The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 10-07-09 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia October 7, 2009 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) Adoption of Agenda: Pursuant to established procedures, the Planning Commission should adopt the Agenda for the meeting................................................................ (no tab) 2) August 19, 2009 and September 2, 2009 Minutes........................................................... (A) 3) Committee Reports.................................................................................................. (no tab) 4) Citizen Comments.................................................................................................... (no tab) PUBLIC HEARING 5) Rezoning #07-09 of the Burns Property — Valley Mill Road, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, to rezone 1.26 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Uses. The properties are located in the northwest corner of the intersection with Valley Mill Road (Route 659) and Martin Drive, in the Red Bud Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 54 -A -112Q, 54 -A -112D and 54 -A -112P. Mr. Ruddy........................................................................................................................ (B) 6) Senseny Road Enhancement Grant Application. Staff is seeking a recommendation from the Board of Supervisors to apply for Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Enhancement Grant Funds for bicycle and pedestrian paths along Senseny Road in the vicinity of Senseny Road Elementary School. Mr. Bishop....................................................................................................................... (C) PUBLIC MEETING 7) Conditional Use Permit #05-09 for Roger Jenkins, fora Public Garage Without Body Repair. This property is located at 190 Boggess Lane, and is identified with Property Identification Number 41-10-9 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Mr. Cheran....................................................................................................................... (D) 8) Waiver Request of Linda Brewer/Ruby Springs, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, of the Code of Frederick County, Subdivision of Land, Chapter 144, Article V Design Standards, §144-17 Streets, (G) (1), Cul-de-sac, to allow cul-de-sac length of approximately 1,086 feet, 86 feet more than the allowed length of 1,000 feet. The property is located northeast of Red Bud Road (Route 661), 1,300 feet west of its intersection with Morgan Mill Road, in the Stonewall Magisterial District, and is identified by Property Identification Number Mr. Johnston ............... ..... (E) FILE COPY COMMISSION DISCUSSION 9) Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 165 Zoning, Article VI Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Part 605 OM Office -Manufacturing Park District. Revisions to the OM District to include additional uses and revised design standards. Mrs. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (F) 10) Other • �7 MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on August 19, 2009. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chainnan/Mernber at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Opequon District; Brian Madagan, Opequon District, Gary R Oates, Stonewall District, Lawrence R Ambrogi, Shawnee District; H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; George J. Kriz, Gairresboro District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Kevin O. Crosen, Back Creek District; Gregory S. Kerr, Red Bud District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Roderick Williams, Legal Counsel; and Gary Loi of,, Board of Supervisors Liaison. ABSENT: Richard Ruck -man, Stonewall District STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Plarming Director; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Plan nuig Director; Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator-, and Bev Dellinger, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Upon motion made by Conunissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the Plannuig Commission unanimously adopted the August 19, 2009 agenda for this evening's meeting. MINUTES TTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Conunissioner Thomas, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the minutes of the July 15, 2009 meeting. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 19, 2009 Page 2513 F T YA -2 - COMMITTEE REPORTS Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee (CPPC) — 7/21/09 Mtg. Conmiissioner Kriz reported that the CPPC met to consider the Rock Harbor CPPA (Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment) which was forwarded by the Board of Supervisors. Corrnnissioner Kriz said the Board is going to pursue this proposal and Commissioner Oates will take the lead for this. Commissioner Kriz said a meeting.has been scheduled for August 28, 2009, to discuss the proposal further. CITIZEN COMMENTS Chairman Wilmot called for public continents on any subiect not on the Corr nission's agenda for this evening. No one came forward to speak. PUBLIC HEARING Conditional Use Permit 905-09 of Roger "Penkins for a public garage without body repair at 190 Boggess Lane. This property, zoned RA (Rural Areas), is identified with P.I.N. 41-10-9 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Action — Tabled for 45 Days Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, reported that public garages without body repair are permitted ul the RA (Rural Areas) District NNT1th an approved CUP (conditional use permit), provided that all repair work takes place entirely withal an enclosed structure. Mr. Cheran said the proposed use will be conducted in an existing structure, approximately 4,800 square feet in size, on a 77 -acre parcel. He said the property and surrounding properties are zoned RA and are heavily wooded with natural screening for this proposed use; the nearest buildings or dwellings are more than 100 feet from the property. Mr. Cheran said no more than five vehicles awaiting repair will be allowed at one time and no employees will be allowed with the proposed use. In addition, there will be no vehicle sales, nor unrelated repair sales, allowed by the CUP. Mr. Cheran read a list of recommended conditions, should the Planning Commission find the use to be appropriate, as follows: All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. The applicant will be limited to repairing only five vehicles on site at any time. 3. Vehicles awaiting repair shall be screened by an opaque fence. 4. Operation limited to the applicant, no employees. 5. All repair activities shall occur entirely within the enclosed structure. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2�) 14 Minutes of August 19, 2009 Y-- AAM, V V -3- 6. The applicant shall apply for and install an approved septic system within three years (Septernber 9, 2012) of the approval date of this conditional use penult_ 7. This conditional use permit shall be void and XVIII be revoked, if Condition #6 is not implemented_ Any proposed business sign shall conform to the cottage occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four square feet in size and five feet in height. 9_ Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 10. Any expansion or change of use shall require a new conditional use pen -nit. Mr. Cheran explained that some of the conditions have been amended as a result of conversations between the staff and the applicant and he proceeded to review those amendments with the Connmission. Regarding Condition #9, he said the hours of operation have been amended to read, Hours of operation shall be front 8.00 am. until 6:00 p.m. No repair activities shall take place on Sundays_ Mr. Cheran said the applicant has agreed to install signs at the entrance to Boggess Lane which shall state, Children Playing, 1 Smph Speed Limit, and Private Residence No Trespassing. Mr. Cheran stated that installation of these signs will be mandated by Conditions 411 and # 12. Commissioner Kriz asked if Boggess Lane was a private road and if there was an existing road maintenance agreement. Mr. Cheran replied that Boggess Lane was a private road; however, Boggess Lane did not have an existing road maintenance agreement. Commissioner Triplet inquired if the hours of operation included the times when vehicles could be dropped off for repair or picked up_ Commissioner Triplett believed Condition 49, the hours of operation, should be more specific so that vehicles are not dropped off or picked up outside of the designated 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. hours of operation. Commissioner Triplett expressed a concern with opening up a private road for use by the public. Referring to Condition #6, regarding the requirement for an approved septic system, Coin nissioner Thomas asked if any type of approved health system could be installed within the three-year period or if it was restricted specifically to a spray irrigation septic system. Mr. Cheran replied that any approved septic system installed within the three-year period would satisfy this specific Health Department requirement. Commissioner Oates commented that the application stated the property consisted of 88 acres and the staff's report indicated the property was 77 acres. Mr. Cheran replied that the tax record indicated the property was 77 acres. Commissioner Ambrogi noted that when he visited the site, there appeared to be a gravel easement going from Bethel Church Road to the applicant's property. Conunissioner Ambrogi inquired if it would be possible for the applicant's customers to use the gravel easement instead of Boggess Lane to avoid disturbing the neighbors_ Mr. Cheran said he discussed this with the applicant; however, the issue becomes one of whether customers will be able to locate the applicant's business in terms of the signage. He said the code does not allow a cottage occupation sign to be located on an adjoining property. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2515 Minutes of August 19, 2009 LID!, !,l -4 - Mr_ Roger Jenkins, the applicant and owner of the property, was present to answer questions. Commissioner Unger asked Mr. Jenkins if the property owners had approached him about participating in a road maintenance agreement and if he would be willing to share in the cost ofroad maintenance. Commissioner Unger said upon talking with the neighbors, it seemed they didn't have a problem with Mr. willing to share the expense of maintaining the road; he said Jenkins' business, as long as all the neighbors were they were also concerned for the safety of the neighborhood children. Mr. Jenkins said he received a letter yesterday afternoon regarding a road maintenance agreement; however he and his wife have not yet had an opportunity to look over the information. He said he wasn't saying no to the maintenance agreement, but he wanted to have time to think- about the issues. Mr. Jenkins said he has a deeded right-of-way on Boggess Lane and has a right to use it; however, he purchased the other right-of-way to stay off Boggess Lane as much as possible. He said he would be satisfied using the other entry, but questioned using it for his business. Commissioner Thomas asked Mr. Jenkins if he did normal automobile maintenance or if he intended to do block modification, welding, cutting, or fabrication or use break machines. Comm�issioner Thomas was concerned if there would be a lot of noise generated with this repair business. Mr. Jenkins replied that he repairs automatic transmissions and he did not anticipate generating a lot of noise. He said he may possibly get three vehicles per week and this was normal maintenance and equipment. Commissioner Triplett asked Mr. Jenkins if he had a problem with having vehicle drop off and pick up within the designated business hours. Mr. Jenkins replied no, he did not have a problem with it. Chairman Wilmot asked the staff if it was typical to have maintenance agreements on private roads in the County. Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, stated it is not typical as far as a CUP; however, when subdivisions occur, the County has notations placed on the plats to state that road maintenance is the property owners' responsibility. He said the new ordinances state that property owners associations must be created. Mr. LaNATence said the easement for Boggess Lane was created in the early 1990s and there were no requirements at that time. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Thomas Amari, a resident at 285 Boggess Lane, said the right-of-way down Boggess Lane was never intended for conunercial use and his primary concern was safety. Mr. Amari said Boggess Lane is a single lane, private road serving two subdivisions, one on the left and one on the right, and ten residential lots are platted. He said that once all the housing is built, there will be anywhere between 20-40 vehicles traveling this single, one -lane road. Mr. Amari said there are hills and turns do,,wgi Boggess Lane and there is poor visibility in seeing vehicles or people. He was concerned about the safety of the neighborhood children while playing or catching the school bus; he said the corner of Boggess Lane and Old Bethel Church Road is a designated bus stop area. Mr. Amari suggested that Mr. Jenkins use his other existing access road, instead of Boggess Lane, and ifhe does use Boggess Lane, he believed Mr. Jenkins should widen the road to enable two vehicles to pass each other. Mr. Amari said if Mr. Jenkins would do these suggestions, he would not be opposed to his CUP. Ms. Diane Michael, 241 Boggess Lane, said she and her husband, Steve, were the first people to purchase property on Boggess Lane; she said they purchased 10 acres in 1994. She said the deed covenants state the property is not to be used for business. Ms. Michael said there was simply a dirt path and a road had to be made. She said it was originally established that from the beginning point of Route 608 to the end of Parcel 8A, Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 19, 2009 Page 2516 -5 - where Boggess Lane ends, the road would serve Parcels A through D, inclusive, and maintenance was to be shared by those lot owners. Ms. Michael said the property owners of Lots A, B, C, and D have historically shared the cost of the road, without a maintenance agreement, because those were the only lots recorded to use Boggess Lane. Ms. Michael said the property owned by Mr. and Mrs. Jenkins was not addressedm' the Boggess Lane road agreement recorded in the court house. She said that land was fanned before there were any structures on it and the farmland was accessed through the entrance next to the Old Bethel Church. Ms. Michael said one of the reasons she and her husband purchased their property was because it was on a private lane and they didn't have to worry about safety for their children; she did not think the road should be used for business use. Ms. Michael said she believed she was speaking for all of the residents living on Boggess Lane that Mr. Jenkins should use his easement road for his public garage business and this will alleviate many of the issues they have about Boggess Lane. She said if the CUP goes forward as presented this evening and the applicant uses Boggess Lane for his business, the residents would like consideration of the following issues: they are in the process of preparing a road maintenance agreement and would like consideration ofthis CUP to be tabled until the property owners have entered into an agreemeait. Secondly, the property owners are concerned about the safety of neighborhood children; two vehicles cannot pass aiung Boggess Lane at one time and there are blind spots. Ms. Michaels said the residents would like to have a 15mph speed lunit sign to be installed at the entrance into Boggess Lane. In addition, they would like a "nvatch for children" sign to be placed halfway down the entrance, about 500 feet. She said the residents agree with the revised hours of operation, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., writh no work on Sundays. Conmussioner Kriz said there Awill be many more cars on Boggess Lane in the future after more residences are constructed; he said Mr. Jenkins will have very few vehicles per week compared to when the subdivision is built out. Conunissioner Kriz asked if this was taken into consideration when the residents were talking about the maintenance agreement. Ms_ Michael responded that Boggess Lane is a private road for the residents that live there, not for strangers coining in that no one knows who they are. Ms. Michael stated there are two sections to Boggess Lane. She said the road maintenance agreement they are asking everyone to enter into, including the Jenkins, is from the point of Route 608 to the beginning of the gate of the Jenkins property, which is only about one-third of Boggess Lane. She said the Jenkins' were not asked to participate in the remainder of Boggess Lane because they would have no reason to go any further, the rest of the landoNvners would be accessing that portion. Mrs. Staci Amari, wife of Thomas Amari who previously spoke, said she has lived at 285 Boggess Lane for 14 years. Mrs. Amari presented the Commission with a copy of a map and survey of Boggess Lane and the existing subdivision. Mrs. Amari was opposed to the requested CUP because of safety concems for her children and the other neighborhood children; she said children walk to the school bus stop at the corner of Boggess Lane and Old Bethel Church Road. She questioned whether some of the vehicles Mr. Jenkins repairs would need to be hauled in with a tow truck or flatbed vehicle because the road has only a t1vo-inch base and is not intended for large equipment or heavy vehicles; she said the road is currently in need of repair. She remarked that some of Mr. Jenkin's customers have been using the lane and travel at a high rate of speed; she said his customers stop at her home and inquire how they are supposed to pick up their vehicles because the gate on Mr. Jenkins' entrance is locked. She said his customers use her driveway to turn around. Mrs. Amari also had concerns about allowing a pump and haul system for three years. She was concerned the system would not be properly maintained and could contaminate her groundwater. She said the Rural Areas Policy states that pump and haul should only be used in worse -case scenarios and was not intended for new businesses. Mrs. Amari said she would not be opposed to the CUP, if Mr. Jenkins would use his own easement as the commercial access for his business, if he installed a fence to screen all activities related to the business, and if no utilities serving his business have a Boggess Lane address. She said if Mr. Jenkins uses Boggess Lane, he should place appropriate speed limit and watch children signs. Frederick County Plamning Commission Page 2517 Minutes of August 19, 2009 0 W QM. Mrs. Amari also presented a letter from Sarah McClellan, M.D. and David McClellan, M -D., residents at 456 Marple Road, who could not be present this evening, and who requested that their letter be read, as follows: "August 15, 2009, To Whom It May Concern, We concur with the concerns expressed by Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Amari. We would like to also state that the Jenkins' plans are not in the best interest of the community as a whole_ We live in an amazing rural area and we should all strive to be good stewards of the land. We have lived in many different areas and visited many other places. Frederick County, Virginia, is one of the most beautiful areas we have ever seen, but it is in danger of losing the character that makes it so special. The land that the Jenkins own has a historic graveyard on it that is meaningful to all in the community since some of the original settlers of our county are buried there. We agree that allowing a public garage in this area would be deleterious to the entire community and alter the land in a destructive, negative fashion which will be very difficult, if not impossible, to reverse for future generations. Sincerely, Sarah McClellan, M.D. and David McClellan, M.D." Mrs. Nancy Jenkins, wife of Mr. Roger Jenkins, the applicant, came forward to address some of the continents that were made by the neighbors. Mrs. Je�-ikins said their business is currently operating at their residence at 278 Old Bethel Church Road, under an approved CUP, and this is where customers are currently coming to drop off and pick up vehicles. She said the gate is locked for security reasons, because they have their fanii equipment stored in the building. Mrs. Jenkins said her family farms this land and she is a fourth generation farmer; she said they purchased this property for its beauty and to preserve it. Mrs. Jenkins said they constructed the building to house their farm equipment and as they are getting older, it made better sense to use the newer building for the garage, which is the reason they started this process. Mrs. Jenkins stated that the McClellan's house is at least a mile from her property. Mrs. Jenkins said after they purchased this property, Mrs. McClellan wanted her to put up a board fence because she had horses. Mrs. Jenkins said she had no reason to put up a fence, but shared the cost to get along with the neighbors. She said her family helps to maintain the graveyard and regularly brush hogs the area so visitors are able to access it. She said all they are asking is to operate a one- person garage to work on transmissions. She said at the most, her husband could only fix two vehicles per week; she said this is not going to be a Jiffy Lube or a Seven -Eleven; she said there will not be a lot of traffic. Mr. Thomas Looker, at 461 Hidden Valley Lane, said he is opposed to arty change in zoning. He did not want to see any commercial uses established. Connnissioner Oates suggested to Mr. Looker that he read the RA (Rural Areas) section of the Zoning Ordinance because other uses besides residential were permitted in this district, such as a church, a livestock exchange, a store that sells agricultural products, and other businesses. Mr. Gregory Bishop, Back Creek District, said that Stacey Amari was his daughter and he is possibly interested in building a home ui this area sometime in the future. Mr. Bishop said that pump and haul trucks are heavy and will cause more wear on this road. Mr. Bishop said the issue is the use of Boggess Lane for Mr. Jenkins' business traffic and the «year and tear on the road. No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public continent portion of the hearing. Commissioner Kriz asked for the County Attorney to speak regarding the issue of a commercial business using a private road. Mr. Rod Williams, the County Attorney, stated that in terms of the County's consideration of a CUP, conditions may be placed on the permit, legally including a condition regarding a road maintenance agreement for upkeep of a road to particular standards. Mr. Williams said the bigger issue for the County comes front the practical side; for example, if the maintenance agreement simply states that a maintenance agreement must be in place, whether it is abided by is out of the hands of the County. If the condition in the CUP states that the maintenance agreement must be in place and abided by, the practical problem for the County is that Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 19, 2009 Page 2518 the Conunission and the Board of Supervisors would end up being charged with the responsibility ofpolicing the compliance. He said this function is better reserved for the courthouse than for the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, as a practical matter. Commissioner Thomas asked the staff if the Jenkins' had an easement to use Boggess Lane and Mr. Cheran replied yes. Commissioner Thomas said the Jenkins have as much right to use this road as any ofthe tin r residents Cor is mer 1 l,0 a ; ' �'- s was very good and e e .rn sic mas sa�u ,r� order pug u„s u, perspective, it Mr. Jenkin active at repair, lie could work on five vehicles per day; he said that would be ten trips per day which is an equivalent number of trips generated by one house. He said if one additional house is built on one of the vacant lots, it would generate as much or more traffic as Mr_ Jenkins' public garage would generate. Commissioner Thomas said this brings to light one of the County's problems with private roads; lie said private roads relate to the maintenance and does not relate to the use when it is within a subdivision. He said anyone in the subdivision with an easement has just as much right to use the road as anyone else. He said because it is a private road does not give one resident the right to restrict another resident from using it. Conunissioner Unger agreed this business would probably not create a lot of additional traffic and would probably generate as much as an additional residence. However, he believed Mr. Jenkins should pay his share of road maintenance costs, if the other property owners are interested in doing a road maintenance agreement. Conunissioner Triplett also agreed that Mr. Jenkins should participate with the maintenance on the road. Commissioner Kriz said that in order to provide some time for the residents to get a road maintenance agreement worked out, he would move to table the CUP for 45 days to promote harmony among the neighbors. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Triplett and passed by a majority vote_ BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Cormnission does hereby table Conditional Use Permit 405-09 of Roger Jenkins for a public garage at 190 Boggess Lane for 45 days in order to provide the property owners along Boggess Lane the opportunity to work out a road maintenance agreement. The majority vote was as follows: YES (TO TABLE): Mohn, Kerr, Triplett, Kriz, Wilmot, Manuel, Ambrogi, Crosen, Unger NO: Madagan, Thomas, Oates (Note: Commissioner Ruckman was absent from the meeting_) Frederick County Plaiuning Commission Page 2519 Minutes of August 19, 2009 D W" S ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Conmiissioner Triplett, the meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. by a unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, June M. Wilmot, Chairman Eric R Lawrence, Secretary Frederick County Planning Conunission Minutes of August 19, 2009 Page 2520 MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on September 2, 2009. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chainnan/Member at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Opequon District; Brian Madagan, Opequon District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; Richard Ruckman, Stonewall District; Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Shawnee District; H. Paige Manuel, Sha«glee District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Kevin O. Crosen, Back Creek District; Christopn-er M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Roderick Williams, Legal Counsel; and Gary Lofton, Board of Supervisors Liaison, ABSENT: Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director, Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Achninistrator, Candice E. Perkins, Senior Plammer, and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. REMEMBRANCE AND RESOLUTION FOR COMMISSIONER GREGORY S. KERR Chairman Wilmot invited the Planning Commission, staff, and others present to stand for a moment of silence in remembrance of Commissioner Gregory S. Kerr, who passed away on August 29, 2009. Commissioner Mohn read a Resolution of Appreciation for Conmzissioner Kerr on behalf of the Planuling Commission. Supervisor Philip E. Lemieux remembered Commissioner Kerr as dedicated representative for the Red Bud District, an enthusiastic and knowledgeable leader in Frederick County, and a devoted husband and father. Supervisor Lemieux asked all present to keep alive the memory of Greg Kerr and his many accomplishments and he thanked Greg Kerr for his service and efforts to make everyone's lives better. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2521 Minutes of September 2; 2009 Do Nu � V T -2 - ADOPTION OF THE SEPTEMBER 2, 2009, AGENDA Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Thomas, the Planning Cormnission unanimously adopted the September 2, 2009, agenda for this evening's meeting. COMMITTEE REPORTS Development Review & Regulations Committee (DRRC) — 8/27/09 Mtg. Commissioner Thomas reported that the DRRC discussed a number of ordinance changes wb&h included the Rural Area (RA) District revisions, Health System and Sewage Disposal ordinance revisions, and an ordinance revision to include commercial indoor recreation as a permitted use in the M1 Zoning District. Transportation Committee — 8/24/09 Mtg. Conmiissioner Kriz reported that the Transportation Committee acted on the following agenda items: 1) A reconunendation was sent to the Board to fund the I-81 Corridor Coalition' the amoiult of $500 per year for two years. 2) A recommendation was sent to the Board to add additional rail access in the Kemstown/Shady Elm Road area which would allow Annandale M11INvork to expand their business and potentially develop new business. 3) A recommendation was sent to the Board to allow the County Administrator or his/her designee to have VDOT Signatory Authority. 4) An update was presented on Warren County's truck restrictions in relation to Double Church Road. 5) An update was presented on VDOT's Economic Development Access Road Policy. The maximum annual unmatched allocation per locality has been increased from $300,000 to $500,000. The requirement for private capital outlay was reduced from $10 to $1 to $5 to $1. 6) A recommendation was sent to the Board to support the request of the Northern Shenandoah Regional Commission to purchase buses and shelters for the Park and Ride lots. No funds were requested from the Board. Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee (CPPC) — 8/28/09 Mtg. Commissioner Oates reported that two committees met. Coimnissioner Oates reported that the CPPC discussed the addition of the Perry property on Route 50 with the golf course. He said the committee decided to make a revision to the existing Round Hill Plan and directed Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, to look into forming either a new zoning district or an overlay district. He said Mr. Ruddy will present both options to the connnittee next Wednesday, September 9. Commissioner Oates said the Community Facilities Subcommittee with Jim Golladay met and they reviewed their portion of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. He said committee members also spoke with a couple of different agencies about getting ready for the CIP (Capital Improvements Plan) this year. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September 2, 2009 Page 2522 CITIZEN COMMENTS Chairman Wilmot called for public comments on any subject not on the Commission's agenda for this evening. No one carne forward to speak. PUBLIC HEARING Conditional Use Permit 906-09 of Powell's Investments, LLC for a public garage without body repair at 214 Waterloo Court. This property, zoned RA (Rural Areas), is identified with P.I.N. 65-A-130 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Action — Reconmmended Approval Zoning and Subdivision Achninistrator, Mark R. Cheran, reported that public garages without body repair are permitted in the RA (Rural Areas) District with an approved CUP (conditional use permit), provided all repair work takes place entirely within an enclosed structure. Mr. Cheran said the proposed use will be conducted in an existing 2,408 square -foot structure, on a _33 -acre parcel. He said the staff is recommending that only two employees be allowed with this proposed use and no more than five vehicles awaiting repair be allowed at one time. Mr. Cheran said this property is not in an area where a small area land use study has been adopted; however, land use goals for the rural areas of the county identify the importance ofmaintaining the rural character in areas outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA)_ He noted that this proposed public garage is surrounded by RA -zoned properties with residential dwellings; he said careful consideration should be taken to mitigate any negative unpacts to adjacent properties, and additional conditions may be warranted. Mr. Cheran next read a list of recommended conditions, should the Commission find this use to be appropriate. Conunissioner Thomas remarked that the permit states the property has been used for business since the 1960s; he asked if this property has been grandfathered or if it has been operating without a permit and in violation for that long. Mr. Cheran replied this is where Mr. Powell's business actually started; however, he grew out of this location and moved to an industrial park. Mr. Cheran said the building was then used for a woodworking shop from 2001 through 2009. Mr. Cheran explained that this application for a CUP is in response to a zoning violation that staff received. He said the applicant was cited for operation of a public garage without an approved CUP; he said obtaining a CUP is an available option to resolve this violation. Conmiissioner Mohn asked if the complaint the staff received was about its operation and impacts or was it exclusively because there was a business and its legitimacy. Mr. Cheran replied that the complaint arose from an advertisement that appeared on Route 50 and coupons sent through the mail; he said the complaint did not arise from activities at the site. Chairman Wilmot inquired about the Health Department continents and if the pump and haul option was due to the absence of a well and septic system. Mr. Cheran stated that the County Administrator's Office will approve Mr. Jenkins' pump and haul permit, if the CUP is approved. He said if the applicant cannot meet the Health Department requirements of the pump and haul permit, the CUP will be void. Comrmissioner Unger asked about the proposed screening for the site and Mr. Cheran explained where the applicant has agreed to place opaque fencing. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September 2, 2009 % Page 2523 -4 - Mr_ John Powell, the applicant and owner of the property, said the subject property is currently leased. Mr. Powell asked the Commission about amending two of the recommended conditions: Condition 42, he asked if it could be rewritten to state, "The applicant will be limited to only five vehicles on site at anytime awaiting repair," and Condition #4, rewritten to state, "Operation limited to up to four employees." Responding to a previous question about the Health Department requirements, Mr. Powell said a health system is currently on site with indoor facilities; he commented there was never an issue with its operation. Mr. Powell described the health system on the site as a pit privy; he said this type of system was installed back in the 50's. He explained that a hole is dug and filled with gravel and lined with pipe. He said the location was a distance from water streams and sources. Mr. Powell said there is a Class 3B water well on the site. Mr. Powell explained that this building was used as a trucking terminal prior to 1970; he said he moved his company there in 1989. Mr. Powell believed he was grandfathered regarding the use of this site; he noted that back in 1990-91, he received county approval to place a business sign on Route 50. He commented the site has never been vacant. Mr. Powell pointed out the locations where he planned to place the opaque fencing. He added that all work will be done inside the building and he did not believe noise would create an impact. Conrmussioner Thomas asked if there would be an oil and grease separator or any floor drains. Mr. Powell replied no; he said the mechanic uses a refinery to dispose of oil and grease. Commissioner Crosen asked Mr. Powell if he had recently dug up the health system to see if it was work -Ing properly and Mr. Powell replied that he did so a couple months ago and everything looked operational. Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing and asked for anyone wishing to speak regarding this proposed CUP. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public hearing. Conunissioner Manuel made a motion to approve CUP 406-09 with the following modifications to the staff's reconnrnended conditions: Condition 42, "The applicant will be limited to up to eight vehicles (three inside garage and five awaiting repair outside) on site at anytime awaiting repair;" Condition 44, "Operation limited to up to four employees;" and Condition 47, "Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. No Sunday operations." This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ambrogi and wasunanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Conditional Use Pernit #06-09 of Powell's Investments, LLC for a public garage without body repair at 214 Waterloo Court with the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. The applicant aIill be limited to eight vehicles (three inside garage and five outside) on site at anytime awaiting repair. 3. Vehicles awaiting repair shall be screened by an opaque fence. 4. Operation limited to up to four employees only. 5. All repair activities shall occur entirely within the enclosed structure. 6. Any proposed business sign shall conform to cottage occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four square -feet in size. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September 2, 2009 Page 2524 -5- 7. Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a -m. to 7:00 p.m. No Sunday operations. Any expansion or change of use shall require a new conditional use permit. (Note: Connnissioner Triplett was absent from the meeting.) An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article VI, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Part 606, MI (Light Industrial) Zoning District, Subsection 02, Allowed Uses. This revision will add Standard Industrial Cassification (SIC) 3482 and 3484, Fabricated Metal Products, to the permitted uses in the MI (Light industrial) Zoning District. Action — Recommended Approval Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported that Frederick County has received a request to add portions of Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 34, Fabricated Metal Products, to the permitted uses in the M 1 (Light hidustrial) Zoning District. She said specifically, this is a request to add small arms annnurution and small anus manufacturing to the MI Zoning District. Ms. Perkins noted that the revision would still exclude SIC 3483 and 3489. She added that the use would be regulated by the Inten.ational Fire Code and the Building Code. Ms. Perkins said the Board of Supervisors approved this item to be sent to public hearing at their meeting on August 12, 1009_ Chairman Wilmot called for any public continents. No one came forward to speak and Chainnan Wilmot closed the public continent portion of the hearing. There were no questions or issues raised by the Commission. Comunissior, members believed this amendment had been thoroughly discussed and they were in favor of the revision. Upon motion made by Connnissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Comnnission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article VI, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Part 606, M1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District, Subsection 02, Allowed Uses. This revision will add Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 3482 and 3484, Fabricated Metal Products, to the permitted uses in the M 1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District. (Note: Commissioner Triplett was absent from the meeting_) An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article II, Supplementary Use Regulations, Parking, Buffers, and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 201, Supplementary Use Regulations, Subsection 05, Secondary or Accessory Uses. This revision will allow for accessory retailing in the OM (Office Manufacturing Park) Zoning District, the MI (Light Industrial) Zoning District, and the M2 (Industrial General) Zoning District. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September- 2 2009 Page 2525 Q -C Action — Recommended Approval - Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported that this revision to Subsection 165-201.05 will allow for accessory retailing in the OM (Office Manufacturing Park), the M1 (Light Industrial), and the M2 (Industrial General) Zoning Districts -with the same conditions placed on the B3 (Industrial Transition) District. Ms. Perkins said the revision states that accessory retailing would be restricted to no more than 15% of the gross floor area and shall not exceed 2,000 square feet. She said there is also a revised definition proposed with this amendment. She added that on August 12, 2009, the Board of Supervisors approved this item for a public hearing. Chairman Wilmot called for any public comments. No one came fonvard to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. There were no questions or issues raised by the Commission. Couln fission members believed this amendment had been thoroughly discussed and they were ui favor of the revision. Upon motion made by Conmiissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Pi_arnvng Conmiission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article II, Supplementary Use Regulations, Parking, Buffers, and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 201, Supplementary Use Regulations, Subsection 05, Secondary or Accessory Uses. This revision will allow for accessory retailing in the OM (Office Manufacturing Park) Zoning District, the M 1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District, and the M2 (Industrial General) Zoning District. (Note: Conunissioner Triplett was absent from the meeting-) An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article II, Supplementary Use Regulations, Parking, Buffers, and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 202, Off -Street Parking, Loading and Access, Subsection 01, Off -Street Parking, Parking Lots, and Article I, General Provisions, Amendments, and Conditional Use Permits, Subsection 02, Definitions and Word Usage. This amendment will revise standards for off-street parking and parking lot requirements. Action — Recommended Approval Senior Planning, Candice E. Perkins, reported that this is a relatively comprehensive change to the off-street parking and parking lot standards. Ms. Perkins reviewed each of the major sections with the Planning Commission which included: Required Off -Street Parking Spaces, Changes in Use, Procedure for Adjustments to Parking Requirements, Parking for Mixed Uses and Loading Facilities, Captive Market, Spaces Behind Buildings, Parkine Limit for Certain Commercial Vehicles, Parking Lots -Surface Material, Parking Lots - Curb, Gutter_ and Islands, Low-hnpact Design, Setbacks, Parking Space Size and Aisle Requirements, and Definitions. She added that on August 12, 2009, the Board of Supervisors directed this amendmentbe scheduled for a public hearing. Cbainnan Wilmot called for any public continents. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public continent portion of the hearing. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September 2, 2009 Page 2526 -7 - There were no questions or issues raised by the Cominission. Commission members believed this was a good revision and it will allow for low -impact designs. They conunended the staff for their work on this amendment and they were in favor of the revision. - - - - - - - Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article 11, Supplementary Use Regulations, Parking, Buffers, and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 202, Off=Street Parking, Loading and Access, Subsection 01, Off -Street Parking, Parking Lots, and Article I, General Provisions, Amendments, and Conditional Use Permits, Subsection 02, Definitions and Word Usage. This amendment will revise standards for off-street parking and parking lot requirements. (Note: Conurnssioner Triplett was absent from the meeting.) An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article I, General Provisions, Amendments and Conditional Use Permits, Part 101, General Provisions, Subsection 02, Definitions and Word Usage. This amendment will revise the definition of "dwelling" and "dwelling, attached." Action — Recommended Approval Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported that this amendment is a proposed revision to the definition of "dwelling," as well as; -"detached dlvelling;"-contained A ithin the -definition -section of -the ordinance. She said the changes will include adding the word, "residential," to the definition of dwelling and expands the definition of "attached dwelling" to update as well as to distinguish it from some of the other housing types currently pennitted in the ordinance and how it is connected to other units. She said the Board of Supervisors directed the staff on August 12, 2009, to schedule this proposed amendment for a public hearing_ Chairman Wilmot called for any public comments. No one carne forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. There were no questions or issues raised by the Conunission. Commission members believed this amendment had been thoroughly discussed and they were in favor of the revision. Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article 1, General Provisions, Amendments and Conditional Use Permits, Part 101, General Provisions, Subsection 02, Definitions and Word Usage. This amendment NnIill revise the definition of "dwelling" and "dwelling, attached." (Note: Commissioner Triplett was absent fi-om the meeting.) Frederick County Planning Conunission Minutes of September 2, 2009 Page 2527 An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, Article V, Design Standards, Subsection 18, Sidewalks and Pedestrian Walkways, Subsection 19, Streetlights, and Subsection 33, Commercial and Industrial Design Standard Exemptions. The revisions to Subsection 144- 18 will require sidewalks along existing streets as well as proposed streets in the RP (Residential Performance) District, the R4 (Residential Planned Community) District, the R5 (Residential Recreational Deveiopmeni) District, and the MS (Medical Suppori) District; Revisions to Subsection 144-19 will remove lot size requirements; and Revisions to Subsection 144-33 will remove the sidewalks and pedestrian walkways exemption for commercial and industrial properties. Action — Recon-unended Approval Seiuor Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reviewed with the Commission the three sections of the S„bdivision Ordinance that were changing. Those sections included: Section 144-18, Sidewalks and Pedestrian Walkways; Section 144.19, Streetlights; and Section 144-33, Commercial and Industrial Design Standard Exemptions. Ms. Perkins said the Board of Supervisors directed the staff on August 12, 2009, to schedule this proposed amendment for a public hearing. Chairman Wilmot called for any public cormnents. No one came forAvard to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. There were no questions or issues raised by the Commission. Commission members believed this amendment did much to clarify the ordinance and make the ordinance easier to use. Upon motion made by Conunissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, Article V, Design Standards, Subsection 18, Sidewalks and Pedestrian Walkways, Subsection 19, Streetlights, and Subsection 33, Conunercial and Industrial Design Standard Exemptions. The revisions to Subsection 144-18 will require sidewalks along existing streets as Avell as proposed streets in the RP (Residential Performance) District, the R4 (Residential Planned Community) District, the R5 (Residential Recreational Development) District, and the MS (Medical Support) District, Revisions to Subsection 144-19 will remove lot size requirements; and Revisions to Subsection 144-33 will remove the sidewalks and pedestrian walkways exemption for connnercial and industrial properties. (Note: Conunissioner Triplett was absent from the meeting_) ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Conunissioner Thomas, the meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. by a unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, June M. Wilmot, Chairman Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September 2, 2009 Page 2528 i REZONING APPLICATION #07-09 BURNS PROPERTY — VALLEY MILL ROAD Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: September 21, 2009 Staff Contact: Michael. T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director PROPOSAL: To rezone 1.26 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Uses. LOCATION: The properties are located in the northwest corner of the intersection with Valley Mill Road (Route 659) and Martin Drive. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 10/07/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. However, the impacts associated with this rezoning request have not beer fully mitigated by the applicant. In particular, transportation improvements have not been provided that would improve or achieve an acceptable level of service at the adjacent intersection Route 7 and Route 659. Additional corridor street enhancement elements such as landscaping should be provided. In addition, the 10' hiker biker trail should be extended across this properties frontage with Valley Mill Road. Following the required public hearing, a recommendation regarding this rezoning application to the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to„adequately address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 10/07/09 Pending Board of Supervisors: 11/18/09 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 1.26 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Uses. LOCATION: The properties are located in the northwest corner of the intersection with Valley Mill Road (Route 659) and Martin Drive. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 10/07/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. However, the impacts associated with this rezoning request have not beer fully mitigated by the applicant. In particular, transportation improvements have not been provided that would improve or achieve an acceptable level of service at the adjacent intersection Route 7 and Route 659. Additional corridor street enhancement elements such as landscaping should be provided. In addition, the 10' hiker biker trail should be extended across this properties frontage with Valley Mill Road. Following the required public hearing, a recommendation regarding this rezoning application to the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to„adequately address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission. Rezoning 407-09 — Burns Property — Valley Mill Road September 21, 2009 Page 2 This report is prepared by the Frederick County planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 10/071:9 Pending Board of Supervisors: 11/18/09 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 1.26 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Office and Retail Uses. LOCATION: The properties are located in the northwest corner of the intersection with Valley Mill Road (Route 659) and Martin Drive. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Red Bud PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 54 -A -112Q, 54 -A -112D and 54 -A -112P PROPERTY ZONING: RP (Residential Performance) District PRESENT USE: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: B2 (Business General) RP (Residential Performance) South: RP (Residential Performance) East: RP (Residential Performance) West: B2 (Business General) Use: Commercial (220 Seafood) Residential Use: Dowell J. Howard Use: Residential Use: Vacant/Commercial Rezoning 407-09 — Bums Property — Valley Mill Road September 21, 2009 Page 3 - . REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Frederick County Transportation: Comments incorporated into report. Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have a significant measurable impact on Route 659. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to the property. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers in the Burns Property — Valley Mill Road rezoning application dated August 18, 2009 address transpo ration concerns associated with this request. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs, drainage features and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manuel, Seventh Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signalization and off-site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspections fee and surety bond coverage. Fire Marshal: Plan approval recommended. Public Works Department: 1. Refer to Impact Analysis, page 1: Expand the discussion to include the disposition of the three single family dwellings. The dwellings appear to have been constructed prior to 1978 and will require asbestos inspections prior to receipt of demolition permits. 2. Refer to Access and Transportation, page 1: Expand the discussion to include the interparcel connection referenced in the Walgreen's rezoning application. Also, discuss the impact on Martin Drive and the need for upgrades if this road is used for ingress -egress. 3. Sewage Conveyance and Water Supply, page 2: It appears that the existing dwellings are served by public water. However, the existence of public sewer along Martin Drive is questionable. Verify with specific references to existing sewer lines that public sewer service is available within the rezoning boundaries. 4. Storage Drainage: Add a section to discuss stormwater management. We recommend that consideration be given to a regional facility that will serve the Burns' property as well as the Walgreens' site. 5. Refer to the Proffer Statement, Site Development, paragraph 1.2: Expand the reference to the one entrance on Martin Drive to include required improvements to upgrade Martin Drive to accommodate the Virginia Department of Transportation's requirements. Department of Inspections: No comments at this time. Comments shall be made at site plan submittal phase. Sanitation Authority: Sewer and water are available to the site. There is adequate sewer and water capacity to serve this site. Service Authority: No comments. Health Department: As long as no wells or septic systems are impacted either on property or neighboring properties, no objections. Department of Parks & Recreation: No comment. Rezoning #07-09 — Burns Property — Valley Mill Road September 21, 2009 Page 4 Historic Resources Advisory Board: It appears that the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and itis not necessary to schedule a foi�r�al review ofthe rezoriir�g uyplicatiori by the HRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the property nor are there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It was also noted that the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identify a core battlefield within this area, the site's existing condition is such that there is little remaining value to any preservation effort. GIS: No comments. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed rezoning will not have impact operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. Public Schools: We have reviewed the Burns Rezoning application, and are concerned about the increase in traffic volume that this change of use will generate. It is already difficult for school buses to turn left out of the Lowell J. Howard Center, and we expect that this commercial use, with an entrance onto Martin Drive, will increase that difficulty. We see this issue being more related to traffic volume than to stacking at the Valley Mill/Berryville Turnpike intersection. Frederick County Attorney: Please see attached letter dated November 24, 2008, from Roderick 73. Williams, County Attorney. Planning Department: Please see attached Memo dated December 11, 2008from Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning map (USGS Winchester Quadrangle) depicts the zoning for the three parcels which comprise the proposed rezoning as R2 (Residential Limited) District. On February 14, 1990, the R-2 District zoning classification was modified to RP (Residential Performance), during the comprehensive amendment to the county's Zoning Ordinance. 2) Comprehensive Policy Plan The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as the community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key components of community life. The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 1-1] Land Use The property is within the UDA and S WSA and is designated as an area of commercial land use by the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The property is located in the area covered by the Route 7 Corridor Plan. Rezoning #07-09 — Burns Property — Valley Mill Road September 21, 2009 Page 5 The business corridor expectations of the Comprehensive Plan should be recognized_ Even though this project is not located directly on Routes 7, particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate improved corridor appearance along Valley Mill Road. Transportation This application must address the transportation components of the County's Comprehensive Plan, including the Eastern Road Plan. Route 7 is identified as an urban six -lane divided facility. Valley Mill Road is identified as an improved major collector road with an urban four lane divided typical section. It must also be recognized that the County's Eastern Road Plan calls for the ultimate relocation of Valley Mill Road to a point east of its current location, to align with Getty Lane, the entrance to Winchester Gateway. This future improvement, in addition to previous plans associated with improvements to the Interstate 81, Exit 315, call for the closure of the intersection of Valley Mill Road and Route 7. Site Access Site Access is proposed to be provided from one primary location, via Martin Drive. No additional entrances will be permitted on Valley Mill Road. A secondary indirect access point is proposed to be provided via an inter parcel connection to the recently rezoned Walgreens Dairy Corner property to the west. With the anticipated redevelopment that may occur on the properties to the west of this rezoning, additional opportunities may exist for inter parcel connectivity through the adjacent property and on to the connecting driveway proffered by the Walgreens — Dairy Corner property. Pedestrian accommodations should be provided in a coordinated manner internal to the project, to and along Valley Mill Road, and along Martin Avenue. Presently, a bike path along Valley llfill Road has not been provided The original preliminary application provided a 10' hiker biker trail across the property's frontage to connect Martin Drive with the proffered 10' hiker biker trail which was proffered with the Walgreens — Dairy Corner rezoning. This improvement should be reinstated into the application. It would be appropriate for this application to provide for sidewalk improvements along the Martin Drive frontage. The Applicant has sought to address the broader pedestrian needs of this area by providing pedestrian connectivity across the Dowell J Howard property's frontage. This approach would provide additional access and circulation opportunities for the adjacent residents, school users, and patrons of the commercial uses. 3) Site Suitability/Environment The site does not contain any environmental features that would either constrain or preclude site development. In particular, there are no identified areas of steep slopes, mature woodlands, floodplain or wetlands on the parcels which are identified in this application. An evaluation of the existing mature trees on the property should be completed to determine if any can be incorporated into the design of the project, or avoided by site development. Rezoning #07-09 — Bums Property — Valley Mill Road September 21, 2009 Page 5 4) Potential Impacts A. Transportation Based upon the scenario described in theApplicant's TLA, the TLA describes improvements that are necessary to achieve an acceptable level of service. Not all of these improvements will be in-place and none of the improvements are being provided with this application. The recently approved Walgreens- - Dairy Corner Rezoning request has provided Several improvements at the intersection of Valley Mill Road and Route 7. The timing of the completion of these improvements in relation to this rezoning is very important: Development of this site should not occur until the improvements proffered by the adjacent property are implemented. It is evident that this project would further deteriorate the level of service at the exiting intersections in the vicinity of this site most specifically the intersections of Route 7 with I-81 and Valley Mill Road. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to ensure that new development does not deteriorate the level of service at intersections or roads. It seeks to ensure that it maintains or improves the level of service at impacted roads or intersections. Please --understand that an acceptable level of service to Frederick County, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, is a level of service C. It would appear as though even with the suggested improvements to the approach to the Valley Mill/Route 7 intersection, only a level of service D is being achieved at this leg of the intersection. The Applicant has continued the additional improvements on Valley NMI Road in the vicinity of this site in a manner that is consistent with the adjacent properties. In addition, this project is proposing to incorporate into their improvements the left turn lane into the Dowell J. Howard entrance. The provision of this offsetting left turn on Valley Mill Road at the School's entrance would sufficiently allow vehicle storage for those vehicles and school buses accessing Dowell J. Howard. The Applicant has also proposed improvements to Martin Drive which currently does not meet minimum VDOT standards. The proposed improvements appear to be the minimal necessary to meet current standards. A left turn lane is not provided from Valley Mill Road into Martin Drive. It may be desirable to encourage the eastbound traffic utilizing this site to use the entrance proffered with the Walgreens — Dairy Corner application where a protected left turn exists. This could be approached through several methods including a combined signage package with the adjacent property which could share the principle sign for projects and include directional signage. A bike path along Valley Mill Road has not been provided. A 10' hiker biker trail across the property's frontage to connect Martin Drive with theprofferedl0' hiker biker trail which was proffered with the Walgreens — Dairy Corner rezoning should be reinstated into the application. It would also be appropriate for this application to provide for sidewalk improvements along the Martin Drive frontage. The proposed pedestrian improvements in Rezoning 907-09 — Burns Property — Valley Mill Road September 21, 2009 Page 7 conjunction with the Frederick County -Public School's property are beneficial and desirable and should be worked out to the satisfaction of the School's. On recent rezonings, other projects have contributed additional funding for transportation improvements in the general area of their requests. This has been done in recognition of the need to address the broader transportation improvements in the developing areas of the County III addition to the specific improvements they may be proposing. Such an approach should be considered with this request. B. Design Standards The application does include minimal architectural language, written in an attempt to address the appearance of the buildings. However, this is the limit of the design elements and does not fully address the corridor appearance goals of the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, it would be beneficial to tailor an approach to the buffer and screening of these properties in addition to those requirements that would be required by ordinance. The adjacent residential properties across Martin Drive should be recognized. This application Lias providedfor additional street tree planting along the properties' road frontage with Valley Mill Road Additional street trees along Martin give should be considered as should how this would fit in with the required buffer landscape screening. C. Community Facilities The development of this site will have an impact on community facilities and services. However, it is recognized that commercial uses generally provide a positive impact on community facilities through the additional generation of tax revenue. This application's effort to address the impacts to community facilities is limited to a $2,000.00 contribution to Frederick County; $1,000.00 for Fire and Rescue purposes and $1,000.00 for Sheriff's purposes. 5) Proffer Statement — Dated December 5, 2008 with latest revision September 10, 2009 A) Generalized Development Plan The applicant has proffered a very basic Generalized Development Plan (GDP dated July 27, 2009 and revised through September 10, 2009) for the site. The GDP shows a full entrance on Martin Drive and improvements on Valley Mill Road. The location of a potential location for inter parcel connections is also shown on the GDP. It also shows the proposed pedestrian improvements on the Dowell J. Howard property. The Generalized Development Plan accompanying the Proffer Statement could be enhanced to address some of the comments identified in the staff report. The GDP is used to identify the general location of the additional street trees. Rezoning #07-09 — Bums Property - Valley Mill Road September 21, 2009 Page 8 B) Land Use The Applicant has stated that they intend to develop the property with up to 12,000 square feet of commercial land uses on the property. The Applicant has restricted the Average Daily Trips (ADT) for this site to 1,516 Average Daily Trips. This generally remains consistent with the TIA. C) Site Design Building construction materials have been limited to using one or a combination of, cast stone, stone, brick, architectural block, dry vit or stucco. Additionally, any dumpster pad screening shall be constructed of the same materials. Street trees planted a minimum of 50' on center have been proposed. This should be extended on Martin Drive. D) Transportation The applicant has proffered one site entrance on Martin Drive as shown on the CDP. A location has been identified for an inter parcel connection in the southwest corner of the site. Improvements to Valley Mill Road across the properties frontage including improvements to accommodate a left turn lane into Dowell J. Howard are provided, as is the dedication of any necessary right-of-way needed to make the improvements. Improvements to Martin Drive to meet current minimum standards are proposed. Said improvements should include a sidewalk. The Applicant has not proffered a monetary contribution for future transportation improvements within the general vicinity of the property. Other recent projects have taken this approach to address the off-site impacts of their project. E) Community Facilities The applicant has proffered a $2,000.00 contribution to Frederick County; $1,000.00 for Fire and Rescue purposes and $1,000.00 for Sheriff's purposes. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 10/07/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. However, the impacts associated with this rezoning request have not been fully mitigated by the applicant. In particular, transportation improvements have not been provided that would improve or achieve an acceptable level of service at the adjacent intersection Route 7 and Route 659. Additional corridor street enhancement elements such as landscaping should be provided. In addition, the 10' hiker biker trail should be extended across this properties frontage with Valley Mill Road. Following the required public hearing, a recommendation regarding this rezoning application to the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission. Ar A tp&*xW w L. OA tPAI}IA-5"�ir m M. L114 —q% Mizi . , Rp Case Plarmer- ltlruddy ^ Fulura RM e <t 1� N& 61§ :v73 M)Llm I�f, • X13 A 0� �� . • �'rSl3�i:i.�ic�!9r�.38ok a Burns Property Valley Mill Rd REZ # 07 - 09 Rezoning Request Current Zoning RP to B2 Office & Retail Use PIN: 54-A- 112Q, 112D, 112P -t BEvR rOaLrVIKtRYYILLE PIKE Bt� Winchester,VA WOODSTOCK LN N ypapp 7.Oidllt AREZO]09EumsFropetY_vaYe)MiliRaO9tEil3 BI�HusnessNe[gp.orhmADnaxa��Pt•1�ETnaur-%ltvuQt<w[prpBunxt� ��_\I�UtLau Dn%Igam nAtra P_[Prxnexx •:wne�al IltartatIg yti't'.i Bi[P¢saaese luAvattal Tt wsmw 6ta[xt� �FItt{vt F•M1n utm Pwaxa� EB Juhtttual Ltpp[Lnuat� AL'rinhtAavnirramslBwrutr �lTll{ltr[d�Ye S[prrc i'anmvu["Pw[t•a11I� �t)<I$Ateda-n},4ppwallMri<t) R{iRwal-itea Dutvru RiltteWenaiPlpvur.icovumuln'Bwvatt RPiRdpi[auulPeuounwmUnurr� RFrRntMerpiRaraexw[al�'ammminDaa tnrr 0 25 50 100 Feet t t I t 10 PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ # -G1 Residential Performance (RP) to Business General (B2) PROPERTY: 1.26 acre +/-; Tax Map Parcels 54-A 112Q, 54-A 112D, and 54-A 112P (the "Property') RECORD OWNER David M. & Svetlana M. Burns APPLICANT: David M & Svetlana M. Burns PROJECT NAME: Burns Property- Valley Mill Road ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: September 4, 2008 REVISION DATE (S): December 5, 2008; August 18, 2009; September 10, 2009 The undersigned hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property ("Property'), as described above, shall be in strict conformance with the following conditions, which shall supersede all other proffers that may have been made prior hereto. In the event that the above referenced B2 conditional rezoning is not granted as applied for by the applicant ("Applicant"), these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and shall be null and void. Further, these proffers are contingent upon final rezoning of the Property with "final rezoning" defined as that rezoning which is in effect on the day following the last day upon which the Frederick County Board of County Supervisors (the "Board") decision granting the rezoning may be contested in the appropriate court. If the Board's decision is contested, and the Applicant elects not to submit development plans until such contest is resolved, the term rezoning shall include the day following entry of a final court order affirming the decision of the Board which has not been appealed, or, if appealed, the day following which the decision has been affirmed on appeal. The term "Applicant" as referenced herein shall include within its meaning all future owners and successors in interest. When used in these proffers, the "Generalized Development Plan," shall refer to the plan entitled "Generalized Development Plan, Burns Property- Valley Mill Road" dated July 27, 2009 revised September 10, 2009 (the "GDP"). 1. Site Development 1.1 The Property s hall be developed in substantial conformance with the GDP. 1.2 Development of the Property shall not exceed a total of 12,000 square feet of building floor area and shall be limited to a maximum of 1,516 Average Daily Trips (ADT). It is understood that pass -by and all other reductions, as permitted by VDOT, maybe applied to arrive at the maximum ADT yield of 1,516. The ADT shall be determined using the latest edition of the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual and shall be depicted on any future site plans for the Property. No site plan shall be approved for the Property if the proposed use generates an ADT count that exceeds 1,516. 1.3 Access to the Property shall be limited to one entrance on Martin Drive in the general location depicted on the GDP. Direct access to Valley Mill Road shall be prohibited. (See 1 on GDP) Proffer Statement Burns Property — Valley Mill Road 1.4 The Applicant shall provide an inter -parcel connector for access to and from the area located west of the Property in the general location depicted on the GDP prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building constructed on the Property. (See 2 on GDP) 1.5 The Applicant shah design and construct at. aadditional lane for Valley 1,. Road across rhe Property frontage as depicted on the GDP prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building constructed on the Property. The Applicant shall dedicate all right of way necessary for said improvement as determined at the time of site plan. (See 3 on GDP) 1.6 The Applicant shall provide a left turn lane for Valley Mill Road, subject to VDOT review and approval, at the intersection of Dowell J Circle as depicted on the GDP. (See 4 on GDP) 1.7 The Applicant shall provide street trees planted a inaxitnum of 50' on center across the Property frontage with Valley Mill Road as depicted on the GDP prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building constructed on the Property. (See 5 on GDP) 1.8 If an additional 10' of right of way for Valley Mill Road is dedicated by Frederick County Public Schools across the frontage of the Dowell J Howard Center property (TM 54-A 114), the Applicant shall construct a sidewalk as shown on the GDP along the South side of Valley Mill Road along the full frontage of the Dowell J Howard property to connect with the existing sidewalk located on the South side of Valley Mill Road. The proposed sidewalk across the Dowell J Howard Center property shall be constructed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building constructed on. the Property. (See 6 on GDP) 1.9 The Applicant shall widen existing Martin Drive to a minimum width of 22 feet as shown on the GDP between the intersection with Valley Mill Road and the proposed site entrance. The Applicant shall provide curb and gutter along the Property frontage with Martin Drive. Furthermore, the Applicant shall improve the intersection of Martin Drive and Valley Mill Road to provide for a right turn taper along Valley Mill Road and pavement widening of Martin Drive to accommodate any increase in traffic resulting from development of the Property. All proposed road improvements shall be subject to VDOT review and approval. 2. Design Standards 2.1 Any building constructed on the Property shall be constructed using one or a combination of the following : cast stone, stone, brick, architectural block, dry vit or stucco. Additionally, dumpster pad screen walls shall be constructed of the same masonrymaterial(s) used for building construction. 2. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development 2.1 The Applicant shall contribute the amount of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. Said contribution shall be made prior to issuance of a building permit for the Property. 2.2 The Applicant shall contribute the amount of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) to Frederick County for Sheriff's Office purposes. Said contribution shall be made prior to issuance of a building permit for the Property. SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES Page 2 of 3 Proffer Statement Respectfully submitted, David M. `Svetlana Burns r Date: S&O - to , nc)c1 STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: Burns Property — Valley Mill Road The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this /D n day of 6r12, 2009, by Dnulidi 4/1. 6� u2,v s My co ssion fires 11 Notary Public Page 3 of 3 '9 yyo N N 9'H 44' + / ►N J Conaec'tion to exp*' Ing sidewalk rC a m % ;/ R _ EX. VALLEYMILL RD. EX. VALL MILL RD. wDEN ✓ SHOULDER 12' ING 5' x 1S aN MILLED JREOIIIRED VARIES 3 6' x 1.5' MILLED JOINT REOUIR 0 2' GRASS Exxrimy P-1 �`_-•�^^^"s��Ezistutg powment f VOOT CG -6 SAW CUTEDGE SAW WT EDGE PROVIDE TACK COAT PROVIDE TACK COAT L5' SM 12.5 1.5 SM 12.5 5' BM 25.0 5' BN 25.0 (CR MATCH EXISTING DEPTH) *MATCH EX. CROSS SLOPE (OR MATCH EXISTING DEPTH) *MATCH EX. CROSS SLOPE 8' 21-8 AGGREGATE LITERS TO EXTEND 1' BEYOND EDGE OF PAVEMENT. 8' 21_B AGGREGATE LAYERS TO DOEND 1' BEYOND EDGE OF PAVEMENT. SECTION A—A SECTION B—B ROAD WIDENING SECTION ROAD WIDENING SEC770N N.T.S. N.T.S. oARA _ �q<<F M �ay��'�a 01 EET EES--� TMS v Existing: RQ > Proposed: Proposed Inter Parc 1 ^� Co ecti \ �j \ \ /PROJECT r� \ SITE „p B4,7A-1120 \ E cisting RA TM 5¢7A ZP`A\ Proposed: E12 Existing: RA ; -aposed: B2 / s� L93 551 tiD_ Ul i W GR,4PH/CSC.4LE 30 is 0 30 60 1ixAar-J 302. ..7 p C - w � " z w w 0 Z: Q Ld0 H s� C,L) 0 C, U U M 0 �p W I✓I Z m rn 0 a o + N O 2 r': II o a } J D W H� Q BURNS PROPERTY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT September 2009 The Burns Property (the "Property") is ideally located for commercial uses. The Property, identified by Frederick County records as Tax Map Parcels 54-A 112Q, 54-A 112D, and 54A -112P consists of approximately 1.3 acres located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Valley Mill Road and Martin Drive (See Figure 1). The subject site is currently zoned RP (Residential Performance) and currently used for three single family detached homes. This application seeks to rezone the Property to the B2 (General Business) District. An asbestos inspection may be required for the existing homes prior to issuance of a demolition permits. The site is located wholly within the Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (S ,,SA) of Frederick County. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES As depicted by Figure 1, the properties located adjacent to the site are single family homes and vacant property on RP zoning as well as the 220 Seafood Restaurant site which is zoned B2. LAND USE The subject acreage is located within the study boundary of the Route 7 East Corridor Land Use Plan however this plan only shows the existing zoning rather than the planned use for the Property. The Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan identifies the Property with a business designation. As such, rezoning the site to allow for B2 uses, would be in accordance with the land use as planned by the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. ACCESS AND TRANSPORTATION The property would be served by an entrance on Martin Drive, as such no entrances on Valley Mill Road will be constructed as part of the development of this Property. A traffic impact analysis (TTA) entitled "A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns - Valley Mill Road," was prepared for this application using composite data collected from other studies in the area as well as actual traffic counts. The TIA analyzes the impacts developing the site with a 3,500 square foot fast food restaurant as a "worst case" traffic generation scenario. The TIA indicates that background traffic will degrade the Level of Service (LOS) for the subject area intersections below a LOS C. To accommodate background traffic the TIA proposes the following improvements: 1. Route 7/Valley MillRoad/I-81 ramps: • Additional westbound thru lane on Route 7 (proffered by adjoining property) • Additional northbound left turn lane on Valley Mill Road • Additional southbound left turn lane on the NB I-81 off ramp. Impact Analysis Statement --- Burns Property AOL OPP AMES ■ '' _ � rt . - :. � :' � � . r a. � _ . �-.E_• ■ � ; � i i 4`1` ,x.11 °# WW Fi Patton Harris Rust & Associates,pc EXISTING CONDITIONS FIGURE 1 Engineers. Surveyors_ Planners. Landscape Architects. PH Wi East er, V4iliy Street, Suite200 Winchester.1 irgina22FD1 T 5a0.ss7.z,3s BURNS PROPERTY F 540.665.0493 SCALE: 1" = 100' DATE: 7/1/08 Cil blap Features r'rmnfy Lir)Ljrd;irV Ir" W;ip hln.ird;Ir,. Gmro- Wkirh r9hin Nmi.-rel Fm—r Kmy&ts JrFQn Dr.-mcl.-prnnnr %r -;z 0j Roadlsf'Tran spiarialion "Inxislalm, I., Fr i-rurp 1 qw.-:iVir Suum %hr..... Rork -- Mm wk: Fi ie;AW Rw]Lk Llm -,uriek: Pi ioalu R -.-%+J- Pi RL%-ilc a7 I rom 1910f.m) x10pflerl8 guy Aqr1miltural Fill.er1r.t.-t -n irAA -,III 'ril ?wllfj.; (711, irk`.h 131 (But;i-iff�, N�iU -ibihmd Ch;b id'i R7 CR Wwvz;. i7AnA 'Al D �;:-r C: In (Duri lrdijMrial -r.4nnit Lin cinhirm EM rE.-Jiudiya iiiK I IE 'I liUK-r Edijrmi-n 124% -rig'. rd' Arrl.oli iml, -kill. Dish kik td'- ;Ink -miri-il, C—.ncral Dinir MHI 1bblilt, Foil bu Gull I iju -6.4• DitAi U1 tol.' -�Icm i: -al Gacw.r, Dimrk.. R5 11988U@4111A, ger raf.-Aordcomwmnwl -71110 1', Rek ',Ri. m I Am -yr. D mr q, RF .-Rea der - P-3rlmmmoe DfArld"i Patton Harris Rust & Associates,pc Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects. PH 117 East Piccadilly Street S uite 200 R Winchester: Virqinia22601 A T 540.667.2139 F 540_&65.0493 Is Is Is is Is Is ", V AirldhL, NJ ZONING MAP I FIGURE 2 BURNS PROPERTY DATE: 7/1/08 qa WINCHESTER GATEWAY Mrd f PROJECT 44t 4 AREA ", V AirldhL, NJ ZONING MAP I FIGURE 2 BURNS PROPERTY DATE: 7/1/08 The TIA-;,idicates that the development of the site combined with background traffic would necessitate the same transportation improvements needed with background traffic alone. The Applicant has proffered to prohibit direct access to Valley MR Road and to widen Valley Mill Road in order to provide a left turn lane at Valley Mill's intersection with Dowell J Circle. Additionally, the Applicant has proffered to improve existing Martin Drive from the intersection with Valley MR Road to the project entrance which has been located as far from Valley Mill Road as possible to ensure there are no conflicts resulting from traffic entering and exiting the site. The Applicant has also proffered to provide an inter -parcel connection to properties located west of the site. This connection aligns with the inter -parcel connection that was proffered as part of the adjoining Walgreens -Dairy Corner Place site which was recently rezoned for commercial uses. To facilitate a better pedestrian network in the vicinity of the site, the Applicant has proffered to construct an off-site sidewalk across the full frontage of the Dowell J. Howard Center property located across Valley Mill Road from the Property. This sidewalk would connect with the existing sidewalk located on the south side of Valley Mill Road. This improvement is shown on the Generalized Development Plan. ENVIRONMENT The Property does not contain any areas of stream channels or steep slopes. The site has a low elevation of approximately 650 feet and a high elevation of approximately 670 feet. There is an existing drainage swale that runs north to south on the Western edge of the Property. The General Soil Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County. Virginia indicates that the soils comprising the subject parcels fall upon the border between the Frederick Poplimento- 0aklet soil associations. The predominant soill types on the site are Berks Channery Silt Loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes (map symbol 1B) and Weikert Berks Channery Silt Loams, 15 to 25 percent slopes (map symbol 41D) as shown on map sheet number 30 of the survey. The site would not be characterized as prime farmland. The characteristics of this soil type and any implications for site development are manageable through the site engineering process. Flood plain data for the subject parcels is delineated on the Flood Insurance Study Map for Frederick County prepared by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Community Panel # 510063-0115B, effective date July 17, 1978. The entire site is located in Flood Zone C, which denotes areas of minimal flooding outside of the 100 -year flood plain. Existing drainage from the site flows from south to north, ultimately to a drainage swale located on the adjoining property to the west/northwest. Any stormwater management facilities will be designed to meet or exceed the state regulations. Per stormwater management regulations, post development flows will not exceed pre -development levels. As such, development of the site will not negatively impact nearby drainage facilities or adjoining properties. Impact Analysis Statement — Burns Property 2 SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND WATER SUPPLY Access to public water and sewer is available via connection to existing lines adjacent to the site along the Valley Mill Road frontage. An 8 inch sewer line is available at the site and along Martin Drive. Assuming 12,000 square feet of commercial space (proffered maximum), the site would generate 2,400 gallons per day of sewer flows with approximately equivalent water usage assuming a rate of 200 GPD/1,000 square feet. SOLID WASTE Assuming 12,000 square feet of commercial space, the site would generate 300 pounds of solid waste per day assuming a rate of 25 lbs/1,000 square feet. Solid waste would be transferred to the Frederick County Landfill for disposal. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES The subject site does not include any historic structures as identified by the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey. Pursuant to the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, the subject site is located within the core battlefield area of the Third Battle of Winchester (Opequon), however the subject acreage is already identified as lost integrity due to development in proximity to the site. As such, the application will have no impact to the existing integrity of battlefield resources. IMPACT ON COMMUNITY FACILITIES The proposed commercial rezoning will have a positive impact on the Frederick County tax base. The positive fiscal impact is augmented by the fact that the proposed rezoning is replacing RP zoned property currently used for single family houses with commercial uses. In recognition of services provided for Fire and Rescue and Sheriff's Office purposes, the Applicant has proffered a monetary contribution of $1,000 for Sheriff's office purposes and $1,000 for Fire and Rescue services. Impact Analysis Statement —Burns Property A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Burns - galley bili Road Located in: Frederick County, Virginia Prepared for: David Burns 1675 Fort Braddock Court Winchester, VA 22601 Prepared by: Patton Harris Rust & Associates End neers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects. 10212 Governor Lane Blvd, Suite 1007 k- Williamsport, Maryland 21795 ` 1 T 301.223.4010 F 301.223.6831 September 4, 2008 OVERVIEW Report Summary Patton Harris Rust & Associates (PHR+A) has prepared this document to present the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Burns - Valley Mill Road development to be located along the east of Valley Mill Road (VA Route 659), north of Martin Lane, in Frederick County, Virginia. The proposed development is to include a 3,500 square foot fast-food restaurant with drive-thru. Access will be provided via Martin Lane located along the east side of the Valley Mill Road. The proposed development will be built -out over a single transportation phase by the year 2010. Analyses are provided for existing, 2010 background and 2010 build -out year conditions. Figure 1 is provided to illustrate the location of the proposed Burns - Valley Mill Road development with respect to the surrounding roadway network. Methodology The traffic impacts accompanying the Burns - Valley Mill Road development were obtained through a sequence of activities as the narratives that follow document: • Assessment of background traffic including other planned projects in the area of impact, • Calculation of trip generation for the proposed Burns - Valley Mill Road development, • Distribution and assignment of the Burns - Valley Mill Road development -generated trips onto the completed roadway network, • Analysis of capacity and level of service using the latest version of Synchro 7 for existing and future conditions. A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns — Valley Mill Road Project Number: ] 5877-1-0 September 4, 2008 Page 1 No Scale Figure I Vicinity Map: Burns - Valley Mill Road, in Frederick County, VA A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns — Valley Mill Road Project Number: 1-0 T T Septemberer 4 4, , 2008 jH� Page 2 x: a c y C ca, 2. _, ?A s G ., 3 ti hti.. Cqs. SITE ; � Ave Figure I Vicinity Map: Burns - Valley Mill Road, in Frederick County, VA A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns — Valley Mill Road Project Number: 1-0 T T Septemberer 4 4, , 2008 jH� Page 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS PHR+A conducted weekday AM/PM and Saturday mid-day peak hour manual turning movement counts at the intersection of Route 7 (Berryville Pike)/1-81 SB Ramps, Route 7 (Berryville Pike)/1-81 NB Ramps/Valley Mill Road, Route 7 (Berryville Pike)/Martin Lane, Route 7 (Berryville Pike)/Gateway Drive, Valley Mill Road/Dairy Corner Place and Valley Mill Road/Martin Lane. In order to determine the ADT (Average Daily Trips) along the study area roadway links, "k" factor (the ratio of PM peak hour traffic volumes to 24-hour traffic volumes) of 7.7% was utilized based upon the published Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) 2006 traffic count data. Figure 2 shows the existing weekday and Saturday ADT as well as weekday AM/PM peak hour and Saturday mid-day peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 3 shows the existing lane geometry and weekday AM/PM peak hour and Saturday mid-day peak hour levels of service. Existing condition analysis is based upon VDOT signal timing. PHR+A has provided Table 1 to show the existing weekday AM/PM and Saturday mid-day peak hour levels of service and 95"' percentile back of queue for each lane group. All traffic count data and Synchro level of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of the report. A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns — Valley Mill Road Project Number: 15877-1-0 R+A HSeptember 4, 2008 Page 3 No Scale y�4 sq � �prl�e rA 9� o �2q 0 � 3osSo .� 9040 4 011�ai`P A Q�Ke C1� 606 6490 $e�y 7290 9q u a 55260 Y\aye ?�. 25360 1 2 �C. 33200 5 210 lout a1P SITE ti6o a 11430 3 4 a ° °15$211\g391 �",�- -(15615'1j191 (F-�%—= 229(401)1283)1051q8l��"7""69i[7773 434(SJ)[513]rn 797(1103)[1075 7 N„ y16181P81 51 24(88)[81] 21 1 �� f4 7 7 [135](178)86 [174](239)174 [810](92ft)981+� 13g911g85 [8021(1057)645�� t [2781(361)160--% N N a \129611 \01(310 ^�� 1911$13 r! [26]U7)6 y `�' 1380113 A)135� � N � $ 6 10930 cJ X1(2)[31 0(0)[01 1` d i tt' pin)l11 ly°l is j�ry0 rr rs°Jl�s� t+ rla e ` [221(5) 1,71 1 1(0)1+'4�O(j6j 16118)1 h t J(38c Weekday �,DT Saturday ADT P-.- ,P -1-n AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)[SAT Peak Hour] _IL-ff N --z Figure 2 Existing Traffic Conditions A Trak Impact Analysis of Burns – Valley Mill Road Project Number: 15877-1-0 PHR+A September 4, 2008 Page 4 Nc 7 SiLLOZ nalized 2 Signalized 3 Unsignalized 4 Si nalized g $ Unsignalirzd E 2 Intersection Intersection Intersection Intersection a LOS= D(D)(D] Right In/Oot Only c,LOS= C(C)[B]oIL I �� 4— d— Ll � C(D)[D] �_ R Pace L IC)(B)B�1� [C](C)C� !� i I} "LC]lC1C� g�• 6 Unsignalizcd Intersection / Figure 3 Pi4-PA+ * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)[SAT Peak Hour] Channelized Right turn -lane with 'STOP' condition Channelized Right turn -lane with 'YIELD' condition NOTE: Analysis is based upon VDOT Signal Timing Existing Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Traffic Impact Analysiv of Butyls — Valley Mill Road Project Number: 15877-1-0 September 4, 2008 Page 5 Table 1 Burns - Valley Mill Road Levels of Service and Back of Queue (95 %) Results F.J:c/'nom !'nnrlitinnc Intersection Traffic Couirol y AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Saturda Peak Hour Lane Group/ Back or Back or Back of Approach LOS T.OS LOS Queue Queue Queue Route ? & 1-8 ] SB Ramps/Shoney's Entrance Signalized EB/L C 126.0 B 123.0 B 95.0 EB/T B 224.0 B 414.0 C EB/TR 307-0 EB LOS B B C WB/L D 0ffA 25.0 B 25.0 WB/T-Lam.1 E WB/r-Lane 2 ]395-0 54.0 C 234-0 WBRA 025.0 A 25.0 WB LOS D A C NB/LT D 28.0 E 1 75.0 D 63.0 NB/R C 25.0 C 36.0 C 25.0 NB LOS D D D SB/L F 449.0 F1 387.0 E 303.0 SB/LT F 440-0 F 385.0 E 311.0 SB/R A 25.0 A 25.0 A 1 25.0 SB LOS F F E Overall LOS D C C Route? & 1-81 NB Ramps/Valley Mill Road Signalized EB/L C 59.0 E 188.0 D 109.0 EB/r-Lane 1. D EB/T-Lane 2 352.0 C 357-0 C 271.0 EB/R A 66.0 A 113.0 A 28-0 EB LOS C C C WB/L C 29.0 C 41.0 B 250 WB/r-Lane 1 D 418-0 E WB/T-Lane 2 746.0 E 608.0 WB/R A 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 WB LOS C D D NB/L F 464.0 1. 540.0 E 371-0 NB/TR D 273.0 E 245.0 D 165-0 NB LOS E } E SB/L E 364.0 E 1 445.0 E 298.0 SB/LT E 356.0 E 454.0 D 297.0 SB/R A 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 SB LOS D E D Overall LOS D D D Route 7 & Martin Lane Unsignalized EBfr EB/TR WB/r-Lana 1 WB/T_Lane 2 NB/R Route 7 & Gateway Drive Signalized EB/L-Lane 1 EB/L Lane 2 D 56.0 D 227-0 C 208.0 EB/T-Lane 1 B 671.0 A 213.0 A EBIT Lane 2 33.0 EB LOS C B B WB/LU D 350 E 28.0 D 38.0 WBIT Lane 1 B WBIr-Lane 2 3130 C 615.0 C 449.0 WB/R A 25.0 A 66.0 A 44.0 WB LOS B C C SB/L-Lane 1 D SB/L -Lane 2 D A26.0 106.0 D 87.0 SB/R-Lane 1 A SB/R-lane' A 48.0 A 43-0 SB LOS C C B Overall LOS C C B Valley Mill Road & Dairy Corner Place Unsignalized EB/LTR C 25-0 C 25-0 C 1 25.0 WB/LTR B 25.0 B 25.0 B 25.0 NB/L A 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 NB/TR SB/LTR A 25.0 A 25.0 A 25-0 Valley Mill Road & Martin Lane Unsignalized WB/LR B 25.0 B 25.0 B 25.0 NB/TR - SB/LT A 250 A 25.0 A 25.0 x A -....-a 75 f-- VNhirlP t -th PHR�n Minimum queue length assumed to he 25 feet EB = Eastbound, WB =Westbound, NB - Northbound, SB = Southbound L: Left, T:Tbm, R: Right A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns - Valley Mill Road Project Number: 15877-1-0 September 4, 2008 Page 6 2010 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS In order to determine the 2010 background traffic conditions, PHR+A grew the existing traffic volumes (shown in Figure 2) using a rate of 6% per year through Year 2010. There are no "planned" background developments located in the vicinity of the site. Figure 4 shows the 2010 background weekday and Saturday ADT as well as weekday AM/PM peak hour and Saturday mid-day peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area. Figure 5 shows the corresponding 2010 background lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour and Saturday mid-day peak hour levels of service. Table 2 is provided to show the 95`h percentile back of queue and levels of service for each lane group during 2010 background conditions. Synchro levels of service worksheets are provided in the Appendix section of this report. A_ Trak Impact Analysis afBurns — Valley Mill Road RAPHProject Number: 15877-1-0 September 4, 2008 Page 7 Figure 4 2010 Background Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis or Burns — Valley Mill Road Project Number: 15877-1-0 September 4, 2008PA+ Page 8 No Scale a�4 OE4¢ g� ce`Nay Gvn�e O Q y 1�7p 3g5,p 4 8170 p1 �� 68,p 7290 $ R� ti 7 3 1 2 39620 ZB.i' 70 37300 5 y1p 1080 — 11�� aUP C�+��((�rr 1T L' ryQp ao, 6 11X0 := 4-- i a ,"„ y 157(457)[31S] ♦-895p241@(12081 6171 118011891\1 w f16/ 7811`w :=8761980)(879] 11(28)[42] 27(99)[91] �C� J 10 7 16181\181 7 [196](269)196 7 ](29[152](200)97--p7 [152 [970](10422)110)1102 (pl(31p��11 [904](1191)726 [26](17)6 [312)(405)180--kl, "� �A3411 C7�� 1� 5 Al 1�2110 A 2)t31 x'0(0)[11tip~, L N0(0)t0] l �r cc ��(� 1221(5)3� o ✓ t6101)1��1 ? n �✓ r �1 a/� y �8Jl4 � r ,yUR4dJ.7"I MENEM IN Saturday ADT AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)[SAT Peak Hour] Figure 4 2010 Background Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis or Burns — Valley Mill Road Project Number: 15877-1-0 September 4, 2008PA+ Page 8 No Unsignalized j Signalized mIntersection z, Signalized E Intersection 3 Unsignalized intersectionIntersection 4 Signalized S ---- Unsignalized Intersection o c LOS= C(C)lCJ LOS= D(E)JEI Right In/Out Only LOS= A(B)[Bl _ 15 7�7� p15 o A(B)[A] 4— V 0 o t7 �D(D)[E] < Q.! A Cl (Bl) E 7 I 7 Dai Curn. Pla�c =lcllc)c r icl(c)c n = IC1tD)Ur� rA y - 2 Signalized"Suggested luterscelion Improvements" LOS=c(c)t<'l WB -177. - NB -1 Lcft 3. k SB -1 Lrlt a No Improvements o z z 4 act[sj No Improvements rove No Improvements No Improvements Required 9 Required Required Required ri' 11V [ltJtc1c: C 0 Denotes Improvements * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)[SAT Peak Hour] (Channelized Right turn -lane with 'STOP' condition L -PT T,1 /p\ Channelized Right turn -lane with 'YIELD' condition 'TJ +/ Figure 5 2010 Background Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis o{Burns – Valley Mill Road PHProject Number: 15877-1-0 September 4, 2008 Page 9 Table 2 Burns - Valley Mill Road Levels of Service and Back of Queue (95%) Results _-:- i -1 --,...ad imnrnvr nentsl Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Saturda Yeak Hour Lane Group/ Back of Back of LOS Back of Approach LOS LOS Queue Queue Queue Route 7 & I-81 SB Ramps/Shoney's Entrance Signalized FBIL E 213.0 E 272.0 D 157.0 EBrf C 282.0 C 492.0 C EBTrR 345.0 EB LOS C C C WB/L B 25.0 B 25.0 A 25.0 WBTr-Lane 1 B W BTf-Lane 2 124.0 B 130.0 A 68.0 WB/R A 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 WB LOS A B A NB/LT D 1 26.0 177-60 D 57.0 NB/R B 1 25.0 B 1 30.0 B 25.0 NB LOS C D D SB/L E 376.0 E 293.0 E 265.0 SB/LT E 388.0 E 286-0 F_' 270.0 SB/R A 1 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 SB LOS D D D Overall LOS C C C Route 7& 1-81 NB Ramps/Valley Mill Road Signalized EB/LEA 109.0 E 199-0 D 158.0 F.BIT-Lane I566.0 FBTr-Lane 2 C 512.0 C 336.0 EB/R25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 EB LOS C L B WB/L D 37.0 E 107.0 D 78.0 WBTr-Lane I WBirr iane 2 C WBfr-Lane 3 260.0 -D 424.0 B 250.0 WB/R. A 25.0 A 250 A 25.0 WB LOS C C B NB/L-Laue I D NB/L-Lane 2 165.0 D 161.0 D 1320 NBTI'R E 277.0 D 216.0 E 214.0 NB LOS D ll D SB/I. Lane I E 295.0 E 254.0 D SB/L-Lane 2 2270 SBTf D 76-U D 183.0 D 97.0 SB/R A 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 SB LOS ll D D Overall LOS C C C Route 7 & Martin Lane Unsignalized EB/T EBTIR WBTr-Lane 1- V✓BTr-Lane 2 - NB/R Route 7 & Gateway Drive Signalized EB/L-lane 1 EB/L-Lane 2 C 57.0 C 105-0 C 148.0 EBTr-Lane I A 30.0 A 25.0 A EBTf-Lane 2 25.0 EB LOS A AA WB/LU D 34.0D 25.0 D 1 35.0 WBTr-Lane 1 A WB/T-Lane 2 229.0 B 495.0 C 447.0 WB/R A 25.0 A 30.0 A 32.0 WB LOS A B C SB/L-Lane I D SB/L-Lane 2 D 91.0 D 84.0 SB/R-Lane 1 B SB/R-Lane 2 B E99. 47.0 A 44.0 SB LOS C C C Overall LOS A B B Valley Mill Road & Dairy Comer Place Unsignalized EB/LTR C C 25.0 C 25.0 WB/LTR B B 25.0 B 25.0 NB/L A A 25.0 A 25.0 NBTrR A A 25.0 A M25.0 25.0 SB/LTR A A 250 A 25.0 Valley Mill Road & Martin Lane Unsignalized WB/LR B B 25.0 C 25.0 NB/TR - - - - - SB/LT A 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 x n........e.1 -f,-P� Vnhirlr 1r -h PH"A Minimum queue length assumed to be 25 feet EB = Eastbound, WB =Westbound, NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound L: Left, T:Thm, R: Right A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns - Valley Mill Road Project Number: 15877-1-0 September 4, 2008 Page 10 9r,Q TP V_1W 1V Q A T1"N PHR+A determined the number of trips entering and exiting the site using equations and rates provided in the 7th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report. Table 3 is provided to summarize the total trip generation associated with the proposed development. Table 3 Burns - Valley Mill Road Trip Generation Summary ITE Code Land n� Amount In AM Peak Ho� Out Total In PM Peak Haur Out Total ADT in Sat Peak Hnur Out Total AUT 934 Fast Food W DT 3,500 SF 95 91 186 63 58 121 1,736 106 102 207 2,527 Sub-Tota1 95 91 186 63 58 121 1,736 106 102 207 2,527 Pars -by Trips 40% 37 37 74 24 24 48 695 41 41 83 1,011 Total "New" Tripsl 58 54 112 1 39 34 73 1 1,042 64 60 124 1,516 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT The distribution of trips was based upon local travel patterns for the roadway network surrounding the proposed site. PHR+A utilized the trip distribution percentages shown in Figure 6 to assign the proposed Bums - Valley Avenue development trips (Table 3) throughout the study area roadway network. Figure 7 shows the development -generated AM/PM peak hour and Saturday mid-day peak hour trips and ADT assignments. 2010 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS The Burns - Valley Mill Road assigned trips (Figure 7) were added .to the 2010 background traffic volumes (Figure 4) to obtain 2010 build -out conditions- Figure 8 shows the 2010 build -out weekday and Saturday ADT as well as weekday AMIPM peak hour and Saturday mid-day peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area network. Figure 9 shows the respective 2010 build -out lane geometry and weekday AM/PM peak hour and Saturday mid-day peak hour levels of service. Table 4 shows the 95th percentile back of queue and levels of service for each lane group during 2010 build- out conditions. All Synchro levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns — Valley Mill Road R+A Project Number: 15877-1-0 September 4, 2008 PHPage 11 No Scale Figure 6 Trip Distribution Percentages Pj�RA A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns — Valley Mill Road Project Number: 15877-1-0 September 4, 2008 Page 12 No Scale FQ Ei S� Gacc *' a9 Dj1Ve O O 0 152 a1rQ y55 m 114 �c9. 7 °'S 1 i:65 Y,ace 2 Losoes 796 SITE c.P� 6 gs 0 1 b E 2 E 3 4 x x e 1.1)(7)(12) 19(12)1211 4--19(-12)[-217 1� 36(24)[407 7 7 7 \?♦ �� [221(14)20 �a� qp ■ i (-21)('12)-Ifs♦ q■ ! t r C31(Zi3 WONA �� [53)(32)17--% m �' - <^ .� ? C1s111o116 5 6 2338 �nl AL L l o ✓ �d// y Saturday ADT PT TP + / A AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)[SAT Peak Hour] Figure 7 'Development -Generated Trips Assignment A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns — Valley Mill Road Project Number: 15877-1-0 PH13.A September 4, 2008 Page 13 Figure 8 2010 Build -out Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns — Valley Mill Road Project Number: 15877-1-0 PH"'N September 4, 2008 Page 14 No Scale awe 4 S�0�1 GateW ay 0 m4 10302 °96 4 � o�Ra � C� x284 ti 7404 �ct� 7 °p435 1 t 2 - 3Yg85 ety\'ace .2J, CO 29041 8 3096 5 patty 0 ?� t�o a� •' ,^b9g y a � OEM 6 lulu 1 $ A Z ` g 3 4 0 ti m ��498(594)[588] 0 ^' '^ m . ��257(451)[3181 � j N � - 339 (1gMil�1 � 7 w � P "sem- g31156145y `13°1 � 2a� 5(11 1 V �a895(992)(900] 1 t-11(28)[421 �877(1227)[7188J 63(122)[1311 iii 109 g� 16181 IC 7 [196](269)196 6 (269)17 1� 7 1152J(200)97�%� )i r L8901(]030)]084 �� Now `} 1�,n� ♦ 91169 2 7 �[ [Y[1 41 l�7(17)6� m N [365](437)228�� [1439J115i7 [01(3�� [�18 40� o <^ ^GtggNh54) 559 l $ ( % 14618 a pl 1` �o(�No1 (s�7�1 ti�ti c J2�1� [0(5)31 qy r4l d8(v o `yii a L Saturday ADT ,TJ /A\ AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)[SAT Peak Hour] Figure 8 2010 Build -out Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns — Valley Mill Road Project Number: 15877-1-0 PH"'N September 4, 2008 Page 14 1 I No: Unsignalized Intersection / A 1 Signalized 2J Signalized o 2 3 U mignalized 4 Signalized g Umignalized A a Intersection a LOS=C(C)[C] 0 0 Intersection LOS=D(E)[D] o` Intersection Right In/Out Only lnlersection IAS=B(B)[B] a Intersection �B(A)[AJ o 4'C(D)[DJ ♦a 7 '� ��BCS1L�� n ¢ 4 L B(B)[CJ' 7 ®� 1 *�/]�� O f [CJ(C)Col t7 y 21 Stgnalized "Suggested Infersection improvements" IAS C(C}[(j WB-1'rhru NB - 1 Ixft 8- 3 _a` 5 SB - 1 L& No Improvements z z `�� No Improvements No Improvements No Improvements Required 01 B'cB`J Required Required Required Illy 7 = Denotes Improvements * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)[SAT Peak Hour] Channelized Right turn -lane with 'STOP' condition A fiChannetized Right turn -lane with 'YIELD' condition Figure 9 2010 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns — Valley Mill Road PH RA Project Number- 15877-1-0 September 4, 2008 Page 15 Table 4 Burns - Valley Mill Road Levels of Service and Back of Queue (95%) Results � in n.ata ....t !'....d;f;- !m/ -.-d imnrnvernents ) Intersection Traffic _ Control AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Saturday Neck Hour Lane Group/ Approach LOS Back of LOS Back of LOS Back of Qrueue I Queue Queue Route 7 & 1-81 SB Ramps/Shoney's Entrance Signalized EB/L D 2080. D 269.0 D 175.0 EBfr C 293-0 C 492.0 C EBUR 345.0 EB LOS C C C WB/L B 25.0 A 25.0 A 250 WB/T-Lane I C WB/T-Lane 2 270.0 B 148.0 B 165.0 WBIR A 25.0 A 25,0 A 25.0 WB LOS B A A NBILTZE 26.0 0 D 55.0 NB/R 25.0 0 B 250 NB LOSC C WE301.0 SB/L 384.0 E 294.0 SB/LT E 395-0 .0 E 301.0 SB/R A I 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 SB LOS D D D Overall LOS C C C Route 7 & I-81 NBRamps/Valley Mill Road Signalized g EBIL E 115.0 E 1980 E 155.0 EB/T-Lane I C EWT-Lane 2 540.0 C 4980 C 3860 EB/R A 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 FB LOS C C C WBIL E 85.0 F 148.0 D 111.0 VrBfr-Lane I WBl1-Lane 2 B WB/T-]ane 3 202.0 C 403.0 C 264.0 WB(R A 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 WB LOS B C B NB/L-Lane 1 C NB/L-Lane 2 164.0 D 169.0 D 154.0 NWIR E 340.0 E 1 254.0 D 229.0 NB LOS D D D SB/L-lane 1 E 295.0 D 245.0 E SB/L-Lane 2 228.0 SBlr E 106.0 E 212.0 D 106.0 SB/R A 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 SB LOS D D D Overall LOS C C C Route 7 & Martin, Lane Unsignalized EBfr EBrrR WB/T-Lane I WB/T_lane 2 - - - - NB/R - - Route 7 & Gateway Drive Signalized EBIL-Laue 1 EB/L-I - 2 C 46.0 C 110.0 C 124.0 EBfF-Lane I A 700 A 25-0 A EBrr-Lane 2 25.0 EB LOS A A A WB/LU D 34.0 D 25.0 D 1 34.0 WBff-Lane 1 B 321.0 C 505-0 C WWF -Lane 2 426.0 WB/R A 25.0 A 310 A 27.0 WB LOS B B B SBO" -lane I D SB/1_ Lane 2 44.0 D 89.0 D 84.0 SB/R-Lane 1 A SB/R-L2 26-0 A 47.0 B 44.0 SB LOS C C C Overall LOS B B B Valley Mill Road & Dairy Corner Place Unsignalized EB/LTR C 25-0 C 25.0 D 25.0 WB/LTR B 25.0 B 25.0 C 257- NB/L A 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 NBlIR A 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 SB/LTR A 25.0 A 25.0 A 25.0 Valley Mill Road & Martin Lane Unsignalized WB/LR B 25.0 B 25.0 B 25.0 NBrfR - - - - - - SBILT I A 25-0 1 A 25.0 A 25.0 PHRA Minimum queue length assumed to be 25 feet EB = Eastbound, WB =Westbound, NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound L: Left, T:Tbm, R: Right A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns - Valley Mill Road Project Number: 15877-1-0 September 4, 2008 Page 16 CONCLUSION Based upon Synchro analysis results, assuming the suggested improvements as shown in Figure 9, all the study area intersections associated with the proposed Burns - Valley Mill Road development will maintain acceptable level of service "C" or better during 2010 build -out conditions. The following describes the improvements suggested for each of the study area intersections to maintain acceptable levels of service "C" or better during 2010 build -out conditions: Route 7 (Berryville Pike)/1-81 NB Ramps/Valley Mill Road: This intersection will require a westbound through lane, a northbound left -turn lane and a southbound left - turn lane. {Suggested improvements are necessary without the proposed Burns - Valley Mill Road development to maintain levels of service "C". } NOTE: Funding source for the aforementioned improvements have yet to be identified. The applicant will work with VDOT/County to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle facilities adjacent to the site. A Traffic Impact Analysis of Burns — Valley Mill Road RA PHProject Number: 15877-1-0 September 4, 2008 Page 17 REZONING APPLICATION FORINT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be unmpleted 1?y Plannnt s4 f - I ee -Ninouat Paicl $ Zonir7g Amendment N'wnber PC Hearing Date .° + BOS Hearing Date The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicants: Name: Patton Harris Rust & Associates Telephone: (540) 667.2139 Address: 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester Virginia 22601 2. Property Owner (if different than above) Name: David M. & Svetlana M. Burns Telephone: Address: 1675 Fort Braddock Ct Winchester, VA 22601 3. Contact person(s) if other than above Name: Patrick Sowers w/PHRA Telephone: (540) 667.2139 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location Map X Plat X Deed of property X Verification of taxes paid X Agency Comments X Fees X Impact Analysis Statement X Proffer Statement X 1 5. The Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned: David M. Burns Svetlana M. Burns 6. A) Current Use of the Property: Residential B) Proposed Use of the Property: Commercial 7. Adjoining Property: SEE ATTACHED. 8, Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers). The Property is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Valley Mill Road and Martin Drive. In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for the applicant to provide information concerning the specifies of the proposed use. Otherwise, the planning staff will use the maximum possible density of intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on page 9 of the application package. 9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number: 54 -A -112Q, 54 -A -112D, and 54 -A -112P. Districts Magisterial: Fire Service: Rescue Service: Red Bud Greenwood Greenwood High School: Middle School: Elementary School: James Wood JW Middle Redbud Run 10. Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. Acres Current Zoning Zoning Requested 1.26 RP B2 1.26 Total acreage to be rezoned 2 11. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed Single Family Home Townhome Multi -Family Non -Residential Lots Mobile Home Hotel Rooms Square Footage of Proposed Uses Office 6,000 Service Station Retail 6,000 _ Manufacturing Restaurant Flex - Warehouse Other (Pharmacy) 12. Signature: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors' public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right-of-way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. Applicant(s) _ ciL Date 3 Adjoining Property Owners Rezoning Owners of property adjoining the land will be notified of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors meetings. For the purpose of this application, adjoining property is any property abutting the requested property on the side or rear or any property directly across a public right-of-way, a private right-of-way, or a watercourse from the requested property. The applicant is required to obtain the following information on each adjoining property including the parcel identification number which may be obtained from the office of the Commissioner of Revenue. The Commissioner of the Revenue is located on the 2nd floor of the Frederick Countv Administrative Building, 107 North Kent Street. Name Address Property Identification Number (PIN) Name: Eastside Holdings LLC P.O. Box 31 Property#: 54F -3-A1 Winchester, VA 22604 Name: Frederick County School Board P.O. Box 3508 Property#: 54-A-114 Winchester, VA 22604 Name: Edward Spence 115 Canyon Rd Property #: 54-A-1 12J Winchester, VA 22602 Name: 220 Seafood Restaurant LLC 238 Hanging Tree Rd Property #: 54-A-1 12C Winchester, VA 22603 Name: Eastside Holdings LLC P.O. Box 31 #: 54F -3-A2 Winchester, VA 22604 -Property Name: Eastside Holdings LLC P.O. Box 31 Property#: 54F -A-30 Winchester, VA 22604 Name: Edward Spence 115 Canyon Rd #: 54-A-1 12K Winchester, VA 22602 -Property Name: Edward Spence 115 Canyon Rd Pro ert #: 54-A-1120 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: #: -Property Name: Property M. Name: #: -Property Name: #: -Property Name: #: -Property Name: Property M 4 Special Limited Power of Attorney County of FredericK,, Virginia Frederick Manning Web Site: www.co.rrederick.ya.us Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395 Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) David M. & Svetlana M. Burns (Phone) (Address) 1675 Fort Braddock Ct Winchester VA 22601 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 Numbers 060019978, 060019772, and 060021192 and is described as Tax Map Parcel 54 -A -112D, 54 -A -112Q, 54 -A -112P Subdivision: do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) Patton Harris Rust & Associates (Phone) 540.667.2139 "Address) 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200, Winchester, Virginia 22601 ro act as my true and lawful attorney-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 applications for my (our) above described Property, including X Rezoning (including proffers) _ Conditional Use Permits Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) Subdivision Site Plan 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. 4 In witness thereof, I (we) have hereto set my (our) hand and seal this day ofd? , 200 1 .; Signature(s) Stateof Virginia, G�Ceaui�}.of {l� r �i'=S1`e-n Jo -wit: _- A u i d i✓l , i3 ut2 N S I,�► � ! 't i eil ?a(Ft m tr2 a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally. appeared before me a has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this to day ofSeA)t 2009L. My Commission Expires: a o P �. Votar Public SECT-lcw rwo CQLQN/A1 HE/GHTS �U91TiVIS1Q!✓ SCALE ! SO CD 0 N Cl) s7 a r_sr� S/vEET 3 of 4 �7 • D TO: FROM: RE: DATE: COUNTY of FR:4EVERPCK Department of -Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 L.11MLIE M-0 RANDUM Planning Commission John A. Bishop, AICP, Deputy Director - Transportation J1 Enhancement Grant Application September 23, 2009 County staff is undertaking the annual process of applying for Enhancement Grant funds. Enhancement Grants are federal funds that are awarded by the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) on an annual basis for improvements to bicycle and pedestrian transportation. This is a grant with a local match component of 20%. As is the case with many VDOT grant programs, the application process itself does not obligate County funds. In the event that the County receives an award, the Board of Supervisors would determine at that time whether to commit funds with the hope that private funds would be available to cover the match requirement. For this year's application cycle, staff has recommended an application for enhancements to bicycle and pedestrian transportation in the vicinity of Senseny Road Elementary School. This is a continuation of this project which was awarded $140,000.00 in 2006, $250,000.00 in 2007. Last year's application was not successful. The proposed project would add paved multiuse paths to the northern and southern sides of Senseny Road between I-81 and the Orrick Commons project. The project would also include improvements to the crossovers of roadways traversed by the paths, and an additional crossover of Senseny Road at Senseny Road Elementary. Attached please find a graphic depicting the project area. This project would serve as an important cornerstone for a future pedestrian and bicycle system extending further east along Senseny Road and into the City of Winchester. The Transportation Committee is considering this proposal at their September 28, 2009 meeting. Staff will update the committee on their recommendation. Attachments JAB/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 9 Winebester, Virginia 22601-5000 C01, l✓ONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA Use TAB KEY to reach each field. IN 2010 - 2011 PR6, 7 t_`T APPLI- A- T1-- 'N' _ F -0�.M Date (nun/dd/yyyy): , +.-.oar:, fn,- P fiPlrl nnnear an the stats*s hnr nt the bottom of the active Nvindow. Press F1 for additional hein. ---- Name: Frederick County, VA Departnnent of Plauni-n- and C. 'Transportation Enhancement Categories (Check all that apply — See Enhancement brochure for details of categories) Development 2. ❑ Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety and Education 3. ❑ Acquisition of Scenic or Historic Easements and Sites, including Historic Battlefields 4. ❑ Scenic or Historic Highway Programs, including Tourist and Welcome Centers 5. ❑ Landscaping and Scenic Beautification 6. ❑ Historic Preservation A. Applicant (Group, Agency, etc.) Address: 107 N. Kent Street Suite 202 Iff. Relationship to a PreviouslyFirst Funded Enhancement Project critical step in developing key network connections to the city of Winchester which has had a number of enhancement giants for the Green Circle. City, State Zip Winchester, VA 22601 Telephone: 540-665-5651 Email Address. jbishop@co.frederr_ck.va.us Name: I Prc j act Sponsor " (if different from A') Name and Addzess , Address_ City, State Zip iTelephone: i Email Address: Name: John Bishop, Deputy Director - Transportation C. responsibla Person/Ti le—Sponsor.. I Telephone: 540-665-5651 Fax: 540-665-6395 Email: jbishop@Go.frederick.va.us f ' Name: John Bishop, Deputy Director - Transportation D. Project Manager: � Telephone: 540-665-5651 Fax: 540-665-6395 Email: jbishop cr�co.fiederick.va.us E. Project Title: Senseny Road Bicycle & Pedestrian Improvements r F. Project Description: Installation of asphalt multiuse paths along Senseny Road in the vicinity of Senseny Road Elementary C. 'Transportation Enhancement Categories (Check all that apply — See Enhancement brochure for details of categories) 1. Z Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities 2. ❑ Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety and Education 3. ❑ Acquisition of Scenic or Historic Easements and Sites, including Historic Battlefields 4. ❑ Scenic or Historic Highway Programs, including Tourist and Welcome Centers 5. ❑ Landscaping and Scenic Beautification 6. ❑ Historic Preservation 7. ❑ Rehabilitation and Operation of Historic Transportation Building, Structures, or Facilities S. F-]Preservationof Abandoned Railway Corridors and Conversion to Trails 9. ❑ Inventory, Control, and Removal of Outdoor Advertising 10. ❑ Archaeological Planning and Research 11. ❑ Environmental Mitigation of Runoff Pollution and Provision of Wildlife Connectivity 12. ❑ Establishment of Transportation Museum Iff. Relationship to a PreviouslyFirst Funded Enhancement Project critical step in developing key network connections to the city of Winchester which has had a number of enhancement giants for the Green Circle. L Critical Milestone Dates and Eadorsements (Attach copy of the public notice and all resolutions endorsing the project) T_ i.ntoninnno a. Public Hearing Torzravero� b. Local Government Endorsement'g- c. MPO Resolution Endorsement ❑ Check if not applicable—kV24L20 -2 - FederalEnhar:cernentFunds )Reye,, -seed in this Application (Maximum 801' -- $1,345,600.00 r:N— Match Reyried (Minimum 20%) $336,400.00 Tom' 1S1atch Breakdovcar by Source (include value of in- !d/donations] Status {checit appropriate status) Amount County Staff Support and Management of Project ® Confirmed ❑ Anticipated $130,000.00 Donated Right of Way along Corridor ❑ Confirmed N Anticipated $5,000.00 County General Funds ❑ Confirmed M Anticipated $201,400.00 ❑ Confirmed ❑ Anticipated THIS TOTAL MUST MATCH ENTRY IN ITEM lid TOTAL $336,400.00 ! 1. Othei- Funding Sources Available (beyond match requirement) Status (check appropriate status} ❑ Confirmed ❑ Anticipated Amount ❑ Confirmed ❑ Anticipated TOTAL $0.00 i'° . Protect Budget' As lttach1hent A, enclose a complete project budget If the project includes multiple phases, show each phase. `Budget projections suould reflect the total pro] ect cost hrcluding that fhr federal and non-federal funds_ moi. Selection i:riteria Co,-uplete Attachment B — Include pictures, maps and support documents. Attach additional sheets as needed. 3y signing below, Project Sponsor indicates their understanding that these are federal funds, that project development must comply pith all federal and state guidelines, and that they are responsible for future maintenance and operating costs of the completed project. P. Sponsor Signature (person responsible) Date MATI LING ADDRESS AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ]Please mail FIVE copies of your completed application package to the following address: For Technical Assistance Contact: Mr. Michael A. Estes Winky Chenault (804) 786-2264 Toll Free: (800) 444-7832 Local Assistance Division Pamela Liston (804) 786-2734 Fax: (804) 371-0847 Virginia Department of Transportation Erica Jeter (804) 786-9125 1401 East Broad Street Cynthia Clark (804) 371-6289 Richmond, Virginia 23219 EnliancementProQrarn(a�VDOT.Vir6inia.2ov FY 2008 - 2009 ATTACK EN T A r�� ra.e,suaT.ar;un PROJECT BUDGET TEMPLATE t '7 —"—,7 T. Pd PROJECT BUDGET. REQUIRED -BY ALL APPLICANTS C0lv1M0NAVE.4L.TH OF VIRGIN'A This template is an example for creating a detailed project budget— not a form that must be coinpleted online. The number of construction phases, number and types of tasks, and budget items will vary by project. However, every budget inust include totals for ,?A];7 livable abases--1'relir�inary Engineering, Right of Way and/or Constriction (highlighted in gray). Also, please note that all projects should have some money budgeted for Preliininaay Engineering, including environmental and VDOT review charges. Task by Project Construction Construuctiioun C0n5trUCti9n TOTAL I)eve➢o rgeut ]Please Phase A Please 2 Phase 3 Project Costs lPR ElLEVENARY IENGU>Q EEl[NG PHASE .Eno ineering/Design Fees Enviromnnerntal Uor_:ument S -a ,7eying Fees Estimated VDOT review charges (we recomiinend budgeting for 3-5% of total project cost) Crant Administrative Costs Add roes as needed P'E Pba<se TOTAL COSTS might of Tay Purchase Utility Relocation Add rows as needed RW Phase TOTAL' COSTS lR GIRT OF VVA C'ONgTiRIJCTION PHASE *Include construction line items ftom eng,ineer's estimate, add 1'014's as neededp I Inspection Fees Construction Management Contingency Add rows as needed Cly Please TOTAL COSTS TOTAL COSTS (PE, RW&CN) — FY 2008 - 2009 - A T ACHY B ,i- T, 0 ri SELECTION CRITERIA R " P.1 THIS FORM WST BE COMPLETED BY ALL APPLICANTS COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA A. Applicant (Croup, Agency, eta.) Name. Frederick County, VA Department of Planning and Development Address: 107 N. Kent Street, Suite 202 City, State Zip Winchester, VA 22601 J B k roject Titre: Senseny RoadBicycle & Pedestdan lmprovernents C. C'ornplete the foflowing gsestion.s providing as much detail as possible wlAe including examples when available. I Responses will automatically expand to additional sheets as needed. . Relationship to Transportation —What service or function will this project, or has this project, provided for the traveling public? r ow will it impact transportation? This improvement provides the opportunity for a number of subdivisions to access amenities along Senseny Road =,eluding Senseny Road Elementary, Church Services, and Convenience shopping without being forced to use their vehicles. In addition improving this access would reduce automobile trips on a very heavily traveled facility. This project has been expanded since the last fiscal year application and now includes an extended len-1 which attaches to a newly approved shopping center with anchor grocery store and their proffered trail system. This will live added convenience to the swrr ounding localities and give them access to a full service grocery store in addition to the convenience shopping opportunities along this planned path. ----------------------------------------------------------- - ---------- 2. )em6 strated Yeerd — What need(s) will this project fulfill within the community? The Senseny Road corridor is a heavily traveled roadway at the heart of one of tie most densely populated areas of Frederick County. Though it offers a number of amenities mentioned above, it does not have so inuch as a sidewalk to offer the residents opportunity to access those amenities. ---------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------ 3. >rojazt Usefulness and/or Benefit — What purpose will this project serve and how will it benefit the community? Is there strong corrnnunity support? In addition to giving the pedestrian a bicycle alternative to travelers to shopping, it will also offer families the opportunity to walk their children to and fi-om school and church services. The improved access also grants greater community access to the elementary school which really serves as a park for these neighborhoods which lack park facilities. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- 4r. Amenities/Support ?Facilities — What facilities are available and/or included in this proposal? What means of access will be available? This proposal would bring better access to Senseny Road to a number of subdivisions as shown in the included map. These subdivisions, individually, do not have significant traffic on their local streets which makes those streets fairly safe for bicycle and pedestrian activity. However, this link would allow those residents to safely travel via foot or bicycle beyond the borders of their subdivision, thus improving their quality of life and reducing automobile trips on this corridor. --- ---------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5. Educational/ffistorieal — Explain the history and/or scenic significance of this project. What educational experience will be provided? --- --- -its-e- - ----------- ------- - - ---- ---- ----- -- ---- - -- 'p I"?p ect RResourees How has the �o�nnunity involved itself in thisprnject? What supr11 has been provided? Has.fundina and/or land been secured? Is this a continuation of an existing project, and if so, what is the status of that project? This corridor has lora been planned for this type of improvements and the surrounding community has always been very supportive. This segment is seen as a critical first link of a bicycle pedestrian corridor that will run from the city of Winchester to Clark County. County staff has worked and will continue to work to further this project and Vae Board of Supervisors has given their support. a. If fres project has received Enhancement funds in prior years, complete the following: i,ibanecment Award by Year (include Federal Enhancement funds only, do riot include applicant match or other non-federal participaticn). Identify if the award was applied to a prior phase of a multi -phased project. Year Award Applied Toward/]Phase 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 140,000.00 Not yet applied, agreement recently executed 2006 250,000.00 Not yet applied, agreement not yet completed. Total 390,000.00 Y 4 ' r - &1.d1 •' -. \ _ !.' K(}LLIf;•(. F!�C t 1f�. .mak .r �� : °� ..r < p - 1 V t O � J � � • .c �" �y{ i �' ' ,fit' ,'.t ,� y �� I.,. µR . �♦ - �„ �'. � - �,'"° ''° "°~. a '��, t � s ,,ta��.' � i' ILL w r r J t.F IrS+n�r�i i G• LaFWrKC.Omm ` ! -. I •. ~ as uwo-ippp �`�;'" S; ' .. - � '�� 2 r .� y - 41NULFtivO[7�+ -1•,. 6� i - FA II:'mw c5sH4C"`+ ., ' - !, e ---_ yrl l W i6r loc', 116 RT -7`71F 0 r h , Ip tr .. Y, Attaehme-it A Anticipated Project Budget PmEmina*�y Enzine_ering Phase EngineeringlDesignlSurvey Fees...............$218,250.00 VDCT Review Fees..............................$101,850.00 Grant Administrative Costs.....................$72,750.00 Total PE Costs...................................$392,850.00 Right of Way Phase Right of way costs/utility relocation/drainage modifications Where Right of way is constrained to make bettor use of existing right of way/ Modifications to existing signals if needed ....... $1,242,650.00 Total ROW Costs................................$1;242,650.00 _Construction Phrase Construction Costs .................... . ..........$436,500.00 Total CN Costs ....................................$436,500.00 Total Costs ................................................$2,072,000.00 �7 C� CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #05-09 w4vo� ` COG�� ROGER dENKINS Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: September 9, 2009 Staff Contact: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrator This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 08/19/09 Tabled by PC for 45 days 10/07/09 Pending Board of Supervisors: 11/18/09 Pending EXECUTIVE SUMARY: This is a request for a Public Garage without Body Repair. At the Planning Commission meeting of August 19, 2009, a majority of commissioners decided to table this request for 45 days in order to provide time for the residents along Boggess Lane to work out a road maintenance agreement with all of the property owners. Conditions were also amended as a result of conversations staff had with the applicant and property owners, as follows: 1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. The applicant will be limited to repairing only five (5) vehicles on site at anytime. 3. Vehicles awaiting repair shall be screened by an opaque fence. 4. Operation limited to the applicant; no employees. 5. All repair activities shall occur entirely within the enclosed structure. 6. The applicant shall apply for and install an approved septic system within three (3) years of the approval date of this Conditional Use Permit. 7. This Conditional Use Permit shall be void and will be revoked if condition -96 is not implemented. 8. Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four (4) square feet in size and five (5) feet in height. 9. Hours of operation shall be from 8:00 am to 6:00 pm and no repair activities will take place on Sundays. Page 2 Conditional Use Permit #05-09 Roger Jenkins September 9, 2009 10. A 15 -mph speed limit sign shall be posted at the entrance to Boggess Lane from Route 608. A "Watch for Children" sign shall be posted on Boggess Lane approximately 500 feet from its entrance from Route 608. 11. Any expansion or change of use shall require a new Conditional Use Permit. 12. A "Private Residence —No Trespassing" sign shall be posted on Boggess Lane. Page 3 Conditional Use Permit #05-09 Roger Jenkins September 9, 2009 LOCATION: This property is located at 190 Boggess Lane. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 41-10-9 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District Land Use: Garage ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Residential South: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Residential/Church East: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Residential/Vacant West: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Residential/Vacant PROPOSED USE: This application is for a Public Garage without Body Repair. REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation: The application for a Conditional Use Permit for this property appears to have little measurable impact on Route 608, the VDOT facility which would provide access to the property. Existing entrance is adequate for proposed use. However, should use ever expand in the future, the entrance may have to be upgraded to VDOT commercial standards. Fire and Rescue: Plan approval recommended. Inspections Department: Building permit for change of use required. Buildings shall comply with The Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and Sections 311, S Storage of the International Building Code/2006 and Special Use Section 406.6. Other Code that applies is ANSI A117.1-3 Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities. Proposed 4800 sq. ft. repair garage shall comply with ANSI Handicap Al 17.1-3-03. All required egress shall be handicap accessible. Handicap parking shall be provided. Signage shall comply with USBC 1106.8. Parking at proposed shop area not shown on plans at this time. Restrooms shall be provided and Page 4 Conditional Use Permit 405-09 Roger Jenkins September 9, 2009 be connected to an approved disposal system. If floor drain system is provided, a grease/oil separator per the International Plumbing Code. Special inspections requirements of Chapter 17 of IBC shall apply to this type of structure (soils, concrete, steel, etc.). Permit required for fence that exceeds six feet above finished grade. Health Department: The Health Dept. has no objections for the public garage (auto repair) to be utilized as long as the spray irrigation septic system is constructed within the three year time frame and a temporary pump and haul is applied for to be used until the spray irrigation can be utilized within the three year time frame. Please approve with temporary pump and haul for three years after application for pump and haul is approved. All setbacks to existing wells and septics must be met according to Sewage Handling and Disposal Regulations as well as State well regulations. Planninst and Zoning: Public garages without auto body repair are permitted in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District with an approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP), provided that all repair work takes place entirely within an enclosed structure. This proposed use will be conducted in an existing structure approximately 4,800 square feet in size, on a 77 acre parcel. This property and the surrounding properties are currently zoned RA and are heavily wooded with natural screening for this proposed use. The nearest buildings or dwellings are more than one -hundred (100) feet from this property. No more than five (5) vehicles awaiting repair are allowed at one time and no employees will be allowed with this proposed use. There will be no vehicle sales, nor unrelated repair sales, allowed with this Conditional Use Permit. This proposed use will utilize a temporary pump and haul permit approved by the Frederick County Administrator for a period of three (3) years, from the approval date of this Conditional Use Permit. The Health Dept. has no objections for the public garage (auto repair) utilizing the approved pump and haul as long as the spray irrigation septic system is constructed within the three year time frame. Should the applicant not install an approved septic system within the specified time, the CUP will become void and will be revoked. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 08/19/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: This is a request for a Public Garage without Body Repair. Should the Planning Commission find this use appropriate, Staff would suggest the following conditions be placed on the CUP: 1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. The applicant will be limited to repairing only five (5) vehicles on site at anytime. 3. Vehicles awaiting repair shall be screened by an opaque fence. Page 5 Conditional Use Permit #05-09 Roger Jenkins September 9, 2009 4. Operation limited to the applicant; no employees. 5. All repair activities shall occur entirely within the enclosed structure. 6. The applicant shall apply for and install an approved septic system within three (3) years of the approval date of this Conditional Use Permit. 7. This Conditional Use Permit shall be void and will be revoked if condition #6 is not implemented. 8. Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four (4) square feet in size and five (5) feet in height. 9. Hours of operation shall be from 8:00 am to 6:00 pm and no repair activities will take place on Sundays. 10. A 15 -mph speed limit sign shall be posted at the entrance to Boggess Lane from Route 608. A "Watch for Children" sign shall be posted on Boggess Lane approximately 500 feet from its entrance from Route 608. 11. Any expansion or change of use shall require a new Conditional Use Permit. 12. A "Private Residence — No Trespassing" sign shall be posted on Boggess Lane. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 08/19/09 MEETING: The staff reported that a few of the recommended conditions were amended as a result of conversations the staff had with the applicant and adjoining property owners, as follows: Condition #9, Hours of operation shall be from 8:00 a.m to 6:00 p.m. No repair activities will take place on Sundays; Condition #10, A 15 -mph speed limit sign shall be posted at the entrance to Boggess Lane from Route 608; Condition #11, A "Watch for Children" sign shall be posted on Boggess Lane approximately 500 feet from its entrance from Route 608; and Condition #12, A "Private Residence -No Trespassing" sign shall be posted on Boggess Lane. The staff confirmed that Boggess Lane was a private road and no written road maintenance agreement was in effect. The staff noted that public garages without auto body repair are permitted in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District with an approved conditional use permit (CUP), provided all repair work takes place entirely within an enclosed structure. Commission members discussed the proposed business with Mr. Jenkins, the applicant. Mr. Jenkins said he repairs automatic transmissions and he estimated receiving three vehicles per week; he did not anticipate the operation to generate a lot of noise; there would be no fabrication, Page 6 Conditional Use Permit 405-09 Roger Jenkins September 9, 2009 welding, or brake machines. When Commissioners asked the applicant if he would be willing to participate in the cost of road maintenance, Mr. Jenkins said that he did not oppose being involved, but he and his wife had not had an opportunity to review the proposed agreement. Mr. Jenkins had no problem with vehicles being dropped off or picked up during normal business hours. Five adjoining and neighboring residents came forward to speak with concerns about the business and/or the use of Boggess Lane for business purposes. They reported that Boggess Lane was a one -lane private road with poor visibility and they had concerns for the safety of their children playing or walking to the school bus stop. They were concerned about increased traffic, strangers driving up their private lane, and general wear and tear on the road from trucks or heavy equipment. Some were opposed to any type of commercial business establishment. Others suggested Mr. Jenkins use his existing easement for his business which would alleviate many of the concerns raised about Boggess Lane or participate in the road maintenance costs through their proposed road maintenance agreement. They spoke about the need for the speed limit and watch children signs and for the conditions to specify the hours of operation. Mrs. Jenkins, wife of the applicant, said they are currently operating this business at their residence at 278 Old Bethel Church Road with an approved CUP. However, they believed the existing newer building, which was constructed for their farm equipment, would be easier for her husband to work in. She added that this will be a one-person garage for her husband to work on transmissions; she said at the most, he could only fix two vehicles per week. Frederick County Attorney, Rod Williams, stated that in terms of the County's consideration of a CUP, conditions may be placed on the permit, legally including a condition regarding a road maintenance agreement for upkeep of a road to particular standards. However, Mr. Williams said the bigger issue for the County comes from the practical side; for example, if the maintenance agreement simply states that a maintenance agreement must be in place, whether it is abided by is out of the hands of the County. He said if the condition in the CUP states that the maintenance agreement must be in place and abided by, the practical problem for the County is that the Commission and the Board of Supervisors would end up being charged with the responsibility of policing its compliance. Mr. Williams said this function is better reserved for the courthouse rather than for the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, as a practical matter. Some Commissioners voiced their opinion that since Mr. and Mrs. Jenkins have an easement to use Boggess Lane, they have as much right to use the road as any of the other residents. They noted that Mr. Jenkins' CUP would probably generate less or an equivalent amount of vehicle trips as an additional residence. Other Commissioners believed Mr. Jenkins should pay his share of road maintenance costs and he should participate in the road maintenance agreement. Commissioners decided to table the CUP request for 45 days in order to provide time for the Page 7 Conditional Use Permit #05-09 Roger Jenkins September 9, 2009 residents along Boggess Lane to work out a road maintenance agreement with all of the property owners. The majority vote on tabling was: YES (TO TABLE): Mohn, Kerr, Triplett, Kriz, Wilmot, Manuel, Ambrogi, Crosen, Unger NO: Madagan, Thomas, Oates (Note: Commissioner Ruckman was absent from the meeting.) Following the public meeting, it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to offer a recommendation concerning this application to the Board of Supervisors. loger Jenkins CUP # 05 - 09 ,r. 4 • Az.' .. Ili ., - ,,_ • • PIN: 41 -10-9 ■ . ■ ti i pii IC.. A ■ a k r CURRENT ZONING W Case Planner Mcheran 'rwl f Future Rt37 Bypass Zoning M2 (Industrial, General District) CUP0509_RogerJenkins_072309 BI (Business, Neighborhood District) 4W MHI (Mobile Home Cummunity District) w I Urban Development Area B2 (Business, General Distrist) 4W MS (Medical Support District) O SWSA 4M B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) 4W Ra (Residential Planned Community District) OjW EM (Evtractice Manufacturing District) 4W R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) HE (Higher Education District) D RA (Rural Area District) 4W MI (Industrial, Light District) RP (Residential Performance District) 1--p Docrme nti1-.1_1_ heals,, r =.A2n08tCUf 05U9-Jenkin-_0'2".'lyi .q 17 �:2uo) r k f ti • i. y— A ah yT',A , l L �w� l, ..- .n. ��1 ■' �V `�l ,. JL -r Pi' �- ■ate �� • ■ M l ki N µ' E 0 250 500 1,000 Feet ■ a k r CURRENT ZONING W Case Planner Mcheran 'rwl f Future Rt37 Bypass Zoning M2 (Industrial, General District) CUP0509_RogerJenkins_072309 BI (Business, Neighborhood District) 4W MHI (Mobile Home Cummunity District) w I Urban Development Area B2 (Business, General Distrist) 4W MS (Medical Support District) O SWSA 4M B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) 4W Ra (Residential Planned Community District) OjW EM (Evtractice Manufacturing District) 4W R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) HE (Higher Education District) D RA (Rural Area District) 4W MI (Industrial, Light District) RP (Residential Performance District) 1--p Docrme nti1-.1_1_ heals,, r =.A2n08tCUf 05U9-Jenkin-_0'2".'lyi .q 17 �:2uo) Submittal Deadline P/C Meeting BOS Meeting -Cjt APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 1. Aaplicant (The applicant if the owner other) NAME: ADDRESS: �s` �� [old f`Sv�,p. l :�r� � Rd 44 TELEPHONE 2. Please list all owners, occupants (adult individuals as well as any entities occupying the property), or parties in the interest of the property: 3. The property is 'located at: (please give exact directions and include the route number of your road or street) aTq � c od `tf- c� ®; o ,v, cid — l s-� ��ye- .acs:,yn ,��4 / d 4. The property has a road frontage of 0 feet and a Calf el depth. of 52��6;-S feet and consists of acres. (Please be exact) 5. The property is owned by )qo tz"17t-- as evidenced by deed from M a. - recorded (previous owner) in deed book no. on page Llz -2� , as recorded in the records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, County of Frederick. 5. Tax (Parcel) Identification (I. D,) oto. if/– /13 Magisterial. District 95 &r Current Zoning W ,/ Adjoining Property: USE North East i r South H West a ZONING 1) b' 1 I $. The type of use proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept. before completing) Oaf 12 9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be constructed: l 0 'ne following are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to both sides and rear and in front of (across street from) the property where the requested use will be conducted. (Continue on back if necessary,) These people will be notified by mail of this application: NAME )Doa-lal �� ADDRESS 66 k d 141 PROPERTY ID# % -r4 NAMFS4e,ee. g-,4, /12,-cA&e / ADDRESS PROPERTY ID# q / _ /2 - NAME g„r_Y '/'� �� ADDRESS gtS- ��- -- -`�►� PROPERTY TD#/ NAME ADDRESS,�� PROPERTY 1D# V/ - /Q - Er NAME m be.�/ ie >tii ADDRESS /4nGi uS %1 Lcn PROPERTY ID# 41/ NAME _947CC Perk 'n-&,rKDD.RESS r;�o(--D PROPERTY ID#r ` '� NAME ADDRESS 14,-d626 I PROPERTY I I D# ADDRESS' q -3 PROPERTY ID#__YL- 0- NA \/I DDRESS 4-471-7e PROPERTY JD# qJ -/?- -/ QC7'C. NAME hly, C L-elJal-1 ADDRESS PROPERTY IDY V-1 - A -/.I a NAME O,Z.,&,, PROPERTYID# q,-) ADDRESS /(/& (!a -los: N -T AmF- e=v 2::f SACry I /3e-i--'O,-JADDRESS /J 0 PROPERTYID# Y/ NAME ADDRESS //cam 0 -De-a4j- 141 PROPERTYID4 NAME (el,%o6 //ADDRESS PROPERTY ID4 NAME zz�cun—g-s ADDRESS PROPERTY ID#. V1 -A - 104 NAME ADDRESS PROPERTY ID# NAME PROPERTY ID# -10LU NAME. ADDRESS PROPERTY ID# C71d e6c,4,�e-1 11. Please use This page for your sketch of the property. Show proposed audlor existing structures on the property. including measurements to all property .lines. ¢S 10ER 0) BY A FED Fit Vii° OMTB ON AkY 15, 20M W) FtMFlF.'vllMS Oir myyurt C REQ4R SE7 DUST. 50' R/w A �RE R �� FOUND REBAR FOUND E REBAR 470 18. OAK REaaR SET s, F FOUND REBAR LOT 2 � SET 5.OW AC. SET EBAR R FOUND � REBAR �RBAR �I D P ST ER REBAR POST� �� FOUND EBAR � EBAR FOUND R SET SET 4� 4? LOT 1 CEMETERY / REMR 1.000 AC. h 10.000 AC. SET REW SEE DETAIL SET FOR R/W E. REMAINDER I ►� C. POST STONE �N.p s �� ' SEE DEED OF E5MT ` AND PLAT REBAR - INSTR. #020009623 1 1 SET ® w R "pry T— R FOUND FOUNDS = RSET? I� Q t � �ry T v :POST � "�" m � S RE ( C a, FOUND REBAR M 2 � SET PAST STONE FOUND C7 - EXIST. RD.POST TO CEMETERY/PoST '14J - It N K AREA TABULATION EXIONG TOTAL AREA 100.158 AC. CEMETERY 1.00U AC. Tm 41-10-9 105.158 AC. PROPOSED LOT 1 10.000 AC. LOT 2 5.000 AC. REMNNDER 90.155 AO. T H op 'PI 1.2. Additional comments, if any: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully .make application and petition the governing body of Frederick County; Virginia to allow the use described in this application. I understand that the sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven (7) days prior to the first public hearing and maintained so as to be visible until after the Board of Supel-visors' public hearing. Your application for a Conditional Use Permit authorizes any member of the Frederick County Planning Commission, Board of Supen"isors or Planning and Development Department to inspect yourpropetty where the proposed use will be conducted. Signature of Applicant Signature of Owner Owners'Mailing Address p? ` AK e9ld 6e—Me—r rte; Owners' 'telephone No. (r 7 - 96 !�Zo TO BE COMPLETED BY THE ZONI TO ADMINISTRATOR: USE CODE: RE DATE: C-: COUNTY of FREDER1,CK ME+ MORANDUNiepartment cf Planking and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 5401665-6395 TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Dana M. Johnston, Zoning Inspector RE: Waiver Request — Linda Brewer/Ruby Springs DATE: September 23, 2009 On behalf of Linda Brewer, Patton Harris Rust & Associates, is requesting a waiver of Article V Design Standards, § 144-17 Streets, (G) (1), Cul-de-sac, of the Code of Frederick County, Chapter 144 Subdivision of Land, to allow cul-de-sac length of approximately 1,086 feet, 86 feet more than the Zoning Ordinance maximum length of 1,000 feet. The property is located northeast of Red Bud Road (Route 661), 1,300 feet west of its intersection with Morgan Mill Road, in the Stonewall. Magisterial District, and is identified by Property Identification Number 55 -A -128C. Chapter 144 Section 17 (G) (1), of the Code of Frederick County specifies that: Cul-de-sac permanently designed as such, shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) feet in length. The Planning Commission may waive this requirement in cases where extreme topography or other factors make it impractical. In no case shall the street serve no more than twenty five (25) lots. The turnaround provided shall have a right -a -way radius of not less than fifty (50). feet and a paved radius of not less than forty-five (45) feet. Loop streets are preferred to cul-de-sac, where possible. The proposed roadway named Ruby Springs Road has exceeded the cul-de-sac length requirement of 1,000 feet as allowed by the Code of Frederick County. The applicant is seeking a waiver for an additional 86 feet, totaling 1,086 feet. The proposed cul-de-sac would serve six lots proposed as part of the rural subdivision Ruby Springs, as well as an existing lot. The seven lots, which would be served by the cul-de-sac, are far below the maximum of 25 lots, the maximum permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant believes that the shape, topography, and environmental features of the parent tract prevent them from creating a loop road connection. Additionally, the proposed street design allows for a single roadway within the development, thereby allowing for a greater amount of area to be located within the rural preservation tract (47%) and minimizing impervious surface area from roadways. As the proposed waiver will not create safety issues and will promote preservation of open space and the environment using a larger preservation tract and less impervious surface area, staff recommends approval of waiver request. A recommendation from the Planning Commission is requested. Attachments DMJ/bad 107 North Rent Street, Suite 292 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 OLD`CHARLES TON G RD kFti "� ` -Z , A -A C I— ��`��`� \ I ��+ t, ,i t ,, t `� /� )f�• �o��'� moi`, I \ � v ♦ -- .� _, Yrs � i -� - . 6601,` ARD °664 `!! • 1 � �t fir.; p 656 �) IN RD— 659 tiTt`t¢11 t F• t �'' i 661 m ; r h:-n,s r `FQ , ''`�� f\RR � [[E.:ptK_� `)�.�% f • � ,�,� i.�`�� 3 Za. 2Ps c sli+, RD fYCr' i 4 ♦ fj I .r 820\ `:It A;',}. -a''._. W* 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles I i I 1 i --j .inda Brewer - Ruby Springs Wavier Request (1085ftcul-de sac) G CURRENT ZONING PIN: 55 - A - 128C Case Planner: DJohnston Future Rt37 Bypass Zoning M2 (Industrial, Generel District) Waiver LmdaBrewer_RubySprings_081909 B1 (Business, Neighborbood District) 4M MHl (Mobile Home Community District) _ Urban Development Area B2 (Business, General District) ` MS (Medical Support District) SWSA B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) `ftO RJ (Residential Planned Community District) 40 EM (Estractne Manufacturing District) R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) 40 HE(Higher Education District) RA.(Rural Arca District) MI (Industrial, Ligbt District) RP(Residential Performance District) lo ,m, h -r, _A- i0_; Jl:-a.r_ i _.,t',-. .�a.y ;i �'}. 16)81!)_7.+mz7)£.11-u.•,J), - ^ r„�w COUNTY of FREDERICK A .& Department of Planning and Development � t�� 107 North Kent Street ! Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 o Telephone: 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 WAW dER/EXCEPTiONL-1 RE UEST APPLICATION 1. Applicant: : Name: j_;,,�[ j ,„ �,�,;; �, ��j-�_t Telephone:S�:L) Address: 2-o-% -Be,-e-y Ave- ice,�VA LSE L 2. Property owner (if different than above): Name: Address: 3. Contact person (if other than above): Name: Telephone: Telephone: &40 667 -2 ;31 4. Waiver request details (include specific ordinance requirements to be waived): S. 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): A(r �e�X `J1 ///` ) / L F fi- 1� iL 1t 1i 11 /nVq/t 1VAV�1 11 S"J kc`), [ Pt661 l3cv "Yr u,s• Of" i -r% �Yi��✓��r)GIn L✓7T 1 I `b �_�Yl /' 1� �✓ 6. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number t� s -A - z Z I� C Magisterial District.. 7. Property zoning and current use: Zoned: •R A (Z: -,, � A r e.District Current Use: Irl e�t.cyT 8. Attachments: Adjoining Property Owners List �� Existing/recorded and Proposed Plats Z OFFICE USE ONLY: Fee: $500 enclosed: 1/ Receipt #: j qtj t o ,1 � t � ` ! � :7 T � h i�,, s) u �l i ao i S i � :n �✓ � ` h r..�,ti �, � n 000 S. 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): A(r �e�X `J1 ///` ) / L F fi- 1� iL 1t 1i 11 /nVq/t 1VAV�1 11 S"J kc`), [ Pt661 l3cv "Yr u,s• Of" i -r% �Yi��✓��r)GIn L✓7T 1 I `b �_�Yl /' 1� �✓ 6. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number t� s -A - z Z I� C Magisterial District.. 7. Property zoning and current use: Zoned: •R A (Z: -,, � A r e.District Current Use: Irl e�t.cyT 8. Attachments: Adjoining Property Owners List �� Existing/recorded and Proposed Plats Z OFFICE USE ONLY: Fee: $500 enclosed: 1/ Receipt #: j qtj Adjoining Property Owners Ruby Springs Name Address Property Identification Number (PIN) Name: J.R.W. Properties and Rentals, Inc. 13 S Loudoun St Property#: 55-A-127 Winchester, VA 22601 Name: M. Leslie Johns, Jr. 250 Devils Backbone Ovlk Property#: 55-7-4 Stephenson, VA 22656 Name: William G. Meier, III & Barbara E. Meier 270 Lick Run Xing Property#: 55-7-5A Stephenson, VA 22656 Name: William G. Meier, III & Barbara E. Meier 270 Lick Run Xing Property #: 55-7-5 Stephenson, VA 22656 Name: David and Katherine Gregg 1203 Redbud Rd Property It, 55 -A -129A Winchester, VA 22603 Name: Ernest L. Lam 1263 Redbud Rd Property #: 55-A-14 Winchester, VA 22603 Name: Mark S. Rodeffer 1289 Redbud Rd Property #: 55-A-16 Winchester, VA 22603 Name: Donald and Brenda Maceoin 44426 Livonia Ter Property #: 55 -A -128A Ashburn, VA 20147 Name: Robert S. Rodeffer 1293 Redbud Rd Property #: 55 -A -128B Winchester, VA 22603 Name: John D. Orndorff 1295 Redbud Rd Property #: 55-A-128 Winchester, VA 22603 Name: Property#: Name: Property#: Name: Property #: Name: Property#: Name: Property #: Name: Property #: Name: Property#: Name: Property #: Patton Harrr. Rust & Associates Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects. AUG 7 2009 t` August 7, 2009 Mr. Mark Cheran Zoning Administrator Frederick County, Virginia 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 T 540.667.2139 Sincerely, F 540.665.0493 PAT'I'O HARRIS ST 'ASSOCIATES 117 East Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Winchester, VA ' 22601 Patrick R. Sowers, A ICP- RE: Ruby Springs; Waiver of Section 144-17G(1) for Length of Cul-de-sac Dear Mark ILL- On behalf of my client, I would like to request a waiver of Section 144-17G(1) of the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance to allow for a cul-de-sac that exceeds 1,000 feet in length. I have attached the proposed preliminary sketch plan for Ruby Springs, a rural CORPORATE;. preservation subdivision totaling 6 lots (including the preservation tract), located in the Chontilly Stonewall Magisterial District. The proposed cul-de-sac for the development is 1,086 feet in length and would serve the 6 lots proposed as part of the rural preservation subdivision as well VIRGINIA OFFICES: as one existing lot. The total of 7 lots which would be served by the cul-de-sac is far below chant lly -horlottesville the maximum of 25 lots which is the maximum permitted by ordinance. The limited number 'Federicksburg of homes on the roadway results in limited trips traveling the roadway (approximately 70 trips -1a.r sonburg per day based on an average of 10 trips per day per dwelling). The low traffic volume Leesburg combined with the limited increase in length of the cul-de-sac ensures that the proposed Newport News waiver will not have detrimental impacts to public safety. Norfolk Wi,chester The shape, topography, and environmental features of the parent tract prevents us from Wcodbrldge providing a loop road connection. Additionally, the proposed design allows for a single roadway within the development thereby allowing for a greater amount of area to be located LABORATORIES: within the rural preservation tract (47% of the gross tract area) and minimizing impervious Chantilly FredeFlcksbuFg surface area from roadways. The increase in size of the preservation lot has allowed us to include the entirety of a�s]tream channel originating from a spring located on the property to MARYLAND OFFICES: be contained entirely within the preservation tract as well. Baltimore Columbia As the proposed waiver will have not create safety issues and promotes preservation of open Frederick space and the environment using a larger preservation tract and less impervious surface area, Germantown we feel the proposed waiver is in the best interest of all parties involved. Holywood Hunt Valley Please find attached the required $500.00 application fee, application form, as well as 35 copies Williamsport of the proposed preliminary sketch plan in 11x17 format. If you have any questions, please PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE: feel free to call me at (540) 667-2139. Allentown T 540.667.2139 Sincerely, F 540.665.0493 PAT'I'O HARRIS ST 'ASSOCIATES 117 East Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Winchester, VA ' 22601 Patrick R. Sowers, A ICP- VICINITY MAP SCALE 1' - 4000' NOTES: 1. TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURS SHOWN AT 2' INTERVALS 2 SITE CONTAINS NO IDENTIFIED PRIME AGRICULTURAL SOILS 3 PURSUANT TO AN EXAMINATION OF HUD FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP, COMMUNITY PANEL 51OD63 01158, EFFECTIVE JULY 17, 1978, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY UES IN ZONE C (AREAS OF MINIMAL FLOODING) - 4. LOTS 2 & 6 ARE SUBJECT TO A PERMANENT 50' PRIVATE ACCESS & UMUTY EASEMENT AS SHOWN HEREIN FOR THE BENEFIT OF. AND APPURTENANT TO. EXISTING LOT 1. 5. SITE CONTAINS NO AREAS OF STEEP SLOPES (+50%) 6. LANDSCAPING SHALL BE PROVIDED PER SECTION 165-36A OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE. 1 TREE PER 40 FEET OF STREET FRONTAGE 7. RUBY SPRINGS ROAD TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO VDOT STANDARDS AND DEDICATED FOR STATE MAINTENANCE EL SKETCH PLAN DEPICTS SUBDIVISION OF PARENT TRACT (55 -A -128C) AS WELL AS BLA BETWEEN PARENT TRACT AND TWO EXISTING LOTS FRONTING ON RED BUD ROAD (55-A-14 & 55-A-16). THE BLA IS NECESSARY TO ALLOW FOR DEDICATION OF PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY FOR RUBY SPRINGS ROAD WITHOUT DECREASING THE EXISTING LOT SIZE OF TM PARCELS 55-A-14 AND 55-A-16. 9. BOUNDARY AND MERIDIAN SHOWN HEREIN ARE BASED ON A CURRENT FIELD RUN SURVEY PERFORMED BY PHR+A, DATED APRIL 15. 2009. BASIS OF DATUM IS NADS3 VA NORTH ZONE SPC/NAVD88 AS DETERMINED BY CPS SURVEY. _41 N VF$ GNB U ^.�c1 �P S. FICI fi ti MARK S RODE 792 - INST B ED. RA - n ZONED: N1 USE TIRES "'" 20002 ACRES (EXISTING) 2.0722 ACRES (PROPOSED) 55-A-17 i 1 N/T NANCY BOLES \ OB 765, PG 489 INST /060001869 J 8 ZONED: 01 USE RESIDENTIAL ':G6' G8A'RE ! t55-7-5 N& YLUAIARAI M LEER I6 INST #030023968 ZONED: RA .USE AGRILIILTURAL % - - 10.00 ACRE 55-7-5A Gm. N/F WIWAM G. MEIER, III Fri ! J & BARBARA J. MEIER D4 O !INST /040004637 / ZONED_ RA USE:17.051 ACRE LTUftAL e�DRAINFTELD f' / 35' RIPARIAN BUFFER PRESERVATION LOT-- - . ! 129823 AC •NO FUTURE OINSION DF 7NE ! RURAL PRESERVAPON L0T PERMITTED PER SECTION / 165-54D OF THE FREDERICK _! ! t COLWTY ZONING ORDINAN STREAM / CNA N(`( •. .. 1 OWELL 55-A129A N/F DAVID M. & A KATHERINE GREGG 08 BOO. PG 81 ZONED: RA USE: AGRICULTURAL 33.00 ACRE FASTING S LOT 7 . ! /! / / f \ ) {,,. f I •y ....RUBY SPRINGS ! .� ZONED: RA r / DRAINFlEID/ shy✓ ` o+I y USE: VACANT 7 'ji" �I -5.00 ACRES If _ '/ 4 j //:-DRAINFlELD- LOT 5 11 / /, 20000 AC / . •- 'r LOT 6 satE a ff f_l./!5� 20000 F.0 �?•'� / % � )D\ RAIN�oti'�is�X14 LC5 ��sa. D aT'Ez� ! N,9�a0/ Y �R\NGr'F� BID tv \ 'y $ £ \ \\ £ LOT 2 I. 1 l�aV t\ 5.0000 AC I GRAINFIELD` L JT � ! �^ t ` 2OT AC r DRAINFIELD / .. E::\rN a j Sm k fAM/DR WELL m. 20000 ?B 2r ��NA O v - m!v!D55-A-1iGA. 87 �.. \• mix �`'- ai Z71�.� ..3-,.N' iONALD u4ceaN& !?. BRENDA MACEOIN_-....482-- '2 INST /050021467 l•` 2i/.59• Sf5•4m_g/ •�L-.__...._.-. ... /'" _ -. / ZONED. RA USE RESIDENTIAL i 55-A-1288 ^`3f a 55-A-128 -� 1-02 ACRES r N/F ROBERT S nODEFFER ,- - +ly trti N/F JOHN D. ORNDORFF cw ( OB 788, 689 OB 862, ID 1089 ZONED:, RA 4p ". `.. USE;ONED:: RA U SE RESIDENTIAL I_ ...60 ACRES I 1.45 ACRES�- 55-A-13 55 -A -128C - N/F EMMA HARRIS, eL els 55-A 14 ` (NO REFERENCE) ZONED' RA ERNEST L LAM DB 792, PG 411 {\I JSE RESIDENTIAL 250 ACRES ZONED: RA USE -RESIDENTIAL STONEWALL - 20000 ACRES (EXISTI 'V m 20107 ACRES (PROPO _41 N VF$ GNB U ^.�c1 �P S. FICI fi ti MARK S RODE 792 - INST B ED. RA - n ZONED: N1 USE TIRES "'" 20002 ACRES (EXISTING) 2.0722 ACRES (PROPOSED) 55-A-17 i 1 N/T NANCY BOLES \ OB 765, PG 489 INST /060001869 J 8 ZONED: 01 USE RESIDENTIAL ':G6' G8A'RE ! t55-7-5 N& YLUAIARAI M LEER I6 INST #030023968 ZONED: RA .USE AGRILIILTURAL % - - 10.00 ACRE 55-7-5A Gm. N/F WIWAM G. MEIER, III Fri ! J & BARBARA J. MEIER D4 O !INST /040004637 / ZONED_ RA USE:17.051 ACRE LTUftAL e�DRAINFTELD f' / 35' RIPARIAN BUFFER PRESERVATION LOT-- - . ! 129823 AC •NO FUTURE OINSION DF 7NE ! RURAL PRESERVAPON L0T PERMITTED PER SECTION / 165-54D OF THE FREDERICK _! ! t COLWTY ZONING ORDINAN STREAM / CNA N(`( •. .. 1 OWELL 55-A129A N/F DAVID M. & A KATHERINE GREGG 08 BOO. PG 81 ZONED: RA USE: AGRICULTURAL 33.00 ACRE FASTING S LOT 7 . ! /! / / f \ ) {,,. f I •y ....RUBY SPRINGS ! .� ZONED: RA r / DRAINFlEID/ shy✓ ` o+I y USE: VACANT 7 'ji" �I -5.00 ACRES If _ '/ 4 j //:-DRAINFlELD- LOT 5 11 / /, 20000 AC / . •- 'r LOT 6 satE a ff f_l./!5� 20000 F.0 �?•'� / % � )D\ RAIN�oti'�is�X14 LC5 ��sa. D aT'Ez� ! N,9�a0/ Y �R\NGr'F� BID tv \ 'y $ £ \ \\ £ LOT 2 I. 1 l�aV t\ 5.0000 AC I GRAINFIELD` L JT � ! �^ t ` 2OT AC r DRAINFIELD / .. E::\rN a j Sm k fAM/DR WELL m. 20000 ?B 2r ��NA O v - m!v!D55-A-1iGA. 87 �.. \• mix �`'- ai Z71�.� ..3-,.N' iONALD u4ceaN& !?. BRENDA MACEOIN_-....482-- '2 INST /050021467 l•` 2i/.59• Sf5•4m_g/ •�L-.__...._.-. ... /'" _ -. / ZONED. RA USE RESIDENTIAL i 55-A-1288 ^`3f a 55-A-128 -� 1-02 ACRES r N/F ROBERT S nODEFFER ,- - +ly trti N/F JOHN D. ORNDORFF cw ( OB 788, 689 OB 862, ID 1089 ZONED:, RA 4p ". `.. USE;ONED:: RA U SE RESIDENTIAL I_ ...60 ACRES I 1.45 ACRES�- UNE TABLE UNE BEAWNG Il-NGRI /t Li N80M721'E 189.+0' L2 N703J'17E 604.88' U N484T+]'E 214.89' � I 55-]-4 LESLIE JOHNS, JR SHEILA B. JOHNS 09 709, PC 736 It USE:2AGRICULTURAL --' 2522 ACRES N/F J R 1W. PROP RE ANO RENTALS, INC. DB 731. PC 580 ZONED: RA USE AGRICULTURAL 24.98 ACRES OWNER INFORMATION: OWNER: LINDA K. TIMBRDOK BREWER ADDRESS 209 BENTLEY AVENUE WINCHESTER, VA 22602 TELEPHONE (540) SSD -5789 PROJECT INFORMATION: II 55 -A -128C EXISTING ZONING' RA (RURAL AREAS) EXISTING USE AGRIWl_TURAL/VACANT / STONEWALL PROPOSED USED: GRAPHIC SCALE p U 12902 ACRES PROVIDED (47%) LT of u) 1 t- r UNE TABLE UNE BEAWNG Il-NGRI /t Li N80M721'E 189.+0' L2 N703J'17E 604.88' U N484T+]'E 214.89' � I 55-]-4 LESLIE JOHNS, JR SHEILA B. JOHNS 09 709, PC 736 It USE:2AGRICULTURAL --' 2522 ACRES N/F J R 1W. PROP RE ANO RENTALS, INC. DB 731. PC 580 ZONED: RA USE AGRICULTURAL 24.98 ACRES OWNER INFORMATION: OWNER: LINDA K. TIMBRDOK BREWER ADDRESS 209 BENTLEY AVENUE WINCHESTER, VA 22602 TELEPHONE (540) SSD -5789 PROJECT INFORMATION: FASTING TM PARCEL' 55 -A -128C EXISTING ZONING' RA (RURAL AREAS) EXISTING USE AGRIWl_TURAL/VACANT MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: STONEWALL PROPOSED USED: RESIDENTIAL (RURAL PRESERVATION) #RFA SUMMARY: w TOTAL AREA 27.41 ACRES PERMITTED DENSITY: 5 LOTS (2 ACRE MINIMUM) PROPOSED LOTS 5 LOTS (LOTS 2-6) GROSS RESIDENTIAL DENSITY; 1 LOT/5.5 ACRES RURAL PRESERVATION LOT: 10.964 ACRES REWIRED (40X) p U 12902 ACRES PROVIDED (47%) AREA TABULATION: NOME THE FOLLOWING TABULATIONS DEPICT THE AREAS PROPOSED AS PART OF THE RUBY SPRINGS DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS THE BLA REQUIRED BETWEEN RUBY SPRINGS AND TWD EXISTING TAX MAP PARCELS (55-A-14 & 55-A-16) TO PROVIDE THE R/W DEDICATION NECESSARY FOR RUBY SPRINGS ROAD WHILE ENSURING THAT THE EXISTING PARCELS 00 NOT DECREASE IN AREA R/W TABUATION: 13.674 SF 0.3139 AC 55-A-14 5.67] SF 0.1303 AC 55-A-16 41.651 SF 0.9608 AC RUBY SPRINGS 61.202 SF 1.4050 AC TOTAL TM 55-A-16 TABULATION: 20002 AC INST j080007792 (AS SURVEYED) -0.1303 AC R/W 0.0347 AC TO 55-A-14 +0.0768 AC FROM RUBY SPRINGS +0.1002 AC FROM 55-A-14 20122 AC NEW LOT 1 RUBY SPRINGS SUBDIVIDED LOT TABULATION: LOT 2 5.0000 AC LOT 3 2.0000 AC LOT 4 2.000D AC LOT 5 2000D AC LOT 6 20000 AC PRES. LOT 129823 AC TOTAL 25.9823 AC 55-A-14 TABULATION: 20000 AC DS 792 PC 417 (AS SURVEYED) -0.3139 AC R/W -0.1002 AC TO 55-A-16 +0.3901 AC FROM RUBY SPRINGS +0.0347 AC FROM 55-A-/6 20107 AC NEW LOT 2 LOT FRONTAGE: w LOT FRONTAGE ALONG RUBY SPRINGS ROAD, AS MEASURED AT THE FRONT SETBACK LINE, IS PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 165-56A OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY ZONING ORDNANCE U RECUR PROM i LOT 2 100'• 140.5' LOT 3: 200' 20D.0' LOT 4: 200' 417.6' p U LOT 5: 200' 335.1' LOT 6: 100'• 156.0' PRE& LOT: 200' 273.5'•• aW w `LOTS RON TURN -AROUND OF LVL -DE -SAC REQUIRE 100' WIDTH AT FRONT SETBACK, v1 -AS MEASURED 45' FROM R/W FOR RUBY SPRINGS ROAD. J L 1fIB6D1rN<Y, No. 20674 a C� C� COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 MEMORANDUM FAIT: 540/665-6395 To: Frederick County Planning Commission From: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Plannero Subject: Discussion— OM (Office -Manufacturing) District Revisions Date: September 25, 2009 Frederick County has received a request to revise portions of the Office -Manufacturing (OM) Park Zoning District. Specifically, this request is for the addition of a number of uses, as well as modification to the floor to area ratio (FAR) and the height maximums in the district. The intent of the OM Park District is to implement the mixed-use industrial/office land use classification of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. It is designed to provide areas for research -and -development centers, office parks, and minimal -impact industrial and assembly uses. Uses are allowed which do not create noise, smoke, dust or other hazards. Specifically, the request was to add various manufacturing uses, office uses and service uses. The request also included Revisions to the height allowance for office buildings from 60 feet to 90 feet and 70 feet for automobile parking structures, to allow a height exemption for automated storage facilities and to increase the FAR from 1.0 to 2.0. The item was presented to the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) at their meeting on September 24, 2009. The DRRC discussed the intent of the OM Park District and felt that the district should accommodate office, research and development and minimal impact industrial uses that could be compatible with the other uses in the park. The DRRC then went through each of the uses requested by the applicant. First discussed was the requested food manufacturing uses which were originally excluded from the OM Park when it was initially developed. Ultimately, the DRRC felt that the impacts of those uses such as heavy traffic and odor would not be cohesive with other uses that would be permitted in the OM Park and felt they should be excluded. The DRRC also recognized that such uses are currently permitted in the M1 and M2 Districts and were more suited to those districts. The DRRC was satisfied with many of the other requested uses but felt that certain financial uses (such as banks) still belonged in the secondary or accessory use portion of the district. The attached documents show the existing OM District the applicant's letter of request and the OM Park District endorsed by the DRRC (changes in underlined bold), the existing OM Park District and the applicant's letter of request were mailed out with the October 7, 2009 Planning Commission agenda package. This item is presented for discussion. Comments and suggestions from the Planning Commission will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. Attachments: 1. Current OM District Regulations (Chapter 165 — Part 605) — previously sent 2. Letter requesting the revisions — previously sent 3. DRRC endorsed OM Park District revisions CEP/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 CURRENT OM PARK DISTRICT STANDARDS ATTACHMENT 1 ARTICLE VI BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Part 601— Dimensional and Intensity Requirements § 165-601.01 Intent The following tables describe the business and industrial zoning districts in Frederick County, the intent of those districts and the uses allowed in each district. Standard industrial classification numbers are provided for particular uses to assist the Zoning Administrator in classifying uses. Determining whether_a particular use should be classified under a particular category remains subject to interpretation on the part of the Zoning Administrator. § 165-601.02 Dimensional and intensity requirements The following table describes the dimensional and intensity requirements for the business and industrial districts: District Requirement Bl BZ B3 OM M1 M2 Front yard setback on primary or arterial highways (feet) 50 50 50 50 75 75 Front yard setback on collector or minor streets (feet) 35 35 35 35 75 75 Side yard setbacks (feet) - - 15 15 25 25 Rear yard setbacks (feet) - - 15 15 25 25 Floor area to lot area ratio (FAR) 0.3 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Minimum landscaped area (percentage of lot area) 35 15 25 15 25 15 Maximum height (feet) 35 35 35 60 60 60 CURRENT OM PARK DISTRICT STANDARDS ATTACHMENT 1 Part 605 — OM Office -Manufacturing Park District § 165-605.01 Intent. Office -Manufacturing (OM) Park District. The intent of this district is to implement the mixed-use industrial/office land use classification of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The OTA Park District is designed to provide areas for research -and -development centers, office parks, and minimal -impact industrial and assembly uses. Uses are allowed which do not create noise, smoke, dust or other hazards. This district shall be located in a campus -like atmosphere near major transportation facilities. § 165-005.02 Permitted Uses. Permitted Uses Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Furniture and Related Product !Manufacturing 25 Publishing Industries 27 Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing 283 Rubber and Miscellaneous Plastics Manufacturing 30 Excluding uses in italics: Tires and Inner Tubes 3011 Fabricated Metal Products 34 Industrial and Commercial Machinery 35 And Computer Equipment Manufacturing Electronics and other Electrical Equipment 36 And Components Manufacturing Excluding uses in italics: Storage batteries 3691 Primary batteries 3692 Aircraft and Parts Manufacturing 372 Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing 38 Employment Services 736 Computer Programming, Data Processing, and 737 Other Computer Related Services Legal Services 81 Engineering, Accounting, Research 87 Management, and Related Services Medical Laboratories 8071 Public Administration 91-97 Business signs -- — Signs allowed in § 165-201.066 --- Freestanding building entrance signs ------- Multi-tenant complex signs ------ CURRENT OM PARK DISTRICT STANDARDS ATTACHMENT 1 Electronic Message signs § 165-605.03 Secondary or Accessory Uses. Secondary or accessory uses. The following uses shall be permitted by right in the OM Naris District but only in conjunction with and secondary to a permitted principal use in accordance with § 165 -201 -05 - Secondary Uses Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Eating and Drinking Places -58 Commercial Banks 602 Insurance Carriers and Services 63-64 Except the following: Restaurants with drive-through uses ---- Food Services Contractors 5821 Caterers 5821 Mobile Food Services ------ Drinking Places 5813 Office Machinery and Equipment 7359 Rental and Leasing Physical Fitness Facilities for employees 7991 Child Day Care Services 8351 Office Machine Repair and Maintenance 7629 Dry Cleaning and Laundry Services 721 Except the following: Linen supply 7213 Dry Cleaning Plants 7216 Industrial launderers 7218 § 165-605.04 Design Requirements. A. Minimum size. No OM Park District rezoning shall be approved for less than 10 contiguous acres. [1] There shall be no minimum lot size. [2] There shall be no minimum lot width or depth. B. Development standards. The following standards shall apply in the OM Park District: [1] This district shall be planned and developed with a harmonious coordination of uses, architectural styles, landscaping, parking, signs and outdoor lighting. [2] This district shall be developed with a campus -like atmosphere and near major transportation facilities. CURRENT OM PARK D!STR!CT STANDARDS ATTACHMENT 1 [3] Any building shall be faced on all sides facing road rights-of-way with durable, attractive, high-quality materials, comparable to clay, brick, stone, wood, architectural concrete masonry unit (e.g., regal stone, split face, precision, ground face) or precast concrete panels. [4] Loading docks or loading entrances shall be blocked from view from public streets by utilizing board -on- board fencing, masonry walls, or evergreen tree plantings. [5] Outdoor storage shall be prohibited_ [6] All OM Park Districts shall have access to a state road. LAWSON AND S- ILEK, .L .C. 326 EXETER DRIVE. SUITE 2110 POST OFrf(-E ROX 274") 'WINCHES-FER, VA 226114 `FE:l .E:PIfC)V7_: {�Uj hfis-QQ�O FACSIMILE-- (540)722-46SI September 22, 2009 Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Director Planning and Development County of Frederick 107 North Dent Street, 2°d Floor Winchester, VA 222601 'IiiQhLs�'`t§6URf I..9t;'St}t. •- ^7-ASti'SONC�I SPLL:(Y_+M Re: Cans- File No. 546.001 VIA E-MAIL Dear Mile: Ttiis is to confirm our Meeting of last week confirming our desire to ask the DRRS Committee and Frederick Coauty to consider adding uses to the OM zoning district. As I understand it, the County is still currently using SIC codes, but is working to make a transition to the 14AICS codes. In order to capture both definitions, I would propose that the OM district be expanded to include: FRO.— Abouts ,: Ftlsf 42F710E Spz bOi, FY.oNT R0Vm, V1HGmA ?263Q E1-Er1ftl:'E: (S40) 635-9415; Fxcsimru: (-"01635-942 1, t -1:11L: 1513 EK'4 t. WSONMNASILMCum Fxtur..c Annan; 7OR05 AS -ate' STREM S11M 200. (70-1) 752-2645. F.+ IIMILE: (783)3-52-4190, E4wIML: TItO)1 CO.I.T \'StIW t'fRi20\3.'l:i Dairy Products SIC 202 Canned, Frozen. & Preserved Fruits & Vegetables SIC 203 Bakery -Products SIC 20 Sugar and Confectionary Products SIC 206 3> Beverages SIC 208 > Miscellaneous Food (excluding fish & seafood) SIC 209 Paperboard Containers and Boxes SIC 265 i United States Postal Service SIC 43 ➢ Radio and Television. Stations SIC 483 :7 Cable Services SIC 484 Central Reserve Depository Institutions SIC 601 Savings Institutions SIC 603 Credit Unions SIC 606 Foreign Banks SIC 608 Depository Banking Related Uses SIC 609 FRO.— Abouts ,: Ftlsf 42F710E Spz bOi, FY.oNT R0Vm, V1HGmA ?263Q E1-Er1ftl:'E: (S40) 635-9415; Fxcsimru: (-"01635-942 1, t -1:11L: 1513 EK'4 t. WSONMNASILMCum Fxtur..c Annan; 7OR05 AS -ate' STREM S11M 200. (70-1) 752-2645. F.+ IIMILE: (783)3-52-4190, E4wIML: TItO)1 CO.I.T \'StIW t'fRi20\3.'l:i Michael T. Ruddy, Dep ty Director September 21, 21009 Page 2 Nondepository Credit Institutions SIC 61 Security and Commodity Brokers SIC 62 r Insurance Carriers SIG 63 Insurance Agents, Brokers and Service SIC 64 Deal Estate SIC 65 > HoIding and Investment Offices SIG 67 Tax Return Preparation Services SIC 7219 3 Advertising Services SIC 731 r Consumer Credit Reporting Servit.es SIC 739— 32Direct DirectMailing Services. SIC 733 Personnel Supply Services SIC 736 News Syndicates SIC 7383 Dental Laboratories SIC 5072 North American Industry Classification System (NAILS) Land Uses Food %ianufacturing (exclu ding slaughtering) NAICS 311 Beverage Manufacturing NAICS 3121 Converted Paper Product Manufacturing NAICS 3222 Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing NAILS 3391 Publishing Industries NAICS 511 Sound Recording Industries NTAICS _5122 Broadcasting and Telecommunications NAILS 513 Information Services IZAICS 514 Monetary Authorities NAICS 521 r Credit Intermediation Services NAICS 522 Securities and Related Activities NAILS 523 Real Estate NAICS 531 Professional, Scientific and Technical .Services NAICS 54 a Management of Companies and Enterprises NAILS 55 > Administrative and Support Services . NAICS 56.1 Educational Support Services NAILS 6117 Additionally, we would request that the following general definitions of uses be allowed within the OM district to include: General Business Offices Research and Development Offices Assembly Operations 1. In order to ensure that property is developed to its maximum potential in the OM District, the Applicant requests that the County amend the OM ordinance to allow :a floor area to lot area ratio (FAR) of 2.4. This FAR allo-,vance. will provide consistency with office building development currently permitted in the MS, Medical Support District as identified in §165-98D of the Frederick County Code. Mich?el T. Ruddy; Depugt Direclor Septembcr 21, 2009 P2Lle ^} 2. Also, °the Oivl district should allow a maximum structural height of 90 feet for office buildings_ This structural height allowance whl provide consistency w ith office building development currently perrn:i:tted in the MS, Medical Support Districtas identified in §165-1033 of the Fmdrrick- County Code. 3. Uso, the OM district should allow a Lnaximum structural heibht of °70 ,feat IOr automobile parking stnictures_ This structural height allowance will provide coasistency wi0 automobile parking struc;tmcs cure currently prrnilted in the l,,IS, Medical Support District as identified in §165-1018 of the Frederick County Code. 4. Finally, the, ONi district should allow for a maximiim structural height of 100 feet for automated stompe facilities within the Property. This structural beigxlt allowance will provide consistency with automated storage facilities currently permitted in the NII, Light Industrial District and the M2, Industrial Ge=neral District as identified in §165-24(13)(4) of the Frederick County Code. I anderstand The DRRS Committee will rrreet this Thursday cvr-ring. Wc� will attend to prastrit tbi.s request .and respond to any questions or commellts. Than. k you for your continued assisfapct and cooperatiom Very yours, Thori�as Moore Lawson T1viL: atd ATTACHMENT 3 — € MPark Revisions Di2RCEndorsed- 9/24/09 ARTICLE VI BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Part 605 — OM Office -Manufacturing Park District §165-605.01. Intent. Office -Manufacturing (OM) Park District. The intent of this district is to implement the mixed use industrial/office land use classification of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The OM Park District is designed to provide areas for research and development centers, office parks, and minimal impact industrial and assembly uses. Uses are allowed which do not create noise, smoke, dust or other hazards. This district shall be located in a campus like atmosphere near major transportation facilities. § 165-605.02. Permitted Uses. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Furniture and Related Product Manufacturing 25 Paperboard Containers and Boxes 265 Publishing Industries 27 Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing 283 Rubber and Miscellaneous Plastics Manufacturing 30 Excluding uses in italics: Tires and Inner Tubes 3011 Fabricated Metal Products 34 Industrial and Commercial Machinery 35 And Computer Equipment Manufacturing Electronics and other Electrical Equipment 36 And Components Manufacturing Excluding uses in italics: Storage batteries 3691 Primary batteries 3692 Aircraft and Parts Manufacturing 372 Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing 38 Radio and Television Broadcasting Stations 483 Cable and Other Pay Television Services 484 1 Central Reserve Depository institutions Savings Institutions Mortgage Bankers and Brokers Nondepository Credit Institutions Security and Commodity Brokers, Dealers Exchanges and Services Insurance Carriers and Services Real Estate Holding and Other investment Offices Advertisement Agencies Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Direct Mailing Services Excluding the following: Photocopying and Duplicating Services Employment Services A TTACIIAIENT3 — OM Park Revisions DRRC Endorsed- 9/24/09 601 603 616 61 62 63-64 65 67 731 732 733 7334 736 Computer Programming, Data Processing, and 737 Other Computer Related Services News Syndicates 7383 Doctors Offices and Clinics 801-804 Medical and Dental Laboratories 807 Mpdieal i tnric5 orr71 Legal Services 81 Engineering, Accounting, Research 87 Management, and Related Services Public Administration 91-97 General Business Offices including corporate, government or other offices not providing services to the general public on a regular basis as the NA ATTA C HENT 3 — 031 Park Revisioits DRRC Etidorsed- 9/24/09 primary use Business signs Signs allowed in §165-201.06B Freestanding building entrance signs Multi -tenant complex signs Electronic Message signs ------- § 165-605.03. Secondary or Accessory Uses. The following uses shall be permitted by right in the OM Park District, but only in conjunction with, and secondary to, a permitted principal use in accordance with section §165-201.05. Secondary Uses Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Eating and Drinking Places 58 Except the following: Restaurants with drive-through uses Food Services Contractors 5821 Caterers 5821 Mobile Food Services Drinking Places 5813 Commercial Banks 602 Credit Unions 606 Foreign Banks 608 DepjositoryBanking Related Uses 609 Except the following: Check cashing agencies 6099 Money order issuance 6099 Travelers' check issuance 6099 3 Photocopying and Dunficating Services Office Machinery and Equipment Rental and Leasing Physical Fitness Facilities for employees Child Day Care Services Office Machine Repair and Maintenance Dry Cleaning and Laundry Services Except -the- following: Linen supply Dry Cleaning Plants Industrial launderers § 165-605.04. Design Requirements. ATTA CIDTENT 3 — OM Park Revisiotis D -R -RC Endorsed- 9/24109 7334 7359 7991 8351 7629 721 7213 7216 7218 A. Minimum Size. No OM Park District rezoning shall be approved for less than ten (10) contiguous acres. (1) There shall be no minimum lot size. (2) There shall be no minimum lot width or depth. B. Development Standards. The following standards shall apply in the OM Park District. (1) This district shall be planned and developed with a harmonious coordination of uses, architectural styles, landscaping, parking, signs and outdoor lighting. (2) This district shall be developed with a campus like atmosphere and near major transportation facilities. (3) Any building shall be faced on all sides facing road right-of-ways with durable, attractive, high quality materials, comparable to clay brick, stone, wood, architectural concrete masonry unit (e.g., regal stone, split face, precision, ground face) or precast concrete panels. (4) Loading docks or loading entrances shall be blocked from view from public streets, by utilizing board -on -board fencing, masonry walls, or evergreen tree plantings. (5) Outdoor storage shall be prohibited. (6) All OM Park districts shall have access to a state road. 0 ATTACHMENT 3 — OMPark Revisions DRRC Endorsed- 9/24/09 C. The maximum structural height for office buildinas shall not exceed -90 feet all other uses shall be regulated by § 165-601.02 and § 155-201.03. D. The maximum structural height for automobile Parking structures shall not exceed 70 feet. § 165--601.02 Dimensional and intensity requirements The following table describes the dimensional and intensity requirements for the business and industrial districts: Article 11 SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES Part 201— Supplementary Use Regulations § 165-201.03 Height limitations; exceptions. B. Exceptions to height requirements. (4) Automated storage facilities in the OM, M1 and M2 Zoning Districts shall be exempt from the maximum height requirement. This exemption shall be granted only when the facility is provided with full sprinkling for fire protection according to the specifications of applicable codes. Such exemptions shall be approved by the Frederick County Fire Marshal. In no case shall the height of these facilities exceed 100 feet in height. 5 District Requirement B1 B2 B3 OM MI M2 Front yard setback on primary or arterial highways (feet) 50 50 50 50 75 75 Front yard setback on collector or minor streets (feet) 35 35 35 35 75 75 Side yard setbacks (feet) - - 15 15 25 25 Rear yard setbacks (feet) - - 15 15 25 25 Floor area to lot area ratio (FAR) 0.3 1.0 1.0 4=9 2.0 1.0 1.0 Minimum landscaped area (percentage of lot area) 35 15 25 15 25 15 Maximum height (feet) 35 35 35 60 60 60 Article 11 SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES Part 201— Supplementary Use Regulations § 165-201.03 Height limitations; exceptions. B. Exceptions to height requirements. (4) Automated storage facilities in the OM, M1 and M2 Zoning Districts shall be exempt from the maximum height requirement. This exemption shall be granted only when the facility is provided with full sprinkling for fire protection according to the specifications of applicable codes. Such exemptions shall be approved by the Frederick County Fire Marshal. In no case shall the height of these facilities exceed 100 feet in height. 5