The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 09-16-09 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia September 16, 2009 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB I) Adoption of Agenda: Pursuant to established procedures, the Planning Commission should adopt the Agenda for the meeting................................................................ (no tab) 2) August 5, 2009 Minutes................................................................................................... (A) 3) Committee Reports.................................................................................................. (no tab) 4) Citizen Comments.................................................................................................... (no tab) PUBLIC HEARING 5) Rezoning 405-09 of DMJ Holdings, LLC, submitted by Painter -Lewis, PLC, to rezone 2.85 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Use. The properties are located at the northwest corner of Route 50 East and Custer Avenue (Route 781), in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 64A -4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19 and 64A-4-20. Mr. Ruddy........................................................................................................................ (B) PUBLIC MEETING 6) Rezoning #04-09 of the Wampler Property, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, to rezone 2.16 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Use. The property is located west and adjacent to Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), approximately 1,000 feet south of the intersection of Route 11 and Stephenson Road and approximately 1,900 feet north of the intersection of Route I I and Old Charlestown Road, in the Stonewall Magisterial District, and is identified by Property Identification Number 4413-1-12D. Mr. Ruddy........................................................................................................................ (C) 7) Master Development Plan #02-09 for Fieldstone Apartments, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to construct two garden apartment buildings with a total of 25 units. The property is located on the south side of Valley Mill Road (Route 659), approximately 1,200 feet east of Channing Drive and 0.5 miles west of Greenwood Road, in the Red Bud Magisterial District, and is identified by Property Identification Number 55-A-181 C. Mrs. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (D) FILE COPY COMMISSION DISCUSSION 8) Rural Area (RA) District Revisions. Revisions to Chapter 165 and 144 in accordance with the Rural Areas Study. Mrs. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (E) 9) Health Systems/Sewage Disposal Ordinance. Revisions to Chapter 161 in accordance with the Rural Areas Study. Mrs. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (F) 10) Revisions to Include Commercial Recreation (Indoor) as a Permitted Use in the M1 (Dight Industrial) Zoning District Mrs. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (G) 11) Other 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 5, 2009. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chainnan/Member at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chaimlan/Opequon District; Brian Madagan, Opequon District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; Richard Ruckman, Stonewall District; Lawence R. Ambrogi, Shawnee District; H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Kevvi 0. Crosen, Back Creek District, Roderick Williams, Legal Counsel; and Gary Lofton, Board of Supervisors Liaison. ABSENT: Gregory S. Kerr, Red Bud District, Christopher M. Molm, Red Bud District. STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Plam- ing Director; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director, Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; John A. Bishop, Deputy Director -Transportation; Candice E. Perkins, Senior Planner; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the August 5, 2009 agenda for this evening's meeting. MINUTES Upon motion made by Conunissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the Planning Conunission unanimously approved the minutes of the June 17, 2009 meeting. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Conunissioner Triplett, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the minutes of the July 1, 2009 meeting. Frederick County P121uling COMMISSlon Minutes of August 5, 2009 DoM - g -n IM AV Page 2504 -2 - COMMITTEE REPORTS Sanitation Authority — 7/21/09 Mtg. Commissioner Unger reported that the Sanitation Authority currently has 13,100 customers and they met their quota for this year of 200 new customers. Commissioner Unger reported that rainfall for the month of June was above average at five inches; he said average rainfall for June is 3.2 inches. He said groundwater is steady; water production is 2.6 and 1.5 for Frederick County and 1.09 for the City of Winchester. Commissioner Unger said the Parkins Mill Plant is on schedule and completion is expected in October or November, 2009. Commissioner Unger added that the Sanitation Authority allowed the 911 frequency on their tower at no charge. Transportation Committee — 7/27109 Mtg. Commissioner Kriz reported that the Transportation Committee made the following recomendations to the Board of Supervisors: 1) Tiger Grant Applications will be subnutted for federal funding m for Route 37, from Exit 310 to Route 522, Phase I of the I-81 and Route 37 Interchange; and Supplemental funding for the Russell 150 Road Improvements. 2) Projects to be submitted for VDOT Revenue Sharing Funds include the Russell 150 Project at $700,000; the Route 11 North Project, between Route 37 and I-81 at $250,000; and the Intersection of Route I I South and Opequon Church at $50,000. It was noted that previously allocated funds for Inverlee Way will be transferred to Renaissance drive so the money will not be lost due to time commitments. 3) Warning signs, stating road is tmsafe for truck traffic, should be installed at both ends of Double Church Road as a first step in restricting truck traffic; Warren County is going to restrict truck traffic on this road. 4) A resolution in support of Rep. Frank: Wolf to commercialize Virginia's Rest Stops, if local tourism boards will be accommodated. CITIZEN COMMENTS Chairman Wilmot called for public continents on any subject not on the Cormnission's agenda for this evening. No one came forward to speak. PUBLIC HEARING Rezoning Application 904-09 of the Wampler Property, submitted by Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates (PHR&A), to rezone 2.16 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (Business General) District, with proffers, for commercial use. The property is located west and adjacent to Martinsburg Pike (Rt. 11), approximately 1,000 feet south of the intersection of Route 11 and Stephenson Road, and approximately 1,900 feet north of the intersection of Route 11 and Old Charlestown Road. The property is further identified with P.I.N. 44B -1-12D in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action — Tabled for 45 Days Frederick County Planning Coiranission Page 2505 Minutes of August 5, 2009 Do I A -3— Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that the property is located within the SWSA (Sewer and Water Service Area); the land uses proposed in this rezoning are generally consistentwith the Northeast Land Use Plan and the commercial designation for this area; aid the application addresses the appearance of the Route I 1 corridor and provides a monetary contribution towards transportation improvements adjacent to this site. Mr. Ruddy said the applicant has provided a GDP (Generalized Development Plan) which identifies site access and it provides locations for inter -parcel connectivity, should the adjacent properties develop at some future time. In addition, the applicant has provided some additional landscaping along Route 1 I and has further clarified this with a proffered landscape exhibit. Mr. Ruddy noted that in the event the development of the property would exceed 2,000 vehicle trips per day, the proffered monetary contribution will increase from $75,000 to $100,000. He further added that a monetary contribution has been proffered to Frederick County in the amount of $1,000 for fire and rescue services and $1,000 for Sheriff's Office purposes. Deputy Director -Transportation, John A. Bishop, referred to the tiered system of the cash portion of the transportation proffers. He said the right-of-way proffers, the bicycle and pedestrian pathways, and the niter -parcel comiections were supported and appreciated; however, the TIA (Transportation Impact Analysis) indicates a shortfall with the increased vehicle trips, particularly in excess of 2,000 vehicle tpd (trips per day). Mr. Bishop compared the cash portion of the proffer with that provided by a recent rezoning, the Bishop -Amari property. He noted that the Bishop -Amari cash proffer was smaller than what is being proffered w th the Wampler rezoning; however, the Bishop -Amari property offered 900 feet of road frontage improvements, while this applicant is not offering any improvements to their 350 -feet of road frontage. Mr. Bishop said in ternis of an overall transportation package, there is a significant difference as far as the value to the County for very similarly -sized parcels and similar proposed uses_ Mr. Bishop commented that the applicant has stated they granted to do self -storage; however, this use has not been proffered. He said this is an un -proffered B2 use and is the reason there are multiple scenarios in the TIA, including a gas station and retail components_ He pointed out the applicant could do any B2 use by right, should the rezoning be approved as proposed. Mr. Bishop stated with the scenario that includes the gasoline station and other uses, the TIA calls for a traffic signal to maintain adequate Ievels of service at the entrance. He said while the staff is not supportive of the proliferation of traffic signals throughout the comdor, the analysis does a good job of high- lighting the improvement and quantifying the impact of the higher level of use. Mr. Bishop said that based on this information, his conclusion was that the value of the applicant's proffer package was insufficient coniparedto recent local rezonings and does not appear to offset impacts, in terms of both physical improvements and cash proffers. Mr_ Patrick Sowers, with Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates (PHR&A), was present on behalf of the applicant. Recognizing the property is within a DSA (Developmentally Sensitive Area), Mr. SoNvers talked about the applicant's proffers dealing with site design to insure that all portions of the building will be constructed using a high-quality design materials pallet and providing a substantial Route 11 buffer including landscaping, a hiker/biker trail, a split rail fence, and restrictive on-site lighting. Regarding the transportation concerns raised by the staff, Mr. Soxvers stated that the possible fueling station use shows a traffic generation of 6,500 tpd and with VDOT's 40% by-pass reduction, the trip generation is reduced to 3,900 tpd. He compared this with the Bishop -Amari rezoning at 10,000 tpd, noting the larger acreage at 2.77 acres compared to the applicant's 2.16 -acre site. Mr. So«rers commented that since this site has a limited portion of the Route 11 frontage, the applicant believed a monetary contribution to Frederick County, to address issues such as the BrucetoNNm and Hopewell intersection, would be more appropriate than 350 feet of road frontage improvements. Regarding the issue of the cost of the traffic signal, Mr. Sowers pointed out the volume of background traffic along Route 11 with the build -out of Rutherford Crossing and Snowden Bridge. Mr. Sowers did not believe the Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2506 � $1 Minutes of August 5, 2009 �;� ME applicant's proposed development would cause the need for a traffic signal as much as the background traffic along the Route 11 corridor. In addition, he commented that their monetary contribution ,%xill cover half the cost of a traffic signal. Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing and called for citizen continents_ The following person came forward to speak: Mr. Ronald Simkovitch, Sr., an adjoining property owner along Martinsburg Pike (Rt. 11), presented a letter to the Planning Commission. Mr. Simkovitch said his family has lived at this location for over 27 years and in 1997 he purchased additional adjoining land to prevent anyone from building next to him. He said his property adjoins the Wampler property on two sides. Mr. Simkovitch was concerned this proposed rezoning would negatively affect the value of his home and property. He was also concerned about noise from a commercial development, increased traffic on Route 11, and the history of sewage problems experienced on the Wampler property. No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Planning Commission members asked the staff to describe the required buffers for the adjacent residential properties. An issue of the Commission was that no uses had been proffered out of the proposed B2 rezoning and the range in intensity of commercial uses for the site was problematic in assessing the possible impacts. If a higher intensity use was developed on the property, such as a 12 -pump gasoline service station, Conunission members preferred to see additional buffers and screening to motect adjacent residential uses from the increased activity, noise, and lights. Commissioners inquired if the applicant had considered limiting the hours of operation. They also believed a greater responsibility fell on the applicant to provide signalization for traffic turning in and out of the site, if a more intensive use was pursued. Mr. Sowers stated that in light of the concerns raised by Mr. Sunkovitch and some of the Planning Commissioners, he offered to provide an eight -foot fence which would provide a permanent, opaque screening element and a third row of trees along with the required Category B Buffer. Mr. Sowers said he would consult with his client on the hours of operation. Commissioner Oates asked Mr. Bishop if higher vehicle trips could be expected with a fast food restaurant or with a six -pump gasoline station NAlith fast food incorporated. Commissioner Oates inquired if it would be more appropriate to limit the use to six pumps or to cap the use at 6,500 tpd. Mr. Bishop believed a fast food restaurant would generate fewer trips than six pumps or 6,500 tpd. Mr. Bishop addressed the applicant's earlier comments on where the monetary proffer would be best spent, whether via cash or improving the property's frontage. Mr. Bishop agreed that constructing an additional lane for 350 feet would not be a functional piece of pavement; he said he was not trying to ask for that from the applicant_ Mr. Bishop said he was attempting to address the cash portion of the proffer. He said as far as the debate over what percent of the traffic signal is the applicant's responsibility, should there ever be a signal, the applicant's TIA with self -storage does not call for a signal; however, under the higher use, the TIA calls for a traffic signal and Writhout the development, there is not a need for signalization. Mr. Bishop said he did not agree with the idea that the need for a traffic signal should be placed on background traffic. Mr. Bishop reinforced his previous conunents regarding the impacts of this project on the transportation network and the potential need for site signalization generated by this request. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 5, 2009 Page 2507 -5 - Commissioner Oates asked Mr. Bishop if the monetary contribution of $75,000 was sufficient to construct a turn lane in the future. Mr. Bishop said he was not as concerned about the turn lane because VDOT would require the applicant to construct a turn lane during the site plan stage of development. Mr. Bishop said if the self -storage use was developed, it is possible the traffic count would not meet VDOT's warrants for a turn lane. Commissioner Oates asked if the any of the $75,000 contribution could be considered a percentage of a traffic signal or would it be used up in other improvements not constructed by the applicant. Mr. Bishop believed it would be used for other improvements; he said the staff would rather not see a signal here, but the signal is a good way to quantify the impact. Mr. Bishop said he could see the money being used anywhere along the corridor through a revenue-sharing project_ Conissioner Thomas was pleased to have the applicant acknowledge the concerns with the adjoining residential use and offer to increase the proffer by constructing an eight -foot fence and placing a third row of trees. However, Commission Thomas noted that a sturdier fence will have to be built and maintained. He also felt that restricting the hours of operation would be helpful. Commissioner Thomas cautioned against assessing the impacts based on a self-service storage use generating less than 2,000 tpd. He raised the possibility of the use changing within a year or two to a gasoline station INrith 6,500 tpd because it's a by -right use and the resulting impacts would be much greater. Commission Thomas conunented there are six to eight RA -zoned residential lots herein the middle of a commercial area along Route 11. He questioned the timing of the rezoning and thought the rezoning maybe premature, based on the impacts. He said at some future time, the entire area will probably be commercial, but in the interim, the residences will have to be protected. Chairman Wilmot voiced her concern with another entrance on Route 11 and secondly, the wide range of uses possible for this site under a B2 rezoning. Conunission members asked the applicant to review the specifics of the proposed screening and buffer area proposed adjacent to the residential area. Mr. Sowers stated that he was proposing a third row of trees in addition to what is required by the zoning ordinance. Mr. Sowers said the screening will be between the fence and Mr. Simkovitch's residential property, so that Mr. Simkovitch will be vie«ing the trees and not the fence. He said that existing mature trees along the property line will remain undisturbed. Mr. Sowers said there will be a 25 -foot inactive buffer from the property Iine inward. The three rows of trees and the fence will be located within the 25 -foot inactive buffer; he said there will be 50 feet of total buffer area. Commissioner Ruck -man said he would have preferred to have the more intensive uses proffered out of this application. Commissioner Ruckman next made a motion to table the rezoning application for 45 days in order to give the applicant the opportunity to evaluate the timing and scale of the proposed uses and, in particular, the more intensive uses permitted in a B2 (Business General) Zoning District. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Thomas and was unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby table for 45 days Rezoning Application 404-09 of the Wampler Property, submitted by Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates (PHR&A), to rezone 2.16 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (Business General) District, with proffers, for commercial use in order to provide the applicant the opportunity to evaluate the timing and scale of the proposed uses and, in particular, the more intensive uses permitted in a B2 (Business General) Zoning District. (Note: Commissioners Kerr and Mohn were absent from the meeting.) Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 5, 2009 Page 2508 An ordinance amendment for the recodification of Chapter 165, Zoning, of the Frederick County Code, which will restructure the Zoning Ordinance so that it can numerically accommodate current and future proposed changes. The revised format will include separate parts that could individually be expanded when amendments are inserted into the Chapter. Content is not proposed to be changed. Action — Recommended Approval Seiuor Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported there have been numerous revisions to Chapter 165; Zoning, over the past few years and additional larger revisions are being proposed. Ms. Perkins said the revisions have highlighted the need to restructure the Zoning Ordinance so it can numerically accoinrnodate current and future proposed changes. She said that in order to address this issue, the staff is proposing a recodification of Chapter 165 which will revise the entire chapter number; the content is not being changed. She said the revised forniat will include separate parts that could individually be expanded when amendments are inserted into the chapter. With this proposed revision, certain portions of the ordinance would be consolidated into other articles OF moved to similar uses. Ms. Perkins reviewed the specific changes with the Commission. Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing and called for citizen conmients. No one carne forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. No issues or concerns %vere raised by members of the Conunission. Upon motion made by Cornmissioner Thomas and seconded by Conunissioner Knz, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Conunission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of an ordinance amenchnent for the recodification of Chapter 165, Zoning, of the Frederick County Code, which will restructure the zoning ordinance in order to numerically acconmiodate current and future proposed changes. The revised format will include separate parts that could individually be expanded when amendments are inserted into the chapter_ (Note: Conunissioners Kerr and Mobn were absent from the meeting.) An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article XV, Floodplain Districts. The proposed ordinance amendment provides revisions to the zoning ordinance to comply with the 2009 Flood Insurance Study and the Flood Insurance Rate Map for Frederick County. Action - Recommended Approval Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported that Article XV, Floodplain Districts, of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance is the portion of the ordinance which lays out the various floodplain districts and the uses and disturbance permitted within the various districts_ Ms. Perkins explained that FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Administration) has developed new flood insurance rate maps and Frederick County is required to adopt a floodplain ordinance which is compliant with State and Federal regulations. She said the staff has prepared revisions to the Floodplain Districts section which are in conforniance with the DCR's (Department of Conservation & Recreation's) model ordinance. Frederick County Planning Commission V V Page259 Minutes of August 5, 2009 j'I IA -7 - Ms. Perkins noted that the DRRC (Development Review & Regulations Committee) endorsed the revisions at their meeting of June 25, 2009. The Planning Commission discussed this item at their meeting on July 15, 2009 and sent it forward to the Board of Supervisors. She said the Board discussed this item on July 22, 2009; the Board requested that the Permit and Application Requirements section be clarified and they also requested information on enforcement of the ordinance and penalties. Ms. Perkins said the Board of Supervisors approved the ordinance and sent it forward for public hearing. Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing by calling for citizen continents. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. No issues or areas of concern were raised by the Commission members. Upon motion made by Conunissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article XV, Floodplain Districts. The proposed ordinance amendment provides revisions to the zoning ordinance to comply with the 2009 Flood Insurance Study and the Flood Insura_n,c:e Rate Map for Frederick County_ (Note: Conmussioners Kerr and Mohn were absent from the meeting.) PUBLIC MEETING Subdivision Application #03-09 of Miller Auto Sales, submitted by Painter -Lewis, P.L.C., to create four out -parcel lots. In addition, a waiver is requested from the Frederick County Code, Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, Article V, Design Standards, Section 144-24, Lot Requirements, (C) Lot Access. This property is located on the eastern side of Valley Pike (Route 11), south of the Route 37 interchange at Kernstown Commons. The property is further identified with P.I.N. 75 -A -11C in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Approval Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, reported that the current zoning of the property is B2 (Business General) and the land use is automobile dealership. Mr. Cheran stated that the request is for the subdivision of 15.2181 acres into four parcels consisting of 6.7482 acres, 2.6838 acres, 2.8567 acres, and 2.9294 acres. He said the property had been zoned B2 when Frederick County adopted zoning in 1967 and has no approved MDP (Master Development Plan)_ The parcels are located within the Route 11 South Corridor Land Use Plan and the SWSA (Sewer and Water Service Area) as indicated in the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Mr. Cheran said the proposed subdivision has met the requirements for a waiver from the MDP requirements; however the design elements associated with the MDP have not been waived. Therefore, Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors' review and action on this subdivision is necessary. Mr. Cheran continued, stating that the applicant has requested a waiver from Section 144-24C of the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the four parcels to be served by a private commercial access. He said Section 144-24C requires that all new parcels must abut and have direct access to a state -maintained public street or road. Access to these parcels is proposed via a private commercial 50 -foot ingress/egress from Valley Pike (Route 11); Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2510 Minutes of August 5, 2009 NOp F 1 Y the 15.2181 -acre parcel abuts Valley Pike and is served by a single entrance onto Route 11. Commissioner Unger inquired who would maintain the roads. Mr. Cheran said the property owner would enter into a road agreement or covenant with the property o',miers group to maintain the roads. Mr. Tim Painter of Painter-Lennris, P.L.C. and Mr. Joe Ritchie were present to represent this project and answer questions from the Conurnission. Chairman Wilmot called for any citizen comments. No one came forward to speak and Chainnan Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. No issues or concerns were raised by Conmlission members. Cormrnissioner Manuel moved to recommend approval of the subdivision for Miller Auto Sales; he reconnnended approval of the request for a waiver of the public road frontage requirement and he reconunended that the staff be granted administrative approval authority for this subdivision. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ambrogi and was unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the waiver requested from the Frederick County Code, Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, Article V, Design Standards, Section 144-24, Lot Requirements, (C) Lot Access, and furthermore, does hereby recommend that staff be granted administrative approval authority for Subdivision Application #03-09 of Miller Auto Sales, submitted by Painter -Lewis, P.L_C., to create four out -parcel lots. (Note: Commissioners Kerr and Mohn were absent from the meeting.) COMMISSION DISCUSSION DISCUSSION OF A PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW FABRICATED METAL PRODUCTS (SIC 3482 AND 3484) IN THE M1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) ZONING DISTRICT No Action Required Senior Planner Candice E. Perkins reported that Frederick County has received a formal request to add portions of Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 34 -Fabricated Metal Products to the pernnitted uses in the M 1(Light Industrial) Zoning District of the Frederick County Code. Ms. Perkins said specifically, the change would permit SIC 3482 which is small anus ammunition (30mm- 1. 18 -inch or less) and SIC 3484 which is small arms (30min- 1. 1 8 -inch or less). Ms. Perkins said this was discussed by the DRRC (Development Review and Regulations Committee) at their June 25, 2009 meeting and it was recommended the proposed amendment be sent to the Planning Commission for further discussion. She added that the DRRC had requested additional information regarding storage of the materials. Ms. Perkins said the use would be regulated by Frederick County and the storage of materials would be regulated by the Fire Code. She said the Fire Marshal was present to answer questions. Commissioner Thomas asked for clarification on AvI ether the amount of gun powder stored on site and the type of storage facility required would be governed by the Fire Marshal's Office. Ms. Perkins replied Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2511 Minutes of August 5, 2009jl � A WE that it would be governed by the Fire Marshal and the Inspections Department under the International Fire Code - Commissioner Thomas inquired if there was a limit on the amount. Mr. Denny Linaburg, Frederick County Fire Marshal, said the applicant is limited to ten pounds under a general permit -type building. Mr. Linaburg said if the applicant elects to have more, it would be classified as a high -hazard use group and the use would be regulated by the international Building Code and the Fire Code_ He said fire walls, sprinkler systems, and alarms would be required; he said the use is highly regulated and there are annual inspections. Chairnnan Wilmot asked if this type of operation would generally have a firing range. Ms. Perkins said she was not certain whether the applicant intended on having a firmg range to test his products; however, he could have an accessory to his use which would not be open to the public. Commissioner Thomas asked the staff if the Conunission could place a requirement that neighbors must be notified of the intended use by the applicant_ Conuiissioner Oates expressed a concern with the definition of "small arms." -He said in his opinion, a 30inm shell was not "small anus." Other Conunission members did not see any problems with this request and believed it should be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for discussion. The staff said that all comments of the Planning Conus fission would be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for their discussion. ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Conunissioner Triplett, the meeting was adjourned at 8:07 p -m. by a unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, June M. Wilmot, Chairman Eric R Lawrence, Secretary Frederick County Planning Commission Pae 2512 Minutes of August 5, 2009 J4 � � g O r 1 � J REZONING APPLICATION 905-09 DMd HOLDINGS, LLC Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: September 1, 2009 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 09/16/09 Pending Board of Supervisors: 10/14/09 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 2.85 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Use. LOCATION: The properties are located at the northwest corner of Route 50 East, Millwood Pike, and Custer Avenue (Route 781). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 09/16/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan and the Route 50 Business Corridor Plan. However, elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated as they do not fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan. In particular, the transportation impacts of the request as they pertain to Route 50 and its intersection with Route 781, Custer Avenue. Additional corridor enhancement elements such as landscaping should be provided, and flexibility in the proffer statement with regards to final entrance locations and bicycle and pedestrian accommodations should be provided. 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 905-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 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: 09/16/09 Pending Board of Supervisors: 10/14/09 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 2.85 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Use. LOCATION: The properties are located at the northwest corner of Route 50 Ease and Custer Avenue (Route 781). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 64A -4-16A, 64A -4 -16,64A -4 -17,64A -4-18,64A-4-19 and 64A-4-20 PROPERTY ZONING: RP (Residential Performance) PRESENT USE: Residential, Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential South: B2 (Business General) Use: Commercial Car Lot Fast: B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant West: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential Rezoning #05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 3 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Frederick County Transportation: A proffer that leaves the door open for cooperation between the applicant, VDOT and the County to work out the best entrance and interconnectivity design at site plan phase would be appropriate. Based upon the recent rezoning at Old Charles Town and Route 11, the rezoning at Senseny Road and Greenwood Road and the importance of Route 50 to the County transportation system, it seems that the cash proffer for transportation does not offset the impacts of this rezoning. Bicycle and pedestrian improvements will need to be further refined to ensure connectivity to existing systems. Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have a significant measurable impact on Routes 50 and 781. These routes are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property. VDOT has reviewed the transportation proffers offered in the DMJ Holdings, LLC rezoning application dated July 1, 2009 addressing the transportation concerns associated with this request. It appears, after reviewing these proposed proffers for the improvements required for this rezoning, the improvements meet the threshold of acceptance for VDOT. There is one significant concern which VDOT needs to point out: Residents in subdivisions which are served by Route 781 who utilize this facility, will be required to travel west on Route 50 and make a U-turn at the intersection of Route 50 and Ryco Lane. Traffic then will travel west to the intersection of Route 50 and Route 781. If the Frederick County Board approves this rezoning, the potential for a negative impact on the flow of eastbound Route 50 traffic at the intersection of Ryco Lane and Route 50 could be significant. Fire Marshal: Plan approval recommended. Public Works Department: 1. Refer to the discussion of the site suitability on page 2 of the impact analysis. Expand the discussion to include the potential existence of water wells and drainfields. These items should be accurately located on future site plans with references to appropriate abandonment procedures in accordance with the Virginia Department of Health guidelines. 2. Refer to the discussion of traffic on page 3 of the impact analysis. The discussion indicates that the site has frontage on both Custer Avenue and Millwood Pike. In actuality, access to Custer Avenue is via the old Route 50 right- of-way. It is possible that the property could be obtained from the Virginia Department of Transportation for the proposed proffered access improvements from Custer Avenue. Department of Inspections: No comment. Sanitation Authority: There should be sufficient sewer capacity and sufficient water pressure and volume to serve the rezoned parcels. Service Authority: No comments. Health Department: Health Department has no objection if public water and sewer are to be provided by the County. Department of Parks & Recreation: No comment. Rezoning #05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 4 Historic Resources Advisory Board: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal review of the rezoning application by the HRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the 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. Frederick Coun*y Public Schools: We offer no comments on this application. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed rezoning request for DMJ Holdings, LLC would be considered compatible with airport operations. It appears that this type of rezoning will not impact business operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. We do request review of the site plan once it is developed. Applicant should be made aware that prior to site work being performed, in accordance with the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2294, and the Federal Aviation Administration, the applicant must file a Notice of Proposed Construction, FAA Form 7460-1 with the Federal Aviation Administration for proposed structure(s) and a separate 7460-1 for construction equipment. Copies need to be forwarded to this office for record and review. Final comment on a site plan will be withheld pending the FAA's final determination with a copy forwarded to this office. This process could take upwards of 60 days and can be filed online. Frederick County Attorney: Please see attached e-mail dated May 26, 2009 and letter dated May 8, 2009, from Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney. Planning Department: Please see attached Memo dated May 26, 2009 and e-mail dated August 12, 2009 from Michael T. Ruddy, A1CP, Deputy Planning Director. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning map (USGS Winchester Quadrangle) depicts the zoning for the five 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] Rezoning #05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 5 [""d INP The property is within the UDA and SWSA 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 50 Business Corridor Plan. The land use plan identifies, more specifically, a business and office commercial designation with a transition back into the surrounding residential land uses. The business corridor expectations of the Comprehensive Plan should be recognized. Particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate improved corridor appearance along Route 50. The business corridor design standards in the Comprehensive Plan are relevant to this application. The standards call for landscaping along the major roadways and the screening of adjoining uses Transportation This application must address the transportation components of the County's Comprehensive Plan, including the Eastern Road Plan. The Eastern Road Plan section of the Comprehensive Plan designates Route 50 as an improved minor arterial roadway. Access on arterial roadways must be carefully managed to protect safety and capacity. Route 50 is identified as an urban six - lane divided facility in this location. In 2007, the Govemers Hill project was approved by Frederick County. This project includes a variety of transportation proffers which addresses improvements to the intersection of Route 50 and Prince Frederick Drive/Custer Avenue. The timing of these improvements in connection with the development of this property should be a consideration. Access management of Route 50 is a significant consideration. Any entrance onto Route 50 should be carefully designed to avoid additional degradation and conflicts of the areas traffic conditions. Site Access and desig_n. Site Access is proposed to be provided from two locations. Primary access to the site is via Route 50 and a secondary access point is proposed to be provided from Route 781 (Custer Avenue) via a modified commercial entrance onto Route 781 generally using the existing right of way across the properties frontage. The Route 50 entrance would be in the form of a right in right out only entrance, the Route 781 entrance would be right in only. As noted above access to Route 50 must be carefully managed to protect the safety and capacity of Route 50. The ability for staff and VDOT to influence the design of entrances to this location at site plan will be an important consideration for this rezoning. Rezoning #05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 6 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. A more thorough evaluation of the existing mature trees on the properties perimeter should be completed to determine if any can be incorporated into the design of the project. A proffer has been provided which seeks to address this. Such an approach is warranted as any building located to the rear of the site may sit at an elevation higher than the surrounding residential properties. The screening should be evaluated to ensure the adjacent residential properties are adequately protected. 4) Potentiallmpacts A. Transportation The TIA indicates that adequate levels of service should be able to be maintained. The applicant still needs to address VDOT's comment regarding U-turns on Route 50. Placement of bicycle and pedestrian facilities along Route 50 and connections to existing bicycle and pedestrian systems in the neighboring community will be important for this rezoning. Great care will need to be taken in design and implementation of entrances to this site. It would be appropriate for the proffers to ensure that Frederick County and VDOT will have adequate influence to make sure this happens. S. Design Standards The application does not provide for the addition of an enhanced landscaping element along the properties frontage with Route 50. This application could provide for additional street tree planting along the properties' road frontages. 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 may not fully address the corridor appearance goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Given the adjacent residentially zoned properties to the north and west of this site, it may 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. This may need to be in addition to the existing tree preservation proffer. 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 for Fire and Rescue purposes. Rezoning 905-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 7 5) Proffer Statement — Dated March 24, 2009 with latest revision July 1, 2009 A) Generalized Development Plan The Applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan for the purpose of identifying the general configuration of the proposed commercial development; the location and form of the site access, the approximate location of inter parcel access easements, and construction improvements to Route 50 and 781. B) Land Use The Applicant has not proffered any limitation on the scope or square footage of the development that could occur on this site. Alternately, the proffer proposes to limit any future use(s) to those that will not generate in excess of 200 vehicle trips per hour during any hour. It should be clarified that this trip count is cumulative Several land uses have been prohibited by the Applicant. These include; Car washes, Fast Food Restaurants with Drive through service windows, Automotive Dealers with outdoor display areas and Gasoline Service Stations, Model Home Sales Offices, Amusement and Recreational Services operated outdoors, Self Service Storage Facilities, and Adult Retail. C) Site Desijn New buildings are proffered to be constructed using compatible building architectural style and materials and have limited the facades of the building to certain materials. Staff note: A specific design, including building orientation, has not been provided The building height has been limited to 35' as defined by the County's Zoning Ordinance. This proffer will ensure that the height of any building does not extend above the height limitations of the District, including any exceptions to the limitations for uses such as hotels. A parcel lighting proffer has been included which limits pole mounted and wall mounted luminaries from exceeding a height of 18'. Additional lighting expectations have been offered. It should be recognized that Frederick County has recently adopted new lighting standards which will guide the lumination of the site. The Applicant has proffered to identify and preserve existing vegetation within the 25' inactive buffer which can be preserved and incorporated into the screening requirements currently in place in Frederick County. It would be anticipated that this would serve to maintain a better buffer between the commercial activities and the residences. Rezoning 905-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 8 D) Transportation The Applicant has proffered frontage improvements on Route 781, Custer Avenue, and Route 50, Millwood Pike, including construction generally consistent with that identified on the Generalized Development Plan and required by VDOT. The Proffers need to address the need for Frederick County and VDOT to have final approval over design of entrances in the site planning process. A restricted right -in right -out commercial entrance is proffered on Route 50. Access from Custer Avenue has been provided by a modified right in entrance that utilizes the existing right of way which runs in front of the properties. Additional median separation is also provided along Custer Avenue as identified on the Generalized Development Plan to facilitate traffic flow in this location. Additional storage capacity has been proffered to be provided in the existing left turn lane on eastbound Route 50. The timing of this project should be evaluated against the timing of the installation of improvements to the Custer Avenue intersection with Route 50, specifically, the improvements proffered by the Coverners Hill project which would improve the intersection to an acceptable level of service. The Applicant has proffered to provide $5,000.00 for future transportation improvements within the Route 781 and Route 50 right-of-ways. As noted earlier the cash proffers appear inadequate when considering other recent B2 rezonings and the importance of Route 50 to the Frederick County transportation system. Inter parcel circulation and access has been proffered from all points of right of way ingress and egress to and from the site to the parcels which share a common boundary line to the east and west. A sidewalk has been proffered aimed at linking the project to the adjacent neighborhood of Pembridge Heights and a bicycle facility has been proffered on the Route 50 frontage. Bicycle and pedestrian accommodations need to be provided along Route 50 in keeping with adopted plans and connections need to be made to the existing sidewalk system in the neighboring community (it would be expected that a connection be made to the existing sidewalk at the entrance to the Raven Wing neighborhood). E} Community Facilities The Applicant has proffered a monetary contribution in the amount $2,000.00 for impacts to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. Rezoning #05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 9 STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 09/16/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan and the Route 50 Business Corridor Plan. However, elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated as they do not fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan. In particular, the transportation impacts of the request as they pertain to Route 50 and its intersection with Route 781, Custer Avenue. Additional corridor enhancement elements such as landscaping should be provided, and flexibility in the proffer statement with regards to final entrance locations and bicycle and pedestrian accommodations should be provided. Following the required public hearing, a recommendation re,Qarding this rezoning application to the Board of Supervisors would he appropriate. The applicant should he prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission. COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 TO: John Lewis FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Denuty Director RE: Rezoning Notes — Route 50 @ Custer Avenue, DMJ Holdings, LLC DATE: May 26, 2009 The following additional points are offered regarding the Route 50 @ Custer Avenue, DMJ Holdings, LLC Rezoning application. Please consider them as you continue your work preparing the application for submission to Frederick County. Route 50 @ Custer Avenue, DMJ Holdings, LLC Rezoning — Additional Rezonin Notes. General. This property is located in an area that is adjacent to a number of established residential properties. Special consideration should be provided to ensure that the impacts to the adjacent residential properties and neighborhood are considered. It does not appear as though sufficient evaluation of the potential uses impacts on the adjacent residential properties has been provided. Particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate improved corridor appearance and the sensitive integration of the project into the surrounding community. Landscaping, lighting, and building layout and form should be carefully planned to ensure that this is achieved. The elevation of the site compared with the adjacent residential properties should also be considered. Transportation. The evaluation of the access and immediate transportation impacts of this request does not adequately address the potential impacts and access issues that this property needs to deal with. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Route 50 @ Custer Avenue, DMJ Holdings, LLC Rezoning — Preliminary Rezoning Comments May 26, 2009 Page 2 The location of the property in relation to the existing road network, and particularly its close proximity to Custer Avenue and Route 50, highlights significant access issues. As stated in the impact analysis, access to both rights-of-way would be problematic without thorough analysis. A thorough analysis and an appropriate solution to this should be provided with this rezoning application, rather than with a future site plan as proposed. Preliminary design, right-of-way constraints, environmental impacts to the wetland areas on both sides of existing Custer Avenue, access to the adjacent properties, access management on Route 50, and timing of improvements proffered by others which may impact the conclusions of the TI_A are some of the conside,ratiens that sh-ould be addressed prior to this application's acceptance for the Planning (commission. Bicycle and pedestrian accommodations should be considered at this time in connection with the proposed improvements and should relate to the surrounding neighborhoods and Route 50. It is anticipated that development may occur on the property to the east of this parcel. The evaluation of inter -parcel circulation and access should be a greater consideration in this location. It may be beneficial to incorporate the adjacent property as part of the solution to the development issues in this location. Any improvements proposed to access this site should not negatively impact the adjacent site's access. Rather, an approach should be proposed that would accommodate the development of both properties. Proffer Statement. Any Fire and Rescue Proffer should be designated as being to Frederick County for Fire and Rescue Purposes. Similar to the approach provided with the recent Senseny Road Rezoning, which you prepai'ed, a b eater .:11V t€_ UI liCt%11 ii'�1d'. p.i ` I: eti vti'ii t Li[e pl`J.tler is GIN-. A proffer specifying an amount of development has not been provided. Therefore, please ensure that the impact statement's analysis is based upon the full development of the property. As an example, please provide the anticipated amount of usage of water and waste water based upon the full development of this site. Additional Comments Provided by Mr. John Bishop, County Transportation Planner A significant amount of additional work is needed to determine if safe access for commercial use of this property is possible. Particular attention will need to be paid to restricting left turns off of Custer Avenue too close to its intersection with Route 50. It would appear that any solution that leads to that end will need to include the neighboring B2 parcel. Route 50 @ Custer Avenue, DMJ Holdings, LLC Rezoning — Preliminary Rezoning Comments May 26, 2009 Page 3 If right in right out is allowed on Route 50, the distance to the next crossover will need to be analyzed for weaving risks (if it is too near to the entrance) and potential improvements. Above notes aside, staff currently feels it is unlikely that a truly appropriate entrance scheme for commercial use can be attained given the limitations faced by this property. Staff feels,; based on that, it may be inappropriate to rezone this property to a more intense use than currently allowed tinder the existing zoning. Lu�rs7l:�Til cc: Mr. John Bishop, County Transportation Planner Page 1 of 1 John Lewis From: Mike Ruddy [mruddy@co.frederick.va.usj Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 2:12 PM To: John Lewis Subject: DMJ - Route 50 Hi John, I believe John Bishop has forwarded a couple of points to you regarding this application. Please ensure that John's and VDDT's concerns are addressed. From my perspective, the application has made progress. I would continue to promote sensitivity to the adjacent residences and additional site design elements to guide the development of the site. Please confirm that the 35' height limitation would recognize the B2 exception allowable for hotels and motels, among other things. Naturally, with the high point of the lots being closer to the existing residences, the building location could minimize or increase the level of impact to the adjacent properties depending on its ultimate placement. The lighting proffer should be simplified to avoid the intent narrative and the standards evaluated against current requirements. Flexibility to the ultimate construction of the transportation improvements may be helpful. The timing of the improvements, and any other improvements proffered by others, should be further evaluated and described in the event that this project proceeds ahead of the others. The monetary transportation proffer may be tweaked in recognition of this element of the project. The final location of bike and pedestrian accommodations should also remain relatively flexible but consistent with the approach you have illustrated. As suggested previously, a continuation of the sidewalk approximately 200 feet to connect with the existing sidewalk in Raven Point may be achievable with this project. Please address those elements you can as part of the final submission to the County. It looks like we will also need a plat of rezoning. Thanks. Mike. 8/12/2009 Page 1 of 1 John Lewis From: John Bishop obishop@co.frederick.va.us] Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:17 AM To: John Lewis Subject: DMJ John; i have reviewed the updated materials that you submitted and would offer the following; 1. 1 think that a proffer that leaves the door open for cooperation between the applicant, VDOT, and the County to work out the best entrance and interconnectivity designs at site plan phase would be appropriate. 2. Based upon the recent rezoning at Old Charles Town and Route 11, the rezoning you did on Senseny Road, and the importance of Route 50 to the County transportation system it seems that the cash proffer for transportation does not offset the impacts of this rezoning. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. John John A. Bishop, AICP Deputy Director - Transportation Frederick County Planning & Development 107 North Kent St, Suite 202 Winchester, VA 22601 Ph: 540-665-5651 F: T0`=665=6455 3 jbishopaco.freder ick.va.us 8/18/2009 COUNTY of E EDERIC Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 540/722-8383 Fax 540/667-0370 May 8, 2009 E-mail: rw1ll1a@co.freden'ck.va.us VIA FACSIMILE — (540) 662-5793 — AND REGULAR MAIL Mr. John Lewis Painter -Lewis, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade 0 u �e• i _., Winchester VA 22601 Re: DMJ Holdings, LLC — Route 50 and Custer Avenue — Proposed Rezoning — Proffer Statement dated March 24, 2009 Dear John: You have submitted to Frederick County for review a proposed proffer statement dated March 24, 2009 (the "Proffer Statement") for the proposed rezoning of 2.85± acres constituting the property of DMJ Holdings, LLC ("DMJ") and others, Parcel Identification Numbers 64A -4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, and 64A- 4-20 (collectively, the "Property"), in the Shawnee Magisterial District, from the RP (Residential Performance) District to the B2 (Business General) District. I have now reviewed the Proffer Statement and it is my opinion that the Proffer Statement would be in a form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, and would be legally sufficient as a proffer statement, subject to the following comments: With respect to Parcels 64A-4-16 and 64A-4-17, as best as I am able to det-e . :re, it appears tha+ Winchester Metals, inc. still holds an undivided one-half interest in the parcels. Specifically, the most recent deed for the parcels, Instrument Number 050023688, indicates that that interest was conveyed to C & S Steel & Fabricating, Inc., now known as Winchester Metals, Inc. The materials do not, however, indicate that Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc., from which DMJ claims title, ever acquired the interest of C & S Steel & Fabricating, Inc. 2. With respect to Parcel 64A -4-16A, likewise, it appears that Winchester Metals, Inc. still holds an undivided one-half interest in that parcel. The deed from the Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner for the parcel, at Deed Book 700, Page 225, indicates that the interest was conveyed to Charles Zuckerman & Son, Inc., now known as Winchester Metals, Inc. The materials 107 North Kent Street . Winchester, Virginia 22601 Mr. John Lewis May 8, 2009 Page 2 do not, however, indicate that Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc., from which DMJ claims title, ever acquired the interest of Charles Zuckerman & Son, Inc. 3. Proffer 2 — The heading is incorrect in that it refers to Route 657 and Route 656, instead of to Route 781 and Route 50. 4. Proffer 2 — The proffer should indicate a date/event by which the improvements will be completed. Right now, the proffer states only that they will be designed and submitted for approval during the site plan review process. 5. Proffer 3 — The proffer should indicate a date/event by which the easements will be recorded. Right now, the proffer states only I- at the easement Jill'v'e defined during the site plan process. 6. Proffer 5 — The proffer should indicate that the amount will be paid prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, rather than "prior to the occupancy", as it now states. 7. On page 4, in the last paragraph, the second line, "even" should be "event". 8. The signature block on the Proffer Statement indicates that Mark Phelps is acting by power of attorney. If Mr. Phelps is already a member, manager, or officer of DMJ and is authorized to act for DMJ in that capacity, the County could accept the Proffer Statement signed by Mr. Phelps directly on behalf of the DMJ. Otherwise, the County would need to receive a power of attorney, duly executed on behalf of DMJ, for such other person as may execute the Proffer Statement. I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for this specific development, as my understanding is that that review will be done by staff and the Planning Conunission. Sincerel Roderick B. Williams County Attorney cc: Michael Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Director of Planning and Development Z_E: DMJ Holdings, LLC '-11 Fries ,m: Rod Williams [rwillia@co.frederick.va.us] Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 8:36 AM To: 'John Lewis` Cc: 'Jill Fries'; 'Mike Ruddy' Subject: RE: DMJ Holdings, LLC John, Page 1 of 3 I have gone back and reviewed what appear to be the relevant records for this matter and must respectfully disagree with your assertion that DMJ Holdings, LLC currently has clear title to a 100% interest in tax parcel numbers 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, and 64A -4-16A. Specifically, with respect to lots 16 and 17, 1 find that Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc., formerly known (prior to 1/22/1986) as Zuckerman Company, Inc., made the following separate conveyances of undivided one-half interests in the two lots.- On ots: On 11/14/1975, by deed recorded in Deed Book 451 at Page 655, to C&S Steel & Fabricating, enc., which was later known as Charles Zuckerman & Son, Inc., and is today (since 7/1/2004) known as Winchester Metals, Inc. On 10/12/2005, by deed recorded as Instrument Number 050023688, to DMJ Holdings, LLC. Therefore, unless Winchester Metals, Inc., under that name or one of its previous names, conveyed its a Tided one-half interest to DMJ Holdings, LLC or to DMJ's predecessor -in -interest, Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc., formerly known as Zuckerman Company, Inc. (and I am unable to find any such conveyance in the land records from 1983 forward that are indexed electronically), I remain firmly of the view that DMJ Holdings, Inc. does not hold title to a 100% interest in lots 16 and 17. With respect to lot 16A, the deed from the Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner was jointly to Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. and to Charles Zuckerman and Son, Inc. Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. and Charles Zuckerman and Son, Inc., as the language in the middle of the second page of the 2005 deed to lVlMIJ Holdings, LLC makes clear, are two separate entities; with the former now being Winchester Metals, Inc. As with lots 16 and 17, while Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. has conveyed its interest in lot 16A to DMJ Holdings, LLC, I find no record that Charles Zuckerman and Son, Inc., now known as Winchester Metals, Inc., has done the same. I must note as well that I respectfully further disagree with your assertion that the County real estate records show that "DMJ and Winchester Metals are the same". First, the fact that both names are listed in the tax records does not mean that the County considers the two entities to be one and the same, rather the double listing means that the County considers the two entities to be co-owners. In fact, the County would have no means, nor likely the authority, to make the determination in its tax records that two entities are one and the same. The records of the State Corporation Commission, however, which are the only authoritative records as e existence of Virginia business entities, clearly indicate that DMJ and Winchester Metals are not one the same. The SCC records show DMJ Holdings, LLC with SCC ID number S076841-8 and a creation d`acd 1! of 4/23/2002 and Winchester Metals, Inc. with SCC ID number 0161939-4 and a creation date of 10/1/1975, that is, two separate entities. Finally, for DMJ Holdings, LLC and Winchester Metals, Inc. to be 7/15/2009 RE: DMJ Holdings, LLC Page 2 of 3 one and the same would appear to be a legal impossibility, as one (DMJ) is organized as a Virginia limited I;' Aity company and the other (Winchester Metals) is organized as a Virginia corporation. As one further note, I would observe that, if DMJ Holdings, LLC and Winchester Metals, Inc. are now under common ownership, the mere fact of any such common ownership would not render the two entities one and the same. The common ownership may be able to direct one to convey its interest in the subject properties to the other, but absent such an action, the ownership of the subject properties appears to be had by two legally separate entities, meaning that DMJ Holdings, LLC would need Winchester Metals, Inc. to join it in any rezoning application for the subject properties. Roderick B. Williams County Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia 107 North Kent Street, 3rd Floor Winchester, Virginia 22601 Telephone: (540) 722-8383 simile: (540) 667.0370 E-mail: rwillia _ co.frederick.va.us -----Original Message ----- From: John Lewis [mai Ito: jclewis@painteriewis.com] Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 11:18 AM To: rwillia@co.frederick.va.us Cc: 'Jill Fries'; 'Mike Ruddy' Si iI-" : vMJ Holdings, LLC You recently sent me comments on the rezoning for DMJ. I am trying to sort through the first two comments. The first concern is that there is no evidence that Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. acquired the interest of C & S Steel & Fabricating, Inc. in the two parcels identified as 64A-4-16 and 64A-4-17. It appears to me that c. erman Company, Inc. conveyed half interest to C & S in 1975. Then in 7/15/2009 RL-': DMJ Holdings, LLC 2005, Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. conveyed (the other) half interest to DMJ. S is now Winchester Metals, Inc. (a.k.a. DMJ Holdings) and Zuckerman Co. in now Zuckerman Enterprises. The second concern is that Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. did not acquire the i iterest of Charles Zuckerman & Son, Inc. on the parcel identified as 64A -4-16A. The deed dated 1998 conveyed half interest to Charles Zuckerman & Son, Inc which subsequently changed its name to Winchester Metals, Inc. (a_k.a. DMJ Holdings). The same deed conveyed half interest to Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. which conveyed same to DMJ in 2005. The name changes are listed in the deed. The county real estate records show that DMJ and Winchester Metals are the same. please let me know if you concur with this. iks John C. Lewis Painter -Lewis, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 VVinchester, VA 22601 Off.: 540-662-5792 Fax_: 540-662-5793 Cel-: 540-323-5559 7/15/2009 Page 3 of 3 " w r" ■r y DMJ Holdings LLC RP to B2 I W�1c y +. REZ # 05 - 09 \�� iL. 1 yd YLY ': moi; , ` `.r;'g,` #, ` `�,, i''� �. ,� PIN: 64A-4-16, 64A -4 -17, 64A-4-18, CURRENT LAND USE �,•,� oA�:"'�' :''' " 64A -A -19,64A -4-20 r , �JlIy . 2, I A�a -+�y.� "+�•+rf{ - - =- ._ _ ■ . !', ■ Y aaw ;: R �� a ■"t $ a em { 4 ;s. iF . �.. 6 � .. ''s, i•' !a e * • ti�� -�' � " �� 1�T *q � !u 'fir t '` • �' t P til`- •- y?,. � ® �, �, �a i' ..+ y�.r, V'. aP b ri f !- �""�, Vii, •'-� � �" - r' � I' ► r � LqN, $ .sw c�� f ',, ' G�I�PEI�S VFr:.I..EY '�O'Wo� LE►�1��'- �' 0 125 250 500 Feet A 44 AR, a 4. 10 00 50 - , «7. • 'r ' 'VOOD ("asePhnncr MRtWd, Future RtV Bypass Long Range Land Use Highway Commercial Recreatim REZ0509_DMJHcldin sLLC_08250S 9 Rural Coramnity Center InrAlstdal Natural Raswtces 5 Reaeat •Residential • w t4 ban De,'el.)Pnwnt.%— taxed Use etdustdaf tOffice Open Space SS\3.X 4/, Mixed Use Age Restricted X;Y^j-._ man Centel -. Instrttltlonal Mzed-Use NeighDataood Village, Nstoric t DSR Business '.r�.r, , Planned Untt Dav*Vrnent '%j Wed Use Commercial n Ofte CARPER -5 VALI-Cf TOWN GENTFV, `\ 0 125 250 500 Feet 1 t t DMJ Holdings LLC REZ # 05 - 09 PIN: 64A - 4 - 16, 64A -4-17, 64A -4-18, 64A - A - 19, 64A - 4 - 20 4ti��' CSG RP to B2 CURRENT ZONING t � x �00b r s 4 411 41,00,0 ■ i r ■ a A 1f ■ ■ t x-_� _ �.:.r—�"'� .. �.M��6dG�■t�F;e+rlfl'`,i ■ • ■ ■ •t i ■ ■ ■ ■ • ■ C-OLLURF- FAQ ■ , ■ • ■ ■ • r ■ ■ ■ • v`i • , r. � • , • ■ ' • (HAVEN Y� NlA ,,�' , , Al ■ ,1'r ■ ■ • .fir " ■ , • • • ' • • ■ ■ , ■ 1. ` ■ ■ � �`' ■ ht(LLER HEIGtH75 t dd00 ��1� • • '� x +• �` CARPER -5 VALI-Cf TOWN GENTFV, `\ 0 125 250 500 Feet 1 t t DMJ Holdings LLC REZ # 05 - 09 PIN: 64A - 4 - 16, 64A -4-17, 64A -4-18, 64A - A - 19, 64A - 4 - 20 4ti��' CSG RP to B2 CURRENT ZONING t � x r%o Fi■uru Rt37 Bypass C) REZ0509 LHdJHcidinysLLC_082509 • 7.511.11 UeceLyrmrnt Alen � SFFS.F Zoning 131 (Iprvhte... Nrighl-h .1 fijglkii B2 (&toll . General Dlulist) R3MLuuesx, Washial 7I4n916n11 DI■ritt) ERI IEitt arthe M.nutarlm ing M'u let) 1w(Iag*r Eduratlan Diurkt) 1111 lUtuurial, Light Dl,,Ukt} Gv 44 . (.'ase YL'utner ModdN RI. (InilnaYrtal. <;.ilnai Okh'hY) RIl-11 (Rbhlk lian.•ltinmmmif, INsOkY) RIS (RleAkal Saplwrl Dtwddl RJ iRe.44,10ai Plauued 0-lu ti)DtoUid) KS (RrsiAenital KerleaOonal t iunmanih Dtvftk0 Dwrid) kr4w tetidal t'etb' —Ie, Dbt,utl �00b r s 4 411 41,00,0 r%o Fi■uru Rt37 Bypass C) REZ0509 LHdJHcidinysLLC_082509 • 7.511.11 UeceLyrmrnt Alen � SFFS.F Zoning 131 (Iprvhte... Nrighl-h .1 fijglkii B2 (&toll . General Dlulist) R3MLuuesx, Washial 7I4n916n11 DI■ritt) ERI IEitt arthe M.nutarlm ing M'u let) 1w(Iag*r Eduratlan Diurkt) 1111 lUtuurial, Light Dl,,Ukt} Gv 44 . (.'ase YL'utner ModdN RI. (InilnaYrtal. <;.ilnai Okh'hY) RIl-11 (Rbhlk lian.•ltinmmmif, INsOkY) RIS (RleAkal Saplwrl Dtwddl RJ iRe.44,10ai Plauued 0-lu ti)DtoUid) KS (RrsiAenital KerleaOonal t iunmanih Dtvftk0 Dwrid) kr4w tetidal t'etb' —Ie, Dbt,utl V m 41144,w- �' 5 07'59'47" 1 82'2807 `V .......:::. �::.i•ir :•::. Sp r`�� 32.78. W 250.00 Zt; iT3s Opti TF60�-- a \ a \ / \ \ v , l Y \ M,oy TFS DMi HOLDINGS, 01=,L.C. ROUTE 50 ciik CUSTER AVENUE Proffer Statement Rezoning #: Property: 2.85 acres PARCEL ID's: 64A -4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, 64A-4-20 Recorded Owner: DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. Applicant: Mr. Mark Phelps DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. 345 Phelpsmore Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 Project Name Original: Date of Proffers: Revision Date: DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. Route 50 & Custer Avenue Shawnee Magisterial District March 24, 2009 June 1, 2009 July 1, 2009 Prepared by: PAIN TER? --1 EVVIS, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, VA 22601 Tel.: (540) 662-5792 email: office@painterlewis.com Job Number: 0812002 PROFFER STATEME,.. f PARCEL ID's: 64A -4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, 64A-4-20 Pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, the undersigned applicant proffers that in the event that the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County shall approve Rezoning Application # �� for the rezoning of parcels TM#'s 64A -4-16A, 64A--4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, 64A-4-20 from RP to 132, the use and development of the subject property shall be in strict conformance with the following conditions set forth in this proffer except to the extent that such conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the applicant and such are approved by the Board of Supervisors in accordance with the Code of Virginia and the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. These proffers shall be binding on the owner and their legal successors or assigns. PPOFFFRS 1.) Generalized Development flan The applicant agrees to proffer the Generalized Development Plan (GDP) dated 7/01/09, identified as "Generalized Development Plan DMJ Holdings, L.L.C." and which is attached to the proffer statement, for the purpose of identifying the general configuration of the proposed parcel after consolidation, the location and form of the site access, the approximate location of interparcel access easements, and construction, improvements to Route 781, Custer Avenue and Route 50, Millwood Pike. Please refer to the attached drawing named "GDP". 2.) Limitation of Future Development A specific use for the parcel has not been identified. The type of use can have a significant traffic impact on local roads and the function of nearby intersections. The Traffic Impact Analysis, which is a part of the rezoning application, incorporated the assumption that the parcel could be developed with a 60 room hotel along with a convenience store with 8 fueling positions. This assumption resulted in relatively high vehicle trip counts when compared to other uses allowed in the B2 zone. These trip counts were used to evaluate potential impacts to the local road network. The applicant agrees to limit any future use(s) of the parcel to those uses which will not generate in excess of 200 vehicle trips per hour during any hour. The determination of trip numbers will be accomplished during the site plan review based on the proposed use(s). Trip counts will be determined using the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition. 3.) Improvements to Route 50 and Route 781 The applicant will make the necessary road frontage improvements, as required by the Virginia Department of Transportation, to Route 50, Millwood Pike, and Route 781, Custer Avenue, in support of the proposed development. The improvements will be designed and submitted for approval to the Virginia Department of Transportation and Frederick County during the site plan review process. Construction of the improvements will be completed prior to the occupancy of any new building on the site. The improvements will include - page 2 PROFFER STATEMEy-, ( PARCEL ID's: 64A -4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, 64A-4-20 a) The design and construction of a right turn lane westbound on Route 50 with the appropriate length and taper ending in a right in/right out commercial entrance serving as the primary access to the site, b) The design and construction of a right turn lane southbound on Route 781 from a proposed rigFii in only entrance to its Intersection with Route 50; c) The design and construction of a raised median between travel lanes on Route 781 to prevent left turn movements into the right in only entrance described in "b" above; d) The design and construction of additional vehicle storage area in the existing left turn lane on eastbound Route 50; e) The design and construction of bicycle facilities along Route 50 in front of the site, f) The design and construction of pedestrian facilities linking Pembridge Avenue with proposed facilities in the Route 50 right of way. 4.) Inter -parcel Circulation and Access The applicant agrees to provide easements which will permit access through the site from all points of right of way ingress and egress to and from the site to the parcels which share a common boundary line to the east and west. The approximate locations of the access points are shown on the GDP. The easements will be defined during the site plan process and recorded by the applicant upon approval by Frederick County and prior to the issuance of the first building permit issued for the site. 5.) Monetary Contribution to Frederick County Service Organizations The applicant will donate or will cause to be paid to the Treasurer of Frederick County for Fire and Rescue purposes the sum of $2,000.00 for impacts to fire and rescue services. This sum will be paid upon the receipt of the first building permit issued for the site, subsequent to the approval of this rezoning. 6.) Monetary Contributions The applicant agrees to provide $5,000.00, for future transportation improvements within the Route 781 and Route 50 rights-of-way. This sum will be paid to the Treasurer of Frederick County prior to the occupancy of any structure on the property. 7.) Building Design New buildings shall be constructed using architectural styles and materials which are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Design elements shall be compatible with Frederick County and will respect the continuity and character of the existing architectural fabric of the surrounding community. All building fagades shall be limited to one or a combination of the following materials: cast stone, stone, brick, glass, wood, stucco, or other high quality, long lasting masonry materials. Metal panels shall be prohibited as a construction material for buildings. Roof materials shall be standing seam metal, architectural shingle, or other high quality material. Flat roofs shall be permitted only to the extent that rooftop mechanical units are screened from the view of adjacent residences. Building height shall be limited to 35 feet as defined in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. page 3 PROFFER STATEMEI-M I" PARCEL ID's: 64A -4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, 64A-4-20 S.) Parcel Lighting The applicant recognizes that the illumination associated with future uses and improvements on the parcel could have an impact on the adjacent properties. In order to preclude any negative impacts, the applicant agrees to regulate the overall illumination level emanating from the parcel. At the same time, it is necessary to assure that public safety concerns will be satisfied from night time activity associated with future uses of the parcel. 1. Pole -mounted and wall -mounted luminaries shall meet the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) criteria for "cut off' fixtures where the candela per 1000 lamp lumens does not numerically exceed 25 at or above an angle of 90 degrees above nadir. Pole -mounted and wall -mounted luminaries shall not exceed a height of 18 feet as measured from the adjacent ground surface. 2. Front -lighted, freestanding signs shall be lighted from the top, and aimed and/or shielded so that no more that 100 candelas per 1,000 lamp lumens are emitted above a line that is struck through the lamp center and extends at an angle of 80 degrees relative to nadir after the luminaries are in their finally -focused position. 3. Internally and rear -lighted freestanding signs shall be limited to the illumination of the sign letters or characters only. No iuminous backgrounds shall be permitted. 9.) Parcel Usage The applicant agrees to prohibit the following uses (as listed in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance) on the property: 1. Car Washes; 2. Fast food restaurants with drive through service windows, 3. Automotive dealers with outdoor display areas and gasoline service stations; 4. Model home sales offices; 5. Amusement and recreational services operated outdoors; 6. Self-service storage facilities; 7. Adult retail 10.) Preservation of Existing Vegetation Mature vegetation exists along the boundary between the parcel and adjacent residential lots. During the site plan process, the applicant will identify existing vegetation within the 25' inactive buffer which can reasonably be preserved and incorporated into the screening requirements as described by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. Any such vegetation will be shown within a "non -disturbance" area depicted on subsequent site plans. page 4 PROFFER STATEME, J PARCEL ID's: 64A -4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, 64A-4-20 The conditions proffered above shall be binding on the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in the interest of the owner. In the even that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grant this rezoning and accepts these proffers, then these proffers shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to the other requirements of the Frederick County Code. Fi Submitted By- On yOn Behalf of DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. City/County of �vN �r N ' , Commonwealth Of Virginia. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this a0 day of rA 200 ry 2Public L N Notary Registration number: I9�119Q My commission expires: On Behalf of Winchester gMetals, Inc. City/County of �t� !�� , Commonwealth Of Virginia. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of CWC. 200 q No,�gry Public Notary Registration number - My commission expires. ( 0 - 31 1—'t k page 5 m ! EXISTING RESIDE IAL LOTS PRESERVAT N OF E' ! ! 10 EXISTING/VEGETATION ! IN 25' NACTIVE BUFF R TM#64A CARTER4-15 / �! ! / m v z ZONING: RP / �� /! \~ z5' —50' CAT. "B" BUFFER 3 01 -i 3 ' � / RESIDENTIAL m� / o a m� I S FFR\ �• 25' INACTIVE BUFFER N a " ° eR1� I \ \ 25' ACTIVE BUFFER O.�O 3 o N ! ! I FULL SCREEN CARROLL ; tp 4' A* ! TM#64A-10-1-8 i ZONING: 82 (D O N CID „� !! \ VACANT DMJ kOLDINGS LL \ i O) o oa � :'� � TERPAR9EL ACCESS .� � N N N BICYCLE F CILITIES Nv O �'► EXISTING COMMERCIAL LOTS N n tovCD I m O,NO 3-50' g - ■ CARROLL - - - - - TM#64A-4-20A ZONING:82 VACANT ■ ` INTERPARCEL ACCESS PEDESTRIAN WALKS m rn z mat O r*a ni N ROUT 0/j<<,1, \ \ \ OUSTER gVEN i ®2®�� SpF Oo40 _ UE- C z RIGHT TU LANE AND TAPER �dj/ r� RIGHT IN/RICKI OUT ENTRANCE ;>:;;,.._ T3S ROV 3� 4' RAISED MEDIAN O a � Mpy rFs r-- 0 RIGHT TURN LANE � r Zm 3f RIGHT IN ONLY ENTRANCE G) _ EXP ON OF LEFT TURN LANE jj(y m 11= > aA ��` STORA CAPACITY �: ! Spn�` OO \ \ ijij W Q o so Q �Q D" i for DMJ Holdings, Toute 50 East !; Custer Avenue Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia March 24, 2009 Revised: July 2, 2009 Revised: August 19, 2009 Prepared for: DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. Mr. Mark Phelps 345 Phelpsmore Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 Prepared by: PAINTER -LEWES, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, VA 22601 Tel.: (540)662-5792 email: office@painterlewis.com Job Number- 0812002 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS section page i. INTRODUCTION 2 A. SITE SUITABILITY 2 B. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES 3 C. TRAFFIC 4 D. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT 5 E. WATER SUPPLY 5 F. DRAINAGE 5 G. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES 5 H. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES 5 I. COMMUNITY FACILITIES 6 J. LOT CONSOLIDATION 6 K. HOA MEETING RESULTS 6 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. i. INTRODUCTION DMJ holdings, L.L.C. (the applicant) proposes to rezone six parcels of land located on the north side of Route 50 at its intersection with Custer Avenue in Frederick County, VA. The parcels (the site) are currently zoned RP (Residential Performance District) and are identified by the following Tax Identification Numbers - Tax Flap No. Area (acres) Ex. Zoning Pr. Zoning 64A -4-16A 0.0355 RP B2 64A-4-16 0.6887 RP B2 64A-4-17 0.7504 RP B2 64A-4-18 0.6112 RP B2 64A-4-19 0.5318 RP B2 _ 64A-4-20 0.2311 RP B2 Total 2.85 ----- The applicant is requesting to rezone the properties from RP, Residential Performance District to B2, Business General District. The total area of the request is approximately 2.85 acres. Please refer to Exhibit 1 on the following page. The intended purpose of the rezoning is to enable the applicant to develop the site for commercial purposes. A. SITE SUITABILITY The subject parcels are located at the northwest corner of Route 50 and Custer Avenue. The description of B2 zoning in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance states that general business areas are located at major intersections, involve frequent and direct access by the general public, and should have direct access to major thoroughfares. All the other parcel's frG^tong o^ +his intersection are currently zoned B2 or cont -4i __ , -•-'-:_ 't. - -aed r.,_ � a.. aL... f� !"� 1 1-l' TLS ;f;C:I•�leI C ! ! uses. : !!l'5 �i�r i i il�CL! !� �! rrii,ili!!lg W U M i=std-!! lis %�t?il�iof ��Istrict . A A $ Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan designates these parcels as "Business". The parcels are within the Urban Development Area and the Sewer and Water Service Area. If any existing wells and drainfields are identified on the properties, they will be located and appropriately abandoned at the time of development. 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN FIRM Community Panel Number 510063 0115 B shows the subject area to be outside of any flood hazard zone. WETLANDS No wetlands have been identified on this site. As a result of the development of this site, construction activities will occur off site. In the event that construction will impact off site wetlands, the requisite permits will have to be obtained to allow disturbance of `- jurisdictional wetlands. 2 N ■ O ■ ■ 'D � o M ; n v mr-0 n m x o cz cn N cn O Y z Y `A' U)W -0 O Z In X It j I �7 DC .mi O rr+.'i r 9 < O Z C o m \ 0° m N N \ � O Z t7 z- f- M O i Z ZC, ITmI r-1 V Oo V IM (D Ct (D 0 r CID e F O 0 O N N N� � `-S• C -n N In 11 V �as U) C1 tDto Qi O W N O D V 3 N ■ O ■ ■ 'D � o M ; n v mr-0 n m x o cz cn N cn O Y z Y `A' U)W -0 O Z In X It j I �7 DC .mi O rr+.'i r 9 < O Z C o m \ 0° m N N \ � O Z t7 z- IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. STEEP SLOPES According to the soil survey information there are no steep slopes located on this site. Tho, general elevation of the site is lower than the adjacent residential lots and therefore, the apparent height of commercial buildings will be minimized when viewed from the neighborhood. MATURE WOODLANDS There are no mature woodlands located on this site_ SOILS According to the Soil Survey of Frederick County, the site contains the following soil types - 0 Blairton silt loam: 3C (7-15%) This soil is moderately deep, strongly sloping, and somewhat poorly drained. It is mostly found along heads of drainage ways and in broad upland depressions. • Weikert-Berks channery silt loams: 41D (15-25%) This consists of shallow and moderately deep, moderately steep, well drained soils on side slopes and ridges. B. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES The parcels to be rezoned are bordered to the north by residential properties contained within the Pembridge Heights subdivision. The parcel to the west is residential. The parcel to the east is zoned B2 and is vacant. The parcels directly across Route 50 to the south are all zoned B2. The following table lists all adjacent owners and parcel numbers. Tax Map No. Owner Ex. Zonin Ex. Use � 64A -4-20A Carroll, James H. B2 Vacant 64A -10-1-B Carroll, James H. B2 Vacant 64A-10-1-153 Schraff, Timothy & Amanda RA Residential 6 .A-10-1-152 Pvle, Glenn I RPT Residential 64A-10-1-151 Bryant, Thomas & Stephanie RA _ Residential j 64-A-93 EFG Investments, LLC B2 Vacant 64A-10-1-145 Rhyne, Jerry & Julie RA Residential 64A-10-1-144 Pritchett, Elyse & Ralph RA Residential 64A-4-15 Carter, Jan RP Residential 64 -A -89A Marlow Investments, LC B2 Commercial 64A -A-13 Winchester Outdoor RP Commercial C. TRAFFIC The property is located at the signalized intersection of Custer Avenue and Route 50. According to the Frederick County Eastern Road Plan, Route 50 is designated as a six lane, divided, urban section. At the location of the site, Route 50 is generally a four lane, divided, rural section. Please refer to the existing conditions plan shown on (Exhibit 2 on 3 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. the following page. There are no long range plans for altering Custer Avenue from its current configuration. Access to the site will be carefully planned to insure safe and efficient traffic flow. The site has frontage on both Custer Avenue and Millwood Pike, however, access from both rights of way could be problematic without thorough analysis. The future traffic patterns should be planned with consideration given to the adjacent commercially zoned parcel identified by Tax Map #64A -4-20B. While access to Custer Avenue would allow traffic exiting the site to utilize the existing traffic signal at Route 50; there appears to be insufficient stacking depth for southbound traffic. Therefore, the applicant is proposing a "right in" only from Custer Avenue that will serve only southbound traffic coming from the residential neighborhoods located to the north and east of the site. Please refer to the Location Map in Section 2 of this report. The primary access to the site is proposed to come from Route 50. Route 50 is a divided highway, therefore the access is proposed as a right in/right out only entrance. Interparcel access will be granted to the adjacent parcels (Tax Map #64A -4-20B and Tax Map #64A-4-15). This will provide the means to limit the number of access points on both Custer Avenue and Route 50. A Traffic Impact Analysis is contained in Section 7. The analysis was performed by Stowe Engineering, PLC. The TIA as presented is based on a build -out of the site which would include intensive traffic generators. The TIA assumes the construction of a 60 room hotel and a convenience store with eight fueling positions. These particular uses were proposed to achieve a high level of trips generated by the proposed site and thus to make provisions for street improvements that may result from the rezoning. According to figures from the Virginia Department of Transportation, the Average Annual Daily Traffic on Route 50, Millwood Pike, in 2004 in the vicinity of the site was 20,000 vehicles/day. Custer Avenue, Route 781, had an AADT of 1900 vehicles/day in 2004. The T iA shows that traffic that may result from the rezoning represents a minor portion of the projected traffic from existing and future developments. The TIA points out that there are now proffered improvements for the intersection of Route 50 and Prince Frederick Drive (Custer Ave.) that are associated with the Governors Hill project. With Phase 2 of the Governors Hill project the following improvements are proffered for the Route 50/Prince Frederick Drive intersection: • Construction of a second northbound left turn lane; • Extension of the storage for the northbound right turn lane; • Extension of the storage for the eastbound left turn lane; • Extension of the storage for the westbound left turn lane. The TIA recommends that additional improvements to this intersection be proffered in association with this rezoning that would include: 4 E41 FONE 91 kyj ME : FAIM 61 o IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. • Construct an additional southbound lane from the proposed entrance on Custer Avenue to Millwood Pike. This lane will serve as a right turn lane for south bound traffic. • Restripe the pavement on Custer Avenue at the intersection to delineate a right turn lane, and a combined through -left turn lane. The residents from the adjacent neighborhoods have expressed concern that the eastbound left turn lane is inadequate at times to provide vehicle storage. Potentially, this site could be developed before the Governors Hill project_ Therefore, the Proffer Statement contains a commitment to increase the storage capacity of the left turn lane if required. Bicycle and pedestrian improvements will be constructed generally along the Route 50 frontage of the site. Pedestrian facilities will be constructed to link Pembridge Avenue with Route 50. Final design of these improvements will conform to the standards and requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation and Frederick County. Please refer to the Proffer Statement. During the review of the TIA, concern has been raised that the U-turn movement at the Ryco Lane intersection with Route 50 may have significant impacts on westbound and eastbound traffic. Specifically, the concerns are 1) that traffic exiting the site will not be able to cross the westbound lanes of Route 50 safely to get to a position to make the U- turn to head eastbound, and 2) that the U-turn movement will create conflict with the eastbound traffic. The traffic engineer has evaluated the movement of vehicles which exit the site heading westbound and crossing both lanes to enter the left turn lane and has determined that this movement is functional. This evaluation has been attached to the end of the TIA in Section 7. The TIA states that at design year 2020, the peak hour U-turn movement at Ryco Lane is 32 VPH. The impact of these U-turn movements is mitigated by the existence of the center turn lane in Route 50 which provides protection for the vehicles and the upstream traffic signal which will provide gaps in the eastbound traffic into which these vehicles may make the U-turn movement. D. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT The site is inside the limits of the Frederick County Sewer and Water Service Area. The development would be serviced by the county sewer system. The location of the existing sewer lines is shown on Exhibit 3 on the following page. 9(Z rye o rb }- v w � � 0 IN OSS DRIVE D ARgY DRIVE b DR RT 7 8D 1 N E� ] � o D vJ m ccn CDUR z 0 FLANAGAN DRI CID _ � P��gRIDGE DR 1101 couRT o <<8 8 >> J Q B" CO 1w 00 (9 �' UO q) ��O CD N �Cu Q �O= cb �,7 Qcr �J�i cn U Z ft -1 Q Q 4z- O � �v �1a 3Ne�nl `<< PAINTER-LEWIS, Ie.7y P.L.C. PROJECT: 1�,�p�/ n�,! 1T NUARVEY: C•NA 81 7 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 SANfTAR 1 SEWER EXHIBIT DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: P -L2002 Winchester, Virginia 22601 DMJ HOLDINGS, L.L.C. SCALE: DATE: Telephone (540)662-5792Lai j SCA Facsimile (540)662-5793 FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA 6DD. 3°5°°9 rnnici n nnir_ � CHFFT- IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. E. WATER SUPPLY The site is inside the limits of the Frederick County Sewer and Water Service Area. The development would be serviced by the county water system. The location of the existing water lines is shown on Exhibit 4 on the following page. F. DRAINAGE According to Frederick County topographic mapping and the Frederick County Soil Survey this site has gentle slopes ranging from 2 percent to 25 percent. Storm water runoff generally toward the Route 50 right of way from west to east and passes under Custer Avenue in a culvert_ With the development of this site a storm water management system would be implemented to control any added flow created by the increased impervious areas. G. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES The nearest citizens' trash facility is located at the landfill on Sulphur Springs Road approximately two mile north and east of the site. In general, the collection of solid waste from the proposed commercial development will be accomplished by a private hauler. It is estimated that the development will generate approximately 100 pounds of solid waste per acre per day that will be transported to the landfill. Tipping fees are currently $45 per ton for commercial haulers. No additional solid waste disposal facilities will be required for the proposed development. It is estimated that $2,280 in tipping fees will be paid to dispose of 50 tons of solid waste annually. H. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES This site does not contain any historic or "potentially significant" historic structures as listed in The Rural Landmarks Survey Report of Frederick County. There are several `potentially significant sites" that lie within a mile of the site. The Rural Landmarks Survey Report lists several other structures within approximately one mile of the site as shown on Exhibit 5. A copy of the Civil War Battlefields and Sites map has been included on the following pages. The subject parcels do not lie on any Civil War Battlefield sites. I. COMMUNITY FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT MODEL The Frederick County Development Impact Model (D.I.M.) is utilized primarily for residential rezoning requests. It is anticipated that the capital facilities impacts of [el - o b 'r v nR C C� °— Q � ARBY ORS S' OR �� 7 B0 C� STANELY � 4z- DONEGAL �; CD 00 COURT � pR1V 7 O o m FLANAGAN o PE�gR�pGE pR s JURT a' "'g B" EET 8„ L_ v� a O 41 8 Ob \ cb 9Z 01 - Co c\Ja INV�ni v 11'v 5 O / tiQ V PAITER LEWIS, P.L.C. PROJECT: NARY C' INA 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 WATER DISTRIBUTION EXHIBIT PRAWN BY: : 081200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 DMJ HOLDINGS, L.L.C. Telephone (540)662-5792 SCALE: A00.0, 3/5/09 CONSULTING Facsimile (540)662-5793 FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SHEEE4 TT; ,1 ENGINEERS Email office@painterlewis.com EXHIBIT A Or solp 464 BEAVER HOUSE LA 465 GOTHOIC REVIVAL HOUSE, _7 HISTORICAL PRO, -,:TY1TY KEY BEAVER PROPERTY J/ 8 - UNIDENTIFIED o F - 199 - BARR HOUSE <> 7- s o0i 417 JOHN CARPER HOUSE** Lli J— 418 - HOUSE, ROUTE 657 @ 1213 cl :D0 1 7 p 423 - BRAITHWAITE HOUSE Sense LLI 424 430 GARBER FARM ROSENBERGER FARM** j CL o— p Rodd 0 j I- j, p U) n D -4 462 - PINGLEY HOUSE ix SURVEY REPORT OF FREDERICK COUNTY 463 STORE, RT 522 0 OLD RT 645 (-) Or solp Ld C) c LL] SURVEY: C. I.: NA NONE DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: 1200 0 1200 JLF 0812002 SCALE: DATE: Rd IM 1'=1200' 03/05/09 SHEET: Scale I" = 1200 ft EXHIBIT 5 464 BEAVER HOUSE 465 GOTHOIC REVIVAL HOUSE, BEAVER PROPERTY 1129 CARPER-WYNN HOUSE** o 1176 HEISHLAND HOUSE 0 L0 v o0i Lli cl :D0 1 7 LLI j NOTE: INDICATES A POTENTIALLY 0 p SIGNIFICANT SITE AS DENOTED BY THE RURAL LANDMARKS SURVEY REPORT OF FREDERICK COUNTY MILE RADIUS FROM co 0 o m . U) CENTER OF SITE co Lo -co) co co (o (D 0 0 0 �LL Lo 4 U) LLJI 7C, C) (D 0 c: 0 3: 1-176 co 0 ;j '29L* U) Lu Ld C) c LL] SURVEY: C. I.: NA NONE DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: 1200 0 1200 JLF 0812002 SCALE: DATE: Rd IM 1'=1200' 03/05/09 SHEET: Scale I" = 1200 ft EXHIBIT 5 II`CIVIL WAR SITES-, 1i First Battle of Kerrstown 2 First Battle of Winchester 3 Second Rattle of Winchester 4 7ncagement at Putherford's arm 5 Second Bat le of Kernstovrn o Third Battle of Winchester 7 Battle of Cedar Greek 8 Star Port 9 Fort cullier 1CIParkins Mill Battery 11 Gat,sbroak Redoubt 12 19th Corps Line 13 -Iilandale Earthworks/1^o59-65 Line i 14 Zig-Zag Tr=nches 7 8zttlefieid Fort'ifie ation/Pn'trenchment J �a�Gon� fl r .- She ea�nc nary p%Q �. Co Q Cross r fiens� ity I r Y - --- I Civil ar attre etas and .bites Frederick County Planning E Development (As Dj7ned by the NO'S Shenan aah Valley Civil War Sites Study) tt —, l._ 1 -- -- 12-10 _�.. IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. commercial and industrial rezoning requests are ultimately fiscally positive to the County by policy. Accordingly, the D.I.M. does not apply a fiscal impact to commercial rezoning. EMERGENCY SERVICES Police protection is provided by the Frederick County Sheriffs Department. The nearest fire and rescue facility is the Millwood Station Volunteer Fire and Rescue Company located on Costello Drive. No additional fire and rescue facilities will be required for the area proposed to be rezoned. The Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model calculates that there will not be any projected capital cost for emergency service facilities attributable to this development_ The owner recognizes the importance of emergency services, and proposes to proffer a monetary contribution to the local emergency responder. See the attached Proffer Statement. PARKS AND RECREATION There are typically no impacts on Parks and Recreation facilities associated with rezoning to a commercial use. J. LOT CONSOLIDATION Exhibit 6 on the following page shows the total site proposed for rezoning in a consolidated form. Consolidation will eliminate interior lot lines. Access easements will be created to preserve access to the adjacent parcels. K. HOA MEETING RESULTS A meeting with members of Pembridge Heights and Raven Winq home owners associations took place on May 28, 2009 at the _home of Ralph and Elyse Pritchett. Pembridge Heights owners included the Pritchetts, Adrienne Hayes, and James Davern. Raven Wing owners included Howard Miller, James Oakes, Frank Lucostic, Pat Meyer, and Henry Noble. The meeting resulted in a number of concerns that can be categorized as concerns associated with existing conditions and concerns associated with conditions which would arise with a change in the zoning. CONCERNS ASSOCIATED WITH EXISTING CONDITIONS Traffic at the intersection of Custer Avenue and Route 50 is currently a concern_ Discussion at the meeting resulted in the identification of four specific deficiencies associated with the intersection: 1) The turn signal cycle for the southbound lane on Custer Avenue seems to be too short to allow a sufficient number of vehicles through the intersection per cycle. 7 Q ......:......::... ,/ a is it::{ :..:.::.:: _r:_ii: is f :::: { i t........ .. ♦ /� F v o z m- m IIa D 5'v m 3 5' n r Z m N, 0 3 sCD� c l I DO l Q x �sl 2 O O M r+ 0)0 Q N N V v N C p r O W N 3 , N O � ■ Q ......:......::... ,/ a is it::{ :..:.::.:: _r:_ii: is f :::: { i t........ .. ♦ /� F i P S. f r S',04F 00,0 A \ e r1s Ao�TF v o z m- m IIa D DC o m o' r Z o c DO 0co Z C1 0 N O a i P S. f r S',04F 00,0 A \ e r1s Ao�TF IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. 2) The southbound lane on Custer Avenue in the area of the intersection with Route 50 is in need of pavement repair. 3) A right turn lane should be added to Custer Avenue southbound to allow continuous right turn movement. 4) The vehicle storage area for left turns on Route 50 eastbound is not adequate. ® The applicant will address concerns 1, 2, and 3 by a commitment to add a right turn lane northbound on Custer Avenue. This will result in a repair of the existing pavement and allow more vehicles to pass through the intersection during each signal cycle. ® As pointed out in the Traffic Impact Analysis, the Governors Hill project has already committed to increase the vehicle storage capacity of the left turn lane east bound on Route 50_ However, the applicant will commit to providing this improvement, and therefore address concern 4, in the case when the subject property is developed before the Governors Hill project. Please refer to the Proffer Statement in Section 7. CONCERNS ASSOCIATED WITH A CHANGE TO B2 ZONING Discussion at the meeting resulted in the identification of nine specific concerns associated with the proposed zoning change. 1) If a "destination use", such as a fast food restaurant, is developed on the site, there will be an unacceptable increase in traffic from the Senseny Road area associated with local trips. 2) A "white table cloth" restaurant is an acceptable use. A fast food or high turnover restaurant with drive-through service will be a source of noise, odors, and trash_ 3) A commercial establishment will result in light glare impacting the residential neighborhood. 4) Freestanding signs may be illuminated to the point that the glare is offensive_ �) I�¢: N' ':Idly ,�is should he constriucted fr :rrs atorialc Inrhirh are attra�titire and compatible with the adjacent residential uses. 6) The height of new buildings should be limited to decrease impacts on the adjacent residential uses. 7) Existing vegetation along the site perimeter should be preserved if possible. 8) Automobile sales establishments with outdoor sales areas should be eliminated as potential uses. 9) Lodging establishments with outdoor swimming pools should be eliminated as potential uses. ® The applicant will address concerns 1 and 2 by prohibiting the site from being used for fast food or high turnover restaurants with drive-through service. Additional uses deem incompatible will be prohibited. 0 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. • Concern 3 is already regulated under the. current guidelines in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. To further ensure against excessive glare, the applicant will restrict parking lot pole lights to 18' total, maximum height as measured from the ground surface. Wall mounted lights will be shielded to result in downcast lighting only and limited in their height above the ground surface. • The applicant will address concern 4 by ensuring that lighting sources for free standing signs shall be shielded, external, and directed only at the sign itself. Internal illumination of the free standing signs is acceptable only if the sign letters or characters themselves, not the background, are illuminated. • The applicant will address concern 5 by ensuring that compatible materials will be used in the external finishes of buildings. Multiple buildings will be required to exhibit a common architectural appearance. Roof top mechanical units will be screened from the view of the adjacent residential uses. • The applicant will address concern 6 by eliminating the height exception for hotels and office buildings as currently allowed in Section 165-24-B-(6) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. • The applicant will address concern 7 by establishing a "non -disturbance area" within the buffer adjacent to the residential uses where it is practical to preserve existing vegetation. • The applicant will address concern 8 by prohibiting the site from being used for automotive dealers with outdoor display areas and gasoline service stations. • No prohibition on outdoor swimming pools has been added to the proffer statement. Outdoor pools would typically be associated with public lodging facilities. These facilities impose hours of operation to insure that the guests are not disturbed from their sleep. These types of pools generally seem to experience limited usage. Please refer to the Proffer Statement in Section 7. 9 Traffic Impact Analysis submitted as a separate document J, -_ 3, 20C!9 John C. Lewis Painter -Lewis, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winch,°iter, VA 22601 Mr. Lewis: `,!I. Holdinl•3, Miliv ;,d Frederick Co, VA As requc. sted I am pr::v Jing information to ans-wer the en;s of jised in review comments issued by Gr€'°k; Hoffman of VDOT, and John E;i hop of Frederick Co. Planning. VDOT Comment (Greg Hoffman) - Now will U -Turns in the gore area be controlled by west bound traffic leaving your site? This is a potentially dangerous situation which needs to be addressed. The proposed entrar-; onto Miliw,-.Od l' 3. -' -n.. d Wi_ Right in -Richt out connection. ,'tris will forc-,y vehr :,:, desi _ to travF, a a;:' c t j' ,i1 Pike to first tri: I west and ma'. w _ l_I turn about " 00 feet downstream. An f !,>ft ..#ria lane i! :n pl ac!.2 t:.- jr prapo .r :� :tx' entrance. i. e+ °! turn r-' it Royal Pike. A companirl _ "B left turn lanL _l:>o r. _i t':. :: h _!, firing t ; : ; ke t€w aforemert; onFci U turn will be s::p� ed hr thr +; ; traf` :: by usE. t=,is c:�edicate.d t}:ft turn lane + mak 4 U-turr- Oncr ir r(-zt , Ir I, tum =ane, drivers making a LI-tu -.'Il also have the bent <t of an ur,. =--eaim trarfir the E.3 +.inct,a Shat wrtl ca sty _ aps in the traffic flow sufficient for the U turn to b ,� ,)fished. Frederick County Planning Comment (John Bishop) — if right in — right out is allowed on. Route 50, the distance to the next crossover will need to be analyzed far weaving risks (if it is too near to the entrance) and potential improvements. Mr- Joh: i Lewis July 13, 2009 Page 2 Highway Capacity Manual refers to this nja� J,_,er as a Type C'', .vii.;,; Configuration, Sidcd n. .--ults: Weave. This weave was evaluat(I J two v.�t3vs W. w�tl_' PhO Synchro saftwau prescribed by VL)OT for the Tr- 'tic in), - ,-t tudy of this project inc l�;Av-; an animation tool that displays the actual modOt d traff 7!:D-lditions- This animation was reviewed for the Design Year 2020 PM and Saturday Peak Hour ,;Jnditz')f15 to determine if the wea" :.::area would Cause unacceptable delays or blockin-,-,- of traffic, No suC,A) k'vents were obs;L,-V'-'.d. The upstream traffic signal at the intersect -oil of Pr ' -,-4 Frederick Drivl Millwood Pike provided gaps in the westbound traffic stream that allow0d for the weave movement to be accomplished with minimal through traffic. Evi-.'!intw�n Method,' ii 'w ".fm7r A Weave Analysis was a! sin. th;-, condition morlels the highest p, I formed f o r th-,r 1, IM Pock Hour 'n thy,: _'M-20 Dc-li— traffic volumes on the W3 throu ; Ia- ...... the xit point :.,f 0--- :;tc to the (-,,-the left to -t 3ne was r- %k;tl iclditi_ :,lf `ft turn Ota ,aT �,_,-itysis reported a Weave ?v-' of taking vehi, �o the point � f thc Service of B for the studied se ;menti ;3tty-hefj rlCM worksheet). Should you need any additional infomt-ai-ton, plee-:!y� do, niot hesitate to contact me. SincerMy, NGINEERING, and Manager Attachm :-Z' FREEWAY WEAVING WORKSHEET eneral information _L& lnfarmation t_�_ � West 9 , REZONING APPLICATION FORM FRE DE RICK COUNT17, VIRGINIA, o be coinpleted by Planning Staff iizig Amendment Number Hearing Date Fee Amc,unt Paid $ " Date Received BOS Hearing Date j The follo�j,ing iforination shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book andpage numbers may be obtained frond the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, lZeal Estate Division, 107 North :Kent Street, Winchester., L Applicant: Name:MiJ Hdrl1nn 1 ; L LC Telephone,- Address:. elephone!Address: N5 POe ,&)-� ire L ' -i L V Z.. Property Owner (if diffczrent than. above) Name: �''! t nd esti Mtfa is Address: C � V�r� �Qa, 3. Contact person if other than above Telephone: G)&7 -6t600 Name: john Luo. s Telephone 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map Agency Comments Plat Fees Deed to property Impact Analysis Statement Verification of taxes paid Proffer Statement 10 S. The Coyle of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of o-whership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties iii interest of the land to be. rezoned: 6. A) Current Use of the Property:.. r 5 ( b (II /Vocaot — B) Proposed Use of the Property.- 7. roperty: 7. Adjoining Property* PARCEL ID NU YIBER USE BONING ae a- ac--hecl ShceA 8. Locat%o a: The nroneity is ivnearest at give exact location based on Barest mad and -jiSta�_it c from nearest intersection; using road names and route numbers}: Pacets are l occuted @, Nafh wes4 Corner c( h u e '30 and Cusco- -A\'ej� ue . 11 9. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed : Number of Units Proposed Single Family homes: Townhome: Multi -Family: Non -Residential Lots: Mobile home: Hotel Rooms: 0fCe; Retail: Restaurant: 10. Signature. Square Fodt4ae of Proposed. Uses Service Station: Manufacturing: Warehouse:, Other: Coiy)m er6 o_J - T6 o I (we), the -undersigned, do hereby respectfully m ake.ap e c . 'plication and. petition the Fred ri k 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 0 ...:_ us?app ication is Submitted mugt be placed at the front property line at least seven days: prior 10, tho. Planning. Cor'i I i public hearing omissicn pu r 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 o -P -my (our) -knowledge. Applicant(s): IL, L.C. Owner(s): ol n95 L L Wiricre.s-fcr Wtaisj Irc 12 Date: Date: Date: -7 Date: /09 ( OF Ck(ESTER WI ? oQ L�! _T oI LLL Ir oD FUTURE fy I,\\'� jCONNECTipN r A;` 1 J�� SULPHUR SPRIN�:Rp p DMJ HOLDINGS, L.L.C. FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE: 1"=2000' DRAWN BY: P- L DATE: 2-12-09 1 JOB 10812002 1 REVISED: PAINTER—LEWIS, P.L.C. WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA LOCATION MAP M / Q Im 81 :ti4:��'is�.:.Eti'is.i:i{�a.t:.:;:?:;i^?:�isii:.:ti'ittta��ci:4t��iiitki?.:4�4, n EE Sr o S n a m r N [D O �" 9 O S N Ort CD n M tD 1 ci b ........:•i:•i:•:::::•ii:::•i:: � r:i•iizi ::i•r::i•:•:i �::•:•::•: ::•::•:•::•tt:�rit:' tt:�tt:i� �ii:::':•i::•::::•ir: ri::•::•::•i::•:::•::•:::::•::•i:•::•:i•:::': i:•::•:•::•::::•:::... m Ln Ln 17S p Z .i: i. � :} it:i'i:i•ii:?�:;:;:?:tiiF:�tS�:�:ii� � �tt:�t?:iF}:' ii rii:a: :�:(� it:iit': � tt7t'rttit �ttttii ttitit: }: � :iztt:i�tt � i'tit:•:':':": i:ii.t:i: iF;i;':. o• o _. DMJ HOLDINGS • 0 c� LLC 2.85± AC rn RE S rn rn a (D N N ■ I N F I • CJi N W. — CJi N _ V N C OJ V O •:i::b:::'::::'t:::':.'.•;••••'• ••s:co rn O W OV �•r':ai••i:•r•C',••(•rar:7•:::bi:4:;•i::•:'.•F,6:t: s•.'::•.•..i:i:'r:•.r^:''r:'�:i.: 3 m 3 _ N e N� h C I O 1 �u I . g' i v �a 0 0 m y Al •:'� A S 07-59'411•N:•'82'29::::i:t;:::::i::::ii:'.::i:i:: G LW Ot W ,ti m o Sp �QQ �+ 32.78' 250.00 • '• � • � •' Z F ,0 C _• 1 R O p ` \ GUST IFR AV ENUe 0� O Cz f \ x 0 \ \ 03 Z \ C y C3o In D Oz n 4 M . NO D- Q�Q • C� REZONING APPLICATION 904-09 WAMPLER PROPERTY Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: September 1, 2009 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 08/05/09 Tabled by PC 45 days 09/16/09 Pending Board of Supervisors: 09/09/09 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 2.16 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Use. LOCATION: The property is located west and adjacent to Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), approximately 1,000 feet south ofthe intersection of Route 11 and Stephenson Road and approximately 1,900 feet north of the intersection of Route 11 and Old Charlestown Road. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 09/16/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Applicant provided the Planning Commission with an updated Proffer Statement dated August 7, 2009. This revised Proffer Statement includes several modifications, some of which were discussed during the Planning Commission meeting, and a couple which are aimed at further attempting to mitigate the impacts associated with this request on the surrounding residential properties. These include the addition of some use restrictions and controls to the hours of operation, and a more intensive screening plan which has been located on the revised Generalized Development Plan. The land uses proposed in this rezoning are generally consistent with the Northeast Land Use Plan. The property is in the vicinity of existing and proposed commercial land uses and efforts have been made to address the Developmentally Sensitive character of this area. The application seeks to address the appearance of the Route 11 corridor, and provides a monetary contribution towards transportation improvements adjacent to this site. It would appear as though the significant level of intensification of this site may be impactful to the surrounding area, including the business corridor, and the adjacent residential properties. The Commission should ensure that a satisfactory level of expectation has been met regarding: 1) Site design considerations on the property, along the properties frontage, and the potential impacts to the surrounding properties. 2) Sufficient value has been provided in the transportation contributions aimed at addressing the transportation impacts of this project when compared to the implementation of the improvements at this time. Following the public meeting, 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 #04-09 — Wampler Property September 1, 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: 08/05/09 Tabled by PC 45 days 09/16/09 Pending Board of Supervisors: 09/09/09 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 2.16 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Use. LOCATION: The property is located west and adjacent to Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), approximately 1,000 feet south of the intersection of Route 11 and Stephenson Road and approximately 1,900 feet north of the intersection of Route 11 and Old Charlestown Road. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 44B -1-12D PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas) PRESENT USE: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: RA (Rural Area) Use: Residential South: RA (Rural Area) Use: Residential East: B2 (Business General) Use: Commercial/Residential West: RA (Rural Area) Use: Residential Rezoning #04-09 — Wampler Property September 1, 2008 Page 3 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Frederick County Transportation: Please see additional Frederick County Transportation Comments provided by Mr. John Bishop on page S of this report: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Route 11. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to the property. VDOT is not satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in. the revised Wampler Property rezoning application dated November 25, 2008 address transportation concerns associated with this request. Specifically: Proffers 1.3. We would like to see the last sentence read: "Said entrance and turn lanes shall be subject to VDOT review and approval at time of site plan". Proffer 1.5. We would like the following statement removed: "Use of said interparcel connection will be at the discretion of the applicant". Fire Marshal: Plan approval recommended. Public Works Department: 1. Refer to the impact analysis statement on page 1: The discussion indicates that the subject site was previously used for mobile home pad sites. We recommend that the narrativebe expanded to indicate the disposition of the drainfields and possibly wells that served these mobile home sites. The narrative should also include a reference to the existing single family residence which remains on the site. 2. Refer to the environmental discussion included on page 2: The discussion of the soil conditions should be expanded to include a description of the underlying karst limestone bedrock and the potential for solutioning. 3. A discussion of site drainage and proposed stormwater management shall be included in the impact analysis. It should be noted that Best Management Practices will be required by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. Department of Inspections: No comments required at this time. Sanitation Authority: Water is available to the site. Forced sewer parallels the railroad track located to the west of the site. Service Authority: No comments. Health Department: The Health Department has no objection ifpublic water and sewer are available to the property. The necessary easements for connection to public sewer should be obtained either prior to the rezoning approval or as a condition of the approval, whichever is appropriate. Department of Parks & Recreation: It appears the applicant has provided for a bike -pedestrian (ten feet) trail that is consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan. Historic Resources Advisory Board: It appears that the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal review of the rezoning application by the HRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the property nor are there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It was also noted that the Rezoning #04-09 — Wampler Property September 1, 2009 Page 4 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identify a core battlefield within this area. GIS: No road names are required at this time. Structure numbering will be assigned during the permit - construction phase of development. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed rezoning will not have an impact on operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. While the proposed site lies within the airport's airspace, it does fall outside of the airport's Part 77 close in surfaces. Public Schools: We offer no comments. Frederick County Attorney: Please see attached letter dated February 17, 2009, from RoderickR Williams, County Attorney. Planning Department: Please see attached Memo dated February 20, 2009from Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County zoning map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identifies the subject parcel as being zoned A-2 (Agricultural General). The County's agricultural zoning districts were subsequently combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re -mapping of the subject property and all other A-1 and A-2 zoned land to the RA District. 2) Comprehensive Policy Plan The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as 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-I] Transportation The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan includes this portion of the County. The Northeast Land Use Plan calls for Martinsburg Pike to be improved to a four -lane facility and is further defined as an urban four -lane divided facility with a landscaped median. The Plan states that proposed industrial and commercial development should only occur if impacted roads function at Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. The Frederick County Bicycle Plan designates Route 11 as a short-term designated route. Rezoning 404-09 — Wampler Property September 1, 2009 Page 5 Site Access The Northeast Land Use Plan states that individual access to industrial sites should be discouraged along Martinsburg Pike. This development has proffered one full commercial entrance on Martinsburg Pike and potentially three points of inter parcel connectivity to the surrounding properties. Pedestrian and bicycle accommodations have been provided along the road frontage of this project. 2) Site Suitability/Environment The site does not contain any enviromnental features that would either constrain or preclude site development. There are no identified areas of steep slopes, floodplains or woodlands. This area is also known for karst topography. The Frederick County Engineer has identified that this issue, along with consideration of best management practices should be addressed at the time of detailed site plan design. 3) Potential Impacts A. Transportation (Provided by John Bishop, Deputy Director -Transportation) Based upon the scenarios described in the Applicant's TLA (A Traffic Impact Analysis of Wampler Property dated 03111/2008), the TLA describes improvements that are necessary to achieve/maintain an acceptable level of service. Not all of these improvements are provided by this applicant or others. For example, the build out of scenario I as notated on page 19 of the TLA indicates a signal at the site entrance. While staff would not be supportive of an additional signal being put in place at this location, the analysis does indicate that level of impact. however, the proffers do not address the equivalent value of a signal, but `max out' at $100,000.00. It is important to note that while the UA analyzes two scenarios with significantly different levels of traffic generation, the application is for unrestricted B2 zoning. Based upon recent rezoning approvals in this vicinity, it would appear that the cash proffers provided by the application are insufficient to offset the proposed impacts. This application, and recent TIA's, has also demonstrated level of service and lane geometry issues at the intersection of Route 11 and Hopewell Road, Route 672, in Clearbrook. The ultimate solution to this intersection has yet to be determined. Previous applications have participated in providing a solution to achieve acceptable levels of service at this intersection by providing a monetary contribution in various amounts that may be used to allow for the development of improvements in the general area of this intersection. Staff is satisfied with the proffered bicycle and pedestrian trail, and would note that it will be important that the applicant tie these improvements into the development of the site, via connections to the trail from the developed building(s). Rezoning #04-09 — Wampler Property September 1, 2009 Page 6 B. Csign St-andarVs The project's location on a major corridor warrants particular attention. This attention is provided in the application by a combination of proffered commitments aimed at designing the development of the site. Specifically, the Applicant has provided a 25' wide Route 11 buffer. This 25' wide buffer includes a 10' wide hiker biker trail, additional areas of landscaping which will include a combination of plantings on both sides of the trail, and a split rail fence. Additional on-site site design considerations would be desirable. Zoning District Buffers would be required adjacent to the surrounding residential properties. However, this may be an area where additional considerations are warranted. C. Community Facilities The development of this site will have an impact on Fire and Rescue 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 makes an effort to address the impacts to Fire and Rescue services by providing a monetary contribution in an amount of $1,000. In addition, the application provides for a monetary contribution in the amount of $1,000 for the Frederick County Sheriff's Office. 4) Proffer Statement — Dated June 12, 2008 with latest revision July 8, 2009 final revision dated August 7, 2009 - see Staff summary at end of report) A) Generalized Development Plan The Generalized Development Plan simply identifies site access and relates to the specific points of the Proffer Statement. The GDP is supplemented by an exhibit that fizrther illustrates the proffered Route 11 buffer. This 25' wide buffer includes a 10' wide hiker biker trail, additional areas of landscaping which will include a combination of plantings on both sides of the trail, and a split rail fence. A particular area of concern would be the use of the YO' landscaped strip for any parking lot landscaping that would be in addition to the proffered buffer landscaping. The application should provide for any parking lot requirements, including distance and landscaping to begin from the edge of the proffered buffer, thus providing sufficient area to accommodate the requirements. B) Land Use The Applicant has proffered to limit the development of the site to a maximum of F.A.R. of 0.25, excluding self storage. In addition, a maximum of 6 gasoline pumps with 2 fueling positions each for a maximum of 12 fueling positions may be developed on the property. No land uses have been proffered out by the Applicant. Therefore, this is an unrestricted request with regards to the permitted uses allowed in the B2 (Business General) District. Rezoning #04-09 — Wainpler Property September 1, 2009 Page 7 C) Site Design Minimal architectural and lighting proffers have been made which are aimed to exceed current County requirements. The application does not provide any additional commitments aimed at designing the development of the site examples of which could include a commitment to the building location, parking lot location, potential gasoline fueling islands and their location, and additional buffering adjacent to residential properties. D) Transportation The Applicant has proffered right-of-way dedication in the amount of 15' across the properties Route 11 road frontage and to one commercial entrance on Route 11. Generally, these improvements would be required as part of the site development. No additional physical transportation improvements are proposed. As identified in the staff report and Mr. Bishop's comments, additional improvements to Route 11 to achieve the desired ultimate section, and signalization improvements at the site entrance, should be addressed further; either through implementation or by a related commitment. Included as part of the proffer statement is an exhibit that depicts the proffered improvements adjacent to Route 11. In addition, three points for inter parcel connectivity have been proffered within the future parking lot to the adj acent properties to the north, south, and potentially to the west. A monetary contribution has been proffered in the amount of $75,000 that may be applied to road improvements in the general vicinity of the property. This may include improvements in Martinsburg Pike and Hopewell and Brucetown Roads amongst others. In the event that development of the property would exceed 2,000 vehicle trips per day the monetary contribution will increase to $100,000. The 2,000 vehicle trip per day amount provides a reasonable threshold for staging the contribution. However, the value of the contribution should be evaluated based upon the potential impact of the trips and the other identified transportation of the TIA. E) Community Facilities The Applicant proffers a monetary contribution in an amount of $1,000 to Frederick County for fire and rescue services and a monetary contribution in an amount of $1,000 to Frederick County for Sheriff's Office Purposes. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 08/05/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The land uses proposed in this rezoning are generally consistent with the Northeast Land Use Plan and the commercial designation for this area. The application addresses the appearance of the Route 11 corridor, and provides a monetary contribution towards transportation improvements adjacent to this site. Rezoning #04-09 — Wampler Property September 1, 2009 Page 8 The Commission should ensure that a satisfactory level of expectation has been met regarding 1) site design considerations along the properties frontage and on the property, and 2) sufficient value in the transportation contributions aimed at addressing the transportation impacts of this project when compared to the implementation of the improvements at this time. Following the public meeting, 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. PLANNING COMMISSION SUTUMARY AND ACTION OF THE 08/05/09 MEETING: The Deputy Director -Transportation reported that the TIA indicates a shortfall in the level of service with increased vehicle trips, particularly in excess of 2,000 vehicle trips per day. In terms ofthe overall transportation package, there was a significant difference as far as the value to the County for other similarly -sized parcels and similarly proposed uses recently rezoned. It was noted that since the self - storage use was not proffered, the applicant could do any 132 use by right, should the rezoning be approved as presented. In particular, the TIA scenario, which includes a gasoline station, calls for a traffic signal to maintain adequate levels of service at the entrance. It was noted that while the staff is not supportive of the proliferation of traffic signals throughout the corridor, this analysis does a good job of highlighting the improvement and quantifying the impact of a higher level of use. Based on this information, the Deputy Director -Transportation concluded that the value of the applicant's proffer package was insufficient compared to recent local rezonings and does not appear to offset impacts, in terms of both physical improvements and cash proffers. The applicant described the proffers dealing with site design to ensure that the proposed building will be constructed using a high-quality materials pallet and the provision of a substantial Route 11 buffer including landscaping, a hikeribiker trail, a split -rail fence, and restrictive on-site lighting. The applicant noted that a possible fueling station indicates a traffic generation of 6,500 tpd and with VDOT's 40% by-pass reduction, the trip generation is reduced to 3,900 tpd. Regarding the issue of a traffic signal, the applicant did not believe the proposed development would cause the needfor a traffic signal as much as the background traffic along the Route 11 corridor; the applicant also noted that the monetary contribution would cover half the cost of a traffic signal. During the public comment portion of the hearing, one citizen, an adjoining property owner, came forward to speak in opposition to the rezoning. The adjoining property owner was concerned the proposed rezoning would negatively affect the value of his home and property. He was also concerned about noise from a commercial development, increased traffic on Route 11, and the history of sewage problems experienced on the Wampler property. The Planning Commission expressed concerns that no uses had been proffered out of the proposed B2 rezoning and the range in the intensity of commercial uses for the site was problematic in assessing the possible impacts. If a higher intensity use was developed on the property, Commissioners preferred to see additional buffers and screening to protect adjacent residential uses from the increased activity, noise, and lights. Commissioners inquired if the applicant had considered limiting the hours of operation. Rezoning #04-09 — Wampler Property September 1, 2009 Page 9 Considering the issues raised, the applicant offered to construct an eight -foot fence, which would provide a permanent, opaque screening element, and a third row of trees along with the required Category B Buffer. Existing mature trees along the property line would remain undisturbed; 50 feet of total buffer area was being proposed. The applicant said he would look into the possibility of limiting the hours of operation. Commission members were cautious about assessing the impacts based solely on a self-service storage use generating less than 2,000 tpd because of the possibility of the use changing within a year or two to a more intensive use, such as a gasoline station with 6,500 tpd. Commissioners noted there .were six to eight RA -zoned residential lots in the middle of this commercial area along Route 11. They questioned the timing of the rezoning and thought it may be premature, based on the impacts. At some future time, they believed the entire area will probably be commercial; however, in the interim, the residences would have to be protected. Commissioners said they would have preferred to have the more intensive B2 uses proffered out of this application. The Deputy Director -Transportation reinforced his previous comments regarding the impacts of this project on the transportation network and the potential need for site signalization generated by this request. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to table the application for 45 days in order to provide the applicant the opportunity to evaluate the timing and scale of the proposed uses and, in particular, the more intensive uses permitted in a B2 (Business General) Zoning District. (Note: Commissioners Kerr and Mohn were absent from the meeting.) STAFF UPDATE & SUMMARY FOR THE 09/16/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The revised Proffer Statement, dated August 7, 2009, provided by the Applicant, includes several modifications, some of which were discussed during the Planning Commission meeting, and a couple which are aimed at further attempting to mitigate the impacts associated with this request on the surrounding residential properties. More specifically, these include the addition of some use restrictions which prohibit the following uses on the property: Communication Facilities, Truck Stops, Hotels and Motels, Motion Picture Theaters, and Adult Retail, in addition to prohibiting Car washes for the extent of the time the adjoining properties are residential in use. Also, while the adjoining properties are in residential use, the Applicant has limited the hours of operation to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. The Applicant has provided a more intensive screening plan which has been located on the revised Generalized Development Plan. An 8' high fence is proffered in lieu of the required 6' high fence and an additional row of evergreen trees has been proffered. Please note that this additional row of evergreen trees has been proposed for the 25' inactive portion of the required buffer. This area already contains a large amount of landscaping and screening as required by Ordinance. It may be problematic to place additional landscaping within such a small area. It is usual for any additional landscaping to be placed in an area of additional area beyond that already required. Rezoning #04-09 — Wampler Property September 1, 2009 Page 10 It would appear as though the significant level of intensification of this site may be impactful to the surrounding area including the business corridor, and the adjacent residential properties. This is from the perspective of the buffering and screening and from the potential need for signalization of the site on an already busy corridor. The land uses proposed in this rezoning are generally consistent with the Northeast Land Use Plan. The property is in the vicinity of existing and proposed commercial land uses and efforts have been made to address the Developmentally Sensitive character of this area. The application seeks to address the appearance of the Route 11 corridor, and provides a monetary contribution towards transportation improvements adjacent to this site. The Commission should ensure that a satisfactory level of expectation has been met regarding: 1) Site design considerations on the property, along the properties frontage, and the potential impacts to the surrounding properties. 2) Sufficient value has been provided in the transportation contributions aimed at addressing the transportation impacts of this project when compared to the implementation of the improvements at this time. Ronald Simkhovitch, Sr. 2659 Martinsburg Pike Stephenson, VA 22656 August 5, 2009 Dear Planning Commission/Board Members: Thank you for listening to our concerns. My family and I have lived at that address for over 27 years. We purchased it in 1982. In June 1997 we purchased more land from Mr. and Mrs. O.L. Payne that joined our property. That property was Zoned M-1 and we had it downzoned to RA to keep anyone from building next to our property. Our property joins the Wampler property on two sides in the shape of an "L", down one side and along the back. We feel the Rezoning will hurt the value of our property as well as our neighbor's properties that joins the Wampler property. The other thing that concerns us is the sewer problems that the Wampler property has had for many years. Will he have to hook to the County Water & Sewer and how will the sewer be supplied to his property? Traffic on Route 11 is already heavy. What is he going to put in there? We don't want the extra noise, lights, crime and traffic. I know the property that Rocky Yost owns behind our properties along Route 11 is rezoned. If and when that property gets built out, then it may be the right time to look at rezoning. But not now, this is the wrong time. Please help protect our homes. �incerely, Ronald Simkhovitch, SR. COUNTY ar FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 TO: Patrick Sowers, AICP FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Director RE: Rezoning Comments — W ampler, Route i 11,4 orth DATE: February 20, 2009 The following points are offered regarding the Wampler Route 11 North Rezoning application. The comments are offered in addition to those discussed during our previous meetings on this application. Please consider them as you continue your work preparing the application for submission to Frederick County. Land Use. The property is located in the area covered by the NELUP Plan. The property is within the SWSA and is designated as an area of commercial land use with an area of associated DSA. The business corridor expectations of the Comprehensive Plan should be recognized. General. Based upon the information submitted to this department, including a revised proffer statement dated February 4, 2009, it would appear as though most of the items discussed during the preparation of this application have been addressed. The following transportation item has been identified as needing additional attention. Transportation. The Northeast Land Use Plan calls for Martinsburg Pike to be improved to a four -lane facility. This application does not propose construction within Route 11 in implementation of this goal. The application proposes the construction of an entrance to the site which would include improvements customarily required by VDOT for site development. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Wampler, Route 11 North -- Rezoning Comments February 20, 2009 Page 2 The Plan also states that proposed industrial and commercial development should only occur if impacted roads function at Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. The Impact Analysis prepared for this application recognizes that there will be impacts to the transportation network in the vicinity of this project. Several area intersections are anticipated to operate at an unacceptable level of service. This application proposes a monetary contribution for area transportation improvements in the amount of $50,000. It should be evaluated if the amount proffered is sufficient to mitigate the impacts of the project. Consideration should be given to a combination of ;-- o�'o.-- tS ;1hi : R,)ate i 1 to fiarlhcr tl.e Plan atki a rnoncLar-y :;orunbittion in the appropriate amount to offset the potential impacts. Please ensure that all application materials are provided and that all agency comments are adequately addressed in the submission of this application. MTR/bad COUNTY of FREDERJCK I Roderick 13. Williams County .Attorney 540/722-8383 Fax 540/667-0370 February 17, 2009 E-mail: rwillia @ co.frederick.va.us VIA FACSMILE 540-665-0493 AND FIRST-CLASS MAIL Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates 117 East Piccadilly S,re:.,, Sunc 200 Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Wampler Property -- Proposed Rezoning — Proffer Statement dated February 4, 2009 Dear Patrick: You have submitted to Frederick County for review a proposed proffer statement dated February 4, 2009 (the "Proffer Statement") for the Wampler property, Parcel Identification Number 4413-1-121) (the "Property"). Specifically, the proposed rezoning for which the Proffer Statement is submitted contemplates the rezoning of 2.161 acres, in the Stonewall Magisterial District, from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (Business General) District. I have now reviewed the Proffer Statement and it is my opinion that the Proffer Statement would be in a form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, and would be legally sufficient as a proffer statement, subject to the following comments: • The Applicant will, of course, need to submit the required application form, with complete responses to all questions, including list of adjacent parcel information, and fee, along with any appropriate power of aii.orney, to the Department of Planning and Development. It appears that the adjacent parcels are Parcel Identification Numbers 44-1-A, 44-A-56, 44-A-55, 44B -1-12C, and 44B-1-6. • The Proffer Statement refers to a GDP revised February 4, 2009. The materials I received include only a previous version of the GDP, dated November 18, 2008. To the extent that there are any material differences between the two versions of the GDP, my comments are based on the earlier version. • Proffer 1.2 — This provision might .read more clearly if the reference to a building permit was to "a building permit for the Property", similar to the language used in section 3 of the Proffer Statement. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 Mr. Patrick Sowers February 17, 2009 Page 2 • Proffer 1.3 — Staff should be aware that the depicted Route 11 entrance and turn lanes are subject to VDOT review and that the Proffer Statement does not make anv alternative provisions, in the event that VDOT does not approve the entrance and turn lanes as proposed. • Proffer 1.4 — This provision refers to a buffer exhibit, which was not among the materials I received. To the extent that the buffer exhibit might entail legal issues, as with the GDP, my comments would not cover any materials that I did not receive. Also, with general respect to buffers, while not necessarily required to be referenced in the Proffer Statement, under B2 zoning, the Property would be subject to buffer requirements as to any of the adjacent RA zoned properties (on the north, south, and west) if such properties are primarily used for residential use. County Code § 165-37(D)(3). Therefore, I would note that such requirement exists notwithstanding the specific reference to buffers along the east (Route 11) frontage of the Property. • Proffer 1.5 -- The version of the GDP dated November 18, 2008 does not show the interparcel connection, designated by the notation "4c", to the property to the west of the Property. I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for this specific development, as my understanding is that that review will be done by staff and the Planning Commission. Sincerely, A Roderick B. it lams County Attorney cc: Michael Ruddy, A1CP, Deputy Director of Planning and Development Patton Harrib Rust & Associates Engineers. Surveyors. Planners_ landscape Architects. 10 July 2009 Mr, Michael Ruddy Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 N Kent St, Suite 202 %Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Wampler Property Rezoning Application; Response to Comments Dear Mike, To accompany the application submission for the Wampler Property rezoning, I have provided below a response to all comments made by review agencies. Our CORPORATE: responses are as follows: Chantilly VIRGINIA OFFICES: Blawlyy (Mike Rudd, -41CP)P) Chontilly Charlottesville 1. The property is located in the area covered by the NELUP Plan. The property is within the FredeHarris icksbDrg SIYISA and is designated as an area of commercial land use with an area of associated onburg Leesburg Leesburg DSA. The business corridor expectations of the Comprehensive Plan should be recognised. Newport News Norfolk The proposed B2 rezoning is in accordance with the future land use Winchester designation. Additionally, the substantial buffer and landscape screening Woodbridge provided along the Route 11 frontage of the property will enhance the Route LABORATORIES`. 11 comdor. Chantilly Fredericksburg 2. Based upon the information submitted to this department including a revised proffer stated MARYLAND OFFICES: dated February 4, 2009, it would appear as though most of the items discussed during the Bolrlmore preparation of this application have been addressed. The following transportation item has Columbia been identified as needing additional attention. The Northeast Land Use Plan calls for Frederick Martinsburg Pike to be improved to a four -lane facility. This application does not propose Germantown construction within Route 11 in implementation of this goal. The application proposes the Hollywood construction of an entrance to the site which would' im provements customarily required Hunt Valley Williamsport by T�DOT for site development PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE The Applicant has proffered to provide the right of way necessary for the Allentown future widening of Route 11. In place of roadway construction across a T 540.667.2139 limited portion of Route 11, the Applicant has proffered to provide a F 540.665.0493 substantial monetary contribution ($75,000 for uses up to 2,000 ADT and 1 17 East P eCadilly Street $100,000 for uses over 2,000 ADT). We feel that this cash contribution would Suite 200 have a greater, and much more immediate, benefit to the area transportation Winchester, VA system by helping to fund improvements such as the re -alignment of Hopewell 22601 and Brucetown Road which would serve the area much more than a limited portion of frontage improvements across the Property. 3. The Plan also states that proposed industrial and commercial development should only occur if impacted roads function at Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. The Impact Analysis prepared for this application recognises that there will be impacts to the transportation network in the vicinity of this project. Several area intersections are anticipated to operate at an unacceptable level of service. The same improvements required to achieve an overall LOS C for the subject area intersections are needed with background traffic alone, regardless of whether or not this 2 acre site develops. The comprehensive plan notes that an application must address its share of transportation impacts. As the Applicant has proffered a substantial sum of money (up to $100,000.00) for a +� relatively small lot, we feel that the proffer statement adequately addresses the fair share of the transportation impacts. 4. This application proposes a monetary contribution for area transportation improvements in the amount of $0,000. It should be evaluated if the amount proffered is sufficient to mitigate the impacts of the project. Consideration should be given to a combination of improvements within Route 11 to further the Plan and monetary contribution in the appropriate amount to offset the potential impacts. The monetary proffer has been increased to a minimum of $75,000 and may increase to $100,000 if the use of the site generates more than 2,000 ADT. Please refer to response 2 above regarding the constructed improvements vs. a monetary contribution. Vr�ir`i�tl>Wdrtment o1Z,-a)7s ortation (Greg Hoffman) �. Proffer 1.3: Wle would like to see the last sentence read: "Said entrance and turn lanes shall be subject to VDOT review and approval at the time of site plan. " The proffer has been revised to ensure that all entrance improvements are subject to VDOT review and approval. 2. Proffer 1.5: Wle would like the following statement removed: `use of said inter parcel connection will be at the discretion of the applicant. " This statement has been removed. Additionally, the application has been revised to provide for a third interparcel connector to properties located west of the site, shown as 4c on the GDP. This third interparcel connector will be provided should the site develop with any use other than self service storage as security fencing for a self service storage facility would preclude this connection from occurring. 2 iacl�esterl'egion�zlAirort (Serena R. Manuel) 6Y/e have reviewed the proposed rezoning application and determined that the proposed rezoning will not have an impact on operations at the Vinchester Regional Airport iVhile the proposed site lies within the airport's airspace, it does fall outride of the airport's Part 77 close in surfaces. Acknowledged. ffistoric Resources AdzzsoaAeard(Amber Powers) Upon review of the proposed reonin� it appears that. the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessay to schedule a formal review of the rezoning application by the HRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survy, there are no szgnfcant hzstorc structures located on the propery nor are there anypossible historic districts in the vicinity. Itwas also noted that the National Park Service Study of the Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identij a core battlefield within this area. Acknowledged. Frederzck CountyAttorney (Roderick 1 lilliams) The Applicant will, of course, need to submit the required application form, with complete responses to all questions, including list of adjacent parcel information, and fee, along with any appropriate power of attorney, to the Department of Planning and Development. Ii appears that the adjacentparcels are Parcelldentifmation Numbers 44-1 A, 44-A-56, 44- A-55, 44B -1-12C. The submission package includes the complete application, signed power of attorney, application fee, and adjoining property information for the parcels noted. 2. The Proffer Statement refers to a GDP revised February 4, 2009. The materials I received include only a previous version of the GDP, dated November 18, 2008. To the extent that there are any material differences between the two versions of the GDP, my comments are based on the earlier version. The revised GDP was provided to the County Attorney in February 2009. 3. Proffer 1.2 — This provision might read more clearly if the reference to a building permit was to "a building permit for the Property" similar to the language used in section 3 of the Proffer Statement. The Proffer Statement has been revised accordingly. 4. Staff should be aware that the depicted Route 11 entrance and turn lanes are subject to VDOT review and that the Proffer Statement does not make any alternative provisions, in the event that VDOT does not approve the entrance and turn lanes as proposes. In the event this scenario occurs, the Applicant would submit a revised rezoning application depicting an alternative access scheme for the property which would be subject to review and approval by Frederick County. 5. Proffer 1.4 — This provision refers to a buffer exhibit, which was not among the materials I received. To the extent that the buffer exhibit might entail l gal issues, as with the GDP, + my comments would not cover any materials that I did not receive. Also, with general respect PHRto buffers, while not necessarily required to be referenced in the Proffer Statement, under B2 honing, the Proper y would be subject to buffer requirements as to any of the adjacent BA honed properties (on the north, south, and west) if such properties are primarily used for residential uses. County Code Section 156-37(D)(3). Therefore, I would note that such requirement exists notwithstanding the spec fc reference to buffers along the east (Route 11) frontage of the Property. The buffer exhibit was provided to the County Attorney in February 2009. 6. Proffer 1.5 — The version of the GDP dated November 18, 2008 does not show the interparcel connection, designated by the notation of `4c" to the proper-* to the west of the Proper*. The revised GDP dated February 4, 2009 depicts interparcel connector "4c". Frederick Co4rZtX.�ttment 0 I b& W rks (Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E) Refer to the impact analysis statement on page 1: The discussion indicates that the subject site was previously used for mobile home pad sites. We recommend that the narrative be expanded to indicate the disposition of the drainfields and possibly wells that served these mobile home sites. The narrative should also include a reference to the existing single family residence that remains on the site. The impact statement has been revised accordingly. 2. Refer to the environment discussion included on page 2: The discussion of the soil conditions should be expanded to include a description of the underlying karst limestone bedrock and the potential for solutioning. The impact statement has been revised accordingly. 3. A discussion of site drainage and proposed stormwater management shall be included in the i)�Kpact analysis: It should be noted that .Best Management Practices will be req.:ired by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Becreatioin. The impact statement has been revised accordingly. Frederick CoazrztyFireMarshaloe#rey Neal) Plan approval recommended. + Acknowledged. Frederick Cognty Sanitation �4uthorit Oohn Whitacre) mater is available to the site. Forced sewer parallels the railroad track located to the west of the site. Acknowledged. Frederick Co11szty GIS(Annie Cahill) No road names are required at this time. Structure numbering will be assigned during the permitl construction phase of development. Acknowledged. Frederick - W-,",Ychesterllealth IDZi2artmevt (Doug Daily) The health department has no objection if public water and sewer are available to the property. The necessary easements for connection to public sewer should be obtained either prior to the rezoning approval or as a condition of the approval, whicheveris appropriate. Section 4 of the proffer statement ensures that the Applicant is connecting the property to public water and sewer. Frederick CMiztyDeartinento Parks andRecreation (Matthew Hott) It appears the applicant has provided for a bikelpedestrian (10 ) trail that is consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan. Acknowledged. 5 Frederick TnchesterService Authority 0'esse Moffett) No Comments. Acknowledged. Frederick Countylnspections John Trenary) No comment required at this time. Acknowledged. Frederick CountyPisblc Schools (Vayne Lee)) l,Ve offer no comments. Acknowledged. I hope that these responses aid in the review of the application by Frederick County Staff as well as the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. If you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please feel free to call me at (540) 667-2139. Sincerely, PATTON HARRIS RUST &ASSOCIATES Patrick R. Sowers, AICP Wampler Property REZ # 04 - 09 (RA to B2) PIN: 44B - 1 - 12D �%♦ Fut-6 Rt37 bypass Application wT lml ik{'rl�>♦mxllt:llxa E 0 75 150 300 Feet CURRENT ZONING Zoning Bl(BuxWe:s. Net2ld rliml INvh Ict) BI (Budnec4, C, n-11>i.tlixll B3 piusinexs. hldu.4rla111'mdtlou M.,o kc ) EAI (ESuaCil{"P Alaourmimutg I)1'J11'lcl) ql HE (IBghel Education T)ishid) +_ Atl (hldu<hlai, Light I)Julkt) Al2 (hxlustl lal. Gmm 11 IM hki) 4M ABTI(AloWle Hww (baunulih' INshict) ALC (Aledica151q)Iwl t Igwllrt) RJ (f(r.Wdrnllal Y4nned Couumudla" Di.suk-0 R4 (we klentlal Reaeatiokal T'oilunnldK INshkrl R1(Ru .1-1-1M.,t o RP (Rndtlelltial TYrta'luauce IN:.trk•1) Patton Harris Rust & Associates Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Archiiect5. 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 T 540.667.2139 H+A F 540.665.0493 To: Mike Ruddy, AIC' Organization/Company: Frederick Coun Plarmin From: Patrick Sowers, AIC' Date: September 2, 2009 Project Name/Subject: WamplerProperty-- Rt 11 PHR+A Project file Number: 15291-1-0 cc: Memorandum Please find attached the final signed copy of the revised Proffer Statement dated August 7, 2009, for the Wampler Property rezoning application. The revised Proffer Statement includes the following modifications since the application was last presented to the Planning Commission on August 5, 2009: 1) Hours of use will be limited to 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM so long as the two adjoining properties are in residential use. 2) Car washes shall not be permitted on the Property so long as the two adjoining properties are in residential use. 3) Regardless of use of the adjoining properties, the following uses shall not be permitted: Communication facilities, Truck Stops, Hotels and Motels, Motion Picture Theaters, or Adult Retail 4) An additional row of evergreen trees along the northern, western, and southern property boundary along with an 8 foot fence have been proposed in an effort to provide a better screen for adjacent residential uses. 5) Any trees located within 5 feet of the common Property boundary with TM 44-1-A (Simkhovitch) will be retained to provide improved screening for the adjacent property. These changes to the Proffer Statement are reflective of the commitments made at the August 5 Planning Commission meeting and also include some additional proffers to address concerns associated with higher intensity users locating on the Property. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (540) 667-2139. PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ # Rural Areas (RA) to Business General (B2) PROPERTY: 2.16 acre +/-; Tax Map Parcels 44B -1-12D (the "Property") RECORD OWNER Wampler's Mobile Homes APPLICANT: Wampler's Mobile Homes PROJECT NAME: Wampler Property ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: June 12, 2008 REVISION DATE (S): October 1, 2008; November 25, 2008; February 4, 2009; July 8, 2009; August 7, 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, Wampler Property" dated November 18, 2008 revised August 7, 2009 (the "GDP"), and shall include the following: 1. Site Development 1.1 The Property shall be developed in substantial conformance with the GDP. 1.2 The Applicant shall dedicate 15 feet of right of way along the Property frontage with M Tinsbug Pike (Rt 11) prior to issuance of a building permit for the Property or within 90 days of receiving written request from Frederick County and the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). (See 1 on GDP) 1.3 Access to the Property from Route 11 shall be limited to a single entrance located in the general location as depicted on the GDP. Said entrance and any associated improvements including turn lane shall be subject to VDOT review and approval at time of site plan. (See 2 on GDP) Proffer Statement Wampler Property 1.4 The Applicant shall provide a 25' buffer along the Property frontage with Martinsbug Pike (Rt 11) in substantial conformance with the attached exhibit entitled "Wampler Property, Route 11 Buffer" dated February 4, 2009 as prepared by Patton Harris Rust and Associates. Said buffer shall include a 10' asphalt hiker/biker trail constructed to VDOT standards as well as a 5' landscaped strip with low lying shrubs (3 per 10 linear feet minimum) and flowers between Martinsbug Pike and the hiker/biker trail. The buffer area will also include a 10' landscaped strip with deciduous flowering trees planted 40 feet on center and a split rail fence located between the hiker/biker trail and future parking area as shown on the attached exhibit. Said buffer improvements shall be installed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancyfor anybuilding constructed on the Property. Additionally, the 10' landscaped strip may also be used for any parking lot landscaping requirements which would be provided in addition to any previously identified landscape improvements. Upon written request by the County, the Applicant shall dedicate an easement for the 5' landscaped area to the County for any future drainage and grading improvements that maybe needed. (See 3 on GDP and Exhibit 1) 1.5 Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building constructed on the Property, the Applicant shall provide for inter -parcel access to and from the areas located North and South of the Property in substantial conformance with the locations depicted on the GDP as 4a and 4b. Should the Property develop with anyuse other than self service storage, the Applicant shall provide for an additional inter -parcel access to areas located West of the P roperty in substantial conformance with the location depicted on the GDP as 4c. (See 4a, 4b and 4c on the GDP) 1.6 The Applicant shall limit gasoline pumps to a maximum of 6 pumps with two fueling positions each for a maximum of 12 fueling positions. 1.7 Excluding self service storage, the Property shall be developed with a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.25. 1.8 Until such time that adjoining properties (TM 44-1-A and TM 44B -1-12C) are no longer in residential use, the hours of operation for any use located on the Property shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM. 1.9 Until such time that adjoining properties (TM 44-1-A and TM 44B -1-12G) are no longer in residential use, the Applicant proffers to prohibit the following uses on the Property: (1) Car washes. 1.10 Regardless of use on adjoining parcels, the Applicant proffers to prohibit the following uses on the Property: (1) Communication Facilities, (2) Truck Stops, (3) Hotels and Motels, (4) Motion Picture Theaters, (5) Adult Retail 1.11 The Applicant shall install a row of evergreen trees planted a maximum of 8 feet on center along the Northern, Western, and Southern Property lines within the inactive buffer area as depicted on the GDP. Said trees shall be provided in addition to any landscaping otherwise required by ordinance. (See 5 on GDP) 1.12 The Applicant shall construct an 8 foot tall fence in lieu of the 6 ft fence required by ordinance within the inactive buffer area along the Northern, Western, and Southern Property lines as depicted on the GDP. (See 6 on GDP) 1.13 The Applicant shall retain all existing trees, excluding trees that are diseased or dying, located on the Property within 5 feet of the property boundary shared with TM 44-1-A Page 2 of 4 Proffer Statement 2. Design Standards Wampler Property 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, other high quality masonry materials, wood, or glass. 2.2 Site lighting shall not exceed 25 feet in height and will utilize full cut-off luminaries. 3. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development 3.1 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. 3.2 The Applicant shall contribute the amount of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) to Frederick Countyfor Sheriff's Office purposes. Said contribution shall be made prior to issuance of a building permit for the Property. 3.3 Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building constructed on the Property which would generate 2,000 vehicles per day (VPD) or less based upon the ITE Trip Generation Report, 7Lh Edition, the Applicant shall contribute the amount of seventy five thousand dollars ($75,000.00) to Frederick Gountyfor road improvements within the general vicinity of the Property. In the event development of the property exceeds 2,000 VPD based upon the ITE Trip Generation Report, 71b Edition, the monetary contribution will increase to a total of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00)- 4. Water and Sewer 4.1 The Applicant shall be responsible for connecting the Property to public water and sewer, and for constructing all facilities required for such connection. All water and sewer infrastructure shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. The cost of all water and sewer improvements will be borne by the Applicant. 5. Escalator Clause 5.1 In the event the monetary contributions set forth in the Proffer Statement are paid to Frederick County within 30 months of the approval of this rezoning, as applied for by the Applicant, said contributions shall be in the amounts as stated herein. Any monetary contributions set forth in the Proffer Statement which are paid to the Frederick County after 30 months following the approval of this rezoning shall be adjusted in accordance with the Urban Consumer Price Index ("CPI -U") published by the United States Department of Labor, such that at the time contributions are paid, they shall be adjusted by the percentage change in the CPI -U from that date 30 months after the approval of this rezoning to the most recently available CPI -U to the date the contributions are paid, subject to a cap of 6% per year, non -compounded. SIGNATURES APPEAR ON TFIE FOLLOWING PAGES Page 3 of 4 Proffer Statement Respectfully submitted, XX7ampler's Mobile Homes By. �A Jack Wampler, Sr. Date: STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The by My commis Notary Public �E Wampler Property acknowledged before me this 13 day of �� 2009, — . v' " Jason Brent Omdorffi Commonwealth of Virginia Notary Public Commiss m No. 237449 Wampler's Mobile Homes By: Jack Wampler,.! �®. Date: P oc' /6 1 /O�l STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The by My co Notary Public was acknowledged before me this �e day of &C°"e, 2009, d rff ission expires -Jason Brent Orn o Commonwealth of Virginia Notary Public Commission No. 237449 Page 4 of 4 LL 6 - � 1y�p,7 FUTURE PARKING AREA DI<iAIDUOUS I'Lci�xl'RTNG I'M I« -� 10' LANDSCAPE STRIP Irl H R v11 YFNW1 Ill` 1-11K R/BIKE' t TRAl1, 2 0i 020 go* 000 *�2* 0�020 ioe 000 99* *00 000 000 00* r EXISTING MARTINSBURG PIKE (Rt 11) R/W Patton Harris Rust & Associates,pc EXHIBIT 1 Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects. 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 WAMPLER PROPERTY k,R+A T 540.667.2139 ROUTE 11 BUFFER F 540.665.0493 SCALE: 1 " = 100' DATE: 2/4/09 WAMPLER COMMERCIAL - IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT July 2009 The Wampler - Route 11 Property (the "Property') is ideally located for commercial uses. The Proper y; identified by Frederick County -records, as Tax Map Parcel 44B -1_-12D consists of approximately 2.16 acres located along the west sie of Route 11 approximately 1,000 feet South of the intersection of Route 11 and Stephenson Road and 2,000 feet north of the intersection of Route 11 and Old Charles Town Road (See Figure 1). The subject site is currently zoned RA (Rural Areas) and was previously used for mobile home pad sites and also contains one single family residence currently. This application seeks to rezone the Property to the B2 (General Business) District. The intent of the Applicant is to develop the site for self service storage uses under the B2 zoning district, however more intensive commercial uses could potentially develop in the future. The site is outside of the designated boundary for the Urban Development Area (UDA) but is located wholly within Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) of Frederick County. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES As depicted by Figure 1, the properties located north, west, and south of the subject acreage are in residential use zoned RA (Rural Areas). To the East of the Property, across Route 11, is the existing Wampler Mobile Homes site which is split zoned MH1 (Mobile Home Community) with B2 (General Business) zoning along its Route 11 frontage. This adjacent property is also owned by the Applicant. B3 (Industrial Transition District) zoning is also located approximately 100 feet Southwest of the subject site on the Easy Living Associates site that was rezoned for B2/B3 uses in 2007 (See Figure 2 - Zoning Context Map). Required zoning district buffers will ensure that impacts to adjacent residential properties are minimized. LAND USE The subject acreage is located within the study boundary of the Northeast Land Use Plan which recommends commercial land uses along the Route 11 corridor. The plan further identifies existing residential uses south of the property as Development Sensitive Areas. The Applicant will be required to provide zoning district buffers against adjacent residential uses to minimize the impacts of the proposed rezoning. Additionally, the proffer package includes a distance buffer for the Route 11 corridor enhanced with various plantings and a split rail fence to minimize viewshed impacts and to also accommodate a 10' hiker/biker trail. Additionally, the Applicant has provided for a design materials palette and also placed limitations on site lighting to ensure there are no impacts to adjacent property owners. ACCESS AND TRANSPORTATION The property would be served by a single access point to Route 11. A traffic impact analysis (TIA) entitled "A Traffic Impact Analysis of Wampler Property," was prepared for this application using composite data collected from other studies in the area as well as actual traffic counts. The TIA analyzes two different development scenarios. Scenario 1 is a "worst case" traffic generation scenario which assumes the site development with a 12 pump Impact Analysis Statement - Wampler Commercial 1 ti S A 7 43 INIIx T 12 G t. 2B 52 53 54 f i 37 i Patton Harris Rust & Associates,pc FIGURE Z Engineers. Surveyors. Planners_ Landscape Architects. 117 East er.Virinia22601ly Street, Suite 200 WAMPLER PROPERTY Pj4R+A Winchester, Virginia 22601 T 540.667.2139 ZONING CONTEXT F 540.665.0493 94A I I Not to Scale I DATE: 10/1/07 1 gas station/convenience store. This scenario would generate 6,511 Average Daily Trips (ADT). This traffic generation volume represents a very conservative approach as applying a 40% pass by reduction would reduce the traffic generation for Scenario 1 to approximately 3900 ADT. Scenario 2 assumes the development of the site for self storage uses which would only generate 89 ADT as the use is sigiufi�aiiuy less iiu`eiisivc. The T1A 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 11/Hopewell Rd/Brucetown Rd Intersection: a Signalization, EB - Heft & 1 right, WB - Heft, SB - 1 right 2. Route 11/Stephenson Rd Intersection: 0 Signalization 3. Route 11/01d Charlestown Rd: • Signalization, NB - 1 thru The 11A indicates that the development of the site as a self storage service facility would not degrade the Level of Service (LOS) at any of the subject intersections beyond the LOS resulting from background traffic alone. Scenario 1, which assumes development of a gasoline service station, indicates that the project would degrade three movements in the study area intersections as follows: Stephenson Road and Route 11 - Southbound left turn (E to F), Westbound right and left (C to D), and Route 11 and Old Charlestown Road - Southbound left turn (E to F). Development of the site under either scenario could be accommodated using the same improvements identified for background traffic. To mitigate transportation impacts, the Applicant has proposed a monetary proffer in the amount of $75,000.00 for development of the property that generates up to 2,000 ADT. For any use with a traffic generation that would exceed 2,000 ADT, the monetary contribution increases to $100,000.00. ENVIRONMENT The Property does not contain any areas of wetlands, stream channels, or steep slopes. The site has a low elevation of approximately 628 feet and a high elevation of approximately 638 feet. 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- Oaklet and Oaklet-Carbo-Chilhowe soil associations. The predominant soil types on the site are Frederick Poplimento loams, 2 to 7 percent slopes (map symbol 14B) and Swimley silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes (map symbol 39B) as shown on map sheet number 24 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. Any wells or septic systems associated with previous use of the property will be abandoned in accordance with required Health Department regulations as part of the development of the site. Impact Analysis Statement - Wampler Commercial 2 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 # 510063-0110B, 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. Any storrawater management facilities will be designed to meet or exceed the state regulations. Per stonnwater management regulations, post development flows will not exceed pre -development levels. As such, development of the site will not negatively impact nearby drainage facilities. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND WATER SUPPLY Development of the site as a self storage facility would not necessitate connection for public sewer. Should the site develop as a more intensive B2 use that requires connection to public sewer, then a connection to the sewer line that runs along the railroad to the west will be needed. Access to public water is available via connection to the existing 10" water main along Route 11. Should the site develop for a more intensive commercial use at a 0.25 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) then the projected 23,500 square feet of commercial space would generate 4,700 gallons per day of sewer flows with approximately equivalent water usage assuming a rate of 200 GPD/1,000 square feet. SOLID WASTE Use of the site as a self service storage facility would generate minimal solid waste. If the site were to develop as a more intensive commercial use then the projected 23,500 square feet of commercial space would generate 587.5 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 Figure 3 identifies historic structures located within the vicinity of the site as identified by the Frederick CouM Rural Landmarks Survey. The nearest structure is identified as Kenilworth (# 34-113) is located approximately 1/z mile North of the subject site. As the subject acreage is not visible from this structure, there will be minimal impacts associated with the rezoning. 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 Second Winchester — Stephenson Depot, 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 Analysis Statement — Wampler Commercial 3 IMPACT ON COMMUNITY FACILITIES The proposed commercial rezoning will have a positive impact on the Frederick County tax base. 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 Sherff's office purposes and $1,000 to the Clearbrook Fire and Rescue Service. Impact Analysis Statement— Wampler Commercial 4 A Traffic Impact Analysis of ampler �r iverty Located in: Frederick County, `Jirghilia Prepared for: Mr. Jack Warnpler 2648 Martinsburg Pike, Stephenson, VA 22656 Prepared by.- Patton y: Patton Harris Rust & Associates Enjneers. Surveyors. Planners. LcndscapeArchitects. ;. 10212 Governor Lane Boulevard Suite 7007 Y Williamsport, Maryland 21795 a� N T 301.223.4010 • F 301.223.6831 March 11, 2008 OVERVIEW Repart Summary Patton Harris Rust & Associates (PHR+A) has prepared this document to present the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Wampler Property to be located at the northwest quadrant of Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike) and Old Charlestown Road intersection, in Frederick County, Virginia. PHR+A has prepared analysis for two (2) possible scenarios of the proposed development. Scenario 1 assumes 12 -pump gas station with convenience mart. Scenario 2 assumes 371,365 square feet of self -storage warehouse. Access to the site will be provided via a site -driveway along west of Route 11. The proposed development will be built -out over a single transportation phase by the year 2012. Figure 1 is provided to illustrate the location of the Wampler Property with respect to the surrounding roadway network. Methodology The traffic impacts accompanying Wampler Property 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 Wampler Property, Distribution and assignment of the Wampler Property generated trips onto the study area road network, Analysis of capacity and level of service using SYNCHRO for existing and future conditions. A Trak Impact Analysis of the Wampler Property �j J� A March 11, 2008 A Hf� Project Number -15291-1 I Page 1 No Scale Ile _ . Freya C,Ih 11 - t., a IL -ff N_1 L Figure 1 Vicinity Map: Warnpler Property, in Frederick County, VA A 7'raffic Impact Analysis of the Wampler Property P"+A March 11, 2008 Project Number -15291-1-2 Page 2 EXISTING, CONDITIONS PHR+A conducted AM and PM peak hour manual turning movement counts at the intersections of US Route 11/ Old Charlestown Road, US Route 11/ Stephenson Road and US Route 11/Hopewell RoadBrucetown Road. PHR+A established the ADT (Average Daily Traffic) along each of the study area roadway links using a "k" factor (the ratio of PM peak hour traffic volumes to 24-hour traffic volumes) of 10%. Figure 2 shows the existing ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area. ;Figure 3 shows the respective existing lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All traffic count data and SYNCHRO levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. PHR+A has provided Table x to show the 95`h percentile back of queue and levels of service for each lane group during existing conditions. A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Wampler Property R -{.A March 11, 2008 L Project Number -15291-1-2 HPage 3 No Scale Figure 2 Existing Traffic Conditions AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Wamr Property March 11, 2008 P FA Project Number -15291-1-2 Page 4 phjRl�. A Trak /mpactAnalvsis of the WamDler Property March 11, 2008 Project Number -15291-1-2 Page 5 Table I Warnpler Property Levels of Service and Back of Queue (95 %) Itesalts Existing Conditions Intersection Traffic Control Lane Group/ Approach AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Back of Queue LOS Back of Queues WB/LR B 25.0 B 25.0 NB/TR - - - - Route 11 & Old Charlestown Road Unsignalized SB/L A 25.0 A 25.0 SB/T - - - - WB/LR B 25.0 B 25.0 NB/TR - - - - Route 1 l &Stephenson Road Unsignalized SB/L A 25.0 A 25.0 SB/T - - - - EB/LTR B 25.0 C 49.0 WB/LTR C 35.0 C 55.0 N -1311-A NB/TR 25.0 - A - 25.0 - Route I I & Hopewell RdBrucetown Rd Unsignalized SB/L A 25.0 A 25.0 SB/TR - - - - K Assumed 2S feet Vehncle Length EB = Eastbound, WB =Westbound, NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound L: Left, T.'fhru, R: Right Minimum queue length is assumed to be 25 feet A Traffic Impact Analysis of the WamplerProperly IRA Marcharch 11, 2008 PL 91-1-2 Project Number -152 Pagei Page 6 6 2012 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS PHR+A increased the existing traffic volumes (Figure 2) along US Route 11, Old Charlestown Road, Stephenson Road, Hopewell Road and Brucetown Road using a growth rate of two percent (2%) per year through Year 2012. Additionally, all trips relating to specific future "other developments" located within the vicinity of the proposed development were included. Based upon the 7th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report, PHR+A has provided Table 2 to summarize the calculated trips associated with each of the 2012 "other developments". Figure 4 shows the 2012 background ADT and AMIPM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area roadway. Figure 5 shows the corresponding 2012 background lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. SYNCHRO levels of service worksheets are provided in the Appendix section of this report. PHR+A has provided Table 3 to show the 95`h percentile back of queue and levels of service for each lane group during 2012 background conditions. A Trc Impact Analysis of the Wampler PropertyP"F�'+A March 11, 2008 Project Number -15291-1-2 IL I Page 7 Table 2 2012 "Other" Developments 5,_;_ i_. --ti- Cnmmary Code Land Use Amount In AM Peak Hour Out Total PM Peak Hour In Out Total ADT Rutherford Crossing 130 Industrial Park 215,000 SF 152 33 186 44 164 208 1,814 862 Home Impr. Superstore 117,000 SF 76 65 140 135 152 287 3,581 815 Discount Store 127,000 SF 73 34 107 321 321 643 7,115 814 Specialty Retail 187,147 SF 139 89 228 207 264 471 8,044 932 H -T Restaurant 5,000 SF 30 28 58 33 21 55 636 934 Fast Food w/ DT 4,500 SF 122 117 239 81 75 156 2,233 932 H -T Restaurant 4,800 SF 29 27 55 32 20 52 610 932 H -T Restaurant 5,500 SF 33 30 63 37 23 60 699 932 H -T Restaurant 7,200 SF 43 40 83 48 31 79 915 912 Drive-in Bank 4,100 SF 28 22 51 94 94 188 1,004 Total 725 485 1,210 1,031 1,165 2,197 26,652 Other Developments 730 FEMA 350 employees 190 24 214 86 191 277 2,713 812 Building/Lumber Store 15,000 SF 26 13 39 33 37 70 639 Total 216 37 253 119 228 347 3,352 Stephenson Village * 210 Single -Family Detached 429 units 77 232 310 255 144 399 4,290 220 Apartment 240 units 20 103 123 100 49 149 1,573 230 Townhouse/Condo 390 units 26 125 150 127 62 189 3,393 251 Elderly Housing - Detach 266 units 29 51 80 78 44 123 1,064 253 Elderly Housing - Attach 72 units 3 2 5 4 3 7 251 Total 155 513 667 564 302 866 10,570 North Stephenson 110 Light Industrial 800,000 SF 752 103 855 118 863 981 5,874 Total 752 103 855 118 863 981 5,874 Adams Commercial 150 Warehousing 120,000 SF 78 17 95 19 57 75 792 151 Self -Service Storage 140,000 SF 12 9 21 18 17 35 334 710 Office 120,000 SF 191 26 217 36 177 213 1,535 812 Building/Lumber Store 25,000 SF 44 21 65 59 67 126 1,024 860 Wholesale Market 150,000 SF 41 34 75 14 17 32 1,010 Total 366 107 473 146 334 481 4,695 Woodside Commercial Center 820 Retail 75,000 SF 80 51 132 249 269 518 5,633 Total 80 51 132 249 269 518 5,633 Easy Living Associates Commercial Property 151 Self -Service Storage 35,000 SF 3 2 5 4 4 8 82 710 Office 35,000 SF 71 10 81 20 98 118 594 820 Retail 45,000 SF 59 38 97 177 192 370 4,041 934 Fast Food w/ DT 5,000 SF 135 130 266 90 83 173 2,481 945 Gas Station w/ Mart 16 pumps 80 80 161 107 107 214 2,604 Total 349 260 610 399 484 883 9,803 Clearbrook 120 GA Heavy Industrial 120,000 SF 54 7 61 3 20 23 180 932 H -T Restaurant 8,000 SF 48 44 92 53 34 87 1,017 Total 102 52 153 56 54 110 1,197 * Assumed Phase 1 build -out ter Year Zulu A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Wampler Property March 11, 2008 Project Number -15291-1-2 Page 8 No Scale r AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Figure 4 2012 Background Traffic Conditions A Tr�c Impact Analysis of the Wam�ler Property R+A March 11, 2008 P Project Number -15291-1-2 Page 9 No Scale Signalized "Suggested Intent0ion Improvements'— LoS--c(C4 Signalizafion NB - 1 Thru U_ignalized Intersection 9qq Unsipialized 3� IntersecYon Jk _ C(�J:■ AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Denotes Two-way Left turn lane k Denotes critical unsignalized movement It is proffered by Stonbridge Development **Funding for the improvement has yet to be determined Figure 5 2012 Background Lane Geometry and bevels of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of the WamProperty � March 11, 2008 Project Number -15241-1-2 Page 10 Table 3 Wampler Property Levels of Service and Back of Queue (95%) Results 2012 Background :Conditions Owl su2pested initDrovements i intersection Traffic Control Lane Group/ Approach AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Back of Queue LOS Back of Queue WB/L E 257.0 E 329.0 WB/R B 83.0 B 62.0 WB LOS C D Route 11 & Old Charlestown Signalized NB/T NB /T B 342.0 -- C 776.0 Road NB LOS _ B C SB/L A F 303.0 SB/T C7-79-0 1053.0 B 860.0 SB LOS C C Overall LOS _ C� C WB/LR C 62.0 D 1 124.0 WB LOS C D NB/TR B 468.0 D 1478.0 Route I &Stephenson Road Signalized NB LOS BSB/L A 25.0 F 89.0 SB/T A 234.0 A 62.0 SB LOS LO S A B B C Overall EB/L E 151.0 F 391.0 EB/T D 79.0 D 57.0 EB/R B 110.0 B 125.0 EB LOS C D WB/L E 127.0 D 112.0 WB/TR C 74.0 C 101.0 WB LOS D D Route I I & Hopewell RdBrucetown Rd Signalized NB/L B 91.0 D 179.0 NB/TR A 343.0 A 1 302.0 NB LOS B B SB/L B 63.0 F 195.0 SB/T C 490.0 C 542.0 SB/R A 37.0 A 70.0 SB LOS C C Overall LOS C C PH13"A * Assumed 25 feet Vehicle Length EB = Eastbound, WB =Westbound, NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound L: Left, T:Thru, R: Right A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Wafnpler Property March 11, 2008 Project Number -15291-1-2 Page 11 TRIP GENERATION The total trips produced by and attracted to Wampler Property site were established using the 7th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report. Tables 4a and 4b are provided to summarizes the trip generation results for the proposed Wampler Property development for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, respectively. Code Land Use 853 Conven. Mart w\pumps Table 4a Proposed Development: Wampler Property Scenario 1: Trp Generation Summary AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ADT Amount In Out Total i� Out Total 12 pumps 103 103 206 115 Total 103 103 206 1 115 Table 4b Proposed Development: Wampler Property gr..a.. C -----fin Cnmmary 115 231 1 6,511 115 231 V AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ADT Code Land Use Amount In Out TotalIn Out Total f 51 Mini -Warehouse 37,635 SF 3 2 6 5 4 9 89 Total 3 2 6 5 4 9 89 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT PHR+A utilized the trip distribution percentages shown in Figures 6a and 6b to assign the Wampler Property trips (Tables 4a and 4b) throughout the study area roadway network. Figures 7a and 7b show the development -generated AMIPM peak hour trips and ADT assignments for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, respectively. 2012 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS The Wampler Property assigned trips (Figures 7a and 7b) were added to the 2012 background traffic volumes (Figure 4) to obtain 2012 build -out conditions. Figures 8a and 8b show the 2012 build -out ADT and AMIPM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, respectively. Figures 9a and 9b show the corresponding 2012 build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. Tables 5a and 5b are provided to show the 95th percentile back of queue and levels of service for each lane group during 2012 build -out conditions for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, respectively. All SYNCHRO levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Wampler Property + March 11, 2008 14R -A Project Number -15291-1-2 JL _IL Page 12 A 7"raffic Impact Analysis of the Wampler Property March 11, 2008 PHR+A Project Number -]529]-1-2 Page 13 R+-A- ---"P-H A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Wampler Property March 11. 2008 Project Number -15291-1-2 Page 14 No Scale ® � lropewe]trloedb (33)31 ¢�.� _ a U g*ucetown Road dry, -- - ---- -- - P L (6.? Jy6 N SITE J' ^`6y1 �4ao' 5 16,�1y I CharlcslnyynRad AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) PT a-P+A Figure 7a Scenario # 1: Development -Generated Trip Assignments A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Wampler Property March 11, 2008 P"+A Project Number -15291-1-2 Page 15 o No Scale NOnewPll Toad iy ��PNwellRoad ^�- Bm"town Koad --- JJ�a , ry `y1 St N SITE s 4, o� �o � as il *�. -1:0,e. Old Char,, f°w n R°w AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Figure 7b Scenario # 2: Development -Generated Trip Assignments A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Wampler Property PRA March 11, 2008 P Project Number -15291-1-2 Page 16 r I j4 No Scale �cN - b � � q4(45) 1Wrl1 )tn t 1 a9 (x )) (2? )116 � (3 6158 to+ 4r, SITE 16l (�s4 ��23s(222) ll lyg9� Bmcelown AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Figure 8a Scenario #1: 2010 Build -out Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Wampler Property Ir y March 11, 2008 1 RAProject Number -15291-1-2 Page 17 r, t. ad ili �(So) No Scale fz_34)1 -cap �h(xoSS) (_398)_7.3 ^+ a N lZoad \ }3rucetown Road ti, , ray .24,41)®1 yb y�� JrJj r� fP SITE 51 l Apgx (154) Old (_6arl�itOu n �l'S,ti�911 Road L AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) MOREMM �■■TJ. )Ay .a N T , + \ Figure 8b Scenario #2: 2012 Build -out Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis of the WamProperty March 11, 2008 RA Project Number -15291-1-2 PHPage 18 1- 1 No Scale Intersection Improvements"** L,t)5 LfU) Signalization EB -1 Left, I Right WB - 1 Left SB - I Right q' to R Rn WeU " 130 eia5+u talc sig"arzed \ tntersecnnn LOS–B(C) dry . 01 i t 1 Sigmlimrd I "Suggested Imteraea6on Improvements""* LOS=C(C) Signalization NB -1 Thru 'vl�]l_ d) SF1'F k Unsignalized �, Intersection s � Unsignalizcd lntersection Ba"It� O" R ad ap Sil;nnliwd "Suggested lutrrsrcfion ttriprovcioents'— L. 1S7A.(c) 9g'.;J ..:RIOT AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Denotes Two-way Left turn lane * Denotes critical ansignalized movement FIt is proffered by Stonbridge Development **Funding for the improvement has yet to be determined Figure 9a Scenario #1: 2012 Build -out Lane Geometry and levels of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of the WcProperly March RAPHMarch 11, 2008 Project Number -15291--1-2 Page 19 Figure 9b Scenario #2: 2012 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Wampler Properly PAMarch 11, 2008 y y Project Number -15291-1-2 j�--j Page 20 Sig;nafind "Suggested Intersection Improvements"** signalization I,OB L (C t EB -1 Left, I Right wB -1 Left SB -1 Right Unsignalized No Scale * Intersection q Q We!/Road )OF(W ew W9Sd. +(�' �`y (D3 $ c� etown "�► Unsigtialized Intersection r� ay v �J� �� Siy.JT��lixeal ":�a;;kested --yid €atersert3ti„ In �trovemenis"* LO =4,1.`) 4' 1€,oalization Unsignalized r� Intersection %�s f%3 J SITE key f`e "Suggested Stena hImprovements'— ,'� o�d fnteiseetion Signalization - LOS=:R/f/ NB _ 1 Thru s r"A40F(F)� t4 A Old I Yian� 1lnsig—liized ChNJestotVn Road Intersection ti AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Denotes Two-way Left turn lane * Denotes critical unsignalized movement �It is proffered by Stonbridge Development **Funding for the improvement has yet to be determined �gT) /A\ �,r -. i � + / 'A Figure 9b Scenario #2: 2012 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Wampler Properly PAMarch 11, 2008 y y Project Number -15291-1-2 j�--j Page 20 Table 5a Wampler Property Levels of Service and Back of Queue (95 %) Results Scenario #1: 2012 Build -out Conditions (w/ suR-eested improvements) Intersection Traffic Control Lane Group/ A roach AM Peak flour PM Peak Hour LOS Back of Queue LOS Back of Queue Route 11 & Old Charlestown Road Signalized WB/L WB/R E A 241.0 67.0 E B 329.0 62.0 WB LOSC D NB/T NB/TR B _ _ 263.0 D_ 912.0 NB LOS B B 41.0 C 901.0 _ D F 275.0 A 1 539.0 SB/L SB/T SB LOS C C Overall LOS C tl C Old Charlestown Rd & Site -Driveway Signalized EB/L EB/R D B 67.0 38.0 E C _ 90.0 47.0 EB LOS C 1) NB/L NB/T A B 38.0 469.0 A C 25.0 1418.0 NB LOS B C SB/TR B 1 921.0 A 48.0 SB IAS B A Overall LOS B C Route 11 & Stephenson Road Signalized WB/LR C 56.0 ll 145.0 WB LOS C D NB/TR A 120.0 _ D 1376.0 NB LOS A D SB/L SB/T A A _ 25.0 423.0 F A 82.0 117.0 SB LOS A B Overall LOS A C Route 11 & Hopewell RdBrucetown Rd Signalized EB/L EB/T EBB E D C 147.0 77.0 186.0 F D B 391.0 57.0 177.0 EB LOS C D WB1L WB[fR D C 1 124.0 72.0 D C 1 112.0 101.0 WB IAS D D NB/L NB/TR B A 124.0 308.0 E A 1 256.0 300.0 NB LOS A C SB/L SB/T SB/R B C A 1 60.0 481.0 31.0 F C A 149.0 579.0 77.0 SB LOS C D Overall LOS C D P"P�A * Assumed 25 feet Vehicle Length EB = Eastbound, WB =Westbound, NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound L: Left, T:Thru, R: Right Minimum queue length is assumed to be 25 feet A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Wampler Property March 11. 2008 Project Number -15291-1-2 Page 21 Table 5b W ampler Property Levels of Service and Back of Queue (95%) Results Qranarin ftp- 1.011. Rrnilrl-ont Conditions (w/ sumiested improvements) Intersection Control Traffic Lane A1vi teak Hour Group/ Back of P LOS Approach Queue PTM Peak Hour LOS Back of Queue Route I I & Old Charlestown Road Signalized WB/L E WB/R A 259.0 62.0 E B 329.0 62.0 WB LOS C D -T NB/T B NB/TR 235.0 D 877.0 NB LOS B D _ SB/L. A SB/T C 41.0 850.0 E A 267.0 424.0 SB LOS B B Overall LOS B C Old Charlestown Rd & Site -Driveway Unsignalized EB/LR C 25.0 D 25.0 NB/L B 25.0 NB/T - - C 25.0 - - SB/TR - Route 11 &Stephenson Road Signalized WB/LR C 54.0 D 119.0 WB LOS C D NB/TR B 1 661.0 D i 755.0 NB LOS B D SB/L A SB/T A 27.0 416.0 F A 89.0 78.0 SB LOS A B Overall LOS A C Route 11 &Hopewell Rd/Brucetown Rd Signalized EB/L E EBIT D EB/R B 1510 79.0 111.0 F D B 391.0 57.0 128.0 EB LOS C D WB/L E WB/TR C 127.0 1 74.0 D C 112.0 101.0 WB LOS D D NB/L B NB/'TR A 101.0 276.0 D A 176.0 285.0 NB LOS A 13 SB/L B SB/T C SB/R A 63.0 490.0 37.0 F C A 196.0 542.0 70.0 SB LOS I C Overall LOS C C PH'1.�A HSSUmeU LJ 1CeL V UJ11U1U LGUgUl EB = Eastbound, WB =Westbound, NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound L: Left, T:Thru, R: Right Minimum queue length is assumed to be 25 feet A Trak Impact Analysis of the Wampler Property March 11, 2008 Project Number -15291-1-2 Page 22 CONCLUSION dd Based upon Synchro analysis results, regional improvements will be required in order to maintain satisfactory levels of service in the vicinity of the proposed Wampler Property development. Assuming the improvements shown in Figures 9a and 9b for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, respectively, all the study area intersections, except the intersection of US Route I I/Hopewell RoadBrucetown Road during Scenario 1 and 2 and the unsignalized intersection of Route 11/Site-Drive during Scenario 2, will maintain overall levels of service "C" or better during 2012 build -out conditions. The following reiterates the off-site roadway improvements recommended for each of the study area intersections during Scenario i and Scenario 2: A Route 11/Old Charlestown Road: In order to achieve levels of service "C" or better, this intersection will require a traffic signalization and an additional northbound thru lane during 2012 build -out conditions for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2. a Route 11/Stephenson Road: In order to achieve levels of service "C" or better, this intersection will require a traffic signalization during 2012 build- out conditions for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2. ® Route i l/ Hopewell RoadBrucetown Road: In order to achieve levels of service "D" or better, this intersection will require a traffic signalization, an additional eastbound left and right turn -lanes, westbound left turn -lane, and southbound right turn -lane during 2012 build -out conditions for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2. The applicant will work with VDOT/County to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle facilities adjacent to the site. NOTE: Funding for the aforementioned improvements has yet to be determined. A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Wampler Property P -T+ March 11, 2008 IA Project Number -15291-1-2 Page 23 APPENDIX Lvcallov�,-1 ofBa0ifyrEqrd velo nents ,:, _.�i _p ,.tx �T No Scale xka I WOODSIE COMMERCIAL CENTER � CLEARBROOK -�+R'elltawn r. ''��ogr. uJM :4U• P' DAMS COMMERCIAL ] -, ,r {� 1'reYco SITE E EASY LiV1NG ASSOCIATE 'r COMMERCIAL PROPERTY h X }d4f1-1 —� STEPHENSON VILLAGE.,� FEMA &LUMBER STORE � �/` � lir 4 b „��• NORTH STEPHENSo–�J, RUTHERFORD CROSSING01 �..- ` M Figure A Location of "Backcground Developments" REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA o be corrlpletf'cl bv.Plcr.h.airzg Suf- Fee Amount Pail Zoning A lmendment Nun '-,-'- Date k eee ve4 Hearing Hate 13OS Hearing Dau The following information shall be provided by the applicant_ All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the O-Ffce of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicants: Name: Patton Harris Rust & Associates Telephone: (540) 667.2139 c/o Patrick Sowers Address: 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 2. Property Owner (if different than above) Name: Wampler Mobile Homes Telephone: (540) 667-7772 c/o Jack Wampler Sr. & Jack Wampler Jr. Address: 2648 Martinsburg Pike Stephenson, VA 22656 3. Contact person(s) if other than above Name: Patrick Sowers Telephone: (540) 667.2139 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location Map X Agency Comments _ Plat Fees Deed of property X Impact Analysis Statement X Verification of taxes paid X Proffer Statement X 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: Wampler Mobile Homes Jack Wampler Sr. Jack Wampler Jr. 6. A) Current Use of the Property: Mobile Home .. Residential B) Proposed Use of the Property: Commercial 7. Adjoining Property: SEE ATTACHED. 11. 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 West and adjacent to Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike) approximately 1000 feet south of the intersection of Route I I and Stephenson Road and approximately 1900 feet north of the intersection of Route 11 and Old Charlestown Road. In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for the applicant to provide information concerning the specifics of the proposed use. Otherwise, the planning staff will use the maximum possible density of intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on page 9 of the application package. 9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number: 4413-1-121) Districts Magisterial: Fire Service: Rescue Service: Stonewall Clearbrook Clearbrook High School: Middle School: Elementary School: James Wood James Wood Stonewall 10. Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. Acres Current Zoning Zoning Requested 2.16 RA B2 2.16j Total acreage to be rezoned 2 11. The fallowing information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Single Family Home Non -Residential Lots Office Retail Restaurant 12. Signature: Number of Units Proposed i ownhome Multi -Family Mobile Home Hotel Rooms Square Footage of Proposed Uses Service Station Manufacturing Flex - Warehouse Other 12 Pump Station Scenario I- worst Case 37,655 Self Storage (Scenario 2 - Intended) — I (wc), 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) c Date v7 �r G� �o Specid Limited Power of Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia Frederick Planning Web Site; www.co.,redeHck.✓a.rs , Department of Pianning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 worth rent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395 Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) Wampler's Mobile Homes (Phone) 540.667.7772 (Address) 2648 Martinsburg Pike, Stephenson, VA 22656 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 Number: 020018080 and is described as Tax Map Parcel 4413-1-121) 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 'o 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. J In witness thereof, I (we) have hereto set my (our) hand and seal this day of 00 w s% n Signature( j' State of Virginia, City/County of�-}� To -wit: I,_ �� -�� ` a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared before me and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this ay of /,—Natary Pub is My Commission Expires: C✓9- /R9.1';Zo"I Z ,,,,, Jason Brent Omdorff Commonwealth of Virginia Notary Poblic 4 _ f amm ssi-n No. 237449 My Cowniss:on Expires 0229/2012 Adjoining Property Owners — Wampler Property 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 2 d floor of the Frederick County Administrative Building, 107 North Kent Street. Name Address Property Identification Number (PIN) Name: Wampler's Mobile Homes 2648 Martinsburg Pike Property #: 44-A-55 Stephenson, VA 22656 Name: Wampler's Mobile Homes 2648 Martinsburg Pike Property #: 44-A-56 Stephenson, VA 22656 Name: Ronald Simkhovitch 2929 Valley Ave Property #: 44-1-A _ Winchester, VA 22601 Name: Nicholas & Brenda Pinchot 2613 Martinsburg Pike Property #: 4413-1-12C _ Stephenson, VA 22656 Name: Easy Living Associates 2489-3 Martinsburg Pike Pro ert #: 44B-1-6 Stephenson, VA 22656 Name: Property #: _ Name: Property#: Name.- ame:Propert y #: Property Name: Property #: Name: Property #: Name: Property#: Name: Property #: Name: -Property #: Name.- ame:Pro ert #: -Property NOTES: 1. FREDERICK COUNTY PIN: 44B -1--12D 2. OWNERSHIP & PROPERTY OUTLINE ARE BASED ON THE DEED RECORDED AS DB 927, PG 1092. MERIDIAN IS BASED ON THE PLAT RECORDED AS DB 226, PG 222. 3. THE PROPERTY DESCRIPTION RECORDED IN DB 927, PG 1092 DOES NOT MATHEMATICALLY CLOSE. GRAPHIC SCALE 100 0 50 100 ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 100 ft. OC PHR+A 2008 EXHIBIT PIN: 4413-1-121) PROPERTY OF: WAMPLER'S MOBILE DOMES STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE: 1"=100' DATE: OCT. 31, 2008 Patton Harris Rust & Associates � Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects_ 7) i PHBA+117 East Piccadilly Street 0 Winchester, Virginia 22601 j I T540.667.2139 N F 540.665.0493 SHEET 1 OF 1 r r � u �� MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #02-09 FIELDSTONE APARTMENTS Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: September 1, 2009 Staff Contact: Candice F. Perkins, A:ICP, Senior Planner Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 09/16/09 Pending Board of Supervisors: 10/14/09 Pending PROPOSAL: To develop 5.58 acres of land zoned RP (Residential Performance) with two garden apartment buildings; one building would consist of 13 units and the second would consist of 12 units (density of 4.48 units per acre). LOCATION: The subject property is located on the south side of Valley Mill Road (Route 659), approximately 1,200 feet east of Channing Drive and 0.5 miles west of Greenwood Road. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 09/16/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Master Development Plan for the Fieldstone Apartments property depicts appropriate land uses and appears to be consistent with the requirements of Article VIII, Master Development Plan, of the Zoning Ordinance, and this MDP is in a form that is administratively approvable. All of the issues brought forth by the Planning Commission should be appropriately addressed prior to a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. It appears that the application meets all requirements. Following presentation of the application to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, and the incorporation of your comments, staff is prepared to proceed to approval of the application. MDP #02-09, Fieldstone Apartments September 1, 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 in the review of this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. LOCATION: The subject property is located on the south side of Valley Mill Road (Route 659), approximately 1,200 feet east of Channing Drive and 0.5 miles west of Greenwood Road. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Red Bud PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 55 -A -181C PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RP (Residential Performance) District Use: Vacant ZONING & PRESENT USE OF ADJOINING PROPERTIES: North: RP (Residential Performance RA (Rural Areas) South: RP (Residential Performance East: RP (Residential Performance West: RP (Residential Performance Use: Residential Use: Carlisle Heights Open Space Use. Vacant Use: Residential and Open Space PROPOSAL: To develop 5.58 acres of land zoned RP (Residential Performance) with two garden apartment buildings, one building would consist of 13 units and the second would consist of 12 units (density of 4.48 units per acre). REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation: The Master Development Plan for this property appears to have a measurable impact on Route 659, the VDOT facility which would provide access to the property. The proposed Master Development Plan appears acceptable to VDOT. Before making any final comments, this office will require a complete set of site plans, drainage calculations and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signalization and off-site MDP #02-09, Fieldstone Apartments September 1, 2009 Page 3 roadway improvements and drainage. Prior to construction on the State's right-of-way, the developer will need to apply to this office for issuance of appropriate permits to cover said work. Frederick County Fire Marshal: Plan approval recommended. Frederick County Public Works: We have completed our review of the revised master development plan dated February 24, 2009. All of our previous comments have been addressed; therefore, we recommend approval of the subject master development plan. Frederick County Inspections Department: No comments at this time. Comments made at site plan submittal. Frederick County Sanitation Authority: There is adequate sewer and water capacity to serve this development. GIS Department: No additional road names are required at this time. The addresses for the structures will be: Building Area (13 apartments): 860 Valley Mill Rd Apartments 1-13, and Building Area (12 apartments): 870 Valley Mill Rd Apartments 1-12. Parks and Recreation Department: The plan appears to meet the open space and recreational unit ordinance requirements. The developer is also providing a 20' easement for a bike/pedestrian trail along Abrams Creek. In addition, staff is recommending, as outlined in the M.P.O. Bike Pedestrian Plan, a 10' paved bike/pedestrian trail along Valley Mill Road. (The revised MDP dated 8/21/2009 has addressed the comment regarding the trail). Winchester Regional Airport: We have reviewed the proposed Master Development Plan for Fieldstone Apartments and it appears that this plan should not impact operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. However, this proposed site does lie within airspace of the Winchester Regional Airport and residents in that area may experience noise from over flights of aircraft operating in and out of the Winchester Regional Airport. Potential homeowners/tenants should be forewarned about the proximity of this site to the Winchester Airport. Frederick County Schools: Thank you for providing the requested acceleration lane east of the proposed entrance for a bus stop, a sidewalk to the bus stop and accompanying street signage. The acceleration lane will provide some refuge outside of the Valley Mill Road travelway for eastbound buses. Please be aware that we will not be able to send buses onto this property, as there will be no bus turnaround in the parking lot. Frederick County Public Schools is concerned about all land development applications. Both capital expenditures and annual operating costs are increased by each approved residential development. Planning & Zoning: A) Master Development Plan Requirement A master development plan is required prior to development of this property. Before a master development plan can be approved, it must be reviewed by the Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors and all relevant review agencies. Approval may only be granted if the master MDP 402-09, Fieldstone Apartments September 1, 2009 Page 4 development plan conforms to all requirements of the Frederick County Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. The purpose of the master development plan is to promote orderly and planned development of property within Frederick County that suits the characteristics of the land, is harmonious with adjoining property and is in the best interest of the general public. B) Location The subject property is located on the south side of Valley Mill Road (Route 659), 0.5 miles east of Greenwood Road. C) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identified the zoning for the acreage within the master development plan as A-2 (Agricultural General) District. On September 9, 1987 the Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning #23-87 which rezoned the site from the A-2 District to the RP (Residential Performance) District. The 5.58 acre site was originally part of a 108 acre parcel; the remainder of the site is part of the Arcadia development. D) Site Suitability & Project Scope 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 composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 1-]J Land Use Compatibility: The parcel comprising this MDP application is located within the County's Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Urban Development Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of residential development will occur. In addition, the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use map designates the general area in which the Fieldstone Apartments development is located for residential land uses. The Fieldstone Apartments project will develop with a density of 4.48 units per acre. Site Access and Transportation: This proposed development will be accessed via one entrance on Valley Mill Road with a right turn lane and an acceleration lane. The development will also be constructing a ten foot paved trail along a portion of the Valley Mill Road frontage and then transitioning to a trail along the creek. The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan shows Valley Mill Road as an improved major collector road (UD4). While this development will not be constructing roads other than a turn land and an acceleration lane, they have demonstrated that there is sufficient right-of-way available on the southern side of Valley Mill Road for future improvements. MDP 902-09, Fieldstone Apartments September 1, 2009 Page 5 Buffers and Screening: A reduced 50 foot road efficiency buffer will be provided along a portion of Valley Mill Road; this buffer will consist of six foot berm and a single row of evergreen trees. The remainder of the Valley Mill Road frontage will have an 80 foot full road efficiency buffer; this buffer will consist of a double row of evergreen trees. A 100 foot full screen residential buffer is being provided along the residential property to the west; this buffer will consist of a six foot opaque fence and three trees per ten linear feet (1/3 evergreen trees, 1/3 deciduous trees, 1/3 shrubs). Environmental Features: The Fieldstone Apartments property does contain various environmental features, including floodplain and steep slopes. Abrams Creek runs through the rear of this property and the limits of the 100 year floodplain are shown on the MDP. This property has received a Conditional Letter of Map Revision from FEMA for the proposed floodplain modifications. The site also has small areas of steep slopes as indicated on sheet 3. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 09/16/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING• The Master Development Plan for the Fieldstone Apartments property depicts appropriate land uses and appears to be consistent with the requirements of Article VIII, Master Development Plan, of the Zoning Ordinance, and this MDP is in a form that is administratively approvable. All of the issues brought forth by the Planning Commission should be appropriately addressed prior to a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. It appears that the application meets all requirements. Following presentation of the application to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, and the incorporation ofyour comments, staff is prepared to proceed to approval of the application. ti+ \�\`)` qtr• 1). 1; �_ " / }:rte 1 1 -r •, �T— C 1( t J h —K, 657 791 N „•e 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles I I Fieldstone Apartments Ww4`C�, CpG� MDP #02-09 CURRENT ZONING w PIN: 55 - A - 181C 179 55 A 1818 0� 55'� �1' '►� '�, '�++•, �-f�41� 55 A 181'A"�= v o- 4� a_swALLEYMILL�RD-"'- r _ �+M 659 w " 55 A 181C ija".a: CP Vit J i � t. N rn u'l UAi, syn N sf - ul� 551 R73252A' f•y f F,OIFeet iy • -ice-. iY ' _ . j i+ ( P riahr 1A11 39 NA Case Planner: CPerkins r\� Future Rt37 Bypass Zoning M2 (Industrial, General District) ® MDP0209_Fie1dsloneApts_082609 BI (Business, Neighborhood District) # MHI (Mobile Home Community District) s Urban De. eI.Pmeat Area B2 (Business, General Distrist) 410 MSMedical Su ( pport District) SWSA 4� B3 (B sines, Industrial Transition District) RJ (Residential Planned Community District) 14 EM (Eafractne Manufacturing District) 4W Its (Residential Recreational Community District) HE (Higher Education District) ( i RA (Rural Arca District) MI (Industrial, Light District) RP (Residential Performance District) 1A11 39 NA APPLICATION MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN Department of Planning and Development Use Only. Date application received 1L Application. ? '107 Complete. Date of acceptance Incomplete. Date of return 1. Project Title: Fieldstone Apartments 2. Owner's Name Valley Mill Road, LLC 112 S. Cameron Street, Winchester, VA 22601 Ben Butler (662-3486), George Glaize (662-5058) (Please list name of all owners or parties in interest) 3. Applicant: Same as Owner Address: Phone Number: 4. Design Greenway Engineering Company: Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Phone Number: 540-662-4185 Contact Name: Evan Wyatt 5. Location of Property Valley Mill Road - South Side 0.5 Miles East of Greenwood Road 6. Total Acreage: 5.58 Acres 7. Property Information a) Property Identification Number (PIN): b) Current Zoning: c) Present Use: d) Proposed Uses: e) Adjoining Property Information: 55 -A -181C RP Vacant Garden Apartments f) Magisterial District: Property Uses Residential RP - Open Space RP - Open Space RP - Residential Red Bud Magisterial District 8. Is this an original or amended Master Development Plan? Original ® Amended ❑ I have read the material included in this package and understand what is required by the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development. I also understand that the master development plan shall include all contiguous land under single or common ownership. All required material will be complete prior to the submission of my master development plan application. Signature: e Date: o 1�."% `Qa Property Identification Numbers North See Sheet 2 of MDP South 551-(2)-1-31A East 55G -5-1-63A West 55 -A -182D f) Magisterial District: Property Uses Residential RP - Open Space RP - Open Space RP - Residential Red Bud Magisterial District 8. Is this an original or amended Master Development Plan? Original ® Amended ❑ I have read the material included in this package and understand what is required by the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development. I also understand that the master development plan shall include all contiguous land under single or common ownership. All required material will be complete prior to the submission of my master development plan application. Signature: e Date: o 1�."% `Qa MrAt RNAL PLAT Of' SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF THE LAND OF EA57ERN fREM RICK DEWLCIA r'r' COMPANY REnB!►n MACIS7TWI pjcmlrr fRUE-?; i ( CGUI;ry I/IRC:RIA OCTOBER 5, 2001 OWNER'S CERTIFICATE �,,$— THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING SUBDIVISIONyOF A PORTION OF THE LAND OF EASTERN FREDERICK DEVELOPMENT COMPA W,"*5. APPEARS ON THE ACCOMPANYING PLATS, IS WITH THE FREE CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DESIRES OF THE UNDERSIGNED OWNERS. PROPRIETORS AND JWSTEES, IF ANY. COMMONWEALTHY� CITY / F / l-' lia�� , TO WIT: THE AREGOING OWNER'S CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS _12-'- DAY OF- 200- BY rr �h tctLe�' NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES P , SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE LAND CONTAINED IN THIS SUBDIVISION IS A PORTION OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO EASTERN FREDERICK DTDREN T COMPANY DEED DATED JULY 1, 1987, OF RECORD IN THE FREDERICK coU11 VRK/OFFICE IN DEED BOOK 652 AT PAGE 478. S. FOLTZ. LS. NOTE: PARENT TAX PARCEL IDENTIFICATION EASTERN FREDERICK DEVELOPMENT CO. 55—((A))-181 ZONE: RP USE: AGRI. ALS: Qpk RICK—WINCHUTFER SERVI E AUTHORITY ATE DEP NT NSPORTATION DATE AR UZ REN S. Fa: K COUNTY SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATOR DA No. 002257 In GRE��►Y ENNGIN� EERING S° lk I Amm ram Tam a 6fi —4185 _ ' Frig (5 0) M,9= Fawided fn 1971 trnvw�aan 2160—RPOI SAT 1 OF 3 .38723' CARUSLE HEIGHTS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION N - COMMON AREA ri , D. B. 759/396 ,TM 551-((2))-1-3fA 7NE RPUSE.• VAC ` C4RUSLE HEIGH7S HOMEOWNERS ASSOC147701V J COMMON AREA D.B. 716/790-845 TM. 551-((1))-2524` ZONE RP USE VAC4;VT SPIKE IN r CORNER 1287.00' -T4 55A(A))-181Y.. : REMAINDER Of D B. 652/47$ 94.399 ACRES - C -( h - . r I DlMASI a , INST. NO. 000012070 i F T.M. 55 -((A)) -182D 70` E 10" BRL 367.07=� F, AW PANM x'10; DA =/478 25' f7?E73ERlCK-WINCESTER,� : SEROCE AUTHORITY I SEWER EASEMENT WH - ©U 579/790 ! : IR. 0 _ r ►A- COOD ZONE . W t 41 SEE NOTE: ON i m SHEET 3 •�� ,� � V tv t - - N 1277'11, -w - f 30.62' . 1\ SSW IRS {i 4 A / -D( -20'. .1 1 f ACCESS ' I_ --A 77 1595.13 (1t7TAL)' 'IRS Z01VE $P - USE rAGRI FmLffAToF summism, OF A POR77ON OF THE LAND OF EASM?N FREDEMCK DMoMW CaMMY REDBUD MAGISTERML DI57R1CT. FREDE VW COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE 1" = 100' ' &TI' .6AI11UARY 17, 2002 , ul Wbjd3rBWLam mmd�mrm-, 7k� () 662-4185 )AX (540) Fa,a�aect 6x1971 TI�SPSM x+ww� nam I IPF r r a'�'Jlfi� r IPF �W! waif Ad n PLAT MERIDIAN IPF 84SED ON D.a 652 PAGE 480 100 0 100 GRAPHIC SCALE (IN FLET) )ARM S. FOi No. 002257 2160-RPOI SHT 2 OF 3 NDTM 1. NO 771LE REPORT FURNISHED. OTHER EASEMENTS THAN 77-IOSE SHOWN MAY &757- 2 XIST2. A PORTION OF THIS SUBDMSION LIES WITHIN THE 100 YEAR FLOOD ZONE, MARKED AS ''ONE A" ON F.I.R.M. PANEL / 510063 0120 Et L14TED JULY 17, 1979. 3. PERIME7E74 BOUNDARY 84SED ON A CURRENT SURVEY BY THIS FIRM. 4. INOMDUAL LOT ACCESS IS PROHIBITED ON RT 659 DUE TO 175 DESIGNA71ON AS A MAJOR COLLECTOR, 77fEREFORE NO FURTHER SUBDMSION OF THIS PARCEL *XL BE PERMT7ED UNLESS ALTFRNARVE ACCESS TO A STA7F MAINTAINED ROAD IS PROVIDED. lEW-fV11lk IRS - 1/2' IRON RER4R SET, WICAP IRF - IRON ROD FOUND 07HER CORNERS AS N07EV 8RL - BUILDING RES7MC710N UNE SSMH - SANITARY SEWD? U4NHOLE AMA MMUY NEW PARCEL: 5.584 ACRES R.D.W DEDICATION.• 0.394 ACRES REUNNDER. 94.399 ACRES TOTAL AREA. 100.J77 ACRES 7.c ;ALAI CURVE RADIUS ARC LENG7H CHORD LENGTH CHORD BEARING TANGENT Cl 1805.37 202.03' 291.92" S 79.01'17 E 101.12' C2 616.72' 65.21 65.17 5 79'11'54 E 3263 C3 596.72' 681' 65.78' N 79'04'04" W 3294' C4 1825.37' 204.27' 204.16' N 79"01'17' W 102.24' Lei �J �1ii t - o 1 FM PLAT OF St� OF A POR77ON OF THE IAND OF F.ASON FREDMM �H DE1+FlQR(ENT COMMY REDBUO M4GIS7D?LAL DIS)RICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA r SCALE NIA *=4_17 JANUARY 17, 2002 N S. F�LTZ QUENWA i ENGINEERING 1 q�N�0. 002257 _ 351 F./ oars �w� 46�22602 Telrplio/�� ( ) b6z-4185 F.4x gm) nz-ow 1971 '� 2160-RPOl SHT 3 OF 3 C:) _I:- VIRGINIA. I - VIRGINIA: FREDERICK COUNTY, SCE This instrument of writing was produced to�mje on A with certificate of acknowledgement thereto annexed was admitted ro record. Ta imposed by Sec. 58.1-M of $ , and 58.1-8111 have been paid, if assessable_ 4G.c la Cledf COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development /� r� 540/ 665-5551 MEMORA �.0 UT►I FAX: 540/665-6395 To: Frederick County Planning Commission From: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner( Subject: Discussion— Rural Area (RA) District Revisions Date: September 1, 2009 On April 22, 2009, the Board of Supervisors approved the Rural Areas Report and Recommendation as a policy component of the Comprehensive Poliey Plan. This report contained recommendations from the Rural Areas Subcommittee, which was a group created by the Board of Supervisors. The Subcommittee_ was charged with identifying growth and development trends and related issues in the rural areas of the County, gathering ideas to address those issues and forwarding a recommendation for resolution to the Board of Supervisors. One of the recommendations contained within the report was to: • Implement enhancements to the existing Rural Preservation Lot Subdivision requirements. o Maintain a minimum lot size of two acres. o Increase the preservation lot (cluster set-aside lot) from 40 percent of the parent tract to a minimum 60 percent of the parent tract. o Removal of the density exception for the rural preservation lot. This agenda item is the first to implement some of the recommendations contained within the Rural Areas Report. Specifically, this ordinance amendment addresses the changes to the rural preservation subdivision requirements contained within Article IV of the Zoning Ordinance and Articles II and V of the Subdivision Ordinance. This draft amendment proposes the following: • Rural preservation tract be counted towards the permitted residential density of the parent tract. • Increase the rural preservation tract requirement from forty percent to sixty percent. • Reduced lot width for rural preservation lots and exemption for rural preservation lots from the maximum depth requirements. • Elimination of agricultural lots from the RA District. • Permitted RA uses - addition of animal husbandry and farm wineries, removal of cottage occupation signs. • Conditional RA uses — addition of Off -premise farm markets; Commercial stables, equestrian facilitates and commercial riding facilitates; Petting farms; Bed and Breakfasts; Country clubs (with or without banquet facilities); Welding Businesses; and Cottage occupation signs. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 o Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Frederick County Planning Commission Re: Rural Area (RA) District Revisions Page 2 August 31, 2009 • Additional standards for farm wineries, and welding businesses. • Revisions to the cul-de-sac length requirements in the Subdivision Ordinance. • New definitions that correspond to the new permitted/conditional uses The item was presented to the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) at their meeting on August 27, 2009. The DRRC requested minor changes to the draft ordinance amendment and recommended it be sent to the Planning Commission for discussion. This item is presented for discussion. Comments and suggestions from the Planning Commission will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. Attachments: 1. Revised ordinance with additions shown in bold italics and deletions shown with a strikethrough (Article IV of the Zoning Ordinance and Articles Hand V of the Subdivision Ordinance). CEP/bad Chapter 1.65, ZONING ARTICLE IV AGRICULTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Part 401— RA Rural Areas District § 165-401.01. Purpose and intent. A. The purpose of the rural area regulations is to preserve large, open parcels of land, tree cover, scenic views, sensitive environmental areas and prime agricultural and locally significant soils. The regulations provide for a variation in lot size, at a density not to exceed one unit per five acres. The varying lot size is permitted in order to facilitate designs that blend in with the existing landscape and preserve some larger tracts of undeveloped land in order to maintain the rural character of the County, as well as provide a choice to home buyers. B. The regulations are intended to reduce environmental impacts, such as soil erosion, by requiring development which is sensitive to the existing features of the natural terrain and by reducing the amount of clearing needed for roads. Diversity and originally in lot layout are encouraged in order to achieve the best possible relationship between the development and the land_ Individual lots and streets should be designed to minimize alteration of the natural site features, relate positively to surrounding properties and protect the views from surrounding areas. It is intended that by allowing flexibility in the subdivision design, while at the same time requiring that environmental concerns be addressed, a more attractive, environmentally sound and economically viable development will result. § 165-401.02. Permitted uses. Structures and land shall be used for one of the following uses: A. Agriculture, farming, dairies, animal husbandry, and forestry. B. Orchards, horticulture and the production of nursery stock and products. C. Single-family dwellings. D. Mobile homes. E. Schools (without residential component). F. Public parks and playgrounds. G. Churches. H. Home occupations (as defined). I. Natural conservation areas. J. Winchester Airport. K. Group homes L. Fire stations, companies and rescue squads. 1 M. Frederick County sanitary landfill. N. Commercial and institutional cemeteries with or without funeral homes or cemetery office complexes. O. Post offices. P. Radio and television towers and their accessory buildings Q. Public utility generating, booster or relay stations, transformer substations, transmission lines and towers, pipes, meters and other facilities, railroad facilities and sewer and water facilities and lines owned by public utilities, railroad companies or public agencies. R. Required off-street parking. S. Oil and natural gas exploration, provided that the following requirements are met= (1) All requirements of the Code of Virginia, as amended, and all applicable federal, state and local regulations shall be met. (2) A site plan shall be reviewed and approved meeting all requirements of the Frederick County Code. (3) Approval of the site plan and use shall be for 90 days, with subsequent renewals being approved by the Planning Commission. (4) In order to begin extraction of the resources, a rezoning to the EM Extractive Manufacturing Zoning District will be required. T. Museums, parks or historic sites used for educational or historic preservation purposes_ U. Business signs. V. Signs allowed in § 165-201.066. X. W. Accessory uses Y. X. Poultry farms and hatcheries and egg production. Z. Y. Fish hatcheries and fish production. AA. Z. Hog farming. It shall be unlawful for any person to have or maintain or to permit to be erected, in the County, any hog pen that is located closer than 200 feet to a residence or an adjoining property that is used for human habitation. BB. AA. Local government services office. CC. BB. Residential subdivision identification signs. 2 CC. Farm Wineries § 165-401.03. Conditional uses. The following uses of structures and land shall be allowed only if a conditional use permit has been granted for the use: A. (R Bed and Breakfasts. B.2 Country clubs, with or without banauet facilities. C. �Reserved)-3 Manufacture or sale of feed and other farm supplies and equipment. D. Fruit packing plants. E. "4aR'-Ifect IFe e..,a!e of feed and other fuFffln su ^lies and equipmeRt. Off -premise arm markets. F. Off -premises wayside stands. G. Country general stores. H. Service stations. I. Antique shops. J. Restaurants. K. Kennels. L. Commercial stables, equestrian facilitates and commercial riding facilitates. M. Petting farms. N. Television or radio stations. M- 0. Motels. P. Auction houses. 4. Campgrounds, tourist camps, recreation areas and resorts. R. Commercial outdoor recreation, athletic or park facilities. 4 S. Nationally chartered fraternal lodges or civic clubs, social centers and their related facilities. R-: T Sawmills and planing mills, Type B. 5= U. Ambulance services. 3 T -V. Retailing or wholesaling of nursery stock and related products_ U W. Landscape contracting businesses. V -. X. Public garages without body repair, provided that the following conditions are met: (1) All repair work shall take place entirely within an enclosed structure_ (2) All exterior storage of parts and equipment shall be screened from the view of surrounding properties by an opaque fence or screen at least five feet in height_ This fence or screen shall be adequately maintained. Y. Public garages with body repair, provided that the following conditions are met: (1) All repair work shall take place entirely within an enclosed structure_ (2) All exterior storage of parts and equipment shall be screened from the view of surrounding properties by an opaque fence or screen at least five six feet in height. This fence or screen shall be adequately maintained. Z. Sand, shale and clay mining, provided that the following conditions are met: (1) All mining shall be above the mean, existing grade level of a parcel of land. (2) All mining operations shall meet all applicable requirements of state and federal agencies. (3) Such mining operations shall meet the landscaping and screening requirements, supplementary regulations, height, area and bulk regulations and site plan requirements contained in the EM Extractive Manufacturing District regulations. Y-. AA. Cottage occupations (as defined). 88. Cottage occupation signs. Z-: CC. Veterinary office, clinic or hospital, including livestock services. AA. DD. Day-care facilities EE. Humanitarian aid organizational office. Com. FF Schools (with residential component). GG. Fruit and vegetable stands (SIC 5431). €€: HH. Blacksmith shops (SIC 7699). I/. Farriers (SIC 7699). JJ. Horseshoeing (SIC 7699). 0 #44-: KK Taxidermists (SIC 7699). LL. Welding (SIC 7692). § 165-401.04. Permitted residential density; exception. A. The maximum density permitted on any parcel or group of parcels shall not exceed the equivalent of one unit per five acres as determined by the size of the parent tract as it existed on the date of adOpriOR of this section. December 11, 1991. B. Exception to permitted density. On lots containing between seven and ten -acres which were lots of record prior to the adept,,,.. -of this .,.-+.,.le December 11, 1991lots of two or more acres may be created despite the density limit of one unit per five acres, provided that they meet the requirements of § 165-401.068 of this chapter. WithiR subrdi�Wismp_ns utilizing rural presewation lots, the feFty percent paFGR_I ShR_11 A84 -m ceunt against the peFMitted density of the parent tFact. § 165-401.06. Permitted lot sizes. The following types of lots shall be permitted: A. Traditional five acre lots. On any parcel, lots of five acres in size or greater shall be permitted. B. Family division lots. On any parcel which contained seven acres or more prior to the : deption of this a;4i December 11, 1991 lots as small as two acres may be created, provided that the following conditions are met: (1) Lots are conveyed to members of the immediate family of the owner of record of the parent tract. (2) Only one such lot shall be permitted per immediate family member. (3) One parcel of at least five acres in size shall remain intact following the division. (4) The creation of all such lots shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Frederick County Subdivision Chapter and § 15.2-2244 of the Code of Virginia. C. AgFieultural lots. Pareels, Of five aeFes eF MGFe in size rnay be created feF legitimate agricultural purposes, as d4WGI Igy this chanter pFevided that the paFeels ted i.ualif., f la r! + , --r---•, r-•--..------ .. p.......•...........�v govrir�,v■�urnrvoc�avcvorrrrnr. O- C. Rural preservation lots. (1) Within the RA Rural Areas District, lots as small as two acres shall be permitted on tracts over 20 acres in size, subject to the following: (a.) feAy Sixty percent or more of the parent tract shall remain intact as a contiguous parcel (Rural Preservation Tract). (b.) This acreage must be designated prior to the division of the fourth lot. (c.) No future division of this designated Rural Preservation Tract shall be permitted. Z' (2) Exception to the Rural Preservation Tract. in cases where excessive topography or other natural features of a site create a situation where a higher quality subdivision design, resulting in less physiCa' and/or visual disruption could be achieved by allowing two residual parcels to be created, the Planning Commission may permit the 40%-50% to be made up of two parcels. § 165-401.08. Minimum width; maximum depth. A. Minimum width. The minim urn ;Agidth fer rural preservatiA-n lets fronting an Feads proposed f9F dediGation sh. be �= gn fppt at tht- front setbaek, with the exce ion 9f lots Uenting on the turnare-und of a cul de sac, which shmaill have a FniRiMUM y6dth at rpthar-k nf 100 fpet. The minimurn width for all other lets shall be 250 feet at the tFant setback line. 1) Minimum width for rural preservation lots: a) Lots fronting on roads proposed for dedication: 50 feet at the front setback line. b) Lots fronting on the turnaround of a cul-de-sac for roads proposed for dedication: 80 feet at the front setback line. c) Lots fronting on existing state roads: 250 feet at the front setback line. 2) Minimum width for all other lots: 250 feet at the front setback line. Maximum depth_ The maximum depth of aRy let shall not exceed fo-,-,F times its width at the fFORt setbark line-. 1) Within subdivisions utilizing rural preservation lots, the sixty -percent parcel (Rural Preservation Tract) shall be exempt from the maximurn depth requirement. 2) Depth/Width Ratio: 5:1 maximum. no Article it SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES Part 204 — Additional Regulations for Specific Uses § 165-204.22. Farm Wineries. Farm Wineries in the RA (Rural Areas) District shall meet the following requirements: A. The following shall be considered by -right accessory uses at farm wineries: (1) The production and harvesting of fruit and other agricultural products - (2) The manufacturing of wine, (3) The storage and sale of wine produced by the winery, including retail sales direct sales and shipment, as well as wholesaling; (4) The provision for on-site winery tours; (5) The incidental retail of wine -related items; and (6) Wine tasting. B. special events shall be permitted only on farm wineries of ten acres or larger. Special events for the Purposes of this section shall include but are not limited to meetings conferences dinners and wedding receptions. Any event at which more than 150 people are anticipated will require a festival permit. C. A site plan in accordance with the requirements of Article Vlll shall be submitted to and approved by Frederick Countv. D. All signs shall conform to the signage requirements specified in §165-201.06. § 165-204.23. Welding Repair (SIC 7692). A. Welding repair operations in the RA (Rural Areas) District shall meet the following requirements (1) Hours of operation shall not exceed 7.00am-7.00pm Monday -Saturday. (2) Total building area shall not exceed 7,500 square feet. (3) All outdoor storage or repair areas shall be screened by a six foot board -on -board fence evergreen screen or berm. (4) The Planning Commission may require buffer and screening elements and/or distance when deemed necessary to protect existing adjacent uses. B. A site plan in accordance with the requirements of Article Vlll shall be submitted to and approved by Frederick County, C. Parking, Signage and Lighting. (1) Parking areas shall conform with § 165-202.01. (2) All signs shall conform to the signage requirements specified in § 165-201.06. (3) Lighting shall conform with § 165-201.07. 7 ARTICLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS, AMENDMENTS, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS Part 101 — General Provisions § 165-101.02. Definitions and word usage. BED AND BREAKFAST— An owner or operator -occupied single-family detached dwelling unit which contains no more than one (1) kitchen and ten (10) or fewer quest rooms which are occupied for sleeping purposes by guests, other than temporary personal quests of a family in a dwelling unit for compensation with or without meals A Bed and Breakfast may include banquet/event facilities for private parties as an accessory use. COUNTRY CLUB -- A land area and buildings containing recreational facilities, club house and usual accessory uses, primarily open to members and their guests for a membership fee or daily fee, may include but are not limited to swimming pools,_.tennis courts golf courses stables and riding facilities. FARMER'S MARKET — Retail of fresh fruit and vegetables and other food and related items, at a facility with space occupied by one or several different tenants on a short term or daily basis; may be indoor or outdoor; this term does not include wayside stands roadside stands or wayside markets. FARM WINERY An establishment (i) located on a farm in the Commonwealth with a producing vineyard, orchard, or similar growing area and with facilities for fermenting and bottling wine on the premises where the owner or lessee manufactures wine that contains not more than 18 percent alcohol by volume or (ii) located in the Commonwealth with a producing vineyard orchard or similar growing area or agreements for purchasing grapes or other fruits from agricultural growers within the Commonwealth, and with facilities for fermenting and bottling wine on the premises where the owner or lessee manufactures wine that contains not more than 18 percent alcohol by volume. A minimum of 51 percent of the fresh fruits or agricultural products used at the winery for the production of wine shall be grown or produced on the farm and no more than 25 percent of the fruits, fruit juir_es or other agricultural products may be grown outside of the Commonwealth Accessory uses shall include wine tasting rooms, accessory food sales related to wine tasting and the sale of wines produced on site. Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land ARTICLE II Definitions § 144-2. Definitions and word usage. SUBDIVISION, MAJOR RURAL — Any subdivision resulting in the cumulative total of four or more traditional five acre lots, family division lots, agricultural 1 or rural preservation lots from a single parcel in the RA Rural Area District. SUBDIVISION, MINOR RURAL — Any subdivision resulting in the cumulative total of three or fewer traditional five acre lots, family division lots, ag.-iGultural 1 or rural preservation lots from a single parcel in the RA Rural Area District. Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land ARTICLE V Design Standards § 144.17. Streets. G. Culs-de-sac. (1) Culs-de-sac, permanently designed as such, shall not exceed 1,000 feet in length unless required L'v the Virginia Department of Transportation standards for connectivity. 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 more than 25 lots. The turnaround provided shall have a right-of-way radius of not less than 50 feet and a paved radius of not less than 45 feet. Loop streets are preferred to culs-de-sac, where possible. (2) Any street dead -ended for access to an adjoining property or because of approved stage development, which is over 200 feet in length, shall be provided with a temporary, all- weather, fifty -foot turnaround. The plan shall note that the land outside of the normal street right-of-way shall revert to the adjoining landowners whenever the street is continued. Temporary cuts -de -sac used to accommodate approved phasing or to provide access to adjoining properties shall not be restricted in length to the one - thousand -foot requirement for culs-de-sac. The length of temporary cull -de -sac shall not exceed the length specified by the phasing plan on an approved master development plan. § 144.31. Rural subdivisions. The requirements of this section shall apply to all subdivisions of land zoned RA (Rural Areas) under Article IV of Chapter 165, Zoning, of the Frederick County Code_ B. Major rural subdivisions. (1) Any subdivision which results in a cumulative total of more than three lots being divided from a single parent parcel within the RA (Rural Areas) Zone shall be considered a major rural subdivision. Lots described in § 165-401.06B, Family division lots;—and § 65 401..060, AgricultUFal lots, of Chapter 165, Zoning, of the Frederick County Code, shall not count toward this three -lot limit. Prior to review and approval of final plats for such E divisions, a preliminary sketch plan must be reviewed and approved by the Zoning Administrator_ (2) Access. All roads serving lots within a major rural subdivision shall be built to the Tertiary Subdivision Street Standards of the Virginia Department of Transportation and dedicated to Frederick County for eventual acceptance into the state secondary road system. C. Minor rural subdivisions. (1) The division of the following types of lots are permitted under the regulations for minor rural subdivision: (a) Lots described by § 165-401.066, Family division lots; and F l c�r 401.06C, AgFiCUltur-al leu—, of Chapter 165, Zoning, of the Frederick County Code. 10 C� • COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development MEMORANDUM 540/665- FAX: 540/665- 63956395 To: Frederick County Planning Commission From: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner u" Subject: Discussion— Health System/Sewage Disposal Ordinance Date: September 2, 2009 On April 22, 2009, the Board of Supervisors approved the Rural Areas Report and Recommendation as a policy component of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. This report contained recommendations from the Rural Areas Subcommittee, which was a group created by the Board of Supervisors. The Subcommittee was charged with identifying growth and development trends and related issues in the rural areas of the County, gathering ideas to address those issues and forwarding a recommendation for resolution to the Board of Supervisors. One of the recommendations contained within the report was to revise the health system requirements. The report recommended the following enhancements to the existing health system requirements applicable to on-site private residential health systems: • Increase the reserve drainfield area to 100 percent. The current regulations require a 50 percent reserve area, which does not enable a homeowner to fully replace a failed health system. • Continue to allow health systems that meet the Virginia Department of Health (VDH) General Approval requirements. Prohibit health systems that are permitted through the Provisional and Experimental Approval process. • Prohibit the use of Discharge Health Systems, and require Board of Supervisors approval for Pump -and -Haul permits. • Support Operation and Maintenance Requirements for alternative health systems. Staff has prepared a revision to Chapter 161 (Sewage Disposal Systems, Water and Sewers) to address the recommendations contained in the Rural Areas Report, as well as to update various portions of the chapter. These draft changes have been reviewed by the Health Department on various occasions and they are satisfied with the proposed changes. Proposed changes are as follows: • Complete revision of Article I (Septic Tanks) o Broken up into two articles; new purpose section and definitions section created and placed in Article I. o Revised section regarding when aper—nit is required by the Health Department. 107 Nortb Kent Street, Suite 202 . Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Frederick County Planning Commission Re: Health System/Sewage Disposal Ordinance Page 2 September 2, 2009 o Requirements of onsite sewage systems — Prohibits the use of conditional approvals, discharging systems, and requires a 100% reserve drainfield area. o License Requirements — New section would require anyone installing or repairing systems or hauling sewage to obtain an Installation License or Septic Haulers Permit from Frederick County. o Permanent pump and haul systems — New section that states that the Board of Supervisors may issue pump and haul permits based on specific criteria, and requires that these systems be inspected. o Replacement or repair of onsite systems — Requires property owners within 300 feet of a public or private sewer system to connect to that system when their system ceases to operate in a sanitary manner or requires major alterations. o Maintenance requirements for alternative onsite sewage systems — New section that requires maintenance for alternative systems. New requirement for agreements to be executed between the property owner and the Health Department (that must be recorded). This section outlines inspection requirements, requirements that the inspection reports be provided to the Health Department, modification procedures and a noncompliance statement. • Revision to the Violations and Penalties Section (Article III) o New Article VI and titled Enforcement, Violations and Penalties. o Institutes civil penalties for violations of the maintenance requirements for alternative systems. The item was presented to the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) at their meeting on August 27, 2009. The DRRC endorsed the changes and recommended it be sent to the Planning Commission for discussion. The DRRC requested minor changes to the draft chapter and recommended it be sent to the Planning Commission for further discussion. Since the DRRC meeting, the chapter has been revised to address the DRRC comments as well as minor revisions requested by the Health Department. This item is presented for discussion. Comments and suggestions from the Planning Commission will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. Attachments: 1. Revised ordinance with additions shown in bold italics and deletions shown with a strikethrough (Chapter 161). CEP/bad DRAFT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 161 Chapter 161 Sewage Disposal Systems, WateF and Sewers ArtillP Part 101 — General Provisions §151-101.01 Purpose and Intent. § 161-101.02 Definitions. ARTICLE 11 Part 201 - Onsite Sewage Systems § 161-201.01 Applicahg6 §161-201.02 Health Department Approval, permit regi fired. § 161-201.03 Requirements of onsite sewage systems. § 161-201.04 License Requirements. § 161-201.05 Permanent pump and haul systems. § 161-201.06 Disposition of materials -removed during cleanin.a § 161-201.07 Replacement or Repair of Onsite Systems within 300 Feet of a Sanitary Sewer. § 161-201.08 Inspections. § 161-201.09 Corrections. § 161-201.10 Maintenance Requirements fo'iAlternati�ve Onsite Sewage Systems. § 161-201.11 Fees A RTS .rc-r CLE T �b1--�—RFpreda� 0:61 2 'sf red-aired-pr�er�e-cav��g-ef�-ase, &16i 3- Pier ... it r.1 C1 4 D for Txvr� v�cn516na1 required fer installain m:+ .� rep^alr an malntenal}6� � ^ . ARTICLE 111. Part 301 - UVastewater Discharge n §1� § 161-301.01 Purpose. ; §1� § 161-301.02 Discharge into sanitary sewer. §1617.161-301.03 Disposition of wastewater from plumbing fixtures. ARTICLE IV Part 401 - Violations and Penalties § 161-401.01 Maintenance of Alternative Onsite Sewage Systems, civil penalties. §461-& § 161-401.02 Violations and Penalties. Article i Part 101 - General Provisions § 161-101.01 Purpose and intent. DRAFT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 161 Frederick County is deemed to have fragile hydrogeology and to have the potential for depletion and contamination of water sources and the potential for hazards to public health safety and welfare as a result For the purpose of promoting the healthsafety and welfare of the general public, there is imposed upon all wells and onsite sewage systems constructed or installed the standards as set forth hereafter in this chapter. Pursuant to these goals the Board of Supervisors hereby exercises its power, as granted bV § 15.2-2157 of the Code of Virginia (1950 as amended) to regulate onsite sewage systems. To the extent permitted by state law, if any provision of this chapter conflicts with any other provision of state or local law, the more stringent provision'shall apply. 4161-101.02 Definitions Definitions of terms contained in this chapter shall be those given in the Virginia State Board of Health Sewage Handling and Disposal Regulations 12 Virginia Administrative Code Agency 5, Chapter 610 (12 VAC 5-610-10 et seg) and the Virginia State Board of Health Alternative Discharging Sewage Treatment Regulations for Individual Single Family Dwellings 12 Virginia Administrative Code, Agency 5 Chapter 640 (12 VAC 5-640-10 et seq.). The following definitions shall apply for additional terms contained in this chapter: ALTERNATIVE DISCHARGING SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM OR DISCHARGING SYSTEM- Any device or system which results in a point source discharge of treated sewage for which the Health Department or the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality may issue a permit authorizing construction and operation when such system is regulated by the State Water Control Board pursuant to a general Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit issued for an individual single family dwelling or a multifamily dwelling with flows less than or equal to 1,000 gallons per day. Such system is designed to treat sewage from a residential source and dispose of the effluent by discharging it to an all weather stream an intermittent stream a dry ditch or other location. ALTERNATIVE ONSITE SEWAGE SYSTEM OR ALTERNATIVE ONSITE SYSTEM - A treatment works that is not a conventional onsite sewage system and does not result in a point source discharge. ALTERNATIVE ONSITE SOIL EVALUATOR (ROSE) - A person licensed bV the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR) to evaluate soils and soil properties in relationship to the effect of these properties on the use and management of these soils as the locations for conventional and alternative onsite sewage systems to certify in accordance with applicable state regulations and local ordinances hat sites are suitable for conventional and alternative onsite sewage systems, and to design conventional and alternative onsite sewage systems suitable for the soils. 2 DRAFT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 161 CONVENTIONAL ONSITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM — Any treatment works designed not to result in a point source discharge. HEALTH DEPARTMENT- The Virginia Department of Health (Frederick County Office) and its authorized employees and agents. ONSITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM — Any treatment works design for the storage treatment disposal, discharge, or reclamation of sewage or crmbinations of sewage and industrial wastes other than through use of a sanitary sewer system. PUMP AND HAUL SYSTEM — Any device or system in which''a sewage holding tank is pumped out on a regular basis and the raw sewage is transported by,moto"r vehicle by a contractor having a valid sewage handling permit to an authorized treatment plant. The term "pump and haul` includes all facilities and appurtenances necessary to collect and store the sewage for handling by a contractor having a valid sewage handling permit. TREATMENT WORKS - Any device or system used in the storage,"treatment disposal discharge or reclamation of sewage or combinations of -sewage and industrial wastes, including but not limited to pumping power, and other equipment and appurtenances septic tanks and any works including land, that are or will be (i) an integral part of,the trevtment process or (ii) used for ultimate disposal of residues or effluents resulting from such treatment. 3 DRAFT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 161 ARTICLE ii Part 201 - Onsite Sewage Systems § 161-201.01 Applicability A. The requirements of this article shall apply to any property where an onsite sewage system is installed or proposed to be installed, except that the repair of a previously permitted sewage disposal system or the replacement of an existing well when performed under a valid repair/replacement permit issued by the Health Department shall be exempt from this article. B. The requirements of this article shall apply to all new sewage disposal systems which are permitted or approved, whether through a construction permit issued by the Frederick County Health Department or through a certification letter issued by the Health Department after the effective date of this article and shall also apply to physical additions or expansions to existing sewage disposal systems. C. Building contractors plumbers or any person making installation and/or repairs to existing installations, shall be responsible to the owners of lots for compliance with this article. § 161-201.02 Health Department approval, permit required. A. it shall be unlawful to use, to allow to be used, to rent or lease for use any onsite sewage system to which this article applies unless and until onsite sewage system is approved and permitted by the Health Department and the construction shall comply with the requirements of this article B. No person shall install, construct, alter, repair or extend, or cause to be installed constructed altered repaired or extended, any onsite sewage system in the County without first applying for and obtaining a valid permit therefore in the name of a specific person or for a specific location Permits for installation, construction, alteration, repair or extension of onsite sewage systems shall be issued by the Health Department. In addition no person shall materially change renovate, alter or remodel any structure served by an onsite sewage system unless and until such is done in accordance with a valid health permit or under written approval of the Health Department stating such will not cause an increased loading on the sewage system. C. person to whom the perms#' was issued to make the necessary corrections within a reasonable time. D. A permit issued as provided in this section may be revoked for failure of the holder to comply satisfactorily with this Chapter. § 161-201.03 Requirements of onsite sewage systems. A. Onsite sewage systems shall be located only where approved by the Health Department. DRAFT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 161 B. Conditional permits shall not be issued for new construction applications submitted after the date of adoption of this section unless specifically authorized by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors. C The use of alternative onsite discharging sewage treatment systems (discharging systems) shall aot be permitted for new residential applications submitted after the date of adoption of this section. Approvals issued prior to the adoption of this section may be honored. D All structures constructed after the date of adoption of this section and served by onsite sewage systems shall have a one -hundred -percent reserve drainfield in addition to a primary drainfield, which reserve drainfield shall have the same disposal requirements as the primary drainfield areas. All requirements pertaining to drainfields shall be as established by regulations of the Virginia Department of Health. § 161-201.04 License requirements. A. Installation License No person shall install repair or contrcc-t to install or repair individual onsite sewage systems or parts thereof without first obtaining an installation license from Frederick County To receive an installation license the applicant must present satisfactory evidence that they have a working knowledge of the installation of onsite sewage disposal systems as well as the provisions of this chapter. This shall be determined by the passage of a standard written examination administered by Frederick County. After approval of the written application has been completed the applicant will need to apply to Frederick County for an installation License and provide payment of the license fee. B. Septic Haulers Permit No person shall engage in the business of cleaning septic tanks, settling tanks and/or vaults designed to hold or retain solids and/or liquids in conjunction with any onsite sewage system by whatever name called without first obtaining a Septic Haulers Permit from the Health Department and the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. The septic tanks haulers permit shall be issued by the Health Department upon written application and payment of a permit fee provided that the applicant gives evidence that he can comply with the following requirements: 1) Equipment requirements: a) The tank into which sewage is pumped or delivered and carried is to be fully watertight; b) All inlets and outlets to such tanks shall be fully enclosed and provided watertight valves; c) Suction and discharge hoses shall be watertight and provisions shall be made for carrying such hoses in a manner that will prevent any spillage or leakage; d) All exposed surface shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition by frequent washing; e) The name and address of the person owning or operating such equipment and the Lord Fairfax Health District hauling permit number shall be painted on the vehicle in letters at least four inches high so as to be visible from either side of the vehicle; and D A copy of the Septic Haulers Permit shall be carried in the glove compartment of each vehicle operated. DRAFT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 161 2) Inspections. Any person or company engaging in the business of cleaning septic tanks settling tanks and/or vaults designed to hold or retain solids and/or liquids in conjunction with any onsite sewage disposal system must be inspected, including all vehicles, annually by the Health Department. § 161-201.05 Permanent pump and haul systems A. The Frederick County Board of Supervisors, after receiving a written statement from the Health Department, may approve a permanent pump and haul system permit for increments of three years if all the following criteria is met: 1. The structure to be served is one of the followind..j , a. An existing occupied dwelling that has no indoor plumbing and is converting to indoor plumbing, or where an existing -onsite sewage system has failed- b. An existing occupied structure used as a place of worship c. An existing occupied school stru"cture; or d. An existing occupied commercial structure; and 2. The Health Department has rejected�,an application for an onsite sewage system otherwise permitted under this chapter or an off-site system; 3. All other options for a sewage system (i.e off-site easement) have been pursued and found unsatisfactory as evidenced by a denial letter issued by the Health Department and/or documentation that a neighborinq property owner is uncooperative in giving an easement,-=-, 9 5. For residential dwellings, for at leasf`one continuous year, the applicant has been the owner and full-timer' s�Wht of the dwelling to be served. B. Upon making application and paying an application fee to Frederick County for a permanent pump and haul systerri permit, the system owner shall sign a statement giving permission to the employees of Frederick County and the Health Department to conduct routine field inspections of the system to ensure proper maintenance. C. Onsite inspections shall be conducted every three years by the Health Department to ensure that all properties with' pump and haul system permits are in compliance with all state and local regulations. D. The property owner shall submit annual invoices of pump out every year to the Health Department. E. Pump and haul system requirements. Pump and haul systems shall meet the following spedfcations: DRAFT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 161 1. Pump and haul tanks are to be 1500 gallon or greater tanks with watertight access risers on both tanks extending to the ground surface. 2. The second tank is to be fitted with an auto -visual alarm float under the access riser and set to activate when the second tank is one-half full. z. All connections ore to he wired inside the dwellinq and not in a crawl space or other area which is not accessible. 4. The tanks and risers must be sealed by the contractor to assure that they are watertight to prevent any infiltration. § 161-201.06 Disposition of materials removed during cleaning. Any person who cieans any septic tank shall dispose of the sludge and materials removed fro.-:; such septic tank by depositing such sludge and material in an approved Water Reclamation Facility. § 161-201.07 Replacement or repair of onsite systems within 300 feet of a sanitary sewer. Should an existing sewage system cease to operate in a sanitary manner or should alternations be required to provide safe and adequate treatment and the building or structure to be served is within 300 feet of an approved public or private sewer, the property owner shall connect to the sewer. If the connection cannot be reasonably obtained the Board of Supervisors may authorize alterations to the existing sewage system through a waiver. § 161-201.08 Inspections The Health Department may inspect any and all onsite sewage disposal systems maintained at all premises in the County for the purpose of determining if such system is being operated and maintained in a sanitary manner. Such inspection shall be done at reasonable times and, whenever practical in the company of the owner or occupant of the premises. in addition the Health Department or his authorized agent shall make such inspections as may be deemed necessary during the construction of any onsite sewage disposal system installed in the County to determine compliance with the requirements of this chapter. No person shall use, allow to be used or cause to be used any system until after the Health Department Professional Engineer or AOSE has inspected and approved the same in writing No part of any system shall be covered until it has been inspected and approved by the Health Department Professional Engineer or ROSE, and any such part which has been covered prior to inspection shall be uncovered for inspection. § 161-201.09 Corrections if upon inspection the Health Department shall find any violation of this chapter or the provisions of any permit and/or licenses issued under this chapter, the Department shall direct the owner or person to whom the permit and/or license was issued by written notice to make the necessary corrections within such reasonable period of time specified. § 161-201.10 Maintenance requirements for alternative onsite sewage systems DRAFT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 161 Any alternative sewage system permitted under the provisions of this chapter must comply with the following conditions and requirements: A. The installation and operation of any alternative onsite sewage system must be approved by the Health Department as compliant with this section and the applicable regulations of the Virginia Department of Health. B. Prior to the issuance of a construction permit for any alternative onsite sewage system an agreement, in a form approved by the county attorney and executed by the Health Department and the property owner, must be recorded in the land records of the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Frederick County. Such agreement shall at a minimum 1_ Permit the installation and operation of such alternative onsite sewage system 2. Provide notice, including, without limitation, subsequent owners of the property that Yl the property is served by an alternative onsite sewage system 3. Impose installation, operation and maintenance conditions determined by the Health Department or the Board of Superv►so - as applicable based on the maintenance requirements of such system, including without limitation a requirement for a maintenance contract; 4. Require the property owner annually Yi the anniversary date of such agreement to ti procure an inspection to ensure` uch system continues to operate as designed and in accordance with this section and such agreement which inspection shall be performed by an individual: Ni Licensed by the Virginia Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation as an authorized onsite soil evaluator, LiiL Licensed by the Virginia Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation as a professional engineer, OL Qualif►ed as an accredited septic system inspector, as such term is defined in title 59.1, chapter 24.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950) as amended or iv) Employed by the system manufacturer or designated by the system manufacturer as an authorized service provider, as demonstrated by evidence acceptable to the Health Department, S. Require the property owner annually, within thirty (30) days of the anniversary date of such agreement or such longer period as may be permitted by the Health Department to file with the Health Department a copy of the inspection report in a form approved by the Health Department and to repair or replace such system as E'� DRAFT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 161 necessarv. to correct any deficiencies identified in the inspection report in compliance with this section and the applicable regulations of the Virginia Department of Health, 6. Require the property owner to obtain approval of any modifications alterations, and expansions of such system that have been certified by a professional engineer, from the health Department 7. Provide that in the event of the failure of such system as determined by the Health Department the repair or replacement of such system shall be subiect to the applicable regulations of the Virginia Department of Health or the State Water Control Board, 8. Permit the Health Department to enter the property to inspect such system and to determine whether such system is installed operated and maintained in accordance with this section and such agreement 9. Provide that the property owner's obligations under such agreement shall run with the land and bind the property owner, and the property owner'sheirs, personal representatives successors and assigns, 10. Permit the termination of such agreement and the revocation of the authorization under this section of the installation and operation of such system, in the event the property owner fails to cause the continued operation of such system, as designed and in accordance with this section and such agreement, and 11. Provide that failure to comply with the terms of the agreement are violations of this ordinance subject to.the penalties and other remedies provided herein. § 161-201.11 Fees. The County shall establish set and charge such fees as it deems necessary and reasonable to de ra the cost of permits, licenses and/or inspections as are required to be issued and/or conducted under this chapter. DRAFT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 161 FA 10 .. .. _ rIMF=- • 10 DRAFT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 161 ARTICLE 111 Part 301 - Wastewater Discharge [Amended 9-26-199.0) §,� 161-301.01 Purpose. The purpose of this Article is to regulate, limit and, restrict discharge to the sanitary sewer system of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority and thereby protect such sanitary sewer system and the wastewater treatment facilities of the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority and the health of the citizens of Frederick County. §1 -61 -tom -161-301.02 Discharge into sanitary sewer. No person shall discharge into the sanitary sewer system or sewer's tributary to the sanitary sewer system of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority or to the trunk Eines and treatment plants of the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority, except in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority and Frederick -Winchester Service Authority regulating, limiting and restricting such discharge - §161 16.1-301.0.3 Disposition of wastewater from plumbing fixtures. It shall be unlawful for any person to allow the wastewater from any sink, bathtub or any other plumbing fixtures of any nature to run or drain onto the surface of the ground. All such wastewater shall be discharged into a drain tile and stone ditch and pit, as directed by the Health Department. 11 - ' 1. - MMIZ -- ARTICLE 111 Part 301 - Wastewater Discharge [Amended 9-26-199.0) §,� 161-301.01 Purpose. The purpose of this Article is to regulate, limit and, restrict discharge to the sanitary sewer system of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority and thereby protect such sanitary sewer system and the wastewater treatment facilities of the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority and the health of the citizens of Frederick County. §1 -61 -tom -161-301.02 Discharge into sanitary sewer. No person shall discharge into the sanitary sewer system or sewer's tributary to the sanitary sewer system of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority or to the trunk Eines and treatment plants of the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority, except in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority and Frederick -Winchester Service Authority regulating, limiting and restricting such discharge - §161 16.1-301.0.3 Disposition of wastewater from plumbing fixtures. It shall be unlawful for any person to allow the wastewater from any sink, bathtub or any other plumbing fixtures of any nature to run or drain onto the surface of the ground. All such wastewater shall be discharged into a drain tile and stone ditch and pit, as directed by the Health Department. 11 DRAFT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 161 ARTICLE VI Part 401 - Enforcement, Violations and Penalties 161-401.01 Maintenance of alternative onsite sewage systems civil penalties. A. In accordance with § 15.2-2157 of the Code of Virginia the owner of property on which is located an alternative onsite sewage system is subject to civil penalties for violations of Section 161-201 of this Code, as follows: 1. Failure to procure an annual inspection report in- accordance with Section 161-201.10(8 .$100 for an initial summons and $150 for each additional -summons. 2. Failure to file an annual inspection report in accordance with Section 161-201.10(B)(5) — $100 for an initial summons and .$150 for each additional summons' " 3. Failure to obtain the approval the Health Department for rnv modification. with Section 161-201.10(B)(6) — $100 for an initial summons and $150 for each additional summons. Each day during which the violation is found to have existed shall constitute a separate offense However, specified violations arming from the same operative set of facts shall not be charged more frequently than once in any 104ay period, and a series of specified violations arising from the same operative set of facts shall not result in civil penalties exceeding a total of $3,000. If the violation is not abated after the imposition of the maximum fine the locality may pursue other remedies as provided by law. Designation of these particular ordinance violations for a civil penalty are in lieu of criminal penalties, except for any violation that contributes to or is likely to contribute to the pollution- of public or private water supplies or the contraction or spread of infectious, contagious, and dangerous diseases. The Health Department may issue a civil summons ticket as provided by law for a scheduled violation. Any person summoned or issued a ticket for a scheduled violation may make an appearance in person or in writing by mail to the Treasurer of Frederick County Virginia prior to the date fixed for trial in court. Any person so appearing may enter a waiver of trial admit liability, and pay the civil penalty established for the offense charged. if a person charged with a scheduled violation does not elect to enter a waiver of trial and admit liability, the violation shall be tried in the general district court in the same manner and with the same right of appeal as provided for by law. In any trial for a scheduled violation the locality shall have the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence the liability of the alleged violator. An admission of liability or finding of liability under this section shall not be deemed an admission at a criminal proceeding. 12 DRAFT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 161 B. In addition to the enforcement of the penalties provided in this section, the Health Department may bring a civil action for injunction abatement or any other legal or equitable remedy to prevent, enioin abate or remove a violation of the provisions of this ordinance or any agreement under Section 165-401.02. §!61 17. 161-401.02 Violations and penalties. A. Any person, user, firm or corporation whether a principal agent, employee or otherwise, who violates or causes or permits the violation of any of the provisions of this chapter or who is found to have violated any order of the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority or who has willfully or negligently failed to comply with any provisions of this Chapter or the orders, rules, regulations and permits issued hereunder shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to maximum fine of two thousand five hundred dollars- ($2,500). or by imprisonment for not more than twelve (12) months, or by both such fine.and imprisonment, for each offense. R. In addition to the penalties provided herein; reasonable attorney's fees, court reporter's fees and other expenses of litigation by appropriate suit at law against the person found to have violated this chapter or the orders, rules, regulations and permits issued hereunder may be recovered. C. If the violations is found to be willful or deliberate or is continued beyond a reasonable time allowed by the Health Department for corrections, each day such violation shall continue shall be considered a separate offense., 13 E 0 0 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 MEMORANDUM FAX: 540/665-6395 To: Frederick County Planning Commission IN From: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner � 1-i' Subject: Discussion— Commercial Indoor Recreation in the M1 District Date: September 1, 2009 Frederick County has received a request to include Commercial Recreation Operated Indoor to the permitted uses in the Ml (Light Industrial) Zoning District. Currently, this use is permitted in the B2 (Business General) and the B3 (Industrial Transition) Districts. While the requested recreation is for a dog training program, this ordinance amendment would be applicable to all types of commercial recreation. Design standards have been included for this use when established in the Ml District. These standards address patron parking and safety, along with regulations when this use is developed in a master planned industrial park. A revised definition has also been included. The item was presented to the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) at their meeting on August 27, 2009. The DRRC discussed whether this type of use would be appropriate in the M1 District. They stated that certain elements of indoor recreation may be appropriate, but uses such as bowling or swimming may not be. The DRRC recommended that the hours of operation be 5:00pm to 12:00am Monday -Friday within master planned industrial parks. With that change, the DRRC sent the proposed amendment forward to the Planning Commission for further discussion. This item is presented for discussion. Comments and suggestions from the Planning Commission will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. Attachments: 1. Proposed Ordinance Revision (§ 165-606.02 and §165-101.02) 2. Letter of request. CEP/bad 107 North bent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 ARTICLE VI BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Part 606— M1 Light Industrial District § 165-606.02 Allowed Uses. ATTACHMENT 1 M1 -Light Industrial District. The intent of this district is to provide for a variety of light manufacturing, commercial office and heavy commercial uses in well-planned industrial settings. Uses are allowed which do not create noise, smoke, dust or other hazards. Uses are allowed which do not adversely affect nearby residential or business areas. Such industrial areas shall be provided with safe and sufficient access. Standard Industrial Classification Allowed Uses (SIC) Landscape and horticultural services 07$ Offices and storage facilities for building construction 15, 16 and 17 contractors, heavy construction contractors and special trade contractors Manufacturing as follows: - Dairy products 202 Canned, frozen and preserved fruits, vegetables and 203 soup mixes Bakery products 205 Sugar and confectionary products 206 Beverages 208 Miscellaneous food preparations and products, 209 excluding the following: Canned and cured fish and seafood 2091 Fresh or frozen fish and seafood 2092 Textile mill products 22 Apparel or other finished products made from fabrics 23 and similar material Lumber and wood products, excluding the following: 24 Logging 241 Sawmills and planing mills 242 Wood preserving 2491 Furniture and fixtures 25 Paperboard containers and boxes 265 Converted paper and paperboard products, except 267 containers and boxes Printing, publishing and allied industries 27 Drugs 283 Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products 30 Concrete block and brick and related products 3271 Fabricated metal products, excluding the following: 34 Coating, engraving and allied services 347 Ordinance and accessories 348 Industrial and commercial machinery and computer 35 equipment Electronics and other electrical equipment and 36 components, excluding the following: ATTACHMENT 1 Storage batteries 3691 Primary batteries 3692 Transportation equipment 37 Measuring, analyzing and controlling instruments; 38 photographic, medical and optical goods, and watches and clocks Miscellaneous manufacturing industries 39 Local and suburban transit and interurban highway 41 passenger transportation Motor freight transportation and warehousing 42 Transportation by air 45 Transportation services 47 Communication facilities and offices, including 48 telephone, telegraph, radio, television and other communications Electric, gas and other utility facilities and offices and 49 trucking and warehousing Wholesale trade - Advertising specialties — wholesale] 5199 Restaurants 58 Linen supply 7213 Dry-cleaning plants 7216 Business services 73 Truck rental and leasing, without drivers 7513 Tire retreading 7534 Welding repair 7692 Agricultural equipment repair 7699 Boiler cleaning and repair 7699 Cesspool cleaning 7699 Coppersmithing 7699 Engine repair 7699 Farm machinery and tractor repair 7699 Industrial truck repair 7699 Machinery cleaning 7699 Meteorological instrument repair 7699 Precision instrument repair 7699 Repair of optical instruments 7699 Repair of service station equipment 7699 Scale repair service 7699 Septic tank cleaning service 7699 Vocational schools 824 Business associations 861 Professional membership organizations 862 Labor unions and similar labor organizations 863 Engineering, accounting, research, management and 87 related services Testing laboratories 8734 General business offices, including corporate - government or other offices not providing services to the general public on a regular basis as the primary use Accessory retailing - Public buildings - ATTACHMENT 1 Public utility distribution facilities - Business signs - Signs allowed in § 165-201.06B - Freestanding building entrance signs - Multi -tenant complex signs - Electronic Message signs - Residential uses which are accessory to allowed business uses - Parks - Regional criminal justice, enforcement and detention - facilities for Frederick County, Clarke County and the City of Winchester Industrial launderers 7218 Truck or fleet maintenance facilities - Self-service storage facilities - Flex -Tech - Fire stations, companies and rescue squads - Commercial Recreation, Indoor - Article II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES Part 204 — Additional Regulations for Specific Uses § 165-204.24. Commercial Recreation, Indoor. Commercial indoor Recreation located in the M1 (Light industrial) Zoning Districts shall be subject to the followina requirements: A. Parking areas for recreation facilities shall be designated to enhance the safety of patrons as they arrive at and leave the facility; B. Establishments shall include a designatedpickup, and delivery area for all patrons in such a way that provides safe and clearly designated access to enter or exit the facility. C. Recreation facilities located within a master planned industrial park shall only operate 5.00pm-12:00am Monday -Friday; there shall be no limitations on Saturday or Sunday, ARTICLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS, AMENDMENTS, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS Part 101— General Provisions § 165-101.02 Definitions & word usage. COMMERCIAL RECREATION, INDOOR ruFCR"TION _ A sports or activi aCg either oven to the aeneral Public for a fee or for members and their guests, located in an enclosed building or structure designed to accommodate gatherings Private, fee-« ppeFt ,-cad for athletic, training, recreational or park purposes, games, cultural activities, martial arts, swimming pools, archery and the like. Office, retail, and other uses commonly established in such facilities and related parking shall be allowed as secondary or accessory uses. Commercial recreation may also include secondary uses such as refreshment stands, equipment sales or rentals. L.JCi 1 August 6, 2009 f_ " Mrs. Candice E. Perkins, AICP Senior Planner Department of Planning and Development Frederick County, Virginia 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Proposed Change to the MI Zoning Ordinance Frederick County, Virginia Dear Mrs. Perkins: I represent the Blue Ridge Dog Training Club. For the past year, our club has been searching for a building in Frederick County to accommodate our dog training programs. Unfortunately, all of the buildings that we have found that meet our area and budget requirements have been located in M1 industrial facilities which are not currently zoned to accommodate recreational uses. Therefore, on behalf of our club, I am requesting that your department consider amending the current zoning ordinance related to M1 property to include recreational uses. We certainly understand that our request may include all recreational uses. However, we are hopeful that, at a minimum, the amendment can be written to include our proposed use which is dog training. We also understand that the amendment may include restrictions which will include limits on hours of use and/or parking. Typically, our training classes are scheduled after 5:00 p.m. and include less than 50 people with a proportionate amount of parking requirements. Occasionally, we host special events on weekends with a maximum attendance of less than 100. During these events, we would anticipate using shared parking located on adjacent properties owned by the same property owner. Thank you in advance for your consideration of our proposed ordinance amendment. Sincerely, r r Stacy J. Defilippi President Blue Ridge Dog Training Club