's 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 property and all other A -1 and A -2 zoned land to the RA District. 2) Comprehensive Policy Plan The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as Rezoning #10 -06 Albin Center September 1, 2006 Page 5 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. I -1] Land Use The site is located outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Comprehensive Plan (6 -8) states "though some business and industrial uses are located outside of the Urban Development Area and the Sewer and Water Service Area, future proposals for such uses outside of these service areas should be given careful consideration The Comprehensive Plan (6 -12) further states that "business and industrial areas need to be served by public sewer and water The site is in the area generally designated in the Comprehensive Policy Plan as the Albin Rural Community Center. The Comprehensive Man is not specific on policies for the Albin Rural Community Center. The Plan (6 -45) speaks to the need to "allow these centers to continue to serve their traditional functions without spoiling their rural character It calls for more commercial uses in some rural community centers, but for others, including Albin, the Plan (6- 74) says to "consider proposals for commercial development on an individual basis For the rural community centers where commercial development is sought, and again Albin is not one of these, the plan promotes "village commercial development" at a "scale and nature that is appropriate for each community center Staff note: A large office building outside of the UDA or SWSA is not consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The general policies for the rural community centers allow consideration of commercial uses in those centers. Typical commercial uses in the rural community centers include general stores, banks and restaurants. In this case however, the proposed office use is not designed to primarily serve the local community. Further, an office building 60 feet in height with 25,000 square feet offloorspace as proposed, will be out of character with, and overwhelm, its surroundings and will not contribute to the rural character. Buildings in this area are approximately 25 feet in height with 2,000 square feet offloorspace (see photo #2). (The office building under construction on Burnt Church Road (see photo #3) is 35 feet in height with 7,100 square feet offloorspace, and it is much larger than the surrounding buildings.) The HRAB provided more detailed comments (see above) on the incompatibility of the proposed design, size, height and use of this building. The Comprehensive Policy Plan recommends a number of design features for business properties. These include landscaping, screening and controlling the size and number of signs. Typical signage in rural areas of the County (non -UDA non -SWSA) is 50 square feet. While general office buildings in the B2 District are allowed up to 60 feet in height, Section 165 24B(6) of the Zoning Ordinance requires the Planning Commission to review the site development plan if the building is adjacent to existing residential uses. The Planning Commission may require increased or additional distance buffers at the site plan stage. Rezoning #10 -06 Albin Center September 1, 2006 Page 6 Staff note: The applicant has not proffered any landscaping, screening or buffering above that which is required by County Ordinance. Approval of the GDP, which shows the building location, would make it impossible for the Planning Commission to require a larger buffer at the site plan stage. The applicant has proffered two monument signs, but is seeking signs 100 square feet in area, the maximum allowed by ordinance, not the 50 square feet typically found in a rural area. Transportation North Frederick Pike (Route 522) is designated as a major arterial road. According to the Comprehensive Policy Plan, major arterial roads provide for statewide and interstate travel. Higher speeds and free traffic flows are maintained. Direct access from land uses to arterial roads should be limited. Access to these roads from private driveways should be discouraged. For this proposed use to function as part of the Albin Rural Community Center, it should be accessed from the rural community center, not from Route 522. Access to the site should be limited to one entrance on Bryarly Road. This is consistent with the recent Old Massey Store rezoning (REZ #09 -04), the Winchester Equipment rezoning (REZ #04 -01) and the conditional use permit (CUP #04 -98) for the miniature golf facility in the Gainesboro rural community center. Staff note: As stated in the VDOT comment, VDOT was only satisfied with this application if a full entrance was constructed on Bryarly Road and a right -out only exit constructed on Route 522. The GDP shows a right -in /right -out entrance on Route 522, contrary to VDOT's recommendation. 3) Site Suitability /Environment The site does not contain any environmental features that would either constrain or preclude site development. In particular, there are no identified areas of steep slopes, floodplain or wetlands /hydrologic soils on the parcels identified in this application. The General Soil Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Virginia indicates that the soils comprising the subject parcel fall under the Frederick Poplimento- Oaklet soil association. The soil types on the site include Timbervillc silt loam (map symbol 40B), Frederick- Poplimento loams (map symbol 14B) and Frederick- Poplimento loams very rocky (map symbol 16C). Frederick- Poplimento loams (map symbol 14B) and Timberville silt loam (map symbol 40B), are considered prime farmland. The characteristics of this soil type and any implications for site development are manageable through the site engineering process. Staff Note: The Public Works Department expressed strong concern with the stormwater drainage on the site. Rezoning 10 -06 Albin Center September 1, 2006 Page 7 4) Potential Impacts A. Transportation A full Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was not prepared for this project. The traffic impact analysis prepared for this application assumed a maximum land use intensity of 25,000 square feet of office use. Using trip generation figures from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual 7 111 Edition, the proposed rezoning is projected to generate 200 -300 average daily trips (ADT). Staff Note: The applicant modeled the traffic for an office use, which does not have a high traffic count. The proffer statement allows full retail use of the site and retail use would generate approximately 1,075 average daily trips. A revision to the TIA is required to model the worst case scenario. B. Sewer and Water The area is not served by public water and sewer. The applicant has not provided evidence that a well and drainfields to support this office development can be provided on -site. In addition, the soil of the site has been disturbed for many months (see photo #1), which may also impact the ability of the site to accommodate a primary and reserve drainfield. C. Community Facilities 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 $2,000 to Frederick County for Fire and Rescue purposes. The timing of this contribution is dependant upon a future building permit. 5) Proffer Statement Dated April 10, 2006 and Revised August 10, 2006 A) Land Use The applicant is limiting the uses allowed on the site to the following offices, medical offices, a small restaurant, a sign shop, general retail and video rental. Staff note: General retail is not a term used in the County Zoning Ordinance. If the applicant intends to allow, for example, general merchandise stores (SIC #53) this should be clearly stated. The proffer as written might be construed to mean all uses in the SIC retail trade grouping (SIC #52 -59), which includes used car dealers. In addition, a 25,000 square foot retail building would have a different health system requirement than a 25,000 square foot office building. B) Generalized Development Plan The applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan (GDP) dated August 10, 2006. It is very detailed and shows the location of a 2 -story (25,000 square foot) office building. It shows a full entrance on Bryarly Road and a right -out entrance, with the ability to convert to a right- in/right -out entrance, on North Frederick Pike (Route 522). It shows a tree reserve area, the drainfield locations, specific buffers, parking spaces, Rezoning #10 -06 Albin Cente September 1, 2006 Page 8 and the location of two monument signs. Staff note: The GDP is unusually detailed. It locks the applicant into a particular design with specifics that may not be appropriate at a rezoning stage. Staff and review agencies did not evaluate this GDP as a site plan. Not all aspects of tyre GDP, including the buffers, meet County Ordinances and these will need to be modified. The entrance on Route 522 does not conform to the VDOT comments, which expressly endorse only a right -out onto Route 522. Staff strongly suggests that the applicant submit a simplified GDP or withdraw the GDP entirely. C) Site Access A maximum of two entrances are proposed, one on Bryarly Road (Route 789) and one on North Frederick Pike (Route 522). D) Structural Development The development is limited to 25,000 square feet of structural area. The height is limited to 60 feet. Similar construction material (brick, vinyl or dry vit) will be used on all building walls. The roof will be standing seam metal or dimensional shingle construction. The structure will be developed in substantial conformance with the perspective rendering entitled Albin Center. Staff note: Structural area is a vague term. Staff would prefer the word floor area as that is the term used in the Zoning Ordinance. Two rendering are included with this application. The proffer statement should therefore refer to the perspective "renderings E) Business Signs Signage on the site will be limited to two freestanding monument signs, not to exceed twelve feet in height. Staff note: The text of the proffer states the signs are limited to twelve feet in height, but the number listed is ten feet. As stated earlier, the applicant is seeking the maximum sign face allowed by ordinance (100 square feet, 150 square feet if it is a franchise). F) Outdoor Storage Outdoor storage will be prohibited on the site. G) Monetary Contribution The applicant has proffered $2,000 to the Fire and Rescue Services. Rezoning #10-06 Albin Center September 1, 2006 Page 9 STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 09/20/06 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: This application is not consistent with the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan. Large office buildings should be located in the Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (S W SA). Only small scale commercial uses that serve local residents and protect the rural character are sought in the rural community centers. The size, height, and scale of the proposed building is incompatible with, and will overwhelm, the surrounding buildings in Albin. In addition. a commercial use to serve the rural community center should be accessed from the rural community center, and should not be designed to cater to passing motorists on Route 522. Access to the site should be limited to Bryarly Road (Route 789). Following the requirement for a public hearing, a recommendation by the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors concerning this rezoning application would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission. •I:' 41 A n8B SHEEHAN, ROBERT R ]R S KAREN T 42 A LB 42 A 2 APPLE RIDGE FARM, LC 7 J ?1 Z Q Z J 3 UNDERWOOD, DELLEA 6 Y ry ,N s 1- z N alla 42 A L STDLKDALE, 0 ELIZABETH V06afln 'S g y m m It iirs o f T li 77 ca Cain :Pi F N r cn CC N -fJVd5O11 (1V- 11 N it N� 1 9 AN IIIII-� p N m N p 42 A in BURR. WAYNE L U NQ Q i B 7 4 a m =o ,MAYE S cH4 :9T alir m g Sc z �j/DIT 1 �dD:� H q Q 9 R a /O'N: n o 112 U d Z '`r La o y Z w tii cc c 42 A K5 3 e Y' C p [tit s v ROSEDPLE PROPERTIES g e a c U Vry Z p Z e W w 2 4 2w. S a v w 2 2 e W m. e c w n 3 r ti 2 3 w tit 4�\1 i. _r 1 I m N ro 0 Albin Center amen —cE Location Map 42 A I ,zs zso saa s t a� Feet SHEEHAN, 4 A IIBB K S o ROBERT R KAREN T 42 A 255 O 42 A TB UNDERNDOD, DELLEA E APPLE RIDGE FARM, it Z z J 3 D 9 O ,31 I APa p f y AReir p Q m N 2 Y g 42 A T 9 'd $TDLKDALE, B ELIZABETH b. 1 J m m 7. A ry I CS' 1, y u 0 S c. BZ -e n� n n l I Is- N N� ti A N N A 0 d 4 a m N c' 42 A lag i 'n BUR WPYNE L z o `..t a en-' 1 h 144 AYES. <HAR_EA t4] S L �1D /TH A w kJ 17 O q ki u ..vs fly ca 41 A i55 Z N. ROSEDALE PROPERTIES N u Q O J 1.1`y ``V C A AI R Q P s s M e r t 1 V q r 0 p z h C 1 Y A 25 p I J N O v W mow, n 3 toirr 4 T Zili fi r r a REZ 10 06 aa. Albin Center a,ae Zoning Map oo. a ®.smmv=. new) o R.- ry mmm.,., (42 A 249) fM,AW wm oem9 wxmawmmmnounyM1 PVmI w ®�ma E o.,,.,, tea,,. o Izs aso soo Dora m r��.W.wnio��m Feet YZ ..n Frei C 3 ,1 0 I it a t` 1 A 3 to y {"R I t e jNEEHAN 14.6URT RISEK 422 A 255 V/ 42 A lt8 Tw y RWOOD A E A' tF`'"i 4 i� UNDE DELLE APPLE. FARM LL N J ry 5 t s s h sk F�}, i..i.§�61 A r I I J T y Ss 4w 4; ea i Mbt ,-.Y l'K F.� y:. f k xy �I t Sv F"f'.. ]�JF FfEfS s t t $(OG DALE,' e ELITA9ETN K D unLn pfi;s3 m yk F.ryy ra r., ,,55 J r Ys 10l f .}t s aC 7 1• 1 :,;./S w� i 4 rn 'a' I �_,y� r sa�a r.y. '�]j� �tsZi4 Rf L. f RSS r y, .ti K `'P'S v' F•RC aS x 1 t r E m 1 f -'R W� dT 1� a rF1'l rc r t�� ss,�� C T HUG50lI AV2 {y"� a� .t'A�Lf S A lt� i l a 1 a Y3 Li ,41' i r r Y� i 1 ,dj Ste' t 4 k q i B f Q �'vf CYF4 l t r IL E �I t_ 3 4, f r cP "5 sj nxrt F U, N ht. Ii N t ti 5" F �t 1 f F C yy{{i i s L i J rk 9, A 'I[ 4 ry r r 1x .7 tn '1R y ea xs• yr. ;i411411 Y�Y� e t f I R T 4 Cf 4z P S V 6URR W N I- y S to a •1 '4Y y� k r.an vaN j t l1 T i 1 She .t O« 3 1 s H 'Y *x� h [9x .va.� i T✓ y r' f x4A'bn n'sit n a m r 1 e '.t 1, ar 1 's. y, tF?1,a+lNr�' F, 4 krr S. r t i AYES <MAW.E ').,C. /4) 2 _l ZZ7 .'Z iY X tea! i s e Y y A it In r JU HAT L 9 s r 01 d/ t ate a i? J t r �a, y x a ua 3:pp✓` ,n .f a s rF" r y *y `..,s d b ce re 42k yA YPE RTIES RDSEOALE PROPE x P Y A r' Y• r f YSY it y a• 1i f" T a 3 t �1( 4 Rd e K .:1 `34'¢ 4 _z 3' S Yry *.,.7 G y >3 l� �aj t4$ 2 a. 1 1"'.; 'Ytf1♦•,yW n '7 d 14 i, L d .i Y*0.w d J T> o I Y�tt"± �,g PY k N lg. "t° '+.7 �t�Z j$!Sj r! y a4 ,t'.`6�'1 t a wxy,�.• 5 X n1 °t I dt 4 i ej k' t j J! q `k9a N.t /.FiJ� x� r X Sit' e v.tralw e�y ?h�/ 'F O 1 F `P� ,F Y f �G 1 F f �y d MYi 1 t. k 1 3O h} Y F 4}r T T t �pN a y W I a, k ,y y. L, 6s ,ems ry y fi2 J 4 1 x k g f '`e'�w x s t`i; 1, t ,5. 7 I j ti W h rc i x y J 4' 1 �p ml(Y &'rt` t[1 n 4 y r! i ti.l 7 n3 a G/ 1 b�F 1 1 o na. b Albin Center 0, Aerial Map 42 A 249) w 12s 2s° s°a E =I 444 q t AIN b Feel .1521011 5.._'... .VI „'ISTI ELLEN er _o RoatlCenWline5 0 EWildrigs >ao 5aenoa La.0000 REZ 1 0 06 Albin Center Building Location Map (42 -A -249) 0 35 50 100 Feet #1 A‘b N Ca ner s '+C. -1 ±2, $ryawly Road Kaz dent e.S #3 O \d Massey S- -ore_. Of-cce_ 13uildin9 undo Cons SkaCC No4c T"C'sts b u;\CUI\ ■s Oe roxeN.a Ve\y r 3 +Re rorsed bu for Pk ;n Ce n}e.r sl it. 0f (he Fee Amount Paid as Date Received 5 DA+ BOS Hearing Date To be completed by Planning Staff Zoning Amendment Number PC Hearing Date C? 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: Ar.TZ A<_S oc /A7'E Address: %a z a sr c c.&A /t-Ly 4rez T 2. Property Owner (if different than above) i9,Y /o A. e G/nioA Name: /c/cs Address: Z. 3 N. ,r E!»ic,C. h. /ivcf/F'STEJa Vt_ 3. Contact person if other than above Name: M/,eE Agra Location map Plat Deed to property Verification of taxes paid 1 REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Telephone: C4'd -64 3233 Telephone: 5 -3'3 cl 789 Telephone: 5 O (07 -32 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Agency Comments Fees Impact Analysis Statement Proffer Statement 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: 7f v/n A.. gG,e;s jests 6. A) Current Use of the Property: VACA-A1'T B) Proposed Use of the Property: 2 Sro,ey Oicp /G€ gel/to/No, 03_Z) 7. Adjoining Property: PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING 5e.t Afl cA/ &c z_ /5r 0 P ,c //-/T oc/r5 S. Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection using road names and route numbers): '41 SCV ARt y 7- 7 6 •47 4 zso y vas cCf- ftl/Zc ,/./o .E rte. Szz 12 Na Parcel Number Owners Name 42 A,252 42,A 244 42 A 90 BARNHART, ELLEN B TRUSTEE BARNHART, ELLEN TRUSTEE ASHALLEN PROPERTIES, LC 1MLSON, LEE RITA 42 A 93 5 42 A 91 WRIGHT- SPINKS, FAYE D 6 42 A 92 MULLEN, MARTIN P DOROTHY A i n-to-co 42A 102 BROWN, EITHA MAE 42 A 101 MICHAEL, WANDA L 42 4_100 MICHAEL, WANDA L 10 403 ROBINSON, JAMES D SHARON V aa11 42 A 104 DILL, JAMES GLORIA 12 42 A_118 BAGEANT, REBECCA S 13 42A 119 FADELEY, KAREN K x="°14 42 A 105 KIDWELL, JEREMY M =15 A 106 BETHEL LUTHERAN PARSONAGE 16 42 A 117 KIDWELL, C ROBERT 17 42_A 116 KIDWELL C ROBERT sr-18 42A 248 HESTER ROBERT H JR r.-- 19 42 107 KIDWELL, C ROBERT BARBARA E 20 42A 247 HESTER, ROBERT H JR 21 42 A 253A LAIL, GURCHARAN 4 22 42 A 108 KIDWELL, C ROBERT BARBARA E 23 42 A 109 FAITH REVIVAL CENTER 24 42 A 246 LINEWEAVER, RONALD L CHERYL A 25 42A 1 5 DAVIS, CHRISTINE ELLEN 26 42 A_2M'" HICKS, DAVID A 27 42 A 279 ALI, MOHAMMED 4 28 42 A 251 ALI, MOHAMMED Page 1 of 1 http: /gis.co. frederick. va. us /Freeance /Cl ient /PublicAccessl /printFrame.html 1/27/2006 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. 7Af e tZ Q Zy 9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number Magisterial: a /c/A/Es/3coo Fire Service: G sa c,a o Rescue Service :,a, /,/w5/s oao Districts High School: Middle School: Elementary School: 10. Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. Acres I Current Zoning 1 Zoning Requested 2 ,07 -Z Total acreage to be rezoned IvA AI /A AVA 11. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed Single Family homes: /VA, Townhome: ///A Multi-Family: Non Residential Lots: N/A Mobile Home: A/A Hotel Rooms: A04. Square Footage of Proposed Uses Office: 24 000 t Service Station: /y /a Retail: Manufacturing: c l c Restaurant: Warehouse: /t Other: ,3 5 p644, /cc; Ge6A/4 toe PIZZA Shop 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): <atJIO ge-g-S Lives 1 /'f /C.CS a °A -/-1, s Ai 14 Date: /_6 Date: J` Date: Date: t fnVele.e LINE BEARING DISTANCE L1 S 18'09'25" E 76.62' L2 N 30'07'12" E 57.55' L3 S 70'01'23" E 122.33' L4 S 74'48'00" W 60.39' L5 N 84'45'39" W 85.93' L6 N 78'30'53" E 155.26' L7 N 53'44'24" E 229.79' L8 N 86'47'00" W 177.37' L9 S 03'13'00" W 146.09' L10 S 86'04'42" E 258.68' L11 N 65'20'46" E 23.19' L12 5 24'44'04" E 39.87' L13 S 68'19'24" W 29.09' L14 N 77'23'50" W 97.35' L15 N 18'51'15" E 35.70' L16 5 76'17'40" E 74.87' L17 5 44'49'18" E 72.51' L18 5 1603'30" E 38.80' NOTES: 1. BOUNDARY SHOWN HEREON WAS DETERMINED BY A FELD RUN SURVEY PERFORMED BY ARE ASSOCIATES ON APRIL 25, 2005. 2. THIS PLAT I5 SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. 3. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. 4. CONTOUR INTERVAL IS 1 FOOT. ELEVATIONS ARE ASSUMED. 5. PROPOSED WELL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MEETING ALL HEALTH DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS DURING INSTALLATION. RAILROAD SPIKE FOUND Z w ACRES Or J TM #42 -A -251 ALI MOHAMMED #050013358 S 76 3 6 50" E 180.94' 2.0475 LA PROPOSED GRAINFIELD L10 REBAR SET I N 77'23'50 TM #42 -A -248 ROBERT H. HESTER Jr. RITA M.KAMLER- HESTER 843/142 DRAINFIELD LOCATION SURVEY of 2.0475 ACRES REBAR FOUND PROPOSED CLASS 38 WELL GAINESBORO DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE: 1 60' DATE: MAY 25, 2006 PRESENT OWNER: DAVID A. LINDA W. HICKS TM #42 -A -249 INST.# 050013756 PROJECT #21261 L =2 2.27' R =5 69.51 A=02'21'10" C LEN 212.26' BRG =S 15'37'57" E COUNTER- CLOCKWISE POINT PROPOSED GRAINFIELD L t& LI n C 7;_ VIRGINIA DEPT. OF CPI HIGHWAYS MONUMENT FOUND cp O0 C 0" REBAR FOUND SHEET 1 OF 1 Artz and Associates, PLC A Subsidiary of Valley Engineering, PLC LANG SLANTING LAND PLANNING DEVELOPMENT 16 East Piaoadly Street MANCHESTER, VA. 22601 -4740 TEL 540 -667 -3233 FAX 540 -667 -9188 TOLL FREE 1 -000 -755 -7320