Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 11-05-08 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia November 5, 2008 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) Adoption of Agenda: Pursuant to established procedures, the Planning Commission should adopt the Agenda for the meeting................................................................ (no tab) 2) September 3, 2008 and September 17, 2008 Minutes ..................................................... (A) 3) Committee Reports.................................................................................................. (no tab) 4) Citizen Comments.................................................................................................... (no tab) PUBLIC HEARING 5) Rezoning #09-08 for Frederick Block, submitted by Painter -Lewis, PLC, to rezone 1.8 acres from the RP (Residential Performance) District to the B3 (Industrial Transition Business) District, with proffers, to accommodate storage of materials and to revise the proffers for Property Identification Number 54A -1-15B. The properties are located at 1086 and 1098 Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North), in the Stonewall Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 54A-1-1513, 54A-1-18 and 54A-1-19. Mrs. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (B) 6) Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 165, Zoning, Article X, Business and Industrial District, §165-82 District use regulations; §165-83 Dimensional and intensity requirements; Chapter 1.65, Zoning, Article IV, Supplementary Use Regulations, §165- 27 Off-street parking; §165-29 Motor vehicle access; §165-31 Protection of environmental features; 165-37 Buffer and screening requirements; 165-47 Landfills, junkyards, trash disposal and inoperable vehicles; Chapter 165, Zoning, Article XVIII, Master Development Plan, §165-133 When required; and §165-141 Contents of preliminary master development plans. Revisions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to add a new zoning district to implement the mixed use industrial/office land use classification of the Comprehensive Policy Plan and revisions to add new secondary use standards. Mrs. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (C) 7) Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 165, Zoning, Article IV Supplementary Use Regulations, §165-37 Buffer and screening requirements. Revisions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance pertaining to buffer and screening requirements adjacent to railroad right-of-ways. Mrs. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (D) FILE COPY 8) Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 165, Zoning, Article IV Supplementary Use Regulations, §165-24 Height limitations/exceptions. Revisions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to enable the building height restriction in the B3 (Industrial Transition) District to be increased from 35 feet to 45 feet. Mrs. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (E) 9) Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 165, Zoning, Article XVII IA Interstate Area Overlay District, §165-130 Qualifying criteria and §165-131 District regulations. Revisions to the Frederick County Zoning 'Ordinance to remove general merchandise, apparel stores and automotive dealers from the qualifying uses. Mrs. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (F) 10) Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 165, Zoning, Article VI RP Residential Performance District, §165-59 Permitted uses, §165-61 Number of uses restricted, §165-62 Gross density, §165-62.1 Multifamily housing, §165-65 Dimensional requirements; Article IV Supplementary Use Regulations, §165-37 Buffer and screening requirements; Article XXII Definitions, §165-156 Definitions and word usage; and, Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, Article V Design Standards, §144-24 Lot requirements. Revisions to the Frederick County ordinances to enable age -restricted multifamily housing in the RP (Residential Performance) District. Mrs. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (G) PUBLIC MEETING 11) Conditional Use Permit #10-08 for Adam Arkfeld, for a Cottage Occupation — Motel/Bed & Breakfast. This property is located at 250 Sister Chipmunk Lane, and is identified with Property Identification Number 34-A-98 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Mr. Cheran....................................................................................................................... (H) 12) Master Development Plan #05-08 for Snowden Bridge, Part A and B, submitted by Greenway Engineering for a Residential Planned Community on 285.5. acres zoned R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. The properties are located on the south side of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) and east of Milburn Road (Route 662), and are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44- A-292, 44-A-293, and 44-A-3 IA in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Ms. Powers........................................................................................................................ (I) 13) Other MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNT' PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kant Street in Winchester, Virginia on September 3, 2008. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Member at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Opequon District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Gregory S. Kerr, Red Bud District; Gary R Oates, Stonewall District; Richard Ruckman, Stonewall District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Lawrence R Ambrogi, Shawnee District; H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Frank Sublett, City of Winchester Liaison; and Roderick Williams, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: Richard C. Ours, Opcquon District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director, Mark K Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; John A. Bishop, Deputy Director -Transportation; Amber Powers, Planner Il; 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 Thomas, the Planning Commission unanunously adopted the agenda for the September 3, 2008 meeting. COMMITTEE REPORTS Transportation Committee — 08/25/08 Mtg. Commissioner Oates presented a detailed report on eight items discussed by the Transportation Committee. The topics reviewed by Commissioner Oates included: 1) an update on the NELUP Transportation Plan; 2) a request by the Town of Stephens City for a reduction in speed limits along Route 11, near the Town; 3) a request by Warren County for truck restrictions on Route 627; 4) a discussion of stoplight cameras was delayed until Sheriff Department comments were available; 5) proposed TIA standards; 6) a request by the Cedar Creek Battlefield Foundation for endorsement of a grant to renovate their offices and information center; 7) discussion of the Northern Shenandoah Valley Coordinated Human Service Mobility Plan presented by Access hidependence; and 8) discussion of the county -wide road plan for the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Frederick County Planning Commission ® Page 2322 Minutes of September 3, 2008jj` it Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) — 08/28/08 Mtg. Commissioner Thomas reported that the DRRS had four topics of discussion: 1) revisions to the ordinance to implement revised lighting standards; particularly, light pollution associated with outdoor lighting and the provision of sufficient lighting for security and safety around industrial parks and parking areas; 2) finalization of the new zoning ordinance for the Office -Manufacturing Park District to implement the mixed use for industrial and office land as a classification in the Comprehensive Policy Plan; 3) review of buffer requirements for manufacturing againsi industrial and industrial against commercial with a railroad line between; and buffer requirements for residential across from an industrial or manufacturing park; 4) revisions to 165-58, age -restricted, multi -family housing; structure height was the major area of contention and the DRRS is recommending an increase in height from 45 feet to 60 feet based on a :waiver request, not by right. Conservation Easement Authority (CEA) Comin-iissioner Watt reported the CEA voted unanimously to recommend the Board of Supervisors accept and hold the easement for the Snapp property. In addition, he said the CEA held a fund-raiser on August 12, 2008 for anyone wishing to learn more about conservation easements; approximately 30 people attended and $3004400 was raised. Conunissioner Watt said anyone wishing to obtain an application has up until December 31, 2008 to file. Rural Areas Working Group - 08/21/08 Mtg. Commissioner Manuel reported the Rural Areas Working Group meets on the first and third Thursdays at 7:30 p.m. He said input is being collected from conumttee members, Planning Commissioners, Supervisors, and the public and a website has been established_ CITIZEN COMMENTS Chairman Wilmot called for public comments on any subject not on the Commission's agenda for this evening. No one came forward to speak. PUBLIC HEARING Conditional Use Permit Application #09-08 of Shenandoah Mobile Company for a commercial telecommunications facility at 1203 Redbud Road (Rt. 661). This property is identified with Property Identification Number 55 -A -129A in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action — Tabled for 45 Days Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September 3, 2008 Page 2323 -3 - Commissioner Oates said he would abstain from discussion and voting on this rezoning application due to a possible conflict of interest. Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, reported this application is for a 195 - foot monopole -type commercial telecommunications facility. Mr. Cheran stated that commercial telecommunications facility in the Rural Areas are subject to additional performance standards in order to mitigate negative impacts on residential properties, land use patterns, scenic areas, and properties of significant historic values. He said the zoning ordinance requires the applicant to provide confirmation that an attempt to collocate on an existing telecommunication facility and possible collocation structures within the proposed service area_ He added that the proposed 195 -foot monopole -type telecommunications facility will be located on a 33 -acre site on Redbud Road (Rt. 661), a designated Virginia Byway. This location is outside of the UDA (Urban Development Area), but is located within the NELUP (Northeast Land Use Plan) and is adjacent to a developmentally -sensitive area (DSA) as noted in the 2007 Comprehensive Policy Plan_ Mr. Cheran pointed out comments received on this proposal from the Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB). Mr. Cheran stated that the designation of Redbud Road as a designated Virginia Byway takes into consideration the scenic landscape, historic civil war battlefields, and environmentally significant nature of the area. He added that the general surrounding area of this proposed site contains sites of significant historical importance; these sites include the Third Winchester Battlefield, Hackwood, and Milburn Road. Mr. Cheran stated that the staff does not concur with the applicant that there are eligible existing facilities or appropriate structures available for collocation in this general area; he said staff has identified possible collocation sites within a three -nine radius of this proposed site. Mr. Cheran stated that the proposed request is not in conformance with the 2007 Comprehensive Policy Plan of Frederick County and the impacts associated with the request cannot be mitigated. Mr. Cheran next read a Iist of recommended conditions, should the Commission find the use to be appropriate. Commissioner Ruckman asked if there were any considerations given to the fact that is tower was proposed within the Redbud Agricultural and Forestal District. Mr. Cheran replied that the County has traditionally allowed conditional use permits for telecommunications towers within the agricultural districts_ Mr. Glen Hodge, an attorney with the law firm of Wharton, Walheizer and Weaver, from Harrisonburg, Virginia, was present to represent the applicant. Mr. Hodge introduced his colleague, Mr. Jim Johnson, and other members of the team representing Shenandoah Mobile Company (Shentel), which included Mr. Lyme Griese and Mr. Lynn Koerner, Site Acquisition and Project Development Consultants with Shenandoah Mobile Company (Shentel), and Mr. William McGaliick with Triad Engineering. Mr. Hodge said there was a demonstrated need for cell phone and broad band improvements in this particular area. He said that Shentel recognized the sites mentioned by the staff, however, they already have antennas on the towers mentioned. He said Shentel believes the collocation cannot be met in this situation. Mr. Hodge discussed the requirements the applicant must meet with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). In addition, he said this application meets all of the requirements of the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Mr. Hodge said Shentel believes there is a demonstrated need to provide the necessary coverage for their customers and the service will improve cell communication plus broad band communication and they believed it would not have a negative impact on the surrounding community. Commissioner Thomas asked Mr. Hodge if the applicant understood Condition #6, stipulating that a Virginia registered professional engineer shall provide verification the tower is designed and will be constructed in a manner that should the tower collapse for any reason, the collapsed tower would be contained in an area around the tower with a radius equal to or less than setback measured from the centerline of the base of the tower. Commissioner Thomas said since the applicant is leasing a 100 -foot by 100 -foot block, the tower Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September 3, 2008 Page 2324 -4 - ,would have to be contained within the 100 -foot block. Mr. Hodge said it was his understanding the collapsed tower would be contained within the boundary lune of the property. Commissioner Thomas said before he would vote positively on this application, a resolution regarding the issue of the collapsed tower must occur. Mr. Roderick Williams, legal counsel for the Planning Commission, advised the Conunission on the correct interpretation regarding the possibility of a collapsed tower. Mr. Williams said the correct interpretation would be the edge of the total property tract. He explained that were the tower to fall within that area, the land it would be falling on would still be land that is owned by the same person who is leasing it to the telephone provider. Mr. Williams added that the interest car -not be separated; the leased area is not a subdivision and, therefore, is the same property even though there is a limited leased area. Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing for citizen comments. The following persons came forward to speak: Mr. William G. Meier said he was building a house in Woodsmill, close to where the tower is proposed. Mr. Meier was concerned about the health issues associated with cell towers. He read an article for the Commission that he obtained from the interrmet. The article stated that, "computer simulation and meastm=ents used in the study both show that radiation in the inner area within 400 meters is 100 times higher, compared to the outer area, mainly due to additional emissions coming from secondary lobes of the transmitter." He asked if there were established limits to the wattage of a tower. Mr. Meier's second concern was the destruction of the view shed along a designated Virginia Byway. He said the visual impact will be greater during the winter, when there are no leaves on the trees. Another concern was the fact that the proposed location was within the Agricultural and Forestal District; he said about three 30 -inch oaks have been marked for removal. Mr. Meier did not believe this was an appropriate location for a tower and he was opposed to the application. Mrs. Bobby Meier said that she has full cell phone signal and has no complaints about her cell phone service in this area. Mrs. Meier was also very concerned about the health issues associated with telecommunications facilities. Ms. Trudy Dixon, a resident on Red Bud Road in the Stonewall Magisterial District_, was opposed to the Shenandoah Mobile Company's application for a telecommunications facility. Ms. Dixon said the residents along Red Bud Road have gone to great lengths to preserve the rural nature of their community, they have established an Agricultural and Forestal District, and they are located on a Virginia Scenic Byway. She said a 195 -foot commercial telecommunications facility is not in keeping with the rural and scenic nature of this part of the County, nor does it conform to Frederick County's Comprehensive Policy Plan. She noted that these points are prominentmi the HRAB's recommendation for denial. She said she already has excellent cell phone service; the proposed site is approximately 2,600 feet from her residence and would provide redundant coverage. Ms. Dixon believed the proposed facility was meant to serve the residents of Snowden Bridge and the northwestern area of Clarke County. She said she did not see the need for a new cell tower in an area with so few residents and who already have cell phone service. She was especially concerned about the visual affects this structure would have on the rural nature of the community. No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the public hearing. Mr. Hodge returned to the podium to respond to some of the citizen continents. Regarding the health concerns, he said the FCC determines the signal strength for radio frequencies and the County does not have input on that particular determination. Regarding the comment regarding the service area, he said the way in which the antennas are cited and located to provide the signal, it is not intended or will be providing any signal into Clarke County, it is for the area within Frederick County. Frederick County Planning Commissionn p rage zil-D Minutes of September 3, 2008 6 R F -5- Conunissioner Mohn mentioned that the fact Red Bud Road is designated scenic byway, does the County have any additional obligation in terms of a review perspective or are there any implications if the County was to approve something that would have arguably a detrimental visual impact, would it compromise the designation 'many way, shape, or form. Mr. Cheran replied that the State Code indicates it should not impact any land use decisions; however, it is left up to the localities. Comrnissioner Thomas asked if this was the first scenic byway in Frederick County with a cell tower and Mr. Cheran replied yes, as far as he could determine. Mr. Cheran pointed out the school site as an alternate collocation site, which is outside of the scenic byway area. Mr. Cheran also pointed out the DSA (Developmentally Sensitive Area) in this particular area of Frederick County. Mr. Cheran recalled that when the Red Bud Agricultural and Forestal District was created, part of the plan included the Third Battle of Winchester, Hackwood, and Civil War Trails and all are included within the DSA. He said the DSA is a little more south of Red Bud Road and wraps around up thorough the Milburn Road corridor. Conunissioner Thomas referred to recormnended Condition #6 and stated it should read, "A Virgmia registered professional engineer," not a "certified Virginia engineer," to have the correct terminology. Mr. Lynn Griese, Site Acquisition and Project Development Consultant with Shenandoah Mobile Company, spoke about the collocation issue. Mr. Griese said Shenandoah Mobile Company prefers to collocate when they are able; be said the construction of a tower is a huge investment and also involves leasing and operating expenses. He mentioned the various sites in the area where they are currently collocating. Mr. Griese said they looked at the school property, but it did not propagate well enough. Members of the Commission noted that with previous cell tower reviews there is usually an engineer available showing that no service is available at a particular location. They were not convinced that the proposed tower was a necessity at this location. Other commissioners agreed and were also concerned about protecting the County's viewsheds. Commissioner Ruckman believed the proposed tower location was too close to the DSA and a Designated Virginia Byway and he agreed with the recommendations of the HRAB stating that the benefits in terms of additional coverage levels as shown on the applicant's coverage map did not warrant the cost of the proposed tower's impact on the area's viewshed. He also agreed with the staff's conclusion that the request was not in conformance with the 2007 Comprehensive Policy Plan and the impacts of the request cannot be nutigated. Cormnissioner Ruckman next made a motion that the CUP #09-08 of Shenandoah Mobile Company be denied. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kriz. This motion was defeated, however, due to a tie vote, as follows: YES (TO REC. DENIAL): Unger, Watt, Manuel, Ruckman, Kriz NO: Ambrogi, Wilmot, Thomas, Kerr, Mohn ABSTAIN• Oates (Note: Commissioners Ours and Triplett were absent from the meeting.) Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September 3, 2008 Page 2326 no A new motion was made by Commissioner Thomas to recommend approval of the CUP #09-08 of Shenandoah Mobile Company th amended terminology to Condition #6, changing the text to, "A Virginia registered professional engineer." The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mohn. This motion was defeated, however, due to the following tie vote: YES (TO REC. APPROVALP: Ambrogi, Wilmot, ; omas, Kerr, Mohn NO: Unger, Watt, Manuel, Ruckman, Kriz ABSTAIN: Oates (Note: Commissioners Ours and Triplett were absent from the meeting.) Commissioner Kerr colmmiented many of the concerns that were raised this evening centered on the fact that the applicant has not proven the tower is needed. He said given the opportunity to address this issue, some of the votes may change. Therefore, Commissioner Kerr made a motion to table CUP #09-08 of Shenandoah Mobile Company for 45 days to provide the applicant the opportunity to gather further information. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Thomas. This motion was passed by a majority vote. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby table Conditional Use Permit 409-08 of Shenandoah Mobile Company for a commercial telecommunications facility at 1203 Redbud Road (Rt. 66 1) for 45 days to provide the applicant the opportunity to gather further information on why the tower is needed at this particular location. The majority vote was: YES (TO TABLE): Ambrogi, Manuel, Wilmot, Thomas, Kerr, Mohn NO: Unger, Watt, Ruckman, Kriz ABSTAIN: Oates (Note: Commissioners Ours and Triplett were absent from the meeting.) Conditional Use Permit #10-08 of Adam Arkfeld for a Cottage Occupation for a Motel/ Bed & Breakfast at 250 Sister Chipmunk Lane. The property is further identified with P.I.N. 34-A-98 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action — Tabled for 45 Days Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, reported that the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance allows for motel uses in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District with an approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP); he said a bed and breakfast qualifies as a motel use. Mr. Cheran said the proposed three- bedroom bed and breakfast will take place on 58 acres of land. He stated the applicant will be limited to a total of six guests and no other activities will be associated on-site wiul this proposed use. He notedd the nearest structures from the proposed use are more than 150 feet away. Mr. Cheran said there will be no employees associated with the proposed use, other than those residing on-site. He next read a list of recommended conditions, should the Planning Commission find the use to be appropriate. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September 3, 2008 Page 2327 -7 - Mr. Adam Arkfeld, the applicant and owner of the property, came forward to answer questions from the Commission. In response to a question from the Commission regarding the Health Department's comment that no water testing was required for the 1 -muted number of potential guests, Mr. Arkfeld read from a letter he received f: em the Health Department. The letter stated that in order to fall under the Health DeparLinent's water testing requirements, the use must be considered "public." He said the Health Department considers "public" use to have at least 25 persons a day for a minimum of 60 days per year. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Kevin Bradford, Adam Arkfeld's brother-in-law, and his wife, Annette Arkfeld Bradford, Adam Arkfeld's older sister, were opposed to the proposed business because the potential increase in noise, traffic, and numbers of people will not enhance or maintain the beauty and tranquility which currently exists on Sister Chipmunk Lane. Mr. Bradford provided a history of the property, beginning in April of 2005, when his wife and her brothers came to an agreement enabling them to subdivide the family farm. He said a four -lot subdivision with covenants was created and his brother-in-law's lot was divided off separate from the subdivision. Mr. Bradford said the agreement was contingent upon his he and his wife fully financing and constructing an access road through their property for Mr. Arkfeld to reach his future home site on the fifth lot, even though Mr. Arkfeld had his own road access to his property from Shady Creek Road. He said the list of covenants established for the subdivision stipulated that no businesses or non-residential uses were permitted. Mr. Bradford said in July of 2008, Mr. Arkfeld informed them he had sold a lot from his property with access on their subdivision access road, Sister Chipmunk Lane, and the new owners signed the subdivision covenants. Mr. Bradford said Mr. Arkfeld also informed him that he planned to have occasional yoga weekends and seminars at his home; he said the house has a large exercise room with dressing rooms and multiple showers. Mr. Bradford said they did not have any idea Mr. Adams was planning a motel/ bed and breakfast until they received a formal notification from the County about the public hearing. Mr. Bradford said as creators of the original subdivision and owners of the three remaining lots, they did not believe a commercial business was appropriate in the neighborhood. He also objected to Mr. Arkfeld's manipulation of their subdivision to suite his own purposes. In addition, he questioned the appropriateness of everyone abiding by the covenants except Mr. Arkfeld. He had numerous questions on how the exterior of Mr. Arkfeld's home would be changed to accommodate a business and parking lot for a motel use. He inquired about outdoor lighting and he suggested that access to the bed and breakfast be via Mr. Arkfeld's Shady Creek Road access, not Sister Chipmunk Lane. He asked what outdoor activities would be permitted and he presented the Commission with photographs of bicycle trails going through the woods on their subdivision property. Mr. Brad Grove said he had a family farm located adjacent to the northern tip of Mr. Arkfeld's property and has known the Arkfelds for 40 years. Mr. Grove said they excavated the road through this property. Mr_ Groves was concerned about the number and presence of outsiders through these woods because be and his family of five sons are hunters. Mr. Tim Gotson, property owner at 141 Sister Chipmunk Lane, said he was also a business owner in Frederick County. Mr. Gotson said that as a small-business owner, he understood the principles behind conditional use pen -nits and the purpose for separating business use from residential use. He didn't think it was wise to build a home on the intent of later opening it as a business, having access through a neighborhood, and banking everything on a conditional use permit because of the restrictions and stipulations. Mr. Gotson said his property is at the beginning of this subdivision and he will be impacted the most. He presented photographs showing Mr. Arkfeld's land and access, he questioned why Mr. Arkfeld is choosing to use their subdivision road to access his home which is about one mile up the road. Mr. Gotson said Mr. Arkfeld's home is difficult to find; he said under CUP regulations, a sign is only permitted on Mr. Arkfeld's land and this presents a problem for guests entering through their subdivision. Mr. Gotson said since he is the first home entering this subdivision, on any given night, he will be inundated with traveling people stopping at his door expecting it to be the bed and breakfast. He said the road is not well marked and the property is not laid out or planned well. Mr. Gotson said Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September 3, 2008 Page 2328 that Mr. Ark-feld did not discuss his intent with any of the neighbors. He disagreed with the staffs comments that the proposed use would not have any significant impacts on the adjoining properties; he believed he would definitely be impacted and a business at this location was not a good idea or well planned. He also believed it could be detrimental to the sale of the final two lots. Mr. Eric Arkfeld, a brother of Mr. Adam Arkfeld and an adjoining property owner, envisioned his brother's proposal to be a weekend -type retreat with probably only six people a weekend. Mr. Arkfeld said this property had a beautiful view and is a beautiful location. He said he didn't think the proposed use would have a major impact on anyone. Mrs. Janet Arkfeld, the mother of Mr. Adam Arkfeld, said she is her son's closest neighbor and her home is about one-fourth mile from the back of her son's house. Mrs. Arkfeld spoke favorably about her son's proposal for a bed and breakfast and she supported hir^. Mrs. Sonya May said she was the newest property owner on Mr. Adam Arkfeld's property. She had no problems with the proposed conditional use permit. Mrs. Margo Johnson said she was the property owner of the first lot sold in this subdivision. She said she and her husband purchased this property because it was picturesque and still a part of the old Frederick County. Mrs. Johnson said the home owners have put hundreds of dollars into in Sister Chipmunk Lane. She said when Mr. Arkfeld, who does not have to provide money to help maintain the road, started construction of his home, heavy construction equipment destroyed the lane and it now has deep ruts, mud puddles, and the gravel is strewn into the grass areas. Mrs. Johnson asked why Mr. Arkfeld could not use his other access for the bed and breakfast_ No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Commissioner Kerr asked the applicant why he wished to use Sister Chipmunk Lane as the access to his proposed bed and breakfast as opposed to his other access. Commissioner Kerr also asked the applicant about the comments made that he had not contributed financially towards road maintenance. Mr. Arkfeld replied the road was deeded to him without restriction for access to his house site before the subdivision was created. He said the other access is his mother's driveway which terminates on her lot. He did not think it was reasonable for her to provide an access easement across her property and it was not possible to go around her property because of the steep topography. Mr_ Arkfeld said he is responsible for a majority of the road maintenance and he contributed towards the underground utilities; he said he paid for the entire conduit as part of the agreement. Commissioner Oates inquired about what was planned for outdoor activities, such as bicycle trails, and he questioned the applicant about any trails crossing over onto someone else's property. Mr. Arkfeld said he wanted to offer amenities and he has 58 acres to accommodate bike trails. He said he would respect his neighbors' wishes and post the property, if that was their desire. Mr. Arkfeld said the yoga studio is an amenity for guests and would be a weekend retreat; he said he does not plan to have regular public yoga classes. Commissioner Oates said he would like to review a copy of the road maintenance agreement before voting on this CUP. Commission members were presented with a copy of the deed. Commissioner Oates read from Page 531, Item 22, "Adam Arkfeld, owner of adjacent 73.507 acres is responsible for the maintenance, repair, and snow removal of subdivision road. Thereafter, the owner of each dwelling in the subdivision shall be responsible for 20% of the cost of such maintenance, repair, and snow removal payable annually in the amount of $200.00 and Adam Arkfeld shall be responsible for the balance." Commissioner Oates said each person coming in is responsible for 20%; he asked Mr. Arkfeld if there were more than five lots on the road besides his. It was Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September 3, 2008 Page 2329 WN determined there were four lots within the subdivision his sister created, plus Mr. Arkfeld's house, plus the newest homeowners, the Mays, for a total of six lots. Commissioner Oates commented that Mr. Arkfeld will not be financially responsible for road maintenance once five lots are established and Mr_ Arkfeld will be having commercial traffic on the road. Commissioner Oates asked Mr. Arkfeld how much money he contributed last year to the road maintenance and Mr. Arkfeld replied that he didn't place any additional gravel because he wanted to wait until all of the construction traffic was done. C::nmissioner Oates asked Mr. Arkfeld who determines when the road needs repaired and what each individual's share will be. Commissioner Oates said he would be more comfortable if there was a road agreement between all of the property owners which clearly defines all of these issues because the neighbors are upset over this issue. Commission members questioned whether the road maintenance issue was referred to within the property deed or the subdivision covenants. Mr. Cheran said that covenants and deeds are beyond the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission. Commissioners recognized the opposition voiced by the neighbors. Commissioner Oates thought an effort should be made by the applicant to talk with his neighbors and an attempt made to work out an agreement on maintaining the road. Commissioner Oates made a motion to table the application for 45 days. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Manuel and was passed by a majority vote. BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby table Conditional Use Permit 410-08 of Adam Arkfeld for a Cottage Occupation for a Motel/ Bed & Breakfast at 250 Sister Chipmunk Lane for 45 days to allow time for the applicant to meet with the property owners along Sister Chipmunk Lane in an attempt to work out an agreement on road maintenance. The majority vote was: YES (TO TABLE): Unger, Watt, Ambrogi, Manuel, Ruckman, Oates, Kriz, Mohn NO: Wilmot, Thomas, Kerr (Note: Commissioners Ours and Triplett were absent from the meeting.) COMMISSION DISCUSSION TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS (TIA) STANDARDS Deputy Director -Transportation, John A. Bishop, presented a draft of the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Standards under development by the staff and the Transportation Committee. Mr. Bishop said the purpose of the standards is to ensure the County continues to have TIAs submitted when necessary and not just when required by VDOT's new Chapter 527 regulations. In addition, he said they are also meant to ensure the quality and completeness of the analysis and for the analysis to be presented in the most readable manner possible. Mr. Bishop noted that the ultimate desire is for a product that does not need to be debated at the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors level, allowing the focus to be on the impacts as opposed to the study. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September 3, 2008 Page 2330 -10 - Commissioner Thomas said he would like to see language included stating that if the majority or a significant amount of the traffic is from vehicles in excess of two axels, (18 -wheelers), and if there is a storage facility or an industrial facility that's generating 1,000 trucks a day, it would not meet the minimum requirement, but a lower minimum should be set; and further state that if more than half or more than 500 trips are generated per day by vehicles with more than two axels, then a TIA is required, so an analysis and traffic impact is presented. He said an 18 -wheeler is equivalent to three to four cars and will generate considerable congestion. Commissioner Oates added a comment from the development community which was that Chapter 527 is the top limit which the State will require; and the development communitywas looking for a lower limit, once you reach this threshold or lower, a TIA won't be required_ However, the way the draft standards are written, it was basically Mr. Bishop's prevue and he can require it for anything at any time and there is no lower exception_ The development community said if a certain amount of impact is not created, then they will not be required to do a TIA because they are small enough. Let the middle point be where Mr. Bishop could grant a waiver. Commissioner Oates said that even a small TIA will cost about $10,000-$15,000. Commissioner Thomas hoped that once the traffic impact analysis standards were in place, there would be enough specificity so it not only meets the minimum required by the State, but for the County as well. He favored establishing a system whereby if application packages are received with TIAs that do not meet the County's minimum standards, they are removed from the agenda and postponed, even if the application has already been advertised. Mr. Bishop's preference was that meeting the criteria was a part of the completeness of the application; if the criteria are not met, then the application is not complete. Commissioner Oates asked about the status of the traffic impact model that was being worked on over the summer. Mr. Bishop expected a meeting of the Development Impact Model Oversight Committee within the next month. Commissioner Oates asked if it was reasonable to expect it to be brought before the Commission as a public hearing before the end of the year. Mr. Bishop believed the staff would be open to that time frame_ OTHER RED HAWK ESTATES POSTPONEMENT Chairman Wilmot announced that representatives for Red Hawk Estates have requested a postponement of their September 17, 2008 return to the Planning Commission until November 19,_ 2008. Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas, seconded by Commissioner Kriz, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to postpone consideration of Red Hawk Estates until November 19, 2008. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of September 3, 2008 Page 2331 ADJOURNMENT vote. -11 - There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. by a unanimous Respectfully submitted, June M. Wilmot, Chairman Eric R Lawrence, Secretary Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2332 Minutes of September 3, 2008 MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on September 17, 2008. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Member at Large; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Gregory S. Kerr, Red Bud District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; Richard Ruckman, Stonewall District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District, Lawrence R Ambrogi, Shawnee District; H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District, Roderick Williams, Legal Counsel; and Gary Lofton, Board of Supervisors Liaison. ABSENT: Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Opequon District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; and Cordell Watt, Back Creek District STAFF PRESENT: Eric R Lawrence, Planning Director; Mark R Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director; 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 Manuel and seconded by Cormnissioner Ours, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the agenda for the September 17, 2008 meeting. COMMITTEE REPORTS Sanitation Authority (SA) — 09/16/08 Mtg. Commissioner Unger reported that the SA hosted a speaker who talked about future water supplies for Frederick County. Commissioner Unger said Frederick County presently obtains water from quarries in Clearbrook and Stephens City, and both of those quarries are producing about 2.5 mgd. Frederick County also gets about 2.0 mgd from the City of Winchester when needed. He said this should peak in the Year 2010 and another water source will probably be needed. Commissioner Unger said they mentioned two quarries towards Strausburg and both have a little over a billion gallons of water each. He said they are thinking about possibly pumping out water from one of these quarries into the Stephens City quarry, to improve the Stephens City water source. Commissioner Unger said this is in the planning stage at this point in time. He said the City of Winchester will probably not be the best source of future water because of their own demands. Predenck county Planning Commission Page 2333 Minutes of September 17, 2008 invownt FT -2 - Route 11 North Working Group — 09/05/08 Mtg. Commissioner Mohn reported that the Route I 1 North Working Group met with representatives of the F CSA (Frederick County Sanitation Authority) to talk about infrastructure issues involving the Route I I North corridor. Commissioner Mohn said there was good discussion with emphasis on capacities, expectations for development, and infrastructure needs_ Commissioner Mohn said a follow-up meeting is scheduled for September 26 at 9:00 a.m. Winchester Planning Commission (WPC) — 09/16/08 Mtg. Commissioner Ours reported the WPC approved a request of Fort Loudoun Properties for a conditional use permit for the conversion of ground floor non-residential commercial use to residential use at 26A Wolf Street in the Historic District. He said the WPC also granted administrative approval authority to the Islamic Society of Winchester to establish a mosque at 601 Woodstock Lane in Winchester. Natural Resources Committee - 09/16/08 Mtg. Chairman Wilmot reported the Natural Resources Committee has been making progress on the work they are conducting. She said this committee should be reporting back to the Commission with the results of their work within a month or so, CITIZEN COMMENTS Chairman Wilmot called for public comments on any subject not on the Commission's agenda for this evening. No one came forward to speak. PUBLIC HEARING Rezoning Application #07-08 of the Unger Property, submitted by Painter -Lewis, PLC, to rezone .49 acres from the 132(Business General) District to the 132(Business General) District with proffers and 8.5 acres from the RP (Residential Performance) District to the B2 District, with proffers, for commercial use. The properties are located on North Frederick Pike (Route 522), between Westminster -Canterbury Drive and Hickory Lane. The properties are further identified with P.I.N. 53A -A-5 and 53A -A-6 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Approval with Proffers Frederick County planning Commission Page 2334 Minutes of September 17, 2008 9 Wnm Ural -3 - Senior Planner, Candice E_ Perkins, reported that the Unger property rezoning request is an application to rezone two parcels of land, totaling 1.34 acres, from the RP and B2 Districts to B2 District with proffers to accommodate a proposed pharmacy use. Ms. Perkins said the properties are within the limits of the SWSA (Sewer and Water Service Area) and the Eastern Frederick County Long -Range Land Use Plan. She said the Long -Range Land Use Plan shows this area with a commercial land use designation and therefore, the applicant's request for a B2 Zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Ms. Perkins said the GllP (Generalized Development Plan) shows a pharmacy use to be developed on four parcels of laud_ She said the subject site is currently accessible via North Frederick Pike, Route 522; however, the GDP shows the ultimate access for the site to be one entrance on Westminster -Canterbury Drive (Rt. 1318) and a right -in, right -out on North Frederick Pike (Rt. 522). She said the new entrance on Route 522 will be a shared entrance with the adjacent existing Continental Restaurant property. The proffers for the rezoning account for the closure of the existing entrances on the Continental Restaurant property and the construction of a new shared right -in, right -out entrance on Route 522, as well as the construction of a new right -out on the Continental Restaurant site, as shown on the GDP. Ms. Perkins stated that the proffers and GDP also account for the construction of a sidewalk along Westminster -Canterbury Drive and a ten -foot bicycle/pedestrian path along Route 522. She said the application also accounts for the closure of the crossover on Route 522 and Hickory Lane, as well as the construction of a left -turn lane at the second crossover to the south of the site on Route 522. Ms. Perkins continued, stating that the entrance -spacing waiver referred to in the application is not now needed because the shared entrance being proposed and the closure of the existing entrances on the Continental site negate the need for the waiver_ Mr. John Lewis with Painter -Lewis, P.L.C. was representing the property owner, Frances A. Unger, in this rezoning request. Mr. Levis said they have worked closely with VDCT and the Planning Staff and a number of transportation improvements are planned for Route 522, including the closure of three entrances and the creation of a shared entrance for the Continental Restaurant and the CVS Pharmacy. Mr. Lewis said he has also met with members of Westbury Commons and endeavored to address their concerns through the site plan. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Gerald Wrenn, Jr., adjoining property owner at 104 Hickory Lane, had several concerns, including: storm water run-off during construction, parking -lot lighting overflowing onto his property; possible use of barriers to separate the pharmacy business from his yard; and limits to the amount of noise. Mr. Stewart Butler, the developer of Westbury Commons, said that Westbury Commons borders the south side of the proposed rezoning site and is a community of 11 age -restricted, single-family homes approved in February of 2005. Mr. Butler said these homes are all -brick, one-story and priced from $400,000. He said the proposed rezoning and the placement of a CVS Pharmacy on the adjoining property represents a significant change from the existing use and if not carefully planned, could adversely impact the homes in Westbury Commons. Mr. Butler asked the Commission to look carefuIl_y at the details of the rezoning and to work to protect the property values and quality of life of the surrounding homeowners. Mr. Butler preferred to see the facility designed to standards above the minimum required and to address the concerns of the existing property owners. Mr. Butler requested that the following design items be addressed: 1) request for the building to be moved forward towards Route 522 by 30-40 feet, increasing the buffer with the single-family homes; 2) request for the first -floor building elevation be lowered to lessen -its visual impact; 3) request for the building to be constructed with an all -brick exterior to improve the visual quality for adjacent single-family homes; 4) request for dumpster location to be moved away from, Westminster - Canterbury Drive to a less -visible location; 5) request for the proposed entrance on Westminster -Canterbury Drive be moved further north and still meet the intersection distance requirements; 6) request for specific hours of operation; 7) request that exterior lighting will not adversely impact adjacent residential uses; and, 8) request rreclenck County Planning Commissionn Page 2335 Minutes of September 17, 2008 lj�Ulj that the fence buffer required by zoning ordinance be moved away from the property line with Westbury Commons and located adjacent to the proposed parking lot; placing the fence buffer at a higher elevation will provide a more effective visual buffer. Mrs. Francis Unger, the property owner, believed the pharmacy use will be an asset to Frederick County and she asked the Cor„mission for a positive recommendation for the rezoning to take place. Mrs. Francis Unger -Ring, the daughter of Francis Unger, said her mother has owned the Sunnyside property over 50 years. Mrs. Unger -Ring said her mother feels it is time to sell the property and she wanted the best for her mother. She said she would like the Commission to vote in favor of the rezoning. Mr. Jeff Butler, with Fountain Homes, said Fountain Homes has built four of the homes in Westbury Commons, with the fifth home to be built soon. Mr. Butler wanted to offer the support of Fountain Homes in this rezoning application for a variety of reasons. He believed the pharmacy was a good use for the location because Westbury Commons was an age -restricted 55 -plus community and the ability to walk down the sidewalk to the pharmacy was an advantage for those residents. Additionally, while CVS Pharmacy is predominantly a pharmacy, the products they carry go beyond pharmaceuticals. He said residents would not have to cross over Route 522 for everyday items. Commissioner Triplett said he had an email from Mr. R. L. Place, 109 Hickory Lane, expressing his concerns and opposition to the proposed rezoning application. Commissioner Triplett called for the email letter be placed in the official record. No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Mr. John Lewis returned to the podium to address some of the concerns expressed by the public, as follows: 1) an erosion and sediment control plan has been submitted with the Department of Public Works and once approved, will adequately protect the neighbors; 2) a thorough illumination plan has been submitted and demonstrates there will be no light cast beyond the property line; 3) a fence will be placed around all of the common property between B2 and the residential; the fence line has been moved higher up the slope about eight feet; plant varieties have been changed to afford a better screen along the property line; 4) the location of the building is where it needs to be as far as engineering because of access, elevation, and buffers; 5) the dumpster is enclosed within an eight -foot masonry structure which matches the building; for functioning of the site, the dumpster cannot be moved; 6) the entrance location cannot be moved closer to the intersection because a significant amount of parking will be lost and the ability of delivery trucks to maneuver will also be lost; 7) the hours of operation are typically 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. or 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.; at closing, the lights are turned off in the parking lot; CVS Pharmacy would prefer to have the option available to operate 24 hours, if there is a demand for services. Connnissioner Oates asked the applicant to show the direction of storm water runoff. Mr. Lewis showed the direction of water runoff and he added that they plan to construct a storm water management pond to collect all of the water and pipe the water down to Route 522, so the water will no longer flow in the direction of adjoining residential properties. Commissioner Oates inquired about a brick exterior for the entire building. Mr. Lewis replied that CVS prefers to have a masonry structure with drivit accents, similar to the CVS Pharmacy on Berryville Avenue. Commissioner Oates wanted to state for the record that he preferred to have this be an all - masonry building and dumpster when this application is forwarded to the Board of Supervisors, and he wanted to have this recommendation considered by the Board. In addition, he asked for the memorandum for entrance closure to be signed and completed before this application goes to the Board of Supervisors. With the inclusion Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2336 MWA Minutes of September 17, 2008 VT -5 - of these two items, Commissioner Oates made a motion to recommend approval of Rezoning Application 407-08 of the Unger Property. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ruckman and unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Rezoning Application #07-08 of the Unger Property, submitted by Painter -Lewis, PLC, to rezone .49 acres from the B2 (Business General) District to the 132 (Business General) District with proffers and 8.5 acres from the RP (Residential Performance) District to the 132 District, with proffers, for commercial use. This positive recommendation is sent forward with the stipulation of an all -brick building exterior and an all -brick dumpster enclosure and the stipulation that the memorandum for the entrance closure at the Continental Restaurant needs to be signed by all parties before this application proceeds to the Board of Supervisors. (Note: Commissioners Thomas, Kriz, and Watt were absent from the meeting.) PUBLIC MEETING Rezoning 405-08 of BPG Properties, Ltd./ I-81 Distribution Center, submitted by BPG Properties, Ltd., to rezone 59 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B3 (Business Industrial Transition) District, with proffers, for office and warehouse use. The properties are located approximately 0.61 miles north of the Route 11 intersection with Cedar Hill (Rt. 671), bounded on the west by I-81, and on the east by Martinsburg Pike (Rt. 11). The property is further identified by P.I.N.s 33-A-109 and 33-A-110 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. (Tabled for 45 days at the August 6, 2008 PC imeeting.) Action — Recommended Approval with Proffers Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that this rezoning application was tabled for 45 days at the Planning Commission's August 6, 2008 meeting because revised proffers were received just prior to the meeting and were not able to be included within the agenda packet. Mr. Ruddy said the latest revision to the proffer statement is dated August 25, 2008 and the applicant has attempted to address issues identified in the staff report, those items identified by the County's legal counsel, and those issues identified by the Planning Commission at their August 6, 2008 meeting. He proceeded to summarize the changes in the latest revision of the proffer statement, as follows: 1) Additional uses have been proffered out, including food and grocery stores, hardware and lumber stores, and garden supply and retail nurseries; it was recognized that such uses could generate higher vehicle trip counts than originally anticipated. 2) Additional landscape plantings provided along the I-81 frontage; provision of a split -rail fence along the frontage of the property on Route 11. 3) A commitment for no more than one entrance to the site; however, provisions have been made for the closure of this entrance in favor of a future entrance aligned with Branson Springs Road; a contribution for up to 50 percent of the cost of this entrance and signalization, up to an amount not to exceed $125,000, has been made. 4) An increase in the monetary contribution by $200,000, resulting in a total of $550,000 from the previous $350,000, for transportation improvements in the Route 11 North corridor. Mr. Ruddy pointed out this contribution is made in attempt to address the transportation improvements in this area, not a commitment to construct any transportation improvements. Mr. John Foote, representing BPG Properties, Ltd., presented a recently -produced handout for the Planning Commission showing the industrial trip generation calculations. Mr. Foote said PHR&A conducted 48-hour traffic counts during weekdays at six separate industrial sites in Virginia, `Fest Virginia, and Pennsylvania. He said the results were tabulated to show the ADT (Average Daily Trips) and am/pm peak -hour traffic volumes, as well as the daily and peak hour truck trips associated with each site. The table also shows the total peak hour and daily trips, as well as the peak hour and daily truck trips estimated for the proposed I-81 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2337 Minutes of September 17, 2008 9 IM. Distribution Center. Mr. Foote said the table indicates that with respect to daily trips, ITE numbers are significantly higher in terms of the actual counts at these facilities; however, the am/pm peak truck trips are actually consistent with the other peak truck trip generation based on actual counts. He said this validates the ITE numbers for the am/pm peak truck trips. Mr. Foote said the truck generation from this facility within the am/pm peak hours is si_rnply not enough to be as great a concern as what eve -.yo -,7e may have intuitively assumed. Mr. Daniel L. Dilella, Jr., representing BPG Properties, Ltd., stated there is no identified user for this site, however, the use would be within the general range of the facilities listed. It was noted that the transportation impact modeling was done with ITE numbers. Referring to Proffer 3.7, which refers to a dedicated easement with a ten -foot wide asphalt trail, Commissioner Oates asked if the applicant would not only designate this as an access easement, but also a drainage and grading easement as well, in the event VDOT would need to install storm sewer through there. Commissioner Oates also referred to Proffer 3.4 and commented that it appears the full cost of closing the initial entrance would be bonne by the applicant and this cost would not come out ofthe $125,000. Commissioner Oates said the language does not specifically state, however, whether other work was taking place solely within VDOT's right-of-way or if the $125,000 was also going to be used to build the new driveway on the applicant's personal property from the existing parking area over to the new entrance. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments; however, no one came forward to speak. Commissioner Unger asked about the contribution to Fire and Rescue. It was noted that the applicant was proffering a $10,000 contribution to Fire and Rescue. Commissioner Ruckman asked for the Deputy Director -Transportation, Mr. John Bishop, to come forward to explain the background LOS and how it relates to the traffic generated by this project. Conunissioner Ruckman also inquired if any transportation improvement estimates had been conducted to determine the sufficiency of the amount proffered by the applicant. Mr. Bishop did not believe the LOS would deteriorate to the point where the use triggers new letter grades of LOS. He said the applicant conducted additional analysis which used today's existing LOS, they added their build -out traffic on top of it, and then projected a new LOS. Mr. Bishop said the amount of money proffered is much improved; however, specific improvements for the $550,000 have not been determined at this point. Mr. Bishop talked about the money possibly going towards other projects the County has begun to accumulate funds for, such as the Brucetown Road improvements. Commissioner Oates commented that although he thought B3 zoning was appropriate at this location, he didn't thunk distribution use belonged in a B3 District. He said if the use goes towards distribution, it would be better with MI or M2 Zoning. Commissioner Oates did not think it was fair to make one applicant pay for all the improvements on Route 11 North. He said each user needs to pay their share and that is the only way anything is going to be built there. Commissioner Oates next made a motion to recommend approval of the rezoning with additional language under Proffer 3.7 designating not only an access easement with a ten -foot wide asphalt trail, but a "drainage and grading easement 'as well in the event VDOT would need to install future road improvements; and, additional language under Proffer 3.4 providing further clarification on where the $125,000 contribution will be spent. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ruckman and unanimously passed. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2338 Minutes of September 17, 2008 Q nA V T -7 - BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Rezoning 405-08 of BPG Properties, Ltd./ I-81 Distribution Center, submitted by BPG Properties, Ltd., to rezone 59 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B3 (Business Industrial Transition) District, with proffers, for office and warehouse use with additional language under Proffer 3.7 designating not only an access easement with a ten -foot wide asphalt trail, but a "drainage and grading easement" as well, in the event VDOT would need to install future road improvements; and, additional language under Proffer 3.4 providing further clarification that the $125,000 contribution will be spent within VDOT's right-of-way and not for the new driveway on the applicant's property. (Note: Commissioners Thomas, Kriz, and Watt were absent from the meeting.) COMMISSION DISCUSSION Discussion of a proposed ordinance amendment for a new Office -Manufacturing Park District. This proposed ordinance amendment would introduce a new zoning district to implement the mixed use industrial/ office land use classification in the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Senior Planner Candice E. Perkins reported that staff has been working on a new zoning district which is intended to implement the Route 277 Land Use Plan adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Ms. Perkins said the new district would Hi nplement the mixed-use industrial/office land use classification of the Comprehensive Policy Plan and would be referred to as the OM (Office Manufacturing) Park District. She said the OM Park District is designed to provide areas for research and development centers, office parks, and minimal impact industrial and assembly uses. She said while the catalyst for this district was the identified land use in the Route 277 Study, it has the potential to be applied in other areas designated for industrial uses. Ms. Perkins said the NAICS Work Group (a subcommittee of the DRRS) reviewed the draft ordinance on three occasions and endorsed the ordinance on May 13, 2008. She said the DRRS had minor text changes and requested comments from the Industrial Parks Association (IPA); they ultimately suggested that the ordinance be sent to the Planning Commission for discussion. Ms. Perkins noted that changes to the Accessory Use/ Secondary Use Regulations were also included with this new OM Park Zoning District. Commissioner Ruckman commented that under the secondary uses, commercial banks are listed and he questioned how a commercial bank would be a secondary use. Ms. Perkins explained the situation where a technical campus might possibly have a bank inside their facilities for their employees. There was some discussion on the FAR (floor area ratios) to be incorporated within the amendments. Chairman Wilmot believed the new district and amendments had much potential for creating an environment for some of the business prospects everyone would like to see come into the County. She raised a concern over three SIC Codes listed, the aircraft and parts manufacturing, the rubber and miscellaneous plastics manufacturing, and fabricated metals. Chairman Wilmot thought those three are heavier uses than she suspected were intended for the vision of the new office -manufacturing park. Commission members spoke favorably about the proposed new zoning district and proposed amendments and expressed their support. Frederick County Planning Commission n Page 2339 Minutes of September 17, 2008 in Discussion of a proposed ordinance amendment regarding buffering requirements adjacent to rail road lines. This proposed ordinance amendment consists of revisions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance pertaining to buffer and screening requirements adjacent to rail road lines. Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported that the staff has been directed to prepare a revision to the zoning ordinance pertaining to zoning district buffer requirements for properties adjacent to rail road right- of-ways. Ms. Perkins said the zoning ordinance requires zoning district buffers to be provided when property is developed adjacent to other uses or other zoning districts. She said this section of the ordinance does not, however, address buffering requirements when the zoning districts are separated by a rail road line. Ms_ Perkins read the proposed amendment for the Commission. Commissioner Mohn commented that staff had mentioned rail road "right-of-way" and the language proposed indicates rail road "line." Ms. Perkins replied that during discussion, it was determined that rail road "right-of-way" would be the preferred terminology, so that change will be made in the text. Commission members spoke favorably about the proposed new zoning district and proposed amendments and expressed their support. Discussion of a proposed ordinance amendment regarding age -restricted, multi -family housing. This proposed ordinance amendment consists of revisions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Section 165-58, RP (Residential Performance) District, to add age -restricted, multi -family housing. Senior Planner, Candice E_ Perkins, reported that this proposed zoning ordinance amendment is for age -restricted, multi -family housing. Ms_ Perkins said this amendment has been extensively discussed over the past two years. She said the requested changes are based on a desire to incorporate elevators in a cost- effective manner by permitting taller buildings, with more units per building, and a higher density than allowed in the garden apartment housing type. She said the principle change to the ordinance would be the introduction of a new housing type in the RP District called age -restricted, multi -family housing and would be added to the list of allowed RP housing types. Ms. Perkins said the proposed amendment was discussed at the August 5, 2008 Joint Work Session with the Board of Supervisors and the Planning Commission. She said the main issue was the proximity of the tall buildings adjacent to existing residential structures. A waiver option to increase the height of the building was discussed and that option was presented to the DRRS (Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee). Ms. Perkins said the DRRS discussed the height issue and ultimately endorsed the ordinance with the waiver option. Ms. Perkins explained that the revised draft ordinance now states that buildings cannot exceed 40 feet in height, which is consistent with the existing Garden Apartments requirements, unless the Board of Supervisors approves a waiver to allow the height of the structure to go up to 60 feet. Commissioner Ruckman questioned whether this amendment should be also incorporated within the Building Code since it focused on the installation of elevators. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2340 Minutes of September 17, 2008 lmJ Chairman Wilmot believed there was a difference between an existing adjoining use and what is land use planned next to this development. She believed the Commission needed to keep in mind that if adjacent property is intended for more intense use, there may be an opportunity to suggest to the Board whether a waiver is possible and probable. Commissioner Unger questioned if the Board had realized the reason for seeking the 60 -foot height was intended to enable a pitched roof Commission members agreed they would much rather see a pitched roof rather than a flat roof and take the height to 60 feet. They felt it was important to achieve architectural interest in the structures. I". COMMONWEALTH TRANSPORTATION BOARD -SPONSORED BUS TOUR OF THE CITY OF WINCHESTER AND FREDERICK COUNTY Deputy Director -Transportation, John A. Bishop, reported that the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) is in the Frederick County area today and tomorrow. Mr. Bishop said the CTB took a bus tour of the City and the County and visited several sites, which are highlighted in the packet. Mr. Bishop said the packet was put together by the Planning Department, specifically with the skills of Ms. Amber Powers, Planner II. He said the information was well received and Dr. Davis requested another 100 copies of the packet for his talk with the Chamber of Commerce next Tuesday. Mr. Bishop said he attended the CTB work session held this afternoon and there were some interesting presentations. He said the most poignant was the discussion relating to the Federal Funding outlook- He utlookHe noted that local news reported that the administration and congress are reviewing stop -gap measures to help prop the Transportation Funding Bill, due to the decline in gasoline taxes. Mr. Bishop believed the measures were going through; however, this was still a stop -gap measure that doesn't fully meet the gaps and more cuts are expected. Mr. Bishop announced that the CTB's working meeting, where they will be taking action on items and receiving presentations, begins at 8:30 a.m., Thursday morning, September 18, 2008, in the student center at Shenandoah University. At approximately 9:00 a.m., they are expecting a presentation by Governor Kaine's primary financial officer with an update on the State's funding picture, which is expected to be just as grim, if not more so, than the Federal funding picture. ADJOURNMENT vote. There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. by a unanimous Respectfully submitted, June M. Wilmot, Chainnan Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2341 Minutes of September 17, 2008 6 0 L: • REZONING APPLICATION #09-08 FREDERICK BLOCK Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: October 17, 2008 Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also he 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: 11/05/08 Pending Board of Supervisors: 11/12/08 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 1.8 acres from the RP (Residential Performance) District to the B3 (Industrial Transition Business) District with proffers to accommodate materials storage associated with Frederick Block and revise the proffers associated with parcel 54A-1- I 5 to remove a proffered buffer. LOCATION: The property is located at 1086 and 1098 Martinsburg Pike (Route I 1 North). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 54A-1-18, 54A-1-19 and 54A -1-15B PROPERTY ZONING: RP (Residential Performance) and B3 (Industrial Transition) PRESENT USE: Residential and Commercial ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential and B2 (Business General) Commercial South: Zoncd B2 (Business General) District Use: Comunercial and B3 (Industrial Transition) District Frederick Block East: Zoned Ml (Industrial Light) District Use: Industrial and B3 (Industrial Transition) District Industrial West: Zoned B2 (Business General) District Use: Office/Commercial PROPOSED USES: Materials Storage associated with Frederick Block. Rezoning #09-08 — Frederick Block October 17, 2008 Page 2 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have little measurable impact on Route 11. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to the property. VDOT has no objection to this rezoning since there are no impacts to VDOT facilities. Any work performed on the State's right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Fire Marshall: Plan approval recommended. Public Works: Refer to the Site Suitability narrative and conceptual development plan: It appears that the proposed development will include the use of only a portion of lot 54A-1-18 for storage. The narrative included under site suitability should be expanded to indicate the future disposition of the single family dwellings located on lots 18 and 19. This discussion should also include abandoning existing wells and septic systems, if applicable. Refer to F. Drainage on page 5: State requirements shall be employed for nutrient removal. Any permitting associated with nutrient removal shall be processed through the Department of Conservation and Recreation. Sanitation Authority: Sewer and water are available to this site and there is adequate sewer and water capacity available. Service Authority: No comments. Health Department: Public water and sewer are to be provided per the submittal from Painter -Lewis. Parks c& Recreation: No comment 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 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identify a core battlefield within this area. Winchester Regional Airport: It is determined that the proposed development plan 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. Frederick County Public Schools: We offer no comments on this application. Frederick County Attorney: Please see attached Memorandum dated October 7, 200& from Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney. Rezoning #09-08 — Frederick Block October 17, 2008 Page 3 Planning Department: Please see attached letter dated September 19, 2008 from Candice K Perkins, Senior Planner. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) zoning maps depict parcels 54A-1-18 and 54A-1-19 as zoned R-1. The zoning changed to RP (Residential General) District on September 28, 1983 when the RI, R2, R3, and R6 zoning districts were reclassified. For parcel 54A -1-15A, the original Frederick County (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) zoning maps depict the site as zoned R -l. In1980, parcel 54A -1-15B was changed fromRI to B2. In 2003, the County considered rezoning application #01-03, a request to rezone the subject property (and multiple other properties) from the B2 (Business General), to the B2 (Business General) and B3 (Industrial Transition) Districts. In 2005, the County approved rezoning #06- 05 for a proffer revision for this property. 2) Comprehensive Policy Plan The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as the community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key components of community life. The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County.. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 1-1] Land Use The subject properties are within the limits of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Sewer and Water Service Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of planned commercial, and industrial development will occur. The properties are within the limits of the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The plan shows this area with a commercial and industrial land use designation. The applicant is requesting a rezoning to the B3 (Industrial Transition) Zoning District and, therefore, this request is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Site Access The existing Frederick Block site is accessed via two entrances on Martinsburg Pike (Route 11). - - Parcels 54A-1-18 and 54A-1-19 are currently utilized for residential purposes and are accessed via one shared driveway off of Martinsburg Pike. With this rezoning the applicant has proffered that only the existing residential structures will be permitted to utilize the existing entrance on Martinsburg Pike. In the event that these structures are removed and the two parcels are utilized for storage of materials, the site will be accessed via the existing Frederick Block entrance on Martinsburg located on parcel 54A -1-15B. Rezoning 409-08 — Frederick Block October 17, 2008 Page 4 3) Site Suitability/Environment No flood plains, lakes or ponds, wetlands, sinkholes, steep slopes, or other environmental features have been identified. The General Soil Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick CoupVir inia indicates that the soils comprising the subject parcel fall under the Fredgick-Poi2limento Loams soil association 14B . These soil types are gently to strongly sloping, well -drained, and deep. 4) Proffer Statement - Dated September 22,2008; Revised October 10, 2008 and October 14, 2008 1. Generalized Develo ment Plan The use and development of the property shall be in conformance with the Generalized Development Plan. 2. Parcel Usage • The use of parcels 54A-1-18 and 54A-1-19 is limited to the storage of materials (STC 5211) associated with the operations of Frederick Block. Any changes in use will require a new rezoning that addresses all impacts. Lot Consolidation • A boundary line adjustment will be submitted within 90 days of approval for parcel 54A-1-19 to combine the area to be used for outdoor storage into parcel 54A -1-15B. 4. Zoning Buffers • The existing residential buffers shall remain on the property until the site will be used for the storage of materials. Once structures are no longer utilized for residential purposes, all outdoor screening elements and buffers will be constructed. • The existing vegetation or a single row of evergreen trees will be installed along the adjacent B3 property and M 1 /railroad property to provide screening for the storage area. • The 50 foot buffer located on parcel 54A -1-15B will be eliminated. Existing vegetation along Martinsburg Pike shall be preserved or the existing buffer along Martinsburg Pike will be continued as shown on the GDP. Entrance • the existing dwellings on parcels 54A-1- The applicant has proffered that while 18 and 54A-1-19 are retained, they will utilize the existing shared driveway and this driveway will not be used for commercial operations. Rezoning #09-08 — Frederick Block October 17, 2008 Page 5 STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 11/05/08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: This is an application to rezone two parcels totaling 1.80 acres from the RP (Residential Performance) District to the B2 District with proffers to accommodate material storage associated with the existing Frederick Block use and to revise the proffers associated with parcel 54A -1-15B to modify the previously proffered buffer. The land use proposed in this application is consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan, as described in the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. A recommendation by the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors concerning this rezoning application would be appropriate The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission. MEMORANDUM TO: Candice E. Perkins, AICP Senior Planner FROM: Roderick B. Williams County Attorney DATE: October 7, 2008 COUNTY OF FREDERICK Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 540/722-8383 Fax 540/667-0370 E-mail: rwillia@co.frederick.va.us RE: Frederick Block/Slaughter Properties, L.L.C. — Proffer Statement Review I have reviewed the above -referenced proposed Proffer Statement. 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: Introductory paragraph — In the fourth line, the reference to Parcel Number 54-1-19 should be to Parcel Number 54A-1-19. With respect to the final sentence, concerning buffering, my comments appear below, in conjunction with Proffers 4 and 5. Proffer 1 — For clarity, the reference to "a Generalized Development Plan (GDP)" should be to "the Generalized Development Plan (GDP)". Proffer 2 — Again, the reference to Parcel Number 54-1-19 should be to Parcel Number 54A-1-19. Proffer 4 — The adjacent property to the north of the subject properties (Parcel Number 54A-1-20) is zoned RP. As well, the adjacent property to the west (Parcel Number 54A-1-4) is zoned RP. The proffer appears to be seeking to use the subject properties as their own buffer between the proposed B3 zoning of the subject properties and the RP zoning of adjacent properties. County Code § 165-37(D), however, requires a Category C buffer between property 107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601 Candice E. Perkins, Alm P October 7, 2008 Page 2 to be zoned B3 and property zoned RP. Among other things, Category C buffering at a minimum requires an inactive buffer of 75 feet, which the proffer and the GDP do not currently provide for. Therefore, the proffer proposes a condition that is less restrictive than the requested zoning requires. Furthermore, no basis appears to exist for an existing use, on a property to be rezoned, being used to satisfy buffering requirements for a rezoning of that property, initiated by the property's owner, in particular when such existing use would conflict with a requirement for an inactive buffer. Proffer 5 — The proffer proposes "to preserve existing vegetation and/or install a single row of evergreen trees along the adjacent B3 property and MI/railroad property to provide screening", and the GDP indicates "area to be screened" and has a circled number 5 pointing to that notation, but the proffer neither refers to the notation nor to the number on the GDP. Furthermore, a rezoning and any proffers associated with it do not bind other properties, even if they are presently under common ownership. 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. September 19, 2008 Mr. John Lewis Painter -Lewis, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, Virginia 22601 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development RE: Proposed Rezoning of Frederick Block Property Identification Numbers (PINS): 54A-1-18 & 54A-1-19 Dear John: 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 I have had the opportunity to review the draft rezoning application for Frederick Block. This application seeks to rezone two parcels totaling 1.80 acres from the RP (Residential Performance) to the B2 (Business General) District. Staffs review comments are listed below for your consideration. 1. Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The site is within the limits of the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The plan shows the area where this site is located with commercial and industrial designations. The proposed B3 Zoning is generally consistent with the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan as it relates to this area. 2. Proffer 2. Parcel 2 limits the use of the parcels to outdoor storage; however, the intent is to leave the existing structures on the site. The proffer fails to address the use of the existing residential structures. This proffer could also be expanded to state that any future rezoning will need to address transportation and all other needs. �e-e.££n r. � Arl.£f r T ];—;+ the future use of a portion. of parcel 18 and all of parcel 19 to i . offl-s . i i o -w - residential uses; therefore, if the property owner wishes to utilize the property for outdoor storage in the future, a new rezoning would be required. The proffer could be revised to state that should the existing residences be removed and the site used for outdoor storage, the Route 11 buffer will be provided. The Zoning District Buffer that would be required to screen the adjacent residential property would be implemented with a site plan and, therefore, a proffer to that effect would not be needed. 4. Entrances. A proffer should be provided that states no commercial entrances shall be permitted on Martinsburg Pike for the two parcels and that the two existing residential driveways shall only serve the existing residential structures. 5. Martinsburg Pike Buffer. The existing buffer along Martinsburg Pike should be extended along the 50 feet where the existing wooded buffer is being eliminated. 6. Recorded Plat. Provide a recorded plat for lot 19. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Page 2 Mr. John Lewis RE: Proposed Rezoning of Frederick Block September 19, 2008 7. Agency Comments. Please provide appropriate agency comments from the following agencies: Historic Resources Advisory Board, Virginia Department of Transportation, Frederick County Department of Public Works, Frederick County Fire Marshall, Frederick County Department of Parks and Recreation, Frederick County Sanitation Authority, Frederick -Winchester Health Department, the local Fire and Rescue Company and the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority. The proposed proffers have been forwarded by staff to the Frederick County Attorney. Once attorney comments are received by the Planning Department, they will be forwarded to your office. Attorney comments are required for acceptance of the rezoning application. 8. Special Limited Power of Attorney. Provide a Power of Attorney for the property owners. 9. Fees. The fee for this application includes a $5,000.00 base fee plus $100.00 per acre, and a $50.00 public hearing sign fee. This is based on fees as of April 28, 2008. Fees may change. All of the above comments and reviewing agency comments should be appropriately addressed before staff can accept this rezoning application. Please feel free to contact me with questions ( regarding this application. Sincerely, Candice E. Perkins, AICP Senior Planner CEP/bad 0 125 250 500 Feet Frederick Block Rezoning REZ # 09 - 08 PIN: 54A -1 -18,54A -1 -19,54A -1-15B 9REZ09FrededckBlnck Zoning M2 (industrial. General District) Builtlings08_ .� BI(Business, Neighborhood District) 40MHI (Mobile Homc Community District) OUrban Dcecioprnm Arca '. 82 (Business. General Distrist) 4W MS (Medical Support District) nywf SWSA B3 (Business. Industrial T—innon District) lam: R4 tResidential Planned Cammnni7y Distric) > EM (Estrmnc Manuracmring Distrix) RS (Residential Recreational Comminin, District) ( HE (Higher Education Dismen RA (Rural Area District) Q5 MI (industrial, Light District) RP(Rcsidcntial Pedia-ante District) = Streets Topography(5'interval) FREDERICK BLOCK SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, L.L.C. Route 11 North/Martinsburg Pike Proffer Statement Rezoning #: Property: 1.80 acres PARCEL ID's: 54A-1-18, 54A-1-19, 54A -1-15B Applicant: Slaughter Properties, L.L.C. 1040 Martinsburg Pike Winchester, VA 22602 Project Name: Frederick Block Route 11 North — Martinsburg Pike Original Date of Proffers: August 13, 2008 Revision Date(s): September 22, 2008 October 10, 2008 October 14, 2008 Prepared by: PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, VA 22601 Tel.: (540) 662-5792 email: office@painterlewis.com Job Number: 0804007 PROFFER STATEMEN ! PARCEL ID PARCEL ID's: 54A -1 -18,54A -1 -19,54A -1-15B Pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, the undersigned proffers that in the event that the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County shall approve Rezoning Application # for the rezoning of parcels TM#54A-1-18 and TM#54A-1-19 from RP to B3, 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. PROFFERS 1.) Generalized Development Plan The applicant agrees to proffer the Generalized Development Plan (GDP) dated 10/14/08, identified as "Generalized Development Plan, Frederick Block Properties", and which is attached to the Proffer Statement, for the purpose of identifying the general configuration of the proposed commercial development, the location of proposed material storage areas, the location of existing residential uses, and the location of proposed screening along TM#54-A-82 and the existing railroad. Please refer to the attached drawing named "GDP". 2.) Parcel Usage The applicant agrees to limit any new use of TM#s 54A-1-18 and 54A-1-19 to that of storage (SIC 5211) for materials associated with the operations of Frederick Block. Any future changes in use will address the impacts associated with these changes and shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. 3.) Lot Consolidation The applicant agrees to prepare and submit a boundary line adjustment to the Frederick County Planning Department within 90 days of rezoning approval. The boundary line adjustment shall consolidate a portion of TM#54A-1-18 into TM#54A-1-15B to create a larger primary parcel for the operations of Frederick Block. 4.) Zoning Buffers A. The applicant aggress, during the near term, to maintain the existing dwellings on TM#54A-1-18 and TM#54A-1-19 for residential use in order to provide a distance buffer and visual screening for adjacent residential properties and the Route 11, Martinsburg Pike, right of way. In the event that the existing dwellings are no longer used for residential purposes, and that the lots are then used for outdoor storage, then the applicant will comply with all buffer and screening requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. B. The applicant agrees to presewe existing vegetation and/or install a single row of evergreen trees along the adjacent B3 property and M1/railroad property to page 2 PROFFER STATEMEN PARCEL ID PARCEL ID's: 54A -1 -18,54A -1 -19,54A -1-15B provide screening of the proposed outdoor storage areas. The screening will be completed prior to the use of the property for materials storage. C. The 50' buffer, previously proffered in Rezoning Application #01-03 and approved by Frederick County Board of Supervisors will be eliminated. The applicant agrees to preserve existing vegetation and/or extend existing screening along the Route 11, Martinsburg Pike, right of way where the existing 50' buffer is being eliminated. 5.) Entrance The applicant agrees that while the existing dwellings on both parcels are utilized for residential use, the common, existing driveway will only serve the two residential structures and will not be utilized for commercial use. 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. Submitted By: page 3 PROFFER STATEMD G PARCEL ID PARCEL ID's: 54A -1 -18,54A -1 -19,54A -1-15B Step en C. laughter - Manager >" , Slaughter Properties, L.L.C. /County of� 141C,�'1 �� Cdr , Commonwealth Of Virginia. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this `t day of 200 N ary Public Notary Registration Number: ��'► My commission expires: 10 /31 //1 page 4 MAINTAIN EXISTING DRIVEWAY TO SERVE RESIDENTIAL USE US ROUTE 11 PIN 54A -1-15B ® AREA TO BE SCREENED - 2.63 AC. EX. 50' WOODED BUFFER TO BE ELIMINATED u I ZONING BOUNDARY PIN 54A -1-15B 1 !_J 2.02 AC. O HATCHED AREA INDICATES — PROPOSED MATERIAL STORAGE AREA ®APPROXIMATELY 0.65 ACRES OF 54A-1-18 TO BE CONSOLIDATED INTO 54A -1-15B PIN 54-A-82 MOFFETT INDUSTRIES ZONING: 83 kB) AREA TO BE .: ¢ U Z .. r ro Z 0 aN N V,) O n 0 Do co1=21 N I `j1 3 m m o zz Z 0 3 0 w o_ L Li D V)� Q J o p U w tn `d o aN N V,) O n O) N L 1- co1=21 N I `j1 3 N c,4 L W o c�o•o J _s L a 1 L c N U U o m - O 0 N fl to N U 0 O z T W CL z� Z� J W U) Ld Z C> W U IMPACT ANALYSTS STATEMENT' A PROPOSED REZONING for SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, L.L.C. TM #'s 54A-1-18, 54A-1-19 Frederick Block Route 11 North - Martinsburg Pike Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia August 13, 2008 Prepared for: Slaughter Properties, L.L.C. 1040 Martinsburg Pike Winchester, VA 22602 Prepared by: PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade Suite 120 "Winchester, VA 22601 Tel.: (540)662-5792 email: office@painterlewis.com Job Number: 0804007 SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, L.L.C. TM#'S 54A -1-18,54A-1-19 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS section Daae L INTRODUCTION 3 A. SITE SUITABILITY 3 B. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES 4 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. OTHER IMPACTS 6 K. LOT CONSOLIDATION 7 page 2 SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, L.L.C. TM#'S 54A-1-18, 54A-1-19 L INTRODUCTION Slaughter Properties, L.L.C. (the Owner) proposes to rezone two parcels of land located along Route 11 north between Brooke Road and Park Center Drive in Frederick County, Virginia. The parcels (the site) are currently zoned RP (Residential Performance District) and are identified by the following Tax Identification Numbers: Tax Map No. Area (acres) Ex. Zoning Pr. Zoning 54A-1-18 1.0 RP B3 54A-1-19 .80 RP B3 Total 1.80 The Owner is requesting to rezone the property from RP, Residential Performance District to B3 Industrial Transition District. The total area of the request is approximately 1.80 acres. The intended purpose of the rezoning is to enable the applicant to develop the site for materials storage which will serve the current business that is located adjacent to the site and identified by TM# 54A -1-15B. Please refer to Exhibit 1 on the following page. A. SITE SUITABILITY The subject parcels are currently used for residential purposes with frontage on US Route 11 just north of the City of Winchester. The parcels are located immediately adjacent to the current Frederick Block retail operations. According to the Frederick County public web site, the long range plans for the area show these lots to be divided between mixed use and industrial use. The Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan identifies the parcels for business and industrial use. The site is within the boundaries of the Sewer and Water Service Area as well as the I Irhan nPNp-Innment Area. Exhibit 2 shows the current conditions at the site and immediate surrounds. The use of the site will be limited to storage as identified in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance as SIC 5211. The rear portion of TM#54A-1-18 will be consolidated with the adjacent TM#54A-1-15B through a boundary line adjustment. The new, rear boundary line for TM#54A-1-18 will generally coincide with the existing zoning line which splits the zoning on TM#54A-1-15B into B2 and B3 zor 1;ng. 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN FIRM Community Panel Number 510063 0105 B shows that the subject parcel is not in the floodplain. WETLANDS No wetlands have been identified on the site. page 3 W SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, LLC 'asJ Z U / iM 1 - 54A- - ZONE: 82 U 0. U JQ 1.42 z JOHN D. GLOVER do SONS INC. fn^ W I U-Ntr KNNO mW 4F'.I-NZ N I mp W y I �� Wd) 4-.-42 SHOCKEY INDUSTRIES, NC. mw y I v a Pial � z o D 11 ii 0 A c) w ? � v1 2 W p.4 lal Vl TM jt 54A -1-15A vi 2�0V Z GNU �! Nw - om ZONE: M2 "`^IW �'- ZONE: 83 U In......._.__. ~ USE: COMMERCIAL x �` En o~ o o Y w rn J N N o O 2 2 to W FORT COLLIER GROUP TMJ 54-A-361 ZONE: M7 USE: COMMERCIAL MOFFETT INDUSTRIES LP LLP TML( 54-A-82 ZONE: 83 USE: COMMERCIAL �g wPC V 0 yo za}: � Y �00 m Y vIr owrx o a�w V SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, LLC 'asJ x / iM 1 - 54A- - ZONE: 82 U 0. Y V USE: COMMERCIAL I y 3,i'. `.--.":: _iN C z ^ mw v� I 4 Z JOHN D. GLOVER do SONS INC. .- yZ: ' =W Do .5} 4 I p ': 2 a I 4 W Z^ x TMM 54-A-19 .. ' ;-..::-- --.:. C 41 V4_::. .>' w-.... 44Zz Y W om 4a. a mzw ZONE: M2 USE: COMMERCIAL a"z aI p _..:x ;:::: p- d ypN U ` 0 N w F SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, LLC a n z ;-2 �-. v} �::;;;; Q'- j 5 N TMJ 54A -1-15B w w:::r::"'`%m rangy ••'sS :'Ell as;: _: rsa;: Z'� w ZONE: 83 U In......._.__. CL USE: COMMERCIAL ......-:.-,_-- FORT COLLIER GROUP TMJ 54-A-361 ZONE: M7 USE: COMMERCIAL MOFFETT INDUSTRIES LP LLP TML( 54-A-82 ZONE: 83 USE: COMMERCIAL �g wPC V 0 yo za}: � Y �00 m Y vIr owrx o a�w V ■ O C O m O 04 M P/% � O N O V 5) C14 ^ I� �U N N Uj 3 c N N 70 CID O LLI C CO O — 01 -, O o ..� t In CL U ` 0 N w F JZZ CI to C p N CL •(n Wa O c V V N V O O Z'� w CL zV) ZOf Lv J LJ Z 0 0 w SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, L.L.C. TM#'S 54A-1-18, 54A-1-19 STEEP SLOPES Steep slopes, as defined by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, do not occur within the boundaries of the proposed rezoning area. MATURE WOODLANDS There are no mature woodlands are located within the boundaries of the proposed rezoning area. Some mature specimens exist on the perimeter of the site and some of these trees will be preserved during the construction of future commercial facilities. SOILS The soils on the site are in the Frederick-Poplimento associations. The USGS Soils map shows the predominant soil types on the site are Frederick-Poplimento Loams (14B) and Frederick-Poplimento Rock Outcrop Complex. These soils are gently to strongly sloping, well -drained, and deep. B. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES The subject parcel is bordered by parcels that are zoned RP, B2, B3, M1, and M2. The locations of these parcels are shown on Exhibit 1. The zoning, owner, and use of each parcel is shown in the table below. Tax Map No. Owner Ex. Zoning Ex. Use 54-A-82 Moffett Investments, L.P., L.L.P B3 Commercial 54A-1-20 David Fahnestock RP Residential 54A-1-21 David Fahnestock RP Residential 54-A-361 Fort Collier Group M1 Commercial 54-A-19 Glover and Sons, Inc. M2 Commercial 54A -1-15B Slaughter Properties, L.L.C. 132/133 Commercial 54A -1-15A Shockev Industries, Inc. M2 Commercial 54A-1-1 Shockey Industries, Inc. B2 Commercial 54A-1-2 Shockey Industries, Inc. B2 Commercial 54A-1-3 Shockey Industries, Inc. B2 Commercial 54A-1-4 Mary Siers B2 Residential 54A-1-5 Shockey Industries, Inc. B2 Residential The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance requires buffers and screening between parcels of different zoning categories. Changing the zoning of the parcels to B3 will require the application of zoning buffers adjacent to the existing RP land. A minimum distance buffer of 100' will be required at this location. The buffer will be provided by maintaining a residential use on TM#54A-1-19. The Ordinance also requires screening of outdoor material storage. This will be accomplished by limiting outdoor storage to the rear portion of TM#54A-1-18 (which will be consolidated into TM#54A-1-1513) and by the page 4 US ROUTE 11 NEW MATERIALS STORAGE AREA ZONING BOUNDARY PIN 54A -1-15B 2.02 AC. CS-)( PIN 54A -1-15B 2.63 AC. IN APPROXIMATELY 0.66 ACRES OF 54A-1-18 BE CONSOLIDATED INTO 54A -1-15B PROPOSED SCREENING PIN :)'4A-1-18 1.00 AC. (0.35 AC.) RP TO B3 Ez PIN 54A-1 —19 0.80 AC. RP TO 83 w U Z O O o z o Q M O o o X= m o W zZ o 3 C o w a ¢ U w (n uv o vvi v=i g moos OY o m 0 V U WW p W W Y o 1 0 V ■ o N n W � co"(,On (A V7 N ^ N, to N `n 3 N N N -p � tD d C W a ..j v �+ 02N U U u c ' li o o a� a 'N LuLu1 -Ot 9> U N V O O Z� W Nb Q 0. U z� �w �w Z 0 w SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, L.L.C. TM#'S 54A-1-18, 54A-1-19 installation of a single row of evergreen trees along the exterior property lines. The front portion of TM#54A-1-18 will maintain its current residential use. C. TRAFFIC No significant impact will be made due to the expansion of services. No additional points of access will be required in support of the rezoning. No TIA is required for this project. D. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT The site is inside the limits of the Frederick County UDA/SWSA line. The development will be serviced by the county sewer system. Sewer is currently in the Route 11/Martinsburg Pike right of way and can be extended to serve the site. No additional sewage demand is anticipated as a result of this rezoning. The site is inside the limits of the Frederick County UDA/SWSA line. The development will be serviced by the county water supply system. Water is Route 11/Martinsburg Pike right of way and can be extended to serve the site. No additional water demand is anticipated as a result of this rezoning. F. DRAINAGE It is important that the quantity and quality of storm water runoff from the site be preserved or enhanced through the development of the site. Any development on this site can be expected to increase stormwater runoff. Storm water management facilities will be constructed as part of the development of the site to provide peak runoff attenuation as well as nutrient and sediment removal. Any permitting associated with nutrient removal shall be processed through the Department of Conservation and Recreation. G. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES Solid waste will be removed from the site by a private contract hauler. It is not anticipated that the generation of solid waste from the proposed commercial development will be increased by expansion of the storage activities associated with the operations of Frederick Block. H. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES The subject property does not contain any historic/archeological sites identified in Frederick County and Virginia Department of Historic Resources records. None is on the National Register of Historic Places or the Virginia Landmarks register. None of this site is located within any Civil War battlefield identified in the National Park Services, Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, published in 1992. The SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, L.L.C. TM#'S 54A -1-18,54A-1-19 site is located near the historic Fort Collier. See the Civil War Battlefields and Sites exhibit on the following page. There are several historic sites within i mile of the site, of these two (2) are identified as potentially significant. The complete list of historical sites within a 1 mile radius of the site and map can be seen on Exhibit 4. I. COMMUNITY FACILITIES DEVELOPMENTAL IMPACT MODEL The new Developmental Impact Model (D.I.M.) is utilized primarily for residential rezoning requests. It is anticipated that the capital facility impacts of commercial and industrial rezoning request 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 Clear Brook Community Volunteer Fire and Company located on Brucetown Road in Frederick County. 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. EMERGENCY SERVICES The Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model calculates that the projected capital cost for public park facilities attributable to this development is $00.00. J. LOT CONSOLIDATION Exhibit 5 on the following page shows the configuration of the site post rezoning. Lot consolidation will increase the size of TM#54A-1-15B, decrease the size of TM#54A-1- 18, and leave TM#54A-1-19 in its current form. CIVIL WAR SITES FredeNck County Planning S Developnent Fi -- Civil War Battlelds and Sites x, Uinchester. Virginia I (As Defined by the NPS Shenan aah Valley Civil War Sites Study) 12-10-97 FFd®M SIT �\ HISTORICAL PROPERTY KEY a 147 — STINE'S HOUSE 165 — FORT COLIER , ; ' r \. 322 — STAR FORT LTJ 520 — SUNNYSIDE GROCERY 521= BROWN HOUSE 0 521 — BROWN HOUSE U ix 523 1048 NORTH FREDERICK PIKE IL 0 524 _ LIBERTY HALL \_ — 525 MCDONALD HOUSE IM 526 — CARPER HOUSE 2_GF NT UY 527 — MARTIN HOUS* 524 LIBERTY HALL 1 — 01f T �.iR F' (� ,f \• 525 — MCDONALD HOUSE 0 LA Ix 5 2F— GAIN PR ISTRI T LINE - w HOUSE L i oute. _37 _. 527 — MARTIN OUSE** — W Rou#e__37__.--_ \ — BEIRER—ROBINSON HOUSE f ---- c� STONEWALL DIS ICT LINE _ � ° 953 W 3: LIE Lj " 954 — HOUSE OFF RT. 11 NORTH 953 o � ° V20 UNIDENTIFIED NOT INDICATES S APOTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT SITE AS DENOTED BY THE RURAL LANDMARKS SURVEY REPORT OF FREDERICK COUNTY IT \,%. - ff Co CD_- LoL 0 /52 �- o� �� , a: L U) A- o E W Cine (Dg � y •, —. Gro ._, �r ok cn �■ ao ° oat CD , ff , o , CITY OF ,..WI RESTER •> ( ,_ t ;✓ NAR NA DRAWN BY: �.. � JOB NO.. pSEM 0804007 1200 O 1200 SCALE: DATE: SHEET: 1• n. QI Sc 1200 f4 EXHIBIT 4 2Tss'13' E 13.9973' ZONING BOUNDARY PIN 54A -1-15B 2.02 AC. US ROUTE 11 PIN 54A-1 -1513 2.63 AC. LOT LINE TO BE ADJUSTED CSX ROAD PIN 54A-1-18 1.00 AC. (0.35 AC.) RP TO B3 N e W PIN 54A-1-19 0.80 AC. RP TO B3 129.1' N n N 0.65 AC. 3 tD d' I� 0 M iJ J � Cl N o0) ♦A 6/®% 3 N ^ P U-) 3 N N O CO tD C C , Y of Lo a N i vv© U y cc w +r L O o Q) a '(j) W U N 0 O E Z ^R C7 V) Z J W N Z 0 w REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 6 be completed by Planning Staf, ling Amendment Number Hearing Date`-,Rs� Fee Amount Paid $ .3a so Date Received 10 11.5 1bg BOS Hearing Date /,-- The.following inforination shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page munbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner ofRevenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, 1. Applicant: Name: S I Q hemI t U ( L LC Telephone; (1 7- I a (o Address: { BO X. (}9 2. Property Owner (if different than above) Name: Address: Telephone: 3. Contact person if other than above NilfeV- Le+w is, PLC Name: Mr -Jo n Lewis Telephone: 5 40- (OW - 9iq a 4. Checklist: Check the following items that Have been included with this application. Location map Agency Comments Plat Fees Deed to property finpact Analysis Statement Verification of taxes paid Proffer Statement 10 5. The Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning; applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned: I] 6. A) Current Use of the Property: R P - f ! es cd c/I tag R) Proposed Use of the Property: 7. Adjoining; Property: PARCEL III NUMBER 9;4-A- 8-� 54,E i - 40 5w -i -moi SqA - I- -SIM - 5yA I-3 P,3 SIG SZ.II USE Commeroo! res Oct) haA raCi.-DA t va cah t tesi'deAlvtl S`/A -/-J E Cin !c! 9P _ _ ts�cler►fi RP s -A -361 In dvsft-�a/ MI l 8. Location: The property is located. at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers): ZONING 33 RP IIP 10,96 and /0q II bz 9. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed : Number of Units Proposed Single Family homes: Townhorne: Multi -Family: Non -Residential Lots: Mobile Horne: Hotel Rooms: Square Footage of Proposed Uses Office: Service Station. Retail: Manufacturing: Restaurant: Warehouse: Other; 10. Signature: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board. of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, 'Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. 1 (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 Bearing 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 accompanyingmaterialsmaterials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. Applicant(s): ` Date: I/619 Date: Owner(s): (. Date: l°/a d8 Date.- 12 ate: 12 j Special Limited Power of Attorney ' County of Frederick, Virginia Planning Office, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395 Know All Men By These Presents: That I (We) (Name) S (Q�3 0��Y- ?rM �fi� s 1 (_ , G (Phone) 5qo _(0 (,o1- i a 61 (Address) F>6, 1307� bqt , Winches+er, VA a� 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 08000 L{ 2 - Instrument Instrument No. � on Page , and is described as 1,9 1 5414� Parcel: Lot: _��1 Block: k Section: 54A -Subdivision: do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) �t1lCltel'- LWs. P��, C.-Ntir_a}oht, 1�ev�IZs (Phone)'S 0 -to(7c�-�rly (Address)8(1 Cedar C e l, C-,rodg-_ Su tie 1'a0 , a e S+er(, VA p 100% To 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,in3luding Rezoning (Including proffers) G Conditional Use Permits G Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) ' F j9 i 0 Subdivision G Site Plan My attomey-in-fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to �ireviously approved proffered conditions except as follows: This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or modified. In witness thereof, � (we) haNe 1(�ereto set my (our) hand and seal this Ja day of , 20CE , Signature(s) State of Virginia, Cit County of �i�IS��C=i 1�Sr t r_ , To -wit: I, 3�1 t L& F1r�, a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument and who is (are) known to me, personally appeared before me and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this 10 day of SQL_, 200-&. �J ols� R&" — I�My Commission Expires: I D 3! Noidy Public 030415293 12 -if i /robLue I IND PK �OEM ORT - - LL r VICINITY MAP - 1' = 2000' SCALE APPROVAL SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATOR A� DAIS OWNERS' CONSENT THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING LOT CONSOLIDATION OF THE LAND OF SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, LLC., AS APPEARS IN THE ACCOMPANYING PLAT, IS WITH THE FREE CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DESIRES OF THE UNDERSIGNED OWNERS, PROPRIETORS, AND TRUSTEES, IF ANY. ON BEHALF OF kb J SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, LLC. /� _ / � DATE / b 3 ;�...,. NOTARY CERTIFICATE t�liCl>TYpF:,_.� FRFofR1 c1< =THf{ FOREGOING 11fSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME ON (e IO BY 4}f8ki¢iF �gcUwtJT 2J P OPERTIES, L.C. 8 ° MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 0C E ° SUR VFYOR'S CFR TIFICA TE. I I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE LAND CONTAINED IN THIS LOT CONSOLIDATION IS THE LAND DESIGNATED AS PARCELS ONE THROUGH FIVE WHICH WERE CONVEYED TO SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, LL.C., BY DEED DATED MAY 8, 2003, RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT # 030012270, SAID DEED IS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA. CONSOLIDATION PLAT TH OP �r OF THE LAND OF SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, L.L.C. y �� 1040 MARTINSBURG PIKE 0 ga"sge STONEWALL MGISTERM DISTRICT N0. 001197 fREDE ICK COUNTY K9RG/N64 Lt47E 06/13/03 COVER SHEL7 SHEET 1 OF 2 l� D sUit'll Marsh & Legge Land Surveyors, P.L.C. 560 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET N WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 DRAWN BY: C.GREENSP.4N PHONE (540) 667-0468 - FAX(540)667-D469 N EUAIL off oeQnarahondegg&coro DWG NAME- 102342-CP L BEARING ORIGINAL z u+� z 6y� MILDRED L. WILLINCHAM 4p cpm` .a P/N 54A-1-19 OB 571 PG 211 / .� ZONED: RP yr USE- RES/DENAAL S 6376:30" E 406.29'–� __ IPF N 60'49'45' W 270.00' JOHN D. GLOVER & SOME, INC PIN 5474-19 98 440 PG 8J ' ZONED: M2 �r..rE- �vi��Iv nrvsr NOTES: 1.) NO TITLE REFORT FURNISHED, 2.) EASEMENTS OTHER THAN SHOWN MAY EXIST. 3.) NO BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE NOTED OR 5HOWN ON PLAT. 4.) BOUNDARY INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON IS BASED ON AN ACTUAL FIELD RUN SURVEY MADE ON JANUARY 30, -2001 . S.) DISTANCE SHOWING TIES FOR SANITARY EASEMENT ARE TO THE CENTERLINE ho O Cn SANITARY EASEMENT LINE TABLE LINE BEARING ORIGINAL U) N 53'4-4 33 W 14.89 PIN 54A-1-17 ni 5L u3 44 yr i 4o.y 5 L3 07297 ACRES { 163.05 L4 N'2732'48' 1 101.66 ORIGINAL m I W PIN 54A-1-16 1 •• I 1� I 1-2838 ACRES B 1 f� J� t Z� 2. -HL`R£BirVACN,ITE73-LIES --------------- o (TYPICAL) 3 I ORIGINAL 1 _ Q PIN 54A-1-1518 I PIN 54A-1-150 rn 11 0.7676 ACRES 1,11 2 4.6468 AC?E.S I off, f:n 1---------------i----------- k m ry L I V O — —12-- f p I I 1 EXIS77NG j 20' SAN/TAR Y SEWER I ORIGINAL j I ORIGINAL N EASEMENT (DB 696 PC TO & I PIN 54A-1-15C1�3 PIN 54A -1-15B I I DB 696 PC 73) 1 1.0913 ACRES 0 7744 ACRES 1 { Z I ( N 1 >• Nim I I p1N �{� I I �� I f 1 N 60'49'45' W 270.00' JOHN D. GLOVER & SOME, INC PIN 5474-19 98 440 PG 8J ' ZONED: M2 �r..rE- �vi��Iv nrvsr NOTES: 1.) NO TITLE REFORT FURNISHED, 2.) EASEMENTS OTHER THAN SHOWN MAY EXIST. 3.) NO BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE NOTED OR 5HOWN ON PLAT. 4.) BOUNDARY INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON IS BASED ON AN ACTUAL FIELD RUN SURVEY MADE ON JANUARY 30, -2001 . S.) DISTANCE SHOWING TIES FOR SANITARY EASEMENT ARE TO THE CENTERLINE ho O Cn SANITARY EASEMENT LINE TABLE LINE BEARING DISTANCE L1 N 53'4-4 33 W 14.89 L2 ni 5L u3 44 yr i 4o.y 5 L3 N 63'24 50 W 163.05 L4 N'2732'48' E 101.66 CONSOUDAT/ON PLAT OF THE LAND OF SLAUGHTER PROPERTIES, L.L.C. 1040 MARTINSBURG PIKE STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA DATE: 06/23/03 I SC4LE- N 1 = 100' I SHEET 2 OF 2_ I Marsh & Legge Land Surveyors, P.L.C. 560 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET N WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 PHONE (540) 667-0468 - FAX (540) 667-0469 - EMAIL ofBce.0morshmdlegge.com TH OP, Y 1� r� 0 183 0. 01 7 DRAWN BY: C.GREENSPAN DWG NAME: 102342 -CP COUNT`' of il♦ RFJ'DF-RICK Department of Planning and Development MEMORANDUM 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 To: Frederick County Planning Commission From: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner N.t " Subject: Public Hearing —Proposed Ordinance Amendment - New Office -Manufacturing Park District and Secondary Use Regulations Date: October 16, 2008 Staff has been working on a new zoning district which is intended to implement the new Route 277 Land Use Plan that was adopted by the Board of Supervisors. This district would implement the mixed-use industrial/office land use classification of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The OM Park District is designed to provide areas for research and development centers, office parks, and minimal impact industrial and assembly uses. While the catalyst for this district was the identified land use in the Route 277 study, it has the potential to be applied in other areas designated for industrial uses. The primary uses that would be permitted in this district consist of target business as determined by the Economic Development Commission. Design and development standards have also been introduced with this proposed new ordinance. These standards include minimum district sizes, standards for building materials, screening requirements for loading areas, as well as the prohibition of outdoor storage areas. The NAICS work group (a Subcommittee of the DRRS) has reviewed this draft ordinance on three occasions and endorsed the ordinance on May 13"'. The DRRS first discussed this draft ordinance on May 22, 2008. The DRRS suggested minor changes and requested that the ordinance be brought back once comments were received by the Industrial Parks Association (IPA). The draft ordinance was sent to the IPA and they had no comments on the proposed ordinance. The Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) considered this item again at their August 2008 meeting. The DRRS had minor text changes and ultimately suggested that the ordinance be sent to the Planning Commission for discussion. Also included with this new Zoning District are changes to the Accessory Use regulations currently in the Zoning Ordinance. The DRRS discussed the Accessory Use/Secondary Use Regulations changes at their May 2008 meeting and recommended that it be sent to the Planning Commission for discussion, along with the proposed Office - Manufacturing Park District. The Planning Commission discussed this item at their meeting on September 17, 2008. Discussion on the proposed district consisted of concerns regarding three proposed uses: aircraft and parts manufacturing, rubber and miscellaneous plastics manufacturing and fabricated metals. It was thought that these three uses were heavier than may be appropriate for the district. Other than the concern over the uses, the Planning Commission was supportive of the proposed new zoning district. The Board of Supervisors discussed this new district at their October 8, 2008 meeting and approved this item to be sent to public hearing. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Frederick County Planning Commission Re: New Office -Manufacturing Park District October 16, 2008 Page 2 The attached documents show the proposed new district, as well as the proposed dimensional and intensity requirements, proposed buffer requirements for the new district and all associated changes necessary to implement the district in the Zoning Ordinance. Proposed secondary use regulations that would apply to all commercial and industrial districts have been included. A recommendation from the Planning Commission on this proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is sought. Please contact me if you have any questions. Attachments: 1. Proposed Ordinance and associated changes. 2. Secondary Use Regulations. CEP/bad ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT - 0111 PARK DISTRICT AND ASSOCIATED CHANGES — October 16, 2008 PROPOSED CHANGES WITH STRMETHROUGHS AND BOLD ITALIC ARTICLE X Business and Industrial Zoning Districts § 165-82. District use Regulations. D. Office -Manufacturing (OM) Park District. The intent of this district is to implement the mixed use industrialloffice land use classification of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The OM_ park District is designed to provide areas for research and development centers, office parks, and minimal impact industrial and assembly uses. Uses are allowed which do not create noise, smoke, dust or other hazards. This district shall be located in a campus like atmospl. ere near major transportation facilities. Permitted Uses Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Furniture and Related Product Manufacturing 25 Pharmaceutical and Medici�,e Manufacturing 283 Industrial and Commercial Machinery 35 And Computer Equipment Manufacturing Electronics and other Electrical Equipment 36 And Components Manufacturing Excluding uses in italics: Storage batteries 3691 Primary batteries 3692 Aircraft and Parts Manufacturing 372 Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing 38 Publishing Industries 27 Rubber and Miscellaneous Plastics Manufacturing 30 Excluding uses in italics: Tires and Inner Tubes 3011 Fabricated Metal Products 34 Employment Services 736 Computer Programming, Data Processing, and 737 Other Computer Related Services Legal Services 81 Engineering, Accounting, Research Management, and Related Services Medical Laboratories Public Administration Business signs Signs allowed in §165-30B Freestanding building entrance signs Multi -tenant complex signs Electronic Message signs ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT - OM PARK DISTRICT — October 16, 2008 87 8071 91-97 Secondary or Accessory Uses. The following uses shall be permitted by right in the OM Park District, but only in conjunction with, and secondary to, a permitted principle use in accordance with section 165-26. Secondary Uses Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Insurance Carriers and Services 63-64 Commercial Banks 602 Eating and Drinking Places 58 b Except the following: Restaurants with drive-through uses ----- Food Services Contractors 5821 Caterers 5821 Mobile Food Services ------ Drinking Places 5813 Office Machinery and Equipment 7359 Rental and Leasing Physical Fitness Facilities for employees 7991 Child Day Care Services 8351 Office Machine Repair and Maintenance 7629 Dry Cleaning and Laundry Services Except the following: Linen supply Dry Cleaning Plants Industrial launderers Design Requirements. ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT - OMPARK DISTRICT — October 16, 2008 721 7213 7216 7218 A. Minimum Size. No OMPark District rezoning shall be approved for less than ten (10) contiguous acres. (1) There shall be no minimum lot size. (2) There shall be no minimum lot width or depth. B. Development Standards. The following standards shall apply in the OM Park District. (1) This district shall be planned and developed with a harmonious coordination of uses, architectural styles, landscaping, parking, signs and outdoor lighting. (2) This district shall be developed with a campus like atmosphere and near major transportation facilities. (3) Any building shall be faced on all sides facing road right-of-ways with durable, attractive, high quality materials, comparable to clay brick, stone, wood, architectural concrete masonry unit (e.g., regal stone, split face, precision, ground face) or precast concrete panels. (4) Loading docks or loading entrances shall be blocked from view from public streets, by utilizing board -on -board fencing, masonry walls, or evergreen tree plantings. (5) Outdoor storage shall be prohibited (6) All OMPark districts shall have access to a state road. D. E. MI -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. F. M2 Industrial General District. The intent of this district is to provide for a wide variety of manufacturing, commercial office and heavy commercial uses, including those which may not be compatible with nearby residential and business areas. Performance controls are used to control potential nuisances, especially in relation to zoning district boundaries. Such industrial areas shall be provided with safe and sufficient access. ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT - OM PARK DISTRICT — October 16, 2008 §165-83. Dimensional and intensity requirements. A. The following table describes the dimensional and intensity requirements for the business and industrial Districts: District Requirement B1 B2 B3 OM M1 M2 Front yard setback on 50 50 50 50 75 75 Primary or arterial highways (feet) Front yard setback on 35 35 35 35 75 75 Collector or minor streets (feet) Side yard setbacks (feet) -- -- 15 15 25 25 Rear yard setbacks (feet) -- -- 15 15 25 25 Floor area to lot area ratio .03 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 (FAR) Minimum landscaped area 35 15 25 15 25 15 (percentage of lot area) Maximum height (feet) 35 35 35 60 60 60 ARTICLE IV Supplementary Use Regulations § 165-27. Off-street parking; parking lots. E. Parking lots. Parking spaces shared by more than one dwelling or use, required for any use in the business or industrial zoning district or required for any institutional, commercial or industrial use in any zoning district shall meet the following requirements: (1) Surface materials. In the RP Residential Performance District, the R4 Residential Planned Community District, the R5 Residential Recreational Community District, the MH1 Mobile Home Community District, the B1 Neighborhood Business District, the B2 Business General District, the B3 Industrial Transition District, the OM Office Manufacturing Park District, the M1 Light Industrial District, the M2 Industrial General District and the MS Medical Support District, parking lots shall be paved with concrete, bituminous concrete or similar materials. Such surface materials shall provide a durable, dust- and gravel -free, hard surface. The Zoning Administrator may allow for the use of other hard -surface materials or parcels located outside of the Sewer and Water Service Area if the site plan provides for effective stormwater management and efficient maintenance. In such cases, parking lots shall be paved with a minimum of double prime -and -seal treatment or an equivalent surface. [Amended 9-12-20011 (3) Curbs and gutters. Concrete curbing and gutters shall be installed around the perimeter of all parking lots in the RP Residential Performance District, the R4 ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT - OM PARK DISTRICT — October 16, 2008 Residential Planned Community District, the R5 Residential Recreational Community District, the MH1 Mobile Home Community District, the BI Neighborhood Business District, the B2 Business General District, the B3 Industrial Transition District, the OM Office -Manufacturing Perk District, the Ml Light Industrial District, the M2 Industrial General District and the Ms Medical Support District. The curbing shall be a minimum of six inches in height. All parking lots shall be included within an approved stormwater management plan. The Zoning Administrator may allow for the use of concrete bumpers instead of curbing for parcels located outside of the Sewer and Water Service Area if the site plan provides for effective stormwater management and efficient maintenance. [Amended 9-12-20011 (4) Raised islands. Raised islands shall be installed at the ends of all parking bays abutting an aisle or driveway in the RP Residential Performance District the R4 Residential Planned Community District, the R5 Residential Recreational Community District, the MH1 Mobile Home Community District, the B1 Neighborhood Business District, the B2 Business General District, the B3 Industrial Transition District, the OM Office Manufacturing Park District, the M1 Light Industrial District, the M2 Industrial General District and the MS Medical Support District. The raised islands shall be bordered by concrete or rolled asphalt curb. All islands shall be at least nine feet wide and shall extend the length of the parking space or bay. The islands shall be landscaped with grass, shrubs, or other vegetative materials. The Zoning Administrator may waive the requirement for raised islands for parcels located outside of the Sewer and Water Service Area when curb and gutter is not proposed. [Amended 9-12-2001] (11) Landscaping. Parking lots in the RP Residential Performance District, the R4 Residential Planned Community District, the R5 Residential Recreational Community District, the MH1 Mobile Home Community District, the Bl Neighborhood Business District, the B2 Business General District, the B3 Industrial Transition District, the OM Office Manufacturing Park District, the MI Light Industrial District, the M2 Industrial General District and the M2 Medical Support District shall be landscaped to reduce the visual impact of glare and headlights on adjoining properties and rights-of-way. Parking lots shall be adequately shaded to reduce reflected heat. Landscaping shall also be provided to reduce the visual expansiveness of parking lots. Landscaping shall be provided in such parking lots as follows: [Amended 9-12-2001; 4-23-20031 § 165-29. Motor vehicle access. A. New driveways. (2) In order to provide safe and convenient access and to provide efficient travel on arterial highways, a minimum spacing shall be provided between new driveways and entrances onto collector roads and onto primary and arterial highways, in the following zoning districts: BI Neighborhood Business B2 Business General B3 Industrial Transition OM Office Manufacturing Park MI Light Industrial ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT- OMPA.RKDISTRICT — October 16, 2008 M2 Industrial General § 165-31. Protection of environmental features. [Amended 12-11-1991; 8-9-2000; 7-11- 2001; 4-23-20031 In order to protect those areas of a parcel which have environmental characteristics that make them unsuitable for development, certain portions of a development shall remain undisturbed or be protected. It is the intention of this section that the disturbance of such areas by the development process be limited. It is also the intention of this section that the large portions of the areas with such environmental characteristics be placed in open space, environmental easements, the portion of the parcel left undivided or other areas where they will remain undisturbed. It is intended that the environmental conditions on a property be reviewed as the first step in the planning process before lots or dwellings are located. A. The requirements of this section shall apply to land in the following zoning districts: RP Residential Performance District R4 Residential Planned Community District R5 Residential Recreational Community District MH 1 Mobile Home Community District BI Neighborhood Business District B2 Business General District B3 Industrial Transition District OM Office -Man ufacturing Park District M1 Light Industrial District M2 Industrial General District HE Higher Education District RA Rural Areas District MS Medical Support District § 165-37. Buffer and screening requirements. [Amended 6-13-19901 D. Zoning district buffers. Buffers shall be placed on land to be developed when it adjoins land in certain zoning districts. (1) Buffers shall be provided on the land to be developed according to the categories in the following tables: (b) Buffer categories to be provided on land to be developed according to the zoning of the adjoining land: [Amended 9-12-20011 Zoning of Land To Be Developed RP R4 R5 RP - - - R4 - - - R5 - - - MH 1 C C C B1 B B B B2 B B B Zoning of Adjoining Land MITI BI B2 1B3 0JV1 MI M2 LM PvIS - A A A A A A A A - A A A A A A A A - A A A A A A A A - B B B B B A A C B - - A A A A A B B - - A A A A A B ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT - OM PARK DISTRICT — October I6, 2008 B3 C C C C B B - - - - - C OM C C C C B B - _ _ _ _ C M1 C C C C B B - - - - - C M2 C C C C B B B B B - - C EM C C C C B B B B B - - C MS C C C C B B B B B B C - § 165.47. Landfills, junkyards, trash disposal and inoperable vehicles. C. Inoperable motor vehicles. (1) Inoperable motor vehicles shall not be stored outside of a completely enclosed building in the following zoning districts: [Amended 10-27-20041 RP Residential Performance R4 Residential Planned Community R5 Residential Recreational Community MHl Mobil Home Community HE Higher Education MS Medical Support BI Business Neighborhood B2 Business General B3 Industrial Transition OM OfficeManufacturing Park MI Industrial Light M2 Industrial General EM Extractive Manufacturing ARTICLE XVIII Master Development Plan § 165-133. When required. A. A preliminary Master Development Plan (MDP) and a final MDP shall be submitted to the Director of Planning and Development for Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors approval prior to any subdivision or development of property in any of the following zoning districts: [Amended 10-27-20041 RP Residential Performance District R4 Residential Planned Community District R5 Residential Recreational Community District MH1 Mobil Home Community District HE High Education District MS Medical Support District B 1 Neighborhood Business District B2 Business General District B3 Industrial Transition District OM Office Manufacturing Park District M1 Industrial Light District M2 Industrial General District EM Extractive Manufacturing District ATTAC111 MNT 1 DRAFT - OM PARKDISTRICT — October I6, 2008 § 165-141. Contents of preliminary master development plans. C. Contents of a preliminary master development plan in the Ml Light Industrial District, the M2 Industrial General District, the EM Extractive Manufacturing District, the HE Higher Education District, the BI Neighborhood Business District, the B2 Business General District, the B3 Industrial Transition District or the OM Office Manufacturing Park District. The preliminary MDP shall contain a conceptual plan, showing the location and functional relationship between streets and land uses, including the following: § 165-26. Secondary or Accessory uses. ATTACHMENT When permitted secondary or accessory uses that are normally or typically found in association with the allowed primary use shall be allowed on the same parcel or lot as the primary use. Secondary uses shall meet the requirements of this section as well as any particular standard imposed on such use. A. Agricultural accessory uses. The selling or processing of agricultural products produced on the premises shall be considered to be accessory to an agricultural use. On bona fide, operating farms, temporary or permanent housing for workers actively working on the farm shall be an allowed accessory use. B. Accessory dwellings. One accessory dwelling shall be allowed with any single- family dwelling as long as the following conditions are met: (1) The floor area of the accessory dwelling shall be no more than 25% of the gross floor area of the primary residential structure on the lot. (2) In the RP Residential Performance, MHl Mobile Home Community and R4 Residential Planned Community Districts, accessory dwellings shall only be allowed if they are attached to the primary residential structure. (3) In no case shall a mobile home be allowed as an accessory dwelling in the RP Residential Performance District. R4 Residential Planned Community District and R5 Residential Recreational Community District. [Amended 6- 9-19931 C. Dwellings in a business. One accessory dwelling shall be allowed with any business or industrial use only so long as it is occupied by the owner of the business or industry, an employee or a watchman. D. Child day-care services. Child day-care services and facilities shall be allowed in the Ml Light Industrial District as an accessory use to any allowed use or group of allowed uses in an industrial park. [Added 8-8-19901 E. In no case shall a mobile home or temporary trailer be allowed as an accessory use, unless it is used for temporary or permanent housing on a bona fide, operating farm. [Added 6-9-19931 F. Secondary Uses in the Bl, B2 and B3Districts. The square footage or area occupied by secondary uses cumulatively shall not exceed twenty-five (25) percent of the gross floor area of the related principle use. In the B3 District no more than fifteen (15) percent of the gross floor area of the principle use may be used for accessory retail sales and in no case shall the accessory retailing component exceed 2,000 square feet. The square footage devoted to accessory retail sales shall be included in calculating the 25 percent limit on secondary uses. G. Secondary Uses in the OM Park, M1 and M2 Districts. The square footage or area occupied by secondary uses cumulatively shall not exceed twenty-five (25) percent of the gross floor area of the related principle use. Retail as an accessory use shall not be permitted in the OMPark, MI or M2 Districts. • C :] MEMORANDUM To: Frederick County Planning Commission From: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner t �T COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Pianning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/66S-6395 Subject: Public Hearing — Proposed Ordinance Amendment - Buffer Requirements Adjacent to Railroads Date: October 15, 2008 Per the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Zoning District Buffers are required to be provided when property is developed adjacent to other uses or other zoning districts per §165-37D. The section of the ordinance does not, however, address buffering requirements when the zoning districts are separated by a railroad right-of-way. Staff has been directed to prepare a revision to the Zoning Ordinance to address properties adjacent to railroad right-of-ways. The proposed text would be added to §1.65-37D and is proposed to state the following: §165-37D. Buffer and Screening Requirements. §165-37D (11) Whenever land is to be developed in the BI, B2, B3, OM, MI or M2 Zoning Districts that is adjacent to a railroad right-of-way that has property zoned Bl, V2, B3, MI or M2 on the opposite side, Zoning District Buffers shall not be required. In the event that residential uses are located on the opposite side of the railroad right-of-way, a Zoning District Buffer as required by §165-37D shall be provided. In the event that a Zoning District Buffer is required, the width of the railroad right-of-way may be counted towards the required Zoning District Buffer distance. The item was presented to the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DDRS) at their meeting on August 28, 2008. The DRRS had minor changes to the wording of the proposed text and ultimately recommended it be sent to the Planning Commission for discussion. The Planning Commission then discussed this item at their meeting on September 17, 2008 and was supportive of the ordinance as presented. The Board of Supervisors approved this item to be sent to public hearing at their October 8, 2008 meeting. A recommendation from the Planning Commission on this proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is sought. Please contact me if you have any questions. Attachments: 1. Proposed Ordinance Revision (§165-37D). a CEP/bad 107 North Dent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 ATTACHMENT 1 § 165-37. Buffer and screening requirements. [Amended 6-13-1990] D. Zoning district buffers. Buffers shall be placed on land to be developed when it adjoins land in certain zoning districts. (1) Buffers shall be provided on the land to be developed according to the categories in the following tables: (a) Buffer categories: Distance Buffer Required (b) Buffer categories to be provided on land to be developed according to the zoning of the adjoining land: [Amended 9-12-20011 Zoning of Land To Be Inactive Active RP RP Screening (Minimum) (Maximum) Total Cate,-ory Provided feetfeet B1 (feet) A Full screen --- --- _-- A Landscape screen --- --- --- A No screen 25 25 50 B Full Screen 25 25 50 B Landscape screen 75 25 100 B No screen 150 50 200 C Full screen 75 25 100 C Landscape screen 150 50 200 C No screen 350 50 400 (b) Buffer categories to be provided on land to be developed according to the zoning of the adjoining land: [Amended 9-12-20011 Zoning of Land To Be MH1 Developed RP RP - R4 - R5 - MH 1 C B1 B B2 B B3 C Ml C M2 C EM C MS C Zoning of Adjoining Land R4 R5 MH1 B1 B2 B3 Ml M2 EM MS - - - A A A A A A A - - - A A A A A A A - - - A A A A A A A C C - B B B B A A C B B B - - A A A A B B B B - - A A A A B C C C B B - _ _ _ C C C C B B - _ _ _ C C C C B B B B _ _ C C C C B B B B - - C C C C B B B B B C - ATTACHMENT 1 (2) If a lot being developed is adjacent to developed land which would normally be required to be provided with a buffer but which does not contain the buffer, the required buffer shall be provided on the lot being developed. The buffer to be provided shall be of the larger category required on either the lot being developed or the adjacent land. Such buffer shall be in place of the buffer normally required on the lot being developed. The buffer may include required setbacks or buffers provided on the adjacent land. (3) Whenever land is to be developed in the Bl (Neighborhood Business) or B2 (Business, General) Zoning District that is adjacent to land primarily used for residential use in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District, a B Category buffer shall be provided on the land to be developed. The Board of Supervisors may grant a waiver to reduce the required buffer distance requirements with the consent of the adjacent (affected) property owners. Should a waiver be granted by the Board of Supervisors, the distance requirements of § 165-37D(1)(a) may be reduced, provided the full screening requirements of this section are met. [Amended 3-9-20051 (4) Whenever land is to be developed in the B3, M1 or M2 Zoning District that is adjacent to land primarily used for residential purposes in the RA Rural Areas Zoning District, a C Category buffer shall be provided on the land to be developed. (5) Whenever land is to be developed in the MS Zoning District that is adjacent to land primarily used for residential purposes in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District, a C Category buffer shall be provided on the land to be developed.1 Whenever land is to be developed in the MS Zoning District that is adjacent to all other land zoned RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District, the requirements for buffer and screening shall be provided in accordance with § 165-102 of this chapter. [Amended 9-12-200121 (6) The Planning Commission may waive any or all of the requirements for the zoning district buffers on a particular site plan when all uses shown on the site plan are allowed in the zoning district in which the development is occurring and in the adjoining zoning districts. (7) Where B3 (Industrial Transition) zoning adjoins B2 (Business General) zoning on land contained within a master development plan, the Planning Commission may allow for specific modifications in screening requirements. [Added 4-12-19951 (a) Such modifications shall be allowed at the Commission's discretion, provided that all the following conditions are met. [1] The property line for which the modification is requested is internal to the land contained within the master development plan. [2] A specified use is proposed on the parcel for which the modification is requested. ATTACHMENT 1 [3] The modification shall not involve a reduction to required buffer distances. [4] The proposed components of the buffer are clearly indicated on a site plan for the parcel. [5] The site plan is reviewed and approved by the Planning Comnission. (b) The approval of modified screening shall apply only for the specified use approved. Any change in use of the parcel including additions for site alterations will require review by the Planning Staff and may require review by the Planning Commission and may result in the Commission revoking the modified screening approval. (8) Land proposed to be developed in the Ml Light Industrial District and the M2 Industrial General District may be permitted to have a reduced buffer distance that is consistent with the required side or rear building setback line, provided that the following requirements are met: [Added 3-13-19961 (a) The property to be developed with a reduced buffer distance is part of an approved master planned industrial park. (b) There are no primary or accessory uses within the reduced buffer distance area, including driveways, access drives, outdoor storage areas, parking areas, staging areas, loading areas and outdoor dumpster areas. All- weather surface fire lanes necessary to meet the requirements of Chapter 90, Fire Prevention, of the Code of Frederick County, Virginia, shall be exempt from this performance standard. (c) A full screen is required to be created within the reduced buffer distance area which shall be comprised of a continuous earth berm that is six feet higher in elevation than the highest elevation within the reduced buffer distance area and a double row of evergreen trees that are a minimum of six feet in height and planted a maximum of eight feet from center to center. (9) Proposed developments required to provide buffers and screening as determined by § 165-37D(1)(b) of this chapter may be permitted to establish a common shared buffer and screening easement with the adjoining property. The common shared buffer and screening easement shall include all components of a full screen which shall be clearly indicated on a site design plan. A legal agreement signed by all appropriate property owners shall be provided to the Department of Planning and Development and shall be maintained with the approved site design plan. This agreement shall describe the location of the required buffer within each property, the number and type of the plantings to be provided and a ATTACHMENT I statement regarding the maintenance responsibility for this easement. The required buffer distance may be reduced by 50% for a com���on shared buffer easement if existing vegetation achieves the functions of a full screen. [Amended 6-12-1996] (10) When a flex -tech development is split by a zoning district line, the Planning Commission may allow for a reduction of the distance buffer and the relocation of the screening requirements. Such modifications shall be allowed at the Commission's discretion, provided that all of the following conditions are met: [Added 2-11-1998] (a) The zoning district boundary line for which the modification is requested is internal to the land contained within the master development plan. (b) The required landscape screen is relocated to the perimeter of the flex -tech development. This relocated, landscape screen shall contain the same plantings that would have been required had the screen been placed along the zoning district boundary line. (11) Whenever land is to be developed in the BI, B2, B3, ®IMI, MI or M2 Zoning Districts that is adjacent to a railroad right-of-way that has property zoned BI, B2, B3, MI or M2 on the opposite side, Zoning District Buffers shall not be required. In the event that residential uses are located on the opposite side of the railroad right-of-way, Zoning District Buffer as required by §165-37D shall be provided. In the event that a Zoning District Buffer is required the width of the railroad right-of-way may be counted towards the required Zoning District Buffer distance. COUNTY of FREDERICK �m- Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 MEMORANDUM FAX: 540/665-6395 To: Frederick County Planning Commission From: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner Subject: Public Hearing — Proposed Ordinance Amendment — Height Restrictions in the B3 Zoning District Date: October 15, 2008 Walsh, Colucci, Lubeley, Emrich & Walsh, PC, submitted a Zoning Ordinance text amendment request to the County to enable the building height restriction in the B3 (Industrial Transition) Zoning District to be increased from 35 feet to 45 feet. The requested changes are based on a desire to have a height allowance in the B3 District that falls between the B2 (Business General) District [35ft] and the Ml (Light Industrial) District [60ft]. The item was presented to the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DDRS) at their meeting on June 26, 2008. The DRRS stated that they could support the 45 foot height increase as an exception to the height requirements so long as anything over 35 feet in height utilized the building setbacks required for the Ml (Light Industrial) Zoning District. This item was then discussed at the Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission Joint Work Session held on August 5, 2008. At the work session, this item was briefly discussed; however, a clear direction on the height exception was not achieved. The Planning Commission discussed this item at their August 20, 2008 meeting and was supportive of the ordinance amendment. The Board of Supervisors approved this item to be sent to public hearing at their September 24, 2008 meeting. The attached document shows the existing Ordinance as well as the proposed height exception in bold italics. §165-83 is the section in the Zoning Ordinance that shows the maximum height restriction for the commercial and industrial districts; this section is proposed to remain the same. The height exception is proposed to be added to § 165-24 Height limitations; exceptions. Information from the applicant has also been attached. A recommendation from the Planning Commission on this proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is sought. Please contact me if you have any questions. Attachments: 1. Existing Ordinance with proposed additions shown in bold italics (§165-24). 2. Existing Commercial and Industrial Height Requirements (§165-83). 3. Letter from applicant requesting a text amendment. CEP/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 ATTACHMENT 1 ARTICLE W Supplementary Use x':egulations § 165-24. height limitations; exceptions. [Amended 4-10-19911 A. No structure shall exceed the height limitations described in this chapter. B. Exceptions to height requirements: (1) The maximum height requirements shall not apply to the following: (a) Barns and silos. (b) Belfries. (c) Bulkheads. (d) Chimneys. (e) Church spires and towers. (f) Flagpoles. (g) (Reserved) s (h) Domes and skylights. (i) Masts and aerials. (j) Radio and television transmission towers and commercial telecommunication facilities [Amended 4-9-19971 (k) Smokestacks and cooling towers. (1) Utility poles and towers. (m) Water tanks. (n) Windmills. (2) Parapet walls may be up to four feet above the height of the building on which the walls rest. (2) Solar collectors, air conditioners and other mechanical equipment may exceed the height limitations if they are screened from the public view of surrounding properties and rights-of-way. ATTACIEWENT 1 (3) Automated storage facilities in the M1 and M2 Zoning Districts shall be exempt from the maximum height requirement. This exemption shall be only when the facility �s provided with full sprinkling for fire granted protection according to the specifications of applicable codes.„ch exemptions shall be approved by the Frederick County Fire Marshall: In no case shall the height of these facilities exceed 100 feet in height. (4) 411 of the above exceptions shall be allowed only if they accomplish the purpose for which they are intended, if they are not intended for human occupancy and if they do not infringe on the solar access of surrounding properties. (6) General office buildings in the B2 and B3 Zoning Districts and hotel and motel buildings in the B2 Zoning District shall be exempt from the maximum height reTairement of those zoning districts. In no case shall the height of such building exceed 60 feet. When such exemptions are proposed adjacent to existing residential uses, the Planning CO rnlnission shall review the site development plan pursuant to the provisions of § 165- 37A(3). [Added 3-8-200061 (7) Buildings used for schools without residential components may exceed the maximum height of the underlying zoning district. The only portions of buildings used for schools without residential components that may exceed the height in the underlying zoning district are those which are accessory and inconsequential to the primary function of the building. In no case shall any portion of the building exceed 75 feet in height. [Added 6-11-200361 (8) If any of the above exceptions exceed the height limitation of the proposed zoning district, the structure shall be required to be setback the normal setback or required buffer distance plus one foot for every foot over the maximum allowed height of that zoning district. [Added 6-9-1993; amended 3-8-20001 (9) In the 83 (Industrial Transition) Zoning District uses may exceed the height limitation so long as all front, side and rear setbacks conform to the setback requirements for the MI (Light Industrial) Zoning District. In no case shall any structure in the B3 Zoning District exceed 45 feet in height ATTACEUAF-NT 2 § 165-83 FREDERICK COUNTY CODE § 165-85 § 165-83. Dimensional and intensity requirements. A. The following table describes the dimensional and intensity requirements for the business and industrial districts: B_ Minimum landscaped area. In the B2 Business General Zoning District, the Planning Commission may require' that more than 15% of the area of a site shall be landscaped in order to meet the intent of this chapter. Additional landscaped areas may be required to .ensure that all unused areas are landscaped and to improve the general appearance and use of the site. In no case shall more than 25% of the site be required to be landscaped in the B2 Business General Zoning District. ARTICLE X1 EM Extractive Manufacturing District § 165-84. Intent. The intent of the Extractive Manufacturing District is to provide for mining and related industries, all of which rely on the extraction of natural resources. Provisions and performance standards are provided to protect surrounding uses from adverse impacts. 'It is also the intent of this article to avoid the encroachment of incompatible uses on the borders of the EM District. § 165-85. Permitted uses. The following uses shall be allowed: 165:122 06-15-2007 District Requirement B1 B2 B3 M1 Yt2 Front yard setback on 50 50 50 75 75 primary or arterial highways (feet) Front yard setback on 35 35 35 75 75 collector or minor streets (feet) Side yard setbacks (feet) - - 15 25 25 Rear yard setbacks (feet) - - 15 25 25 Floor area to lot area ratio 0.3 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 (FAR) Minimum landscaped area 35 15 25 25 15 (percentage of lot area) Maximum height (feet) 35 35 35 60 60 B_ Minimum landscaped area. In the B2 Business General Zoning District, the Planning Commission may require' that more than 15% of the area of a site shall be landscaped in order to meet the intent of this chapter. Additional landscaped areas may be required to .ensure that all unused areas are landscaped and to improve the general appearance and use of the site. In no case shall more than 25% of the site be required to be landscaped in the B2 Business General Zoning District. ARTICLE X1 EM Extractive Manufacturing District § 165-84. Intent. The intent of the Extractive Manufacturing District is to provide for mining and related industries, all of which rely on the extraction of natural resources. Provisions and performance standards are provided to protect surrounding uses from adverse impacts. 'It is also the intent of this article to avoid the encroachment of incompatible uses on the borders of the EM District. § 165-85. Permitted uses. The following uses shall be allowed: 165:122 06-15-2007 - & ATTACPfMENT 3 WALSH COLUCCI LUBELEY EMRICH & WALSH PC John H. Foote (703) 680-4664 Ext 114 j fo otef Qp w. th r1 an d1 awy ers. Dom Fax: (703) 680-2161 May 21, 2008 Via E-mail and First Class Mail Eric R. Lawrence Planning Director Frederick County Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Proposed B3 Text Amendment Request Dear Eric: On behalf of our client, BPG Properties, Ltd., we request that Frederick County initiate an ordinance amending Zoning Ordinance § 165-83.A. to provide for a maximum permitted height of 45 feet in the B-3 Zoning District. As the County's Industrial Transition District, it is appropriate for the maximum permitted height to fall between the permitted height in B-2 of 35 feet and the permitted height of 60 feet in M-1 to accommodate the types of uses and end-users contemplated by the B-3 district regulations. Frederick County is relatively unique in its inclusion of such a transitional zoning category, but a review of some other Virginia jurisdictions reveals that a 35 foot maximum height is comparatively low for similar commercial and industrial districts. In nearby Warren County, the maximum permitted height in the Industrial Zones is 50 feet, and in all other zones 40 feet. Warren County Zoning Ordinance § 183-13. Fauquier County permits maximum building heights as follows in its corresponding commercial and industrial districts: 65 feet in the ,_c.r,m aciul - x3i,,h..ay (C-2) District , „0 Beet in theCorrLmercial - Shopping Center, Community/Regional (C-3) District", 45 feet in the "Industrial Park (I-1) District", and 45 feet in the "Industrial General (1-2) District". Fauquier County Zoning Ordinance § 3-300. Thank you for your consideration of this request, and please inform us when this matter is scheduled for a Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee committee meeting. ,PHONE 7D3 680 4664 -1 FAX 703 68o 6067 1 WWW.THELANI)LAWYERS.COM M1 4310 PRINCE WILLIAM PARKWAY, SUITE 300 1 PRINCE WILLIAM, VA 22192 ARLINGTON OFFICE 703 528 4700 1 LOUDOUN OFFICE 703 737 3633 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Mr. Eric Lawrence May 21, 2008 Page 2 of 2 Sincerely yours, WALSH, COLUCCI, LUBELEY, EMRICH & WALSH, P-C- V�— [�' / ///vL-- John H. Foote JHF/jhf cc: Daniel P. DiLella John Knott Michael Coughlin -- Robert Mitchell Market Driven Justification for 45' Height Increase in B-3 Permitted uses • Offices and storage facilities for building construction contractors, heavy construction contractors and special trade contractors • Warehousing • Various repair facilities • Flex tech 45' height needed for sophisticated storage operations Racking—most users utilize racking system to organize product/materials Product/materials accessed by forklift Goal is to maximize vertical storage to reduce floor space (footprint) needed Typical elevation attached • Fire Code requires clearance between product and sprinkler • Underside of roof joist at 32'3" elevation • Top of structure from finished floor at 41'6" • Loading dock—elevation of loading dock must be higher than ground, increasing the height measurement at the loading dock to 45'6" NOTE—Height measured from mean level of the ground surrounding structure to its highest point Typical Users: Solaris Paper (consumer/commercialpaper products), Plygem Industries (building products), Horne Depot distribution Other jurisdictions: Frederick County at a competitive disadvantage with: • Warren County -50' height limit in Industrial Zone; 40' height limit in all other districts • Fauquier County --65 feet in the "Commercial - Highway (C-2) District", 60' in the "Commercial - Shopping Center, Community/Regional (C-3) District", 45' in the "Industrial Park (I-1) District", and 45' in the "Industrial General (I-2) District". • Rockingham County height up to 45' if certain setbacks increased • No mechanism for modifying height by special use permit or other means 1.0._PANEL /-PARAPET WAL EL. +42'-6" -- -- T.O.S a RIDGE LINE (NIGH F �EL. 8.0.5 a LOW POINT EL_ +32173" CONCRETE WAL ENTRANCE / ST( FIRST FLOOR E L +0'-m,---- 1WALL SECTION A.2 Scale: NTS -SPRINKLER LINE SPRINKLE RACKING RACKING 2 SECTION @ LOADING DOCK A_2 Scale: NTS T.D. PANEL / PARAPET WALL_d, --- — — EL. +42'-6' a RIDGE LINE (NIGH POINT) — EL—.141 1-61 B.O.S a LOW POINT CONCRETE WALL PANEL FLOOR_ EL. +0'-0" LOADING PAD EL_ -4'-0" T� REVISIONS WALL SECTIONS PROPOSED WAREHOUSE BUILDING FOR= BPG DEVELOPMENT GOMPANY, L.P. a WULFF ARCHITECTS, RWR INC. 1515 FOGOir 2N0 BOOR BPG Properties, Ltd. 3000 Centre Sgwre Wei et 1590 A1phi,, An 1-81 DISTRIBUTION CENTER PA 19, 1: 21 AM4 PA 19102 T: 21i9R5.0500 Philodelphio, PA 19103 A 19 ��� > F: 215.9854404 W. WWN.WUIFFARCHRECTi.CON - Tel. N0. (215) 495-0409 Fo. No. (2 5) 496-0431 NOT TO SCALE za, zoma `�L FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA T.O. PANEL/PARAPET WALL (LOADING) EL. +42'-6— — — — T0.5. a RIDGELINE�-z �9 tY LOADING PAD VIEW OF BUILDING FROM NORTHEAST FIRST FLOOR EL. 40'-O.' I-81 DISTRIBUTION CENTER ME'S Development • , WUFFF AP CNITFci ti, INC. FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Company, L.P. PROPOSED WAREPOUSE BUILDING XXREVI6I0N5FER5PECTIVE BPG DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P. WULFF ARCHITECTS, INC. 0 ■ BPG Properties, Ltd. _ ffEM _ oAE ---- Rnwaa — 1515 LOCUST PA 19, 2N0 BOOR . 3000 Centre Sp- West ' I-81 DISTRIBUTION CENTER PHIAOE985. PA 79104 1500 de,ke1 A 19 W 215985.4500 Td.N..(2, PA 19707 F: 215.9Ai.44A Tel. No. (215) 496-0460 PmJect Smlc W Www.wuuraucn06c1s-COM F.. N.. (215) 496-0431 NOT TO SCALE FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA UNE 24,200a T.O. PANEL/PARAPET WALL a ENTRANCE,�l -- - EL. +43'-6"� T.O. PANEL/PARAPET WALL EL 7,-;�� T0.5. a RIDGE LINE_(HIGH POINT) - ----- - EL. 441'-6" FIRST FLOOR EL. 40'-O.' I-81 DISTRIBUTION CENTER ME'S Development • , WUFFF AP CNITFci ti, INC. FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Company, L.P. PROPOSED WAREPOUSE BUILDING XXREVI6I0N5FER5PECTIVE BPG DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P. WULFF ARCHITECTS, INC. 0 ■ BPG Properties, Ltd. _ ffEM _ oAE ---- Rnwaa — 1515 LOCUST PA 19, 2N0 BOOR . 3000 Centre Sp- West ' I-81 DISTRIBUTION CENTER PHIAOE985. PA 79104 1500 de,ke1 A 19 W 215985.4500 Td.N..(2, PA 19707 F: 215.9Ai.44A Tel. No. (215) 496-0460 PmJect Smlc W Www.wuuraucn06c1s-COM F.. N.. (215) 496-0431 NOT TO SCALE FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA UNE 24,200a COUNTY of FREDERICK Depardment of Planning and Development T� /t E /,�OPAI D M 540/665-5651 li' 1 1'� "�i "aJ v j vg FAX: 540/665-6395 To: Frederick County Planning Commission From: Candice E. Perkins, AICD, Senior Planner Subject: Public Dearing — Proposed Ordinance Amendment — Interstate Overlay Signs Date: October 15, 2008 Per Article XVII of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance (§ 165-127-131), property owners are permitted to erect larger signs along highways if they are within the Interstate Overlay (IA) District. Interstate overlay signs range in maximum size from 300sf to 500sf depending on the number of users, and the maximum sign height is determined by the interchange where the sign is located. The intent and purpose of interstate overlay signs is to inform the traveling public as to the location of hotels, gasoline stations and restaurants. Currently, the IA Overlay also allows for general merchandise, apparel stores and automotive dealers (SIC 53, 55 and 56) to be located on the signs as well. Uses such as merchandise and apparel stores are classified as a destination business, and with these types of uses customers have already planned in advance to visit the business and, therefore, an interstate overlay sign would not be necessary. Businesses such as restaurants, hotels and gasoline stations would be classified as drive-by businesses which_ are businesses that customers frequent more on impulse or while driving by and, therefore, a sign to attract customers from the interstate would be more appropriate. Staff is proposing an ordinance revision to the Interstate Overlay District regulations to remove general merchandise, apparel stores and automotive dealers from the qualifying uses. The item was presented to the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) at their meeting on June 26, 2008 and the DRRS endorsed the text amendment as presented. The Planning Commission discussed this item at their August 20, 2008 Planning Commission meeting and were supportive of the proposed amendment. The Board of Supervisors approved this item to be sent to public hearing at their September 24, 2008 meeting. The attached document shows the existing Ordinance with proposed deletions shown in blackline and additions shown in bold italics. A recommendation from the Planning Commission on this proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is sought. Please contact me if you have any questions. Attachments: 1. Existing Ordinance with proposed deletions shown in blackline and additions shown in bold italics. CEP/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 ARTICLE XVII IA Interstate Area Overlay District [Added 5-10-1995; amended 8-13-1997 § 165-127. Intent. ATTACHMENT 1 The IA Interstate Area Overlay District is intended to provide commercial businesses within an identified area the ability to utilize business signs that are in excess of the limits specified in § 165-30 of this chapter. This flexibility is provided to inform the traveling public of business service opportunities at specific interstate interchange areas. The standards within this article are designed to allow for additional visibility for commercial businesses while minimizing negative impacts to view sheds, the traveling public and residential properties that are adjacent to or within the proximity of the overlay district. Established boundaries are based on reasonable sight distances and policies set forth in the Comprehensive Pian and are intended to designate each interstate interchange area and provide guidance for considering the addition of subsequent properties. § 165-128. District boundaries. Properties that are included within the Interstate Area Overlay District shall be delineated on the Official Zoning Map for Frederick County. This map shall be maintained and updated by the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development. § 165-129. Establishment of district. A. The Frederick County Board of Supervisors may apply the Interstate Area Overlay District to properties within the proximity of interstate interchange areas upon concluding that: (1) The property is in conformance with the idealized interchange development pattern recommendation of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. (2) The placement of a sign meeting the requirements of this section will not have an adverse impact on adjoining properties whose primary use is residential. (3) The property has met the requirements of Article II of this chapter, as well as the requirements of § 15.2-2286 of the Code of Virginia 1950, as amended. [Amended 11-12-20031 B. The Interstate Area Overlay District shall be in addition to and shall overlay all other zoning districts where it is applied so that any parcel of land within the Interstate Area Overlay District shall also be within one or more zoning districts as specified within this chapter. The effect shall be the creation of regulations and requirements of both the underlying zoning district(s) and the Interstate Area Overlay District. ATTACHMENT 1 § 165-130. Qualifying criteria. A. On property that is delineated on the Official Zoning Map as being part of the Interstate Area Overlay District, the following uses shall be authorized to erect a commercial business sign that complies with the requirements of § 165-131 of this article. Such commercial business signs complying with the requirements of § 165-131 of this article shall hereinafter be referred to as interstate overlay signs. Standard Industrial Classification Qualifying Uses (SIC) ^utemetive dealers and gasoline service stations X5541 Eating and drinking establishments 58 Hotel and lodging establishments 70 B. Qualifying uses specified under § 165-130A that are authorized on property through the issuance of a conditional use permit in the RA Rural Areas District may be entitled to erect an interstate overlay sign that is of a greater height and size than is permitted in the underlying zoning district, provided that the property has met the requirements of Article III of this chapter, the business sign complies with the requirements of § 165-131 of this article and the qualifying use is located on property that is delineated on the Official Zoning Map as being part of the Interstate Area Overlay District. § 165-131. District regulations. A. Permitted signs. Permitted signs shall be as follows: (1) Interstate overlay signs. (2) Signs permitted in the underlying zoning district(s). B. Prohibited signs. Prohibited signs shall be as follows: (1) Off -premise business signs. (2) Signs prohibited in the underlying zoning district(s). C. Number of freestanding commercial business signs. On any parcel within the Interstate Area Overlay District, one interstate overlay sign that complies with the requirements set forth in this article may be erected. D. Setback requirements. (1) All portions of an interstate overlay sign shall bed set back a minimum of 10 feet from any lot line or property boundary line and shall meet all other applicable setback requirements. (2) When any interstate overlay sign exceeds the height requirement of the underlying zoning district(s) and is located on property that adjoins or is across a right-of-way from property that is in the RP Residential Performance District, the HE Higher Education District or any property which has a residence as its primary E. F. G. H. ATTACHMENT 1 use, the setback shall be the normal setback plus one foot for every foot over the maximum height of the underlying zoning district(s). (3) The Planning Commission may waive any portion of the setback described in § 165-131D(2) if it can be demonstrated that the setback requirement cannot be met due to the irregular size or shape of the parcel. Spacing requirements. The spacing requirements between an interstate overlay sign and signs in the underlying zoning district(s) shall comply with the requirements in § 165-30F of this chapter and shall meet all other applicable spacing requirements. Maximum size. (1) No interstate overlay sign shall exceed a total of 300 square feet in area. (2) When more than one qualifying use is located on a single parcel within the Interstate Area Overlay District, a single support structure may be erected which contains one or more signs, the total combined square footage of which shall not exceed 500 square feet in area. Illumination. Neither the direct nor reflected light from any illuminated interstate overlay sign shall create an increase in the ambient footcandle at the property line, create glare into or upon other structures or create glare onto a public thoroughfare so as to create a traffic hazard for operators of motor vehicles. Maintenance and permits. (1) All signs that are erected in the Interstate Area Overlay District shall meet the maintenance and permit requirements as specified in §165-30K and § 165-30L of this chapter. (2) If required, appropriate easements shall be secured by a property owner that desires to erect an interstate overlay sign prior to the issuance of a sign permit in order to ensure that required maintenance can be performed. Permitted heights. (1) All interstate overlay signs shall be located a minimum of 25 feet in height above the base of the sign support structure. (2) The maximum height for interstate overlay signs shall be determined by the nearest interstate exit number and shall be based on an elevation above mean sea level as set below: Maximum Business Sign Height Exit Number (feet above mean sea level) 302 (Middletown and Rt. 11 South) 760 307 (Stephens City and Rt. 277) S00 310 (Kernstown and Rt. 37) 805 313 (Rt. 50/17 and Rt. 522) 805 315 (Rt. 7 and Berryville Avenue) 750 317 (Rt. 11 North and Rt. 37) 815 321 (Clearbrook and Rt. 11 North) 700 323 (Whitehall and Rt. 11 North) 710 C • • COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 MEMORANDUM FAX: 540/665-63"75 To: Frederick County Planning Commission From: Candice E. Perkins, Senior Planneru Subject: Public Dearing — Proposed Ordinance Amendment - Age -Restricted Multifamily Housing Date: October 16, 2008 In 2007, Patton Harris Rust & Associates (PHR&A) submitted a Zoning Ordinance text amendment to the County to enable age -restricted multifamily housing in the RP (Residential Performance) District. This request has been discussed on numerous occasions over the past two years. The requested changes are based on a desire to incorporate elevators in a cost effective manner by permitting taller buildings, with more units per building, and a higher density than allowed in the garden apartment housing type. The principle change to the ordinance would be the introduction of a new housing type in the RP District called age -restricted multifamily housing. This would be added to the list of allowed RP housing types. The proposal calls for the new housing type to be permitted only with proffered age -restricted housing. Recent discussions on the proposed ordinance have r'volved around height and the setback from existing residential uses. The proposed ordinance was discussed at the August 5, 2008 Joint Work Session with the Board of Supervisors and the Planning Commission. At the work session, the main issue was the proximity of the building to adjacent residential uses. A waiver option to increase the height of the building was discussed at the meeting. After the Work Session, the ordinance was revised to include a waiver option for the building height and was presented to the DRRS on August 28, 2008. The DRRS discussed the height issue extensively and ultimately endorsed the ordinance as presented. The Planning Commission discussed this item at their meeting on September 17, 2008 and was supportive of the proposed amendment with the waiver option for height. The Board of Supervisors discussed this item at their meeting on October 8, 2008. The Board discussed the proposed waiver as well as the potential roof design. Ultimately the Board of Supervisors approved this item to be sent to public hearing. A recommendation from the Planning Commission on this proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is sought. Please contact me if you have any questions. Background The item was presented to the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DDRS) at their meeting on February 22, 2007. The DRRS was supportive of the text amendment with some modifications. The main concern of the DRRS was parking and the number of habitable floors. This 107 North Dent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Frederick County Planning Commission Re: Age -Restricted Multifamily Housing October 16, 2008 item was then discussed by the Planning Commission on April 4, 2007. Commission members raised the issue of compatibility with adjacent existing single-family neighborhoods. Since *here are only eight existing developments that could seek to utilize this housing type, some Commissioners felt reasonably comfortable with it. They noted that the Commission would have the opportunity during the rezoning process for future requests to determine if the location and height were compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The item was then discussed by the Board of Supervisors on April 25, 2007. Concerns regarding the number of habitable floors and the height were raised, as well as concerns about placing this type of use adjacent to existing residential uses. Changes were made to the ordinance after the BOS meeting, but consensus on the revisions was not achieved. The item was again presented at the Planning Commission Retreat in February 2008 and Board members expressed hesitation regarding the height of the structures when adjacent to existing residential units. The proposed text amendment has since been revised and was presented to the DRRS in April and May of 2008. At the April meeting, the DRRS suggested that the height of the structures not be reduced and remain at 60 feet and that the number of habitable floors remain at four to encourage pitched roofs instead of flat roofs. The DRRS also suggested that the side and rear perimeter boundary setbacks begin at 40 feet in height instead of 35 feet, since garden apartments can be up to 40 feet in height by right. The DRRS also discussed the parking space requirements and requested that they be modified to include more spaces for the larger units. Revisions were also made to the definition of age -restricted to include the State Code reference. The revisions were presented to the DRRS at their May meeting and they recommended that the ordinance be sent to the Planning Commission for review. The Planning Commission discussed this ordinance on June 17, 2008. The primary concern revolved around ensuring that the parking calculations were not too high. This item was then presented at the August 5, 2008 Joint Work Session of the Board of Supervisors and the Planning Commission. At the work session, the main issue was the proximity of the building to adjacent residential uses. A waiver option to increase the height of the building was discussed at the meeting, as well as topographic issues that may exist on proposed sites. After the Work Session, the ordinance was revised to include a waiver option for the building height and was presented to the DRRS on August 28, 2008. The DRRS discussed the height issue extensively and ultimately endorsed the ordinance as presented. The DRRS, however, stated that height as defined by the Zoning Ordinance may need to be modified. The principle change to the ordinance would be the introduction of a new housing type in the RP (Residential Performance) District called age -restricted multifamily housing. It would be added to the list of allowed RP housing types. The proposal calls for the new housing type to be allowed only with proffered age -restricted housing. At the present time, there are only eight developments to which this could apply — Snowden Bridge (part), Orrick Commons, Crosspointe (part), Cedar Meadows, Harvest Ridge, Westbury Commons, Westminster Canterbury and Willow Run (part). As evident in the attached text, the amendment has loosely based the new housing type on the existing garden apartment housing type (§ 165-65L). Differences from that section include: a higher density. (20 units per acre), a higher maximum number of dwelling units per building (110), a higher maximum building height (60 feet), a reduced (five feet) setback from parking areas or driveways, a greater (60 feet) setback from the road right-of-way, a greater (100 feet) setback from the side and 2 Frederick County Planning Commission Re: Age -Restricted Multifamily Housing October 16, 2008 rear, and a requirement for an elevator. Text changes are needed in a number of other sections of the Zoning Ordinance, and one section of the Subdivision Ordinance, to ensure consistency throughout the ordinances. In general, the new housing type was treated similarly to a garden apartment. The modified sections are listed below and detailed in the attachments: RP Residential Performance District §165-59. Permitted uses § 165-61. Number of uses restricted §165-62. Gross Density §165-62.1. Multifamily housing (Note: Proposed changes would apply to all multifamily housing types) § 165-65. Dimensional requirements Supplemental Use Regulations §165-37 Buffer and screening requirements Definitions §165-156 Definitions and word usage Design Standards § 144-24. Lot requirements The attached documents show the existing ordinances with changes to the ordinance supported by the DRRS and the PC (with strikethroughs for text eliminated and bold italic for text added) and a clean version of the proposed text as it is proposed to be adopted. A recommendation from the Planning Commission on this proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is sought. Please contact me if you have any questions. Attachm. ents: 1. Existing Ordinances with proposed changes shown in blackline. 2. Proposed Ordinances (clean version). CEP/bad 3 Proposed Changes — Blackline & Redline ATTACHMENT 1 PROPOSED CHANGES WITH STRIKETHROUGHS AND BOLD ITALIC Chapter 165 - Zoning ARTICLE x,71 RP Residential Performance District §165-59. Permitted uses. A. All uses shall be developed in accordance with an approved master development plan unless otherwise waived under Article XVIII of this chapter. B. Structures are to be erected or land used for one or more of the following uses: (1) Any of the following residential structures: single-family detached traditional rural, single-family detached traditional, single-family detached urban, single-family detached cluster, single-family detached zero lot line, single-family small lot, duplex, multiplex, atrium house, weak -link townhouse, townhouse, of garden apartment or age restricted multifamily housing. [Amended 10-27-1999] (2) Schools and churches. (3) Fire stations and companies and rescue squads. (4) Group homes. (5) Home occupations. (6) Utilities necessary to serve residential uses, including poles, lines, distribution transformers, pipes and meters. (7) Accessory uses and structures. Accessory structures attached to the main structure shall be considered part of the main structure. Mobile homes and trailers, as defined, shall not be considered as accessory structures or buildings. (8) Required or bonus recreational facilities and public parks, playgrounds and recreational facilities. (9) Business signs to advertise the sale or rent of the premises upon which they are erected, church bulletin boards and identification signs, signs for non-profit service clubs and charitable associations (off-site signs not to exceed eight square feet) and directional signs. (10) Temporary model homes used for sale of properties in a residential development. (11) Libraries. [Added 6-8-1994] (12) Adult -care residences and assisted -living care facilities. [Added 8-24- 2004] §165-61. Number of uses restricted. Proposed Changes — Blackline & Redline ATTACHMENT 1 More than one principal structure or use and its customary accessory structures or uses are permitted in the RP Residential Performance District for duplexes, multiplexes, atrium houses, weak -link townhouses, and garden apartments and age -restricted multifamily housing. §165-62. Gross density. [Amended 5-11-19941 A gross density shall be established for each proposed development, including all land contained within a single master development plan, according to the characteristics of the land, the capacity of public facilities and roads and the nature of surrounding uses. Because of these characteristics, some developments may not be allowed to employ the maximum density allowed by these regulations. The following density requirements shall apply to all parcels as they exist at the time of the adoption of this section: A. Subsequent divisions of land shall not increase the allowed density on parcels of land. B. In no case shall the gross density of any development within an approved master development plan exceed 4-0 20 dwellings per acre for age -restricted multifamily housing or 10 dwelling units per acre for any other housing types. C. In no case shall the gross density of any development within an approved master development plan which contains more than 10 acres and less than 100 acres exceed 5.5 dwellings per acre. D. In no case shall the gross density of any development within an approved master development plan which contains more than 100 acres exceed four dwellings per acre. §165-62.1. Multifamily housing. [Added 5-11-19941 A. Developments that are less than 25 acres in size may include more than 540A 60% multifamily housing types. B. Developments that are more than 25 acres and less than 50 acres in size shall be permitted to contain up to 5" 60% multifamily housing types. C. Developments that are over 50 acres in size shall be permitted to contain up to 40 -OA 50% multifamily housing types. -2- Proposed Changes — Blackline & Redline ATTACHMENT 1 §165-65. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall be met by uses in the RP Residential Performance District. The Zoning Administrator shall make the final determination as to the classification of housing types. Unless otherwise specified, all housing types shall be served by public sewer and water. L. Garden apartments. "Garden apartments" are multifamily buildings where individual dwelling units share a common outside access. They also share a common yard area, which is the sum of the required lot areas of all dwelling units within the building. Garden apartments shall contain six or more dwellings in a single structure. Required open space shall not be included as minimum lot area. (1) Maximum gross density shall be 10 units per acre. (2) Dimensional requirements shall be as follows: Minimum Lot Area per Number of Dwelling Unit Off -Street Bedrooms (square feet) Parking Spaces Efficiency 1,300 1.50 1 1,700 2.00 2 2,000 2.25 3 plus 2,550 2.50 (3) Maximum site impervious surface ratio (on lot) shall be 0.50. (4) Minimum lot size shall be one acre. (5) Minimum yards shall be as follows: (a) Front setback: [ 1 ] Thirty-five feet from road right-of-way. [2] Twenty feet from parking area or driveway. (b) Side: 50 feet from perimeter boundary. (c) Rear: 50 feet from perimeter boundary. (6) Minimum on-site building spacing shall be 50 feet. (7) Maximum number of dwelling units per building shall be 16. (8) Maximum building height shall be as follows: (a) Principal building: 40 feet. (b) Accessory buildings: 15 feet -3- Proposed Changes — Blackline & Redline ATTACHMENT 1 Q. Age -restricted multifamily housing. "Age -restricted multifamily housing" are multifamily buildings where individual dwelling units share a common outside access. They also share a common yard area, which is the sum of the required lot areas of all dwelling units within the building. Age - restricted multifamily housing shall only be permitted within proffered age - restricted developments. Elevator service shall be provided to each floor of age -restricted multifamily housing structures for use by residents and guests. (1) Maximum gross density shall be 20 units per acre. (2) Dimensional requirements shall be as follows: Minimum Lot Area per Number of Dwelling Unit Off -Street Bedrooms (square feet) Parking Spaces Efficiency 1,300 1.5 1 1,700 1.5 2 2,000 2.0 3 plus 2,550 2.0 (3) Maximum site impervious surface ratio (on Cot) shall be 0.50. (4) Minimum lot size shall be three acres. (5) Minimum yards shall be as follows: (a) Front setback: [I] Sixty feet from road right-of-ways. [21 Five feet from parking areas or driveways. (b) Side: 100 feet from the perimeter boundary. An additional two feet from the perimeter boundary shall be added for every foot that the height of the building exceeds 40 feet when the adjacent use is single family residences. (c) Rear: 100 feet from the perimeter boundary. An additional two feet from the perimeter boundary shall be added for every foot that the height of the building exceeds 40 feet when the adjacent use is single family residences. (6) Minimum on-site building spacing shall be 50 feet. (7) Maximum number of dwelling units per building shall be 110. (8) Maximum building height shall be as follows: (a) nu:n p ,l b uiIWgn 60 feet. The maximum structure height for any principal building shall be 40 feet. The Board of Supervisors may waive the 40 foot height limitation provided that it will not negatively impact adjacent residential uses. In no case shall any principle building exceed 60 feet in height. (b) Aecesso y hugdings: 's fees The maximum structure height for any accessory buildings shall be l5 feet. -4- Proposed Changes — Blackline & Redline ATTACHMENT 1 ARTICLE IV Supplemental Use Regulations §165-37 Buffer and screening requirements. [Amended 6-13-1990] C. [Amended 5-11-1994] Residential separation buffers. (2) Perimeter apartment, or -multiplex or age -restricted multifamily housing separation buffers. (a) Wherever possible and practical, garden apartments, ap,4 multiplex structures and age -restricted multifamily housing structures shall not be placed adjacent to other types of residential structures. If other types of residential structures must be placed adjacent to garden apartments, or multiplex structures; or age -restricted multifamily housing structures the following buffers are required. (b) Buffers shall be placed between the garden apartment, or multiplex structures or age -restricted multifamily housing structures and the lot line of the lots containing the other housing types. (c) For age -restricted multifamily housing the full screen must include all elements of the landscape screen with the evergreen component planted at a height of six feet, and also include a six -foot -high wall, fence, mound or berm. -5- Distance Buffer Required Screening Inactive Active Provided (Minimum) (Maximum) Total (feet) (feet) (feet) Full screen 75 25 100 Landscape screen 150 50 200 No screen 350 50 400 (b) Buffers shall be placed between the garden apartment, or multiplex structures or age -restricted multifamily housing structures and the lot line of the lots containing the other housing types. (c) For age -restricted multifamily housing the full screen must include all elements of the landscape screen with the evergreen component planted at a height of six feet, and also include a six -foot -high wall, fence, mound or berm. -5- Proposed Changes — Blackline & Redline ATTACHMENT 1 ARTICLE XXII Definitions -�.,.a.a 111_10011§i65-1jb. Definitions and wor ua usage.u .".] AGE -RESTRICTED — Housing intended for and occupied by older persons (as defined in Chapter 36-96.7 of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended). The housing must include the publication of, and adherence to, policies and procedures which demonstrate an intent by the owner(s) and manager(s) to provide housing for older persons. -6- - CG - C _ AGE -RESTRICTED — Housing intended for and occupied by older persons (as defined in Chapter 36-96.7 of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended). The housing must include the publication of, and adherence to, policies and procedures which demonstrate an intent by the owner(s) and manager(s) to provide housing for older persons. -6- Proposed Changes — Blackline & Redline ATTACHMENT 1 Chapter 144 — Subdivision of Land ARTICLE V Design Standards §144-24. Lot requirements. C. Lot Access. All lots shall abut and have direct access to a public street or right- of-way dedicated for maintenance by the Virginia Department of Transportation (2) Multifamily Single-family small lot housing, single family attached housing and multifamily housing. [Amended 10-27-1999] (a) Lots in subdivisions to be used for the following housing types, as defined by Chapter 165, Zoning, need not abut public streets: [1] Duplexes. [2] Multiplexes, [3] Atrium houses. [4] Townhouses. [5] Weak -link townhouses. [6] Garden apartments. [7] Single-family small lot housing. [8] Age -restricted multifamily housing -7- Proposed Ordinances (Clean Version) ATTACHMENT 2 PROPOSED ORDINANCES (CLEAN VERSION) Chapter 165 - Zoning ARTICLE VI RP Residential Performance District §165-59. Permitted uses. A. All uses shall be developed in accordance with an approved master development plan unless otherwise waived under Article XVIII of this chapter. B. Structures are to be erected or land used for one or more of the following uses: (1) Any of the following residential structures: single-family detached traditional rural, single-family detached traditional, single-family detached urban, single-family detached cluster, single-family detached zero lot line, single-family small lot, duplex, multiplex, atrium house, weak -link townhouse, townhouse, garden apartment or age -restricted multifamily housing. [Amended 10-27-1999] (2) Schools and churches. (3) Fire stations and companies and rescue squads. (4) Group homes. (5) Home occupations. (6) Utilities necessary to serve residential uses, including poles, lines, distribution transformers, pipes and meters. (7) Accessory uses and structures. Accessory structures attached to the main structure shall be considered part of the main structure. Mobile homes and trailers, as defined, shall not be considered as accessory structures or buildings. (8) Required or bonus recreational facilities and public parks, playgrounds and recreational facilities. (9) Business signs to advertise the sale or rent of the premises upon which they are erected, church bulletin boards and identification signs, signs for non-profit service clubs and charitable associations (off-site signs not to exceed eight square feet) and directional signs. (10) Temporary model homes used for sale of properties in a residential development. (11) Libraries. [Added 6-8-1994] (12) Adult -care residences and assisted -living care facilities. [Added 8-24- 2004] §165-61. Number of uses restricted. ME Proposed Ordinances (Clean Version) ATTACHMENT 2 More than one principal structure or use and its customary accessory structures or uses are permitted in the RP Residential Performance District for duplexes, multiplexes, atrium houses, weak -link townhouses, garden apartments and age -restricted multifamily housing. §165-62. Gross density. [Amended 5-11-1994] A gross density shall be established for each proposed development, including all land contained within a single master development plan, according to the characteristics of the land, the capacity of public facilities and roads and the nature of surrounding uses. Because of these characteristics, some developments may not be allowed to employ the maximum density allowed by these regulations. The following density requirements shall apply to all parcels as they exist at the time of the adoption of this section: A. Subsequent divisions of land shall not increase the allowed density on parcels of land. B. In no case shall the gross density of any development within an approved master development plan exceed 20 dwellings per acre for age -restricted multifamily housing or 10 dwelling units per acre for any other housing types. C. In no case shall the gross density of any development within an approved master development plan which contains more than 10 acres and less than 100 acres exceed 5.5 dwellings per acre. D. In no case shall the gross density of any development within an approved master development plan which contains more than 100 acres exceed four dwellings per acre. 8165-62.1. Multifamily housing. [Added 5-11-19941 A. Developments that are less than 25 acres in size may include more than 60% multifamily housing types. B. Developments that are more than 25 acres and less than 50 acres in size shall be permitted to contain up to 60% multifamily housing types. C. Developments that are over 50 acres in size shall be permitted to contain up to 50% multifamily housing types. -2- Proposed Ordinances (Clean Version) ATTACHMENT 2 §165-65. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall be met by uses in the RP Residential Performance District. The Zoning Administrator shall make the final determination as to the classification of housing types. unless otherwise specified, ail housing types shaii be served by public sewer and water. L. Garden apartments. "Garden apartments" are multifamily buildings where individual dwelling units share a common outside access. They also share a common yard area, which is the sum of the required lot areas of all dwelling units within the building. Garden apartments shall contain six or more dwellings in a single structure. Required open space shall not be included as minimum lot area. (1) Maximum gross density shall be 10 units per acre. (2) Dimensional requirements shall be as follows: Minimum Lot Area per Number of Dwelling Unit Off -Street Bedrooms (square feet) Parking Spaces Efficiency 1,300 1.50 1 1,700 2.00 2 2,000 2.25 3 plus 2,550 2.50 (3) Maximum site impervious surface ratio (on lot) shall be 0.50. (4) Minimum lot size shall be one acre. (5) Minimum yards shall be as follows: (a) Front setback: [1] Thirty-five feet from road right-of-way. [2] Twenty feet from parking area or driveway. (b) Side: 50 feet from perimeter boundary. (c) Rear: 50 feet from perimeter boundary. (6) Minimum on-site building spacing shall be 50 feet. (7) Maximum number of dwelling units per building shall be 16. (8) Maximum building height shall be as follows: (a) Principal building: 40 feet. (b) Accessory buildings: 15 feet -3- Proposed Ordinances (Clean Version) ATTACHMENT 2 Q. Age -restricted multifamily housing, "Age -restricted multifamily housing" are multifamily buildings where individual dwelling units share a common outside access. They also share a common yard area, which is the sum of the required lot areas of all dwelling units within the building. Age -restricted multifamily housing shall only be permitted within proffered age -restricted developments. Elevator service shall be provided to each floor of age - restricted multifamily housing structures for use by residents and guests. (1) Maximum gross density shall be 20 units per acre. (2) Dimensional requirements shall be as follows: Minimum Lot Area per Number of Dwelling Unit Off -Street Bedrooms (square feet) Parking Spaces Efficiency 1,300 1.5 1 1,700 1.5 2 2,000 2.0 3 plus 2,550 2.0 (3) Maximum site impervious surface ratio (on lot) shall be 0.50. (4) Minimum lot size shall be three acres. (5) Minimum yards shall be as follows: (a) Front setback: [1] Sixty feet from road right-of-ways. [2] Five feet from parking areas or driveways. (b) Side: 100 feet from the perimeter boundary. An additional two feet from the perimeter boundary shall be added for every foot that the height of the building exceeds 40 feet when the adjacent use is single family residences. (c) Rear: 100 feet from the perimeter boundary. An additional two feet from the perimeter boundary shall be added for every foot that the height of the building exceeds 40 feet when the adjacent use is single family residences. (6) Minimum on-site building spacing shall be 50 feet. (7) Maximum number of dwelling units per building shall be 110. (8) Maximum building height shall be as follows: (a) The maximum structure height for any principal building shall be 40 feet. The Board of Supervisors may waive the 40 foot height limitation provided that it will not negatively impact adjacent residential uses. In no case shall any principle building exceed 60 feet in height. (b) The maximum structure height for any accessory buildings shall be 15 feet. -4- Proposed Ordinances (Clean Version) ATTACHMENT2' ARTICLE IV Supplemental Use Regulations ;165-37 Buffer and screening requirements. [Amended 6-13-1990] C. [Amended 5-11-1994] Residential separation buffers. (2) Perimeter apartment, multiplex or age -restricted multifamily housing separation buffers. (a) Wherever possible and practical, garden apartments, multiplex structures and age -restricted multifamily housing structures shall not be placed adjacent to other types of residential structures. If other types of residential structures must be placed adjacent to garden apartments, multiplex structures, or age -restricted multifamily housing structures the following buffers are required. (b) Buffers shall be placed between the garden apartment, multiplex structures or age -restricted multifamily housing structures and the lot line of the lots containing the other housing types. (c) For age -restricted multifamily housing the full screen must include all elements of the landscape screen with the evergreen component planted at a height of six feet, and also include a six -foot -high wall, fence, mound or berm. -5- Distance Buffer Required Screening Inactive Active Provided (Minimum) (Maximum) Total (feet) (feet) (feet) Full screen 75 25 100 Landscape screen 150 50 200 No screen 350 50 400 (b) Buffers shall be placed between the garden apartment, multiplex structures or age -restricted multifamily housing structures and the lot line of the lots containing the other housing types. (c) For age -restricted multifamily housing the full screen must include all elements of the landscape screen with the evergreen component planted at a height of six feet, and also include a six -foot -high wall, fence, mound or berm. -5- Proposed Ordinances (Clean Version) ATTACHMENT 2 ARTICLE XXII Definitions §165-156. Definitions and word usage. [Amended 11-13-1991] AGE -RESTRICTED — Housing intended for and occupied by older persons (as defined in Chapter 36-96.7 of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended). The housing must include the publication of, and adherence to, policies and procedures which demonstrate an intent by the owner(s) and manager(s) to provide housing for older persons. Proposed Ordinances (Clean Version) ATTACHMENT 2 Chapter 144 — Subdivision of Land ARTICLE V Design Standards §144-24. Lot requirements. C. Lot Access. All lots shall abut and have direct access to a public street or right- of-way dedicated for maintenance by the Virginia Department of Transportation (2) Single-family small lot housing, single family attached housing and multifamily housing. [Amended 10-27-1999] (a) Lots in subdivisions to be used for the following housing types, as defined by Chapter 165, Zoning, need not abut public streets: [ 1 ] Duplexes. [2] Multiplexes, [3] Atrium houses. [4] Townhouses. [5] Weak -link townhouses. [6] Garden apartments. [7] Single-family small lot housing. [8] Age -restricted multifamily housing -7- .-. u • • CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #10-08 Aw�`GK CO��a ADAM ARKFELD w Staff Report for the Planning Commission w e" Prepared: October 21, 2008 Staff Contact: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrator 73 This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 09/03/08 Tabled 45 days by PC Planning Commission: 11/05/08 Pending Board of Supervisors: 12/10/08 Pending LOCATION: This property is located at 250 Sister Chipmunk Lane. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 34-A-98 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Vacant South: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Vacant East: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Vacant West: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Vacant PROPOSED USE: This application is for a Motel/Bed and Breakfast REVIEW EVALUATIONS: VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION: The application for a Conditional Use Permit for this property appears to have little measurable impact on Route 668, the VDOT facility which would provide access to the property. Existing entrance is adequate for proposed use. However, should use ever expand in the future, the entrance may have to be upgraded to VDOT commercial standards. CUP #10-08, Adam Ackfeld October 21, 2008 Page 2 FIRE AND RESCUE: Plan approval recommended. INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT: Existing R5, under 5 sleeping units, requires no change of use per 2006 Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code. No permit or inspection required unless renovation or new structures are added. Our records indicate 4 bedroom dwelling with 8 occupancy. HEALTH DEPARTMENT: Contact the Office of Drinking Water for information regarding the well. No objections regarding drainfield. Per Office of Drinking Water, 8/7/08, no water testing required to limited number of potential guests. Maximum of 6 guests plus the inn keepers per day. REVISION 8/27/08: If the conditional use permit is approved, please submit an application to the Health Department for a Bed & Breakfast permit. The Bed & Breakfast permit will cover the inspection of the facility and serving of breakfast only. If other meals are provided, then a food facility permit will need to be applied for and a plan review done. Planning and Zoning: The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance allows for motel uses in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District with an approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP); a bed and breakfast qualifies as motel use. This proposed three (3) bedroom bed and breakfast will take place on 58 acres of land. The applicant will be limited to a total of six (6) guests. No other activities will be associated on-site with this proposed bed and breakfast. The nearest structures from this proposed use are more than 150 feet away. There will be no employees associated with this proposed use, other than those residing on-site. Based on the limited scale of this proposed use and evaluation of the property, it appears that this proposed use would not have any significant impacts on the adjoining properties. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 09/03/08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Should the Planning Commission find this use appropriate, Staff would recommend the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four (4) square feet in size. 3. No more than three (3) bedrooms and six (6) guests allowed with this bed and breakfast use. 4. No other activities will be associated on-site with this bed and breakfast. 5. Any expansion or modification shall require approval of a new Conditional Use Permit. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 09/03/08 MEETING: Seven persons spoke during the public comment portion of the public hearing; they were adjoining property owners or residents along Sister Chipmunk Road. Some of the speakers CUP #10-08, Adam Ackfeld October 21, 2008 Page 3 were relatives of the applicant. Those wlio spoke in opposition were concerned the increase in noise, traffic, outdoor lighting, and the intrusion of outsiders would negatively impact the beauty and tranquility of the area and consequently disturb their quality of life. A safety concern was raised by an adjoining property owner regarding outdoor activities because his family members were hunters. They did not believe non-residential uses were appropriate in their subdivision and business use did not conform to their subdivision covenants. A property owner at the entrance to Sister Chipmunk Lane was concerned he would be inundated with people searching for the bed and breakfast because the applicant's property was difficult to find and he was only permitted one sign. In addition, they believed Mr. Arkfeld was manipulating their subdivision for his own purposes by selling a parcel from his property, having the new owners sign the subdivision covenants, and using Sister Chipmunk Lane as an access to the bed and breakfast. They objected to Mr. Arkfeld using their private subdivision road for his business clientele and they believed Mr. Arkfeld should provide his own access to the bed and breakfast. The three persons who spoke in favor, or who said they had no objections to the permit, did not believe the use would generate a great deal of activity or cause a major impact. The applicant answered questions from the Commission on why he wished to use Sister Chipmunk Lane as the primary access for the proposed bed and breakfast and what his intentions were towards contributing financially to the maintenance of the road. The applicant explained his proposed yoga studio would be an amenity for weekend retreat guests and he did not plan to have regular yoga classes for the public. He also wanted to offer the use of bike trails on his property for guests and would respect the neighbors' property lines. Commission members asked the applicant who determined when the road needed repaired and what each individual's financial share would be. Commission members suggested that a road maintenance agreement between all of the property owners, clearly defining the issues, would be beneficial. Commissioners advised the applicant to talk with the neighbors and attempt to work out an agreement on the maintenance of the road. The Planning Commission tabled the CUP application for 45 days to allow sufficient time for the applicant to make an effort to meet with the property owners along Sister Chipmunk Lane in an attempt to work out an agreement. The majority vote was: YES (TO TABLE): Unger, Watt, Ambrogi, Manuel, Ruckman, Oates, Kriz, Mohn NO: Wilmot, Thomas, Kerr (Note: Cormnissioners Ours and Triplett .were absent from the meeting.) Following this public meeting, it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to offer a recommendation concerning this application to the Board of Supervisors. s 34 A BRADFORD ANNETTE ARKFELD f. .0 / 101 Yo Fq , 1 to ` I. b�35; A i 2. MAyc .A 98,9 'a - n _ ARI*£LD JANET ! Q� HgRLfSp � � 4r- 34 A 98 t ARKFELD ADAM CHARLES f 'f ) ] t IP !" l v4 F A; �Y lFlj. r 7 it Oki Q t 34 6,.-12 �F ( �4 4GAN gTjh JONQ B PAULA B jY 1 i 34 6 11 PEEPER CLARENCE L;�1 a i1 4-Y # _may .' M/ryygJyq $6,9) 45A 55 te& SULCIVAN LINDA td � � g H� r t 45 A 66 r) } LEWRICHARO WULFPAiRiC1A { " 0 750 1,500 3,000 Feet WE I t 1 1 e O441GK CpG2 Conditional Use Permit -Bed Et Breakfast . 1 CUP 10 - 08 _ PIN: 34-A- 98 Case Planner: Mark Application Zoning M2 (Industrial, General District v Urban Development � ♦ pment Area 4f:, � BI (Business, Neighborhood Drsmcp 4M MHI (Mobile Home CommunLLy District) .a*? S WSA - 52 (Business General Dismal)40 MS (Medical Support District B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) *Qy R4 (Residential Planned Ccunruninty Dislrvn) EM (Extractive Manufaclunng District R5 (Residential Recreational C—nouvty District OW HE (Higher Education District) RA (Rural Are. D,stnet 410 MI (industrial, Light District) RP (Residential Performance District) P1a( U,t:n a-(N-Wi_ dnu Anr.1_Uevelopmentl_'I_LocaNr lvlps1,2008V{darn ";l �ald_G Up 1 UCo _8l ._ _: 9 5841,41,1 Submittal Deadline P/C Meeting BOA Meeting p1pPLICATIONFOR CONDITIONAL- USE PERMIT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 1. Aunt The applicant if the owner other) NAME: /CAcrs� _ . , ADDRESS TELEPHONE3T Q� 2. Please list all owners, adult occupants, or parties in interest of the property: 3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and include the route number of your road or street} ,-,? y1, A on 9-7 I ti h 4- r 4. The property has a depth of ,500 e be exact) 411. a 5c> road frontage of lead feet res. feet and consists of S_� 12 (Pleas a f / � as 5. The property is owned by r recorded evidenced by deed from (previous owner) X49 on page -, as recorded in the in deed book no . Count Of records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, Y Frederick. 6. Tax(Parcel)Identification (I.,D.)No. Magisterial District __--_--- Current Zoning 7. Adjoining Property: USE ZONING North�— East ash c- 90 c South � r f �� `� K West S. The type of use Proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept. before completing) _jack 4- 9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be constructed: 10. The following are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to both sides and rear xid in front of (across street from) the property - xvhere the requested use will be conducted. (Continue on back if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this application: NAME - r"�ql nr � ADDRESS �®O I Z— -4 vl` C . PROPERTY ID#3v � K' NAME 6 v rr,; ke4,,6_L.L(..ADDRESS%3a 749 -1-VO-�.�5rrjt pw PROPERTY ID43 _19 .1'9 ' J NAME,, /d ADDRESS S � PROPERTY ID# 0, SUsax (S. NAME r t�- l ADDRESS t£�jnr PROPERTY ID#_L � a"�riCi a�U C � g� NAMEL-/er vC-1 ADDRESs , �. �SXC� �� PROPERTY ID#_ `-_ NAME -`� ! r� er'cTIJtADDRESS A PROPERTY ID# 3 C� __ NAME On ck i v ADDRESS or V fcj, 1 PROPERTY ID# -A - c �'� ✓ � (�t1,°��,�s�-�� ��� ���� j Pa r(Cl a - NAME iCJ,r.-.� ��[��° klc-lf ADDRESS PROPERTY ID# NAME, �%�-d -��• y Gr% - PROPERTY ID# y-1,4# - 9 9 NAME �o� /� �%v /Z -ADDRESS PROPERTY ID# NAME Yc� �. h s �J-1 �DDREs� ADDRESS 17411 S'S�/ ��yAZvi ��►% . PROPERTY ID -93y " 6 - S � V14 2Z6 z / s S73, S,`r J,) 4.n s l2J �c r rf f%rra Z (0 2 �_ b 1-1,q -2 � Z� NAMEDDRESS��2 oc% PROPERTY ID# 3 �- NATE E y L%'� ! �/c �� ADDRESS PROPERTY ID# NAME ADDRESS PROPERTY ID# NAME ' _ q �i :1�6DRESS PROPERTY ID# NAME PROPERTY ID# NAME PROPERTY ID# NAME PROPERTYIDP ADDRESS ADDRESS ADDRESS t 12. Additional comments, if any: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the governing body of Frederick County, Virginia to allow the use described in this application. I understand that the sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven (7) days prior to the first public hearing and maintained so as to be visible until after the Board of Supervisors' public hearing. Your application for a Conditional Use Permit authorizes any member of the Frederick County Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors or Planning and Development Department to inspect your property where the proposed use will be conducted. Signature of Applicant Signature of Owner Owners' Mailing Address PC), )3.x a t5k o V—� oaac ,;k /' Owners' Telephone No. (�7Y TO BE COMPLETED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: USE CODE: RENEWAL DA T E: I :.l - 'D :-RONE T VA- N HEAVER -OUVER n^,. T,-,A.-i5�:Y AeW-- FRO',.- 0 -!R AT A-10 MM'fa NI -T,_ '.-T""1- r`,.ORE 3M TO `;0 ST"INE A S.JAU- 1 -*11-1A:7- L- F T E',fD . ... .... .. ) - OF ED R 1 U)'Ll VE -�S) - 1 F) -iD F F- ,7 R, IRNE P REAR ELEVATION iia„ m �._Q. ELIMIHNIATED ALL LITTLE PEICE:S OF SICw1c, O= -"F;+1 _l' ROOM, — 'SLE'P,IER, LESS CLU[TF�;;=D TR,4i l E, r LI D l ADD—7D SOu 4rl 1DOti,vS S �I ' A:, S DOU ^ f FLANKING — f f ---OU%'Er2rALLOW ., i ,� L J. a I,._ -.Q ui i rl`I(�-jvV i;� I,�_I 1� =lj .)JY r `l� DCU,33; 1, , -- i d r 45tJ SIZE rJ ;,t l",l0OWEyDS , f -,,D INCREASED ROOF OVERHA"d-3 A FAWLY R' jl(,)ly! MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #05-08 SNOWDEN BRIDGE, PART A AND B Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: November 20, 2008 Staff Contact: Amber L. Powers, Planner I 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. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 11/05/08 Pending Board of Supervisors: 12/10/08 Pending LOCATION: The subject properties are located on the south side of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) and east of Milburn Road (Route 662). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 44 -A -292,44-A-293, and 44 -A -31A PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: R4 (Residential Planned Community) District Use: Residential and Undeveloped ZONING & PRESENT USE OF ADJOINING PROPERTIES: North: RA Use: Residential & Vacant South: RA Use: Residential & Vacant East: RA Use: Residential & Vacant West: RA Use: Residential & Vacant PROPOSED USE: This MDP proposes a revision to the previously approved Residential Planned Community identified as Land Bay IIIA Part A (231 acres), and slight revisions to the Part B MDP application (54.5 acres) which has not previously received approval. This MDP proposal represents all of Land Bay IIIA including Parts A and B. MDP #05-08, Snowden Bridge November 20, 2008 Page 2 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virlzinia Department of Transportation: The revised master development pian for this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 761 and 11, the VDOT facilities which would provide access to the property. The revised master development plan dated February 22, 2008 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 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. Please provide a paper copy, as well as an electronic copy, of the revised master development once the County has approved. Frederick County Fire Marshal: Plans approved as submitted. Frederick County Public Works: Upon review of the revised plan dated February 22, 2008, all of our previous comments have been addressed. Therefore, we recommend approval of the subject site plan. Frederick County Inspections Department: Comments shall be made at subdivision stage. No comments at this time. Frederick County Sanitation Authority: Revision 1 —1St submittal approved. GIS Department: Valise Way has been approved and added into the system. Structure numbering will be assigned during the perniit/construction phase of development. Parks and Recreation: Review of MDP dated 8/25/08; either option for Recreational Facilities and required parking would meet this portion of the recreation unit requirements. The developer is now providing trail connectivity from Kearsarage Court and Bormann Court to the private trail system which will improve non -vehicular modes of transportation to these residents. Frederick County Public Schools: We offer the following comments: 1. The cumulative impact of this project and other projects in various stages of development in northeastern Frederick County will necessitate future construction of new schools and support facilities to accommodate increased student enrollments. The exact number of the various types of housing in Snowden Bridge is not known at this time, so an example will be used to illustrate the impact of Snowden on Frederick County Public Schools: Based on a buildout of 2,464 total units (exclusive of affordable housing for the elderly) and a split of 30% age -restricted housing, 40% single-family detached, 20% single-family attached, and 10% multifamily, we estimate that this development will house 220 high school students, 187 middle school students, and 354 elementary school students. In order to properly serve these 761 students, Frederick County Public Schools would outlay $26,936,000 in capital expenditures and $7,774,000 annually in operating costs. 2. We acknowledge the cash proffers of $3,925.00 per non -age -restricted dwelling unit plus the land donation, which equates to $220 per non -age -restricted dwelling unit, for a total of $4,135 per unit. Using the example above, cash and land proffers total $7,137,010. This would defray 26.5% of our capital costs noted above. 3. We acknowledge proffers donating 20 acres of land for a school site, providing access for Snowden Bridge residents to the school site from internal roads, and providing the MDP #05-08, Snowden Bridge November 20, 2008 Page 3 school access to water and sewer. Frederick County Public Schools is concerned about all land development applications. Both capital expenditures and annual operating costs are significantly increased by each approved residential development, as is illustrated above. Winchester Regional Airport: It appears that the proposed site plan will not have an impact on operations at the Winchester Regional Airport as the proposed development lies within the airport's airspace it does fall outside of the airport's Part 77 surface. The Airport does request the opportunity to comment on future construction site plans of commercial buildings or communication towers to ensure compatibility with Airport surfaces/operations. Planning & Zoning: A) Location The subject site is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The parcels comprising the site are located wholly within the Stonewall Magisterial District. Numerous parcels adjoin the project site, all of which are zoned RA (Rural Areas) and are either undeveloped or established with residential or agricultural land uses. B) Site History The original Frederick County zoning map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identifies the subject parcels as being zoned A-2 (Agricultural General). The County's agricultural zoning districts were combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re -mapping of the subject properties and all other A-1 and A-2 zoned land to the RA District. On September 24, 2003, the Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning #06-03 which rezoned the 794 acres to R-4 (Residential Planned Community) with proffers. The proffers limit the number of housing units to 2,455, (of which 30-53% will be single family, 10-30% will be townhouses and 7-30% will be Multifamily). The proffers also require a minimum of 239.5 acres of designated open space. C) Project History The initial MDP for 285.5 acres, Land Bay IIIA, was submitted in 2005. Originally, the planned location for Route 37 ran through the southern portion of Land Bay IIIA, so in an effort to allow for the timely development of the northern portion of the Land Bay, and to allow time for the resolution of the Route 37 issue, it was agreed that the southern 54.5 acre portion of the land bay be removed from the original MDP application, thus dividing Land Bay IIIA into Parts A and B. Since then, the 231 acre, Part A portion of this development has received MDP approval and has undergone several revisions. Presently, Part A is being developed in accordance with the approved MDP #14-07. The current MDP application does include several minor changes from the road layout, recreation locations, and housing types identified in MDP 914-07. MDP #05-08, Snowden Bridge November 20, 2008 Page 4 Since the original decision to separate Land Bay IIIA into two pieces, the County has approved the relocation of the planned Route 37 to the southernmost portion of the parcel identified as 44- A -31A. With Route 37 no longer located within the Part B portion of this Land Bay, the applicant has chosen to rejoin parts A and B into a single MDP application. This application proposes some minor changes within the Part A portion of Land Bay IIIA, as well as additional residential units and roads within the Part B portion. 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 a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 1-1] Land Use Compatibility: The Urban Development Area (UDA) is the principal land use tool of the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan. The general purpose of the UDA is to define the areas in the County where more intensive forms of residential development will occur. It does this by dividing the County into rural and urban areas. The UDA was originally created with the intent that it would be adequate enough to accommodate long term growth needs in areas of the County where public services are most available. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-1, 6-2) The subject properties are located within the boundaries of the Northeast Land Use Plan area. This Plan identifies the future land use as a Planned Urban Development; the present zoning is consistent with this PUD designation. The Northeast Land Use Plan also identifies the approximate path of the future Route 37 corridor. • The submitted Master Development Plan for Land Bay IIIB does not provide for, or address, the corridor planned for the proposed Route 37 extension as Route 37 no longer impacts Part A or B. However, the future Master Development Plans for the development of Land Bays IV and V are expected to address the Route 37 extension. Transportation: This MDP application proposes several minor changes within the Part A portion of the Land Bay, including: • The addition of a right-in/right-out entrance along the major collector road identified as Snowden Bridge Boulevard. Previously terminating in a cul-de-sac, Dutchman Court would be extended to Snowden Bridge Boulevard. This revision meets road spacing requirements, and provides a right turn lane to maintain the flow of traffic on Snowden Bridge Boulevard. • The conversion of Blackford Drive's unrestricted entrance onto Snowmen Bridge Boulevard to a right-in/right-out entrance. MDP 405-08, Snowden Bridge November 20, 2008 Page 5 • The addition of Honeycomb Road to the North of Blackford Drive to accommodate the replacement of courtyard style homes (type 4) with townhomes (type 6). The MDP application also includes plans for the Part B portion of the project including: • Additional Active Adult Community residential units within the Part B area as well as additional roads that are to be a part of the community's private road system. • The addition of Single Family Detached housing into the Part B area and the construction of additional public roads to serve these residential units. Recreation: This MDP application proposes the following recreation -related changes: • A removal of one of two recreational sites: either the one south of Northumberland, or the site to the north of Northumberland. The two sites are now identified as "Rec. Option One" and "Rec. Option Two" in the application. (Note that with this change the applicant will still meet recreation -related Proffers.) • Expansion of the Pedestrian Trail System within the boundaries of the Part B portion of the project. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 11/05/08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Master Development Plan application for the Snowden Bridge project appears to be in general conformance with the policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan and the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Parts A and B combined would account for 285.5 acre of the 794 acre site that was rezoned to the R-4 zoning district in September of 2003. This MDP remains within the requirements outlined by the proffers from that rezoning, including the set proportions between different housing types, as well as open space and recreation amenity commitments. If approved, this Master Development Plan would enable the implementation of the proffered Generalized Development Plan for this R-4 Property, and would include a total of 920 residential units, and 57 acres of open space. The Planning Commission will note that due to the small scope of the changes proposed as a part of this MDP application, an abridged version of the MDP has been included in the agenda package. A complete, nineteen page set of the revised MDP application is on file at Planning Department office, and is available for review. Following the Planning Commission discussion, it would be appropriate to forward a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors regarding this MDP conformance with County codes and review agency comments. All issues and concerns raised by the Planning Commission will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for their consideration. Staff is ultimately seeking administrative approval authority of the Master Development Plan. ®P�}" f- �-=�..�� � *�� Snowden Bridge Sec, Pel® I SCK #.ARL&HAZEL , Master Development Plan MDR # 05 08 W A ®"`� '.rr�*`.-` PIN:44-A-292,44-A-293,44-A-31,44-A-31A - id A 188 `Rs I ; 1 rtr . `�i •:. :�,t. 1 ?. . COLE DEXTER 4 - 4n op fS a or Aa or - I "Cam IL v4g0 �N A 29 "� x`46' °sA, ' 1 •``R .r y SLAUGHTER JUDITH MWANN r 'r2 s h - '✓+ +[E •'R°s.... 42 c' �0 �rN,yy. of bi A 31A STEPt1ERSONAS11=4IES LC w•s �, '.� _ .ye _ a ,"sn - -� •� . es .t 44 f kF,t, AIT KEN GREIG 0 W 01 kKi_. •� � c .' �• � .. ,\,�� -ice 1A. �!j - NQl Future Rt37 Bypass YP �..ORlllg Case Planner: Amber M2 (Industrial, General District) '+,, ryQ , .ri� .' �- ��. Q v V `�� �. ',,-' , B r ■ MDP Application BI (Business, Neighborhood District) 111I (Mobile llome Community District) oQ r y3 Q Rezoning Area 62 (Business, General Distrist) t1iS (Medical Support District) \`\.; Buildings BJ (Business, h�dustrial Transition District ) R11(Residential Planned Commnnity District) e ' " • £ Urban Development Area EM (Extinctive Manufacturing District) RS (Residential Recreational Community District) �p - l �`� " �•.. --- SWSA 11E (Higher Education District) RA (Rural Area District) �� � - 0 1,250 2,500 5,000 Feet x All Iaduatrial, Light Distrlet ( g ) RP (Residential Performance District) N' F V-/ APPLICATION MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN Department of Planning and Development Use Only. Date application received %� ' Application # Complete. Date of a(xeptancc -- Incomplete. Date of return 1. Project Title: Snowden Bridge — Master Development Plan Landbay Development — LB III — Phase I 2. Owner's Name Stephenson Assocaites, LC Brookfield Stephenson Village, LLC (Please list name of all owners or parties in interest) 3. Applicant: Greenway Engineering Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Phone Number: 540-662-4185 4. Design Company: Greenway Engineering Address: same Phone Number: same Contact Name: Evan Wyatt, AICP 5. Location of Property The property is located on the south side of the Old Charles Town Road, (Rt. 761) and Jordan Springs Road (Rt. 664) and east of Milburn Road (Rt. 662) 6. Total Acreage: 285.5 acres 7. Property Information a) Property Identification Number (PIN): b) Current Zoning: e) Present Use: d) Proposed Uses: e) Adjoining Property Information: Property Identification Numbers North South Fast West f) Magisterial District: 44-A-292, 44-A-293 and 44-A-3 1A R4 - Residential Planned Community Residential and Undeveloped Residential - Planned Community See attached list Property Uses Stonewall 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: LOV,l/ J,L aa - Date: I ol 13 1 6 P, 0 Map Data Source: Frederick County, Va. GIS Department, April 2008 Adjoining Property Owners Listing Snowden Bridge File 2760B Label Tax Map Number Owner Mailing Address City & State ZIP Acreage Zoning Land Use Deed Book Pa a Inst Year Inst Number A 44 A 148 JENKINS DAVID CALVIN & SCARLET M 879 DICKS HOLLOW RD WINCHESTER VA 22603 1.23 RA 2 847 6 0 0 B 44 A 149 GETTS CERYL S 502 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.68 RA 2 0 2007 _ 3383 C 44 A 150 STULTZ GLENI`. A. & BETTY A. 518 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA. 22656 0.59 RA 2 0 0 0 D 44 A 151 STULTZ GLENN A. & BETTY A. 518 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA. 22656 0.38 RA 2 337 171 0 0 E 144 A 153 REDMOND DARL^. K 67 REYNOLDS CT FRONT ROYAL VA 22630 0.63 RA 2 0 2006 23285 F 44 A 154 VUIL L ERMET ROBERT EUGENE 550 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.60 RA 2 385 687 0 0 G 44 A 155 STROTHER JOHN R. 560 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA. 22656 0.63 RA 2 606 542 0 0 H 44 A 156 HOTT R. CHARLES & KAY K. 572 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA. 22656 0.68 RA 2 304 68 0 0 1 44 A 157 LOUCH WILLIAM G 582 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.60 RA 2 0 2002 15735 J 44 A 158 WILSON ROBERT & MARY BETH 458 DEVILS BACKBONE OVLK STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.33 RA 2 0 2003 25387 K 44C 2 A ZIRKLE WILLIAM RAY & HELEN CHRISTINE 614 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.14 RA 2 805 151 0 0 L 44C 2 B JOBE DARIN SCOTT JOBE JUSTIN CHRISTOPHER 634 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 22656 0.63 RA 2 0 2005 25064 M 44C 2 D BLY TERRY L & CONNIE S 644 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 0.68 RA 2 924 807 0 0 N 44 A 161 GRAY JEAN K C/O ALLEN GRAY 636 BATTERSEA DR SAINT AUGUSTINE FL 0.41 RA 2 0 0 0 O 44 A 162 GETTS ELLEN ELAINE 660 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA. r22656 0.27 RA 2 0 0 0 P 44 A 163 RITTER JUANITA M 688 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 0.63 RA 2 605 511 0 0 Q 44 A 164 RITTER JUANITA M 688 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 0.64 RA 2 605 511 0 0 R 44 A 165 RITTER JUANITA M 688 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.69 RA 2 605 511 0 0 S 44 A 139 MCKEE ANNA B & LESTER W 102 FAIRWAY DR WINCHESTER VA 22602 0.92 RA 2 866 1299 0 0 T 44 A 166 RUSSELL ROBERT H ETALS 704 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.83 RA 2 866 1305 01 0 U 44 A 208 GOLLER ACTRESS 1 776 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.25 RA 2 0 2001 7462 V 44 A 209 AFFLECK RODNEY L 786 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA. 22656 1.23 RA 2 743 506 01 0 W 44 A 210 JONES WILLIAM C JR & BRENDA L 796 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.24 RA 2 758 1072 0 0 X 44 A 211 KNUPP RICHARD R & BONNIE R PO BOX 97 STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.25 RA 2 0 0 0 Y 44 A 212 HAYES JACK L 734 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.82 RA 2 0 2003 10006 Z 44 A 218 KRASICH DINAH G & JOHN E 776 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 3.21 RA 2 856 164 0 0 AA 44 A 213 LAFFOLLETTE ALLEN LEE 744 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA. 22656 0.43 RA 2 312 173 0 0 BB 44 A 214 CAMERON ROY C. & MILDRED F. 752 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA. 22656 0.43 RA 2 315 501 0 0 CC 44 A 215 AL-SWAITY MANAR 760 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.43 RA 2 0 2005 16222 DD 44 A 216 TYSON BAKER B & SHIRLEY P 768 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.41 RA 2 923 583 0 0 EE 44 A 219 NELSON MICHAEL 784 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.16 RA 2 0 20081 3007 FF 44 A 220 BOHNENKAMP GARY BOHNENKAMP KRISTI 214 LITTLER LN STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.22 RA 2 0 2006 8696 GG 44 A 221 TRAVERS GEORGE O. 804 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.22 RA 2 378 656 01 0 HH 44 A 222 MCGAFFICK ROGER A & MARY S 816 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.22 RA 2 482 42 0 0 11 44 A 223 MILBURN DONALD L & KIMBERLY M 826 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.22 RA 2 765 1554 0 0 JJ 44 A 224 SMITH MITCHELL B 836 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.20 RA 2 0 0 0 KK 44 A 225 LINK STEVE A & DENNIS W PO BOX 236 STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.21 RA 2 0 2001 17789 LL 44 A 226 WILLS JERRY MICHAEL & YVONNE 856 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.19 RA 2 1 0 2004 25803 MM 44 A 228 GORDON SHAWN MICHAEL 868 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 2.57 RA 2 0 2005 5546 NN 44 A 229 ESTEP DONALD L & HELEN L PO BOX 66 STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.63 RA 2 786 218 0 0 00 44 A 231 ESTEP DONALD L & HELEN L PO BOX 66 STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.65 RA 2 786 218 0 0 PP 44 A 231 B FAUVER HARRY S JR 906 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.95 RA 2 427 335 0 0 QQ 44 A 230 HEPNER STEPHEN K. 918 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.63 RA 2 706 786 0 0 RR 44 A 231 A FAUVER HARRY S JR 906 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.56 RA 2 404 199 0 0 SS 44 A 232 HEPNER STEPHEN K. 918 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.12 RA 2 706 786 01 0 TT 44 A 233 HEPNER STEPHEN K. 918 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 2.27 RA 2 706 786 0 0 UU 44 A 234 PEARSON ROBBIE M 962 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.66 RA 2 0 2008 3538 V V 44 A 235 PEARSON ROBBIE M 962 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.66 RA 2 0 2008 3538 W W 44 A 236 MERRITT GERALD WRIGHT 976 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA. 22656 1.37 RA 2 388 13 0 0 XX 44 A 286 HEIRS OF DORIS KINES C/O THERESA K GIBBS 1968 FAIRFAX PIKE WHITE POST VA 22663 0.71 RA 2 0 0 12262 YY 44 A 287 HEIRS OF DORIS KINES C/O THERESA K GIBBS 1968 FAIRFAX PIKE WHITE POST VA. 22663 0.66 RA 2 0 01 12262 ZZ 44 A 288 WALTERS WAYNE E 183 QUIET PLACE LN BERKELEY SPRINGS WV 25411 0.66 RA 2 323 430 01 0 AAA 44 A 289 L OFTHOUSE ELSIE A PO BOX 2256 . I - ITER VA. 22604 0.66 RA 2 0 2002 4624 BBB 44 A 291 IWEBB III CONSTRUCTION INC 1386 WRIGHTS MILL RD BERRYVILLE VA 22611 1.33 RA 2 0 2007 7552 CCC 45 93 2 HOFFMAN WILLIAM D_ & PATSY L. PO BOX 22 STEPHENSON VA 22656 7.61 RA 2 585 442 0 0 DDD 45 93 1 KREER THOMAS KREER CRIS 1081 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 5.99 RA 2 0 2005 25649 EEE 44 A 285 FOREMAN RICHARD T FOREMAN FAY L PO BOX 4674 WINCHESTER VA 22604 1.50 RA 2 0 2005 13307 10/9/2008 Source: Frederick County GIS, April 2008 1 of 2 Adjoining Property Owners Listing Snowden Bridge File 2760B Label Tax Map Number Owner Mailing Address City & State ZIP Acrea a Zoninq Land Use Deed Book Pae Inst Year Inst Number FFF 44 A 237 ROBERTS CHRISTINE K& EDDIE R SR & GIBBS THERESA K& DAVID B 1968 FAIRFAX PIKE WHITE POST VA 22663 0.25 RA 2 0 2001 7685 GGG 44 A 238 SHRECK CATHERINE EST. 208 GREENFIELD AVE WINCHESTER VA. 22602 2.00 RA 2 0 0 0 HHH 44 A 207 LUDWICK JAMES L & NANCY L 779 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA. 22656 1.50 RA 2 583 580 0 0 1 1 1 44 A 206 LAKE JAMES T. & HELEN E. 771 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD S I EPHENSON VA 22656 0.25 RA 2 4251 859 0 0 JJJ 44 A 202 BRAGG DAVID L I PO BOX 174 CLEARBROOK VA 226241 0.37 RA 1 2 767 681 0 0 KKK 44 A 205 BRAGG DAVID L PO BOX 174 CLEARBROOK VA 226241 0.75 RA 2 767 681 0 0 LLL 44 A 167 RIDENOUR ELMER W H RIDF_NOUR KRISTINE L 731 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 226561 0.50 RA 2 0 2005 16390 MMM 44 A 168 SHANHOLTZER TIMOTHY A SHANHOLTZER LISA E 721 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.46 RA 2 0 2006 141 NNN 0 0.00 0 01 0 000 44 A 169 BUSSERT GERALD & JOAN E. & 707 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA. 22656 1.65 RA 2 556 467 0 0 PPP 44 A 170C ANDERSON JOHN KENNETH ANDERSON RUBY FEARL PO BOX 27 STEPHENSON VA. 22656 6.00 RA 1 2 600 82 01 0 000 44 A 170 WINCHESTER GUN CLUB INC PO BOX 2012 WINCHESTER VA 22604 14.41 RA 2 874 1642 01 0 RRR 44 A 173 ELLIS LEONARD C. JR. C/O ELLIS WAREHOUSE & MINI STG 10487 WASHINGTON HWY GLEN ALLEN VA 230591 0.00 M1 4 579 104 0 0 SSS 44C 1 15 LOUZONIS JOSEPH T HOMAS JR 543 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.76 RA 2 379 686 0 0 TTT 44C 1 A COLLETT JOEL A. & DIANE L 527 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA 22656 1.54 RA 2 744 535 0 0 UUU 44 A 138A O'ROARK NORWOOD T. & LAURA W. 380 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON VA. 22656 12.96 RA 2 537 709 0 0 V V V 44 A 31 STEPHENSON ASSOCIATES LC PO BOX 2530 WINCHESTER VA 22604 35.67 R4 5 01 2003 5766 WWW 44 A 29 SLAUGHTER JUDITH MCCANN 562 MILBURN RD WINCHESTER VA 22603 150.15 RA 1 5 0 2002 469 XXX 44 A 25 CRIDER & SHOCKEY INC OF WV PO BOX 2530 WINCHESTER VA 22604 51.68 RA 6 0 2003 25588 YYY 44 A 26 CRIDER & SHOCKEY INC OF WV PO BOX 2530 WINCHESTER VA 22604 170.00 RA 6 0 2003 25588 ZZZ 44 A 28B UNGER KENNETH R. 288 MILBURN RD_ WINCHESTER VA. 22603 25.00 RA 5 460 738 0 0 AAAA 55 A 6 HULVER JOSEPH F T JR 1023 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER VIRGINIA 22603 24.04 RA 5 0 0 0 BBBB 55 A 7C OATES GARY K & CONSTANCE J 1071 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER VA 22603 5.00 RA 2 0 2005 1 28103 CCCC 55 A 7E OATES GARY K & CONSTANCE J 1071 REDBUD RD IWINCHESTER VA 226031 5.02 RA 2 0 2005 28103 DDDD 55 A 8 SCHWARTZMAN BERNARD 1105 REDBUD RD _WINCHESTER VA 22603 1 25.90 RA 5 414 463 0 0 EEEE 55 A 9 STOTLER DONALD L 1141 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER VA 226031 0.00 RA 5 01 0 0 FFFF 55 A 10 PENTON E GLENN & BIGGS DAWN R 221 SETTLERS LN STEPHENSON VA 22656 0.00 RA 5 841 1845 0 0 GGGG 55 7 13 NICELY DONNA L NICELY PAUL 261 LICK RUN XING STEPHENSON VA 22656 5.00 RA 2 0 2006 12714 HHHH 55 7 13A MIDDLETON TIMOTHY L & DONNA L 223 LICK RUN XING STEPHENSON VA 22656 17.93 RA 2 0 2005f 19444 1 1 1 1 55 7 15 SIRBAUGH SAUNIE D. 290 LICK RUN XING STEPHENSON VA 22656 12.87 RA 2 641 110 0 0 JJJJ 55 7 14 MEIER WILLIAM G III & BARBARA E 270 LICK RUN XING STEPHENSON VA 22656 12.06 RA 2 744 437 0 0 KKKK 55 7 14A MEIER WILLIAM G III & BARBARA E 270 LICK RUN XING STEPHENSON VA 122656 6.391 RA 1 2 0 2003 603 LLLL 44 A 294A AITKEN GREIG D W & WALLACE TONIE M 1160 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA 122656 1 176.251 RA 1 6 1 0 20001 11813 MMMM 44 A 294 AITKEN GREIG D W & WALLACE TONIE M 1160 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON VA. 1226561 0.001 RA132 1 5 1 1 0 20021 8453 10/9/2008 Source: Frederick County GIS, April 2008 2 of 2 CENEA. I NOTES 1. lf.tn�is and se.d.i. tum u llu mnahvnlav d tae ImPt.m.vmta b�.tv rbdl cmvtvrm N Lbn. cutc'mt rmaLi �,v-..r.:.a r•�ndud. ua m•aar.u..� .m/nr rnn.nt tar. Hanes. -y, ..,d mrutr.tamr. Nn.¢a b eealmt cvszm .vd sLLLt•••^ tanudly{ dee.ntuv 4'md• ad•laa u dlt beds durfa{ - e. prvnded talar to lssuave• d W du deeerap�rat P-r'neL Ta. appm'r•1 a Ism oleo m 'a•"9`.=i,:-,stn. a..-1=PQ w w .{ant nL eb. r..PammEuur. o-st..n.t In .e. runyn P.-m+.=t .m s+d,n.nt c�nnt� i N.o.uwt 1 . Pamlt moat •x vvtafn-d from tEe arllca a( la. Pecd•vt tb4rn•a. wtmta peperLnmt a TrebrpartaLa¢ (--n •vd lrnlmck aaraatT Prfnr b vutsvdlnn m .cutivi 4[-v Hier--at-..I. 1ppranl of lou Pt.v dao tuL ¢umante- Ivumca of m enu.n.+ peryt bT aTN1T .tlm r...w Daratl u e.guttrd u.d.r 3tae. 4r_ 1 Tn. B w>�r. err aLL.wa„c...nt.u�-r,.�L a N.r••,mtm we . iii. cta�. o S-1 vp0"Lranrp<:rtntan (Poor) Z. "I.rnan• a and .last. Nara ren . wd P^`d earls .1ll ba nmd.d. The Cn.lnpe .la b. rvpvraWl- Int Prad.Jrt4 4u. .l -nd P.- dtteho m d•tamtaed bT tnu )mat tmpr_Ltna Safer to vini. c a-Pertmvvt a Tra� (PQar) cotta Pall Ona Pared altII spre[l.ati.n•.a. 6. as •PPro^m rd o< FUPr end e8 eppllraWa p•zmtta m+ad b. araluhl. d fns ctt ilea t.Perx•vvu.e at the dardnp.t drat bs a. vUaW..t aLL Ilmo. t_ eatma4 nPr- mokari n.eTln.e.a x tla{mm .m.W h. IP •--••••r•^•- nL� LII. Wnuvl vP Uvitvrw Tr.lrle r.•.tml Il..lea 11f1ttL01- R rt as nn�dt•nla m.t.n.l .hen a r.mar.a team tiv �aantm.tta. 11,au.. ¢r tb. ra.ar.r n.tnt. Pl.nn4 ➢. •i11 Pmt s-cUvva va the -4 ways ¢rr Fi.ed vv . mL :moa C➢P. raWa of a. CSR raluca lm thin N .111 r.gvtn mrvrG pa.®m[ a.t3laa Pr-P•''•d IT Crem.st PvYla.ar;ry and ."-i bT flu a.n.r. lJ. i➢ rwddde Ltr.Eu •L A[ma, ¢f cmtr Lav S .tall M Y"•d ala ummt ®n" -I. fd LII. LmW InNceted m ttu p "^• ¢nes o rryuaed at Lha Bald I- - It. 111 apM¢s Nell ba v.PP-d Ona wP•d to Uu n..c-tit ttnrta a..v man➢N-a m cath In1.L 1'he PtP. rhall b. mlv:mm Ir dumas .,W -fam . PDM aravdard 9D-1. 1� �n devru ansa to mmrlaetxd w .cryrd.ue..dh ty Pit4tm. [ll:.a C®trvE AeY m Lm efav aa. lht4 ranaptact• ahaLL W Prodded et tbt avaetivetlan d4 [1 Ta. •••••••--•» snail Praatd. ndwlv'Is mam a et.... ... vmd from eraeis .ad/ar atb-r agWpmat pd- It d-IIbal t atr.el. R mrla Ltua.N In tle.n,� �tvd doslrn caaNltlav tit ¢➢ l N.tlffo[lm W W he alta b tort .FPmPnaL uLBtT s.-d r^.PdR coat ea ®trvcL.0 d rata and/a ..a14r) ear nae frlcraaaa. e. -d- alae M vbteiv.d tram ttra ppmpn.L- .u�arvtl ®mean¢ P -recite. mt a.dr. ud came«za. b emUaA Wes 11 114 udl•rT •n4 .etc - -m PPS"'•ecr¢ -b.L h- cvmtt-+ct.d kP -crW.aea nN [N ntmvt .e. n..w. and-p.dOeeltmu W tae fa.delak CvuvlY 4amtalrm /utaan:t. t1^ me Ivc.tfaa d aauW( ut11111a aha+a In tang Pl•rt• ¢n taYan [e® rp.aln¢ r-mN.. R aaa¢ b• the ereu�r. [oPaadhl➢tT ea Rrut W. ...at nvrirmed .,,d .aumL lanwa a w .ds W4 utmua. u nes_. " pNvr u mattuUan, ih. a®tr.ctcr abdl Worm the svtzn.c of mt oanQlr+ -Nato[+� au ad.Un{ ut➢ltr -erdlc.Laa ma tm LvvPaad eaaaervaUaa. tT. Tb. a-.daPv w E. taPPmbl. far .nr dam•". b tae mdme dr..t, .m nLNUu .nlclt �+rra ev . •vwt a bu ®enteiPrm Prelaat .ttntn a mvUPtau. N the meLvA haat-of-..t- iB. antro Q.dent b Pr.Pm•d .ithla aeamevu d uttntla, )tune a pamuvla hm. iR Inrai..d e�paWA d prvrl4al N Ir.a•r:de latmtl l'¢hlu Barb a.p-nme¢i prtae N tmrea-i yr ar•dllt[ and/a[ d1i Qe..L^Pmavt Pasuts t4 Shs a. -eloper -ia ba ra¢prmdhL !ee the r.lnen[}vv el eaI uWtete aulc�t Ia nQvl[ed u . rnult at hf. Pr's.'art- Th. reb a- atrPWa by dove otter to evartr•+etl:m. 9. moa wee. W.eLt1 t!u EabUaa a eL lmv.. an..�to. area -ata thea. ® tau Plan -iLL d ,. •Md W u Le.. In 11u e.at a.rufaa w dram+. -m donee �wrttm, eta v.vn- -vd an[tn•s and b PVLtt-d d^.....r..•_It. .'.1. Ila �et.etar u W r.rllT a.w mvdltlem Fn•r tv .vk diva{ amauactlav tad marl era -P. -I Lattneety[ vt Lwl Bd.T-438! fmmadW.vlt a enl dbcnP•uaz bet -.m env.! flsla c>adltlavl Ova LII. appra.-d PVa .^-. GmtmltW Mlle -a.11 be emnpsuta b a!r vt matlmum d -t) u d•,.....e,..a bf meshed -A7 Pa .f edaeA pruetar 1A4Ra-i9P. /3TY-DbPd yr PN -L u -PPQmvla. Dench and) n. Q+ela.d tr a mpatc-d _ pral•:saad ee{meat -vd ravW4 .uvmetlN V FlNsrick r t1 Pria t^ P-�>at 'm•tr`ac[tcn. R ¢ {.-e...... _. tep¢d bu W.v PrT•^d, It aboard auPea-a. tn. rWu+•�ma. fa e]u m1a Oaatnctnry arult mury opwtan .m mdntam vnde.4rauvA mIl Dao ta m. as of pmpva•d rzvuetP{ bieeunt .t tRa Lae (11 eatklv4 d.fti bat vet ,oar. en.a tan Nal-.rken¢ a.r.. palm tv mmamr+mmt tit [uv a dame➢tbm. Nems sod teuphvva nrem.b•n d flu av] apu.zma uadsatavad uttLtT ➢nes ta Pnautck r^...rT aPPm baht. thra mnnn¢s vbm elm a aced tv .0-.m.r¢•acI maatttlnu- ..1. all mWEla W b• lac.t.d Pvdc-irvutr4 ..�/ h.derlrk c ever sem:.unn ltttacdtr P't®� vr�an ' PA Baa larT PS am 173pa rnaclater. VL "' (5401 Hee-t.dl Qdtlmer.. 1N Cf'Pr fla[I etN..6'b Pawl W.Anrnt rare Gc '�euaadasR r_. Cv. PA eta t4lB Ba4s+Lx.a Im :0741 PA. am 2400 [1P.�ata- PA X04 I-000-[34-vLt (5{01 aaa-LLti want' veeutr Ptols:trm st¢.+a. l-eaB-ssx_7avl FANO RAY [1F'VF'IIIPNF'NT NARRAT-LYE The d_wpmevt .f dur.-Pt hdudtn¢ typo to P¢rmlttad m vo:ur ettaultnaeandl thcau{mut to. Lead Hera .ta"Lhly Strpbaysva Val.[.. I4 Ped- far d-d.pmmt to a yutu Oe.elaPm t Plea -t Subdlrlsintl Otero Pena must ba pPr 1 far Lha PPII-W Lead BOT by LMederfcJr Cnvat7. ea rsyuimd tmptmamea[a v.L he mvdea ¢a4 ell atraLe attain{ Lend uses must by de•nlaped I. a -d lel- -PWbta to Lha Co Y. OXYERS CER The Ism{azar MU Pfau Pf the Iend .1 The fnrc[eta[ Mt. Plan us Lha land Pf BROOPUTE10 SfEPRE71SON VOLICE. LSC 3TEPlQ'rL9ON ASSOCIATES. LG V with Lav I- l rdanrn with th. drd[ea V with tea Imam L end La eccmrda trills the de.Ire. of Ih. tbv zevdantn.d vmrrs, P-Pnrelo -4 Item U -T. P�m IVlAV1tN-M tarr2 �-. 9-(o_D Rlvb" T. Dcagl.r. Vice-Prrataml '0A7E PELTCEriT0.GE ( 1eeWa{tay. LLL' avvq J _mmc 5 -- a -- ._-- UROOKPIELO fASF MM" MC "Soo Er tIti" Perk A—- STOp�f$ON ASSOCIAl'L$ 4C P.O. RIM Z53U (L[ANAMN [menu) suit. =a Rdhc-rtar. VA P'...H04 Felder. VA 2 1 (5101 aH5-1.'-24 (705) L7a-L470 Flw In Anl iia Pa[tini d4u nod r -ear OalvtFeevri luatfvo- .Ill m tv-t.ILd bT 11n4 I^••r••^tt•••• at the dheaelaa a flu Fh-a tlarenataa nm^ VDOT CENEW, NOTES T, ill writ cv - --t .Hall ­vt_ b tiv natant e&-- vL and intoe -'t- tP I.. Vlr¢lnla Qauntem¢nt vI T�.vPvr3ti.a (VDOi7 Bne4 and ➢rtd¢Ppv 3peri0avuaar i Suaavrdr. ehv Vayutn crmi.d mNxre� y r.^�fgi hat..�n ln- 4lalvdetdr vrpspacillcwUanz L d¢rP.Avin4ma thivad trlv4.vt of .n.0 •..,..,,. er m m 4^t Au=notrunlna .be➢ -0, •'len U+. enter as ➢aportm.at er Lbnr. Q_ -e•. n4ea.l satr[r .nes aedt6 1vv (OSHA). ma vU-avla OmpaUanel Safe[) k H_- RaSHI Buba cid L¢uleUoaa V1 ihe¢ .vrmM dLhtnVpOT d¢ht-of-raT, ea liatlte evvtmL .helLK pp vent t tampararT• d -11m W ururamc. Heb Wa .urent .dLUvv of V11LJI•a Kar(e Ara. Prates Una IlaamL Fun4araatr. dl tryf[te rl tLei2a'e mist ba crr[If(ed to ^^^^I• eta $eeaaa IW Ds(el v Lt. m02' Etaed .M ➢Mie 9p- --U m. d.r.Wpa dun ba r.apvmibhr for nlacntla{, tL hLT esPeasa. apper ant Du ¢tl➢Use• I}valvdln[ [t u lhv ale 1-ezmppaa.ltLt[r of Uu da•dvpelr to ladle and f6enplrOryrutrLti fx Itiu arh�t®rLllist mca �`-�a ta mvfeee nen eS• ProPu.d wmcnmUvv eetknti. mOT aPPrae•t of Wuv alae. leu vl Iad.mmlY the de.nWPs [ram Inv r®Pearu➢ltr. v5. Q�t{n rant•. nlatinj m nota rnmu,uu.a r.atdawn,. ma mntrw or a¢Irer .f er.fan mar m aabl.at res rknai- a..m.n br mOT. int maluxtd evp.ns. imua.a m . n.wL W .nT a.la rrnszuu rhea ha the rcrpaaubLLltT v[ fha derdvpc. VH. (�b f�1t SLIT ratk� Seta VOttTarl{bt-nf_r¢T-m r.rpvvib4 [vr .W'tirLnA -n necaw¢rT �� r. �n YJ_ U raq.t i trT the Ivicet VDQT Rmid-, DID— a Pre-cmnatruvUnn _ardereve. Well b. m ffn uta h d bf W a m4m¢rt end/nr d¢eelvp.r .Ith the atteadetuc. v! Ute cvnemcter, rart�ue CvuntT a{swaa utWtl mmpmtn .an m01' Pzivr to IalLaUm al -1 48 Tb. aatn.ctar -ll LLT eh• focal mOT Rerid ry offca ben -ark u •for mr vadeL-ta.n-d levitn ar !!mom VDaT r*qulmr and ¢hnL eau eH ba.v-e a .sac- m!>ta R+L'r to Har r.gvtmd or reguotad tasp.ctlPa Lla p M Them u -a r aha➢ bs ^-^^^ a [x vulvtefvfa¢ m U a cava v cv'ert tram latent 22u Dc n +ala nes a.4uctiou m - U>¢t fa uvar-`.rt nes tntatncd I1nnv^nc. the 3.cUnn 3.0 at tv. Vlrviatn Fivalan avd Sedtmaat Cantnl Rendh>7it. Fttr4Yar--ore, cm pop-rtlu aftaet.a bf i*e• est ehaLL h+ m LaWad LhrTti3 PL[Ynay T!a. ➢z.-Ivp.r fhall Haan. dtnta W. .w,u u 48. prvi�L nn ampinre¢ wctlfl.d hT Ln. zala Dopa.^-czmt of ravaet+ 1 Had m1 mcLmanizmVoail ta Fn+einuvue E.te lar pm�Llaate�LUeti �n IRaopen� ulaa0ail�anvWrt� Hall eW-n PUI VIS C.tnt r Ova➢ aorta edequata dtelna[. V eeaiared and muvtela¢a m the ale. avriv{ a¢d at Ua eve of mrstrucdna L•�trt uu (lei lunua�m..r➢v na�.Lhan pal. eIIeu�ee f�uat�a •.tn� r�Lrma+Tn �Li,-elvnet. hdllminlmum �aDI[t palati VLA Ani unusual baurfec- cmdl[fw. (eQ., uveultaEla toile apria4a atak. ata ides, ea e1n. umd a�rtayy i e mune a mvatmcWm [p1➢ M IrvmadlaulT 6raaiat tv VOQTLL- .ttanWa of mam.r and . k eavLL cmc to mat .IzdullT untR av adsqua4 iest4n can Iu dateaczdned b1 the en{enas ea6 apprnrW h1 maT. T1 W ml cress. ba[rvw mn[eAW aPa tmd•r^-+rt ¢z<av N D bn fnapaeted and apprnea M ¢ mOT �p+rve¢tatt[v Pts tp plavemrnt aPd f11Lr�In¢tal. �R 4ae��ta to regWrad. 4'D'Jf rvPtoaazaLa[ anWl h. tv pn.¢tc Imore•�rsea af¢r Pes I„ the wplo Devil m elver)/Lidvv Lltad and t¢balvamewa bnLm¢tni bie tmLLv L Pr-i�act to as ?td br m[IT d Umt -1a , anon be par(arm.d la ac^sr�na> .4W ell aPP� VOOT .teadetda wd Pnadurn. V14- AN zaad+al ML hme, bff a 1, nuurul, and b.rltOa iv 'L T/"farm eater Irmcho anell be pectad ta ar le} lash Or. to PS: e( tammUd mnnmum d.rssttT u 3etar-mond hT AASHTQ T -a¢ Wtaad L .•tats d a vtu 1 apUmttm uUu. lar thv fun -(dtY of mr dedl.:ntsd armor c14at-of-.a/. At In�dlrric4aa of PDQf. er. tut. eball be p•Rar:nrd by lu al Leve . g Qt+dvWlfted Ind.Dmdanl Ia e -ac -)vac. 1. mor Rv¢a ¢ad ¢a 3PaNLIcnUane- CuvR¢d mPrvpnrte mn1F by eVubmitled b mOr daLLT• uatm .p•aN.d PfdQ.i.e. Via- citlmid�nTMV l d rt' vvd VD zmdcdrNnt an¢LL hr IMWLvd .hvv endlraud va ehv.v Plata "V- m V19. The uaLLLlaLea of mT m[rxncn od m.11bans rllbly r tl� nerd dm.t riib[-at-+aT ah¢D meat VDGT mlmmnr6 d.at4n a4aadatV. end 4 tb. reaPanutrWtl o[ the eLu?ar_ be Imten.dnbT m• dsr.lvpsr °[ ei mOTa QuarU°a bT mOT veiljmn4ncsmtnt [vulaant¢ boon v➢vrfaf {� ma kaaan 0a aauarm irduc rsatrol ae•iae.. "ft Tit. MOT OI id offt alts a lit n! a➢ CtN.l ®ureas Pa. W th. ten N nvv-al+�cuvn. Cvpio at NI (nevleva far mnlme.I. vIIII- attva mf iadl�tea arrear nyht-af-veI m.ut be mandaf to Wv local _QT. Bend-, Olaa Prlvr b •cc.Pty°tn of tit. .ark. atilt ¢nd tvW perm .uT tie vencmwd. ILP. A.AmLau time and eunboe tvaeanvle vtun b. placed vv au!¢r t•c�hatnav �. nT�� a• a�� saes m 3" 'f meR� Von[ Rnai-T 1 addi�ds`srmta-d uaNl lb. ddut T emexvl rtnP 1II-patifL-anent .M a'IN-Ia. A vrttUm - v abW P.rtcrm ta .dilL mar <NL1��ataa. LL.PUrz, n�=VItO[ rcPrermtaU.eL avW be aaUn.rt d iL.m t-PP--tT to b. Pmemt duitai Wope cvadr+rcWn and uaUni of th¢ dvantT mart -v erne PCO. iavneit mvae40msltr nll� bel a tvpimd ndedln accaMavre Ur aye ¢1 Uv m T 6a 1 7.das Ortr{m 9p•onc.uavi twn� ayavl 315 d P'f4[-:0. ♦ cvrUlled pp.rlbn Lecnvi[Aen av¢D Pmform Ucoe CcrULfva =-aPiu of tmt m rL W¢ll b. vnbduttad to mUT dant. anise lad tha.tve, A moT a¢[aUa+ vneU >< emm end IIte•n tae appartamleT m be pa 1 duNv[ th. mnver�teelntt ¢tie tinl of th. aortal .trip. Y41. N .mrdnna .lot ¢acLm ]G0a_ tae [vmdaLma ear Pt�v culrert! Lbil" et2 (m0 IvGfa and the e l.r4a .ball be rsp\mvd helot We mtbm .r txn•eLav deLataLta Wa [Ty� dlLv¢ .f tee [aundsL m. me wntmctaRnaa r anon report Ilndla{a v[ laund¢liav Planum b .d tote eM m01' lar �mv.e1 prbr w Plena¢ Pz�a. PvuadnUm dui .hell mmalJ .IW m0T mdaOM{. Semdnrd PR 1. Rt.n anl4 ltaldln¢. .than•. ut" bee f¢vna.[lvn u mmunlerA Ut. tauve . d UO eM/ar ¢oa f� rnuvdatlan dabWcatlna tbeR h. d.tsrt¢lued br the •naa.er aM npprpavdnnb7 r60[. V . wpm d f�und f., al.a¢tt= b detWvrmi bba f a1ee4 dbee 71uav v1 �bvL [a nn true Re ednncvd m{zn.crLamd YDaT [aL1Pp�`atcLPa°r to cava[ baso PauadlMclvv dell.;uaUnnna acvmPl vrnlz mor Nv.d ¢art add4• standard PR -I. raatrarl m Ih. Ravdned. rnm-e rack u mrsmrer.d-ta-pinv bar u Pc'tP•e•d• Uta tatctmav of b.ddin{ WaB b. et2 lel tneh- Rh.n m1L-LLi•{, yr utlzard.- tie dlernv1 b [. b cacao ln¢ fvundnr� mLan attaint' a.ed far Luna ateb Uva thou av4inaer eppn•-d tri VTC Appm•W v< taw p •^• ¢hall etpin lhrm (S) >ant's from the dao of W¢ -PP-a latter. t^.4. moT _.der] CG -11 Alto R.mpa aadl W IaatallN share tadlvetad a¢ thee. plme -t/., u tlxcta.d nY mm - M5, MOT Slav4aad aaerdred -U b¢ tmtatlaa rtam .err ud and/vr u P__ -d vn that/ P murlsae ta �7tx araaEd b I �n mtteria ria aP'm I al Ih. au¢retrvd I"f L tvim d a•m by VOOT FCS9 CONSTRUCTION NOTES L Tlt. -tri V-ur and Sera 1Lvd.rde am ¢p•dltuaase era .raL - al Th..da std miler- .•..r parllm a[ Lam Puv..aa ralld lar bo Ian Ham dtte a F5 .Pprvr.l S rev mnv. i.er Oban Wasm ta Lm -t -rt P tad -P--ft­U­ ta •[fact et tits ttry W camtrvctlad. 4 m• emir -cru ep.a c®tdlne4 .11A and trr.v4e tae � ^^ til. W- mthvrttT• i me vntracur xh.11 Hrfa •tie. ae.a Ibr tv m aslsaat +adv M cora dzi1I1P{ the maneaie. a Tram .mUP{ aver (oc ft/ 1 te..rl meta L 1.iNa•d to Lha mnauvum of ¢vee LLae: .) Tb. 4utIIeN11 mW lurdW all Iaear tea msurteL bt rm,tn It, mon: - C mm � �PIueA ; vo4 Wl daPmtt 1 evardmeu 1u411sum +Ito tn. araaa.ana¢ auutmt 7. peat lx.tb¢a of wta -Pa aa.er ..rnea m tzti am..m ta e+ �rata.l.a .fth tae Aatna+eie L a.ctat'- S Toe Au[trmief• mNnlm.me dl•Waa theU lurwW evd Wldl .LL .etc ::rues taraa4n 1- In Ona. a u W ermtraetai• rvfnv tr to nary th. meta[ l� .oemWl Iuteliad r3[raeLr. mm.. Pm.nmt aa.ea v (n.talled: .1 2tu mda mS .Ire IV nam. sad mr-c. rnmt M POP-r+r dl4n•d .Leh td. appm-L.a el ma rram..m aa.ar .eau b. a.t to I/ml [nd•- e1 Ila aldenta p.t.aa Lae tFlr of Ice caro evd eaa evppm•La avW to bt bat. --v [0 e¢d G al is mmPan.nu ¢f lb< meta me m•mNr ebW M I. pave-os+tna m-d•r. 9, ret arc .m ea -v sardcu [hat mauat tb It - Th. Iraaliaa a! rev .-trio. lateral u to W eomdlvated .Ira tae .waanti r •mPu.nv[ .edrtanG bl b applL-etlan for Herrtc• :noel. b. made tad f•o paid .•fan evzk ... er4(a e) Iba aa[naat) abea furalah and IvstaO .➢ 1/0% 5/4' tad 1' w.t-r •erns v. d) ra aR L I/— end ': .ata avrzm. I WL LT .nW ttv.lu the uP and t¢1v4 the PlPla¢ u tea pb m-.tT Ube ma c®LracWr she➢ fvnt.a .nes fn.ulF tae mater .salt .a mWl. m• iutmntl .elf hnt.4 .1 Ten autmrar •10 lmtaa au a.rror tata.Ia Id Sal •ata a-erlp Uve cozen hs.w a b.rArle. Pamvtua .somWl (d.tectar dnuWe U.nk alt. m am u I+Aalr•al• 1'h. mamtdT muel mrt ASSe a[a>saard Nva l0[! ar Iml IL Aa f4w Ileo etre[) em . heckDo. Pr.rmtba -Wf (d.t.ctnr a .. check tare c aP u xh�If�daW1 hart •are •edea meta. ]bu .ueuWlf tar aD< t .. tmmaa W) b•Im- tW ­ b.0parldly. Wa preamlm vv1C Ft— -4 rem.tn am mqulmd. 12. Vr t¢ rata- W. m.rhvo t weal.) Iv[ d•c4II and matnzd ePFrae-t a: II t1e dvm.eUc ata mxur and W tacanar PrareaLan drda, etW-.',) Lb. tits r -+area tfaer t.akLlo. PraraLnn darlcv ftECEND I - PROJECT INFORMATION I JDCATmN F=LMM COUNTT PAR[F7 IDENTIFlCAPPH NO : I4 -A -31A, 44-A 282. 44-A-293 CltRrrPNT •n• NINA; 04, REMIENT!" PLANfL® CO40/LffITY UFFNICr D t2. s'M' LRP - 8 `LV11•rRTA1JUN0EYELOE'EO PRQPrIeTTt USE RE.SmCNTIAL PIANNEO cmwuuNrTY UfOMDUAI aigrz'I f'tFO�DM TJL 14-A-3tA 4085 Al3tE5 TDNcu: R4 PROPaSSD USG flFSIOF.VO.4L./COt'.ran.rta TALI u -A-291 1713 AQ= _ONM LLS. PROPa3FD 115E LESIOEMIAL/SMOOL./PARB T.M. k -1-M 213.0 ACRES. Tattt9: 94 PUMSOO USE: IESMENT1AL 3-5 Am n .ONEJ' RA HAS Or= HLA WrVL-'Y PARM 44 -A -3 1A AND 4 &_7a PER OISIRU45NT a caminsaT 83 A(RM -ZONED 04 HAS BEEN BIA OEI'N'M PARCEL 44-A-3IA AND 44-A-203 PEN MSTMUEM / U70001.^1. VICINfTY ff4p TAf£ I' - 7DOD' SHEET GYDEX COVTx-rfE:.'r BE' m^Ss SFS. _ A1M.umc PP.OP62TY OKNEPS PROFF= rF.rt'P DEVOmPMFJfT PLV: OVrpa r Sr7E RwwwI TAL TEArImm M=r DEVL`CPa r A"amATE TAHLT AnoN SHEET DEVEIDP,Mra SUFPE.7 k EA5ra:KT PLAN flYGULL INFR--TRACT RLE SMET as. Rr. IL t OLD MUCKS TO" ROAD PUBLIC O1PROVFSIZN75 0FT'-SATE aALOR COLL-. a aDAO QETAM RMO CLt.nMCATMNs h REQUH1111 LWDSCAPMr MEET Leff➢ BAY m - PHASE I- LAND UM PLAN LAND BAT Of - PHA. I - COM MUNITT ROAD NAME -I= A 9RLtT QlOa LAND RAY m - PHA3E I - LINO Use PIAtf LAND 9AY m - PHASE L- LAND =P[1N LIND RAY N - PRA -M i- LAND USE PUN GHQ PAY DI - PHASE I- LAND USE PLAN LAND 0AY Ill - PHASE 1 - LAND 175E PLAN PROFF.aa :mL[PL1A = sl= TRIP 6ENERJT10N DATA SI ELT I '_BEET 2 STET 3 Mimi` 4 SHEET 5 qHET a SHEET 7 SHEET a SHLET 9 SHEET l0 SHEET 11 SHEET l2 MEET 13 SHEET 14 SHEET 15 SHEET la MIE T t7 SHEET 18 SHEET IN PHASE 3 STEPHENSON VILLAGE TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY mire Qa u rethmr --. _------- F�� [SS � PrrruLTr IIl9➢e C_'PA UM LttIIID -_-- ---- P�m IVlAV1tN-M tarr2 �-. PN PEAK HOUR PELTCEriT0.GE OpDE lJ ren USE m+TItG dl®2Q 2rr8 � P981rivm JtmOi/ 1pII 5 -- a -- ._-- PmP'.-D OILL�lm1'Q t7mnc w lea • Plt� aV Imes G F>�ff [m[ � �• _ 1�nQma:aT ---- 210 ella�rID rattl�t r1a _-- m'1P)C 058 ILP m[ - IOmll$ TCS oIO= m N¢rJbb>Q tide rimIBIC lnwt t f- tro'''yy . L: amlpc 4m1,mIIi at Im - W - raRlOm rllm0ma e/ tQ --�-'- 39 a=c m aMv.Prntuuum o PaIIpCSm [RL IOMtatlsWL"Sa - • m rvr a e'er -- H ^ 11► Ma zm pa"'o atstrn Tao UNITS bffiIID I¢a ­ irFr3L FIimF Plla [N4JK]r I- fl. Iia Pm ➢af ImI,T 1� &.9rTiG fSPadQ y vtOpeiD 9ARbII lli[PIL .1fim0f + . L 1Ntf{Q [I®u CANI'NR O 2.51 O '1®1 auP mm�L1•.� laar'!A . [I�1C .9hr ao�t XT�4 POT-) SNa[ 62inII1 Eu I= Ips 2.124 I - PROJECT INFORMATION I JDCATmN F=LMM COUNTT PAR[F7 IDENTIFlCAPPH NO : I4 -A -31A, 44-A 282. 44-A-293 CltRrrPNT •n• NINA; 04, REMIENT!" PLANfL® CO40/LffITY UFFNICr D t2. s'M' LRP - 8 `LV11•rRTA1JUN0EYELOE'EO PRQPrIeTTt USE RE.SmCNTIAL PIANNEO cmwuuNrTY UfOMDUAI aigrz'I f'tFO�DM TJL 14-A-3tA 4085 Al3tE5 TDNcu: R4 PROPaSSD USG flFSIOF.VO.4L./COt'.ran.rta TALI u -A-291 1713 AQ= _ONM LLS. PROPa3FD 115E LESIOEMIAL/SMOOL./PARB T.M. k -1-M 213.0 ACRES. Tattt9: 94 PUMSOO USE: IESMENT1AL 3-5 Am n .ONEJ' RA HAS Or= HLA WrVL-'Y PARM 44 -A -3 1A AND 4 &_7a PER OISIRU45NT a caminsaT 83 A(RM -ZONED 04 HAS BEEN BIA OEI'N'M PARCEL 44-A-3IA AND 44-A-203 PEN MSTMUEM / U70001.^1. VICINfTY ff4p TAf£ I' - 7DOD' SHEET GYDEX COVTx-rfE:.'r BE' m^Ss SFS. _ A1M.umc PP.OP62TY OKNEPS PROFF= rF.rt'P DEVOmPMFJfT PLV: OVrpa r Sr7E RwwwI TAL TEArImm M=r DEVL`CPa r A"amATE TAHLT AnoN SHEET DEVEIDP,Mra SUFPE.7 k EA5ra:KT PLAN flYGULL INFR--TRACT RLE SMET as. Rr. IL t OLD MUCKS TO" ROAD PUBLIC O1PROVFSIZN75 0FT'-SATE aALOR COLL-. a aDAO QETAM RMO CLt.nMCATMNs h REQUH1111 LWDSCAPMr MEET Leff➢ BAY m - PHASE I- LAND UM PLAN LAND BAT Of - PHA. I - COM MUNITT ROAD NAME -I= A 9RLtT QlOa LAND RAY m - PHA3E I - LINO Use PIAtf LAND 9AY m - PHASE L- LAND =P[1N LIND RAY N - PRA -M i- LAND USE PUN GHQ PAY DI - PHASE I- LAND USE PLAN LAND 0AY Ill - PHASE 1 - LAND 175E PLAN PROFF.aa :mL[PL1A = sl= TRIP 6ENERJT10N DATA SI ELT I '_BEET 2 STET 3 Mimi` 4 SHEET 5 qHET a SHEET 7 SHEET a SHLET 9 SHEET l0 SHEET 11 SHEET l2 MEET 13 SHEET 14 SHEET 15 SHEET la MIE T t7 SHEET 18 SHEET IN SEAZ j �111 P; m sum " a5 Ra1C^.=7 Era %U.� auk IQNAL 4 PwffrMQAS 9m. n SO2=22 [LLQ Mal ten al O -rum Ie2 nm CQOm OrramySiR 1TLIOLEM M r eNT DEPI4:AR DB OIMSS Of TH= PLL. MIL M IFPPmam BT TRT-TCWAC 1SwuvzrL am TO c rolt-M PER 'TLA BY PHR&A DATED 2/7/x3 COVER SHEET SNOWDEN BRIDGE SEE OWNERS CERTIFICATE 0Ra010FIELD STKPIIEASON VULAGE Ld.0 LSI Wb dr Hill Loa- GMUSN1IAT EN47NMUNG ehetler. VA zz= (14a) 802 -Iles APPROVAL EEEDEYOLK COUNTY OOMELTO' OP PLANNUIC a DEVEI.07KENT FemEmcR c9m,:-r aDlm+lsTNATOR W U D� �V o<�z �Zaa°To W lD a <V o21� U C3 21_ Z2 2 N !f1 BATE 8/m/OB SCAM. N/A DATE aencxe0 RY: YEA14 daB NO. _.o. DATE SIC:., I OF L¢ PHASE 3 STEPHENSON VILLAGE TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY AN PtxtHOUR PN PEAK HOUR PELTCEriT0.GE OpDE lJ ren USE AmOtW IN (Nr TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL Aar OF'ftTTAL 210 S[+GLE PAfttRY OETAOLED PSB IJNfIS 153 058 610 177 2SB TCS 8380 720 APARTMENT ABO LINI S 39 ZQI 242 187 92 278 3,011 zm TITW'OLGEfCo"M Tao UNITS u 215 250 .l5 11 318 6788 2.51 ELDERLY HOUSaVGOETACH 53t MANS AB 95 M III Eu 175 2.124 t'3 ELDE1Fm HOt.1'P TTACH IN L24M 6 4 IO 8 8 14 501 5Z0 EWAENTARY SQbOL. '_SO sNmefIS 34 as e60 2 4 6 SA 710 OFFLF F 60,00a S. t09 IS 124 25 171 147 08 �1 (&ML 190.000 SF. 143 91 L' 4 4m 499 99 10.99 .t71AL TRPS 836 1,139 1,7T4 1!95 1.16A LfiS9 32.726 '00% TOTAL INTE1t74AL 16T 167 334 250 m 519 6003 ZD% TOTAL PASS -ay z1 14 35 59 71 SH 1,543 4% - TOTAL-NBV TTOPS- "I 98T 1,405 1,167 it19 7,998 211TH 76% SEAZ j �111 P; m sum " a5 Ra1C^.=7 Era %U.� auk IQNAL 4 PwffrMQAS 9m. n SO2=22 [LLQ Mal ten al O -rum Ie2 nm CQOm OrramySiR 1TLIOLEM M r eNT DEPI4:AR DB OIMSS Of TH= PLL. MIL M IFPPmam BT TRT-TCWAC 1SwuvzrL am TO c rolt-M PER 'TLA BY PHR&A DATED 2/7/x3 COVER SHEET SNOWDEN BRIDGE SEE OWNERS CERTIFICATE 0Ra010FIELD STKPIIEASON VULAGE Ld.0 LSI Wb dr Hill Loa- GMUSN1IAT EN47NMUNG ehetler. VA zz= (14a) 802 -Iles APPROVAL EEEDEYOLK COUNTY OOMELTO' OP PLANNUIC a DEVEI.07KENT FemEmcR c9m,:-r aDlm+lsTNATOR W U D� �V o<�z �Zaa°To W lD a <V o21� U C3 21_ Z2 2 N !f1 BATE 8/m/OB SCAM. N/A DATE aencxe0 RY: YEA14 daB NO. _.o. DATE SIC:., I OF L¢ I 00 Cl N 00 O rti 9 ai 00 O N c0 O C) 00 00 C> C) on O 00 2 C14 00 rQ r? 2 4, ,--4 PURIM tC=M 3H11% SIR PRMM) TO PUBM SMOCL GSD PARK MCS " I & LEI L) AT SHOWN LDMUMNS BY VAT OF P�--,,RUM TF.AH6/EWX0AM. REM 0PTw" AMU16 PM OFFER PROX M anvtlxm 11.6.M "! I EYOE,:E UM Ga TM CHIP V:11m= PMAIX M-W-7--rK wx am= LIM, TE M- 1117=1 M TO M, UMTARW DOME Xc CYHB7I'M "4411T) *--T OMER 8FV -WK?L PW,W.LY Jr, ME SUFFURION VHL&Gl- EMM 0"WES AMIZ=aff!Cl M. EMACTMOr Or TRAIL FAI-13M EM� ME CM (M WE APPMAM PBCVWM MVARIC I= Pl= OF lla� SOMM-1 mm nmw TEE FJMW RECU-02-VAY THU iPPIEW"r WAY IN MMOMM TO MWN= lew PW= PED--SrEwl TRAIL Orlu usuo LL 811. 41 14 Y "A .41 0 00, n wr a L -A 01-po PAfat ma eft 9 'FlM oplzm em * Y-lr am P-1 JI ACME AW -T jig cowfuwN :-! V -14Z lltl\lf�p� IBM UV KM D, W mmomm I 0 0 0 0 00 N 00 O O N O a r 00 00 O N 00 O • t V g _ 'w F. '§C' 4 }r i .. :: � _ , d:Y i}. . - .., _..____-- s -:. . ,_,-.. - � � '6.: -. __ ->'§� - - _ •b\ .k,s r.! 'Y _ - c6 'g,il�-+•»esu -> IV -•__ .' .,n a.>,.:a. v,,d.- Y!_'-__- a ,.."a..--._,._-.�3. >.-� -_- ,- _- --=i-,.\. 3 .a-'° '"', -`-, _-3 - .:,�a f -_ iri , < E .,- •, s'•.., -.:.:a � - 3., .. '� , a i - - - $� »a.� � ^, z q.s ,w `°. �\�' _ _ � -. ,.,. -� _�.-.-��_ y• '�„ �-¢ -_ --.-�.«,,.-K , '.--�,, �.; `* Twp § X:`+ q6,o n. , _ - - c�,�• s - ,:._ _.-..--,-.,. G� .,, � a3 Sa q �_^ g ,5�'� as ' "';.. ti'�� ;a -.. yi b °r. %, 3 ` - � � �_ _ e r ' �- - N.�- .., ,. a 7 9 awe'° - • ---"=>- "--ten, 6 �..,,•.,,.,,. a -: M. •-� - - y 3 _ -.. - .a-4- ,.,-'-- : S {6 w a >_� Q ti, a�.a. .... •.,'� •.q ,,:,.a,�„«;• a� :ti`9,�, '� � - 1 ” ems.... _ 7 ��--��w�a >q'ba''y.�a v �.� f'°9 -- _,- - > - P '! r e : v=ia- -. .._ _ _ -�-�• P 'a> i - A _l P« / ,..'b _ S•, y-. 5 b �--`zj, 'a, `,-' ,�:k. 4 Y, ", .r. ': ,f":.-•:,.. A_9 '® ®..• ,•.; y, . gym... t @ a,_-..� m. ,> ..:_ -.. __ ,:.=,. _ �„ - ._`.+ t. i . 'a``` - , .. .m4,4�•4a-.ate - ' - - - _ s - ,. a ,...,� » ! ., - t f ;_ •'-- i-a 1 i1 ( ,• a, -•.. •, ,_mss -�,� '''a.:;.y. n, w�, �- + --- -'• t _ a •. ti sr _e w<'`- F : B ! ,� .,.•., �.-o�>..�.�ha .,�"*•R.-.-.-.fie, a.; .-,,.. �m I 4'�•,� ��,,a°•a-w�.' ...7 / n° , �_,� ,..�_ 7.yw - . ' �•=tea °.-�. <> 'm s 3 _.-" - - J 0 ? � .3 'm �� s.,°� ) � �a-=�,w k e w ,,,.., r� -4't ., v:-.a--aa a �.?z =.*' -: -. .>n ! s�°-a ��„-•�. - a "^,�_� ls�.',� �, �'8 'l , s ., s_ _, �S •- -. a�a,as-.c,,,-. , .-,,, a.-.,'+?�°- � - .. - - ,--®� ►-_ . / ....:,, ., f .. r ".. -. as .,-+,..-gym, ace,ef..a s _; •� ' : „-, .:=-ate ,. 4 ,... _...- .n a *> r-:._ -•� =b -.a :a .� �, `aa �:a - � `.i i—'7� aIJpFF _. ✓9-,. i01 k0 ., �•a�., :�>.,,. _�� U s. _� s=� q "'a.�--,: - ,_ae.:= d5 is�:'.7 e.. a- r. _,'•. • 8 _,r''. 1 I'm a. agsa �'.- '.a . , .z_ ...�-�_>,-,. "�,• i 1 @ - ,'� wa':. - _ ww•. ,.> m: e - ,�.:i,:. .._ --. .. ,_ '�..'•, -- ,•.-a. - .,� ,.,, Ge ,�: k1{1 4n „ a; ..- �'ma..- a•`'m*:;,aa ,.._.,.: -,: , ..P3.. . -�'•'�' -�R.< ' � 4 ,.- F»_�. d �:e v-: ,v , � _.. ., 3,_ _-, a ...a ._... .r•, r �,.. � � ,..� i`' - •,.°.>'- r�,p°Lt' - -'.a... as �' ! #.-m. »., ! 5t+fI ea �: f! @ems. o �c. s_.,�d� � .�. �,-,� s' 9 • S' �. ,q -.::-„ .,, -_•.. , , ° -- �. � , "",: M°.. '' *, .a"„„ ^+.w'v, a -.e; 'a=:� £s �.�. `.i t{ _l�� r -,3.. a "`i,. -:� , } 1 s 'a �`.:.-3qt $ �y s x ^ F 1 x _ _ ' 6 ,. ,, °, 4„•,,, s. a `4w'".. �:t.- ws_.,, "*° - �: df - -„ is Y �_, a.`�,- '� � .,@. t a `- ':. - 7 1 \ r ' I„ . ” �SP 7 - = , - > t' `- m `^cam a , e a•� _ '\ :,'7 r q r ti �•. I f w-.9 a= . 'a. . w ��4� F kr '' S E " a>., a\°* 'a,�.;q a». >i,�s. �:'i r•?'F'w .v.= F Y s• ;.i'�---, wy.-. I �,�� � d � � „-, �. 3.s ,s '• `� .._ , ,.� ..:: � -._ .-....r. a x: ,' • . 'qac,,,,• s.,: 4 "} r:+_' �,.'• >. 'gym_„ #. '� ~' •.��_ ,>.._ ->,-JA r. a..-\, 3'_; a., - _�a s:;i, ' _ _., ,x, p ♦ v �* � 4 r I-. r:� ', ' qq "> qw aa•''�+ 3 -S'`''am v 'Y ','.,le E�-- �� r ��.._ ..,�^' 'xr.._ ., ., _, a - "_-.a•-33� _4 '-q s,aa+.�, :;t 7a °�,. - x.s=3 .•^: • :, „� � �"_'� _' w / a, ..S q ,a x- /� �q Z. �.ss- �Z. ,:,�.- -'k.c _ ,.` _ d�!' '\ > �,�' ,� _ � - II.. � - �•....�e r�,py._--,a '. -v s $ a e 'a �:.q r.Eti;t �^ .,. p��e.,�, � � ^r> a � ,�*:.. •i". � r 7 - .,t' - -;i\wa,' 9 ®'\ . - �' e'a: s ,-,-,. JJP '" d ; .s. 1 - a, 'v. q "; _, \ 9 7 ti `r:, �;• �.,. �. ,t >ab ><� --±,,;,- `" _ ;-, - w7,...t \ a a i;9' I _ ' >R -_ 'xe 4 q k ,eo,� �a;=a�',^,�, ' k �e' '"� Y",�'-'• 'aaa,� ^-- _ '° ss`. ' � -sq a � �Ym,4 "'" ' mss• ;�a d: •'�-� -- '{� - - ";. a _ -'E. t 5 - ,r&: k '�• ! � "�4._.� � - w ,{+ :.tea � . } •:a . e,a - • q � p't;' 5 -3-: ._ �a-� E> ,aI � ' --'• z a'+, i Z. , "y _\;-5 _ '� i ;. , i:.''A `;.. I `3 I-.,#� t - _p.,� �.., _t '-_. e m---- -_� -.-. ,a_, 0 --; L n . ,, _,. _ ,-:z 4 ''g .a= , �=r 'fir - �. ;'a - - ,,'ear a .•,.� S�: �3 "a» aA� _.�. - .-,.: _..... �-, ,. .s _ - -...7 4 ¢ a � , _, .... '�;.-: , :,. '. c: ;0.-_a.,• mit" _ `u, 1 -','w. .y, "iY m � y,w " a e -a • - .. 6.:. _ a. ,C. � _ `za a 'i __ -,,. _:�]. -4. �,>,. t :%. 3"a- -^ '_v�'S ®_.-e. :� - ., a" � \�- �- �.e.:. ,b , � -.:. .._»y ,,; , ,,,,,,,,, , �., z: ..._. , _ - - t.., .. > _ - - ,.- •, - �.: �.- -'s _:, -. -a, �_ , .f} t, a �'~w �'�� - _ as - .. . -.:, _ .k- `- � • 9 a 5 - A , ,..ha. � ..�, ... >,..,.,,_ ,., ...,"".,'a �. r �w .,: a: a.`':-" a� m „„ 4, �,1 a•. -T : - - 4 -::�- f ' 4 . - ''�.. ;z'�:� , t a A , ,. � .,,.�¢� m, ,... a ! '� x.+ '•+ - a `'_;•-.. ..e§a,-a a ,--.�: .,,a, - 'tee, tK� �.;.:: �.° _ g°e _ _ •a b ,�. ::, a •' ,s -•_ ,,. q e' ,.. `'_. F 4--�;s:_ a:wF*7:.. y '°.. q 'fit". •a>r,.---s. - ��• L i`. � �a � - .,,• � 3-'��,ei\ wia'-q� a � ; - �'q,. _. w. -v i .....-.. t S a a ' � $ '�;, -•., _ .,. gym.,,, .. �-' _'�" ... .., .:.t -, a - ��c� �' .._� -\A*,e _ � �, t a �;-`a,3 I _ - .:. � �„_., - w .'='q'>yi : , / � "6 r •9 an?y7 , �, - .,\, a '. r,g_----��! w e.m ,s - .'i;.E. m . � � "e q - .: a` I -., :•; _ • . - '. b° - w"' -, r.r• a , i =ter ®p - • '.:. :: + - ,,s .. .. - �..- � "m ..:> ., .. .:.. d. a .; .._ - -.- 6 t �. w ^s•a ., c^,° •moi - - _a'h...-.>," s - l; •a.. -' A •. 3__-±-, a."`> '-'--'s.. -? _ -.r_ - .-- @ e, �e rY° +',v'a',F„�_ s:, - - 8 @IAFlt - .. a - q '.5s„ ... 'v m _ - �; 4 ',- �z ....,�.„_.m,r ,a •; ., a . .. v - 5'<<`- f` 1 t _ n, +< _ -a _ °.a ,.. "�'� a ^,- -- ..�.--3x Ka022637 a-. .- Ott, 1,e�� tea. � -_ .. u- •- +r,. .,: �� ..� ' , -�Q - . t .� a. ,.._,�p..., _,--_. .. a , .:,k, ♦ e -,: ., , �- -:,, a'..• , � ti a \ � �,"' �� - 8 .y.ta .� a,.>a, x.z' "t��. � .� "gin. _.. s' 5 ; � �• -- m6�, s` i .. �. , -.. .. n - -.� a >_,� ....ai , .,. - a>e ,:. ,. - ,.r" ,•- day, _ - r t - 4�- s,.. «..r� . ,, ..y . .+ ,a _��-• 's.,., ., .. _ ,.:,.-. �. 7 c. «:_ ., 3- . _+ -a -__ - 1 - ,. -a _ .- �. -. � ,,► � ..,,,. _ - _. _ Bd= R `.'qh ' �v . 'm 0't,. . n .. .... '- -}' `.� -, _... - _ , - a 4,. - , r a •_,:. >."p 'S r.,} � i hn.w°a,,4 0"...`J � s arQ bMP , : � x.. ♦k - , 1e _. 1 ✓qO .�_<,.a,mt .- ,. , , ., -. r- . � ,....._.�_ ,... J ! � - q,:' r'p _ - �1 ° •°1z.6� e s' am 1 - .:. -. v :.-.-_ n , , ., ' " r / ., d,✓ } w,�._,.r- _ _...: , ... c yy -. _ ,fin �� 4 a 1 t b . , $ . •. .a. ,,.. - , . _ .._- .. f f _ .!<r � a -* - ?--,a _��-,....., s 1.. ,. . ,... �, :.s� .E-,.m.. / •� �.-, qo T, - a� - d a,�a:. "a., t-e 7 - .•. , ... -. d = ? s - , . , ,.,• a.�-. , .. n - - \ � u....>..: t-'." _ .a 4 -.� - 'sa, a'° : ,d r - x = -. §. '. r .e _ �a�»..• _ F � a --t� Via. I� , f ��` ° ^, e'm ;j'; � , *, ...'a•;a 0 ", 4 -c> 7a4 � t m ,,,t. +±7s, r�S e t 9- , .,! _ . 44- � \ ! f . ''a :ate '+ .�„^ �'a.'� 7 J?. ti iO��R; `'; •\ .�°.,° 1; ,z ma• e w'a e .. •. 3 " c. $ `- .. t .,A J. ., a. I• 4 . •x - \ ' qa \. .'�� �`-�' � • '�J .y ,�, 1 q qae`=.. c� ..... - . .., •F ."•>>__�m>w. __ > r,; rt, ,o., 1 y - .. ._,e A , i • rc _ ._ A41-. .�. .-> t ,. .-, -r;. s r.. Y:-+ ±; \ ".- _ _ n „.. •t>s ! 1 f ���'., 9 S ,@`' q,aw''baa '>."'a ' 3 !.r a, .'SI, ..\ `e, 7a• 7\q k�Al a,-. _.,, ....,° ,- . :� . =Y f F � , r . , ,,. \ .. � a.' t, .+� tm,� w - \°R Y � . ,,, �-4,1.:-futf,e, 1� ... -' SjO,- .: -., .:.�.t,.=..a ,.E'"...?v, ,� ,q-� < aas„i a , >.-,-,.�'' Y . s ,. : - 3 6 t . -®tf.. -=Y .3 3 - = k - \'m .. a q?a - - 13... • ., f .i > -. - - ,. ^;_ X41. . s@ ,i•:, w ,..�. ,. , § , as ° . z :. �^s -:- ,4, 1 = � \`� a +,!', e 6.. r. $� 0. j” �r•��- 1J. F 'c,[ y ea`e - r° <' i . 'a ` 7 -' �-±._, , , + a I b ., ' 7 f t , .,: ,1 _ � `" - _.,�'' f ",�..,.�. `-�•S@��^�f: �,. ® 'a , - ti ,C .qe m,l�>. 'at.' „v.I,,svl' -., 7 .� e , r�.:Itu +. : _. , a, <..._ ,� �•,�. a> � •,4 '9 R « . w .. ., $ .e. , , a a s: b d + . - d s•x '<A, - . ftit _. ;•,. ,,. �•x5,1. 0 bid -, - G 30,. y- .s• ,., "`., g.. ,.. 'Ja. Y-., f� -g rr 9a t.,• W U i ,.�' _ UJ V ..E -i'r - _•4- ! �i.Y. E. '"q9 - �- �F`.., zi _ �- - t • - 9 et .. `�� �. - - 'i' 'i ! ^s •® .\ a _ _cT' as t5r ..1`' I s,� d , 99 5^ a- _ 7 a= ,:? aw -e.. 7 a.,,->. ^„� , a • ;. .,, a. Yc'a mJ \_ - m, `,a"_� �> � +, a-..a.,., ,. ..,.. ,e ,• k ��ii�c - ..,. .. e. ,.�? f m.. a:.. 1 � _ - �.f c: - �I�',� �7 - _ .st. - .,.,_- F i5-- ®_,..; 4 ® . a a, c . V .,. - . ,, b ®,..sa ,� e. a:,• 'm" e ,�"„- `°�,� - - - �,�` _ d`., � _ .•y -� log e e ,e :4 . - - _ ", 6 f Y a . _ a + .. oq - . ani, ., . -•� _ _ _ 'w F s 'a'� P p ! 1 5 e _L 4 '1 '1 _ 1 '� §.., .. •.. .r - _ =. a' ', �, , .: ... .� -- aa_ e > a.: _ � g ° r`>' I ,� w , 7 9-,{•.'a +•,e`, n fr R >m 'iq'a ---.� -. ,• _'$•t;e :-..,;. "a '79 _ � -- ':�.:d0: �.�7,® �,. _ ,:. .�e �a..�w,�?a•a '>.' s-�•s. fm.> �.®w- '=- 'o - .c a. ,e � 9'�\ -_.a = -.._ «t . ► a :,~, t _a,±. > ''.70 «, s. m - , .- � .. a 4 v J *, ® "m. .�' - , ',-„:'�, _ ,,,ddy . E� - a qr... I e1 a _�.- ._.,, - f t - ; ``=.5 { . ._.. • - , "c. a 1 "..., - z : �” , ,' . e .: , e � :� i'a - - .. � s "-v i 3 e s ..a, is. - 5,. ::_ @ a =.•;a q d : .,, &eq: �- / , T;,»�. Y f a ,. �.. 91 t . \® Y a a eta •. 7 - e a • e k a q, , @. - ; T a. �;``•P ✓ ' / R . 4 .a�.-. .q w ,m7 .i'° a. ,,.-' •►,+s ii 3- 'a'``m-. `*, i" d' _aa q �r �� ,.d I, -'w _ tro 1 O � aa: :9 \ `>, .�s � t@ x 2: 'w_, :q'• q' - _"'w ! ��;.s / ! @ °q- E e . \ ., .. -',. , . ' _ e "- .. tS, ®. -> `._ � _ ^ � ti° ,+,= ��•� d k / %1 ®1 -.,. _ �§,, ry "7i .yg 4 a,,. .17 °„4+>•., a. a, -. ! r . Y e -S w a - itrdm�,�o .r �• 3 e @ 0 *' i _. .._ \�O �: ,.-,.s! i., •o', . -. ',< ,,^ � , „ �.' .,•s, .�. �4 a'• '! a. - a .�., gR� t ?•��.�”' f a °.�.m.�» t �3 - } „ 7` i �} r 7� •® -a7 _ d i d .... _. -....f e 4 :,..a. ..:: > '@ - a, =„�J• r tp ., ..dr_,/ ”. . -1-T , c''•'..,,- --- .-_. �, .,.. _.a.;,-xw «a,aa •... -_., a, r....,1.,,.- y.,4 a_- . -,mow a_-•'=-_ jX�.m�, w _ 7d'-:ac ®owX �'- ":`-_-,.....ra, . a�- j � R , 7 wi; . •:.., q. ,, a -. z_ -. /` r, B r e a -..: : .•. ! a „4• � t a_. �-.. _-,.:.- _ 1 r a f , e _- >< { Fg r ,• - � e ,a • _ - q t Js '•« - f - f : ! , - �' -, 4�q P _ J, - f" q .eqq. ✓ _ w`w €w �'�".v - ...-..._ _ dr .'ram _.` '�•� o ! . _ .,-. .. . , ., s ' ,R ?eia >,. °A " - ...�'••. .- - .q„Fc7,", .'a`":i. _ � sy.v�; n -,, ,... ..': . _.-.✓:.---.�,.�._� ! :. ,q+. ,r q.-'a.,,,. � . ,.-.. � $ .- r . C , :,. - , ...:' i ',$.*,. ;1', S'�a 1 e z'Ys � :ri r- :_,•°•r d, e �d•d > i!0:r. _ s J - . / +' ,� f � r R t 9 .. > . 7c e:., , . ;, ®.,, w , w � ; �> � '� �� `*? r / __w , .r9: • 1 ``,,� F r , i f ,, � , .a�:�, � m�,•,..:.,..-,.-�.� =--3. ,_., .... ^F -: ,. _. :, .,-qv--°. Ya. ani d t r :v-:a, k .p. 4 .F .=®e,,,' - �3� `�S �� <d'�-_ d' �,, 11 '.'. J s.,..".A.��^ � .T -� + J. -r,€�t _ r 314,±:J aaa .\t _- -a„� p'-.�' 4 .x .. a.. , a.. -<k. _- .:,w;C+� - 6°e • r g rt .srs��, - w.,- }�: ' � f .�"- / P`.�'r �y -t .''• .a ,_ !i� _ A e,�R _ - , n, +.l,. i e_ _ \ - 2S ._^" - 8 9± -_ 1 .. - f .d .- !. 'C P„` F-, - 4 o ,a=.,..". F7 .. � •-, ^- > r. .:41, s® ,:., a-,'' \ �.#I' - -� •,,� i�' - y ,`_y ;•'. f _ ,`a", - __ a�e .- .,> -,_ .- . �A ,•, •..:, mak. &... ,, ._ d a ± 79. a,;';J±1 ,.m 'ss �y.- e'x ;6 - ea^° , _ =aw ..,.-,..- � _ ....�-._, f - � + m,: __.. .. 7 ♦ _flV .,, , t .. 7 . - "_-'. '.i' , . 0'' rX e-- "°`'q � f> ✓ �5�„ *, s _� J , eW t 9. le, 3 t-,._ ._;:,- a .•r° v A "Mi._,t,. ,. 1974. .\. � :`.v:m a wv _ •s °a'�,@et*, fr __.Ra _ ">. ., ...,,:,- --'a •a._,.. m= a -- ,>„ ,_ _« •x,,., z-- 1 sGk ., -..,a t w --.�z a, .@.,c. .. ' ._. a "'�°' d `t ra„r, � .a. - - x -i t-. R -.. - ��a s ,✓ a__....-gid +,....,. "•.�,. w. as--=-. ., ;:':.. .. . .<.�-, .-... + :•: •, .. .5: d `"`.m..., > ' P"' - dq i a.'a ..: may. __..--z-»�.+ ., ^- F af.. _ qab - � � _ . 7 .e'. �r � ,_•��,• _ •<.',.»�,..,� -"• � ' "., .,.. .p..°baa _.r .+^',. -.� ,r 4i-. °_!. . m,. *m5 - 4' 4 {t7 -f .'« 'i,! l -✓. J c ., .. .�.,. .,.. u..... .a•.... r... ...,..°•-.ex. �.,.� -,. :,,a.q:, fi» ' - F.. _ P _a.. 7r _ - - m ;a� i �, - J 35..J I - ,a•:t - �� v ..-. •.. _;.,. .. . _ _a- ,.>9C... J ..._.:z .-,.,, a"a - - .,. ¢._,...-�.:',.�. -...,,,ro�-,�.�" ! w.�r�,.;�.._.'..,•., ., ,c• z•,.::. . ,a.,.' .� ®-,o.�t...e,. m?�era'$: ai,. _a,,.��. ._ .. �- --_,�.�„`,v ;`>. °<.__-_��>r:z.-.,..:.,,,...,-,- - . ,.,._.a.�«- m_...,.3��,.-.-�fi-%.d,, ,9_.: _,•' ..acny. ,, r i�,f / ,a e, fi t 3 . - �--'�°d v_�.d. ,<_P,-`s✓ w ®Fd-_i ,.,a r gs ,. f 3: 3zrl• f-_,lai, 1a±A ^a\..,?�,- .m \4;4°. ',. eaFq q :-e=-_�..- .e,w y r!`-�- -� .. g �.i-� drrsw!s" s 441 ed- a �~,-�• s¢W. .aA - qO @„ t aa'm r' - / } - g i $ ,�• i:,ee.,y v w a7... 9. \ >' _ :/i.+ f- n t'�.s _ o - - _� // �,_-. -•� cwt �`H w � o-.- f �'Td 2 ".`w w.. ::.� ",. i. -.> - ,.,a�-. ._�.:_ :.r a 9', a '�' � .+,* e. ' 3 s +• ^'..30 ,s ,. „_ � + -v •. -a• s =. .;-::.0-s 4,"'_�_- >a.. '• . r'ss , 3-. - y\.. .li`� e . \.._.Y .• �' „•..� w '�..,� -•*,.., ,. ,�.. +.. `,-r -' a - ,.� - _a, c , ,; ,. G'w y..•wm,,,,•,�� - nSp " �'Y"Y ,.. "'I_. - _ �,:s - •, -..... ,x,'., y: +.3^ _ s''—All®.: a• x`�" -ms's •- - - _x - _-..... -, - ® a -., ._'-.,. ...:.,:� .. -.ti . ,y.s-... �.., �., ,- / a J . / . a,7 ,.;v . y,�w.. .•w w q \ i as ,, rL , __�.-'`s- . -. -- s. .. -«.-. ,..,,. - ,";.._-„s �.o,•'m w, 4:�.w-.,..,-_ .d/= ,,^ !f •a+- e-.. a. �'x sb r' � ,, e7 a,q'e !§• - � a'�- a,Tr= _ 1 f �} _ _ e9 • A s . sa'a a- - » - y ✓ ! s„a d d . d ! a,�'a'A w .. d t q _a� oe ,,� -:.:. - f ,,�"'� - � �,�� / / q3:. •a.'. •�.m,taw>w`p - , qi,3 d° «°,:'.. '", gN' .� : _ .4. -41P-_ %_- -- _- �'"`�.: ----' -- ,.Ei �.tlj�. �-•e.-t, "� _i .,-.-,-�r•�..'e.e."� <,>_e. ...,. `�;i s., p,JE",v-, r+. -y 'oma -:� .ra m � i' -- -=Yi�4iEH 'e.K.-'--'f'Iv RS�iR -'s '` -✓ t,3 a."- - - ,._ , w \ '�,. �'� �• d o" .•• r ' w �,.. -- d"'�. � , _w � dw '•Q qc -'. - - ,. ° ,a< __ Y' _.. «.-�, >._- .,.,-. w_ ... .. � . „ •,q,. -.b - - 'r r �h a h°f_ 4-:ta.' , •� _$_ - i3 —•„— "_J7IM RX2513 'NW... ^0 MUMOWING M .rm�",,. - ,` , - ...•` _• �a�"�' -.��.. .. _.,, act _,�.�. � . q, _ - „aF'..,+ii►. `.•s *, 'rr - E" - � tr ,{,.,,. - - \ _ _ _ '� , `• "•'r tee:: o sw fe,� d � ^" �,� _ �'+ : �" -�: ..,�.�. _ _,, a •>. - _' d .-A�=.,`°° m `'¢ �d.,s' - 100 0 _ 100 :200:.IIb` t' Iffo' SGAL.E. I 100 c w FIa . or TEwL. JOB NO. CMOEI >3$SY !B OFi� 0 P, a-4 U O c 0 /.y i --I r - M all N 0) ati bA 3 Fd -1 W w w O F-`•1 MI O N v --t 4/..a f tO 00 0 (V 00 Q F-•1 Fit F^^� P� F --I rid v O Q ^^N !�1 M/yIT Y`t•i f� J 0 a, PROFFER STATEMENT SUMMARY STEPHEH,RN WTAGERESH) NTlALPLANNEDCOMMUNITY PmPary: 794 6•/. Acres 'Pax Map Nos. 44-((A)}3 M, 44-((A)}292, 44 ((A))-293, and A Bulb..- Parcel44-((A)) 31 Sm.ewin M""ZI Diem, ""'""kCowry, Vvgvua PmJI Onok Co Ise NTUNY DESIGN MODIFICATION DOCUMENT: L COhIT A. Allows E4 Duln % B. Generalized Development P.a • The. -bas .-,d a Con--iry Desi Modification D --chat u amcbcd d an APP P � D lcospomrd by refacnce here, as Exhib' F % `The Frtdmck Camty Bvad v(Supem grecs wnhoumcd o[wy (rota Beard o[Supavulrs or Plmnlg Depmmtmtappmvalb etch modihcavoasfrmy maser wtich has been prcvinusly agrecdm X mdLbertf mvedb Fmdenck Cow . aPP Y H Z.'HAS WG I- A. Ad. --oven, • Frcdenck Caw ma to nmvtb effective, double at ty Y APP Y xhml ¢ d mRers far etch stud -o P war acmesac.-na' d bid lncasco(60 s.dm. Y Y per Year X B -Li eui,si mPe-iB 'The phasmg allowedq -' sbagbe ;m""d to e.year ovave yearly basis begmdng di wnh to dab aFapproval of to azovfg basal an f< fogvwlg fomreWa: x '(2,465-9 00 b 1,300 range ofage restic.W units) x 8°e * wusd p<min fiompdor yem(s)=maximi® w age tt' pe y smekd ®zts fornmmt w X • Armora nm used m a o, ear shall becavi<d fiwad- Y 6 mY X 3. USES, DENS" AND MLX OF HOUSNGTYPE A The appbemr shall develop amu o(hlusing uv. rypea. include lose single -fly lemch4 mwvhouu, and vdLQamity h-vmg udt W. ae Led l the 1mJ Bay Breadowv Table in S. 3AO) and f4i,h¢ x dex,i6cd m Section 21 of- prof,, s.bmmt B. All Redicat and Comeymcn ofand fm public use me/m Forth. us. of to develapmmt shillbencdikd Rroee'dvcilcWannrta. % C. Then shag bea-tit rap o4`2,465,exclwive ofto affordable bmslg tar we cW ty(Sado. 11) R. a.bj<n property. X D- AHland uses within to - -1wd we M-1 dweim shill be protibimd, -Ira atervise pemincd m to RP Diems, the B -t Disvin or fc B-2 Disle. le vo case shall -k amps be P®itkJ whim Steph. x VBUge 4. CAPITAL FACILITY "ACTS: A Tbc Frederick Cowry G i.1-1tes Fkeo Imps¢Model-w. demmamk a buil®pan. mend f."',l t. amount 1[1.5,327 p rziamual tion • The Appbemt w0 pry 10U/. oftbeu brpac. wmugh moncury w-wrtnom wd Imd davauow b Fadaick Cowry, udess otewue sparked by fc po fe_ % 'Tb, Pad¢ agxe flat to vibres used fie to lied dit,,,i s, of S30,000 pe, ase appmprute and wcp.bk. x `Mmewy cwtrtidms shallbepar at we time ofbuilding perms untmm forc.h wit x • Mmetary cmtrrbwer, will be djun i eery two yeah by die Consumer Prlode- x • MY min.. used'm v N. y - shill be...,.;d fmwmd x •lM Per roil mmse.ry pmHe,Fir m"k -' towehoux and mdubory Pmvidca fm x f $3, 92540 , F, -Cowry Public Schools (14,135 pmmhmodel kss 5210 fe leud buefie, $635.00 f Fiderick Cmmry Pinks and Remeanm (5889 Oamdel ks 1254 fm brad tlomnon) f400.o0Im Fredmck G-ry Fbc roil Rexee T 145 W for Public LfY T152 Oo for Admlumuan Buildlg •The P¢ uoitmovcmry Prager fmacuve duk mi. Pmvidn for. 563500(.1 Fiederkk Codr wry Pae and Re -($889 per model kO$254 far lied deidov) X SW W Total fm Fiedmiek Cowty Fire wd Rnmc $14500"-. U- 1152.00 f, Ade roblet.. Building • The pe alit vetoer.,, --for to aQmdabl -P fm to elderly pmvidn f $500.00 Tod fm Fredeick Cowry Fire and Revue x 5.MATCHR,lGFUNDSFOR TRANSPORTATONFNHANCEMENCSAND/ORHERITAGET'Ot M: A The app&rot shall mamhlg fiends, Fredmck-t,, Missed for of pus.uo. emm.w,co.nfax$75,0o). of odeio,, for we --um hm ,,g mivism. x 6. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE: A. The APPh-an p,v,Clea&mkVolwteerFucwd Re -be. to srmd$2dR000.o0frMgm¢d brad x 0000 m be paid vlc vwtW ago -un approvd. ' '='w x •$50,000.00robepal=@vy(30)day' ausuanm oftbe 500th buildlg Pemitnm.wfm Damlw 31, 2006 x ' $10,0SR. m be paled -Ms, rosy (3o) days ruaumm ofwe 1,000ih buildiv6 Peron rot law wet Dee®he 21, 2013 % ' $50,000.10 m be paid wuhl fly (30) days of isomer of to 1,50bh buidlg Pearn not bw wet December 31, 2018 x T TRANSPORTATON EdPECvRl-HS: A Improve wifur w. Property: (1)Majalc,41 ,Rod (a)Thede,T -shall dedi<mem80fourrightofwayandcoos-rote Majm Cull Road Som OW own Red LI Skb,,,E Village, ,ed to P.PertY wvmaY owned by McCaw ant d by x I Hd O¢pa, U.S. Roux 11 (Mai4mburg Price) ou,,". (b) Provide bout-. ares deog. wifi4 avNo, djacmt. each situ It. Major C10aysr Rvd in ccordwcc wit wtim 22-A x (c) The median will be vege.md wit a camblation o(bow oro.- mnxrvauln rams roil Soused n. r wit VOGI'wdch wHltrwafr. tep(HOA)y.Im6atimpprys¢mawJl be designed aaaupaab (d) Fmvide birycic bore. will to rightofway tat are four fM m wiMh -d ase wnagum. wit to .-de ravel Iron -a am prvpedy madrd ma signed % (e) Prohibit ltvidud "'W" d aha commacal coronet. ham lwxemg Milmmt Ptd (Rvuk 662) x (2) IderParxl Clru- (a) Pmviae ma laud bays b we atmf rea.vabty postk fw'pal 7"""' b""" x (3) Pdvam Shan, Alley. -d Cmmvm Drive, (a) The App ii- tall pr -de fora raid commmiry -e (or to active dal Dotson wit a i-lmery-df0vile sures. Tx mos-,seul dlxnsim afpevercnt deletes. w.Pi-il x kneas wd` me baa Lhkn or need to Public men pavmwrt xmm amvderds ultrei by VDOT (b) Pdvab All— • The Appbeam willPm D .wry allrya wdtma 1wteevfnot(16�wide easemabavlg hvelve f(l2) [p wnnar«o fot(r) sbeur¢ 1. int ado_ % •Pmax Al- -bob ot¢Pin-aU'i m 90 t,-e-ek. shallprovuk fora - - wmivg red F25 Ra x • Prwme dkys. m oouon. Public or private suet..hall pmvidc curb c- axndm6 bw1 f beywd to paved doe ofi a zimdad alley wide x (c) Ed_ Slmns --A Re. shag provide fete min®smrovcl auk widt of24 Eat fm to piwam mai. m .Mfion, onset. park,&deaignedf to prrvax stat. x (d) Cav-ov Drive- Uwt Type 4 (mmtyad dour) () Malnm Wdt.Ilo f x ( )Mlimmt&gnrvillii-il. cum tdbeaf autm lod mete b.x ova a¢ lutes of x ( )N Parkine'si®t-B be P. -m diemmeec. to cmvryatd x (iv) )F Byway pmwdeddtc mEwce. inch em>w drive. to comtymd cissa x (0Vui-parkingue. will be provided outside aft. eomrymd clusxrcovmmu drive oma x B. OQaix Rightvf-way ®dlm Eas.menb •The Appncmt will acquve mY ddiumd right.-of-waY md/or eaxmmts frall.H-six tra.postuov impmvemevn PmQe,d % •Fwdmek Cl..tyI-Pt to-pakesuch ngWnt-ways re.a®m. by approprax mwm, drop., pm¢cdings at the ".. ofAppbi- x • A,--,ible foray paymmu rode b P^Perry' owvas for,isw-of-way roil/., ov- .isommmIL x C The A,H-will ,want fall sure mtrmce i,.vcmenu with right awl teff mm Iron at to ftauctim of Old , Towa Rod f to Major C.11n R.ad dram Re first Phsevfvelopmmt x D. rod Chadea Town Rod and US. Rome l l • TLc A,. -will -corse a sigmgzaum agrremm, wiw VpOT fm to lrasecliov ofUS. Rote 11 and Old c1uWn Town 8.x3 x •The ABdii.,vdl wamua fall arse evrovcc boo,­wild,bora ngbt my lave and left- to on Od Charles Toww R14 and a right ave lure- U S. Roux I1. x E. The A,._ orf ae-k a zigvlaatim agrennmt wit VDOT for to ltasmtily o[Od CLadea Town Rod ad Re Major Ca IRoad. x F. Maj., Cournar Rod • The A,,,- oral deign and cava-na four -ave boWevad Maj. C.11-1 Rod fr ft SIT- VilbBe Couutoury l 1.1-1cal ce wM to p.5eed Gmeeduid Devclopvrd Plw. x •The firs,pbax will be a two-lane haV ucuov fat a wvmuctd hum Old Charles Town Rod m fe Ih.Ra 1rt<aevelopment X ' The scrod pbax vfte Major C.0 -Reid will provide for fe id a ,de four -lave sectio. whh appropdax right -d left v- `t,' based v. to -Mowlg Pmt- % (1) Dmgv ofwe haysp,.uon uu--mu will beg, whin 8% 1[fe acmd rode clwl-Mete is realized wite,uPlmon athe ""P- wino 18 smote of ltd-Rv. % (2) o- -edroll sown of 7,9% -,Ie yips p¢ day bavc beet doer-mxd m Re Majm Coucno,Rmd, fe Appumvt wul bond ved mvmxv-mmvucuon ofte ad ,ed baro i,, we eusilg Major C.Hecb, Rnd ro ti Wtiwam f -bre se,,fi- x (3) Once the acetal mfe count retches 10,5)0 vehicle trips M day ov to Majoc Cvlb-r RoaA the Applicant off bond wd co®mcc<onsmcuov ofa Lbreelmc sectio. fOld L"oade. Tawe. Road, hum to E. -b U.S. Rook I I using fc existing bridge. (4) Omz the acmd haffe court reaches 17,699 birk hips perday o. to Major C,4bs e r Rud, Lbs Appkc-willb d d wee eonsmcdon ofarwo lanehaffucton o(fe 6.lor CoMec.r Road loto te 1- ft fmlave smtion tl US. Roux 11 at the Rutmhd Famt maumid Paz mbrse-1n.lad<d tura mfi um fon-t.<aatade lrUs. Rnm.IL sh ' The Applicant .goes b evw lm a sigmfimuon agremKnt wnh VDOT at to US. Pack 11/Ruf¢for Farm fdustal Park lkrs<cum ifrofcsi alaadovavm norma;.. 'rid Bo Pmw ai tai time. •Tofc-raters will be ms.11ed atfeslufwesxm meth..- Siepheosvv vwk mwe d of0osmgrmvme t ' v Property as p (5) 0- ec befe-m, m to soork-. mrome m Slephcacon Village scar to Rurberbas Faro Witoo al Pads lrersection aazhn 7.996 -We rips per day vv to Myo, Collect Roan, we Applicant oral bovd roil corms...metro-oft: revmiamg amtue l laves. to..ting Mayor Cid'-r-d to p.vidc Sir die Wimak for -lane -ti melg at to east.ric o(U S. R1ux 11. G. The -.iK vide S50odd, wet sbvU a tikzd oma hmdsb VDD'f m&,e the Com of APP Pro role , ty Fmdmck [ar fume- emmnb ee mws.k BIN S_Rome 11 fmrth eatExrt31>- Improv avg 8. SCHOOL AND BALLF- SPITS A School Sm • The Appli-I shall detcax 20 mores of.d to we Frederick Cowry Schm1 Bovr frau ar a p- '6-1 - which shall cow,.wards to avail- opm space tequicmx d Ira to development ' The Appli-will allow occas for Skp6m-n Village -id- le we sbe from a local veighbatad stets -d will proal. awes m wawad sew¢. B- Soccer and B-11 FWd Sib (1) lie AppOcan, shall dedicax 24 acres of lana ro Faamek Camry mooch ore maty v Fredmdc Comr dcsigmks. ' Whm cambwed wit vb-I bM fields, were will be 6 sacs¢ fields and 6 baubil, fields av shown o. to 4.. for S...up.R Sim (-be C), which shall court inwards to.veal] opm space reFe emmt fm to development • The Applicant w0 all- . . for Smphmmv Villam die aaidmn e aim fiom a kcal vciNtborhoad mat and will .Boor xccs ro waw ad uwa. (2) Frederick Cowry may envvry or kale its owve,tip lt¢en m we wmc,ad inch.,, field aims b a cmpma- mnmoth¢mury,provtde maroons opporsmtn forte public. C. Lend c-ey • The Appuwrt .ball pmvidc a bowdary survry ad sWg stake fe comers ofcaeh sim_ • Freb-Co-ry will exewx m agreensmt in rsodable f which is sauaDebry, fe appbeant whicI will pmvidc m -M sd rmarsaitd fhd parry .grins. be bow. by we --i- off. Proffer S.kmevt D. Laud Usc • My ow¢ Iii iiiz, type. ofPubbe uua Audl be pled oily wit to crosmt off. Apphmm • Qrhe puboc purposes arc nor wvshucid or aaageA covgkred and l use on the pm«B which au idmtd d m subpmagmpb.+A and B above wnhl -years of en.vrymce saN pmp¢ucs waY be p.chsn by to APPHvmt forte ,roil vdee apecfd l g4 ofwu Pm%dakmmt E. 1Lc Appucmtaaaver we right. real xmpmmy roil Pe®mrcnt 0admg. sips, miury. dmlage smm wait mamgemen[ and access eaaemevn w dpublic use Dame. which art dedicated b Frtdmek Cbwry. 9. RECREATIONAL AMFNHffS: A Rwrauo. d Cmw • Tse Ap tredi shall wvsmtetme revrauon crow wMvi Lam, By 111 v o o of mwe Gmemgzel Devebpmmt Plan • The tteaeuoval wvmrshaH it Rude a bafhouse roil a b-Iwe, 25 -mels campeuum sdvmrmg pmL • Wmb m Otis fmtry shall eomvrcun prior m to asueme 1Cfe 250th.00-age reapickd builtv6 Pmom and be wmpl<bd prbc b .sones offs Ralf vm-agc reatrimed buildlg p®it B. Active Atill Re--Cenw • Ttc App veR shall wvsmut 1vc (1) mneauov crow wM m me of to Land Bars &r she po- use of to resdenn ofwe Active Adult Coouo edy. •- m Mua fcitity shall clmmevice prim b the usuavtt of to 15m buildl6 Pewd andbe w 1eled Frio,, isuaeee ofwe 35th bi,ddieg p<cmd l fe Active Aauh Cto eee r. C Pedestrian Tmu Sidewalk By- • The APpbewt shall-umm7 a Delo . hail m ddew.h syamvr, whbh comeN e.ch acrealm arm b to surou.ding.< s-edbeod. Such mils m sidewalk ryamm shall be mvahuc W ofs+®e dun mwvod chips orauch owm ma-ida Pmvided,bey armor pot oft. sWewalk ryaxm with, fe public nghtar--way_ D. Lmmr Pit IM•A6'wide our"P--dt<mawillbe fli ..-C'wide hail rave-, R.,.l be dediaameb Frederick Cowty Packs and,8001iovwithin uHa.Ret C. ooffand retthe kngt ufsar co¢irlm on the subjatpmp¢ry (m 3.810 •/-Iinwf sahawnmwe pmQad Gmad Devebpvsmt Plan. • My.rea so ddimhd shill be,shad m we mkulmion er required opm span, and till ecu*, rhe App -I rmrradonal¢edit � be, we rabic -scmamctim of we hail -d ddimbsl •Tie Appfi<am aaave. to righ,. re.l-,,iuey and pc -.vent Bmdlg, unity, sew¢ f maid, slope,mm- rour,gemm,,,arrmsxnm and deeu Ogg e- within sad dMvavd a^, •f de, eve- wit to Pontic Hvear pa hxJ u -able. be cm -d doe m Cowty or Sox odlmccs, to ABdi-shill develop am -pads Ltd v a'- a hail sY-f,, to use vfRe -id- of su,lue o VBbge 10. ACT ADULT AGERFSTTUCTED HOUSPIG: A The KHawbg bu,so ..hell be -b ied. to deeds cmveyiue mal pmpaty: 80°A Rfe nee Tid rtaidmtiil -W be occupied by, least av pars- fifty-five (55) yearn ofwe m older (1) All ow¢ asNmn rami regia. wMh a prom who is fifty-five (55] ymra oCage m older and be a sp.0 , a cahabirwt w occupmt's child eightmv(18) yeah ofage .cold.. (2) Conn miler to age offihy-five (55) art pemdued for pends oftlx rot, exceed awry (60) Jaya i. wy mkdaryear. pl A smdvlg spouse .+ball be allowed, covmm, omvpY a dwelllg mit wifmnregar m age B. M/6 --w ago-,-uicmd,eaidenud mina shillbeilbwd robe mid by d ken we posee fifty (50) hems of- m - (I) All uta residcnu non snide wM a Pm- wim u rift(50) yeah of age m rider, cobebe a spouse, a birmt, m encu euil,i eld d eigmem 0.) ywa Drage mode (z) Gans mdm fc age ffifty (50) are Peemmed f, P nod, aft®e votb memd rimy (60) day., my cdmdmymr. (3J A survrvmg apouu shillbe eiled,-ti..woc-py a dwcHlg rah w0roula,ued mage (4)MYamevdmmt be' orame with apphmbk bed and gam mgWmmagoveming age aahicbA houvi.gmel fe.Fsi H ralg A. C. ILe requv®en.mquaufy H -gfm onto Personauderihc Fdail Fm Houvpg Aa oil ax Fan Hommg Anaf Vbglia shall be lcldcd f Lie dreds cwvrying ted PtoPe3Y de.�taxd ar age resnilled 11. AFFORDABLE HOU NO FOR THE ELDERLY: •Thecma1, on l(w« de, "^•will be ll afla m lea„50o. B,ii,- tt.il apace hasbeen eeveloped,, Grid tatrhe pmjen quauBee Sir We MWu-Famay Com FNgmm ant Lbe Low Laamc xomlg rax Ctdn F'rog.m or egdvalmt 12. PRFSERVATON OF H15'10RICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES' A a -house The Bym hmx will be pmervd m c rid appmpnax by to Apphmnt B. Caner ' • Tb<Appbeant shah nark and dee"y any c®eteiee roil sndlpreswc fou cmewin a rsu�dem' wiw a Cowry and Sore BlPiFt nap I). COMM IAL CENTER A Major CUHecbr Pmad A- • Pnvide fm A tum foes and mf i. A,,ed- vv me Major Calkcmr Rod aavlg Che mmmvcal • c-er rode uupa milyvs smdie, for .1b mnmecid ane Plm Srtmieed m Fiededd, Cowry •A role sigmfimfi-agrecmc1 bean dcd won vD(T B. Amhikcmil DewRi • Resor mcbuec l and deign reahktive -vmm. Cmfe covmeaid raw wd .hag submit awpy, to Fredefick Co-ty PLieub g Drue or and f<Fad-1, Cowry -sig Odell wnh to fimr she plot will So --ail cmw- • Provide for f< --.f. -eloril avow b..dfi fcpuryvac ofmiew and vppmvd of .0 arehixamnl elevaums and signage Sir d co®¢cd uua. C All covmxmd aim pkm aubmitrd. Frederick Ca-ry far to <omvxmal wmedai®tdm mylevxnt ben mmagcmmiPmlluslBMP) D. The arta. wNrl to co®racd amkr fat are v1t rtquued m be grade. m cleared tet fe ivplemev.nm of all approved aim papa will amain uvwsmrbd. EProvide bre max®im ofM.NO iquse(m nfco® Wlend use F. The devebpmevt ffM.Rod squaw fen of-vmemd space will beg, wifl fe-®.mid.moronm r wet to oueve- ofte 1,2001 van -age aBiued.1ur dil budding Penns wit completion nfibu cvnmemial apace wit, 18 monflu 14. RENT FREE COUNTY OFFICE SPACE: A pmvidc up.2,500 square fa, ofteU spore f, a 10-ycar prod rte, fee excluvive.f.d, and common charge, in to commercial maw fm Lbs ,.cation ora Pobne Servl<S.kgim Fxuhy f F--=- IS. COMMUNITY DESIGN A. Design . Provide w oveag -fir-dry ofded, wnnin fe--ily B. (1)Au,vve (I) Mhaecaual srytng of Housing Hit Types 1 dnlugh 4 commekd m azcoraanm wM to 11om66 UM Types Exbibbs. Housing Udr Types 5 wJ 6 shall be wmpad6le wah Housing Umt Type. I through A_ (2) Access m garages by . use Sais ys shall S-. T,, ov Housing llvitpypcs 1 (Caviage Nouse), 3 adifid Sl eF SnaH la md6 MdSd Tuwvhvuu_ (Comgc Homc), 5 (M gl amty ,, ( ) 3S elements allowed m -in UiuiT sshall include dmots Ak, the amhixmmd g YPc .6 () p¢ Pcak [decks chs wJ/or ora es. ebimr abdcldnn .pm s s ry C Housing Orb Type 3 (Corsage }louse roil Uri, type 4 (Courtyard Clone) ' 1 Decks and Patios H be Class 1 A foe meed co osim hwber or vd 'All dmk P,"u. she ( ) vqs al'Pm Wail (2) Fitt Profeta. Sym= ' Couoyad Cle.ur roil Comge Mores will bavc a 13-D spfnede, rys-m fc home wd tc garage. O. Lighilg ' Any af¢i0r liPhtivg of individual homes orcov®w uu rtaeaum areas shall be duecail downwaN ave coward E. Amhmmsml and Oeago Covenwn •Develop td'; Wmddni deeiuuded rwd s.blish ambacauml review hood frte pmpou ofbbilyp td ';7. afdlambneceu-1&,,u archirm.mel Corms, as weu as my pubbely provided swevues lomtd av roes dedi-seri for pub8e use_ 16. EHVB0 PHAL FEATTRES: A-Eoioure, Fe.hucs and Evsmrnn: (I) Sigvihm.i wiles babibn shag be idmn6ed and P - by fc Apptmv, wiw kcbvid assa.vec hour to Vifgma Depa.mmt of Game and bund Futcrie" (2) Limine ib ar and gmdlg -each lot, to arm needed Cor -hues, vet i., azens and fire p.oa (3) UMuildable we0 '-bddabl<fi-pliiei, and wb.11.1esleep A'e, sial,be deiPPakd and shall be subjmb to fnR.- led Cl-, ma gruh," will nota.ewon mY slope 1(mmty frvc peered (25%) ar Rieuer, except be bile, road r..ssiv6s, u0iun, drdvaBe, roil »orm wawvam6®cvtfadBues. (b) D.v (Weer t wru. fi-dp.l areas shill be lbutJ to pubbe Lbrear Pale Trail ryabm (c) Buffett roil Core-fi- E - C -- C ComituC tvaanda ferrojoem tome Channel •The Wellmda ft®iamt Pavle Clamel tall be wmidmd arcavuaepmtenm ism ClearlR wd Rmdl6bymdooudbtown ufurhibimdwi0tin0ds - Pb.msg PlanfmoP,wdb,,Se, walbe emetd whh xemtiml assimww from VDGIF mrd to Lord Favfaz Soo and Waw Gmmanon Ou4ict D Foist Mavagcmcv[ Plm: (l) The Foan --hip and Mmms-Plm wal be -mrd wit bchniW avaisbvm fent to 0ep-1.fFme,ey. (2)Prre Podswillbe -du and, Hbm.hcial and eppmprax shall b<la-nil and desigadb Pmmok water mfmauo. on the ane Ammlmm aim oftwmryfm (20•)wid<.wmuvdlgr Lsuch prod shah be devebpd es a pale .ening. (H-' 3)TMFMavag®ent Pen will be mmxd wit --e Ct-bvkdaaau.me hour to DrPartmot ofForemy. E Env l Uutrylfto.d hvpecs: ' msmtcuov rudiun, meds, rof, bio-relmam .rem, m wetfda .corm shall be ellowdwif to ivnwmen.l feamar usmd l § IEA -§IED o(Wis pmQe svkmmt My commdm orw. above iaka Gema wm.x mw ®pan <lmhmtln mMoaa. F. Ivglarcv.nov of F.h....-•v..n and Ammammty • Tse applicwt shill pmvidc we brains of we resource posociim arms n a eompouod afore Mew Develop®tPlm. � tiro pWllgto pmpared eoluvicemmu and ®mdmmtsbwe rtsomc< auras shall be lcludd v mvativn of the Masks Derebpmmt Play, arose then Weu ro rmmsmn will be impkmenW. IJ. COMMUNITY CURERRH TRASH COLLECTION: A The MP--Slept-Village shill , serviced by --w Pvbrp ma was+. rmnvil B. TLe area immcdinay smouvding-emupaxr six shag be pb uded wnh vegemtim i®ilarm or idmnW , wet pl-ol l to melon open v.gaabd meas, in edditim b to mgvued f sd gase etches.. IB_ WATER ANO SEWFA WROVEMFMS: A. The AppBcmt ahnll.c- beta m be utitzed for t.lontion ofa reglml pump spoon a d-nisr cd by we Fadedck Cmmry Sani.dan A""ury B"") B. pump S.Oon •The Appgc-t shill covstl-ta puvq..Yon inemfivee wit the FWmh C dy S -vi Autmry Prov, I l NOM sewer and Waw S mry Area Pbi andshalldedirmc to appbabk waw and sewalles, FCSA fropaaum and mamwavice. V • statim aheg he wnsmtcled and vpesatimal prlrmtofin rccupmq pe®itm Sxphmsav ufge. C. Wax R,A kirLin • Tbe AppluwdeII mnstmctwma ad xw¢Ilnlcmf ce web tc Frederick Cowty Sad.uw Autadry Pwrx 11 Nm,h Sewn and Wamr Service PLm. • The app-, tell po v & wit¢ and sew¢ Wes of de,- 'bre b we proped, gee ft d pubficty dedimkd poeebes. 19. COMPREHFNSNE PLAN CONFORMl'IY: A. The Fred¢vk Couary Hoer ofSepemson aulhmizd th I We and povisinv oftou pubec urs and f vibes y ffiedly refmatsd m the Gmerabed Deo by m P,w, roto Poll Said L and we di- ad wnndno. of -end sew r Iles and Belisle, .nil roil. eemssary b sure to Pmpety pmsuam m oec Virginia Code- 1522232 ad the Fr -da C -y Code. 20. CREATION OF HOMEOWNERS ASS TION(S): ACaauonofAs- W.(O • A hovswweers asocadm m owe gun one homeowm uswamn ("HOA') shell be .cold and sLeH be made aapomibk fr we miew and approval nfall design stwdads fm fe Stephms.n Vill.ge DaekPmmt and frfe malimmcc and apauofall c1®on a<as. B Atubuto ReToeobifily • The HOA ball b Y N repo tder, f- (1) M m..(,)All comnmT spa ludmg (aaliucs .rev not oth¢wise do- public uum pined by .1'- (2)Co®o buff 1 ted -de f idmtid its. (3) Rndmdd curbsde vat chum s, 21. PROFFERED HOVRwG TYPES: •That-uo6Homlg Uodeszn arc dC.bereiv. Mye,-y orfima Hadi Unb Typc, whvhu p¢mitkd vMe to R4 Aeeidrntial Pained Cao -miry Disti � waY also be uElizcsL • The mm®om d -Re stadars fr ft fgowlg h...9 We me au®mized vlid b- on EahfdE - Mlimrm Design Simdmds. • "Homme Udt Type I"(Cmiage House): •-HOusmR Unit Type 2" (No. -Ally Cmiage 4louvc): • "Housing Uri, Type 3" (Comge H1uv): • "Hamlg Hit Type V (Comryerd Clusw): • "Hmal6 Udt Type S' (Modified Siegle Family Dawhd La): •"H..,Wg Udt Type 6"(Moefd'Townhouu"Atachd Dwelling): • "H.1ing Unit Type 7" (Elderly Hmalg D-dlued: 22. STREETRCAPE DESIGN AND LANDSCAPING: A -Tse Applicant sballpmvidc lmduaped areas ov bow side.f we Myor Cog -.r Rvadu Jlustre Amfe .hashed Exhibit D frypkd Majm d C.-Rnlion) (1) Worland v --..aeras al ill lave a varying wide of.. less fm fillem fee, and shall be M- P- S-.- A, rovidedpapmr.StrmnmpeAt we APp,icmts Pb­otree wd-di, shag be pbnid l clunks wd de R be p,mxd atm cquivdmt mm ofkv Ft- witsP 401mcm Raofc.-mend-y-uSe. • PI-, uoit sada vie dewmmn u Rod-: Shad<Tan (2" mi. nlipei)= 10 phot units, Omavrnril urn (IS" minimum nliper) = 5 PI -t mita. EvaBmm nen (6' vel. heiPp,) = 5 pant tmnes, Shm6s (ill" mivlrwtheigbt) = 2 Plaut unit. B. The Appkcmt sh:Jl have we option ofudivn6 andscaped emtrul islmds will -Ids -son- Wbm landvapd islmd atemikzedatwevry-eight folt(28')(mn paved area shallbeprovidedb azcl®oJane nn -sets .king ad rove, aisles. C. curd" m shame. sha0 be used' where mlm pe®it, .egeaxa 1p mamnngn,-1r ora ret na-wamrt-1ff, insxd of nub and g u.ermg. D. To to emmt possible, smve fetes or wood chip mas/pats wdl6c uses instead of,,Vbalt trailatl,.- Whee Pm,a.a(men o-aus/paw, ahau he fmtw nn hilt nn< aiae nr<a<6 mt¢,mmm pm.;aw rmewaDr art not rcquhcd orpracncd wMl tc adjacmirad nghraf--way. 23. COMMUNHv SIGNAGE P ROGRAM: A Commuury Fno--m •The Herat rtvme Ce dl a kO w is App an vwwrry entry g urn mr sty gnat to mttmces m we d Such si Wane shell vat accedes mbrsecvo we m 1 g g w 4 on®taper- aawlg an nor¢ side.Fwe wham • Sign pane areas shall no ,ed 65 square Rnpa aig4 and shell be a-ched,awaltnot b accede fcamheigpr, exclWlg Piers. winch shall be 9.25 Retro height. 'M.wallsV rpb,P, si0ugewdlnot b<ldutl<dlthe egawable square r-.gef to sigopwel. B Nm bode dEvh,rras gh •1Le 0cmr resines a otodm fa inckwn a leo App w nPhta-m-nnagm % rams g minrmmt nr g,t atwe orE. eit¢elid..Rhbotod Such sigmge shall not acmd two sigoaper lErsatiun one ofwe rah -u •Sip Pavel azuls Ltu.seed 40 square f pe sib, and shall --hod ma wall not, uccd] l height excluding piers, which shall he R2-amheight. The wallsmporm6fc signage will rot be included mi we A.- square rvomge [a, to sign p - C. C.vrmemal Eno-ana •Com ed --to beimns signs shill bemmummt kyle wnh s®d. deign and ouu,,i,. to commadty entry future sip • C.--.fimsiwdlg bueiii- signs shag be -mete tan 20' l height measured hour we baa and _u be spazd a m mi- of lid fen apart mm Seplembe, 3, 2001 SIGNATURE PAGE The conditions tit forth herein are the MIT- for Stephenson Village and supersede all previous pmffer statements submitted for this Development. Resp-Mly subinkled, S.pheason A. -ides, L.C. / By: ��`�/ N :1. onald Shockey, Ir. 7' e. Manager Subscribed and swum before me this Bch day of Sept. -2003. Seem D Stahl (Typed Name of Notary) 1? / My Commission E[pir 5: 4-30-2004 Notary Pub is 1. DEED DAT® OCTOBER 2, 2000 (INSTRUMENT NO. 000010622) 2. FINAL PLT FOR BOUNDARY LON ADJOSTIENT B6TIIEHN TNR LANDS OF STEPHENSON ASSOCIATES, LC.. DATED JUNE M. 2004 (BNSTRUIENT NO. 0{0011890) S. FIIIAL PLT FOR BOUNDARY LM ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE LANDS OF STEPBEN90N ASSOCIATE. LC.. DATED OCTOBER 8, 20" (INSTRUMENT NO. 040020874) 4. DEED DATED OCTOBER 16. 2004 (INS[RVMOT NO. 040021293) OATS a/Y4/OB 8C11JII N/A DID881® B7: ltE•MY JOB ND. EMS ME= 19 Will