PC 04-07-10 Meeting AgendaAGENDA
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The Board Room
Frederick County Administration Building
Winchester, Virginia
April 7, 2010
7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB
1) Adoption of Agenda: Pursuant to established procedures, the Planning Commission
shouldadopt the Agenda for the meeting................................................................ (no tab)
2) Committee Reports.................................................................................................. (no tab)
3) Citizen Comments.................................................................................................... (no tab)
PUBLIC HEARING
4) 2010 — 2015 Agricultural and Forestal District Update — This Public Hearing is to
consider the renewal of the South Frederick, Double Church and Red Bud Districts and
the creation of the Albin, Apple Pie Ridge and South Timber Ridge Districts. The
renewal and creation of these districts will establish a total of 10,585.012 acres within the
Agricultural and Forestal District Program for the ensuing five year period. Properties
that are incorporated into an agricultural and forestal district are guaranteed certain
protections as specified in Section 15.2-4300 of the Code of Virginia.
Mr. Cheran ....................................................................................................................... (A)
5) Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 165 Zoning, Article III Transfer of Development
Rights (TDR) Program — Part 301 Establishment and Purpose, 165-301.01 Purpose,
165-301.02 Applicability, 165-301.03 Right to Transfer Development Rights;
General Provisions; Part 302 Sending and Receiving Properties, 165-302.01 Sending
Properties, 165-302.02 Receiving Properties, 165-302.03 Calculation of Development
Rights, 165-302.04 TDR Sending Property Development Limitations, 165-302.05
Sending Site Certification, 165-302.06 Instruments of Transfer; Part 303 Transfer
Process and Development Procedures, 165-303.01 Transfer Process, 165-303.02
Development Approval Procedures; and Article I General Provisions, Amendments
and Conditional Use Permits, Part 101 General Provisions, 165-102.01 Definitions
and Word Usage - Revisions to the Frederick County Code to include a Transfer of
Development Rights (TDR) Program.
Mrs. Perkins........................................................................ (B)
.............................................
6) The Virginia Department of Transportation and the Planning Commission of
Frederick County, in accordance with Section 33.1-70.01 of the Code of Virginia,
will conduct a joint public hearing in the Board Room of the Frederick County
Government Center, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia at 7:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, April 7, 2010. The purpose of this public hearing is to receive public
comment on the proposed Secondary Six -Year Plan for Fiscal Years 2010-2011
through 2015-2016 in Frederick County and on the Secondary System Construction
Budget for Fiscal Year 2010. Copies of the proposed Plan and Budget may be reviewed
at the Edinburg Office of the Virginia Department of Transportation, located at 14031
Old Valley Pike, Edinburg, Virginia or at the Frederick County offices located at 107
North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. All projects in the Secondary Six -Year Plan
that are eligible for federal funds will be included in the Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP), which documents how Virginia will obligate federal
transportation funds. Persons requiring special assistance to attend and participate in this
hearing should contact the Virginia Department of Transportation at 540-984-5600.
Persons wishing to speak at this public hearing should contact the Frederick County
Planning Department at 540-665-5651.
Mr. Bishop....................................................................................................................... (C)
PUBLIC MEETING
7) Subdivision Ordinance Variance Request of Robert & Lynda Carpenter —
Greenway Engineering is requesting exceptions to Section 144-24(B) Lot Requirements
and 144-31(C)(3) Rural Subdivisions of the Code of Frederick County, Chapter 144
Subdivision of Land, to allow the creation of a parcel of land intended to accommodate
the development of the Round Hill Ground Water Storage Tank.
Mr. Cheran....................................................................................................................... (D)
8) Other
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning aid Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
MEMORANDUM
Frederick County Planning Commission
Mark R Cheran, Zoning Administrator,��,/L f-.
Public Hearing - 2010 – 2015 Agricultural and Forestal Districts Renewal and
Additions
March 24, 2010
Chapter 43, Section 15.2-4300 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, requires that Agricultural
and Forestal Districts be reviewed by the local government every five years after establishment.
Furthermore, the Code of Virginia requires the local governing body to establish an Agricultural
District Advisory Committee for the purpose of reviewing proposals that establish or renew districts
to ensure conformity with the provisions of Section 15.2-43000. Ultimately, the Board of
Supervisors approves, approves with modifications, or denies the proposal to establish or renew an
Agricultural and Forestal District.
In working with members of the community and the Extension Services, staff has circulated forms
for the renewal of, additions to and deletions from, the Agricultural and Forestal Districts to the
property owners. These forms are important aspects of the Agricultural and Forestal District
Program; the program is voluntary, enabling property owners the right to participate should they be
interested.
The Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) met on March 18, 2010, and unanimously
recommended the creation of three new agricultural and forestal districts and the renewal of three
existing agricultural and forestal districts. The following items are included in your agenda:
1) Creation of the Albin Agricultural and Forestal District.
2) Creation of the Apple Pie Ridge Agricultural and Forestal District.
3) Creation of the South Timber Ridge Agricultural and Forestal District.
4) Update of the 2010-2015 Double Church, Red Bud and South Frederick Agricultural
and Forestal Districts.
A recommendation from the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors is requested.
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 o -Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Proposed Albin Agricultural and Forestal District
This is a request to the Frederick County Planning Commission to establish a new Albin
Agricultural and Forestal District (District). This is a proposed addition to the County's three
Agricultural and Forestal Districts, which includes the South Frederick District, established in
1980, the Double Church District, established in 1995 and the Red Bud District, established in
2006. The Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) recommended approval of
the Albin Agricultural and Forestal District at their meeting on March 18, 2010.
LOCATION
This proposed District is located in the Gainesboro Magisterial District, across North Frederick
Pike (Route 522) to the north, Route 37 to the east, and Poorhouse Road (Route 664) to the west.
SIZE
The proposed District contains 1,017.84+/- acres within 14 parcels. Please see attached map.
AGRICULTURAL & FORESTAL SIGNIFICANCE
The predominantly agricultural operations in the new District are 90 percent agriculture
(livestock, orchards, and crop harvest) and 10 percent open-space/woodlands. The area within
the District is rural in nature.
LAND USE
All parcels within the proposed District are in agricultural or residential use.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The 2007 Comprehensive Policy Plan of Frederick County (Comp Plan) provides guidance when
considering land use actions. The location of this proposed District lies in an area that is
identified by the Comp Plan as the Route 37 West Land Use Plan. This plan identified a study
area which encompassed 645 acres bounded by Route 522 to the north, Route 37 to the east, and
the Round Hill Community Land Use Plan boundary to the south.
The land use component of this study identified approximately a 120 -acre area located in the
southeastern portion of this 645 -acre study area as a location for potential business
concentrations. The land use component envisions this 120 -acre area be planned for office park -
type development that will complement the medical center, pharmaceutical school, and
providing retail services that cater to these uses, and the community within the proximity of this
study area. The remaining 525 acres within the study area should remain in its present land use
of pristine condition with land use of orchards, while preserving the historic integrity of the
Battle of Second Winchester and historical significant properties identified by the Frederick
County Rural Landmarks Survey.
The transportation component of this study area proposes future road networks which link the
120 -acre business and retail area with Route 37, Route 522 and Route 50. The system of major
collector roads will be necessary for efficient movement of traffic through this area. A major
component of this transportation system is an interchange on Route 37 to provide direct east -to -
west access to the Winchester Medical Center, and linking the 120 -acre business and retail area
via a major collector road. As of the application for this proposed District, the Winchester
Medical Center and the Virginia Department of Transportation are currently working on this
interchange. This major collector road will serve to ensure an efficient north -south traffic
movement with Route 522 to the north and Route 50 to the south.
The Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) component of this study area calls for the inclusion
of the 120-arce business and retail area within the SWSA. This will ensure compliance with
County polices regarding land use and zoning changes from rural land use to commercial land
use. Residential development is not proposed or encouraged for this study area. As land use
planning is for the future, it may be appropriate to honor the property owner's request for
placement in an Agricultural District.
ZONING
All but one of the parcels is currently zoned RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. The remaining
parcel is split -zoned RA (Rural Areas)/RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District. The
surrounding properties are zoned:
North: RA (Rural Areas)
B-2 (Business, General)
B-3 (Industrial, Transition)
MH- I(Mobile Home Community)
RP (Residential Performance)
East: RA (Rural Areas)
MS (Medical Support)
Route 37 (State Roadway)
City of Winchester
RP (Residential Performance)
South: B-2 (Business, General)
MS (Medical Support)
West: RA (Rural Areas)
LAKES/PONDS/STREAMS
The proposed District lies primarily within the Abrams Creek drainage area. The establishment
of this District will further assist with managing the quality of the County's water resources.
SOILS
The general relief of the new District varies from broad rolling hills to the west and gently
rolling hills to the north and east. This District lies within the Abrams Creek watershed and
water is available from ponds, wells and springs. Most of the area within the District is in
pasture, orchards, livestock, and few areas are woodland.
PRIME AGRICULTURE SOIL
The largest amount of prime agricultural soils located within the proposed Albin Agricultural
and Forestal District is Frederick-Poplimento
STAFF COMMENTS
The Route 37 West Land Use Plan supports the establishment of future business and office use
and a major transportation network in this area of the County. The land use plan identifies the
remaining land with no land use designation, which indicates the area should remain rural in
nature and be protected from any development. The intent of the Rural Areas is to maintain
agriculture as a significant portion of the County's economy, and to maintain the rural character
of areas outside of its Urban Development Area (UDA). The proposed Albin Agricultural and
Forestal District is agriculturally significant as outlined in the Agricultural and Forestal Districts
Act.
The Route 37 West Land Use Plan identifies the remaining 525-arces of this study area to be
preserved in its pristine condition, continuing the present land use of orchards, and preserve the
battlefield of the Second Winchester. Furthermore, creation of this District would be an
important addition to this land use plan and will ensure the 525 acres of this land use plan will be
implemented.
A balanced approach is needed to ensure the broader future land uses and transportation
improvements of the Route 37 West Land Use Plan are met and recognize this proposed District
as an important element of the land use plan. The Route 37 West Land Use Plan offers
framework for future land use, yet supports the existing agricultural uses. As land use remains
agricultural at the desire of property owners, there may not be a conflict in establishing an
Agricultural District today, but maintain its Route 37 West Land Use Plan elements for
consideration in the future.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE APRIL 7 2010 FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING
The Frederick County Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) unanimously
recommended approval of the Albin Agricultural and Forestal District at their meeting of March
18, 2010. This new district will have a total of 1,017.84+/- acres. This proposed District meets
the intent of Chapter 43, Section 15.2-4300 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, that
enables local governments to establish Agricultural and Forestal Districts to conserve and protect
agricultural and forestal land. The Code of Virginia outlines criteria for evaluating Agricultural
and Forestal District applications. One of the criteria is that the application should be evaluated
in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan of the locality. The Comprehensive Plan and this
proposed District provide an opportunity for the agribusiness community to conduct long range
planning efforts for the management of their operations, while providing a reserve of agricultural
land through the year 2015. Therefore, staff would recommend that this 1,017.84+/ -acre District
be included as one of the County's Agricultural and Forestal Districts.
ALBIN AGRICULTURALAND FORESTAL DISTRICT
Map #
Owner Information
Acreage
41-A-170
Fruit Hill Orchard
274.16
42-A-61
DTS LC
2.50
43-A-62
Fruit Hill Orchard
199.14
42-A-180
Fruit Hill Orchard
105.26
42-A-190
Fruit Hill Orchard
7.88
42-A-191
Fruit Hill Orchard
16.78
42-A-192
Fruit Hill Orchard
1.04
42-A-193
Fruit Hill Orchard
6.22
52-A-48
Fruit Hill Orchard
24.50
52-A-49
Fruit Hill Orchard
8.50
53-A-1
Fruit Hill Orchard
96.69
53-A-2
Fruit Hill Orchard
145.93
53-A-3
Fruit Hill Orchard
8.34
53-A-69
Fruit Hill Orchard
120.90
1017.84
A4s. Diane Kearns
Fruit Hill Orchard
P.O. Box 2368
Winchester. Va. 22604
Jan. 18, 2010
Mr. Mark Gheran
Fred., �co. Pbrining and Development
1 07 Nl Orth Kent .Sit
Winchester, Va. 22601
Dear Mark:
Thank you for taking time to meet with me and my father this past Friday. As a result we like
to ask the county to crcatc 2 new agricultural' districts.
We oke of one centered on tax man mmnber 53AZ which we'd like to be called the Aibin
a� D .-t3[Ct. spoke
aLiGi diSCtiSStias it iiL Cry E`r'e Piiitd -t to create a second district centered Gr. tai map
number 42A356 and call it the Apple pie Ridge Ag llistrict. 1 ant enclosed: a list showing the tax map
numbers, ownership andacreageacreage,yoyf each of the parcels we are asking to be included.
Aa i�rc spoke 0f, I ax -n sc-nding later.- to Jc`'cra,l of Laic -1-- c Und ovr-ncrs adjacont to the Albin
Ag District. I am enclosing a copy of one just to let you we and I will promptly let you know if i get
any positi,= response.
I'm also enclosing several renewal applications for the Southern rederiek Ag District.
Thanks a bunch and please let me know if there's anythmi I can do to help out.
Sincerely,
'GY,rtrS
Diane Kearns
Enclosures
Proposed Apple Pie Ridge Agricultural and Forestal District
This is a request to the Frederick County Planning Commission to establish a new Apple Pie
Ridge Agricultural and Forestal District (District). This is a proposed addition to the County's
three Agricultural and Forestal Districts, which includes the South Frederick District, established
in 1980, the Double Church District, established in 1995 and the Red Bud District, established in
2006. The Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) recommended approval of
the Apple Pie Ridge Agricultural and Forestal District on their meeting on March 18, 2010.
LOCATION
This proposed District is located in the Stonewall and Gainesboro Magisterial Districts, across
Payne Road (Route 663) to the north, Welltown Road (Route 66 1) to the east, Apple Ridge Road
(Route 739) to the west, and Glendobbin Road (Route 673) to the south.
SIZE
The proposed District contains 889.052+/- acres within 34 parcels. Please see attached map.
AGRICULTURAL & FORESTAL SIGNIFICANCE
The predominantly agricultural operations in the new District are 90 percent agriculture
(livestock, orchard, and crop harvesting) and 10 percent open-space/woodlands. The area within
the District is rural in nature.
LAND USE
All parcels within the proposed District are in agricultural or residential use.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The 2007 Comprehensive Policy Plan of Frederick County_ (Comp Plan) provides guidance when
considering land use actions. The location of this proposed District lies outside the Urban
Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water and Service Area (SWSA), and is not part of
any land use plan or study by the County. The Stonewall Industrial Park is located on the south
boundary of this proposed District. The land use within this proposed District of 889.052+/ -
acres is residential and agricultural. The current land use should remain in its present land use of
pristine condition with land use of orchards, agricultural, and residential.
The Eastern Frederick County Road Plan is the major transportation component of the Comp
Plan. This road plan identifies the future transportation needs within Frederick County. A major
component of this road plan is Route 37 which will provide direct limited east -to -west access
around the City of Winchester.
ZONING
All of the parcels are currently zoned RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. The properties
surrounding properties are zoned:
North: RA (Rural Areas) South: M-1 (Industrial, Light)
East: RA (Rural Areas) West: RA (Rural Areas)
RP (Residential Performance)
LAKES/PONDS/STREAMS
The proposed District lies primarily within the Hiatt Run drainage area. The establishment of
this District will further assist with managing the quality of the County's water resources.
SOILS
The general relief of the new District varies from rolling hills to ridges to the north and west and
flat and gentle rolling hills to the south and east. This District lies within the Hiatt Run
watershed and water is available from ponds, wells and springs.
PRIME AGRICULTURE SOIL
The largest amount of prime agricultural soils located within the proposed Apple Pie Ridge
Agricultural and Forestal District is Frederick-Poplimento
STAFF COMMENTS
This proposed Distinct is not part of any land use plan or study. The proposed District is located
outside the UDA and SWSA, and is to remain rural in nature and protected from any future
development. The intent of the Rural Areas is to maintain agriculture as a significant portion of
the County's economy, and to maintain the rural character of areas outside of its UDA. The
proposed Apple Pie Ridge Agricultural and Forestal District is agriculturally significant as
outlined in the Agricultural and Forestal Districts Act.
The Eastern Frederick County Road Plan (Road Plan) identifies Route 37 as a major component
of the County's future transportation network. A balanced approach is needed to ensure the
broader future transportation improvements are met and recognize that this proposed District is
an important element of this area of the County.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE APRIL 7, 2010 FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING
The Frederick County Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) unanimously
recommended approval of the Apple Pie Ridge Agricultural and Forestal District at their meeting
of March 18, 2010. This proposed District meets the intent of Chapter 43, Section 15.2-4300 of
the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, that enables local governments to establish Agricultural
and Forestal Districts to conserve and protect agricultural and forestal land. The Code of
Virginia sets out criteria for evaluating Agricultural and Forestal District applications. One of
the criteria is that the application should be evaluated in conjunction with the Comprehensive
Plan (Comp Plan) of the locality. The Eastern Frederick County Road Plan (Road Plan) identifies
Route 37 as a major component of the County's future transportation network.
Therefore, a balance between the proposed transportation improvements and the proposed
District will ensure the future function of both of these important elements. The transportation
needs of the broader community and the function and context of the Agricultural and Forestal
District shall continue to be recognized in the implementation of this plan. This proposed
District provide an opportunity for the agribusiness community to conduct long range planning
efforts for the management of their operations, while providing a reserve of agricultural land
through the year 2015. Staff recommends that we accept these parcels into the Ag District and
we also continue to recognize the future planned Route 37 corridor; the two can co -exist
together.
2010-2015 APPLE PIE RIDGE AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT
Map #
Owner Information
Acreage
31-A-170
BHS LC
0.34
31-A-171
BHS LC
1.07
31-A-180
BHS LC
70.00
42-A-356
KSS LC
303.81
42-A-357
KSS LC
23.04
43-A-4
Becon Inc
127
43-A-11
BHS LC
84.50
43-A-12
BHS LC
4.00
43-A-13
BHS LC
8.00
43-A-14
BHS LC
9.66
43-A-69
Fruit Hill Orchard
5.00
43-A-70
Fruit Hill Orchard
57.66
43 -A -10A
Becon Inc
53.43
43 -A -A1
Becon Inc
29.30
43-1-A2
Beconlnc
3.50
43-1-B1
Becon Inc
16.56
43-11-4-1
KSS LC
5.51
43-11-4-2
KSS LC
5.00
43-11-4-3
KSS LC
5.00
43-11-4-4
KSS LC
5.00
43-11-4-5
KSS LC
5.86
43-11-4-6
KSS LC
5.25
43-12-3-7
KSS LC
5.01
43-12-3-8
KSS LC
5.00
43-12-3-9
KSS LC
5.00
43-12-3-10
KSS LC
5.00
43-12-3-11
KSS LC
5.00
43-12-3-12
KSS LC
5.00
43-12-3-13
KSS LC
5.00
43-12-3-14
KSS LC
5.12
43-12-3-15
KSS LC
5.00
43-12-3-16
KSS LC
5.33
43-12-3-17
KSS LC
5.05
43-12-3-18
KSS LC
5.05
Ms. Diane Kearns
Fruit Hill Orchard
P.O. Box 2368
Winchester, Va. 22604
Jan. 18, 2010
Mr. Mark Cheran
Fred. Co. Planning and Development
In i�ivr`u2 Kent St
Winchester, Va. 22601
Dear Mark:
I J
—2
Thank you for taking tune to meet with me and my father this hast Friday. As a result we like
tv ask- the county to creatc 2 new c' eLcultuiai &sstdc"ia.
We spoke of one centered on tax may number 53A2, which we'd like to be called the Albin.
� .g TM.stiict. i.#�er d4sC',:SS�ig ;t fxi dher, �. e �: ould'. e to create a second dwtr�ct centered on ax map
number 42A356 and call it the Apple.Pie Ridge Ag l3istrict. 1 am endosec[ a list showing the tax snap
numbers,, ownershiv and acreage of each of the parcels we are asking to be included.
Ass a13oAc d31 1 acre scandang Icttcrto avvcrai -14L% urger Und vamcrs adjacont to uiv CU&LLL
Ag District. I am enclosing a copy of one Just to let you see and I will proinptiy let you know if I flet
an;* posit^re response.
I'm also enclosing several renewal applications. for the Southern riederick Ag District.
Thanks a bunch and please let me know if there's anvthing I can do to hely out.
Sincerely,
Diane Kearns
Enclosures
•
•
J
Proposed South Timber Ridge Agricultural and Forestal District
This is a request to the Frederick County Planning Commission to establish a new Agricultural
and Forestal District (District), South Timber Ridge. This is a proposed addition to the County's
three Agricultural and Forestal Districts, which includes the South Frederick District, established
in 1980, the Double Church District, established in 1995 and the Red Bud District, established in
2006. The Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) recommended approval of
the South Timber Ridge Agricultural and Forestal District at their meeting on March 18,
2010.
LOCATION
This proposed District is located in the Back Creek Magisterial District bordered by Hollow
Road (Route 707) to the north, and Muse Road (Route 610) and Golden Orchard Road (Route
708) to the east.
SIZE
The proposed District contains 466.70+/- acres within 7 parcels. Please see attached map.
AGRICULTURAL & FORESTAL SIGNIFICANCE
The predominantly agricultural operations in the new District are 90 percent agriculture (orchard,
and crop harvesting) and 10 percent open-space/woodlands. The area within the District is rural
in nature.
LAND USE
All parcels within the proposed District are in agricultural or orchards.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The 2007 Comprehensive Policy Plan of Frederick County (Comp Plan) provides guidance when
considering land use actions. The location of this proposed District lies outside the Urban
Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), and is not part of any
land use plan or study by the County. The land use within this proposed District of 466.70+/ -
acres is residential and agricultural. The current land use should remain in its present land use of
pristine condition with land use of orchards, and agricultural.
ZONING
All of the parcels are currently zoned RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. The properties'
surrounding properties are zoned:
North: RA (Rural Areas) South: RA (Rural Areas)
East: RA (Rural Areas) West: RA (Rural Areas)
LAKES/PONDS/STREAMS
The proposed District lies primarily within the Back Creek drainage area. The establishment of
this District will further assist with managing the quality of the County's water resources.
SOILS
The general relief of the new District varies from rolling hills and ridges to the north, west, south
and east. This District lies within the Back Creek watershed and water is available from ponds,
wells and springs.
PRIME AGRICULTURE SOIL
The largest amount of prime agricultural soils located within the proposed South Timber Ridge
Agricultural and Forestal District is Weikert-Berks-Blairton
STAFF COMMENTS
Based upon the Comp Plan which indicates the area of the County where this proposed Distinct
is to be located, the area is not part of any land use plan or study. The proposed District is
located outside the UDA and SWSA, and is to remain rural in nature and protected from any
future development. The intent of the Rural Areas is to maintain agriculture as a significant
portion of the County's economy, and to maintain the rural character of areas outside of its UDA.
The proposed South Timber Ridge Agricultural and Forestal District is agriculturally significant
as outlined in the Agricultural and Forestal Districts Act.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE APRIL 7, 2010 FREDERICK _COUNTY PLANNINC
COMMISSION MEETING
The Frederick County Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) unanimously
recommended approval of the South Timber Ridge Agricultural and Forestal District at their
meeting of March 18, 2010. This proposed District meets the intent of Chapter 43, Section 15.2-
4300 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended that enables local governments to establish
Agricultural and Forestal Districts to conserve and protect agricultural and forestal land. The
Code of Virginia sets out criteria for evaluating Agricultural and Forestal District applications.
One of the criteria is that the application should be evaluated in conjunction with the
Comprehensive Plan of the locality.
The Comprehensive Plan and this proposed District provide an opportunity for the agribusiness
community to conduct long range planning efforts for the management of their operations, while
providing a reserve of agricultural land through the year 2015. Therefore, staff would
recommend that this proposed 466.70+/ -acre District be included as one of the County's
Agricultural and Forestal Districts.
Potential South Timber Ridge Ag & Forestal District
Legend
mnmg
., ta�.��ax xneneameaa cawcq
B3 Rvvnenv Ina�me� innawn oacpl
EM IEa,aa�vc Me,ulece,nne m.mcq
na,wp6a, aa�-nla� M,.mrn
xe uae me, uanl a+m=n
xx,,Maxl. xa,e rAm .��n ry.Mal
a.al.l v�w�.a c�n,mmm a+a..o
ue,R. aenax qurcoumel emnmun.ry w:"ry
xA f6uniaee oNfip)
Potential South Timber Ridge
Nam: Faereary4, zD1D
Map C.-4 Rada— Gnunty De pt& Planning 6 Devoiop—t Ag &Forestal District 0 0.5 1 2Vile Data is no sumery da ane i-
1 D7 N Ken151, 0M9e 202, Winchester, VA 2601 I I I I� eremre apprexlmate.
540 �6fi5�i661 g'
2010 - 2015 SOUTH TIMBER RIDGE AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT
Map #
Owner Information
Acreage
26-A-61
Timber Ridge Fruit Farms
101.00
26-A-62
Timber Ridge Fruit Farms
35.50
26-A-63
Timber Ridge Fruit Farms
38.62
26-A-64
Timber Ridge Fruit Farms
91.38
26-A-65
Timber Ridge Fruit Farms
8.00
37-A-1
Timber Ridge Fruit Farms
173.20
37-A-74
Timber Ridge Fruit Farms
19.00
466.70
Frederick County Planning & Development February 1, 2010
Zoning Administrator
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, VA 22603
Mr. Cheran:
Please accept the attached list of properties owned by me, Cordell Watt, and my
business, Timber Ridge Fruit Farm, LLC, to create the South Timber Ridge
Agricultural and Forestral District. These properties contain open space,
woodlands, and orchards and meet the requirements of the Commonwealth of
Virginia for the creation of such a district.
Thank you,
L iL y'L
Cordell Watt
Timber Ridge Fruit Farms, LLC
Update of the 2010-2015
Double Church Agricultural and Forestal District
Chapter 43, Section 15.2-4300 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, requires that Agricultural
and Forestal Districts be reviewed by the local government every five years after establishment. The
Double Church Agricultural and Forestal District (District) was established in 1995. This is a
request to the Frederick County Planning Commission to renew the District and to remove one parcel
of 74.53+/ -acres. This District would decrease from 1,023.73 +/-acres to 949.20 +/- acres. The
Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) recommended approval to renew and
remove acreage to the Double Church Agricultural and Forestal District at their meeting on
March 18, 2010.
LOCATION AND SIZE
This District is located in the Opequon Magisterial District. The Double Church Agricultural
District currently contains 1,023.73+/- acres. The removal of one parcel (tax map numbers: 86-A-
32) of 74.53+/- acres from the District will decrease the District to a total of 949.20+/ -acres. Please
see attached map.
AGRICULTURAL & FORESTAL SIGNIFICANCE
The predominantly agricultural operations in the District are livestock and cultivation of hay and 25
percent open-space/woodlands. The area within the District is rural in nature.
LAND USE
All parcels in and surrounding the areas are in agricultural or residential use.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The 2007 Comprehensive Policy Plan of Frederick County (Comp Plan) provides guidance when
considering land use actions. The Comp Plan identifies this District as an area that is outside the
Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The District will
be impacted by future transportation improvements as noted within the Route 277 Land Use Plan
approved by the Board of Supervisors in 2008. The parcels in this District have no land use
designation, which indicates the area should remain rural.
The intent of the Rural Areas is to maintain agriculture as a significant portion of the County's
economy and to maintain the rural character of areas outside of the Urban Development Area. The
Comprehensive Plan can accomplish this by promoting the inclusion of additional land in
Agricultural and Forestal Districts. The Comprehensive Plan supports the additions and renewal of
the District, for it provides an opportunity for the agribusiness community to conduct long range
planning efforts for the management of their operations, while providing a reserve of agricultural
land through the year 2015.
LAKES/PONDS/STREAMS
The District lies primarily within the Stephens Run drainage area. The District will assist with
managing the quality of the County's water resources.
SOILS
The general relief of the District varies from a broad rolling valley to flat lands, and water is
available from ponds, wells and springs. Most of the soils are suited to a wide variety of farm uses.
Most of the area is in pasture, cultivated crops and hay with few woodland areas.
PRIME AGRICULTURE SOIL
The prime agricultural soil located within the District is Blairton.
STAFF COMMENTS
Based on this information, staff feels that this District is agriculturally significant as outlined in the
Agricultural and Forestal Districts Act. Furthermore; this District would conform to the County's
Comprehensive Policy Plan which labels the area as rural.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE APRIL 7, 2010 FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISISON MEETING
The Frederick County Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) unanimously
recommended approval of the Double Church Agricultural and Forestal District at their meeting of
March 18, 2010. This will decrease the acreage of the District to a total of 949.20+/- acres. The
Comprehensive Plan and the Route 277 Land Use Plan component proposes a balance approach
between the future transportation improvements and the District to ensure the function of both of
these important elements. The transportation needs of the broader community and the function and
context of the District shall continue to be recognized in the implementation of the Route 277 Land
Use Pian. This will provide an opportunity for the agribusiness community to conduct long range
planning efforts for the management of their operations, while providing a reserve of agricultural
land through the year 2015.
Double Church Ag & Forestal District
-
R II
ypP,
64 '`'`"ate
moor
rc
KERRp
r9 �J 11 i �. .t.
p�
�.._ . _ '�RIBORp Rp �� � �
F f . •' Qsy -
ephens Cit
+ a
W
S i ,
hs \
B A� "�'
r f'.
v. _. 40
63 CANrERBURG,pp _
1640
Legend00
oecdecna:eh—tet sea Long Range Land Use
CIO,ie sorter -Rpral Community Cert., .• ..' �t P - +
:. efecw�an core Reseenral Q �-
EastepnRoadplan iMned use Age Resticted � 1Q
5G �O
333
4dWen•Meior A,1 -I C>Mxed Use ..^ Ply FRE,b 64 0�~
rarevae Mater Anana B",—
messMi d Use cpmmero al t once UNCNRp ,10, Cc ,L
Wed
ed Mawr A�eral Hgn vcgmp,erMal R�HR $2
p
$`ayaew Mapr curert or >t.lneustr al
-.-
rmpmxad Maier cmlaamr O Mixed Use meustrialt orrice
b,�ew Minor Co sear h Ulhan Certer
jmprc.ea Mner collernr /�+Ne ghbarhood Village _—
—"
_
Romp N Plannee Unit Development
Recreallpn
�.� Naturel Respurcesa Recreation
oven space
':Insrimh—I
iF Hismda I OSA
Double Church
Nolo: Fobmary a, zom
Map Created by Frederick County CeptotPlanning8nevelopmeM Ag &Forestal District 0 0'25 0-5 1 Miles kala ie not survey grade an0 is
107 IN Kent St. Sutle 202. Winchester. VA 22601 Nerckre apprpximale.
590-665-5651 9 9
2010 - 2015 DOUBLE CHURCH AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT
Map #
Owner Information
Acreage
85-A-125
Ritenour Farm
125.00
85-A-130
Ritenour Farm
55.00
85-A-131
Ritenour Farm
178.67
85 -A -131A
Betty Stelzl
24.74
85-A-132
Sandra Ritenour
3.67
85-A-139
Gary, Stephen & Dennis Scothorn
103.60
85 -A -139A
Gary Scothorn
1.29
8513-5-1-1
Dennis & Martha Dale
0.25
86-A-25
Betty Steizl
142.95
86 -A -25A
Betty Stelzl
7.04
86-A-27
Arthur Ritenour
10.50
86-A-33
Betty Stelzl
0.12
86-A-35
Fairview -Springhill Farms Hog Group
105.39
86 -A -35A
John Stelzl
5.00
86-A-38
Linda Borror
20.66
86-A-70
Kenneth Waymer
28.98
86-A-71
Linda Borror
5.26
86 -A -71B
Robert Shiley
20.84
86 -A -72B
Kenneth Waymer
10.21
86 -A -230A
Jeffery & Joseph Gore
0.97
86 -A -230B
Jeffery Gore
21.03
86-A-231
Fred Gore
2.50
86-A-242
William Ireland
3.00
86-A-245
John & Virginia Booth
0.50
86-A-264
Arthur Ritenour
0.50
86 -A -264A
Arthur Ritenour
0.53
92-A-73
Lawrence Fagg
71.00
949.20
Update of the 2010-2015
Red Bud Agricultural and Forestal District
Chapter 43, Section 152-4300 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, requires that Agricultural
and Forestal Districts be reviewed by the local government every five years after establishment. The
Red Bud Agricultural and Forestal District (District) was established in 2006. This is a request to the
Frederick County Planning Commission to renew the District and remove two parcels of 15.4 +/-
acres and add two parcels of 245.81+/- acres. The Agricultural District Advisory Committee
(ADAC) recommended approval to renew, remove acreage and add acreage to the Red Bud
Agricultural and Forestal District at their meeting on March 18, 2010.
LOCATION AND SIZE
This District is located in the Stonewall Magisterial District. The Red Bud Agricultural District
currently contains 849.28 +/- acres. The proposed addition of two parcels (tax map numbers: 55-A-3
and 55-A-4) of 245.81 +/- acres will increase the District to a total acreage of 1,095.09+/ -acres. The
removal of two parcels (tax map numbers: 44 -A -28F and 44 -A -28H) of 15.4+/- acres, leaves a total
of 1,079.69+/ -acres. Please see attached map.
AGRICULTURAL & FORESTAL SIGNIFICANCE
The predominantly agricultural operations in the District are 75 percent agriculture (livestock,
horses, crop harvest) and 25 percent open-space/woodlands. The area within the District is rural in
nature.
LAND USE
All parcels in and surrounding the areas are in agricultural or residential use.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The District lies in an area that is outside the Urban Development Area and Sewer and Water Service
Area. The area is located within the Northeast Land Use Plan. About half of the District is
designated as a Developmentally Sensitive Area in the Northeast Land Use Plan. The remaining
parcels have no land use designation, which indicates the area should remain rural.
LAKES/PONDS/STREAMS
The District lies primarily within the Redbud Run drainage area, and partially within the Hiatt Run
drainage area. The District will assist with managing the quality of the County's water resources.
SOILS
The general relief of the District varies from a broad rolling valley to the west of Devils Backbone, to
very steep forested land on the eastern parcels and along Redbud Run. This District is within the
Redbud Run watershed and water is available from ponds, wells and springs. Most of the soils, with
the exception of those on the steeper slopes, are suited to a wide variety of farm uses. These steeper
slopes are mostly forested and are heavily wooded. Most of the area is in pasture, cultivated crops
and hay with few woodland areas.
PRIME AGRICULTURE SOIL
There is a limited amount of prime agricultural soils located within the District, which are Blairton,
Carbo, Frederick, Guernesy, Massanetta.
STAFF COMMENTS
Based on this information, staff feels that this District is agriculturally significant as outlined in the
Agricultural and Forestal Districts Act. Furthermore, this District would conform to the County's
Comprehensive Policy Plan which labels the area as historic and developmentally sensitive and rural.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE APRIL 7, 2010 FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING
The Frederick County Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) unanimously
recommended approval of the Red Bud Agricultural and Forestal District at their meeting of March
18, 2010. Staff would recommend that Planning Commission consider renewing this District; with
the addition of the two parcels totaling 245.81+/- acres and the removal of two parcels of 15.4 acres.
This will leave the District acreage total of 1,079.69+/- acres. The Comprehensive Plan and this
District provide an opportunity for the agribusiness community to conduct long range planning
efforts for the management of their operations, while providing a reserve of agricultural land through
the year 2015.
Bud
& Forestal
Red �� District ' ;
4
� O
> T
,
.00
)Yu
37
f-r'�� �T, `\• `rte � � �� rr
:, ..�♦, � �4jj(( /_ �,, moo, , o� _�_ t
J• / /�� '?iii
•�aA� \ `` �°��� 1J ��'�� 66 `' SNF 659 _.
� al
BERRYVILLE PIKE
Y ' ' �mProygd Ml?�rgFRRj"17
s I 4�Fp�kF !or cDUeotor
VALLEY MILLRO - � y
+ I
• r Caq� Q
� I
f t
r-+. y Lan Range Land Use ✓
~Subtractions –�. ��uew MlnprAnenal B 9 �.a'MI au mdusman off—
R-1
v - y dS�!uman centar
nrheua
Rural Communil Cetrtet
�I r� Atltl1t10n5 ImprovetlM na AHeHaI
�yoy� �- Red liutl 0.g District �ew Major Gall t r Res dentlal Neighh Vllage
Mixed lJse Age R.Mrc d XJ(-
Pland Unit b
Mile Buffer G Improved Malo CII for evelopment
Eastern Road Plan _Oct280 x,.` N7>red Use
�" Jew Minor Coll t R alien
�i {W�pQ 656) T New Major Arterial C~ improved M norC 11 t 6 ess N.W., Reseurcea 1 Recreation
mvm.-q9w,)l Improved MaJor Anerlal a _Vamp Mmed Use Commerciall Off— Open Space
ryJ/
_SX1\0�'Highway Commercial
Intaonal„NN, !? HiAuHcl os
A
: ” 2010
Map Created hy; rederick Comty Dept al Plenning 8 nevelopment
107 N Kent St, Suite 2D2, Winchester, VA 22601
5
qp
Note , sFesruerys5 565I
Red Bud
Ag & Forestal District
0 0.5 1 2Miles ostale em—, grade and is
i I ; i 1 Nertfpre approximate.
2010 - 2015 RED BUD AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT
Map #
Owner Information
Acreage
43-A-154
Shenandoah Valley Battlefield Foundation
36.27
43-A-159
Jeffery & Roseanne Jenkins
2.00
44D-2-6
Charles Willis
2.37
44-A-28
Donna & Donald Werdebaugh
8.72
44 -A -28A
Allen & Velda Jobe
20.46
44 -A -28B
Kenneth Unger
25.00
44 -A -28C
Robert & Marsha Boden
4.30
44 -A -28D
Robert & Marsha Boden
5.00
44 -A -28G
Allen & Velda Jobe
5.00
44-A-281
Voight & Bonnie Miller
8.00
54-A-87
William & Claudia Britz
20.00
54-A-88
Preservation of Civil War Battlefields
181.03
54 -A -89C
Shenandoah Valley Battlefield Foundation
100.00
54-A-90
Preservation of Civil War Battlefields
41.00
55-A-3
Preservation of Civil War Battlefields
29.00
55-A-4
Preservation of Civil War Battlefields
162.52
55-A-5
Kevin Herring
33.43
55 -A -5A
Stacy Herring
3.56
55 -A -5B
Vera Herring
1.00
55 -A -SC
Stacy Herring
17.01
55 -A -5D
Kevin Herring
1.21
55-A-6
Joseph Hulver
24.04
55-A-7
Gary & Constance Oates
13.48
55 -A -7A
Gary & Constance Oates
9.37
55 -A -7B
Gary & Constance Oates
7.49
55 -A -7C
Gary & Constance Oates
5.00
55 -A -7D
Gary & Constance Oates
5.00
55 -A -7E
Gary & Constance Oates
5.02
55-A-8
Bernard Schwartzman
25.09
55-A-14
Ernest Lam
2.00
55-A-18
Wayne & Stephanie Seipel
12.00
55-A-19
Wayne & Stephanie Seipel
22.00
55-A-20
Wayne & Stephanie Seipel
10.86
55-A-21
Wayne & Stephanie Seipel
58.50
55 -A -109B
Jeffery & Roseanne Jenkins
8.82
55-A-115
Pine Knoll Construction
1.75
55-A-117
Jeffery & Roseanne Jenkins
4.33
55-A-118
Debra & Dawn Stultz McNeil
1.13
55-A-129
Nathan & Diana Childress
33.08
55 -A -129A
David & Katherine Gregg
33.00
55-A-138
Stephanie Sempeles Orndoff
21.50
55-A-139
Stephanie Sempeles Orndoff
7.31
55-A-151
John & June McAllister
19.00
55 -A -151A
John & June McAllister
5.00
55-A-177
William & Beverly Schuller
0.38
55-A-178
William & Genevieve Schuller
2.99
2010 - 2015 RED BUD AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT
55 -A -178A
William & Genevieve Schuller
1.28
55-A-179
William & Beverly Schuller
12.86
55 -A -181A
William & Genevieve Schuller
4.41
55-A-1818
William & Genevieve Schuller
11.12
55-A-1821)
Anthony & Lori Dimasi
5.00
1079.69
Update of the 2010-2015
South Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District
Chapter 43, Section 15.2-4300 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, requires that
Agricultural and Forestal Districts be reviewed by the local government every five years after
establishment. The South Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District (District) was established
in 1980. This is a request to the Frederick County Planning Commission to renew the District, to
add five parcels of 429.36+/- acres and remove three parcels of 221.48+/- acres. The
Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) recommended approval to renew,
remove acreage and add acreage to the South Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District
at their meeting on March 18, 2010.
LOCATION AND SIZE
This District is located in the Back Creek Magisterial District and currently contains 5,974.65+/ -
acres. The proposed addition of five parcels (tax map numbers: 62-12-5-53, 72-A-24, 73-A-31,
73-A-73, and 84-A-50) will bring the acreage of the District to 6,404.01+/- acres. Three parcels
(tax map numbers 84-A-29, 73-A-3, and 73-12-13) totaling 221.48+/- acres have requested to be
removed from the District, leaving a total of 6,182.53+/- acres in size. Please see attached map.
AGRICULTURAL & FORESTAL SIGNIFICANCE
The predominantly agricultural operations in the new District are 90 percent agriculture (orchard,
and crop harvesting) and 10 percent open-space/woodlands. The area within the District is rural
in nature.
LAND USE
All parcels within the proposed District are in agricultural or residential use.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The 2007 Comprehensive Policy Plan of Frederick County (Comp Plan) provides guidance when
considering land use actions. The addition of these parcels within the District are outside the
Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), and are not part
of any land use plan or study by the County. The current land use should remain in its present
land use of pristine condition with orchards, agricultural, and residential.
LAKES/PONDS/STREAMS
The proposed District lies primarily within the Opequon Creek and Stephens Run drainage area.
The establishment of this District will further assist with managing the quality of the County's
water resources.
SOILS
The general relief of the District varies from rolling hills to ridges to the north, west, south and
east. This District lies within the Opequon Creek watershed and water is available from ponds,
wells and springs.
PRIME AGRICULTURE SOIL
The largest amount of prime agricultural soils located within the District is Frederick-
Poplimento.
STAFF COMMENTS
Based on this information, staff feels that the additions to this District are agriculturally
significant as outlined in the Agricultural and Forestal Districts Act and the 2007 Comprehensive
Policy Plan (Comp Plan), which labels the area as rural. The intent of the Rural Areas is to
maintain agriculture as a significant portion of the County's economy and to maintain the rural
character of areas outside of the UDA. The Comprehensive Plan can accomplish this by
promoting the inclusion of additional land in Agricultural and Forestal Districts. The
Comprehensive Plan supports additions to and renewal of the District, for it provides an
opportunity for the agribusiness community to conduct long range planning efforts for the
management of their operations while providing a reserve of agricultural land through the year
2015.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE APRIL 7, 2010 FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING
The Frederick County Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) unanimously
recommended approval of the South Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District at their meeting
of March 18, 2010. Staff would recommend that the Planning Commission consider renewing
this District; with the addition of the five parcels totaling 429.36+/- acres, and the removal of
three parcels of 221.48+/- acres. This will leave the District with an acreage total of 6,182.53+/ -
acres. The Comprehensive Plan and this District provide an opportunity for the agribusiness
community to conduct long range planning efforts for the management of their operations, while
providing a reserve of agricultural land through the year 2015.
PRIME AGRICULTURE SOIL
The largest amount of prime agricultural soils located within the District is Frederick-
Poplimento.
STAFF COMMENTS
Based on this information, staff feels that the additions to this District are agriculturally
significant as outlined in the Agricultural and Forestal Districts Act and the 2007 Comprehensive
Policy Plan (Comp Plan), which labels the area as rural. The intent of the Rural Areas is to
maintain agriculture as a significant portion of the County's economy and to maintain the rural
character of areas outside of the UDA. The Comprehensive Plan can accomplish this by
promoting the inclusion of additional land in Agricultural and Forestal Districts. The
Comprehensive Plan supports additions to and renewal of the District, for it provides an
opportunity for the agribusiness community to conduct long range planning efforts for the
management of their operations while providing a reserve of agricultural land through the year
2015.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE APRIL 7, 2010 FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING
Staff would recommend that ADAC consider renewing this District; with the addition of the five
parcels totaling 429.36+/- acres, and the removal of three parcels of 221.48+/- acres. This will
leave the District with an acreage total of 6,182.53+/- acres. The Comprehensive Plan and this
District provide an opportunity for the agribusiness community to conduct long range planning
efforts for the management of their operations, while providing a reserve of agricultural land
through the year 2015.
South Frederick Ag Forestal Distract
�F
N�RPH�yy�TERN PIKE 4 1 >�.
'a-d,FAI
b
z r` Winchester
f k
6 37
Fs A s
It6Do%
r ....,,1 02
Hav
U
01
:.�
Stephens City/
P w
WILI-
r a
4.
Ct
.14
fIl
scum Finae' k s la. crops ll—
M, Art erial Long Range Land use sZ Uman Cerner-� y�' 636 GANTERBURG RD
Rural Community Lente,
lh Feder ck Adddons X86. fd MafprC 11 1 - 'A:: Ne 9hbprhpo"lag.
Q ours FretlertN Mlsmct Parcels_ '-app Dyed M LII R Id t'al ,6, Planned Unit Development ♦ -
M x d llae Age l��.
( 71 Mlle 8ufler (�"faJ M' or C.11—
Emu. R tl Plan Oct2gg6m,'�%Mbed use
m -d M atter Nat
—1 8 Recreation iUiitO]+ y
of » ural Fe
MF: Aaeral (amp _. Bus nese Open Space
mproved Mator Adenxl ibl xee Use Comm— IOt`re .J3 Inetnullandl
,Vew MlnprArterial Hl9nwaV Ccrrmerdrl kH,M.,ia%DSA
Mixed Use tndusMal lLMce
South Frederick
101 aronq 4. 2010
map G sted by Fretlen'ck [aunty Dept of Planning 8 Developmentqg & Forestal ®istriet U 5 1 2 Mlles
fpr N Kant St, Syi[e 2L2, Wincheslen VA 22661 t ��� Data is not 911Ney gretle and is
Sdg-665-5657 Herefore epproxlmate.
2010 - 2015 SOUTH FREDERICK AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT
Map #
Owner Information
Acreage
51-A-42
James & Laura Merriner
24.50
51 -A -42A
James & Laura Merriner
90.82
51-A-4213
James & Laura Merriner
6.01
52-A-300
DTS, LC
305.43
60-A-7313
Robert Fawcett
18.87
60-A-75
Triple S Associates
39.03
61-A-7
Roland & Elizabeth Snapp
109.51
61-A-8
Roland Snapp
5.00
61 -A -8A
Roland Snapp
5.00
61-A-9
Roland Snapp
97.00
61-A-21
BHS, LC
34.00
61-A-22
Vernon & Eula Wright
89.48
61-A-23
BHS, LC
154.75
61 -A -23A
BHS, LC
1.00
61-A-24
BHS, LC
20.16
61-A-25
BHS, LC
5.50
61-A-26
BHS, LC
4.50
61-A-27
BHS, LC
4.00
61-A-29
BHS, LC
1.25
61-A-30
Woodbine Farms
44.00
61-A-31
Linda Nelson
52.32
61-A-34
Woodbine Farms
14.00
61-A-37
Woodbine Farms
11.60
61-A-40
Roland & ElizabethSnapp
28.00
61-A-41
Roland Snapp
42.00
61-A-43
Wayne Snapp
7.50
61 -A -43A
Wayne Snapp
37.50
61 -A -43B
Wayne Snapp
10.00
61 -A -43E
Robert & Carol Melby
1.00
61-A-44
Roland Snapp
2.00
61-A-45
Thomas Fawcett
30.99
61-A-96
M&M LP
170.95
61-A-106
M&M LP
42.00
61-A-107
M&M LP
19.00
61-A-116
M&M LP
44.76
61-A-117
M&M LP
29.00
61-A-118
M&M LP
77.50
61-A-119
M&M LP
16.00
61-A-120
M&M LP
9.92
61-A-126
M&M LP
11.00
61-A-127
M&M LP
166.62
61 -A -127A
M&M LP
68.45
61-A-128
Woodbine Farms
137.50
61-A-129
Woodbine Farms
48.00
61-A-130
Woodbine Farms
30.00
2010 - 2015 SOUTH FREDERICK AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT
61-A-131
Woodbine Farms
7.75
62-A-21
Bruce & Kellie Davidson
9.15
62-A-27
Edward Copenhaver
1.00
62-A-28
Edward Copenhaver
76.37
62-A-34
Ruth Gregory
107.79
62 -A -57A
MELCO
46.48
62E-1-2
James Vickers
6.14
62E-1-5-
James Vickers
5.11
62E-1-3-14
James & Patricia Gosa
5.41
62E-1-5-23
James & Marcia Engelage
5.00
62E-1-6-25
Nicholas & Kathleen Nerangis
5.01
62E-1-6-26
Nicholas & Kathleen Nerangis
10.00
62E-1-6-27
Nicholas & Kathleen Nerangis
5.10
62-12-5-53
M&M LP
97.21
72 -A -29L
Jeffrey Stout
15.85
72-A-45
Dogwood Knoll
5.25
72-A-53
Albert & Sylvia McDonald
197.00
72-A-58
Vasiliki Baughman
168.50
72-A-59
Vasiliki Baughman
20.00
72-A-82
Constance Meagher
12.00
72-A-83
Constance Meagher
0.50
73-A-4
Dogwood Knoll
50.00
73-A-10
BHS, LC
190.80
73 -A -10A
Fruit Hill Orchard
5.00
73-A-13
Alfred Snapp
84.69
73-A-16
KSS
134.21
73-A-17
KSS
160.00
73-A-18
Charles Bauserman
135.93
73-A-20
Charles Bauserman
234.43
73-A-21
Woodbine Farms
271.00
73-A-24
Ruby Ridings
10.00
73-A-27
Vernon Ridings
4.00
73-A-28
Vernon Ridings
4.00
73-A-29
Ruby Ridings
46.57
73-A-30
Dudley Rinker
4.83
73 -A -30B
Shirley Anderson
5.95
73 -A -30E
Dudley Rinker
1.01
73 -A -30H
Joseph & Phyllis Swack
6.15
73-A-301
Dudley Rinker
6.43
73-A-31
Woodbine Farms
84.04
73-A-38
Mark & Roxanna Orndorff
3.57
73-A-39
David Carbaugh
11.90
73-A-63
BHS, LC
240.17
73 -A -64A
Holly & Samuel Dillender
2.32
73-A-66
Woodbine Farms
280.01
73-A-67
Woodbine Farms
23.00
73-A-73
Woodbine Farms
40.71
2010 - 2015 SOUTH FREDERICK AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT
73 -A -90B
Daniel & Sandra Anderson
7.92
73-A-94
Vernon Ridings
12.35
73-A-100
Paul & Mary Anderson
100.00
73-A-103
James & Jo Ellen Huey
24.40
73-A-104
Winchester Warehousing
103.85
73-12-11
Charles & Vicky Murphy
2.86
73-12-13
Mildred Simpson
4.91
73-12-16
John Simpson
59.88
73-12-23
David & Patricia Hlavinka
2.98
74 -A -10A
Larry & Joyce Earhart
13.80
74 -A -10F
Larry & Joyce Earhart
1.46
74-A-12
Glenn & Mary Barley
9.00
74-A-14
Cheryl Humphries
2.00
74-A-15
Philip Whitney
3.00
74 -A -15A
Cheryl Humphries
1.23
74 -A -15B
Philip Whitney
32.77
74-A-18
Winchester Warehousing
109.14
74 -A -18A
Winchester Warehousing
80.00
74 -A -18B
Winchester Warehousing
58.39
83-A-87
Jeffrey & Sharon Rezon
20.57
83-A-100
Robert & Mary Haskings
14.11
84-A-2
Constance Meagher
66.50
84-A-6
Constance Meagher
60.00
84-A-40
Alfred Snapp
69.30
84 -A -40A
Alfred & Betty Snapp
46.00
84-A-41
Donald & Stella Redmiies
6.00
84 -A -42A
Wade & Angela Ramey
6.00
84-A-44
Vernon Ridings
51.95
84-A-50
Woodbine Farms
197.40
6,182.53
C
•
COUNT' of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651 DJD FAQ: 540/665-635
To: Frederick County Planning Commission
From: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner C49
Subject: Public Hearing — Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Ordinance
Date: March 24, 2010
On April 22, 2009, the Board of Supervisors approved the Rural Areas Report and
Recommendations as a policy component of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. This report
contained recommendations from the Rural Areas Subcommittee, which was a group created by
the Board of Supervisors. The Subcommittee was charged with identifying growth and
development trends and related issues in the rural areas of the County, gathering ideas to address
those issues and forwarding a recommendation for resolution to the Board of Supervisors. One
of the recommendations contained within the report was to establish a Transfer of Development
Rights (TDR) Program. The Study stated that the sending properties should be designated in an
effort to discourage development and take into account environmental constraints. Receiving
properties were to be located in areas where residential development was desired (UDA, Urban
Centers, Rural Community Centers).
The TDR Ordinance that has been developed consists of three parts that will regulate the
program, including sending site requirements, receiving site requirements and the
transfer/development process. Definitions that correspond to the TDR Ordinance have also been
included. The TDR ordinance contains various criteria and processes as outlined below:
Sendinz Properties
Sending properties have been identified as parcels located in the Rural Areas Zoning District,
outside of the UDA and the SWSA, twenty acres in size or greater, and subdividable in
accordance with Chapter 144 - Subdivision of Land (state road access, etc.). The ordinance
contains a section on calculations to determine the number of rights a sending property may
transfer. The draft TDR Ordinance also contains proposed density bonuses for specific sending
areas. The proposed density bonuses are as follows:
Maximum Density Allowed in Zoning Districts through Transfer of
Development Rights (TDR) Program
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 o Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Frederick County Planning Commission
Re: TDR Ordinance
Page 2
March 24, 2010
Sending Area 41 would be property located within designated Agricultural Districts; Sending
Area #2 would be property located within areas generally associated with prime agricultural
soils; and Sending Area #3 encompasses the remainder of the sending area. A map has been
included with this package that shows the proposed sending areas.
Receivinz Properties
Receiving properties have been identified as parcels located within the UDA (designated for
residential land uses) or a designated and defined Rural Community Center, that the parcels be of
the correct zoning district (RA, RP, R4), served by public water and public sewer, be served by
state roads, not impact historical resources and be outside of the Airport Support Area.
Certification Process
Sending properties would be certified as outlined in §165-302.05. The certification process
would involve the applicant providing the County with outlined information (such as application,
title report, plats). The County would then provide the applicant with a certification letter
outlining how many density rights the property may transfer.
Transfer Process
Once a sending property has been certified (issued a LETTER OF INTENT and then a
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE), it may transfer its density rights
to a receiving property or a receiving person. The receiving property must also be certified as
outlined in the draft ordinance. Density rights can be severed from a sending property and
transferred directly to a receiving property (thus extinguished), or they can be severed from a
sending property and held by a receiving person.
Receiving properties must complete the Master Development Plan and Subdivision Design Plan
process and meet all development regulations set forth by the RP (Residential Performance)
District. Development rights from a sending property shall be considered transferred to a
receiving property or a receiving person when the extinguishment document for the sending
property has been recorded.
DRRC Discussion
The item was presented to the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) at
their meeting on September 24, 2009. The DRRC discussed the possibility of future
development bonuses for areas containing natural or environmental resources such as karst
topography, as well as the need to remove natural resources from the density right calculations.
The DRRC felt that TDR's may not be used if environmental features are excluded because that
could lead to the property owner not getting full yield from the property. The DRRC also
wanted to ensure that people understood that family lot subdivisions would not be possible if the
property owner sold their rights. The DRRC then recommended that the draft TDR ordinance be
forwarded to the Planning Commission for further discussion.
Planning Commission Discussion
The Planning Commission discussed this item at their October 12, 2009 meeting.
Commissioners discussed the proposed ordinance and who would provide final approval of
transfers. Staff explained that the Planning Department would oversee the program and it would
Frederick County Planning Commission
Re: TDR Ordinance
Page 3
March 24, 2010
be an administrative process. It was also questioned what would happen if a sending property
was eventually included in the UDA; it was explained that the State Code states that once
development rights are sold through a TDR, the property cannot be developed. Commissioners
also asked about the use of proffers with the TDR Program and it was explained that the TDR
process avoids the expected proffers from the developer. The TDR Program would be an
incentive for the development community to look at, because not only do they avoid going
through the rezoning process, with its time and uncertainty, they do not have the proffer
expectation. Also discussed during the Commission discussion were transportation
improvements and that under the TDR program, the County stands to lose some of the
transportation proffers, either in terms of construction or money, depending on the volume and
scale, or with strategically located in -fill sites. They inquired about the extent to which that may
have been quantified for comparison, recognizing that in the rural areas, there is no opportunity
to receive transportation proffers. Staff replied that there is still an obligation through the current
process and ordinances to address transportation impacts immediately adjacent to the site;
however, the developer could avoid the cash per unit requirement. During the rural areas
discussions, the concern was raised that transportation impacts in the rural areas were not being
mitigated. So, with the consideration of the TDR Program, the idea that transportation impacts
could be somewhat mitigated, not from a dollars aspect, but if those houses were transferred out
of the rural community, traffic congestion is slowed down that otherwise would show up on the
rural roads unsuitable for traffic. It was also expressed that there should be some type of TIA
required and some mechanism to force a developer to incorporate public trails and inter -parcel
connections.
Commissioners were also concerned that there is a possibility that development rights could be
given to properties with environmental features that would have previously rendered them
unsuitable for development. Concern was expressed about whether the typical 20 -lot subdivision
might turn out to be much larger because the developer wouldn't be required to meet the impacts
of development. The profitability for the sending properties was raised and the fact that the
property owner would have to get surveyors or environmentalists involved. Staff stated that
there is an economic decision to be made if the TDR option is used and that a transferred right
may not be as valuable as a true build on your own, but the difference is that the owner gets to
keep his land and with it the viewshed or the agricultural opportunity. Some questions arose
about the possibility of a landowner who might not receive the true full value of the property. It
was emphasized that the TDR Program is a voluntary program; and it is a private financial
transaction between property owners and they will need to come to agreement on a price. There
was an additional comment made about the absence of TNDs (Traditional Neighborhood
Design). Mr. Lawrence stated that the TND component will be included after the TND
ordinance is adopted.
Board of Supervisors Discussions
The draft TDR Ordinance was presented to the Board of Supervisors on December 9, 2009. At
that meeting, staff provided an overview of the ordinance and stated that prior to the meeting,
staff was made aware of the Model TDR Ordinance drafted by the State Workgroup that
included density bonuses. Discussions during the Rural Areas Subcommittee meetings had
included the desire to include density bonuses; however, under the wording of the TDR language
in the Code of Virginia, it was believed that bonuses were not permitted. Staff then revised the
draft TDR Ordinance to include bonuses based on where the density right is located. The revised
Frederick County Planning Commission
Re: TDR Ordinance
Page 4
March 24, 2010
TDR Ordinance was discussed by the Board of Supervisors at their March 10, 2009 meeting.
The Board of Supervisors requested minor clarifications and additions and with those changes
sent the proposed ordinance forward for public hearing. The draft TDR Ordinance has been
revised to reflect the Board of Supervisors comments.
The attached document shows the proposed Ordinance which is presented for discussion. A
recommendation from the Planning Commission on this proposed Zoning Ordinance text
amendment is sought. Please contact me if you have any questions.
Attachments: 1. Draft TDR Ordinance
2. Draft TDR Map
NWII to
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) DRAFT ORDINANCE - March 23, 2010
ARTICLE III
Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program
Part 301— Establishment and Purpose.
§165-301.01. Purpose.
Pursuant to the authority granted by §§ 15.2-2316.1 and 2316.2 of the Code of Virginia, there is
established a transfer of development rights (TDR) program, the purpose of which is to transfer
residential density from eligible sending areas to eligible receiving areas and/or transferee through a
voluntary process for permanently conserving agricultural and forestry uses of lands and preserving
rural open spaces, and natural and scenic resources. The TDR program is intended to supplement land
use regulations, resource protection efforts and open space acquisition programs and encourage
increased residential density where it can best be accommodated with the least impacts on the natural
environment and public services by:
A. Providing an effective and predictable incentive process for property owners of rural and
agricultural land to preserve lands with a public benefit; and
B. Implementing the Comprehensive Policy Plan by directing residential land uses to the Urban
Development Area (UDA); and
C. Providing an efficient and streamlined administrative review system to ensure that transfers of
development rights to receiving areas are processed in a timely way and balanced with other county
goals and policies, and are adjusted to the specific conditions of each receiving area.
§165-301.02. Applicability.
The procedures and regulations in Article III of Chapter 165 shall apply to the transfer of development
rights from land qualifying as sending properties to land qualifying as receiving properties and/or to a
transferee. Land utilizing transferred development rights may be subdivided at an increased density
above the base density specified by Table 1 and Table 2 in §165-302.03 in applicable receiving areas. All
development utilizing transferred development rights shall conform to the guidelines contained in the
Comprehensive Policy Plan.
§165-301.03. Right to Transfer Development Rights; General Provisions.
A. A development right shall be transferred only by means of documents, including a covenant to
which Frederick County is party and any appropriate releases, in a recordable form approved by the
Director of Planning and Development or his designee. The covenant shall limit the future
construction of dwellings on a sending property to the total number of development rights
established by the zoning of the property minus all development rights previously transferred in
accordance with this chapter, any development rights previously extinguished or limited as a result
of a recorded covenant against the property, the number of development rights to be transferred
by the proposed transaction, and the number of existing single-family detached dwellings on the
1
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) DRAFT ORDINANCE -March 23, 2010
sending property. If a sending property contains no dwelling units, a development right equal to
that for one single-family dwelling must be maintained for the property, except that, for properties
larger than one hundred (100) acres, one development right equal to that for one single-family
dwelling must be maintained for each multiple of one hundred (100) acres, or fraction thereof,
contained within the sending property.
B. Each transferor shall have the right to sever all or a portion of the rights to develop from the parcel
in a sending district and to sell, trade, or barter all or a portion of those rights to a transferee
consistent with the purposes of §165-301.01 so long as the conditions of §165-301.03A are met.
C. Any transfer of development rights pursuant to this Chapter authorizes only an increase in
maximum density and shall not alter or waive the development standards of the receiving district,
nor shall it allow a use otherwise prohibited in a receiving district.
D. Transfer of development rights shall not be available for the following:
1) Portions of lots owned by or subject to easements (including, but not limited to, easements of
roads, railroads, electrical transmission lines, gas or petroleum pipelines) in favor of
governmental agencies, utilities and nonprofit corporations.
2) Land restricted from development by covenant, easement or deed restriction.
E. Any transfer of development rights shall be recorded among the land records of Frederick County,
Virginia.
F. Value of transferable development rights. The monetary value of transferred development rights is
completely determined between the seller and buyer.
Part 302 — Sending and Receiving Properties
§165-302.01. Sending Properties.
A. For the purposes of this chapter, a sending property must be an entire tax parcel or lot qualified
under §165-302.01B of this section. Sending areas may only be located within the rural areas
outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), and
zoned RA (Rural Areas), as described in the Comprehensive Policy Plan and the RA Zoning District of
this Chapter. A sending property shall be maintained in a condition that is consistent with the
criteria in this section under which the sending was qualified.
B. Qualification of a sending property shall demonstrate that the site contains a public benefit such
that the preservation of that benefit by transferring residential development rights to another site is
in the public interest, according to all of the following criteria:
2
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) DRAFT ORDINANCE - March 23, 2010
1) Designated in the Comprehensive Policy Plan as Rural Area;
2) Designated on the Zoning Maps of Frederick County as being zoned RA (Rural Areas) and be
located outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area
(SWSA);
3) Designated on the Sending Areas Map;
4) Comprised of at least twenty (20) acres in size; and
5) Qualified for subdivision in accordance with Chapter 144 of the Frederick County Code including,
but not limited to, meeting all state road and access requirements.
C. If a sending property has any outstanding code violations and/or unpaid taxes, the owner shall
resolve these violations, including any required abatement, restoration, or payment of penalties or
taxes, before the property may be qualified as a sending property in the transfer of development
rights program.
§165-302.02. Receiving Properties.
A. Except as provided in subsections B and C of this section, in order to be eligible as a receiving
property, a property must be:
1) Located in one of the following zoning districts:
a. RP (Residential Performance) District;
b. R4 (Residential Planned Community) District; or
c. RA (Rural Areas) District; and
2) Designated on the Receiving Areas Map;
3) Served by public water and public sewer;
4) Served by state maintained roads or have the ability to utilize private roads in the RP District as
permitted by Chapter 165 or Chapter 144.
5) Located within the Urban Development Area (UDA) or a designated and defined Rural
Community Center as identified in the Comprehensive Policy Plan; and
6) Identified in the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan for residential land uses.
3
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) DRAFT ORDINANCE - March 23, 2010
B. A property is not eligible as a receiving property if the transfer of development rights to the
property would adversely impact regionally or locally significant historical resources or naturally
sensitive areas as specified in the Comprehensive Policy Plan.
C. A property is not eligible as a receiving property if the property is located within the airport support
area as identified by the Comprehensive Policy Plan.
D. If a receiving property has any outstanding code violations and/or unpaid taxes, the owner shall
resolve these violations, including any required abatement, restoration, or payment of penalties or
taxes, before the property may be qualified as a receiving property in the transfer of development
rights program.
E. A receiving property may accept development rights from one or more sending properties, up to a
maximum density specified in Table 1 and Table 2 in §165-302.03.
§165-302.03. Calculation of development rights.
A. The number of residential development rights that a sending property is eligible to send to a
receiving property and/or transferee shall be determined by applying the sending property base
density established in subsection C of this section to the area of the sending property after
deducting all the following:
1. Development rights previously transferred in accordance with this chapter;
2. Development rights previously extinguished or limited as a result of a recorded
conservation easement or similar covenant against the property;
3. The number of existing single-family dwellings on the sending property;
4. The amount of any submerged land (i.e., lakes, ponds, streams), floodplains, and steep
slopes as determined by Frederick County GIS Data.
5. The amount of any land contained within easements (including, but not limited to,
easements of roads, railroads, electrical transmission lines, gas or petroleum pipelines)
in favor of governmental agencies, utilities and nonprofit corporations.
B. If a sending property contains no dwelling units, a development right equal to that for one single-
family dwelling must be maintained for the property. Properties with over 100 acres shall be
required to retain the number of development rights required in accordance with Section 165-
301.03A.
C. For the purposes of calculating the amount of development rights a sending property can transfer,
the square footage or acreage of land contained within a sending property shall be determined by a
valid recorded plat or survey, submitted by the applicant property owner and that has been
prepared and stamped by a land surveyor licensed in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
D. For the purposes of the transfer of development rights program only, sending sites zoned RA (Rural
Areas) shall have a base density of one dwelling unit per five acres for transfer purposes.
4
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) DRAFT ORDINANCE - March 23, 2010
E. Any fractions of development rights that results from the calculations in subsection A of this section
shall not be included in the final determination of total development rights available for transfer.
F. Development rights from one sending property may be allocated to more than one receiving
property and/or transferee and one receiving property and/or transferee may accept development
rights from more than one sending property.
G. The determination of the number of residential development rights a sending property has available
for transfer to a receiving property and/or transferee shall be documented in a TDR LETTER OF
INTENT to issue a TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE issued by the Director of
Planning and Development or his designee, pursuant to the provisions of this Part 302.05 of Chapter
165, and shall be considered a final determination, not subject to revision. Such a determination
shall be valid only for purposes of the transfer of development rights program and for no other
purpose. Any changes to the proposed sending property shall void any issued letters of intent.
H. A sending property transferee may extinguish TDR density rights, sever and hold TDR density rights,
sever and sell TDR density rights, or apply TDR rights to a receiving property in a receiving district in
order to obtain approval for development at a density greater than would otherwise be allowed on
the land in the receiving district, up to the maximum density or intensity outlined in the table below:
Table 1
Maximum Density Allowed in Zoning Districts through Transfer of
Development Rights (TDR) Program
5
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) DRAFT ORDINANCE - March 23, 2010
TDR density rights may be converted to bonus density rights by an increase in the residential density
on the receiving property, based on the conversion factors in the table below:
Table 2
Maximum Density Allowed in Zoning Districts through Transfer of
Development Rights (TDR) Program
1. Allowable bonus density remains subject to the maximum density provisions outlined in Table 1
of §165-302.03H.
§165-302.04. TDR Sending Property Development Limitations.
A. Following the transfer of residential development rights, a sending property that has retained part
of their development rights may subsequently accommodate remaining residential dwelling units on
the sending property consistent with the requirements of the RA (Rural Areas) District and all
requirements of the Frederick County Code. A sending property that has retained part of its
development rights may also transfer the remainder of the eligible rights through the transfer of
development rights program.
B. On sending properties with environmental features as outlined in § 165-302.03A, the development
rights shall be severed from the areas outside of the specified environmental features. If
development rights are retained on the sending property, future subdivision of the parcel cannot
occur on the areas where development rights have already been severed.
C. The limitations in this section shall be included in a deed covenant applicable to the sending
property.
§165-302.05. Sending Site Certification.
A. The Director of Planning and Development or his designee shall be responsible for determining that
a proposed sending property meets the qualifications of §165-302.01. The Director of Planning and
Development or his designee shall render a determination or denial under this subsection within
sixty (60) days of the date of submittal of a completed sending property determination application.
If the determination is that a property meets the qualifications of §165-302.01, the Director of
Planning and Development or his designee shall issue the determination in the form of a LETTER OF
INTENT to issue a TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE. A LETTER OF INTENT issued
under this subsection shall be valid until the development rights are severed and extinguished
R
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) DRAFT ORDINANCE - March 23, 2010
through the transfer process, or unless applicable zoning changes are approved that would affect
the sending property, or unless the property is developed.
B. Determinations of sending property qualifications under subsection A of this section are appealable
to the Board of Supervisors by filing a notice of appeal with the Director of Planning and
Development or his designee within thirty (30) days of the date of the determination.
C. The Director of Planning and Development shall be responsible for maintaining permanent records
of action taken pursuant to the transfer of development rights program under this Article III of
Chapter 165, including records of letters of intent issued, certificates issued, deed restrictions and
covenants known to be recorded, and development rights retired, otherwise extinguished, or
transferred to specific properties and/or transferees.
D. Responsibility for preparing a completed application for a determination that a proposed sending
property meets the qualifications of §165-302.01 rests exclusively with the applicant/property
owner. An application for a transfer of development rights to issue a transfer of development rights
LETTER OF INTENT shall contain:
1) A certificate of title for the sending property prepared by an attorney admitted to
practice law in the Commonwealth of Virginia;
2) Five copies of a valid recorded plat or survey, of the proposed sending parcel and a legal
description of the sending property prepared by a land surveyor licensed in the
Commonwealth of Virginia;
3) A plan showing the existing and proposed dwelling units and any areas already subject
to a conservation easement or other similar encumbrance;
4) A completed density calculation worksheet for estimating the number of available
development rights;
5) The application fee as set forth in the Development Review Fees adopted by the Board
of Supervisors; and
6) Such additional information required by the Director of Planning and Development or
his designee as necessary to determine the number of development rights that qualify
for transfer.
E. A transfer of development rights LETTER OF INTENT issued by the Director of Planning and
Development or his designee shall state the following information:
1) The name of the transferor;
2) The name of the transferee, if then known;
3) A legal description of the sending property on which the calculation of development rights is
based;
4) A statement of the size, in acres, of the sending property on which the calculation of
development rights is based;
7
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) DRAFT ORDINANCE — March 23, 2010
5) A statement of the number of development rights, stated in terms of number of dwelling units,
eligible for transfer;
6) If only a portion of the total development rights are being transferred from the sending
property, a statement of the number of remaining development rights, stated in terms of
number of dwelling units, remaining on the sending property;
7) The date of issuance;
8) The signature of the Director of Planning and Development or his designee; and
9) A serial number assigned by the Director of Planning and Development or his designee.
F. No transfer of development rights under this ordinance shall be recognized by Frederick County as
valid unless the instrument of transfer contains the transfer of development rights certificate issued
under this section.
§165-302.06. Instruments of Transfer.
A. An instrument of transfer of development rights shall be reviewed and approved as to the form and
legal sufficiency by the County Attorney and, upon such approval, the County Attorney shall notify
the transferor or his or her agent, who shall record the instrument with the Clerk of the Circuit Court
and shall provide a copy to the Commissioner of the Revenue. An instrument of transfer of
development rights shall conform to the requirements of this section and shall contain the
following:
1) The names of the transferor and the transferee;
2) A legal description and plat of the sending property prepared by a land surveyor licensed in the
Commonwealth of Virginia;
3) The transfer of development rights certificate described in §165-302.03F;
4) A covenant indicating the number of development rights remaining on the sending property and
stating that the sending property may not be subdivided to or developed to a greater density
than permitted by the remaining development rights;
5) A covenant that the transferor grants and assigns to the transferee and the transferee's heirs,
assigns, and successors a specific number of development rights from the sending property to a
receiving property;
6) A covenant by which the transferor acknowledges that he has no further use or right of use with
respect to the development rights being transferred; and
7) A covenant that all provisions of the instrument of transfer of development rights shall run with
and bind the sending property and may be enforced by Frederick County.
B. An instrument of transfer of development rights shall be recorded prior to release of development
permits, including building permits, for the receiving property.
E3
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) DRAFT ORDINANCE — March 23, 2010
Part 303 — Transfer Process and Development Procedures.
§165-303.01. Transfer Process.
Development rights shall be transferred using the following process:
A. Following approval of the sending property determination application and issuance of the LETTER
OF INTENT as described in §165-302.05, the Director of Planning and Development or his designee
shall issue the TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE, agreeing to issue a transfer of
development rights in exchange for the proposed sending property deed covenant to which
Frederick County is a party. If a sending property with a TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
CERTIFICATE changes ownership, the letter of intent may be transferred to the new owner if
requested in writing to the Department of Planning and Development by the person(s) that owned
the property when the letter of intent was issued, provided that the documents evidencing the
transfer of ownership are also provided to the Department of Planning and Development.
B. In applying for receiving property or receiving person approval, the applicant shall provide the
Department of Planning and Development with one of the following:
1) A TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE issued in the name of the applicant;
2) A TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE issued in the name of another person or
persons and a signed option to purchase those TDR sending property development rights; or
3) A TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE issued in the name of the applicant or
another person(s) and a copy of a signed option to purchase those TDR sending property
development rights.
C. The receiving property applicant and/or transferee shall deliver the documentation outlined in §
165-303.0113 for the number of TDR development rights being severed or transferred and the TDR
extinguishment document to the County.
D. Development rights from a sending property shall be considered transferred to a receiving property
and/or a transferee and extinguished when the extinguishment document for the sending property
has been recorded.
§165-303.02. Development Approval Procedures.
A. A request to utilize transferred development rights on an eligible receiving property must be in the
form of a Master Development Plan and a Subdivision Design Plan submitted to the Department of
Planning and Development in accordance with the Zoning and Subdivision regulations contained in
Chapters 165 and 144 of the County Code.
B. All subdivisions for receiving properties zoned RA (Rural Areas) utilizing development rights shall be
subject to the same requirements as property zoned RP (Residential Performance) and shall not
qualify for the standards specified in §144-31 of the Frederick County Code.
9
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) DRAFT ORDINANCE - March 23, 2010
C. A final recorded plat for a subdivision using transferred development rights shall contain a
statement setting forth the development proposed, the zoning classification of the property, the
number of development rights used, and a notation of the recordation of the conveyance required
by §165-302.06.
10
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) DRAFT ORDINANCE - March 23, 2010
ARTICLE I
GENERAL PROVISIONS, AMENDMENTS, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
Part 101— General Provisions
165-101.02 Definitions & word usage.
As used in this ordinance, the following words and terms have the meanings specified herein:
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS - the permitted density of development that is allowed on a sending property
under any zoning ordinance of the County on a date of transfer of such rights.
RECEIVING AREA — One or more areas identified in this Chapter and designated by the comprehensive
plan as an area authorized to receive development rights transferred from a sending area.
RECEIVING PROPERTY - A lot or parcel of land within a receiving area and within which development
rights are increased pursuant to a transfer of development rights affixed to the property.
SENDING AREA - One or more areas identified in this Chapter and designated by the comprehensive plan
as an area from which development rights are authorized to be severed and transferred to a receiving
area.
SENDING PROPERTY - A lot or parcel of land in a sending area that is the subject of a transfer of
development rights, where the owner of the parcel is conveying development rights of the parcel, and
on which those rights so conveyed are extinguished and may not be used, by reason of the transfer of
development rights.
EXTINGUISHMENT OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS - The process by which development rights from a sending
property are severed from the sending property to a receiving property or transferee, pursuant to the
transfer of development rights program under Chapter 165 of the County Code.
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS - The procedure prescribed by this ordinance whereby the owner
of a parcel in a sending area may convey development rights to the owner of a parcel in a receiving area
or to another person or entity, whereby the development rights so conveyed are severed or
extinguished on the sending property and may be exercised on the receiving parcel in addition to the
development rights already existing regarding that parcel or may be held by the receiving person or
entity.
TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS - All or that portion of development rights that are transferred
or are transferable.
TRANSFEREE —A person or legal entity that owns property in a receiving area or who receives and holds
development rights from a sending property.
TRANSFEROR — The person or legal entity, including a person or legal entity that owns property in a
sending area, who conveys development rights.
11
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) DRAFT ORDINANCE -March 23, 2010
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS LETTER OF INTENT — A letter issued by the Director of Planning
and Development or his designee determining the number of residential development rights a sending
property has available for transfer to a receiving property or transferee.
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) CERTIFICATE- A letter issued by the Director of Planning and
Development or his designee agreeing to sever a specified number of residential development rights
from a sending property in exchange for a restrictive deed covenant to which Frederick County is a party
to on the sending property that restricts further development.
12
Sending Area #9 'Transfer of
Designated Agricultural Districts
Density Transfer e— Ye l o p e n tRights
i g h is
1 TDR Density Right = 2 Dwelling Units
in the Receiving Area
Sending Area #2
trbonate Bedrock Areas
Density Transfer S�0 n d I n g Areas
1
TDR Density Right = 1.5 Dwelling Units
in the Receiving Area
Sending Area #3
y eivinci Areas
Shale/Sandstone Area
Density Transfer
1 TDR Density Right = 1 Dwelling Units DRAFT
in the Receiving Area i
�r 127
Recieving Areas
Urban Development Area
Per §165-302.02
Rural Community Centers
Areas Not Qualified N.
for the TDR Program
Sewer and Water
Service Area Gane`sboro f' J
* /F/
Clearbrooke
11
I / Stephenson
�8 F,
Round Hill.�m,'
t i
+s Winchester Urban
Development
Area
37 / '+
f <-
a �(522 50 '1,
55 ' Urban
Development • .
/ phens ty Area 4
s + r
Note: Created March 11, 2010
Frederick County Dept of
0 1.5 3 6 Mlles Planning & Development
107 N Kent St, Winchester, VA 22601
540 - 665 - 5651
www.frederickcountyva.gov/planning/
•
C�
•
COUNTY of FREI-) ,R a'CK
Department of Planning and Development
540/655-5651
VAX: 540/665-%539S
LMEMORAN�l�
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: John A. Bishop, AICP, Deputy Director - Transportation
.RE: Six Year Road Improvement Program Public Hearing
DATE: March 24, 2010
This is a public hearing item to consider the updates of the Interstate, Primary, and Secondary
Road Improvement Plans. The Transportation Committee reviewed this item on March 22, 2010
and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Board. Attached please find the current
drafts for your consideration.
You will find that there are no significant changes to the Interstate and Primary plans.
In the Secondary Road Improvements Plan, a number of projects have been added or removed
due to completion or in recognition of County priorities. There has been no need to reprioritize
the Rural Hard surfacing projects this year due to a lack of funding for new projects. Two new
hard surface projects were added to the unscheduled list. These projects are Cattail Road and
Light Road.
Staff is seeking a recommendation for the Board of Supervisors on these road plans.
Attachments
JAB/bad
107 North Keret Street, Suite 202 * Winchester, V rginia 22601-5000
20I0-2,0II
INTERSTATE ROAD IMPROVEMENT T PLAN
for
FI DERIC:I" COUNTV, VIRGINIA
Frederick County Transportation Committee: 03/22/2010
Frederick County Planning Commission:
Frederick County Board of Supervisors:
li-8'1 Im y�oyenientU:
Provide additional travel lanes on the main line, collector -distributor lanes adjacent to the
main line, modifications to existing interchange areas, and develop new interchange areas
and bridge crossings of the main line as recommended by the WinFred MPO Long Range
Plan.
In addition, as the State continues to work toward an ultimate plan for the 1-81 widening,
the County of Frederick continues to support the study of Eastern Route 37 as a potential
corridor on new location as an alternative for that effort.
Moreover, the County of Frederick supports exploration of the potential for rail
transportation as a component of the Interstate 81 Corridor improvements.
A) Progress to Plaas 1 of the FHWA approve: interchange modification to Exit
310
(as illustrated on map as priority A)
B) Relocate Exit 307 further south to alleviate existing and future congestion on
Route 277. There is an urgent need to begin increased study of this project.
(as illustrated on map as priority B)
�) Widen 1-81 from Fairfax Pike to Route 37 North. This should include the
relocation of the 277 Interchange.
From: Route 277, Exit 307
To: Route 37 North, Exit 310
(as illustrated on map as priority C)
Widen Remainder of 1-81 in Fr ed+,rack County
From: West Virginia line
To: Warren County line
(as illustrated on map as priority D)
L+) Spot Improvements on 1-81 in Frederick County. Provide spot
improvements at various interchanges to increase capacity and/or enhance
safety for the motoring public.
5k
Middletown
37 Winchester
Stephens City
W —.
IN
U
2010-2,911
PRIMARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN
for
FR,-EDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
draft
Frederick County Transportation Committee: 03/22/2010
Frederick County Planning Commission:
Frederick County Board of Supervisors:
I) Route 37 Bypass
A. Route 37 - Phase I
Initiate final engineering and design, acquire right-of-way, and establish a construction
phase schedule for the southern segment of the Route 37 Eastern Bypass from Interstate
1-81 to Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South).
(As illustrated on map as priority IA)
B. Note: It is intended that the fust phase of Fairfax Pike (Route 277), as
ident�fled under item #2, shown below, be programmed for construction following the
completion of Please 1 of the Route 37 Eastern Bypass.
(As illustrated on map as priority 1B)
C. Route 37 - Phase 2
Initiate final engineering and design, acquire right-of-way, and establish a construction
phase schedule for the preferred alternative between existing Route 37 around Stonewall
Industrial Park and Route 7.
(As illustrated on map as priority I C)
A Route 37 - Phase 3
Initiate final engineering and design, acquire right-of-way, and establish a construction
phase schedule for the preferred alternative between Route 7 and Route 522.
(As illustrated on map as priority ID)
2) Route 277 (East of Stephens City)
From: I-81/Route 277/Route 647 Intersection (East of Stephens City)
To: Route 340/Route 522 South Intersection (East of Double Toll Gate)
Phase 1: From the 1-81/277 Interchange to Route 636
(As indicated under note for priority 1B)
Phase 2: From Route 636 to Route 340/Route 522
(As indicated on map as priority 2)
Improve to a four lane divided roadway with County staff to work with site developers to
acquire dedicated right-of-way and achieve grading, drainage, and construction
improvements in conjunction with development projects which occur along the corridor
until such time that funding is available for construction.
Establish a construction schedule for the phased improvement of Fairfax Pike (Route
277).
Program funding for the completion of right-of-way acquisition and construction of each
phase as described above.
3) Route 11 (forth and South of Winchester)
A) Establish an Urban Divided Four Lane System
From: Southern limits of the City of Winchester
To: 0.4 miles south of intersection of Route 37 South, Exit 310
(As illustrated on map as priority 3A)
B) Establish an Urban Divided Four Lane System
From: Northern limits of the City of Winchester
To: Intersection of Merchant Street
(As illustrated on map as priority 3B)
C) Establish an Urban Divided Four Lane System
From: Intersection of Merchant Street
To: West Virginia line
(As illustrated on map as priority 3C)
4) South Frederick County Parkway
From: Relocated Exit 307
To: Intersection with Route 277 approximately 1 Mile west of the intersection of
Route 277 and Route 522
This is a planned new roadway with limited access points serving a mixture of
predominantly commercial and industrial development.
There is need to study this project in conjunction with the Exit 307 relocation and
planning for Route 277 improvements noted in item 3.
Phasing of this project is not yet clearly defined, however general phasing would be from
West to East with the clear first phase being from relocated Exit 307 to Warrior Dr.
(As illustrated on map as priority 4)
5) Commuter Park and Ride Lots
Establish a new park and ride facility along the Berryville Pike (Route 7) corridor.
Work with the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission to determine
appropriate locations for park and ride facilities at other strategic locations within
the County's Urban Development Area. For Park and Ride locations in Frederick
County the primary goal should be that they are situated in such a manner that
they reduce traffic in Frederick County in addition to adjacent localities.
(As illustrated on map as priority S)
szz
50 37 �
eQL
11
Winchester
so
so
37
'`" i
37 • ,
11 50 �
.fP�odly IA
Stephens City
Rt277 East of I
Pwrity 1B
V 91
40%.oPdority 38
40%0 Priority X
Map Document: (N:\Planning_A.nd_Development\. RANSPOR?ATION'xRoadtmprovements 2GG9_2010\Primary\2009_2010_ PdmaryRoadimprovements.mA) 7/22/2008 —2:3555 PAA
010/11-20 1 /16
SECONDARY ROAD LVIPROVEM-ENT PLAN
-for
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
Frederick County Transportation Committee: 03/22/2010
Frederick County Planning Commission:
Frederick County Board of Supervisors.
FREDERICK COUNTY
MAJOR ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
20J.101121-01.1 through 201.5/12-10'16
Major road improvement projects command the reconstruction of hardsurfaced roads to
enhance public safety. Improvements required for road width, road alignment, road strength,
and road gradient are considered major road improvements projects.
2
t--
I -
LU
C3
LU
J0
N
Z
LU
Y
H
a
�LL
WV
o
ww
Z
g
o
o
°�
°
g9Z z
Z
a
�W
w
11--
a
LU
LU o
LA
Q
o
<LL
°�
> V
T)N
�
aQ
o
N
o
v
UJ
a
1)
655
Sulphur Springs
Route 50
0.30 M.E.
6000
1.1 miles
SH
$5,798.00
2013
Road
Rt. 656
$1,500,000
2)
672
Brucetown Road
Route 11
0.35 M.
3200
0.35 miles
ST
Significantly
UN/SH
East
Variable
$2,000,000
11
788
East Tevis Street
0.2 Miles
Route 522
N/A
0.2 miles
SH
Revenue
UN/SH
west of Rt.
Sharing
522
4)
719
Warrior Road
Rt. 1012
Rt. 277
N/A
N/A
OP
$200,000
UN/SH
Feasibility
Phase
5)
788
East Tevis Street
1-81
0.2 Mi West
N/A
N/A
SH
$1,400,000
UN/SH
Cover overall
of Rt. 522
Revenue
project needs
Sharing
6)
Renaisance Drive
Route 11
42 Mi.
N/A
.42 Mi.
BC
$2;001,000
UN/SH
Connector
West of
Revenue
road through
Rt. 11
Sharing
commercial/
industrial area
7)
11
Valley Pike
Intersection
N/A
17000
N/A
BC
$100,000
UN/SH
Rt. 706
Revenue
Sharing
8)
11
Martinsburg Pike
Under 81
N/A
16000
0.2 Mi.
ST
$500,000
UN/SH
LF Turn Lns
Overpass
Revenue
SBound @
Exit 317
Sharing
1-81 overpass
9)
642
Tasker Road &
0.10 Miles
0.10 Miles
2010/11
Install left turn
White Oak
W Rt. 636
E Rt. 636
7600
0.2 Mi.
OP
$751,000
lanes
10)
723
Carpers Valley Road
At Clarke
Beyond
Federal bridge
County line
N/A
1100
N/A
SH
$1,262,327
2013
replacement
funding
2
1, Sulpher Springs Rd
O%W2, 6rucetown Rd
d%03, East Tovis St
&%f-4, Warrior Rd
01%o6, East Tevis St
i, Renaissance C1r
7, Valley Pike & Rt 706
S, Martinsburg Pike & 1.81
9, Taker Rd & White Oak
0 10, Carpets Valley Rd
Frederick County
Major Road
Improvement Projects
2010/2011 thru 2014/2015
g 2 4 Miles
FREDERICK COUNTY
HARDSURFACE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
2010/2011 through 2015/2016
Hardsurface road improvement projects provide impervious resurfacing and reconstruction of
non-hardsurfaced secondary roads. Hardsurface improvement projects are prioritized by an
objective rating system, which considers average daily traffic volumes; occupied structures;
physical road conditions including geometrics, drainage, and accident reports, school bus
routing; and the time that project requests have been on the Secondary Road Improvement
Plan_
V
J
Z
W
Q
W L"
w
Q
p
W
�
Y
Z
W
Z
O
O
OWF-
�9Z
U
Z
R'V
UJ
Iw—;—
Qcn
LULU
U)
Z
W
O
D
u_
I—U)
WHO
�..
H
O
FU
E_�
it
L
Q
>}U
Ln
0�
LU
U
QQ
0
��
W
>
�
Q
671
Woodside Road
Rt. 11
0.4 East of
50
0.4 miles
ST
$144,000
UN/SH
Potential Rural
Rt. 11
Rustic/Funding
by Others
709
Ridings Mill Road
Rt. 735
1.3 Mi. S
130
1.3 miles
OP
$175,000
2010/
Potential Rural
Rt. 735
11
Rustic
FREDERICK iOU��ary
mulNSpii-iEDULED
HARDSURFACE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
RATINGS UPDATED
20.1,0112-101-1 through 2015; 2016
W
�
Lu
W
a
N
Z
Fes^
Q
ZLU
�Z
90
Z
W V
Z
o
o
°�
°
LU
a
T�
0
as
o
U
0
�o
1)
709
Ridings Mill
1.30 miles
Route 636
130
1.40
OP
Road
south Rt. 735
miles
2)
676
Warm
Route 677
0.83 miles
230
0.83
ST
Springs Road
north
miles
3)
671
Woodside
Route 669
WV line
250
; 030
ST
Road
! miles
+)
644
East Parkins
Rt. 50 East
Clarke County
260
0.81
Mill Road
miles
SH
76
5)
707
Hollow Road
WV Line
Rt. 610
200
1.6
BC/GA
73
miles
6)
734
North Sleepy
1.27 Mi. S. W.
2.27 Mi. S. W.
140
1.0
GA
73
Creek Road
of Rt. 522
of Rt. 522
mile
7)
692
Pack Horse
12 Mi N. E.
Rt. 671
200
14
GA
71
Road
of Rt. 600
miles
8)
629
Carter Lane
Rt. 631
Rt. 625
290
1.8
BC
71
miles
9)
733
Fletcher Road
Rt. 50 West
Rt. 707 1
120
1.3
GA
70
miles
10)
638
Clark Road
Rt. 625
Rt. 759
70
0.8
BC
69
miles
11)
607
Heishman
Rt. 600
End of State
100
0.78
BC
68
Road
Maintenance
miles
12)
695
Middle Fork
2.3 Mi. N of
WV Line
30
0.9
GA
68
Road
Rt. 522
miles
13)
677
Old Baltimore
Rt. 676
Rt. 672
200
1.2
GA
68
Road
miles
14)
634
Cougill Road
Rt. 635
Rt. 11
130
0.25
BC
67
miles
15)
612
Fishel Road
Rt. 600
Rt. 600
30
1.6
BC
67
miles
16)
629
Laurel Grove
Rt. 622
2.5 Mi. W. of
180
2.5
BC
63
Road
Rt. 622
miles
7)
636
Canterburg tRt.
640
Rt. 641
130
1.5
OP
63
Road
miles
8)
811
Timberlakes
Rt. 671
End of State
180
0.25
ST
63
Lane
Maintenance
miles
W
W
U
V�U-z
LUr
z
�C
wv--
z
r
w
Z=
z
O
Ua
O
o
w
o
jai
Oa
QEF-
aB
O
�
o
�
U
19)
661
Wright Road
Rt. 669
WV Line
140
1.84
ST
61
miles
20)
636
Huttle Road
Rt. 709
Rt. 735
150
1.1
OP
60
miles
21)
730
Babbs
Rt. 654
Rt. 677
50
09
GA
59
Mountain
miles
Road
22)
696
South Timber
Rt. 522
Rt. 694
130
1.3
GA
56
Ridge Road
miles
23)
616
McDonald
Rt_ 608 Mid-
0.44 Mile N.
85
045
BC
41
Road
Int.
Rt. 608
miles
24)
682
Glaize
Rt. 608
Rt. 671
200
1.54
GA
NA
Orchard Rd
Miles
25)
685
Light Road
Rt. 600
Rt. 681
GA
NA
26)
731
Cattail Rd
Rt. 608
Rt. 654
GA
NA
0
Ridings Mill Rd
Frederick County
Warm Springs Rd
Un.Scheduled
Woodside Rd
Hardsurface Road
I 61arkins Mill Rd
0
Ilouo�,�RdImprovement
� Projects
2010/2011 thru 2014/2015
North Sleepy Creek. Rd
Pack l lorsc Rd
Carter Ln
7
I Ltcltcr Rd
Clark Rd
I is i,h�rtutl Rd
�.
Middle fork Rd
Old Baltimore Rd
C'ougill Rd6'
l-
Fishel Rd
•'' 3
18
1-aur0 Grove Rd
t#
Canterhurg Rd
Timberlakes Ln
Wright Rd
Huttle Rd
Rubbs Mountain Rd
_ " � . }f
South Timber Ridge Rd
1 t
!'r
McDonald Ln
Glaice Orchard Rd
Light Rd
m
Catlail Rd
y 0 2 4 PJlifieS
ti
COUNTY of FREBEA RICK
hI -N U u 1„T Department of Planning and Development
5-00/665-5651
FAX: 540/663-6395
Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator ,.'�,;,/
RE: Subdivision Ordinance Variance Request of Robert & Lynda Carpenter
DAT F: March 23, 2010
On behalf of Robert & Lynda Carpenter, Greenway Engineering is requesting exceptions to Section
144-24(B) Lot Requirements and 144-31(C)(3) Rural Subdivisions of the Code of Frederick County,
Chapter 144 Subdivision of Land, to allow the creation of a parcel of land intended to accommodate
the development of the Round Hill Ground Water Storage Tank. Section 144-24(B) states that the
dimensions of all lots shaii conform with the requirements of the Frederick County Code
concerning lot area, minimum lot width, setbacks and other dimensional requirements.
Additionally, Section 144-31(C) (3) states that the minimum width for a shared private
driveway shall be 50 feet. The property is located on the east and west sides of Poorhouse Road,
approximately 0.6 miles north of the intersection with Northwestern Pike (Route 50 West); the
proposed water tank parcel is located on the west side of Poorhouse Road in the Gainesboro
Magisterial District, and is identified by Property Identification Number 52-A-47 and contains
156.57+- acres.
The proposed new parcel will require the following variances to the requirements of Chapter 144:
Allowance of a 0.763 ± minimum lot size for a parcel in the RA Rural Areas District, which
otherwise be a minimum of five acres.
Allowance of reduced setbacks in the RA to establish a 20 foot BRL along the western
property line, which would otherwise be a 60 foot BRL.
➢ Allowance of reduced setbacks in the RA to establish a 25 foot BRL along the southern
property line, which would otherwise be a 60 foot BRL.
➢ Allowance of reduced setbacks in the RA to establish a 40 foot BRL along the northern
property line (owned by Carpenter), which would otherwise be a 100 foot BRL.
➢ Allowance of a new minor rural subdivision parcel to be accessed via a 20 foot, rather than a
50 foot, minimum right-of-way as required. This parcel will have direct access to a state
road (Poorhouse Road Rt. 654) via Skyview Lane.
The proposed new parcel will be provided to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) for
the development of the new Round Hill Ground. Water Storage Tank. Staff would recommend that
this newly created parcel be restricted to public utility use only and the request for variance be
approved. A recommendation from the Planning Commission is requested.
MRC/bad
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 + Winchester, Virginia 22601-50130
Ir
41 1212r '� ( Subdivision Ordinance 'r'ariance
NOh
N
Robert Ft Lynda
f'1,,► . "f Carpenter Current Zoning
�.1f q •i + V1yr y. 47 A 170
FRUIT HILL,OFtCHARn INC.
PIN: 52 -A-47
�IJz
654
52 A 47
" p ZA'
q�
CARPENTER ROBERT N TRUSTEE G
It, R-1
THE R1 I.
r SSGyC� / .ti.
t'.
-yryr� �� •k ■ �O; G
. •a y�� 52 A C
= a" SILVER LAKE LLC
J, 52 A 63 �?
_•� 'A A SILVER LAKE LLC
Case Planner MCheraN
Ir
" inchester,VA
t-,nure RL17 Bypass
ZDniug
Eh](Extrvctive AWnufacturing Diva,id)
h12®duat,ial, General Divirict
M )
t Oht(OBice-hla�ufaaturing Park) (�� Ra
SUB)110_BubDivEaceptivn_Rvbert_Lyntla_Carpenter
Bl (Buvinua, Neighborhood DiaUict)
HE(}Dgryer Educvtion Duirict)
hIF}t(htobile
_ (AanlArca DutrictJ
Q�,i, Urhaa Development A,—
B2(iht—, General Dhlxirt)
":
Flame Commwity ptdr4t)
RJ(Residential Plowed Conwmdry Ubtrict) RP(Anidential Perpa,manc. Duarid)
AU(Indwtrlol, Light Dmhh,t)
y"aj ry15(hl--1 5upparl Divtrict)
16(R-Idential Recreational--ttity—lynx)
N h—A
aar_f Be(&a —, Indmtnal Tnnstwn D,atri t)
wE 0 125250 500 Feet
S
two
A,
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
107 North rent Street ! Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Telephone: 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395
WAIVER/EXCEPTIONS REQUEST APPLICA a ION
1. Applicant:
Name: Greenway
En ineerin,2
Telephone:
(540) 662-4185
Address: 151 Windy
Hill Lane Winchester
VA 22602
2. Property owner (if different than above):
Name: Robert N. & Lynda C. Carpenter Telephone: (540) 662-1179
Address: 516 Poorhouse Road Winchester VA 22603
3. Contact person (if other than above):
Name: Evan Wyatt
Telephone: (540) 662-4185
4. Waiver request detauis (include specific ordinance requirements to he waived):
Please refer to information in cover letter dated March 12 2010.
5. Property Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on
nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route
numbers): Tax map parcel 52-((A))-47 is located on the east and west sides of
Poorhouse Road; approximately 0.6 miles north of the inetrsection with
Northwestern Pike (Route 50 West); the proposed water tank parcel is located on
the west side of Poorhouse Road.
6. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number 52-((A))-47
Magisterial District: Gainesboro
7. Property zoning Pad current use: Zoned: RA, Rural Areas District
Current Use: Residential & Agricultural
8. Attachments: Adjoining Property Owners List X Existing/recorded and
Proposed Plats X
OF'IC , USE (�tA�r .� . 1 ce : $500 enclosed: , f Receipt#:
9. List of Adjoining Pr(;perties: The following names and addresses are all of the
individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to the property for
which the waiver or exception is being sought, including properties at the sides,
rear, and in front of (across street from) the subject property. (Use additional pages
if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this application.
Please refer to attached Adjoining Property Owner Table for mailing notice information.
NAME PROPERTY INFORMATION
Address
Property ID #
Address
Property ID #
Address
Property ID #
Address
Property ID #
Address
Property ID #
Address
Property ID #
Address
Property ID #
Address
Property ID #
Address
Property ID #
TAX MAP NUMBER
OWNER NAME
ADDRESS
CITY & STATE
ZIP CODE
41
A
170
FRUIT HILL ORCHARD INC.
PO BOX 2368
WINCHESTER VA
22604
41
A
175
RACEY CHARLES W & BARBARA H
788 POORHOUSE RD
WINCHESTER VA
22603
41
A
176
COTE VALERIE TURINSKY
753 POORHOUSE RD
WINCHESTER VA
22603
52
A
37
HAINES PHILIP C - HAINES DIANA N
675 POORHOUSE RD
WINCHESTER VA
22603
52
A
37A
HAINES PHILIP C. & DIANA N.
675 POORHOUSE RD
WINCHESTER VA
22603
52
A
38
TRIGGS ERIC A - TRIGGS THERESA JOY
731 POORHOUSE RD
WINCHESTER VA
22603
52
A
39
TRIGGS GARY A
699 POORHOUSE RD
WINCHESTER VA
22603
52
A
41
HAINES DIANA N
675 POORHOUSE RD
WINCHESTER VA
22603
52
A
42
HAINES PHILLIP C - HAINES DIANA N
675 POORHOUSE RD
WINCHESTER VA
22603
52
A
42B
LARSEN RICHARD G & HARRIET J
319 S SAINT ASAPH ST
ALEXANDRIA VA
22314
52
A
46
BURLEY LAURA C
479 POORHOUSE RD
WINCHESTER VA
22603
52
A
46A
MOLDEN REAL ESTATE CORP
2400 VALLEY AVE
WINCHESTER VA
22601
52
A
47
CARPENTER ROBERT N TRUSTEE - CARPENTER LYNDA C TRUSTEE
516 POORHOUSE RD
WINCHESTER VA
22603
52
A
48
FRUIT HILL ORCHARD INC.
PO BOX 2368
WINCHESTER VA
22604
52
A
50
SILVER LAKE LLC
13 S LOUDOUN ST
IWINCHESTER VA
22601
52
A
50A
SILVER LAKE LLC
13 S LOUDOUN ST
WINCHESTER VA
22601
52
A
63
SILVER LAKE LLC - C/O JAMES R WILKINS III
13 S LOUDOUN ST
WINCHESTER VA
22601
' Special Umited Power of Attorney
County of Frederick, Virginia
Frederick Planning Web Site: vww.cu.fredoJck.va.us
Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia,
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601
Facsimile 540-665-6395 Phone 540-665-5651
Know All Men By These Presents: That I (We)
(Name) Robert N. Carpenter, Trustee & Linda C. Carpenter, Trustee (Phone) (,540) 662-1179
(Address) 516 Poorhouse Road Winchester, VA 22603
the owner(s) of all those tracts or parcels of land ("Property") conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the
Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by
Instrument No. 0717603 on Page , and is described as
Parcel: 47 Lot: Block: A Section: 52 Subdivision:
do hereby make, constitute and appoint:
(Name) Greenway Engineering, Inc. (Phone) (540) 662-4185
(Address) 151 Windy Hill Lane, Winchester, VA 22602
To act as my true and lawful attomey-in-fact for and in my (our) name, place and stead with full power and
authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning application for my (our) above described
Property, including:
❑ Rezoning (Including proffers)
❑ Conditional Use Permit
❑ Diaster Development Plan (Preliminary and Final)
® Subdivision
❑ Site Plan
® Variance or Appeal
❑ Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment
My attorney-in-fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to
previously approved proffered conditions except as follows:
This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or
modified.
In witness thergA I (we) have hereto set my (our) hand and seal this i !day ofiviG'.r fZ-00 Zt
Signature(s)
State of Virginia, City ounty f✓'c t.c'Ic: , To -wit:
I, 0bnY LL [, • H fi5o. a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who
signed to the foregoing instrument and who I (are) known to me, personally appeared before me and has
acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this 6H1 day ofkEy ; 26f3 266 c'
Notary Public
Revised 3/17/08
My Commission Expires: Z- ? c:.
Registration c)
? 0 0 >
.�
55
POOH a E
�P a OP
085 T.M. 52 -A -42B Oro L0 31P
QER RICHARD G. LARSEN, ET UX N A 0 p�
0 2
119000 r ZONE: R4 89USE: RES DENTIAL 65PG 1458 5 X10
16.23 ACRESt ;OR
O '5 i
N 074447" E
163.00'
y �1� RA1p E)
$� R (FG6 4 ,
20o08
156PG 38
E 8
SDe N� GRACE- LANE, 2�
L 6 "
EXISTI
PROPOSED o o c i j
to WATER TANK ,
I tV 5747 08 W a a
I\\\ fz
NAIL 100' BRL ¢i ¢ 3i ¢ \m
ryoLZ�^ �
� FOUND ,� Z �
POSGTATE NEW T'AX J W �� Z z
�z aZ
~ 2
' i .
TEl" PAR EL52 -4-47el
oIRS
o W � �
OF SUPERVISORS WAIVER.SEE
TR o'STEES OF THE CA,+ PE TER FAMILY LAND TRUST
"
0.7360 ACRE
`�
m
W z �'�CS
(IN FEET)NO
S 53'17'11' E
F�J�TE
N 53'17'11 " Wooh
462.29' TO RR SPIKE
..
4i
`v o...:":
FOUND CORNER TOSEE
61.00'
'o `�
Z Q) � ¢,IRS:"
AND AREA TABULATION.
i l o•�—,...���4837
h
�W d Z: a)
m i2
No�iuv
�l! WNm��
I :.:-..I
S 36'4249" {y
rte.,
�~Z
mMj�
ti Q
IRS
4i
j . -I
DOT -SHADED AREA DENOTES
AND
m
_
�, h
ISI
A 20' INGRESS/EGRESS
N
\ �mN"—^
I,
UTILITY EASEMENT HEREBY
ESTABLISHED OVER THE
RESIDUE OF T.M. 52-A-47
N W cV
to
Z j �.-:-:.:.:.I
FOR THE BENEFIT OF NEW
TAX PARCEL 52 -A -47A.
REDUCED WIDTH TO BE
~ 2
' i .
ESTABLISHED BY BOARD 50 0 50
S
ROBERT N CARPENTER AND L YNDA C. CARPENTER,
OF SUPERVISORS WAIVER.SEE
TR o'STEES OF THE CA,+ PE TER FAMILY LAND TRUST
�� -v_sx4 k: lyl
SHEET 3. GRAPHIC SCALE
RICHARD A. EDENS y
SCALE: 1" = 50' I a4TE.MARCH 12, 2010
(IN FEET)NO
S 53'17'11' E
. '•"":"
nlillt
w BU DNG RESTRICTION LINES WITH ASTERISK(*) TO BE
462.29' TO RR SPIKE
..
.I ESTABLISHED BY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WAIVER.
FOUND CORNER TOSEE
..I SHEET 4 FOR NOTES, LEGEND, EASEMENT LINE DATA
T.M. 52-A-46.
AND AREA TABULATION.
DEDICA77ON PLAT FOR PROPOSED F.C. S.A. WATER TANK
%�' -
OF
OF A POR77ON OF THE LAPID OF
o ��T,1H
ROBERT N CARPENTER AND L YNDA C. CARPENTER,
It
TR o'STEES OF THE CA,+ PE TER FAMILY LAND TRUST
�� -v_sx4 k: lyl
GAJNESBORO 114GIS7ERML DISTRICT; FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGIN/A
RICHARD A. EDENS y
SCALE: 1" = 50' I a4TE.MARCH 12, 2010
LIC. No. 2550
�., , REENWAY ENGINEERING,. mc.
L
3-,z-kn 4,
�d
151 Windy Hill Lane
SURv�'
Engineers Winchester, Virginia 22602'
Surveyors
'
Telephone: (540) 662-4185
FAX: (540) 722-9528
49285 SHEET 2 OF 4
Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com
SUBD 10-02
NEW TAX
PARCEL
SEE SHEET 2
R
EX. GRAVEL i I GAP Ge
LANE I I II W I PE
II.
I Ip77 O
oQ�:�l ,ice 1 I ] QZnm�� ��gC�
hL
x Q 'm i I `x- �mo�m���o v
oQ�W�u-��Wo
li �Wd 2rn
V��Wc��r'I:'ice I ��Z tih
¢�aWU I I.•1 ���
o N l r.
I.I..-I
l .r.
^' RAILROAD ��+1I�
SPIKE -1-01, i E� 4
FOUND I , I
20' INGRESS -EGRESS AND UTILITY
EASEMENT TO BE ACQUIRED OVER T.M. 52-A-46.
II I
I j I T.M. 52-A-46
I i I I LAURA C. BURLEY
EX. GRAVEL I' li-DB 861 PG 737
LANE I , ZONE. R4 USE RESID.
2.00 ACRES± /
PER DB
J61,W
--------------
- - POORHOUSE ROAD
_ — — — — VA. SECONDARY ROUTE 654
30' PRESCRIPTIVE F1ISEMENT
0.53 1kf1LEf TO 100 0 100
NORTHWESTERN PIKE
U.S. ROUTE 50 NOTE GRAPHIC SCALE
SEE SHEET 4 FOR EASEMENT LINE DATA,
LEGEND, NOTES AND AREA TABULATION. IN FEET)
DEDICATION PLAT FOR PROPOSED F.C.S.A. WATER TANK
OF A PORTION OF THE LAND OF
�p,L'i`ti OF t, I,
ROBERT N CARPENTER AND L YNDA C. CARPENTER,
TR, ST ES OF THE CARPENTER FAMIL Y LAND TRUST
GAINESBORO MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
:J RICHARD A. EDENS y
SCALE. 1" = 100' DATE: MARCH 12, 2010
Lic. No. 2550
GREENWAY'' ENGINEERING=
y
9�d
1 151 Windy Hill Lane
SUR
Engineers
Sun Winchester, Virginia 22602
Surveyors
+ g .
y y
Telephone: (540) 662-4185
FAX.- (540) 722-9528
1 4928S SHEET 3 OF 4
Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com
I SUED 10-02
FASFAAFNT IINF nATA
LINE BEARING DISTANCE
E1
N 5J4252" E
20.91 '
E2
S 53'17'11" E
54.89'
E3
S 53'17'11" E
462.29'
E4
S 364249" W
20.00'
E5
N 53'17'11" W
462.29'
LEGEND
BRL = BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE
PER ZONING ORDINANCE
IRS = 1/2" IRON REBAR & CAP SET
EMMMAW11grzOA
EXISTING AREA OF T.M. 52—A-47 (PER DB 858 PG 175)
LESS NEW TAX PARCEL 52—A -47A (BY CURRENT SURVEY)
RESIDUE OF TAX PARCEL 52—A-47
156.670 ACRE51
— 0.7360 ACRE
155.934 ACRESf
(BY SUBTRACTION)
NOTES
1. NEW TAX PARCEL 52—A -47A IS HEREBY DEDICATED IN FEE SIMPLE TO THE FREDERICK
COUNTY SANITATION AUTHORITY.
2. THE BOUNDARY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THIS PLAT IS BASED ON A CURRENT FIELD
SURVEY BY THIS FIRM.
3. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. EASEMENTS MAY EXIST WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN.
4. THE PROPERTY SHOWN HEREON LIES ENTIRELY WITHIN FLOOD ZONE X, AREAS DETERMINED
TO BE OUTSIDE THE 0.29' ANNUAL CHANCE FLOODPLAIN, PER N.FLP. FLOOD INSURANCE
RATE MAP No. 51069CO205D, DATED SEPTEMBER 2, 2009.
ln9res.90Uress 4sem Pt Note:
The proposed private driveway/road shown hereon is not built according to street
specifications of and will not be maintained by, the Virginia Department of Transportation
or Frederick County. The improvement and maintenance of said driveway/road shall be
the sole responsibility of the owners of lots which are provided with access via the
driveway/road. Said driveway/roads will not be considered for inclusion into the state
secondary system until they meet the applicable construction standards of the Virginia
Department of Transportation. The cost of bringing said driveway/road to acceptable
standards shall not be borne by the Virginia Department of Transportation nor by
Frederick County.
DEDICATION PLAT FOR PROPOSED F.C.S.A. WATER TANK
OF A POR77ON OF THE LAND OF LTH OF .
r
ROBERT CARPENTER A;W L yNDA c CARPENrE,57�;ky6,
TRUSTEES OF THE CARPENTER trAiVil, Y LAND TRUST
WNESBORO MAGIVERML DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA €�, RICHARD A. EDENS y
SCALE: N/A DATE. MARCH 12, 2010 Llc. No. 2550
GREENWAY ENGINEERING iNc. � 3-izoo p �
{�
151 Windy dill Lane ' w � STTTRgs
Engine ers Winchester, rirginia 22602 a '
Surveyors Telephone: (540) 662-4185
FAX: (540) 722-9528 49285 SHEET 4 OF 4
Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com I SUBD 10-02
Fox Ridge Farm
516 Poorhouse Road
Winchester, VA 22603
March 15, 2010
Frederick County Planning Department
Attn: Mark Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, VA 22601
RE: Robert N. & Lynda C. Carpenter Subdivision Ordinance Exception
Dear Mark:
I am writing to acknowledge the support of my wife and I for an application to seek a variance
from certain restrictions in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance that would permit us to
complete a minor subdivision transfer to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. The
specific request has been outlined in a letter from Greenway Engineering which has prepared
the application on our behalf.
The project in question is to construct a water storage tank that will serve the Round Hill service
area. We have worked with the developers to ensure the structure is fenced and a screen of
natural trees is incorporated into the site to protect our adjoining land and the view shed of our
neighbors. We request the waivers to permit the designated site and this project to move
forward.
Sincerely,
L
Robert N. Carpenter
UREENWAY1 ENGINEERING,,
151 Windy Hill Lane
Winchester, Virginia 22602
i
Founded in 1911
March 12, 2010
Frederick County Planning Department
Attn: Mark Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, VA 22601
RE: Robert N. & Lynda C. Carpenter Subdivision Ordinance Exception
Dear Mark:
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with information pertaining to tax map parcel
52-((A))-47 currently owned by Robert N. Carpenter and Lynda C. Carpenter. Per our
discussion, the Carpenter's are working to establish a new tax parcel under the minor
rural subdivision procedures, which will be provided to the Frederick County Sanitation
Authority (FCSA) for the development of the new Round Hill Ground Water Storage
Tank. Tax map parcel 52-((A))-47 is located on the east and west side of Poorhouse Road
(Route 654) in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. This parcel is approximately 156.57±
acres and has an existing residence, which is located on the portion of the parcel on the
west side of Poorhouse Road. The proposed Round Hill Ground Water Storage Tank will
also be located on the portion of the parcel on the west side of Poorhouse Road.
Greenway Engineering has prepared a preliminary plat exhibit that demonstrates the
potential configuration of the new tax parcel associated with the new Round Hill Ground
Water Storage Tank. This new tax parcel is approximately 0.736± acres and is located on
the north and east sides of Skyview Lane, which is a shared variable width private
driveway. The preliminary plat exhibit provides for the location of the new Round Hill
Ground Water Storage Tank with the proposed building restriction lines that would be
created from Skyview Lane and the Carpenter parcel.
Section 144-5 of the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance states that the Board of
Supervisors may grant variations in or exceptions to the provisions of Chapter 144. The
Carpenter's are requesting exceptions to Section 144-24(B) and 144-31(C)(3) of the
Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance. Section 144-24(B) of the Frederick County
Subdivision Ordinance states that the dimensions of all lots shall conform with the
requirements of the Frederick County Code concerning lot area, minimum lot width,
setbacks and other dimensional requirements. Additionally, Section 144-31(C)(3) states
that the minimum width for a shared private driveway shall be 50 feet. The new FCSA
tax parcel will require the following exceptions to the requirements of Chapter 144:
Engineers Surveyors Planners Environmental Scientists
Telephone 540-662-4185 FAX 540-722-9528
File #4928S/EAW wovw.greegiwayeng.com Subdivision Ordinance Exception
➢ Allowance of a 0.763± minimum lots size for a parcel in the RA, Rural Areas
District.
A Allowance of reduced setbacks in the RA, Rural Areas District to establish a 20'
BRL along the western property line, which would otherwise be a 60' BRL.
➢ Allowance of reduced setbacks in the RA, Rural Areas District to establish a 25'
BRL along the southern property line, which would otherwise be a 60' BRL.
➢ Allowance of reduced setbacks in the RA, Rural Areas District to establish a 40'
BRL along the northern property line (owned by Carpenter), which would
otherwise be a 100' BRL.
➢ Allowance of a new minor rural subdivision parcel that does not provide for a 50'
minimum right-of-way as a shared private driveway.
Greenway Engineering has provided the information required to process this Subdivision
Ordinance Exception request, including this cover letter explaining the request, a Special
Limited Power of Attorney form, a $500.00 processing fee, a preliminary plat exhibit,
and property deed information for tax parcel 52-((A))-47. Please process this information
for inclusion on the next available Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors
agenda in order to determine if the Carpenter's will be authorized to proceed with final
subdivision plat approval that will be provided to the FCSA for the development of the
new Round Hill Ground Water Storage Tank. Please advise me if you need any
additional information at this time and we will provide it to you immediately.
Sincerely,
Evan Wyatt, AIC
Greenway Engineering
Cc: Robert N. Carpenter & Lynda C. Carpenter
File #4428S/EAW 2 Subdivision Ordinance Exception