PC 04-18-07 Meeting AgendaFILE COPY
AGENI
FREDERICK COUNTY PLAlrmmu uuivuvtiNNmiv
The Board Room
Frederick County Administration Building
Winchester, Virginia
April 18, 2007
7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB
1) Adoption of Agenda: Pursuant to established procedures, the Planning Commission should
adoptthe Agenda for the meeting............................................................................ (no tab)
2) March 7, 2007 Minutes.................................................................................................... (A)
3) Committee Reports.................................................................................................. (no tab)
4) Citizen Comments.................................................................................................... (no tab)
PUBLIC HEARING
5) Rezoning #12-06 of Carriage Park, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, to rezone
30.26 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District, and 15.18
acres from MH1 (Mobile Home Community) District to RP District, totaling 45.44 acres, with .
proffers, for up to 249 single family attached homes (townhouses). The properties are located
south and adjacent to Route 7, east and adjacent to Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park in the Red
Bud Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 55-A-161, 55 -A -
165A, 55 -A -166,55-A-1 67, 55 -A -167A, 55 -A -168,55-A-1 74A, 55 -A -1 74B, and 55 -A -174D.
Mr. Ruddy........................................................................................................................ (B)
6) Rezoning #03-07 of Easy Living Associates, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone
4.02 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, and 15 acres from
RA District to B3 (Industrial Transition Business) District, totaling 19.02 acres, with proffers,
for commercial uses. The properties are located on the west side of Martinsburg Pike (Route
11), approximately 600 feet north of the Martinsburg Pike/Old Charles Town Road (Route 76 1)
intersection, in the Stonewall Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification
Numbers 44-1-B, 4413-1-2, 44B-1-3, 4413-1-3A, 44B-1-4 and 4413-1-6.
Mr. Ruddy........................................................................................................................ (C)
PUBLIC MEETING
7) Master Development Plan #01-07 for a MDP which reflects revisions to Sovereign
Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, for 216 Single Family Urban Detached Units,
42 Single Family Detached Zero Lot Line Units, 62 Multiplex Units and Commercial Use.
The properties are located on Senseny Road (Route 657), and are identified
with Property Identification Numbers 65-A-39 and 65 -A -39A, in the Red Bud Magisterial
District.
Mrs. Perkins.................................................................................................... ................. (D)
8) Other
•
C�
�:
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 March 7, 2007.
PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Shawnee District; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/ Opequon
District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Christopher M. Mohn,
Red Bud District; Gregory S. Kerr, Red Bud District; Gary R- Oates, Stonewall District; John H. Light, Stonewall
District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; H. Paige Manuel, Member -At -Large; Philip E. Lemieux, Board of
Supervisors Liaison; Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Legal Counsel.
ABSENT: George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Cordell Watt, Back
Creek District; and the City of Winchester Liaison.
STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision
Administrator; Candice Perkins, Planner II; Kevin T. Henry, Planning Technician; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk
CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. A motion was made, seconded, and
unanimously approved to adopt the Planning Commission's agenda for this evening's meeting.
MINUTES
Upon motion made by Commissioner Oates and seconded by Commissioner Manuel, the
minutes of the January 17, 2007 Planning Commission meeting were unanimously approved as presented.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Manuel and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the
staff briefing minutes of December 19, 2006 on Willow Run were unanimously approved as presented.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1994
Minutes of March 7, 2007 @@AFT
-2—
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) — 02/22/07 Mtg.
Commissioner Thomas reported that the DRRS discussed modifications to the ordinance for
age -restricted housing, height -restriction relaxations, and parking lot requirements. He said work on these
items will continue.
Transportation Committee — 02/26/07 Mtg.
Commissioner Oates reported that the Transportation Committee discussed two items: a review
of possible adjustments and revisions to the Rural Roadways Ranking System; and, endorsed several local
projects for grant applications to the Transportation, Community, and System Preservation Grants Program.
Sanitation Authority (SA) — 02/20/07 Mtg.
Commissioner Unger reported that rainfall for the month of January was down; the water flow
was down because of less rain in January; and water usage was up about 5.3 mgd, which was contributed to
warmer January temperatures. Commissioner Unger said the SA is anticipating the bid for the pump station at
Stephens which will supply the new subdivision, Snowden Bridge; condemnation of some property is involved.
Economic Development Commission (EDC) — 03/02/07 Mtg.
Commissioner Kerr reported that the EDC received a presentation by Sherando High School's
Future Business Leaders of America on a project they did in conjunction with the EDC. Commissioner Kerr said
the results of surveys, W -11 -IM -11 had been dist^bated to parents and students with questions dealing with students'
r- -----
future plans after high school, were discussed.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Chairman Wilmot called for citizen comments on any item that was not on this evening's agenda.
No one came forward to speak.
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of March 7, 2007
Page 1995
-3 -
PUBLIC HEARING
Conditional Use Permit 902-07 for Keith Rogers and Sandra Rogers for a public garage without body
repair at 2204 Fairfax Pike (Rt. 277). The property is further identified with P.I.N. 87-A-89 in the
Opequon Magisterial District.
Action — Recommended Approval with Conditions
Planning Technician, Kevin T. Henry, stated that the proposed public garage business will take
place in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. The property has an existing entrance for residential use on
Fairfax Pike (Rt. 277), but this entrance will be closed prior to business activities taking place on site. Mr. Henry
said the application contains a letter of permission from the adjoining property owners, Mr. Gary McDonald and
Mrs. Sharon McDonald, granting their permission to use their commercial entrance at 2180 Fairfax Pike. Mr.
Henry noted that an engineered site plan will be required which will account for activities on the property such as,
structures, driveways, parking/storage areas, screening, and signage. He said the applicant is proposing to build a
60'X30' (1,800 square foot) garage with a 30'X40' (1,200 square foot) screened parking area behind the garage.
He added that all repair work shall take place entirely within an enclosed structure and storage of parts and
equipment shall be screened by an opaque fence. Mr. Henry next read a list of recommended conditions, should
the Commission find the use to be appropriate.
Commission members had questions concerning the location of drainfield and septic systems; the
basis for the building size restriction; who will inspect the oil interceptor, if installed; and if a license is required
for the disposal of oil and grease. A member of the Commission also questioned how this property would be
accessed, if the adjoining property would be sold.
Mr. Henry reported that the inter -parcel connection will have to be platted and legally recorded
with the two lots before the site plan is approved. He said it could be conditioned, so that if the conditional use
permit (CUP) becomes void, the residential driveway could be utilized again.
Mr. Keith Rogers, the property owner and applicant, stated that a waste oil heater will be
installed to burn waste oil; disposal of old parts are sold for scrap metal or recycled; tires and anti -freeze will be
picked up by independents for a fee; and the septic fields are back along the fence line and will have to be marked
for building setbacks. Regarding the size of the structure, Mr. Rogers thought this was the largest building he
could construct considering building setbacks, the water main easement, parking, etc.
Chairman Wilmot called for public comments; however, no one came forward to speak.
Commission members said they would like to modify recommended condition #6 by increasing
the number of vehicles being repaired from four to five, including storage. Commissioners also thought that if the
restriction on the size of the building, under recommended condition 49, was driven by limitations of the property
and the building size would not actually be known until site plan review, the size limitation should be increased so
the applicant could get a larger structure, if the property would accommodate it. A suggestion was made to
increase the maximum size to 2,700 square feet.
A motion was made by Commissioner Thomas to recommend approval of CUP #02-07 of Keith
and Sandra Rogers with a modification to Condition #6, "The applicant will be limited to repairing only five
vehicles at a time, including storage," and, Condition 49, "All repair activities shall occur entirely within an
enclosed structure which shall not exceed 2,700 square feet." This motion was seconded by Commissioner
Morris.
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of March 7, 2007
Page 1996
-4 -
BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend
approval of Conditional Use Permit 402-07 for Keith Rogers and Sandra Rogers for a public garage without body
repair at 2204 Fairfax Pike (Rt. 277) with the following conditions:
All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times.
The property shall have no more than one (1) non -illuminated business sign, no larger than 25 square
feet in area, and no taller than 10 feet.
The existing commercial entrance on the parcel to the west, known as Tax Map Identification 87-A-90,
will provide the driveway for ingress/egress onto the applicant's property, Tax Map Identification 97 -A-
99 -
The existing residential driveway accessing from Fairfax Pike will be removed prior to business
activities.
An engineered site plan and implementation of identified improvements is required prior to any business
activities taking place on the site.
6. The applicant will be limited to repairing only five (5) vehicles at a tune, including storage.
Vehicles for repair use shall be stored behind a board -on -board six foot tall fence, to shield from
adjoining properties. Any inoperable vehicles on the property shall adhere to Section 165-47 of the
Frederick County Zoning Ordinance.
The auto repair business is permitted a maximum of four (4) employees.
All repair activities shall occur entirely within an enclosed structure which shall not exceed 2,700 square
feet.
10. Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M.
11. Any business uses outside the repair realm of the conditional use permit, are not permitted.
12. Any expansion or change of use shall require a new Conditional Use Permit.
(Please note: Commissioners Watt, Ours, and Kriz were absent from the meeting.)
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of March 7, 2007
Page 1997
-5 -
PUBLIC MEETING
Master Development Plan #01-07 Revised Sovereign Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, for
216 single-family detached units and 116 multiplex units. The properties are located on SensenyRoad (Rt.
657), and are identified with P.I.N.s 65-A-39 and 65 -A -39A in the Red Bud Magisterial District.
Action — Tabled for 45 Days
Planner Candice E. Perkins reported that the revised master development plan (MDP)
application is a proposal to revise the original MDP for the Sovereign Village development. Ms. Perkins said this
development was originally master planned with all three of the Channing Land Bays, which consisted of
Sovereign Village, Lynnhaven, and the Twin Lakes Overlook project, and were rezoned in 1999. Ms. Perkins
noted that the Sovereign Village plan consists of 156 acres, of which 144 acres are residential and 12 acres are
commercial.
Planner Perkins reported that the original MDP called for 362 single-family detached lots; the
revised plan calls for a total of 216 single-family detached units and 116 multiplex uits, which is a net loss of 30
units overall for the development. The revised MDP also shows the addition of two new cul-de-sacs. Ms. Perkins
proceeded to describe a multiplex unit, using the zoning ordinance. She said the proffers for the Channing Drive
rezoning only prohibited townhouses and garden apartments from the development, so a multiplex unit is a
permitted housing type within this area.
Ms. Perkins stated that in addition to the new housing type, the MDP provides a commitment for
the construction of Channing Drive from Farmington to Canyon Road within 12 months of the final approval of
the MDP. The MDP also states that the portion of Channing Drive will be bonded prior to the MDP receiving
final signatures; and, the proffered community center will be constructed within 24 months of the final approval
of the revised MDP.
Ms. Perkins noted two outstanding issues: 1) the detail for the trail within the multiplex area
needs to be provided on the MDP; and, 2) the metes and bounds should be provided on the MDP around the
commercial portion of the property. Ms. Perkins said that since the agenda packets were mailed, staff has
received the details for the trail within the multiplex area. Ms. Perkins concluded her presentation by noting that
the revised MDP for Sovereign Village depicts appropriate land uses and appears to be consistent with the
requirements of Article XVII, MDP, of the Zoning Ordinance. In addition, the preliminary MDP is also in
accordance with the proffers for Rezoning # 15 -99. She noted that the MDP process is an administrative process,
not a legislative one; she said that once the MDP is in accordance with the county ordinances, it can be approved.
Mr. Thomas Moore (Ty) Lawson, P.C., of Lawson & Silek, P.L.C., was present on behalf of the
owners, Manning and Ross Developers, LLC, and the applicant, Greenway Engineering. Mr. Lawson believed
the purpose of the public meeting for this revised MDP was for the Commission to confirm that the proposed
revisions conform to the requirements of the Frederick County Code. Mr. Lawson stated that the proposal allows
for a new housing type, multiplex, in addition to the single-family residences, which is allowed in the RP Zone
and is consistent with the proffers. He stated that with this revision, there will be less total units than what was
approved with the original rezoning in 1999. This results in less impact, fewer vehicles, and fewer school
children. He said it also provides key timing for two proffered improvements, the completion of Channing Drive
within 12 months and the completion of the recreation center within 24 months.
Chairman Wilmot next called for citizen comments and the following persons came forward to
speak:
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of March 7, 2007
Page 1998
a.
Mr. Jack Lewis, a resident of Sovereign Village, spoke on behalf of the Sovereign Village
Homeowners Association. Mr. Lewis said the residents are concerned about the shrinking marketability and value
of their homes, the broken commitments and promises made to them when they purchased their homes, the
absence of promised recreational facilities, inadequate schools for their children, and the undesirable affects on
u e living environment in Sovereign Village. Mr. Lewis commented that the pro��uses made �r a single-famil;
home community with a recreation center and a commercial area have not been kept. He said it's been more than
six years since the proffer and the recreational center has not yet been started and the applicant wants another two
years; he said the commercial acreage has been up for sale for the past year. Mr. Lewis said the residents are
interested in securing compliance with the original proffers. He said the State Code empowers the Zoning
Administrator to take action through building or occupancy permits, through court injunctions, or to impose a
bond equal to the cost of construction of the missing proffers.
Mr. Ken Jackson, a homeowner in Sovereign Village, said the developers marketed the homes
in Sovereign Village and commanded prices based on promises made with the original rezoning. He said many
residents paid more than $500,000 for their homes, which is comparable to the prices in Ravenwing and Oakdale
Crossing, and more than prices in Pembridge Heights, Pioneer, Briarwood, and Senseny Glen. He said the
developer would not have gotten these prices if it weren't for the promises made. Mr. Jackson believed the
developers have defrauded the homeowners and if the revised plan is approved, the homeowners intend to take
legal action. Furthermore, Mr_ Jackson was concerned that the Board of Supervisors would approve the MDP for
the purpose of getting Channing Drive completed.
Mr. Rick Churchill, a homeowner in Sovereign Village, said the promise of a recreational center
with a swimming pool was critical in his family's decision to purchase a home in Sovereign Village. Mr.
Churchill said it has been six years since that proffer was made and the builders have not yet started on the
recreational center. He said his children continually ask when they will be able to swim in the community pool
and now the developer is asking for another two years.
Mr. Jerry Fiffield, a resident of Sovereign Village, said he has been a contractor in the State of
Virginia for 25 years. Mr. Fiffield said that in his business, when a contract agreement is made with a client, both
parties adhere to the contract. Prior to purchasing his home' Sovereign Village, he asked about the recreational
center, the swimming pool, and if there would be other housing types; he was told emphatically no other housing
types except single family. Mr. Fiffield was concerned that now, three years later, the developer is asking to
change something previously sold for a certain price; he commented that this was "bait and switch." Mr. Fiffeld
wanted the County to hold the developers to what they originally asked for and what was sold to the homeowners.
Mr. Roger Trowesdale, a resident in Sovereign Village, agreed with the previous speakers. Mr.
Trowesdale said he didn't think there was much difference between a multiplex unit and a townhouse unit; he
didn't understand how the multiplex was allowed, but not the townhouses. Mr. Trowesdale asked is any actions
have been taken by the zoning administrator to enforce the original proffers. He said the Code states that the
Commission has the power to take action to enforce the proffers and protect the value of homes in this
development.
Mr. Kirk Matthews, a resident of Sovereign Village, referenced sections of the Constitution and
the Bill of Rights which he believed empowered local government officials with providing protection and security
to its citizens. He also quoted sections of the Code which stated that garden apartments and multiplex structures
shall not be placed adjacent to other types of residential structures, such as detached, single-family dwellings. Mr.
Matthews also read from the Sovereign Village covenants which noted that a change could be made so long as the
same established scheme, that being a single-family residential lot, is maintained. He thought this change would
cause residents to leave the area, which would create a domino reaction, affecting many others in the community.
Mr. Matthews asked the Commission to either table or reject this proposal.
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of March 7, 2007
Page 1999
ae
Ms. Michelle Jenkins, a homeowner in Sovereign Village, agreed with the comments made by
the previous residents; however, as a teacher, she wanted to make several points from an educational perspective.
Ms. Jenkins was concerned about an increase in student population that multiplex housing would create which
will add to the problem of overcrowded schools, increased class size, and the quality of education. She said the
completion of Channing Drive will provide easier access for the developer to build multiplex housing and the
overcrowding will add to the existing transportation problems. She talked about the difficulty transporting
students in a timely manner; she noted there were children who spend 45 minutes on a school bus to get from
Sovereign Village to their school. Ms. Jenkins said there are two elementary schools within two miles of
Sovereign Village; however, the children in Sovereign Village are bused eight miles to an elementary school
which is already overcrowded. She did not believe the construction of new schools should come secondary to the
construction of the multiplexes.
Mr. Howard Kittel, a resident of Sovereign Village, shared the concerns of the previous
speakers; he said he was in opposition to the proposed MDP revisions for Sovereign Village. Mr. Kittel said
when changes are proposed, certain conditions need to be considered, for example: 1) does the proposed plan suit
the character of the land; in this case, more intense development on land with significant slopes and wetlands; 2)
would the proposed development be in harmony with the existing development, i.e. multiplex units surrounded by
detached single-family homes; 3) is Am' the best interest of the public; the general consensus from the residents of
Sovereign Village and Lynnhaven is that the MDP change is not in their collective best interest. In addition, Mr.
Kittel said that much of the development in the proposed revision would be constructed on identified wetlands; he
asked if the developer had addressed the need for wetlands review or issuance of wetlands permits before
construction. Mr. Kittel believed there should be some assurance that permits would be granted before the MDP
is changed. He said the areas designated for the proposed multiplex units, especially those along Rossman
Boulevard and Farmington, are much closer to the wetland boundaries than was the site for the recreation center,
which was held up a number of months in 2003 to get its permit. Mr. Kittel said in 2003, his family made a
decision to build a home in Sovereign Village and move to Frederick County; a significant factor in his decision to
select Sovereign Village was the assurance that they would be moving into a planned community of detached,
single-family homes. Mr. Kittel believed that to now alter the MDP in exchange for a quarter mile ofroad would
be a betrayal of trust by the developer, as well as the County.
Mr. Harry Mallette, a resident of Sovereign Village, said that when he moved to Sovereign
Village, he thought he was moving into a well planned and designed community with reasonably spacious lots,
each with a two -car garage with lengthy driveways that permitted additional parking. Mr. Mallette asked how
multiplex units would fit into that planned community design. He said when he bought his home, there was no
mention of townhouses or multiplexes. Mr. Mallette added that every homeowner in Sovereign Village also
bought a share in the community he just described of single-family, detached homes. He said that is what was
promised and that is what everyone bought. He said that such a drastic change without the consent of the majority
of homeowners is certainly not morally justifiable.
Ms. Joanne Leonardis said that she lived adjacent to Sovereign Village and Lynnhaven, which
is part of the large 1999 rezoning and also includes Twin Lakes. Ms. Leonardis said that everyday she sees the
dirt road, which is supposed to be Channing Drive, she sees a dirt pile that is supposed to be the recreation center,
and she also sees the woodchip trail that goes nowhere and has weeds growing from it. Ms. Leonardis said she
also sees broken promises to the residents of Sovereign Village and the County. She asked if the County will hold
the developers accountable to their original agreements or if the County will accept more promises.
Ms. Julie Wozniak, a resident of the Lynnhaven subdivision, agreed with the previous residents
who spoke. Ms. Wozniak inquired if there had been adequate consideration of the impact of the proposed
multiplexes on the roads with increased traffic. She was concerned about the possibility of increased traffic
accidents, not only at the intersection of Channing Drive and Senseny Road, but also the intersection of Senseny
and Greenwood Roads. She was concerned about the safety of children who live in the development. Ms.
Frederick County Planning Commission
Page 2000
Minutes of March 7, 2007��
p
Wozniak questioned whether there would be adequate parking for the residents of the multiplexes or would
parking spill over onto the road or in front of single-family dwellings. She said that with no real idea of what a
multiplex is going to look like, there was not enough information for anyone to make an informed decision on this
revision and its long-term affects on traffic congestion and road erosion. Ms. Wozniak pointed out that the 2003
Comprehensive Policy Plan states under Land Use that, "... the intrusion of either non-residential or residential
uses of different types and densities can have a significant, negative impact on existing residential area, adequate
separation of uses is needed." In conclusion, Ms. Wozniak asked who would ultimately benefit from the creation
of high-density multiplexes and was it in the best interest of the general public.
Ms. Gionnie Estler, a resident of Sovereign Village, asked everyone in the audience who was
opposed to the MDP revisions to please stand and about 75 people stood up. Ms. Estler said it has come to her
attention that the developers have faced many challenges with this development from the beginning; she heard the
developers may be interested in just walking away from it. Ms. Estler said if the developers are interested in
selling, is this revision all about making that piece of land more valuable for another developer to buy. She said if
that is the case, then the existing single-family homes are going to lose some of their value. She felt the County
would be taking money from the existing homeowners and giving it to the developers. She hoped the
Commission would oppose the requested revisions.
Mr. Ted Burger, a resident of Sovereign Village, asked how a multiplex home differs from an
apartment complex, a townhouse, or a condominium.
Mr. Craig Sangri, a resident of Sovereign Village, agreed with the other residents who
previously spoke. Mr. Sangri said that he and his wife purchased their home based on agreements that were either
written down or told to them by Manning & Ross. He said that he works in Washington, D.C. as a federal law
enforcement officer and he bought his home in Frederick County to be away from the density of Reston or
Arlington. He said statistically, there was a correlation between population densities and its associated crime.
Mr. Sangri disagreed with Mr. Lawson's statement that the revision was consistent with current proffers; he said
the multiplex units were not a part of the original proffers and he believed the density would increase.
Another resident of Sovereign Village, who did not provide his name, stated that he came to the
United States from Vietnam to pursue the American dream. He said he was a small business owner and works
very hard to be a good a neighbor. He said he moved here from California in 1998 because this was such a
beautiful area. He asked the Commission to abide by the developers original promises; he said his home is his
investment and he is relying on that investment for retirement
Ms. Cindy Hughs, a resident of Sovereign Village, agreed with the previous speaker when he
said he bought into the American dream; she said all the residents bought into the American dream with the
promises of roads, the beauty, the recreational center, and places for the children to play. Ms. Hughs said
everyone worked hard and saved to become members of Sovereign Village and own property in Frederick County.
Ms. Christina King, a resident of Sovereign Village, said she and her husband both commute an
hour to and from work in order to afford a single-family home. She said that if she wanted to live in a town home,
she could have done so and saved a considerable amount of money in gasoline by not commuting. She raised the
issue of the promised swimming pool not yet been built; she questioned how safe Sovereign Village would
continue to be with an increase in density; and she questioned the impact on the value of the single-family homes.
Ms. King asked the Commission not to approve the proposed revisions with multiplex units.
Mr. Patrick Skorker, a resident of the Red Bud District, said he previously lived in a
townhouse community in the State of New Jersey. Mr. Skorker was concerned about adequate parking for the
proposed multiplex units. He anticipated there would be considerable illegal parking and people treading across
other resident's properties. Mr. Skorker said when he first moved to this area, the woodlands and wildlife were
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of March 7, 2007
Page 2001
abundant; he questioned what was happening to the ecology of this area. He asked the Commission not allow this
revision to go forward.
Mr. Scott Bowman, a resident of Sovereign Village, said he purchased a home in Sovereign
Village for many of the same reasons his neighbors did, such as the promise of a pool and a single-family
neighborhood. He was opposed to the revision proposed by the applicant. Mr. Bowman asked if the 116 units
would have four multiplexes per unit, or if the 116 units represented a total of 29 buildings with four multiplexes
in each. He understood the County wanted Channing Drive completed, but hoped the County would not allow the
developers to make the revision solely to get Channing Drive finished. He said he also wanted Channing Drive to
be completed, as well as the promised swimming pool, but he was willing to wait as long as the multiplex units
were not approved for his neighborhood.
Mr. Mark Chase, a resident of Sovereign Village, said that when he purchased his home he
asked what was going to be built in the adjacent field and was told more of the same. Mr. Chase agreed with
statements made earlier that new construction should be consistent with the character of the adjoining areas,
whether it be for a rural garage, where someone wants to fix a few cars, or to residential subdivisions. Mr. Chase
said the deed to his property prohibits him from hanging his jeans to dry in his back yard or leaving his boat in the
driveway because of the character of the neighborhood. He said he was okay with that because he knew about it
up front before he bought into the development. He said he couldn't think of a greater inconsistency with the
character of the surrounding development than this proposal.
Mr. Chris Collins, a resident of the Lynnhaven subdivision, expressed concern that the
proposed multiplex units would negatively impact property values; he said it appears the residents are getting an
apartment complex in the middle of all their single-family homes. Mr. Collins pointed out that other
developments in the County with a mix of townhouses, apartments, and single-family homes, such as Preston
Place or Autumn Winds, have the various housing types distinctly separated. He said this developer is proposing
to place the multiplex units along Rossman, an area with single-family homes. Mr. Collins said this is not what
he expected when he purchased his home.
Since everyone who wished to speak had been given the opportunity to do so, Chairman Wilmot
closed the public conunent portion of the meeting.
Chairman Wilmot next requested the staff to provide a definition and description of multiplex
units for those in attendance. Ms. Perkins displayed the definition of multiplex from the zoning ordinance and she
described the possible layouts.
Mr. Lawson returned to the podium to address some of the comments made by the residents who
spoke. Regarding parking for the multiplex units, Mr. Lawson said the County's ordinance requires more than
one parking space per residential unit. He said this proposal calls for four residences or less per multiplex unit for
a total of 116 residences. He said the density proposed is 2.3 units per acre; the original rezoning called for a
density of 2A units per acre. He explained that the original rezoning approved 362 residential units and this
revision will have a total of 332 residential units, which is a reduction of 30 units. In addition, the projected
number of school children is 73, as opposed to the original 85 school children; and, the number of vehicle trips is
reduced by 764 trips per day. Mr. Lawson said the developer was committed to the proffers and this submission
has gone one step further by imposing a time deadline on the completion of Channing Drive and completion of the
recreation center.
Commission members next called for Mr. Evan A. Wyatt of Greenway Engineering to come
forward to explain the design layout and to provide a description of a multiplex. Mr. Wyatt came forward and
explained that the idea is to have three or four units collectively attached, mostly side-to-side and semi -attached,
with individual lots and individual access.
Frederick County Planning Commission
Page 2002
Minutes of March 7, 2007
y
��
-10 -
Commissioner Moms asked if there was a projected date for the construction of the amenities so
the residents could have an idea of when to expect their recreational center or swimming pool, or if they should
assume it will be the last item constructed. Mr. Wyatt said the approval of the MDP would dictate the one-year
window and the two-year window Mr. Lawson described. Mr. Wyatt said the public improvement plan for
Channing Drive has been approved by VDOT; approval of the MDP and the delivery of the bond and deed of
dedication would allow the applicant to move on Channing Drive immediately. Regarding the construction of the
community center, he said the County would first have to approve a site plan for the pool, the multi-purpose area,
and the building itself.
Commissioner Light asked the Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, how much time the
applicant had to meet the conditions of the proffers set forth in the 1999 rezoning. Mr. Lawrence replied that the
applicant does not have a time restriction, but the proffer does contain a trigger mechanism based on when
building permits are pulled. Mr. Lawrence said the completion of Channing Drive, which includes Lynnhaven,
Sovereign Village, and Twin Lakes, is based on the number of building permits issued and before the County
could issue the 474th building permit, Channing Drive would have to be completed from Senseny Road through
Fieldstone. He said the County has issued approximately 390-392 building permits to date, which means there is
about another 84 building permits that can be pulled prior to having the road built. Mr. Lawrence said that based
on the development's average growth rate, it will probably be 2'/s years and possibly 3-4 years, if the economy is
slower. In terms of the recreational center, Mr. Lawrence said the proffer stated that the developer of Sovereign
Village would provide a 3,000 square -foot recreation center with an outdoor multipurpose playing court and a
swimming pool; however, there was not a trigger as to when that would be built. Mr. Lawrence stated that with
today's MDP revision, the proffer introduces a timing mechanism which previously did not exist which assures
construction within 24 months.
Commissioner Light recalled numerous off-site traffic improvements with the 1999 rezoning; he
asked if any of those had taken place. Mr. Lawrence replied there have been contributions for signalization at
Senseny and Greenwood; and as improvements occur at Senseny and Greenwood with the Food Lion project,
turning lanes will be installed. Furthermore, Mr. Lawrence stated that while it is not within the proffer, a
signalization agreement has been signed with VDOT for a traffic signal at Rossman Boulevard and Senseny
Road. Commissioner Light inquired if there were any other incomplete proffers and Mr. Lawrence replied that at
this point, there are no violations on the property.
Mr. Lawrence next explained that the difference between multiplex and townhouse is with the
dimensional requirements. He said the minimum lot size for a two or three bedroom townhouse is just under
2,000 square feet and a multiplex is about 3,000 square feet; the lot size is 50% larger.
Commissioner Morris believed the County will be seeing more mixed-use developments, with a
variety of housing types in the same community, and the County's desire to accommodate them. Commissioner
Morris thought it was very important for purchasers to know up front what they were buying into.
Commissioner Thomas commented that it was not desirable to see a switch in the MDP from
what was promised to the homeowners who buy into an area.
Commissioner Mohn stated that the one issue that must be dealt with at all stages, and certainly
the MDP, is the issue of harmony and compatibility; however, he was not entirely convinced that some form of
multiplex unit couldn't be compatible in a higher end, single-family detached community. He said he could
understand the concern of the residents that without knowing what the multiplex units will look like, the units
could take on a variety of forms. Mr. Mohn said that before he would be comfortable with this request, he would
have to know more about what is actually being proposed and be assured that it would be compatible with this
community.
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of March 7, 2007
Page 2003
-11 -
Commissioner Unger said he didn't get the impression that any of the residents who spoke were
dissatisfied with their homes. He recommended that the developer go back and put something on paper so the
homeowners could see what the multiplex units would look like. In addition, he recommended that the developer
place a nriP► nes on when things are going to be constructed.
Commissioner Oates said he did not think it was beneficial to change the housing type in the
development solely for the benefit of a quarter mile of road; he said there will be other future developers coming
into the area who would be able to construct the road.
Commissioner Kerr said he would also like to see more details about the multiplex units.
Commissioner Kerr made a motion to table MDP #01-07 of Sovereign Village for 60 days to
give the applicant time to come back with more information on what the multiplex units will look like. This
motion was seconded by Commissioner Mohn, but failed by the following tie vote:
YES (TO TABLE FOR 60 DAYS): Unger, Manuel, Triplett, Kerr, Mohn
NO: Morris, Oates, Light, Wilmot, Thomas
(Note: Commissioners Watt, Ours, and Kriz were absent from the meeting.)
A motion was made by Commissioner Light to deny MDP #01-07 of Sovereign Village and this
motion was seconded by Commissioner Oates. This motion failed by the following majority vote:
YES (TO REC. DENIAL): Morris, Oates, Light, Thomas,
NO: Wilmot, Unger, Manuel, Triplett, Kerr, Mohn
(Note: Commissioners Watt, Ours, and Kriz were absent from the meeting.)
A motion was next made by Commissioner Oates to table MDP #01-07 of Sovereign Village for
45 days. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kerr and passed by a majority vote.
(At this point some recommendations were made by the Commissioners about the elements they wanted to see
when the applicant came back to the Commission. Commissioners said they would like to see architectural and
elevation details of the multiplex housing type, buffering details, and triggers or any other concepts the developer
is willing to provide to convince existing homeowners this is a better plan than the previous one.)
YES (TABLE FOR 45 DAYS): Morris, Oates, Light, Unger, Manuel, Triplett, Kerr, Mohn, Wilmot
NO: Thomas
(Note: Commissioners Watt, Ours, and Kriz were absent from the meeting.)
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of March 7, 2007
Page 2004
-12 -
OTHER
PROFFERED CASH PAYMENTS
Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, stated there were questions at a previous meeting regarding
how long the County could hold cash proffers before they had to be spent. Mr. Lawrence said the County
Attorney's office provided him with Code Section 15.2-2303.2. Proffered Cash Payments and Expenditures and
the first sentence states that, "... within seven years of receiving full payment of all cash proffered... " He said the
interpretation is if a residential development proffers cash for schools, for example, then seven years after the last
building permit is issued, the County will have had to initiate spending the money, whether through engineering or
actual construction. Mr. Lawrence answered questions from the Commission on the specifics of the Code section.
PLANNING COMMISSION RETREAT RESULTS
Planning Director, Eric R Lawrence, presented the top four long-range planning priorities and
the top four current planning priorities that carne out of the Planning Commission's Retreat:
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. by a unanimous
vote.
Respectfully submitted,
June M. Wilmot, Chairman
Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of March 7, 2007
Page 2005
.�
u
Patton Harris Rust & Associates
Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. landscape Architects.
PHR+1\
CORPORATE:
Chantilly
VIRGINIA OFFICES:
Bridgewater
Chantilly
Charlottesville
Fredericksburg
Leesburg
Newport News
Virginia Beach
Winchester
Woodbridge
LABORATORIES:
Chantilly
Fredericksburg
MARYLAND OFFICES
Baltimore
Columbia
Frederick
Germantown
Hollywood
Hunt Valley
Williamsport
PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE:
Allentown
WEST VIRGINIA
OFFICE:
Martinsburg
T 540.667.2139
F 540.665.0493
1 17 East Piccadilly Street
Suite 200
Winchester, VA
22601
April 4, 2007
HAND -DELIVERED
Mr. Michael Ruddy
Deputy Director of Planning and Development
Frederick County, Virginia
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
RE: Carriage Park Rezoning Application
Dear Mike:
I would like to request a two week continuation of the public hearing scheduled for
April 18, 2007 for the Carriage Park rezoning application in order to finalize an
agreement between my client and the adjacent property owner to obtain the off site
right of way needed for this project prior to a vote by the Planning Commission.
Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Patton Harris Rust & Associates
Patrick R Sowers
CG Clay Athey
Chuck Maddox
Denver Quinnelly
REZONING APPLICATION #12-06
CARRIAGE PARK
Staff Report for the Planning Commission
Prepared: April 4, 2007
Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director
This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the
Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this
application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues
concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report.
Reviewed
Action
Planning Commission: November 1, 2006
Tabled by Planning Commission
Planning Commission: March 21, 2007
Tabled at request of Applicant
April 18, 2007
Pending
Board of Supervisors: May 9, 2007
Pending
PROPOSAL: To rezone 30.26 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance)
District, and 15.18 acres from MH1 (Mobile Home Community) District to RP District, totaling 45.44
acres, with proffers, for up to 249 single family attached townhouses. (Previously the proposal wasfor
165 attached and detached single family homes).
LOCATION: The properties are located south and adjacent to Route 7, east and adjacent to Blue
Ridge Mobile Home Park.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Red Bud
PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 55-A-161, 55 -A -165A, 55-A-166, 55-A-167, 55 -A -167A, 55-A-168,
55 -A -174A, 55 -A -174B, and 55 -A -174D
PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas) District and MH1 (Mobile Home Community) District
PRESENT USE: Mobile Home Community, residential, and vacant.
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
North:
RA (Rural Areas)
Use:
Residential
South:
RA (Rural Areas)
Use:
Residential and Agricultural
East:
RA (Rural Areas)
Use:
Residential
West:
MH1 (Mobile Home Community)
Use:
Mobile Home Community
Rezoning #12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 2
PROPOSED USES: Up to 249 single family attached townhouses (45.44 acres @ 5.5 units per acre).
(Previously the proposal was for 165 attached and detached single family homes).
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Dept. of Transportation: I have reviewed your proffer statement dated August 10, 2006 and
offer the following comments: With the volume of traffic currently utilizing Route 7, existing access
points and the additional traffic generated by this site, the Residency feels access to this site provided
through the Valley Mill Connector with no direct connection to Route 7 is needed. Item 12.7: The
Residency suggests the wording be clarified on this proffer to reflect construction within 180 days of
written request by VDOT. We feel this would ensure the installation of the traffic signal based on
traffic conditions. Item 12.11: Residency suggests more flexibility should be provided to the County to
meet overall transportation needs in this area of the County. The applicant has been open to addressing
the needs of the transportation issues arising from this proposed development. However, we are
concerned that within the context of the proffers, the desire of the Residency and County to connect this
subdivision to Route 7 via the Valley Mill Road Relocation, while mentioned, it does not appear to be a
priority. The application is requesting full build -out regardless of completing the connection to Valley
Mill Road. Mr. Lloyd Ingram of VDOT provided revised comments (see attached) dated September 29,
2006.
Please see attached revised comments dated February 23, 2007from Mr. Lloyd Ingram, VDOT.
Fire Marshal: Municipal water supplies for firefighting shall meet the requirements of Frederick
County Code Section 90-4. Plan approval recommended.
Greenwood Volunteer Fire Company: OK. Note: Area Fire & Rescue Company is Greenwood
Volunteer Fire & Rescue Co. Why no access off of Valley Mill Road?
Public Works Department: Refer to Summary and Justification: The summary references proposed
single family residential development of 165 dwellings. This number does not correspond to the
generalized development plan which indicates 161 dwellings. 2. Refer to Site Suitability: The table
summarizing environmental features indicates no wetlands and no steep slopes. Based on our site visit
and review of applicable topographic surveys, it appears that both of these conclusions are incorrect. A
wetlands study should be performed prior to the master development plan submittal with copies
furnished to the Corps of Engineers for their review and comment. Also, a more detailed topographic
survey should be performed to allow the delineation of the steep slope areas. 3. Refer to Traffic: The
discussion states that "The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) indicates that the study area roads and
intersections have the capacity to accommodate the trips generated by this project at acceptable and
manageable level of service conditions". Actually, the TIA does reach the above conclusion assuming
that the referenced intersection improvements are made along Route 7. Currently, the cross-over at the
intersection of Valley Mill Road and Route 7 is not adequate to accommodate the U-turn traffic
anticipated from the proposed development. Indicate what guarantees the applicant will offer to ensure
that these intersection improvements will be made prior to initiating construction on this site. 4. Refer
to Site Drainage: The discussion indicates that low impact development techniques.... will mitigate
adverse stormwater discharge impacts. Elaborate on what is meant by low impact development
techniques as applied to this proposed site development. It appears that the proposed development will
Rezoning #12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 3
clear a majority of the wooded areas and strip a majority of the topsoil areas. 5. Refer to Solid Waste
Disposal Facilities: The statement is made that "consideration of curbside pick-up would be an
improvement to solid waste issues associated with increased dumpster use in the County". This
statement is not satisfactory. Existing dumpster sites in Frederick County are currently at capacity and
will not accommodate new residential development. Therefore, any new development will be required
via the Homeowners' Association or other means to provide curbside trash pickup. This function will
not be an option; rather it will be a requirement. This statement should be corrected accordingly and
revised in the Proffer Statement, Paragraph 9.2 iii (Delete "if they decide to use a commercial collection
company.") 6. Refer to Proffer Statement, paragraph 12.1: The statement indicates that the applicant
shall privately fund all transportation improvements required of this project. Indicate if this offer
extends to improvements at/on the Route 7 intersection related to Valley Mill Road or possibly
Haggerty Drive.
Frederick County Inspections: No comment required at this time.
Frederick -Winchester Service Authority: The first item of concern is the application of a submeter
for sewer flows. Based on the number of dwellings, it would seem to be an inappropriate way of
measuring wastewater flows. We would like to see more detail relative to the design/construction of
such a submeter if it would be acceptable.
Sanitation Authority: The Opequon Water Reclamation Facility has sufficient capacity to accept
flows from this development. The eight -inch water line through Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park might
not provide the added demands of this project's 165 units. The developer will probably need to extend
the water line on Valley Mill Road and connect it to this project.
Frederick -Winchester Health Department: The Health Department has no objection as long as
sufficient public water and sewer service can be provided.
Department of Parks & Recreation: Plan appears to offer appropriate monetary proffer to offset this
development will have on the parks and recreational services provided by Frederick County. It is
assumed that recreational and open space requirements will be addressed in future plans to be reviewed.
The Parks and Recreation Department would also like to see a detailed pedestrian/bicycle trails plan
which offers an internal network and provides connection to existing and future adjacent development.
Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided, it is anticipated that the
proposed 120 single family units will yield 11 high school students, nine middle school students and 25
elementary school students. The 90 townhouses will yield ten high school students, 11 middle school
students, and 28 elementary school students for a total of 94 new students upon build -out. Significant
residential growth in Frederick County has resulted in the schools serving this area having student
enrollments nearing or exceeding the practical capacity for a school. The cumulative impact of this
project and others of similar nature, coupled with the number of approved, undeveloped residential lots
in the area, will necessitate the future construction of new school facilities to accommodate increased
student enrollments.
Rezoning #12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 4
Winchester Regional Airport: While the proposed development lies within the airport's Part 77
surfaces and airspace, it appears that the proposed site plan should not impact operations at the
Winchester Regional Airport. However, residents in this area could experience fly over noise from
aircraft arriving and departing the Winchester Airport from the northeast.
Frederick County Attorney: It is my opinion that the Proposed Proffer Statement is generally in a
form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia,
subject to the following comments: 1. While the Generalized Development Plan contains few details,
nevertheless the proffer statement should include a proffer that provides that development shall occur in
substantial conformity with the Generalized Development Plan. 2. In Proffer 1.1 it is provided that the
residential development shall not exceed 165 dwelling units. However, the GDP provides for a total of
only 161 dwelling units. 3. The staff should determine whether the Site Access Point, the Interparcel
Connection Point, and the Emergency Access Point are located with sufficient detail on the GDPA.
With respect to Proffer 12.3, the staff should determine whether the interparcel connector location is
appropriate, given any existing or planned streets on the adjoining parcel. It should be noted that I have
not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for the
rezoning of this specific property, or whether other proffers would be appropriate, as it is my
understanding that that review will be done by the staff and the Planning Commission.
Mr. Mitchell has been provided with the latestproffer statement submitted on February 23, 2007. His
comments are pending.
Historic Resources Advisory Board:
The Frederick County Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) considered the above referenced
rezoning proposal during their meeting of June 20, 2006. The HRAB reviewed information associated
with the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey Report and the Virginia Department of Historic
Resources, as well as information provided by the applicant. The HRAB felt that the proffers associated
with historic preservation and recognition was adequate, but made three recommendations which included:
• Protect natural vegetation along Rt. 7 and Valley Mill Rd. to the greatest extent possible.
• The backyard of the single family lots abutting the historical Stafford property need a
vegetative protection buffer.
• Install a roadside interpretive site which the HRAB decided would be more useful along
Valley Mill Rd. as compared to placing it along Rt. 7.
These recommendations made by the HRAB were addressed at the August 15, 2006 meeting. The
HRAB felt that the rezoning application had thoroughly addressed their comments and recommended
that this proposal move forward since there were no further issues.
Planning Department: Please see attached letter dated August 3, 2006 from Eric R. Lawrence,
Planning Director.
Rezoning #12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 5
Planning & Zoning:
The Applicant has submitted a revised Proffer Statement dated January 25, 2007. The Generalized
Development Plan which is apart of the Proffer Statement has also been modified. The changes are
relatively substantial and exceed the scope of what the Planning Commission discussed with the
Applicant during the Planning Commission's meeting on November 1, 2006. Staff has attempted to
identify the changes to the Proffer Statement and GDP within the staff report.
1) Site History
The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identifies the
parcels for which the rezoning is being requested as being zoned a combination of A-1
Agricultural and MH Mobile Home zoning classifications. The County's A-1 and A-2
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 (Rural Areas) District. The Mobile Home
designation encompasses the original boundaries of the Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park.
The most recent Site Plan for the development of the remaining areas of the Blue Ridge Mobile
Home Park was approved by the County on July 30, 1987. In 2005, a Boundary Line
Adjustment Plat was approved by the County that reorganized the parcels that make up this
rezoning request. Parcels 55-A-161, 55 -A -165A, 55-A-166, 55-A-167, 55 -A -167A, 55 -A -174A
maintained the RA zoning classification. Parcels 55-A-168 and 55 -A -174D maintained the
MH1 zoning classification. Parcel 55 -A -174A contains both the MH1 and RA zoning
classification. The approval of this rezoning request would place all of the properties entirely
into the RP zoning classification.
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. 1-11
Land Use
The parcels comprising this rezoning application are located within the County's Urban
Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Urban
Development Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of residential
development will occur. In addition, the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use map
designates the general area in which the Carriage Place property is located for residential land
uses.
Rezoning #12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 6
The average overall residential density of the Urban Development Area should not exceed three
units per acre. More specifically, the Zoning Ordinance stipulates that properties which contain
less than one hundred acres but more than ten acres should not exceed 5.5 units per acre.
With the more urban densities envisioned for development in the UDA, the Comprehensive
Plan seeks to ensure that special effort is made to provide the infrastructure necessary to
accommodate the desired land uses and densities.
As land is developed in the eastern portion of the Urban Development Area, the Comprehensive
Plan identifies the preservation of the stream valleys as environmental open space as an
important goal that contributes to the protection of flood plains and water quality and provides a
continuous system of green open space. The goals of the Comprehensive Plan also include
protecting the natural environment from damage due to development activity, avoiding
development in environmentally sensitive areas, and the identification and protection of
important natural resources. A balanced approach to providing necessary transportation
infrastructure in the area of the project and promoting the protection of sensitive environmental
areas and features is warranted.
Transportation
The Frederick County Eastern Road Plan provides the guidance regarding future arterial and
collector road connections in the eastern portion of the County by identifying needed
connections and locations. Plans for new development should provide for the right-of-ways
necessary to implement planned road improvements and new roads shown on the road plan
should be constructed by the developer when warranted by the scale, intensity, or impacts of the
development. Existing roads should be improved as necessary by adjacent development to
implement the intentions of the plan (Comprehensive Plan 7-6).
Route 7 is an arterial road whose character should be fully recognized in any rezoning
application. Route 7 is characterized with high volumes of traffic traveling at rates of speed in
excess of 55 miles per hour. Access management should be a key consideration.
Valley Mill Road is identified as an improved major collector road in the County's Eastern
Road Plan. In addition, Valley Mill Road is shown as being relocated to a new location and
alignment. In 2005, modifications to the County's Eastern Road Plan occurred in the vicinity of
this prof ect. The modifications were completed in recognition of the changing traffic patterns in
the area, the recently approved Haggerty project which provided for a new Spine Road parallel
to future Route 37, and the need to avoid the historically and environmentally sensitive areas in
the vicinity of the one lane bridge over Abrams Creek. Valley Mill Road is designated as a
major collector road that traverses south of its existing location, providing a new crossing of
Abram's Creek, and connecting with the Haggerty Spine Road in the vicinity of future Route
37. Ultimately, a connection will be made to Route 7 at the location previously determined as
part of the Haggerty project, directly opposite the future on and off ramps of future Route 37.
This location is immediately west of the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Facility. This
approach furthers access management goals along Route 7.
Rezoning #12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 7
New development in the Urban Development Area should only be approved when roads and
other infrastructure with sufficient capacity have been provided. The Comprehensive Plan
identifies that a level of service "C" should be maintained on roads adjacent to and within new
developments and that traffic analysis should be provided by the applicants to ensure that
needed road improvements are identified in order to maintain or improve upon the level of
service.
In some cases, new development may need to contribute to the provision, construction, or
improvement of roads that are not adjacent to the development. In such cases, developments
should contribute their fair share costs of road improvements needed to accommodate the traffic
generated by a particular development.
3) Site SuitabilitylEnvironment
The Carriage Park site has been identified as a site typical of the Martinsburg Shale Region with
steeply eroded side slopes and reasonably level plain areas. This is an accurate identification
that presents challenges when planning the development program for this property. Ash Hollow
Run parallels Route 7 along the entire frontage of the property. Abram's Creek forms a portion
of the eastern boundary of the property. A pond is located central to the property. These features
and their associated slopes, natural drainage ways, and floodplains warrant particular attention
and may also provide an opportunity for enhanced protection of the riparian corridor. The site is
predominantly heavily wooded.
The area of this site in floodplain, wetlands, ponds, streams and steep slopes has not been
entirely identified in the application. By current County definition, this project contains
relatively small areas of steep slopes. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the preservation of the
stream valleys as environmental open space as an important goal that contributes to the
protection of flood plains and water quality and provides a continuous system of green open
space. The application proposes development of a greater intensity in the reasonably level
wooded areas and offers areas that will be set aside for environmental and open space purposes.
The revised road layout proposes access to the site directly from Route 7 immediately west of
Abrams Creek. Previously the road layout included access to the site from Valley Mill Road
via a crossing ofAbram's Creek and its associated floodplain, in an area that contained the
steepest slopes on the property. As proposed, the projects only access road includes the
crossing of Ash Hollow Run.
Protection of the integrity of the pond, environmental open spaces, and the riparian areas
along Abram -s Creek and Ash Hollow Run, especially during the construction phases,
remain a concern and should be a greater consideration of this application and as part of the
proffer statement. To help achieve this, the location of the limits of disturbance could be
extended beyond the proposed 100' proffered natural vegetative buffer to cover the protection
of the identified environmental features, including the floodplain. Presently, the limits of
disturbance do not entirely cover the creeks and their associated floodplain.
Rezoning #12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 8
Initially, the Applicant provided for a 15 foot no cut vegetative buffer along the southern portion
of the project boundary with Valley Mill Farm which was shown on the GDP. A portion of this
proposed buffer was shown on the GDP in a location where no vegetation existed. As noted,
current County Ordinance recognizes that a 50 foot woodland strip could be utilized as a
desirable and effective alternative to typical buffer and screening standards. It should be
recognized that no buffer and screening requirements exist between the proposed
development and the property to the southeast, Valley Mill Farm. The Applicant has the
ability to address this issue in the Proffer Statement. The revised Proffer Statement and GDP
provides no consideration for buffering the adjacent properties in particular the property to
the southeast as recommended by the HRAB. The relocation of the road directly adjacent to
this property line further eliminates the ability to buffer the adjacent property from the
proposed development. It would be appropriate for the application to more thoroughly
address the preservation of the existing tree lines and wooded areas as a desirable buffer to
the surrounding properties along with the location and composition of any new buffer areas.
4) Potential Impacts
A. Transportation
Traffic Impact Analysis.
The latest Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared for this project, dated February 23, 2007, was
prepared as an addendum to the September 8, 2006 TIA. The initial TIA projected that the
development of 165 residential units (53 single family detached and 94 single family attached
residential units) would generate 1,348 vehicle trips per day. The new TIA projects that the
development of 240 single family attached townhouse units would generate 2,088 vehicle
trips per day.
The report was developed with access to the site provided via a signalized site driveway along
the south side of Route 7. The TIA concludes that the traffic impacts associated with the
Carriage Park application are acceptable and manageable, assuming suggested improvements
are in place. Suggested improvements include the signalization of the intersection of the site
access road with Route 7. The TIA identifies that this intersection will function at an
unacceptable level of service without the suggested improvements. Previously, access to the
project was being provided via a single site driveway onto existing Valley Mill Road, Route
659, immediately south of Valley Mill Road's intersection with Route 7.
Transportation Program.
The Generalized Development Plan for Carriage Park delineates the general public road
system that will serve the residential development. This consists of one road that runs from
Route 7 to the southern corner of the property directly adjacent and parallel to the
southeastern property line. This provides the ability to connect to the property to the
southwest of the site. The Applicant has proffered that this road will be constructed as a two
lane rural undivided collector roadway on a 50 foot right of way. Further, that no direct lot
access shall be permitted on the road. No other internal streets have been identified in the
GDP and no public inter parcel connections to the adjacent property to the west are proposed.
Rezoning 412-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 9
Background.
Initially, the applicant designed the public road system with on site access to and from Carriage
Park via Route 7. Establishment of a new entrance onto Route 7 was strongly discouraged. Due
to significant concerns with this approach, the applicant redesigned the road system. The revised
road system presented to the Planning Commission in November provided for primary access
from existing Valley Mill Road, immediately south of its intersection with Route 7, and north of
the existing one lane bridge crossing of Abrams Creek. The existing section of Valley Mill Road
in this area was identified as being insufficient to accommodate the traffic from this, and
adjacent projects, as was the existing intersection on Route 7 without significant improvements
and environmental impact.
As noted previously, the Comprehensive Plan promotes an effort to enhance and relocate Valley
Mill Road so that it serves as a major collector road. This enhancement will provide for a more
efficient transportation network that also minimizes environmental and cultural impacts. Valley
Mill Road is designated as a major collector road that traverses south of its existing location,
provides a new crossing of Abram's Creek, and connects with the Haggerty Spine Road in the
vicinity of future Route 37. Ultimately, a connection will be made to Route 7 at the location
previously determined as part of the Haggerty project, directly opposite the future on and off
ramps of future Route 37. Staff maintains that all efforts should be made to implement the
Comprehensive Plan and make a safer and more efficient use of Valley Mill Road, in the
manner identified in the Comprehensive Plan, as the primary access route to the
development.
Since the Planning Commission's Public Hearing on this project, Staff, VDOT, and the
Applicant's representative, who also represents two other projects in this general area, have
discussed the Eastern Road Plan in the vicinity of this project in great detail. A request to revise
the Eastern Road Plan in the vicinity of Valley Mill Road was submitted but not pursued. Due
to the complex nature of the transportation issues in this area it was recognized that a detailed
traffic analysis which covers a broader area than the individual site TIA's would be extremely
valuable.
The revised Proffer Statement and GDPpropose a relocated alignmentfor the future Route
37 on/off ramp. The Applicant asserts that the location of the Route 37 ramps west of Route
7's crossing of Abram's Creek is dictated by minimum curve radius standards which would
preclude this ramp from aligning with existing Valley Mill Road. VDOT has reviewed this
revised location and expressed concerns. Frederick County has not endorsed this
realignment. Any relocation of this major intersection should be carefully considered. As
previously noted, the realignment to this location would impact additional properties and
residences on the north side of Route 7 that were not previously identified as being impacted
by the construction of Route 37. The Applicant's assertion that their proposal is better
without being willing to fully study would not justify impacting additional homeowners for
this ramp configuration. Please see additional comments provide by VDOT, dated March 7
regarding this issue.
Rezoning # 12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 10
It should be recognized that the spacing of the future on and off ramps on both the west and east
sides of future Route 37 are approximately the same distance from future Route 37,
approximately 600 feet. The previously approved Haggerty Spine Road intersects directly across
from the future Route 37 on/off ramp east of future Route 37.
The Carriage Place application does not address the intersection of Valley Mill Road and Route
7 which is located approximately 500 feet east of the proposed signalized intersection. This
intersection and existing crossover would remain in place. Please refer to the comments
provided by VDOT on February 23, 2007 regarding this issue. Existing Route 659, Burnt
Factory Road, located approximately 400 feet west of the proposed signalized intersection
should also be a consideration.
If it is ultimately determined that the approach proposed by the Applicant is acceptable, the
applicant should guarantee the improvements to the intersection of the site driveway and
Route 7 occur in a manner that fully enables the implementation of the future signalization
of the Route 37southbound ramps, including vertical and horizontal designs and all turning
movements. The Applicant's proffer states that the said entrance and signal shall be designed
and constructed with improvements as necessary on Route 7 to accommodate the future
construction of the Route 37 ramp as depicted on the GDP. The build out lane geometry shown
in the TIA appears to be missing a north bound through lane on the site driveway and a left turn
lane from the eastbound Route 7 on to the Route 37 on ramp. The Proffer Statement, GDP, and
TIA should be clearly coordinated to complete the ultimate improvements to this intersection to
accommodate the Route 37 ramps. The left turn lane is important when considering vehicles
making an undesirable u -turn movement on Route 7. This condition presently exists at the
Valley Mill Road crossover and is exacerbated by vehicle trips from the Blue Ridge Mobile
Home Park who don't have the benefit of an alternative way in and out of their development,
and by trips utilizing Burnt Factory Road.
Consideration should also be given to additional traffic that may ultimately use the proposed
road as a collector to gain access to Route 7. Presently, only the trips generated from the actual
development, 2088, have been considered in the TIA and accounted for in the build -out lane
geometry which achieves a level of service C. The initial TIA included an additional 3850 trips
utilizing Valley Mill Road. The inclusion of additional trips into this intersection would likely
have an impact on the level of service of this intersection.
As an alternative to implementing the construction of the road network identified in the
Comprehensive Plan, the Applicant had previously proffered a monetary contribution in the
amount of $5,000 per single family detached residential unit and $3,000 per single family
attached townhouse unit for improvements in the general vicinity of the project, including the
connection from this project to Valley Mill Road to the south, and the relocation of Valley Mill
Road. This proffered contribution has been eliminated from the Proffer Statement.
Rezoning #12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 11
It should be evaluated whether the transportation improvements proffered by the Applicant
are adequate to address the impacts generated by this rezoning request and will facilitate the
long range transportation goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
The road layout provides the potential for interparcel connection to the property to the south. An
emergency access interpareel connection is proposed with the adjacent Blue Ridge Mobile
Home Park. However, this is proposed as a private emergency connection. Inter -parcel
connectivity of the public street system is a requirement of the zoning Ordinance and should be
extended to the Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park. Consideration should be given to enabling a
public road connection to the Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park in the general location of the
existing street network. Control of this access point should be at the discretion of the Board
of Supervisors.
Omitted from the transportation program are any additional accommodations for pedestrian
circulation and potential multiuse trails that would provide access internal to the project and
ultimately to the adjacent residential developments. The comments offered by the Department of
Parks and Recreation relating to this effort have not been addressed.
In general, the general transportation program does notpromote an approach thatfurthers
the transportation goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
B. Sewer and Water
The Carriage Place rezoning proposal is estimated to require approximately 32,200 gallons per
day of water usage and approximately 32,200 gallons per day of wastewater. The Frederick
County Sanitation Authority will serve the property and the wastewater flow from the site will
go to the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Recent planning efforts have identified that evolving nutrient reduction regulations
promulgated by Virginia's Bay Program will have a significant impact on the permitted waste
water capabilities of Frederick County. Both the Frederick Winchester ServiceAuthority and
the Frederick County Sanitation Authority are currently undertaking efforts to evaluate the
regulations and proactively plan to address this issue. Requests for land use modifications
should be evaluated very carefully in light of the evolving nutrient loading regulations.
C. Community Facilities
The comment provided by the Frederick County Public Schools should be carefully considered
when evaluating the application. The schools evaluation anticipated that the proposed 120 single
family units will yield 11 high school students, nine middle school students and 25 elementary
school students. The 90 townhouses will yield ten high school students, 11 middle school
students, and 28 elementary school students for a total of 94 new students upon build -out. The
revised housing type would generate at the full allowable density would generate the same
Rezoning #12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 12
amount Significant residential growth in Frederick County has resulted in the schools serving
this area having student enrollments nearing or exceeding the practical capacity for a school.
The cumulative impact of this project and others of similar nature, coupled with the number of
approved, undeveloped residential lots in the area, will necessitate the future construction of
new schools facilities to accommodate increased student enrollments. The impact of this
rezoning on current and future school needs should be considered during the approval process.
Recent planning efforts have identified that the 11 `h elementary school opened in the fall of
2006 opened above its programmed capacity. This is based upon the transfer of students
currently enrolled in area schools that exceed programmed capacities and the projected build
out and occupancy of previously approved residential projects in the UDA. The I2`h
elementary school has been identified in the current Capital Improvements Plan for this
general area of the UDA. However, no site has been located or construction initiated to
address the needs of additional students generated in this area of the UDA.
The Frederick County Development Impact Model is a tool that is used to identify the capital
costs associated with various types of development proposals presented to the County. The
projected costs to Fire and Rescue, Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, Library, Sheriffs
Office and for the Administration Building have been calculated and provided to the applicant
for their consideration.. The impacts associated with entirely residential projects are fixed at
$23,290.00 for single family detached residential dwellings and $17,732 for single family
attached residential dwellings. This application addresses community facility impacts and
needs by proffering a payment in the amount of $17, 732 for single family attached residential
dwellings to mitigate the impact to the identified communityfacilities.
For your information, the following is the breakdown of the projected impacts per dwelling
unit for each capital facility taken from the Development Impact Model.
For each single family attached unit:
$528
for fire and rescue;
$14,618
for schools:
$1,634
for parks and recreation;
$204
for library;
$503
for public safety; and
$245
for general government;
$17,732
for capital improvements
No rezoning should be approved unless the net impacts on community facilities are positive, or
if the negative impacts can be adequately addressed through proffers or some other means. A
request for a rezoning may be turned down even though all fiscal impacts appear to be
addressed (Comprehensive Plan 8-17). The comments relating to the impacts to the Frederick
County Public Schools in this area of the Urban Development Area should be a significant
consideration.
Rezoning # 12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 13
5) Proffer Statement — Dated January 25, 2006 and Revised February 2, 2006, May 23, 2006,
June 28, 2006, August 10, 2006, and September 12, 2006. Latest Revision Dated January 25,
2007.
A) Generalized Development Plan
The applicant has provided a Generalized Development Plan for the purpose of identifying the
general configuration of the street providing access to and through the project, residential land
use areas, and open space areas within the Carriage Place development. The GDP may be
utilized to a greater extent to address the sensitive environmental features on the property, the
buffering of the adjacent residential uses, and the historic context of Berryville Canyon, among
other things.
B) Land Use
The applicants have not proffered a limit to the total number of residential units. Based upon a
maximum allowable density of 5.5 units per acre, a maximum yield of up to 249 single family
attached townhouse units may be constructed.
The applicant has committed to a phased introduction of the residential units over a minimum
four year period with the potential for up to seventy five units per year (Previously, the
commitment was over a minimum three year period). The Applicant has committed to not make
application for more than 75 building permits in any twelve month period. This phased
approach specifies that the date of final rezoning would commence the phasing of the issuance
of building permits. The intent of phasing is to ensure a timed integration of new development
in a manner that would enable the timely provision of the public facilities necessary to serve the
new development. It may be more desirable to have the annual allocation occur on consecutive
years following the approval of the master development plan for this project. This would be
consistent with several other recently approved rezoning applications. Regardless of the phasing
approach, the comments relating to the impacts to the Frederick County Public Schools in this
area of the Urban Development Area should be recognized.
C) Transportation
The applicant has proffered the signalization of the intersection of the site driveway and Route
7. The Applicant has also proffered to construct a two lane rural undivided collector roadway on
a fifty foot right of way from the entrance to the southern property prior to issuance of the 125th
building permit. Further, that no direct access shall be permitted on the said collector road. This
project is located within the Urban Development Area and all roads should be built with an
urban typical section. sufficient right of way should be provided to accommodate the
appropriate road section. In addition, the majority of the length of this road should be
completed at the initiation of the project rather than by the 125`h building permit.
The monetary contribution in the amount of $5,000 per single family detached unit and $3,000
per single family attached townhouse unit for transportation improvements in the vicinity of the
project has been eliminated from the proffer statement.
Rezoning #12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 14
Historic Resource Protection
The applicant has proffered a $25,000 contribution to the County for purposes associated with
security fencing at Star Fort. The proffered buffers along Route 7, Berryville Canyon, are not
accurately reflected on the GDP. However, this concept and the buffer and screening of adjacent
properties, including the historical Valley Mill Farm, should be addressed to a greater extent as
part of this application.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 09/20/06 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
The Carriage Place rezoning application, while generally consistent with future land use designations of
the Comprehensive Plan, does not fully address the goals of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan
as described in the staff report. Elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be
carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan. In
addition, the Planning Commission should ensure that the impacts associated with this rezoning request
have been fully addressed by the applicant. The Planning Commission should pay particular attention to
the transportation impacts, the environmental impacts, and the capacities and capabilities of community
facilities needed to serve the proposed land uses. At this time, the road improvements identified in the
Comprehensive Policy Plan are not fully addressed in the application.
Confirmation of the issues identified in the staff report, and any issues raised by the Planning
Commission, should be addressed prior to the decision of the Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 11/01/06 MEETING:
The applicant's attorney, Mr. Clay Athey, presented their proposed access out to existing Valley Mill
Road and continuing out to Route 7, explaining how Valley Mill will line up directly with the off ramps
for proposed Route 37 and their plans to improve the intersection with traffic -control devices. Mr.
Athey did not believe this option was inconsistent with satisfying the County's Eastern Road Plan. He
noted their provision for a proposed connector, if right-of-way can be acquired across the Stafford
property back to Valley Mill Road. He also made note of the applicant's monetary provision towards
transportation, which exceeded the proffer model, to help meet the County's transportation goals.
The applicant's design consultant, Mr. Charles W. Maddox, Jr., noted that the access alternative
described by Mr. Athey was in keeping with the HRAB's desire to create an unbroken vegetative buffer
along Route 7. He said the monetary proffer for fencing and improvements to Star Fort, in lieu of
interpretive kiosks along Route 7, was also preferred by the HRAB. It was also noted that the proposed
layout does affect some of the more environmentally- sensitive areas of the site, but the applicant's
reason for doing so was to create a better transportation system.
One property owner spoke during the public comment portion of the hearing. Mr. Tim Stafford, whose
family owned the adjacent Valley Mill Farm, said he was opposed to the rezoning primarily because the
access described by the applicant's representatives crossed through a floodplain area. Mr. Stafford said
that over the years, the development that has occurred around his property has affected his property,
causing the creek to flood, with water coming closer to his home with each storm, and trees to fall.
Rezoning #12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 15
Mr. Lloyd Ingram of VDOT was called to the podium to address numerous questions raised by
Commission members. Those questions included the accuracy of the interchange design presented by
the applicant; whether VDOT considered the applicant's proposed access a better alternative than direct
access to Route 7; the interim impact on Valley Mill Road, if VDOT had concerns about the close
proximity of the Haggerty traffic signal on a major arterial highway; and if there were any obstacles that
would prevent the applicant from crossing the environmentally -sensitive area. Mr. Ingram replied that
the interchange presented by the applicant is basically conceptual and has not yet been engineered. He
said it was VDOT's opinion that the proposed entrance alternative was a better scenario than direct
access onto Route 7, which in their opinion, was a fatal flaw and presented safety issues for the
traveling public and local residents. Mr. Ingram said the one -lane bridge will be a bottleneck, but will
keep the flow of traffic through there relatively low; traffic signals will be installed only when
warranted and spacing was sufficient to allow a synchronized system.
Frederick County's Transportation Planner, Mr. John A. Bishop, presented his views on why this issue was
more complex than just whether or not it was safer to go out on Valley Mill Road or to Route 7. He
explained that Valley Mill Road is planned to be relocated, so although the Eastern Road Plan does not say
specifically this crossover will be closed, it can be inferred by the relocation. He said the primary reason
for the relocation is that the geometry would be very difficult to improve to the point where it can
adequately meet future development. Further, with the Haggerty and the Adams rezonings, there is a
requirement that Eddy's Lane have access through there. Mr. Bishop said it was not just the 1,600 trips
from this development, but the additional trips from those new developments would have the opportunity
to come up Eddys Lane and Valley Mill through an area that is very hard to adequately fix. He explained
that considering the amount of long-term traffic, the one side is unlikely to be able to handle the traffic
without some major redevelopment of Valley Mill Road where it currently enters Route 7. He said this, in
turn, could affect where the Route 37 ramps need to go.
Numerous questions and concerns were raised by Commission members. Commissioners recognized the
applicant's work on making the unique situation of this site work; furthermore, they were not completely
opposed to something along the lines of what the applicant was proposing, assuming it fits in and
compliments the Eastern Road Plan. However, members of the Commission wanted to know more from
the applicant about the design of the proposed intersection, not only how things would potentially line up,
but also the scope of improvements. They also wanted more information on the environmental impacts.
They thought the proposal was much too conceptual at this point and asked the applicant if they could
present something that would help the Commission visualize how this will take shape. Members of the
Commission said they would also like to see more clarity on what the system would look like relative to
the proposed improvements of the Eastern Road Plan.
A motion was made, seconded, and unanimously passed to table the application for a period of 60 days to
allow for additional analysis and information to be provided by the applicant, as follows: to provide the
Commission with a design of the proposed intersection, not only detailing how things will potentially line
up, but the scope of improvements; to provide additional information on the environmental impacts; and,
to provide additional clarification on what the system would look like relative to the proposed
improvements of the Eastern Road Plan. The Commission sought clarification and answers to those issues
from VDOT as well. (Note: Commissioners Light, Ours, and Thomas were absent from the meeting.)
Rezoning #12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 16
STAFF UPDATE FOR 03/21/07 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
The Commission previously tabled the application for a period of 60 days to allow for additional
analysis and information to be provided by the applicant regarding the design of the proposed
intersection, the environmental impacts of the project, and what the transportation system would look
like relative to the proposed improvements of the Eastern Road Plan. The Applicant has not responded
directly to these issues. However, the applicant has substantially revised the application. The changes
generally exceed the scope of what the Planning Commission had previously discussed.
The Carriage Place rezoning application, while generally consistent with future land use designations of
the Comprehensive Plan, does not appear to fully address the goals of the Frederick County
Comprehensive Plan as described in the staff report. Elements of the rezoning application have been
identified that should be carefully evaluated including the following points.
Staff maintains that all efforts should be made to implement the Comprehensive Plan and
make a safer and more efficient use of Valley Mill Road, in the manner identified in the
Comprehensive Plan, as the primary access route to the development.
The revised Proffer Statement and GDP propose a relocated alignment for the future Route
37on/off ramp. VDOT has reviewed this revised location and expressed concerns. Frederick
County has not endorsed this realignment. Any relocation of this major intersection should
be carefully considered.
If it is ultimately determined that the transportation approach proposed by the Applicant is
acceptable, the applicant should guarantee the improvements to the intersection of the site
driveway and Route 7 occur in a manner that fully enables the implementation of the future
signalization of the Route 37 southbound ramps, including vertical and horizontal designs
and all turning movements.
It should be evaluated whether the transportation improvements proffered by theApplicant
are adequate to address the impacts generated by this rezoning request and will facilitate the
long range transportation goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
Inter parcel connectivity of the public street system is a requirement of the zoning Ordinance.
Consideration should be given to enabling a public road connection to the Blue Ridge Mobile
Home Park in the general location of the existing street network. Control of this access point
could be at the discretion of the Board of Supervisors.
This project is located within the Urban DevelopmentArea and all roads should be built with
an urban typical section.
Rezoning # 12-06 — Carriage Place
April 4, 2007
Page 1'7
The comments relating to the impacts to the Frederick County Public Schools in this area of
the Urban Development Area should be a significant consideration.
It would be appropriate for the application to more thoroughly address the preservation of
the existing tree lines and wooded areas as a desirable buffer to the surrounding properties
along with the location and composition of any new buffer areas.
The protection of the integrity of the pond, environmental open spaces, and the riparian
areas alongAbram's Creek and Ash Hollow Run, especially during the construction phases,
remain a concern and should be a greater consideration of this application and as part of the
proffer statement.
Following the requirement for a public hearing, a recommendation
by the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors concerning this rezoning application
would be appropriate (a second public hearing is being held due to the scope of the modifications
to the application). The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised
by the Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 03/21/07 MEETING:
The applicant requested that their application be tabled for 30 days. The applicant said they were very
close to working out the principal issues, but had some property owner details that needed to be
solidified and proffers that needed to be checked by the County attorney.
Commission members asked the applicant if a 30 -day tabling was realistic with the issues that need to
be worked out with VDOT and the surrounding property owners. The applicant replied yes; the
applicant intended to work diligently to meet that requirement and he believed 30 days was a sufficient
amount of time.
There were no public comments. By a unanimous vote, the Commission granted the applicant's request
for a 30 -day tabling to April 18, 2007.
(Commissioner Unger was absent from the meeting.)
STAFF UPDATE FOR 04/18/07 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
Staff has not received any additional information from the Applicant. A request was provided by the
Applicant on April 4, 2007 to continue the consideration of this application for an additional time
period (see attached letter). The Planning Commission may address this request at your 4/18/07
meeting.
Carnage Park Pro$er Statement
PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT
REZONING: RZ. # : RA (Rural Areas) and MH1 (Mobile Home
Community) to RP (Residential Performance)
PROPERTY: 45.44 Acres +/-;
Tax Map Parcels 55-A-161, 55-A-1 65A, 55-A-166, 55-A-167,
55 -A -167A, 55-A-168, 55 -A -174A, 55 -A -174B, 55 -A -174D (the
"Property")
RECORD OWNER: Carriage Place, LLC
APPLICANT: Carriage Place, LLC
PROJECT NAME: Carriage Park
ORIGINAL DATE
OF PROFFERS: January 25, 2006
REVISION DATE(S): 2/2/06; 5/23/06; 6/28/06; 8/10/06; 9/12/06; 10/29/06;
1/25/07
The undersigned hereby proffers that the use and
development of the subject property ("Property"), as described above, shall be in strict
conformance with the following conditions, which shall supersede all other proffers that
may have been made prior hereto. In the event that the above referenced RP conditional
rezoning is not granted as applied for by the applicant ("Applicant"), these proffers shall be
deemed withdrawn and shall be null and void. Further, these proffers are contingent upon
final rezoning of the Property with "final rezoning" defined as that rezoning which is in
effect on the day following the last day upon which the Frederick County Board of
Supervisors (the "County") decision granting the rezoning may be contested in the
appropriate court. If the County's decision is contested, and the Applicant elects not to
submit development plans until such contest is resolved, the term rezoning shall include the
day following entry of a final court order affirming the decision of the County which has not
been appealed, or, if appealed, the day following which the decision has been affirmed on
appeal.
The headings of the proffers set forth below have been prepared for convenience or
reference only and shall not control or affect the meaning or be taken as an interpretation of
any provision of the proffers. The improvements proffered herein shall be provided at the
time of development of that portion of the Property adjacent to or including the
improvement or other proffered requirement, unless otherwise specified herein. The term
"Applicant" as referenced herein shall include within its meaning all future owners and
successors in interest. When used n hese proffers, the "Generalized Development Plan,"
shall refer to the plan entitled "Generalized Development Plan, Carriage Park" dated January
5, 2006, as revised on January 25, 2007 (the "GDP").
Page 1 of 6
Park
1. LAND USE:
Statement
1.1 Residential development on the Property shall be limited to single family
attached dwelling units.
2. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS AND PLAN
APPROVALS:
2.1 The Property shall be developed as one single and unified development in
accordance with applicable ordinances, regulations, and design standards, and
this Carriage Park Proffer Statement.
2.2 The Property shall be developed in substantial conformance with the GDP
provided that minor modifications may occur during the engineering phase
of the project.
2.3 Construction of the residential dwelling units shall be phased over a
minimum four year period commencing with the Date of Final Rezoning
("DFR"). The Applicant shall not make application for more than 75
building permits in any 12 month period.
3. FIRE & RESCUE:
3.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the County of Frederick the sura of
$528.00 per dwelling unit for fire and rescue purposes, payable upon the
issuance of a building permit for each single family attached unit.
4. SCHOOLS:
4.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the County of Frederick the sum of
$14,618.00 per dwelling unit for school purposes, payable upon the issuance
of a building permit for each single family attached unit.
S. PARKS & RECREATION:
5.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the County of Frederick the sum of
$1,634.00 per dwelling unit for parks and recreation purposes, payable upon
the issuance of a building permit for each single family attached unit-
6.
nit
6. LIBRARIES:
6.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the County of Frederick the sum of
$204.00 per dwelling unit for library purposes, payable upon the issuance of a
building permit for each single family attached unit.
Page 2 of 6
Carriage Park Pra�%r Statement
7. PUBLIC SAFETY:
7.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the County of Frederick the sum of
$503.00 per dwelling unit for public safety purposes, payable upon issuance
of a building permit for each single family attached unit.
S. GENERAL GOVERNMENT:
8.2 The Applicant shall contribute to the County of Frederick the sum of
$245.00 per dwelling unit for general government purposes, payable upon
issuance of a building permit for each single family attached unit.
9. CREATION OF HOMEOWNERS' AND PROPERTY OWNERS'
ASSOCIATION:
9.1 The residential development shall be made subject to a homeowners'
association (hereinafter "HOA") that shall be responsible for the ownership,
maintenance and repair of all common areas, including any conservation
areas that may be established in accordance herewith not dedicated to the
County or others, for each area subject to their jurisdiction, and shall be
provided such other responsibilities, duties, and powers as are customary for
such associations or as may be required for such HOA herein.
9.2 In addition to such other duties and responsibilities as may be assigned, an
HOA shall have title to and responsibility for (i) all common open space
areas not otherwise dedicated to public use, (u) common buffer areas located
outside of residential lots; (iii) common solid waste disposal programs,
including the use of a private refuse collection service to collect the solid
waste generated by the residents, (iv) responsibility for the perpetual
maintenance of any street, perimeter, or road buffer areas, all of which buffer
areas shall be located within easements to be granted to the HOA if platted
within residential or other lots, or otherwise granted to the HOA by
appropriate instrument and (v) responsibility for payment for maintenance of
streetlights.
9.3 The Applicants hereby proffer to establish a start-up fund for the Carriage
Park Homeowner's Association (CPHOA) that will include an initial lump
sum payment of $2,500.00 by the Applicant and an additional payment of
$100.00 by the homeowners at closing for each platted lot purchased within
the Carriage Park community. Language will be incorporated into the
CPHOA Declaration of Restrictive Covenant Document and Deed of
Dedication that ensures the availability of these funds to the CPHOA prior
to the transfer of ownership and maintenance responsibility from the
applicants to the CPHOA. The start-up funds for the CPHOA shall be
made available for the purpose of maintenance of all improvements within
the common open space areas, liability insurance, street light assessments,
and property management and/or legal fees.
Page 3 of 6
Carnage Park Proffer Statement
10. WATER & SEWER:
10.1 The Applicant shall be responsible for connecting the Property to public
water and sewer, and for constructing all facilities required for such
connection. All water and sewer infrastructure shall be constructed in
accordance with the requirements of the Frederick County Sanitation
Authority and the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority.
11. ENVIRONMENT:
11.1 Stormwater management and Best Management Practices (BMP) for the
Property shall be provided in accordance with the Virginia Stormwater
Management Regulations, First Ed. 1999, Chapter 2, Table 2-3 which results
in the highest order of stormwater control in existing Virginia law at the time
of construction of any such facility.
12. TRANSPORTATION:
12.1 Transportation improvements shall be designed and constructed consistent
with the study entitled "A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Carriage Park
Property," prepared by Patton Harris Rust & Associated, dated September 8,
2006 (the "TIA") including addendum dated February 23, 2007.
12.2 Access to the property shall be provided via a signalized entrance on Route 7
in the location depicted on the GDP. Said entrance and signal shall be
designed and constructed with improvements as necessary on Route 7 to
accommodate the future construction of the Route 37 ramp as depicted on
the GDP and will be subject to review and approval by VDOT and Frederick
County. Said improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of the first
building permit. (See 1 on GDP)
12.3 The Applicant shall construct a two lane rural undivided (R2) collector
roadway on a 50 foot right of way from the entrance on Route 7 to the
Southern property line as depicted on the GDP prior to issuance of the 125`b
building permit. The roadway shall be designed to accommodate a future
connection with existing Valley Mill Road as shown on the GDP. No direct
lot access shall be permitted on said collector road. (See 2 on GDP)
12.4 The Applicant shall provide a private, gated connection between the internal
road network for the project and the existing road network in the adjacent
Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park for emergency access in the location depicted
on the GDP. (See 3 on GDP)
Page 4 of 6
Cariage Park Proffer Statement
13. HISTORIC RESOURCE PROTECTION
13.1 A minimum 100 foot buffer of natural vegetation shall be preserved between
VA Route 7 and any future residential lots located on the P.toperty.
Encroachment of construction activities in this area shall not be allowed
except to construct necessary utilities and the proposed collector road. (See 4
on GDP)
13.2 The Applicant shall contribute $25,000.00 to the County for purposes
associated with security fencing at historic Star Fort.
15. SEVERABILITY
15.1 In the event any portion of these proffers are subsequently determined to be
illegal or unenforceable, the remaining proffers shall continue in full force
and effect.
16. BINDING EFFECT
16.1 These proffers run with the land and shall be binding upon all heirs,
executors, administrators, assigns and successors in interest of the Applicant_
17. ESCALATOR CLAUSE
17.1 In the event the monetary contributions set forth in the Proffer Statement
are paid to the County within 36 months of the approval of this rezoning, as
applied for by the Applicant, said contributions shall be in the amounts as
stated herein. Any monetary contributions set forth in the Proffer Statement
which are paid to the County after 36 months following the approval of this
rezoning shall be adjusted in accordance with the Urban Consumer Price
Index ("CPI-U'� published by the United States Department of Labor, such
that at the time the contributions are paid, they shall be adjusted by the
percentage change in the CPI -U from that date 24 months after the approval
of this rezoning to the most recently available CPI -U to the date the
contributions are paid, subject to a cap of 6% per year, non -compounded.
SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES
Page 5 of 6
Carriage Park Proffer Statement
Respec
Title:
STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE
FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowled ed before me this day
nil l u ���� 1 t
of `�-ei��l.x�C �> 2007 by � .1901111
My commission ,expires Q\
Notary Public
Page 6 of 6
W . ~•.
_moi
o ZA
.fes`
•.r N �.` •,. y
O�j •rrr rrr..•
��` `t•�
It
I tellt'��``'
\ -. - - "_ ,YBLUE RIDGE- `. •.,
- Amp
r _, EMERGE Y CONNECRON
/ � r rte' 1 `•f >` .\ F i� �
\ ! „
SINGLE FAM1 Y—�'
t ;
FUTURE,VgLL Y WILL ROAD= �•y�
CONNEC77061 Y,(ANERS) } 14 9196 A
EX ZONIN
`;ti PRbPOSEO'`
hl,F
f • rr f 4-• i
p rb
CARRIAGE PARK
/ f
i
'°'1 jA
r f
I E
NCE
F
I
Fop, \
i.
i l ,
/1}1;
\,
#
RON 'BUFFER
`
r.'
1
J.
)RE ROU'(E ,3.7„
i s r // E i
-•r_
7z.
.� ,.: "~ -.::- -.� �, r ,cam•, ... _ -�_..rf f 'I`{
\ -. - - "_ ,YBLUE RIDGE- `. •.,
- Amp
r _, EMERGE Y CONNECRON
/ � r rte' 1 `•f >` .\ F i� �
\ ! „
SINGLE FAM1 Y—�'
t ;
FUTURE,VgLL Y WILL ROAD= �•y�
CONNEC77061 Y,(ANERS) } 14 9196 A
EX ZONIN
`;ti PRbPOSEO'`
hl,F
f • rr f 4-• i
p rb
CARRIAGE PARK
f /1MV;�l.
/ f
i
'°'1 jA
r f
I E
NCE
F
I
Fop, \
\,
#
RON 'BUFFER
`
r.'
1
J.
)RE ROU'(E ,3.7„
f /1MV;�l.
(RROPQSED ZOJVINGI IRP
i
'°'1 jA
r f
NCE
Fop, \
5(I I— .',r
oaoa space
GENE FL IZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FREDERICK COUNTY, V/RCIMA
Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates
117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601
VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493
(RROPQSED ZOJVINGI IRP
i
'°'1 jA
��
Fop, \
GENE FL IZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FREDERICK COUNTY, V/RCIMA
Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates
117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601
VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493
i
r
�
r _
,
r
GENE FL IZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FREDERICK COUNTY, V/RCIMA
Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates
117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601
VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493
•
C:
•
REZONING APPLICATION #03-07
EASY LIVING ASSOCIATES
Staff Report for the Planning Commission
Prepared: April 2, 2007
Staff Contact: Michaei T. Ruddy, AICD, Deputy Planning Director
This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the
Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this
application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues
concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report.
Reviewed
Planning Commission: 04/18/07
Board of Supervisors: 05/09/07
Action
Pending
Pending
PROPOSAL: To rezone 4.02 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District,
and 15 acres from RA District to B3 (Industrial Transition Business) District, totaling 19.02 acres, with
proffers (a maximum of 120,000 square feet has been proffered).
LOCATION: The properties are located on the west side of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11),
approximately 600 feet north of the Martinsburg Pike/Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) intersection
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall
PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 44-1-B, 44B-1-2, 44B-1-3, 44B -1-3A, 44B-1-4 and 44B-1-6
PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas)
PRESENT USE: Residential and Vacant
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
North:
Ml (Light Industrial)
Use:
Residential
RA (Rural Areas)
Residential
South:
RA (Rural Areas)
Use:
Vacant
East:
RA (Rural Areas)
Use:
Residential/Vacant
West:
MHl (Mobile Home District)
Use:
Mobile Home Park
PROPOSED USES: Commercial uses (a maximum of 120,000 square feet has been proffered)
Rezoning 903-07 — Easy Living Associates
Page 2
April 2, 2007
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Department of Trans ortation: The documentation within the application to rezone this
property appears to have significant measurable impact on Route 11. This route is the VDOT roadway
which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the
transportation proffers offered in the Easy Living Associates Rezoning Application dated September 15,
2006 addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. Before development, this office
will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs, drainage features, and
traffic flow data from the LT.E. Tri 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. 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.
Department of Inspections: No comments.
Department of Public Works: 1. Refer to Page 4, Wetlands: A wetlands delineation study shall be
performed prior to the master development plan submitted to verify that no upland wetlands exist within
the proposed project boundaries. 2. Refer to Page 4, Soil Types: Expand this discussion to include
descriptions of the existing karst geology and the potential for sinkhole development. A detailed
geotechnical analysis is recommended as part of the detailed site plan design.
Frederick -Winchester Service Authority: No comments.
Sanitation Authority Department: We have the sewer and water capacity to service this site.
Department of Parks & Recreation: No comments.
_Winchester Regional Airport: We have 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.
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 properties 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 identify a core battlefield
within this area, but further research displays that this parcel has lost its integrity with respect to historic
value.
Rezoning 403-07 — Easy Living Associates
Page 3
April 2, 2007
Frederick County Public Schools: No comments.
County Attorney: It is my opinion that the proposed proffer statement is generally in a form to meet
the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, subject to the
following comments: 1. In Proffer C.2., staff should determine whether the proffer contained in the
second sentence is sufficiently definite. 2. It is not clear to me the relationship between Proffers C.3.
and C.6. The staff should review this. 3. In Proffer E., the proffer should provide that the monetary
contribution shall be to Frederick County "for", rather than "directed to" the Clearbrook Volunteer Fire
and Rescue Company and County fire and rescue services. In addition, at the end of the second
sentence the words "all commercial structures" should be changed to "each commercial structure." It
should be noted that I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are
suitable and appropriate for the rezoning of this specific property, or whether other proffers would be
appropriate, as it is my understand that that review will be done by the staff and the Planning
Commission.
Planning Department: Please see attached letter dated January 25, 2007. from Michael T. Ruddy,
Deputy Director.
Planning & Zoning:
1) 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 subsequently combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an
amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding
revision of the zoning map resulted in the re -mapping of the subject property and all other A -I
and A-2 zoned land to the RA District.
2. Comprehensive Policy Plan
The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as
the community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public
facilities and other key components of community life. The primary goal of this plan is to
protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a
composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County.
[Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. I-]]
Land Use
The parcel comprising this rezoning application is located within the County's Sewer and Water
Service Area (SWSA) and the site is within the limits of the Northeast Land Use Plan. The
Northeastern Frederick Land Use Plan generally provides for commercial uses in the vicinity of
this site and along Route 11, Martinsburg Pike. The Plan also recognizes the existing industrial
zoning surrounding this site and the Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA's) which front the
Rezoning #03-07 — Easy Living Associates
Page 4
April 2, 2007
site. The application of quality design standards for future development is also an objective of
the Plan.
Transportation
The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan does include this portion of the
County. The Northeast Land Use Plan calls for Martinsburg Pike to be improved to a four -lane
facility. The Plan also states that proposed industrial and commercial development should only
occur if impacted roads function at Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. The Frederick
County Bicycle Plan designates Route I 1 as a short-term designated route.
Site Access
The Northeast Land Use Plan states that individual access to industrial sites should be
discouraged along Martinsburg Pike. This development has proffered that one public street
entrance and one commercial entrance shall be permitted on Martinsburg Pike from the
property. The project proposes additional access enhancements that safely accommodate the
existing traffic to the Easy Living Mobile Home Park through the project. Pedestrian
accommodations have been provided internally to the project and along the projects frontage
with Route 11.
3. Site Suitability/Environment
The site does not contain any environmental features that would either constrain or preclude site
development. There are no identified areas of steep slopes, floodplains or woodlands. This
area is also known for karst topography. The Frederick County Engineer has identified that a
detailed geotechnical analysis will be needed as part of the detailed site plan design.
4. Potential Impacts
A. Transportation
Traffic Impact Analysis.
The traffic impact analysis (TIA) prepared for this application assumed 120,000 square feet of a
variety of commercial uses and a 16 pump gas station with mart. Using trip generation figures
from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual 7`h Edition, the proposed rezoning is projected to
generate 9,803 average daily trips (ADT). The TIA indicates that Level of Service C conditions
or better will be maintained on study roads and intersections with the proposed signalization of
Old Charles Town Road and Route 11, for which the Stephenson Village project has proffered
the construction. The applicant has proffered the signalization of the main project entrance and
Martinsburg Pike.
The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) distributes approximately 35 percent of the traffic from the
site along Route I 1 North to the intersection of Route 11 and Hopewell Road, Route 672, in
Clearbrook. Recent TIA's have demonstrated level of service and lane geometry issues at this
intersection, the ultimate solution to which has yet to be determined. This application
Rezoning #03-07 — Easy Living Associates
Page 5
April 2, 2007
participates in providing a solution to achieve acceptable levels of service at this intersection by
providing a monetary contribution in the amount of $50,000 that may be used to allow for the
development of improvements in the general area of this intersection. This project should be
evaluated in relationship with other projects in this area that are currently under various stages .
of review.
Interparcel connectivity should be a consideration with this application. Particular attention was
provided to the properties to the west and south of this project. Consideration was also given to
potential interparcel connection to the property to the north. However, this interparcel access
was not pursued by the Applicant. The properties to the south are likely to encounter entrance
spacing issues due to the proposed entrances and anticipated signalization improvements.
Interparcel connections through the B-2 commercial property will help facilitate movement
within the commercial properties and avoid additional conflicts on Route 11. Interparcel
connectivity between the commercial areas, Route 11, and access to the existing mobile home
park has been thoroughly provided by the applicant.
B. Sewer and Water
The FCSA has an eight inch sewer force main adjacent to the Winchester and Western Railroad
approximately 1000 feet west of the property to which the Applicants will connect. This
commercial development is expected to generate 500 gallons/day/acre for a total of 9,519 gpd.
The FCSA has a ten inch water main along Route 11 and a 20 inch water main adjacent to the
Winchester and Western Railroad. This development is expected to generate 1000
gallons/day/acre for a total of 19,020 gpd. The FCSA has stated that they have the water and
sewer capacity to service this site.
C. Design Standards
The project's location on a major corridor and adjacent to an area identified as a
developmentally sensitive area warrants particular attention. This attention is provided in the
application by a combination of proffered commitments including a proffer to provide a detailed
corridor enhancement strip 20 feet in width along the frontage of the property. Included within
this strip is a ten foot multi -use trail and landscape plantings. The applicant has also proffered a
limitation on the signage on the property by limiting the business signs to one monument sign
(15 feet high and 100 square feet in size) for the land uses on the B3 portion of the property and
two monument style signs (10 feet high and 50 square feet in size) for the B2 portion of the
property. The applicant has further proffered general building material specifications and finally
special consideration has been provided to the buffer and screening of the adjacent properties, in
particular, any potential preservation of identified wooded areas.
D. Community Facilities
The development of this site will have an impact on Fire and Rescue Services. However, it is
recognized that commercial uses generally provide a positive impact on community facilities
through the additional generation of tax revenue. This application does address the impacts to
Fire and Rescue services by providing a monetary contribution in an amount of $12,000.
Rezoning #03-07 — Easy Living Associates
Page 6
April 2, 2007
5. Proffer Statement - Dated September 15, 2006 (Revised March 21, 2007)
1. Generalized Development Plan
A Generalized Development Plan has been proffered which identifies the general location of the
B2 and B3 zoning districts, the general location of the primary public street system and
commercial entrance on Route 11, the general location of the realigned private drive serving the
Easy Living Mobile Home Park, and the zoning district buffers.
2. Land Use Restrictions
The applicant has proffered the following land use restrictions:
a. The prohibition of a variety of uses within both the B2 and B3 zoning districts that will
be on the property.
b. A limitation on the maximum amount of structural square footage that may be
constructed on the property. A maximum of 120,000 square feet of total structure area,
30,000 square feet within the B2 portion of the property and 90,000 within the B3
portion of the property, has been proffered.
2. Transportation
The applicant has proffered a limitation on the entrances onto Route 11, the re -alignment of the
Easy Living Mobile Home Park access road to the new public street, sidewalk accommodations,
and interparcel connectivity. In addition, the applicant proffer includes construction of an
additional lane of Route 11 along the frontage of the property with the triggered timing of its
construction, the signalization of the main entrance to the project, and a monetary contribution
in the amount of $50,000 that may be used to allow for the development of improvements in the
general area of the intersection of Route 11 and Hopewell and Brucetown Roads. The applicant
has also proffered the dedication of an additional ten feet of right -away along the property's
frontage of Route 11.
3. Site Design Standards
The Applicant has proffered to provide a detailed corridor enhancement strip 20 feet in width
along the frontage of the property. Included within this strip is a ten foot multi -use trail and
landscape plantings. The applicant has proffered a limitation on the signage on the property by
limiting the business signs to one monument sign (15 feet high and 100 square feet in size) for
the land uses on the B3 portion of the property and two monument style signs (ten feet high and
50 square feet in size) for the B2 portion of the property. The applicant has also proffered
general building material specifications and finally special consideration has been provided to
the buffer and screening of the adjacent properties, in particular, any potential preservation of
identified wooded areas.
4. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development
This application does address the impacts to Fire and Rescue services by providing a monetary
contribution in an amount of $12,000 ($6,000 for the Clearbrook Volunteer Fire and Rescue
Department and $6,000 for County Fire and Rescue Services).
Rezoning #03-07 — Easy Living Associates
Page 7
April 2, 2007
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 04/18/07 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
The land uses proposed in this rezoning are generally consistent with the Northeast Land Use Plan. The
application provides a level of sensitivity to the identified Developmentally Sensitive Areas, addresses
the appearance of the Route 1 l corridor, and recognizes the transportation improvements identified for
this corridor. Further, the impacts associated with this rezoning request appear to have been mitigated
by the Applicant.
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
COUNT' of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
January 25, 2007
``'- 1 �i
i"
i j 1AA tai 10().7' ;
uL 3
Mr. Evan Wyatt, AICP=�.
Greenway Engineering
151 Windy Hill Lane
Winchester, VA 22602
RE: Preliminary Comments — Easy Living Commercial Rezoning Application
Dear Evan:
The following points are offered regarding the Easy Living Commercial Rezoning
application. Please consider them as you continue to work on the preparation of this
rezoning application for submission to the County.
Comprehensive Plan
1. The Northeastern Frederick Land Use Plan generally provides for commercial
uses in the vicinity of this site and along Route 11, Martinsburg Pike. The Plan also
recognizes the existing industrial zoning surrounding this site and the Developmentally
Sensitive Areas (DSA's) which front the site. The application of quality design standards
for future development is also an objective of the Plan. The application should further
explain how the request is in conformance with the Plan and more particularly how the
request addresses the DSA designation for the properties immediately adjacent to the site
which front on Route 11. The goal would be to ensure compatibility of the proposal with
the adjacent existing land uses and to provide for the application of quality design
standards for the proposed. land uses.
Transportation
2. The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) distributes approximately 35 percent of the
traffic from the site along Route 11 North to the intersection of Route 11 and Hopewell
Road, Route 672, in Clearbrook. Recent TIA's have demonstrated level of service and
lane geometry issues at this intersection, the solution to which has yet to be determined.
This applicant may have the opportunity to participate to a greater extent in providing a
solution to achieve acceptable levels of service at this intersection. This could involve
working closely with other projects in this area that are currently under review.
3. Interparcel connectivity should be provided to the properties to the north and
south of the project. This is in addition to the proposed connection the applicant has.
provided for the existing mobile home park.
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Re: Easy Living Commercial — Preliminary Rezoning Comments
January 25, 2007
Page 2
3.1. The properties to the south are likely to encounter entrance spacing issues due to
the proposed entrances and anticipated signalization improvements. Interparcel
connections through the B-2 commercial property would help facilitate movement within
the commercial properties and avoid additional conflicts on Route 11.
3.2. The property to the north is presently zoned M1 and RA. The extension of the
Public Street to the northern property line should be a consideration. This would enable
any additional commercial or industrial development to have safe access to Route 11 via
a signalized intersection.
4. It may be desirable to locate the proposed public street adjacent to the buffer on
either the east or west side of the property to provide a greater amount of usable lot area
for the future commercial projects. Placing it adjacent to the western buffer would
address both this comment and provide access to the adjacent Ml zoned property.
Alternately, placing it adjacent to the eastern buffer could afford the opportunity for
future reverse access from the adjacent lots that front along Route 11, minimizing
potential future access points along Route 11. Language could be offered that enables
future access across the buffer area for the adjacent properties. In either scenario, a
greater amount of developable area may result from locating the road adjacent to a buffer
and the number of additional entrances onto Route 1 I could be minimized.
5. The language in the Proffer Statement; A.) Generalized Development Plan,
regarding the final location of the internal public street and commercial entrances should
be more specific in an effort to address the interparcel connectivity issue described above.
The final sentence appears to make the GDP irrelevant and should be reconsidered.
6. Access to the properties across Route 11 from the proposed project, in particular
the Stephenson Post Office, should be carefully evaluated to make sure that their access
would not be compromised by the proposed installation of a signal in the location
identified in the GDP.
7. Martinsburg Pike is identified on the Frederick County Bicycle Plan with a short-
term designation. Consideration of this item should be incorporated into the application.
Recent applications on the west side of Martinsburg Pike have addressed this issue by
providing for a ten foot wide multi -use trail along the frontage of their property. The
consistent application of this improvement along the west side of Route 11 would be
desirable. Consideration should also be given to providing a sidewalk adjacent to the
new public street at least from Route 11 to the relocated entrance to the mobile home
park. It is anticipated that this area will become more walkable as development of this
style continues in close proximity to existing residential areas.
Re: Easy Living Commercial — Preliminary Rezoning Comments
January 25, 2007
Page 3
Proffer Statement and Community Facility Impacts
7. Areas of existing vegetation or mature woodlands should be evaluated and
potentially preserved to the greatest extent possible and enhanced with additional
plantings to provide protection to the adjacent residential land uses and DSA. It appears
as though the existing vegetation within what would be the future buffer area may
provide a desirable buffer.
8. A one-time initial contribution to Clearbrook Volunteer Fire and Rescue
Company and to Frederick County for Fire and Rescue Services based upon the
maximum proffered build -out of the site is suggested rather than the approach proposed
in this proffer. This would simplify the administration of this proffer. .
9. Proffer C.) 1. should specify one primary public street access to the property and
one commercial entrance to the B2 portion of the property.
10. Proffer C.) 2. should include a timing trigger for the internal connection to be
made consistent with the construction of the public street.
11. Proffer C.) 3. should occur concurrently with the first development activity on the
property. The desire would be to ensure the proffered public street access, relocated
private street from the mobile home park to the public street, and the frontage
improvements occur with the onset of the development. The vehicle trips from the
mobile home park alone would appear to warrant the initial construction of the frontage
improvements. It would be undesirable to create a situation where the B2 portion of the
property develops without the benefit of the public road access and the relocation of the
mobile home park traffic around the B2 portion of the property.
12. Proffer C.) 5. should promote an approach consistent with that endorsed for other
projects in the area of the needed improvements identified by the applicant. The scope of
the improvements necessary and the costs of the improvements should be understood.
This would enable an accurate evaluation of the appropriate contribution.
13. Proffer D.) 1. replicates existing setback requirements and landscaping details for
parking lots adjacent to road right-of-ways. The application should seek to enhance the
current requirements of the ordinance in an effort to address the goals of the
Comprehensive Plan. and provide for a quality landscape design along the Route 11
corridor.
14. Proffer D.) 2. should be revisited to promote a sign that enhances the corridor
appearance of Route 11 in conjunction with the landscaping. A further reduction in the
number, size, and square footage of the signage is recommended as a means to achieving
this objective. As an example, in the Round Hill Route 50 Corridor, one monument sign
per development with a maximum size of 50 square feet and a maximum height of 12 feet
would be acceptable.
Re: Easy Living Commercial — Preliminary Rezoning Comments
January 25, 2007
Page 4
15. Proffer D.) 3. should promote design elements that clearly achieve a desired standard
of design for this project. As currently written, the proffer does not appear to guarantee
the quality standard of design sought by the Plan. Consideration could be given to
proffering particular design elements or even the design of the commercial buildings in
the B2 portion of the property if a particular style and character of commercial use has
been identified.
Other
A relatively significant violation of the County's Zoning Ordinance appears to exist on
the property in the form of large piles of debris and trash. This issue should be addressed
by the property owner immediately.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or would like additional
assistance with this rezoning request.
Sincerely,
Michael T. Ruddy, AICP
Deputy Director
MTR/bad
cc: Mark Cheran, Zoning Administrator.
pa 44 1 D
°fa
A�
d' s
lade �efrd
w,{
✓ak
eAl
44 1 C �o
4a
�a
s
yLfGr�
g�sr
44 A v
Se
Ar R
I
44 A
8
q r
1
44 A 5
/ 44 A 75E
44 A 75
A 40
44 A 56
Re - Zoning
REZ# 03 - 07
Application
Easy Living
Commercial Center
Parcel ID:
44-1-B,44B-1-2,
44B -1 -3,44B -1-3B,
Location in the County 44B - 1 - 4, 44B - 1 - 6
Map Features
Application
0 Lakes/Ponds
Streams
Streets
a. Primary
'�. Secondary
'�- Terciary
�f Urban Development Area
SWSA
E J
125 250 50Dee t w ��
w 7r�
Case Planner: Mike
44 1 A
�w9
/
49
B
1
rzF
44 1
D1
�B
\
r
r?O
1
�e
� 11
44B 1
6
9
7
r?
�B
r
r
7
44B 1
4
44 A 54
44 A 50
9
�B
r
s
Ay
r Ay
>7
9
Q9
9 QS
q gBq q
q
sS
4�
e
44 A 43
4
SbJi�
44 A 41
44 A 42
A 40
44 A 56
Re - Zoning
REZ# 03 - 07
Application
Easy Living
Commercial Center
Parcel ID:
44-1-B,44B-1-2,
44B -1 -3,44B -1-3B,
Location in the County 44B - 1 - 4, 44B - 1 - 6
Map Features
Application
0 Lakes/Ponds
Streams
Streets
a. Primary
'�. Secondary
'�- Terciary
�f Urban Development Area
SWSA
E J
125 250 50Dee t w ��
w 7r�
Case Planner: Mike
REZ #0 - 07
Land *e Map
Greenway Engineering September 15, 2006 Easy Living Associates Rezoning
Revised March 21, 2007
EASY LIVING ASSOCIATES — RT. 11 NORTH COMMERCIAL
PROFFER STATEMENT
REZONING: RZ# 62— 6
Rural Areas District (RA) to Business General District (132) and
Industrial Transition District (133)
PROPERTY: 19.02 acres +/-;
Tax Parcels #44-((1))-B, 44B -((I)) -2,44B -((I)) -3,44B -((I)) -3A,
44B -((I))-4, and 44B-((1))-6 (here -in after the "Property")
RECORD OWNER: Easy Living Associates, Jacob H. Yost, III, Manager
APPLICANT: Easy Living Associates (here -in after the "Applicant")
PROJECT NAME: Easy Living Associates — Rt. 11 North Commercial
ORIGINAL DATE
OF PROFFERS: September 15, 2006
REVISION DATE: March 21, 2007
Preliminary Matters
Pursuant to Section 15.2-2296 Et. Seq. of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and
the provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance with respect to conditional
zoning, the undersigned Applicant hereby proffers that in the event the Board of
Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall approve Rezoning Application # 02'0 9
for the rezoning of 19.02± -acres from the Rural Areas (RA) District to establish 4.02± -
acres of B-2, Business General District and 15.0± -acres of B-3, Industrial Transition
District, development of the subject property shall be done in conformity with the terms
and conditions set forth herein, except to the extent that such terms and conditions may
be subsequently amended or revised by the Applicant and such be approved by the
Frederick County Board of Supervisors in accordance with the said Code and Zoning
Ordinance. In the event that such rezoning is not granted, then these proffers shall be
deemed withdrawn and have no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon
this Applicant and their legal successors, heirs, or assigns.
The Property, more particularly described as the lands owned by Easy Living Associates,
being all of Tax Map Parcels 44-((1))-B, 44B-((1))-2, 44B -((I))-3, 44B -((1))-3A, 44B-
((1))-4, and 44B-((1))-6, and further described by Boundary Survey Plat prepared by Artz
and Associates, dated August 31, 2006 (see attached Boundary Survey Plat).
File #0633/EAW
Greenway Engineering
September 15, 2006 Easy Living Associates Rezoning
Revised March 21, 2007
A.) Generalized Development Plan
The Appllcm. hereby proffers to develop the Property in substantial conformity with the
attached Generalized Development Plan ("GDP") prepared by Greenway Engineering
dated March 21, 2007 that will be approved as a condition of the rezoning application.
The GDP shall identify the general location of the B-2 Zoning District area and the B-3
Zoning District area, the general location of the primary commercial street system and
entrances on Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11), the general location of the realigned
private access drive serving the Easy Living Mobile Home Park, and the location of all
zoning district buffers. The length of the primary commercial street system identified in
the B-3 Zoning District area may be reduced without the need of a modified GDP for the
Property.
B.) Land Use Restrictions
1. The Applicant hereby proffers to prohibit the following land uses within the B-2,
Business General District portion of the Property:
Retail Nurseries
SIC 526
Truck Stops
SIC 55
Hotels and Motels
SIC 701
Organization Hotels and Lodging
SIC 704
Car Washes
SIC 7542
Motion Picture Theaters
SIC 7832
Amusement and Recreation Services Operated Indoors
SIC 79
Golf Driving Ranges and Miniature Golf Courses
SIC 7999
Adult Retail
No SIC Indicated
2. The Applicant hereby proffers to prohibit the following land uses within the B-3,
Industrial Transition District portion of the Property:
Local and Suburban Transit
SIC 41
Motor Freight Transportation and Warehousing
SIC 42
Transportation by Air
SIC 45
Transportation Services
SIC 47
Truck Stops
SIC 55
Automobile Recovery Service
SIC 7389
Automobile Repossession Service
SIC 7389
Automotive Repair, Services and Parking
SIC 75
Drive -In Motion Picture Theaters
SIC 78
Amusement and Recreational Services Operated Indoors
SIC 79
File #0633/EAW
Greenway Engineering September 15, 2006 Easy Living Associates Rezoning
Revised March 21, 2007
3. The Applicant hereby proffers to limit the total structural area on the Property to
120,000 square feet. The following identifies the allocation of the total structural area
square feet within the B-2, General Business District and the B-3, Industrial Transition
District portions of the Property:
B-2, General Business District 30,000 total square feet (5,000 square feet
maximum restaurant)
B-3, Industrial Transition District 90,000 total square feet
C.) Transportation Enhancements
1. The Applicant hereby proffers to limit the number of entrances to the Property
that intersect Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11) to provide for one primary public
street entrance and for one commercial entrance.
2. The Applicant hereby proffers to relocate the existing entrance and access road
serving the Easy Living Mobile Home Park to connect to the primary commercial
street system in the general location indicated on the proffered GDP. The
Applicant shall construct this improvement at the same time that the primary
commercial street system is developed. Additionally, the Applicant hereby
proffers to provide a five-foot sidewalk along the southwest side of the primary
commercial street system to the private access drive and a five-foot sidewalk
along the south side of the private access drive to the adjoining property.
3. The Applicant hereby proffers to provide for an inter -parcel connection along the
southern boundary of tax map parcel 44B-((1))-2 that will be identified on the
Site Plan on this portion of the Property. The appropriate area for the inter -parcel
connection shall be reserved by easement by the Applicant and shall be
developed by others.
4. The Applicant hereby proffers to provide an additional 12 -foot paved travel lane
and shoulder along the entire frontage of the Property that will be constructed in
conjunction with the site plan in which the average daily traffic volume exceeds
500 VPD for the Property.
5. The Applicant hereby proffers to enter into a signalization agreement with the
Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to fully fund a new traffic signal
at the primary commercial entrance to the Property. This signalization agreement
will be executed with VDOT prior to first Site Plan approval for the Property
and will be installed when warranted by VDOT.
6. The Applicant hereby proffers to provide a monetary contribution of $50,000.00
that may be applied towards right-of-way acquisition, engineering, or
File #0633/EAW 3
Greenway Engineering
September 15, 2006 Easy Living Associates Rezoning
Revised March 21, 2007
construction costs to allow for the development of intersection improvements at
Martinsburg Pike with Hopewell Road (Route 672) and Brucetown Road (Route
672). This monetary contribution will be made to Frederick County within 90
days of first Site Plan approval.
7, The Applicant hereby proffers to dedicate a 10 -foot right-of-way to VDOT along
the entire frontage of the Property on Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11). This
dedication shall occur prior to the first Site Plan approval for the Property.
D.) Site Design Controls
1. The Applicant hereby proffers to provide a corridor enhancement strip along the
Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11) frontage of the Property that is 20 feet in width
and located on the south side of the primary public street entrance adjacent to the
10 -foot right-of-way dedication specified in Section C(7) above. This corridor
enhancement strip will be developed in substantial conformity with the proffered
Martinsburg Pike Corridor Enhancement Exhibit prepared by Greenway
Engineering dated March 21, 2007, which shall include a 10 -foot wide asphalt
pedestrian trail, parking lot landscaping on the west side of the pedestrian trail and
deciduous flowering trees planted on 40 -foot centers, low lying shrubs and
flowers on the east side of the pedestrian trail. These improvements shall be
developed in conjunction with the improvements specified under Section C(4) of
this proffer statement.
2. The Applicant hereby proffers to limit business signs to one monument style sign
for the land uses on the B-3 District portion of the Property that will be limited to
a maximum height of 15 feet and 100 square feet in each message face area, and
two monument style signs for the land uses on the B-2 District portion of the
Property that are each limited to a maximum height of 10 feet and 50 square feet
in each message face area as an enhancement to the Martinsburg Pike corridor.
3. The Applicant hereby proffers to prohibit the use of metal buildings on the B-2
District portion of the Property and to utilize similar construction themes and
building materials limited to brick, stone, false stone, split -face block, simulated
stucco, wood and glass on three sides of the primary land use structures within
this portion of the Property.
4. The Applicant hereby proffers to preserve a 50 -foot strip of the existing
vegetation surrounding the north, east and west boundaries of the B-3 District
portion of the Property to be utilized as a full screen as identified on the proffered
GDP. Additionally, the Applicant hereby proffers to provide a single row of
evergreen trees immediately adjacent to the 50 -foot vegetation strip that are a
minimum of four feet in height and planted on 10 -foot centers. The 50 -foot
vegetation strip will be field located in conjunction with each Site Plan to allow
4
File #0633/EAW
Greenway Engineering September 15, 2006 Easy Living Associates Rezoning
Revised March 21, 2007
the Planning Department to determine if additional evergreen trees are needed to
achieve the function of a full screen.
E.) Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development
The Applicant hereby proffers to provide a monetary contribution of $12,000.00 ($0.10
per proffered building square foot), of which $6,000.00 is to be for the Clearbrook
Volunteer Fire and Rescue Company and $6,000.00 is to be for County Fire and Rescue
services. The monetary contribution shall be made payable to the Frederick County
Treasurer at the time of issuance of the building permit for the first Site Plan approved on
the Property.
File #0633/EAW 5
Greenway Engineering
F.) Signatures
September 15, 2006 Easy Living Associates Rezoning
Revised March 21, 2007
The conditions proffered above shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators,
assigns and successors in the interest of the Applicant and owner. In the event the
s this rezoning and accepts the conditions,
Frederick County Board of Supervisorthe lantd rezoned n addition to other requirements
the proffered conditions shall apply to
set forth in the Frederick County Code.
Respectfully Submitted:
EASY LIVING ASSOCIATES
By: �T Date
Jacob' YosC, iII, Manager'
Commonwealth of Virginia,
-' To Wit:
Cit Counf �-V"e
ty d� k'
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2Zr-dday of MaV
Zoo' by N C� e
Notary Public
My Commission Expires �e � V �' -�1�
6
File #06331EAW
5-2 ZONING AREA
w1k 0 0 5' PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING CA
I0' BIKE Tf2AIL
RTE. I1 MARTINSBURG PIKE
MARTINSBURG PIKE CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT EXHIBIT DATE: 3-21-07
SCALE: 1 "=10'
Engineers
Surveyors
Founded in 1971
151 WINDY HILL LANE
WINCHESTER, VA. 22602
TELEPHONE: (540) 662-4185
FAX: (540) 722-9528
www.greenwayeng.com
a
z
R
W
W
_z
a
z
W
0
z ale
W d
mc
= EE
cc Z
FW5
Z d
W F
vZ
J W
Q �
v L
O
W J
� W
W
OG
00
a W
Z N
J cc
W
W Z
a W
W a
E-
0 0
E-
M M
DATA MARCH 21, 20071
SCAM 1' - 200'
DEMNED BY ebw
muz NO. 0099
9HnT 1 OF I
IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT
El ASY LIVING
COMMERCIAL CENTER
Stonewall Magisterial District
Frederick County, Virginia
TM 44-((1))-B, 44B-((1))-29 44B-((1))-3,
44B -((1))-3A9 44B-((1))-49 44B-((1))-6
September 15, 2006
Revised March 21, 2007
Current Owners: Easy Living Associates
Jacob, H. Yost, Manager
Contact Person: Evan Wyatt, AICP
Greenway Engineering
151 Windy Hill Lane
Winchester, VA 22602
540-662-4185
File #0633 Impact StatementlEAW
Greenway Engineering September 15, 2006 _,y Living Commercial Center Rezoning
Revised March 21, 2007
EASY LIVING COMMERCIAL CENTER REZONING
INTRODUCTION
This report has been prepared for the purpose of assessing the impact on Fredrick County by
the proffered rezoning of a 19.02± -acre subject property owned by Easy Living Associates,
and identified as Tax Map Parcels 44-((1))-B, 44B-((1))-2, 44B-((1))-3, 44B -((1))-3A, 44B-
((1)) -4 -and 44B-((1))-6. The subject property is located on the west side of Martinsburg Pike _
(U.S. Route 11), approximately 600 feet north of the Martinsburg Pike/Old Charles Town
Road (Route 761) intersection. The Applicant proposes to rezone the 19.02± -acre subject
property from RA, Rural Areas District to B-2, Business General District and B-3, Industrial
Transition to allow for the development of business, retail and small office land use.
Basic information
Location: Fronting on the west side of Martinsburg Pike (U.S.
Route 11), approximately 600 feet north of the
Martinsburg Pike/Old Charles Town Road (Route 761)
intersection,
Magisterial District:
Property ID Numbers:
Current Zoning:
Current Use:
Proposed Use:
Proposed Zoning:
Total rezoning area:
Proposed build -out
File #0633 Impact StatementJEAW
Stonewall
44-((1))-B, 44B-((1))-2, 44B-((1))-3, 44B -((1))-3A,
44B-((1))-4 and 44B-((1))-6.
RA, Rural Areas District
Residential and Unimproved
Commercial land use
B-2, Business General District (4.02± acres)
B-3, Industrial Transition (15.0± acres)
19.02± -acres
120,000 maximum square feet commercial
Greenway Engineering
September 15, 2006 asy Living Commercial Center Rezoning
Revised March 21, 2007
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Urban Development Area
The 19.02± -acre subject property is currently located outside of the Urban Development
Area (UDA); however, expansion of the UDA to accommodate the proposed commercial
land uses is not necessary for this rezoning application.
Sewer and Water Service Area
The 19.02± -acre subject property is currently located within the Sewer and Water Service
Area (SWSA); therefore, expansion of the SWSA is not necessary for this rezoning
application.
Northeast Land Use Plan
The 19.02± -acre subject property is a component of the Northeast Land Use Plan. This land
use plan recommends the development of business and commercial land uses along the
Martinsburg Pike (Route 11) corridor. The Planning Department staff has advised the
applicant that the development of business and commercial land use on the subject property
would be in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The Northeast Land Use
Plan identifies existing residences adjacent to the subject property as developmentally
sensitive areas (DSA). The Applicant's proffer statement provides for the preservation of
existing dense vegetation supplemented with evergreen tree plantings and significantly limits
business sign height and area to mitigate potential impacts to the existing adjacent residences.
SUITABILITY OF THE SITE
Access
The 19.02± -acre subject property is located on the west side of Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route
11), approximately 600 feet north of the Martinsburg
11 be accomplished Pike/Old
through the developmentoute
of a
761) intersection. Access to the property P
primary commercial street system serving the B-2 District and the B-3 District acreage, as
well as a commercial entrance serving the B-2 District acreage that is located 300 feet south
of the primary commercial street system. The existing private access drive serving the Easy
Living Mobile Home Park is proposed to be relocated to connect to the primary commercial
street system within the commercial center. The proffered Generalized Development Plan
identifies the proposed transportation plan for this project and the existing Easy Living
Mobile Home Park.
3
File #0633 Impact StatemendEAW
Greenway Engineering
Flood Plains
September 15, 2006 —dsy Living Commercial Center Rezoning
Revised March 21, 2007
The 19.02± -acre subject property does not contain areas of floodplain and is classified as a
.� s• i rt _ _ J-__ _ a RTL' Maps -FPC 1 vV-1-
Category C — Area of Minimal floods tg as demonstrated on FEMA N IP Maps 41C I n()4'2
0105-B and #510063-011013 and on the Frederick County GIS Database.
Wetlands
The 19.02± -acre subject property does not contain wetland areas as demonstrated on the
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map information from the Frederick County GIS
Database. The Applicant will conduct a wetlands analysis for the subject property to - -
determine if any wetlands are present. The findings from this analysis will be included as
information on the Master Development Plan subsequent to rezoning approval.
Soil Types
The 19.02± -acre subject property contains two soil types as demonstrated by the Soil Survey
of Frederick County, Virginia and the Frederick County GIS Database. The following soil
types are present on site:
14B Frederick-Poplimento Loams 2-7 % slope
14C Frederick-Poplimento Loams 7-15% slope
17C Frederick-Poplimento Loams, rock outcrop complex 2-15% slope
39B Swimley Silt Loams 2-7% slope
Table 5 on page 123 of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Virginia identifies these soil
types as prime farmland soils. The soils types on this property are suitable for commercial
development and have moderate shrink -swell potential. Karst geology is present in this area
of the County; therefore, geotechnical analysis will be conducted during the development of
infrastructure on the subject property.
Other Environmental Features
The 19.02± -acre subject property does not contain areas of steep slope, lakes or ponds or
natural stormwater retention areas as defined by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance.
There are no environmental features present that create development constraints for the
proposed commercial center.
SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
Adjoining property zoning and present use:
North: M-1, Light Industrial District
RA, Rural Areas District
Use: Unimproved
Residential and Unimproved
File #0633 Impact Statement/EAW 4
September 15, 2006 _,sy Living Commercial Center Rezoning
Greenway Engineering Revised March 21, 2007
South: RA, Rural Areas District Use: Residential and Unimproved
MH -1, Mobile Home Community District Easy Living Mobile Home Park
East: RA, Rural Areas District Use: Residential and Unimproved
M-1, Light Industrial District Allied Wood Products
West: RA, Rural Areas District Use: Residential and Unimproved
MH -1, Mobile Home Community District Easy Living Mobile Home Park
TRANSPORTATION
A traffic impact analysis (TIA) has been prepared for the rezoning application by PHR&A
dated May 11, 2006. The TIA models the 19.02± -acre site at two driveway intersection
points on Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11) and at the intersection of Martinsburg Pike and
Old Charles Town Road (Route 761). The TIA provides information pertaining to existing
lane geometry and levels of service at these
intersections,
Plannedaccounts
Communi background
thedAdams
associated with the Stephenson Village Residential
Commercial Center along with a 4°Ioaverage a annual of commercial development onuthe l9 02
ike and
Old Charles Town Road, and accounts for m
acre site including office, retail, fast food with drive-through service and convenience store
with gasoline pumps.
The TIA build -out analysis for lane geometry and levels of service demonstrates fairly high
traffic volumes during the AM and PM peak hours at the two driveway intersection points for
the subject property, as well as at the intersection of Martinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town
Road. The suggested improvements in the TIA recommend traffic signalization at the
northern site driveway, which is the primary entrance to the commercial center, as well as
traffic signalization and the development of separate right and left turn lanes on Old Charles
Town Road at the Martinsburg Pike _ intersection. Rezoning Application #06-03 for
Stephenson Village proffered to develop off-site transportation improvements that include
traffic signalization at the Old Charles Town Road/Martinsburg Pike intersection and turn
lanes on Old Charles Town Road and on Martinsburg Pike. Greenway Engineering has
prepared a Public Improvement Plan for these off-site transportation improvements and
construction is anticipated to begin in calendar year 2007.
The Applicants have incorporated a transportation enhancements section within their proffer
statement to mitigate the potential traffic impacts associated with this rezoning application.
These proffered enhancements include the execution of a signalization agreement with
VDOT to fully fund a traffic signal at the intersection of the primary site entrance and
Martinsburg Pike, a dedication of land to VDOT for the future widening of Martinsburg Pike
along the entire frontage of the subject property, the construction of an additional 12 -foot
travel lane onto Martinsburg Pike along the entire frontage of the subject property, access
management controls, the development of a 10 -foot asphalt bicycle and pedestrian trail, and a
monetary contribution for right-of-way acquisition, engineering or construction for
5
File #0633 Impact Statement/EAW
Greenway Engineering September 15, 2006 _,sy Living Commercial Center Rezoning
Revised March 21, 2007
intersection improvements at the Martinsburg Pike intersection with Hopewell Road (Route
672) and Brucetown Road (Route 672). The transportation enhancements proffered by the
Applicants allows for the development of the Easy Living Commercial Center while
maintaining acceptable levels of service at the subject property and along Martinsburg Pike;
therefore, the potential transportation impacts associated with this development will be
adequately mitigated.
SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT
The 19:02± -acre subject property is located within the Route 11 North Sewer and Water
Service Area (SWSA). There is a newly constructed 8" sanitary sewer force main adjacent to
the Winchester and Western Railroad that is located approximately 1,000 feet to the west of
the subject property. The Applicants are the owners of the adjacent Easy Living Mobile
Home Park; therefore, the proposed commercial center can be connected to the 8" sanitary
sewer force main.
Based on comparable discharge patterns, the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA)
has determined that 500 gallons/day per acre is a reasonable guide for estimating the sewer
impact for this commercial and industrial transition site.
Q = 500 gallons/day/acre
Q = 500 gpd x 19.02 acres
Q=9,510 gpd
The proposed commercial center is estimated to add 9,510 gallons per day to the public
sewage conveyance system and the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Plant (OWTP). A pump
station will be designed and constructed by the Applicants with adequate capacity to direct
effluent to the 8" sanitary sewer force main. The design capacity of the treatment plant is 8.4
million gallons per day, of which approximately 6.4 is currently being utilized. The total
build -out of the proffered commercial land uses would require approximately 0.47 percent of
the available capacity at the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Plant; therefore, adequate
capacity is available for this development.
WATER SUPPLY
The 19.02± -acre subject property is located within the Route 11 North Sewer and Water
Service Area (SWSA). There is an existing 10" water main located on the east side of
Martinsburg Pike (Route 11) and a newly constructed 20" water main adjacent to the
Winchester and Western Railroad that is located approximately 1,000 feet to the west of the
subject property. The Applicants are the owners of the adjacent Easy Living Mobile Home
Park; therefore, the proposed commercial center can be connected to the 20" water main.
File #0633 Impact Statement/EAW 6
p
Greenway Engineering September 15, 2006 'asy Living Commercial Center Rezoning
Revised March 21, 2007
Based on existing water consumption patterns, Frederick County Sanitation Authority
(FCSA) has determined that 1,000 gallons/day per acre quantity is reasonable to consider for
the water impact analysis for this commercial and industrial transition site.
Q = 1000 gallons/day /acre
Q = 1000gpd X 19.02 acres
Q = 19,020 gpd
The proposed uses will utilize an estimated 17,580 gallons of water per day. The Northern
Water Treatment Plant provides 2.0 MGD of potable water from the Global Chemstone
Quarry as one of the water sources contributing to the new 20 -inch water main. The projected
water usage for the build -out of the proffered commercial land uses would require
approximately 0.95 percent of the available water source; therefore, adequate capacity is
available for this development.
SITE DRAINAGE
The topographic relief on 19.02± -acre subject property generally follows a south to north
pattern, which directs drainage through a Swale in the central portion of tax map parcel 44B-
((1))-6. Drainage from the subject site flows to a man-made impoundment on the adjoining
industrial property, which goes under Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11) to Hot Run. The
development of the 19.02± -acre area to create commercial land uses will increase the
impervious area of the property and will increase the amount and rate of storm water flow.
The development of a .regional storm water management facility for the 19.02± -acre property
will be delineated on the Master Development Plan for the Easy Living Commercial Center
and will be designed in conjunction with the first development plan for this site. The
regional storm water management facility will be designed to ensure that storm water
drainage impacts to the adjoining property are mitigated.
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
The impact on solid waste disposal facilities can be projected from an average annual
commercial consumption of 5.4 cubic yards per 1,000 square feet of structural area (Civil
Engineering Reference Manual, 4t' edition). The following figures show the increase in
average annual volume based on a maximum development of 120,000 square -feet of
commercial land use:
AAV = 5.4 cu. yd. per 1,000 sq. ft. commercial
AAV = 5.4 cu. yd. x 120 (1,000 sq. ft.)
AAV = 648 cu. yd. at build -out, or 453.6 tons/yr at build -out
The Municipal Solid Waste area of the Regional Landfill has a current remaining capacity of
13,100,000 cubic yards of air space.' The maximum development of the commercial center
7
File #0633 impact Statement/EAW
Greenway Engineering September 15, 2006 —asy Living Commercial Center Rezoning
Revised March 21, 2007
will generate approximately 450 tons of solid waste annually on average. This represents a
0.22% increase in the annual solid waste received by the Municipal Solid Waste area of the
Regional Landfill, which currently averages 200,000 tons per year. Solid waste produced by
the Easy Living Commercial Center will be routed to the Regional Landfill by a commercial
waste hauler; therefore, the County will receive tipping fees associated with this land use to
mitigate this impact. The Regional Landfill has adequate capacity to accommodate the solid
waste impacts associated with this proposal.
HISTORICAL SITES AND STRUCTURES
The 19.02± -acre subject property does not contain any structures that are deemed to be
historically significant. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey identifies one
property to the north and one property to the southwest that contain structures that are
potentially eligible for the state and national register of historic places. These sites are
identified as Kenilworth (#34-113) to the north and Woodburn (#34-102) to the southwest.
Both properties are located approximately 3/a -mile from the 19.02± -acre subject property and
the potentially significant structures are not visible; therefore, the development of this
property will not negatively impact these structures or their viewshed. The entire 17.58± -
acre subject property is located within the identified core battlefield area of Second
Winchester — Stephenson Depot. The National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the
Shenandoah Valley identifies this portion of the core battlefield area as "lost integrity" due to
the extensive amount of development that has occurred over time. The undeveloped portion
of the subject property is surrounded by residential land use including single-family detached
dwellings and mobile homes; therefore, the development of commercial land use on the
property will not compromise the integrity of this portion of the core battlefield area.
OTHER IMPACTS
The rezoning and commercial development of the 19.02± -acre subject property is not
anticipated to negatively impact County services; however, it is recognized that the
development of a commercial center has the potential of increased service demands on the
Clearbrook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Company. The Applicant's Proffer Statement
provides a monetary contribution of $12,000.00 for the potential fire and rescue service
demands associated with this project. This monetary contribution directs $6,000.00 to the
Clearbrook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Company and $6,000.00 to Frederick County for
general fire and rescue services. No additional impacts to County capital facilities or services
are anticipated by this commercial center development.
File #0633 Impact Statement/EAW 8
Map Data Source: Frederick County, Va_ GIS Department, 2006 Data
SWSA & UDA Map,
W
LU
� Brucetown Rd
� P �
Rd fir, LLI
c,
n
'\ I /
/ L
'r fr -.7
Zxy Z.-,-
-70
/U
�JI V' �✓ LU
J.4'S�
w
w
Un U
Un J p
ehael pr
` Q
Q
> W UQ
--7—
�/ �/ Walters Mill � U)
U
LU
T �
0
110
U)
W
:E w
\ \ / U Q �
` CO
\06
J. Q < z w
\%\ �\ i
Legend �; t7 0 a z
\ f ® � z o
Q Subject Parcels r. 0 Y m N
C % fit'\ T
har s"j-o ! / Parcel Boundaries tr
/ ' r ` Sewer -Water Service Area / W W Z w
Feet - - -- - \\ °C O °`
v_
Cn
�� % Urban Development Area g T
L1,200 600 0 1,200 2,400
A . AVs. 7 Ati
Map Data Source: Frederick County, Va. GIS Department, 2006 Data
Environmental Features Ma
I�
p
cc
P„LU
, �° / I �fir. w / W
i
s
lip z
LU
epi
, 6
W �9
UI
� a X
_ / e
V\
141
t
o
Q
�
Sol
I/
,
-r
a
Z
I
635, �
0
U) W
Q
s
ILL
i y k6�
U
„Z Er
\ t W
`J
i
t
\ I �
• ' a
W —
a
s
�I
\ / w
yy \
Fb �- ED
U
` jLU LIJ
a _ tr tr Q
h
Tw —
0
'R �
m _
0 LL Q > ,
/ Le end QLU
-�� Subject Parcels �� , Q CO
}
,
Parceles - c <z zui
� i. , -....: • , _ \ - __ / 4 Boundaries = �� Q w _ � w
0 0
e ons �, z z �
h
Lakes L k & Ponds �..
LL>
Floodplain _ U o 0
N
, a t
N
1 $ a — 1 l cn z w
\�� ��yi% � r' / � :�i 2� Wetlands /, / < w w o LO
Feet 'f -Streams zLU
o
\\ — _
0 C
5 ft. Contour Lines 0 O N
r 2 500 1 000 / N w
r 500 50 0
'i. I`�yri.'''• r .a 4 //// / �✓'1/!i':1 :i f///''./gyp w�x�lt�\ 0 Cn
- t}
r ,
Map Data Source: Frederick County, Va. GIS Department, 2006 Data
JJ rr-
W
_ H
D Z
D W
nU
f)-jtQ
7 �
j W
J
nO
�U
li
Q
75
U)
J_
cn
LU
0
� m
U o
W Q z
Uj Z_
C'3 m
LU
J � C,
Q � �
} 0
W � o
(n Z w
O
M
Q U�
2iYZ u_
U O
W
W p n
W r ami
O (r O
LLU
O C
(n O r
N ..
LJ W
Q U
� rn
Map Data Source: Frederick County, Va. GIS Department, 2006 Data
Map Data Source: Frederick County, Va. GIS Department, 2006 Data
A Traffic Impact Analysis of the
Easy Living Associates
Commercial Property
Located in:
Frederick County, Virginia
Prepared for:
Easy Living Associates
112 South Cameron Street
Winchester, VA 22601
Prepared by:
Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc
Engneers. Surveyors_ Planners. Landsccpe Architects.
Avenue,
Suite 200Martinsburg, West Virginia 25401R+AT 304.264.2711PH
F304.264.3671
May 11, 2006
OVERVIEW
Report Summary
Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc (PHR+A) has prepared this document to
present the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Easy Living Associates
Commercial Property located along the west side of Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike), north of
the intersection of Route 11/Old Charles Town Road (Route 671), in Frederick County,
Virginia. The proposed project is comprised of 45,000 square feet of retail, 35,000 square
feet of office, 35,000 square feet of self-service storage, a 16 pump gas station (with
convenience store) and a 5,000 square foot -fast food restaurant. Access will be provided
along Route 11 via two site -driveways: 1) Primary - to be located north of the existing Easy
Living Mobile Horne Park Site -Driveway, 2) Secondary - to be located along the existing
Easy Living Mobile Home Park Site -Driveway. The proposed development will be built -
out over a single transportation phase by the year 2008. Figure 1 is provided to illustrate
the location of the proposed Easy Living Associates Commercial Property with respect to
the surrounding roadway network.
Methodology
The traffic impacts accompanying the Easy Living Associates Commercial Property
were obtained through a sequence of activities as the narratives that follow document:
• Assessment of background traffic including other planned projects in the area of
impact,
• Calculation of trip generation for the proposed Easy Living Associates Commercial
Property,
• Distribution and assignment of the Easy Living Associates Commercial Property
development -generated trips onto the completed roadway network,
• Analysis of capacity and level of service using the latest version of the highway
capacity software, HCS -2000, for existing and future conditions.
PA Trafc Impact Analysis o the Easy Living Associates Commercial Property
HRA
ProjectNumber: 14367-1-0
May 11, 2006
Page 1
N
No Scale
Figure 1 Vicinity Map - Easy Living Associates Commercial Property
A Traffic Impact Anal sis o the Easy Livinz Associates Commercial Pro er
P J� Project Number: 1, 21 6
May1Page gee
2
r
Figure 1 Vicinity Map - Easy Living Associates Commercial Property
A Traffic Impact Anal sis o the Easy Livinz Associates Commercial Pro er
P J� Project Number: 1, 21 6
May1Page gee
2
EXISTING CONDITIONS
PHR+A conducted AM and PM peak hour manual turning movement counts at the
intersections of Route 11/Old Charles Town Road and Route 11/Easy Living Mobile Home
Park Site -Driveway. ADT (Average Daily Traffic) was established along each of the study
area roadway links using a "k" factor (the ratio of PM peak hour traffic volumes to 24-hour
traffic volumes) of 9.4% based on the published Virginia Department of Transportation
(VDOT) traffic count data.
Figure 2 shows the existing ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key
locations throughout the study area roadway network. Figure 3 shows the respective
existing lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour HCS -2000 levels of service. All traffic
count data and HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix
section of this report.
A Traffic Impact Analysis ofthe Easy LivingAssociates Commercial Propertv
P
HRA Project Number: 14367-1-0
May 11, 2006
Page 3
No Scale
11
�ffe
� %`f
ti
�61� qct'
`0
4,N
rya
i
tL,4(,,
r` 38f2s1
1�6
O
Charles To
""Road
11
AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour)
1 �
Figure 2
PHRn
Existing Traffic Conditions
A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Easy Living Associates Commercial Property
Project Number: 14367-1-0
May 11, 2006
Page 4
No Scale
0
Denotes two-way left turn lane
* Denotes critical unsignalized movement
AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour)
Figure 3 Existing Lane Geometry and Levels of Service
A Tra f �c Impact Analysis of the Easy Living Associates Commercial Property
Project Number: 14367-1-0
H
p
May 11, 2006
Page 5
2008 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS
Based upon the VDOT (Virginia Department of Transportation) historical average
daily traffic data (between years 2001 and 2004) for Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike) within
the vicinity of the site, a growth rate of 3.2% was calculated. PHR+A, however, applied a
conservative annual growth rate of four percent (4%) per year to the existing traffic
volumes along Route 11 and Old Charles Town Road (shown in Figure 2) to obtain 2008
base conditions. Additionally, PHR+A included specific future developments located
within the vicinity of the proposed site. Using the 7th Edition of the Institute of
Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report, PHR+A has provided Tables I a
and lb to summarize the 2008 "other developments" trip generation.
Figure 4 shows the 2008 background ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes
at key locations throughout the study area. Figure 5 shows the corresponding 2008 build-
out lane geometry and levels of service. HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are
provided in the Appendix section of this report.
Table I a
Background Development: Adams Commercial
Code
Land Use
1
Amount
In
AM Peak Hour
Out
Total
In
PM Peak Hour
Out
Total
ADT
150
Warehousing
120,000 SF
78
17
95
19
57
75
792
151
Self -Service Storage
140,000 SF
12
9
21
18
17
35
334
710
Office
120,000 SF
191
26
217
36
177
213
1,535
812
Building/Lumber Store
25,000 SF
44
21
65
59
67
126
1,024
860
Wholesale Market
150,000 SF
41
34
75
14
17
32
1,010
50,000 SF
64
Total Tripsl
366
107
473
146
334
481
4695
Table lb
Background Development: Stephenson Village (Phase 2)
Trip Generation Summa
Code
Land Use
Amount
In
AM Peak Hour
Out Total
In
PM Peak Hour
Out Total
ADT
210
Single -Family Detached
858 units
153
458
610
477
268
745
8,580
220
Apartment
240 units
20
103
123
100
49
149
1,573
230
Townhouse/Condo
390 units
26
125
150
127
62
189
3,393
251
Elderly Housing - Detach
531 units
49
86
135
112
63
175
2,124
253
Elderly Housing - Attach
144 units
6
4
10
8
6
14
501
820
Retail
50,000 SF
64
41
106
191
207
397
4,365
Total Tris
317
816
1.133
1,014
655
1,669
20,536
Total Internal
26
26
53
99
99
199
2,183
Total Pass -by
10
6
16
29
31
60
655
Total "New Trips"
281
784
1,065
886
525
1,411
17,699
A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Easy Living Associates Commercial Property
Project Number: 14367-1-0
P i May 11, 2006
H Page 6
No Scale
Figure 4
PHRn
AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour)
2008 Background Traffic Conditions
A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Easy LivinQAssociates Commercial Property
Project Number: 14367-1-0
May 11, 2006
Page 7
No Scale
C:
P`Gl�
Unsign .on
Intersection
xre)B tit. Unsignalized
Intersection
P1P
Old Charles To
Road
Signalized "Suggested
Intersection Improvements"
11 LOS=B(B) Signalivtion
RB -I Right
400*1
11
Denotes two-way left turn lane
* Denotes critical unsignalized movement
AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour)
Figure 5 2008 Background Lane Geometry and Levels of Service
A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Easy LivinizAssociates Commercial Property
Project Number: 14367-1-0
PHR-
A
2006 Page 8
TRIP GENERATION
Using the 7th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip
Generation Report, PHR+A has prepared Table 2 to summarize the trip generation for the
proposed Easy Living Associates Commercial Property development.
Table 2
Proposed Development: Easy Living Associates Commercial Property
Trip Generation Summary
Code
Land Use
Amount
In
A -M Peak Hour
Out
Total
In
PM Peak Hour
Out
Total
ADT
151
Self -Service Storage
35,000 SF
3
2
5
4
4
8
82
710
Office
35,000 SF
71
10
81
20
98
118
594
820
Retail
45,000 SF
59
38
97
177
192
370
4,041
934
Fast Food w/ DT
5,000 SF
135
130
266
90
83
173
2,481
945
Gas Station w/ Mart
16 pumps
80
80
161
107
107
214
2,604
Total
349
260
610
399
484
883 1
9,803
TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT
The distribution of trips was based upon local travel patterns for the roadway
network surrounding the proposed site. PHR+A utilized the trip distribution percentages
shown in Figure 6 to assign the proposed Easy Living Associates Commercial Property
trips (Table 2) throughout the study area roadway network. Figure 7 shows the
development -generated AM/PM peak hour trips and ADT assignments.
2008 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS
The Easy Living Associates Commercial Property assigned trips (Figure 7) were
added to the 2008 background traffic volumes (Figure 4) to obtain 2008 build -out
conditions. Figure 8 shows the 2008 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic
volumes at key locations throughout the study area network. Figure 9 shows the
respective 2008 build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All
HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report.
A Traffic Impact Anal sy is of the Easy I ivingAssociates Commercial Property
P
H
� Project Number: 14367-1-0
May 11, 2006
Page 9
No Scale
Figure 6
PH RA
Trip Distribution Percentages
A Trak Impact Analysis of the EasyLiving Associates Commercial Property
Project Number: 14367-1-0
May 11, 2006
Page 10
Figure 7 Development -Generated Trip Assignments
P A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Easy Living Associates Commercial PropeHrty
Project Number: 14367-1-0
May 11, 2006
Page 11
No Scale
ti
q
ob�le� J
o�
el,
ask
rr9�rJr
ryry ob�
Sfe� '� ti`
1 -9
�r89e
t
448)
pb
r0
11
�5
ry�111
Old Canes Town
Road
11
AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour)
Pr Tri+n
, , ZM
Figure 7 Development -Generated Trip Assignments
P A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Easy Living Associates Commercial PropeHrty
Project Number: 14367-1-0
May 11, 2006
Page 11
1N
No Scale
ti
(oho
3
(78�z9��e► oble� 2(q JJ
O�
eA
Sfe
�rdfr Ce, —
o-e� NI°, Q^b1
(4 X3-9_ 1
rz86/ 9 ! 3 p
r� aS 3321 11 ti
Old Charles Town Road
11
AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour)
1 �
Lp_._ -.-P+A -
Figure 8
PH R+A
2008 Build -out Traffic Conditions
A Trad:ic Impact Analysis o(the Easy Living Associates Commercial Property
Project Number: 14367-1-0
May 11, 2006
Page 12
I
No Scale
Unsignalized
Intersection
n xzed
Intesection
o�
r
Unsignali 900�-
Intersection
P
�l
Signalized
"S�gesred
Intersection
LOS=B(G)
Improvements"
Signalizes tion
-I Right
Signalized
v� C(C)
Old Charles To
wl' Road
Denotes two-way left turn lane
* Denotes critical unsignalized movement
AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour)
Figure 9 2008 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service
A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Easy LivinjZ Associates Commercial Property
PH
Project Number: 14367-1-0
May 11, 2006
Page 13
G�
elj
rf`P
Signalized
Intersection
r )e
LOS B(C)
3
4
11
Denotes two-way left turn lane
* Denotes critical unsignalized movement
AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour)
Figure 9 2008 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service
A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Easy LivinjZ Associates Commercial Property
PH
Project Number: 14367-1-0
May 11, 2006
Page 13
CONCLUSION
The traffic impacts associated with the build -out of the proposed Easy Living
Associates Commercial Property development are acceptable and manageable. All the study
area intersections, except the intersection of Route 11/01d Charles Town Road, will maintain
satisfactory levels of service "C" or better during 2008 build -out conditions. The intersection
of Route 11/Charles Town Road will maintain unacceptable levels of service "F" during
2008 background and build -out conditions, suggesting minimal impact of the proposed
development. Traffic signalization and one westbound right turn lane would be required at
this intersection to achieve acceptable levels of service "C" or better. The following
describes the suggested roadway configuration required for the study area intersections:
• Route 11/Old Charles Town Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service,
this intersection will require traffic signalization along with a westbound right -turn
lane during 2008 build -out conditions.
• Route 11/Site Driveway #1: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this
intersection will require traffic signalization along with a northbound left -turn lane
and separate eastbound left/right-turn lane during 2008 build -out conditions.
• Route 11/Site Drivewa#2_ This unsignalized intersection will require a shared
eastbound thru/right, a shared westbound left/thru and a shared southbound
left/right turn lane during 2008 build -out conditions.
A Tragic Impact Analysis of the Easy Living Associates Commercial Property
PR+A Project Number: 14367-1-0
H May 11, 200614
Page l4
REZONING APPLICATION FORM
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
To be completed by Planning Staff W
Fee Amount Paid
Zoning Amendment Number Date Receive3 a�
PC Hearing Date �.,•f `'' ' BOS Hearing Date
The following information shall be provided by the applicant:
All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the
Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent
Street, Winchester.
1. Applicant:
Name: Greenway Engineering Telephone: (540) 662-4185
Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602
2. Property Owner (if different from above)
Name: Easy Living Associates Telephone: (540) 662-3486
Address: 112 South Cameron Street Winchester VA 22601
3. Contact person if other than above
Name: Evan Wyatt, AI_CP Telephone: (540) 662-4185
4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this
application.
Location map X Agency Comments
Plat X Fees
Deed to Property X Impact Analysis Statement
Verification of taxes paid X Proffer Statement
5. The Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in
relation to rezoning applications.
Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned:
Easy Living Associates Jacob H Yost III Manager
6. A) Current Use of the Property: Residential and Unimproved
B) Proposed Use of the Property: Commercial
7. Adjoining Property: Please refer to attached Adjoining Property
Owner List
8. Location: The property is located at (give exact located based on nearest road
and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route number):
The subject property is located on the west side of Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11),
ap roximately 600 feet north of the Martinsburg Pike/Old Charles Town Road Route
761) intersection.
Information to be Submitted for Canital Facilities Impact Model
In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for
rhe annlirapt rr.______ to r provide information concerning the specifics of the proposed use-
Otherwise, the planning staff will use the maximum possible density or intensity scenario
for the proposed Zoning District as described on Page 9 of the application package.
9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Numbers 44 -((I)) -B, 4413-
((1))-2, 44B -((I))-3, 44B -((I)) -3A, 44B -((I))-4 and 44B -((I))-6
Magisterial:
Fire Service:
Rescue Service
10.
11.
Stonewall
Clearbrook
Clearbrook
Districts
High School:
Middle School:
Elementary School:
James Wood
James Wood
Stonewall
Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category
being requested.
Acres
Current Zoning Zoning Requested
4.02
RA District B-2 District
15.0
RA District B-3 District
19.02
Total Acreage to be rezoned
The following information should be provided according to the type of
rezoning proposed:
Single Family homes
Non -Residential Lots
Office:
Retail:
Restaurant:
Number of Units Proposed
Townhome:
Mobile Home:
Square Footage of Proposed Uses
Service Station:
Manufacturing:
Warehouse:
Multi -Family
Hotel Rooms:
The Proffer Statement limits the square footage of development to 30,000
square feet of commercial within the B-2 District and 90,000 square feet
within the B-3 District portions of the Property.
12. Signature:
I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the
Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change
the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County
officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes.
I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be
placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission
public hearing and the Board of Supervisors' public hearing and maintained so as to
be visible from the road right-of-way until the hearing.
I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and
accurate to the bet of my (our) knowledge.
11 Applicant(s):
!o 0 . Date: 3 , 0_
Owner (s ' ' �� I / C t4 Date:
Special Limited Power of Attorney
County of Frederick, Virginia
Frederick Planning Web Site: www.co.frederick.va.us
Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia,
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601
Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395
Planning office, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601
Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395
Know All Men By These Presents: That I (We)
(Name) Easy Living Associates, Jacob H. Yost, III,Manager (Phone) (540) 662-9470
(Address) 2489-3 Martinsburg Pike, Stephenson, VA 22656
the owner(s) of all those tracts or parcels of land ("Property") conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the
Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by
Instrument No. 060016824 on Page ,
Deed Book No. 626 on Page 810
Deed Book No. 664 on Page 818,
Instrument No. 020008972 on Page
Deed Book No. 903 on Page 244,_
Deed Book No. 659 on Page 693, and is described as
Parcel: 44 Lot: B Block: 1 Section:
Subdivision: —
Parcel: 44B Lot: 2 Block: 1 Section:
Subdivision: _
Parcel: 44B Lot: 3 Block: 1 Section:
Subdivision: _
Parcel: 44B Lot: 3A Block: 1 Section:
Subdivision:
Parcel: 44B Lot: 4 Block: 1 Section:
Subdivision: _
Parcel: 44B Lot: 6 Block: 1 Section:
Subdivision: _
do hereby make, constitute and appoint:
(Name) Greenway Engineering
(Phone) (540) 662-4185
(Address) 151 Windy Hill Lane, Winchester, VA 22602
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 application for my (our) above described
Property, including:
® Rezoning (Including proffers)
❑ Conditional Use Permits
❑ Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final)
❑ Subdivision
❑ Site Plan
❑ Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment
My attorney-in-fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to
previously approved proffered conditions except as follows:
This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or
modified.
In witness thereof, I (we) have eto,,,._ety k id end s I this ZZrlci day of K Cu�C(n , 200 `7 ,
Si nature(s)..._-..-- i / n c ✓ e-� `1 c ✓/^,✓(
St*tif Virginia, City/�tejiurisdiction
f (7y, �Iex'i'ck , To -wit:
I, ')6n� L Meli�o, a Notary Public in and-foaforesaid, certify that the person(s) who
signed to the foregoing instrument and whoI (are) known to me, personally appeared before me and has
acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this 2-2atd day of MCAV&1 , 200 7.
Gm --Aa ,),1 Lx� My Commission Expires: Gel, nit � 2-672�qb8
Notary Public
Easy Living Associates Commercial Center
Adjoining Prop
NUMBER TAX MAP
OWNER
ADDRESS
1
44
1
C
EASY LIVING ASSOCIATES
2489-3 MAR
2
44
1
D1
EASY LIVING ASSOCIATES
2489-3 MAR
3
44
1
D
PAYNE, 0. L. & RUTH B.
PO BOX 16(
4
44
1
A
SIMKHOVITCH, RONALD S. &
2929 VALLE
5
44B
1
12D
WAMPLER, JACK K SR & JACK K JR P/A WAMPLER'S MOBILE HOMES
2648 MARTI
6
44B
1
12B
SIMKHOVITCH, RONNIE S JR
2601 MARTI
7
44B
1
12A
8
44B
1
12
9
44B
1
11A
DYE, JANET S.
PO BOX 35E
10
44B
1
11
11
44B
1
10A
PYNE, DONALD A & DOROTHY L
2565 MARTI
12
44B
1
10A1
13
44B
1
9
14
44B
1
8
SIMMONS, ANN H. C/O DAVID HIETT
2543 MARTI
15
44B
1
7
CAMPBELL, STEPHANIE J
2537 MART
16
44
A
50
CUTSHAW ENTERPRISES, L C
PO BOX 23,
17
44
A
49
SHANHOLTZ, DAVID L ET ALS
791 MARPL
18
44
A
48
MCKEE, JANNEY T. C/O MOULDEN, MELVIN
932 ALLEN
19
44
A
48A
THARP, SHARON M
1855 SENSI
20
44
A
47
CAMPBELL, BEVERLY L & GARLAND L SR
114 WINDIIN
21
44
A
43
BISHOP, GREGORY A & AMARI, THOMAS
285 BOGGE
22
144B
1
1
D T SHIRLEY PROPERTIES LLC
2455 MART
3/23/2007 Adjoining Prop
Adjulining Property Owners Map
Feet
300 150 0 300 600
Map Data Source: Frederick County, Va. GIS Department, 2007 Data
Le end
Parcel Boundaries
Subject Parcels
Adjoining Parcels
U)
W
0 -
LL, Cc
-
WCc w
¢W Z
0Uw O
co U
QQ
Z
W C
> W
J � W
>-U C7
<U _Z
W Z_
0
D
¢
w
fn F- m
L
m
0:
Map Data Source: Frederick County, Va. GIS Department, 2006 Data
NOTES:
SHEET 1 O
i. BOUNDARY SHOWN HEREON WAS DETERMINED BY A FIELD RUN SURVEY
44-1-D
PERFORMED BY ARTZ & ASSOCIATES ON MARCH 18, 2004.
2. THIS PLAT IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
O.L.& RUTH B.
3. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED.
PAYNE
4, SEE SHELF 2 FOR COURSE INFORMATION.
381/225
`r 44-1-A�y
'IN-
RONALD S. & VELMA D.
SIMKHOVITCH
44-1-D1
�F 883/181
s33
EASY LIVING
ASSOCIATES
'
14.714
468/629
446-1-12D
ACRES WAMPLER'SMOBILE
TM #446-1-6 g HOMES
Q
Q�
(14.004 AC.) c
0
C3
Z
���� f� 8
i
D
oh B�o�LlT s�
PROPOSED
ti
B3
ZONING
C3°
(15.006 AC)
y >r
dO�l.
9 9 Oa O
�'6T 4B �p PO2 9
A
`sassy
F°f`p py /B82�O�s P9yti (�
N °° �3r,
vr,S -
3 h `"g, 3 0
A9 635. �`� N?
S
BIf
j ,c 1, 1441 8-
&' ACRES
A6y
Fo sja9 Q
" f TM #44-1-B
(1.002 AC.)
Otilp�
13
�p��C�
44-1-C10
44-1-C60'
EASYR W s Q�pepS�1 `, ``
EASY LIVING / P ,
11117/
`,
AS468/634E5 801267
`� �s 1.126 ACRES
TM #44B-1-4
hi
if,
,! ry "a", (,J
Arr
GL
9".j9 s �`•
�R
0192
gm ph ACRES
!3r ���5 `� TM #44B-1-3
TM #4413-1-1
CHARLES EDWARD & �y
PROPOSED
EVELYN D. SHIRLEY
352/305
BZ
ZONING
(4.021 AC) LTH of
PROPOSED REZONING PLAT
o���P
EASY LIVING
�
C)MICHAEL M. ARTZ�
ASSOCIATES LAND
k �j�b
STONEWALL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA "No sUg\JO
SCALE: P' z 200' DATE: AUGUST 31, 2006
PRESENT OWNER:
Artz and Associates, PLC
EASY LIVING ASSOCIATES
A Su of Valley Engineering. PLC
EIry
LAND SURVEYING LAND PUNNING DEVELOPMENT
SEE SHEET 2 FOR TAX MAP AND DEED INFORMATION
16 East Piccadilly St—t
WINCHESTER, VA 22601-4740
PROJECT #20650
TEL 540-fi67-3233 FAX 540-667-9106
TOLL FREE 1-600-755-7320
CURVE
RADIUS
ARC LENGTH
CHORD LENGTH
CHORD BEARING
I DELTA ANGLE
C1
2824.79
100.26'
100.26'
S 42'28'24" W
02'02'01"
C2
2824.79'
171.14'
171.11'
S 45'13'33" W
03'28' 16"
C3
2824.79'
69.78'
69.76'
S 47'40'08" W
01'24'55"
C4
762.13'
60.67'
60.65'
S 48'59'30" W
04'3370"
C5
2824.79'
155.83'
155.81'
S 51'11'14" W
03'09'38"
LINE
BEARING
DISTANCE
Lt
S 47'58'26" W
34.43'
L2
S 47'49'52" W
100.68'
L3
5 49'28'27" E
304.27'
L4
N 49'34'25" W
310.33'
L5
N 47'42'31" E
215.61'
L6
S 49'25'02" E
94.75'
L7
N 40'3T2 -5" E-
239.86'
L8
N 49'24'49" W
64.79'
L9
N 49'24'49" W
248.88'
L10
N 49'28'13" W
116.43'
L11
N 49'23'12" W
109.95'
L12
N 40'39'59" E
69.31'
L13
S 49'26'16" E
124.94'
L14
S 49'25'34" E
319.76'
L15
N 47'44'34" E
40.28'
L16
N 48'54'26" W
155.23'
L17 I
N 47'41'00"E
201.44'
AREA TABULATION
PROPOSED B2 ZONING:
TM 144B-1-2 1.113 AC.
TM 44B-1-3 0.192 AC.
TM 44B -1-3A 0.441 AC.
TM 44B-1-4 1.126 AC.
TM TM #4481 , B 6 (PART OFPART ) 0.710 AC.
0.439 AC.
TOTAL B2 ZONING: 4.021 AC.
PROPOSED B3 ZONING:
TM �44-PART OFTM 4481' B6 (PART OF� 11.002 AC.
TOTAL B3 ZONING: 15.006 AC.
PRESENT OWNER:
EASY LIVING ASSOCIATES
TM #44B-1-2
1.113 ACRES
DB 626, PG 810
TM #44B-1-3
0.192 ACRES
-DB 903, PG 244
TM #44B -1-3A
0.441 ACRES
INST.# 020008972
TM #44B-1-4
1.126 ACRES
DB 903, PG 244
TM #44B-1-6
14.714 ACRES
OB 438, PG 629
TM #44-1-B
1.441 ACRES
IN5T.# 060016824
COURSE SHEET FOR
PROPOSED REZONING PLAT
EASY LIVING
ASSOCIATES LAND
STONEWALL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
DATE: AUGUST 31, 2006
PRESENT OWNER:
EASY LIVING ASSOCIATES
PROJECT #20650
MICHAEL M. ARTZ v
No. 1951
i
J
•
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #01-07
SOVEREIGN VILLAGE - REVISED
Staff Report for the Planning Commission
Prepared: April 5, 2007
Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins, Planner II
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: 03/07/07 Tabled by Planning Commission for
45 days
Planning Commission: 04/18/07 Pending
Board of Supervisors: 05/09/07 Pending
LOCATION: The properties are located on Senseny Road (Route 657) east and adjoining the
future Channing Drive.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Red Bud
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 65-A-39, 65 -A -39A and 69-A-40
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
Zoned: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential and Vacant
B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant
ZONING & PRESENT USE OF ADJOINING PROPERTIES:
North:
RP (Residential Performance)
Use:
Residential
South:
RP (Residential Performance)
Use:
Residential
RA (Rural Areas)
Use:
Residential
East:
RP (Residential Performance)
Use:
Residential
West:
RP (Residential Performance)
Use:
Res] dent]al/Vacant
B2 (Business General)
Use:
Vacant
PROPOSED USE: 216 Single Family Urban Detached units and 42 Single Family Detached
Zero Lot Line
commercial use
Meeting)
9
Units and 62 Multiplex Units (2.2 units per acre density), and 12 acres of
("This MDP has been revised since the March 7, 2007 Planning Commission
MDP 401-07, Sovereign Village - Revised
April 5, 2007
Page 2
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Department of Transportation: The revised master development plan dated October
5, 2006 for this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Route 657, the VDOT
facility which would provide access to the property. VDOT offers the following comments:
• VDOT has no objections to the proposed changes to the revised MDP.
• VDOT is concerned that under Proffer #3-A, Signal Installation at Channing Drive and
Senseny Road is controlled by the submittal of a commercial site plan. Currently there
is little prospect of commercial development at this site in the foreseeable future.
Therefore, VDOT would like to suggest as part of this MDP revision approval, the
developer enter into a signalization agreement with VDOT to install the signal when
traffic warrants are met.
• Proffer #5 Paragraph D has been inaccurately marked as complete. The two turn lanes
proffered for the intersection of Senseny and Greenwood Road have not been built nor
has the monetary consideration been given to the Department. We would like this
corrected.
• Some of the items noted in the typical road plan no longer meet current VDOT standards.
These details need to be brought into compliance as part of the site plan submittal.
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.
Frederick County Fire Marshal: Plan approval recommended.
_Frederick County Public Works: We do not have any comments regarding the minor revisions
to the MDP for Sovereign Village dated October 5, 2006.
Frederick County Sanitation Authority: No comment.
Frederick County Inspections Department: No additional comments required at this time.
Will comment on lots at the time of subdivision submittal.
_GIS Department: Young Court has been approved and added into the Frederick County Road
Naming and Structure numbering system.
Winchester Regional Airport: This parcel does lie within the air space of the Winchester
Airport and due to its proximity to the airport, property owners may experience aircraft fly -over
noise from aircraft entering into or departing the flight pattern from the north-northwest. Special
considerations will not be requested by the Winchester Regional Airport.
MDP 401-07, Sovereign Village - Revised
April 5, 2007
Page 3
Department of Parks and Recreation: Please find below the Parks and Recreation Department
comments relative to the revised Master Development Plan for Sovereign Village:
• Plan appears to meet open space requirements.
The proposed Multi Plea Trail should be considered no more than a sidewalk and should
not receive credit as a recreational amenity. If the six foot wide trail were to be expanded
to encourage multi (a minimum of 10 feet in width), it could be considered a recreational
facility.
• For the credit requested, this department recommends the proposed gazebo be of
commercial grade, on an approved slab, with a minimum of 380 square feet of interior
space.
This department recommends the developer provide detailed information relative to the
proposed Recreation Center. Specific information regarding the size, design and quality
of the amenities to be included should be detailed at this time.
.• The monetary proffer does not appear to be adequate to offset the impact this
development will have on the recreational services offered by the county.
Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided, it is anticipated that the
proposed 216 single family detached homes and 116 multiplex units will yield 47 high school
students, 40 middle school students and 73 elementary school students for a total of 160 new
students upon build -out. Significant residential growth in Frederick County has resulted in the
schools serving this area having student enrollments nearing or exceeding the practical capacity
for a school. Due to Channing Drive not being completed, transportation routes are being
affected. Routes are being affected in the amount of time that students are on buses, which
results in the inefficiency of both fuel and time. This also heightens our levels of risk and it
becomes increasingly difficult to maintain a satisfactory level of safety. The cumulative impact
of this project and others of similar nature, coupled with the number of approved, undeveloped
residential lots in the area, will require the future construction of new schools facilities to
accommodate increased student enrollments in this area. The impact of this project on current
and future school needs should be considered during the approval process.
PlanninL, & ZoninIz:
A) Master Development Plan Requirement
A master development plan is required prior to development of this property. Before a
master development plan can be approved, it must be reviewed by the Planning
Commission, Board of Supervisors and all relevant review agencies. Approval may only
be granted if the master development plan conforms to all requirements of the Frederick
County Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. The purpose of the master development
plan is to promote orderly and planned development of property within Frederick County
that suits the characteristics of the land, is harmonious with adjoining property and is in
the best interest of the general public.
B) Location
The properties are located on Senseny Road (Route 657) east and adjoining the future
Channing Drive.
C) Site History
MDP #01-07, Sovereign Village - Revised
April 5, 2007
Page 4
The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identified
the zoning for the acreage within the master development plan as A-2 (Agricultural
General) District. This zoning classification was modified to RA (Rural Areas) District
on February 14, 1990 during the comprehensive amendment to the county's Zoning
Ordinance.
The Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning Application #15-99 for Channing Drive on
December 8, 1999. This action established 354.3 acres of land zoned RP (Residential
Performance) District, and 22.0 acres of land zoned B2 (Business General) District. This
property was originally Master Planned with MDP 908-2000 which was for the entire
Channing Land Bay. The original MDP for the Channing Drive project included the
developments novo known as Lynnhaven, Twin Lakes, and Sovereign Village. A MDP
specifically for the revised Twin Lakes development has been approved. Sovereign
Village is now seeking approval of a MDP for their revised development.
D) Intended Use
The original MPD for the site depicted this portion of the Channing Land Bay as being
developed with 362 single family urban detached lots, and is known as Sovereign
Village. The new MDp—fevisiens for-SevereignVillage
developed mith 216 Single F fnily Jfban Detaehed tinits a -ad 116 Multiplex Units, and ! 2
aefes of eeminefeial land uses. This fevised MDP intfeduees the multip! -x housing
—And tv,xe- -additierA etA de saes fef single family detaehed ttfban dwellings. The new
MDP for Sovereign Village shows the site as being developed with 216 Single Family
Urban Detached Units, 42 Single Family Zero Lot Line units, 64 Multiplex units,
and 12 acres of commercial land uses.
E) 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-I]
Land Use Compatibility:
The parcels comprising this MDP application are located within the County's Urban
Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Urban
Development Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of residential
development will occur. In addition, the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use
map designates the general area in which the Sovereign Village development is located
for residential land uses. The Sovereign Village project will develop with a density of
2-3 2.2 units per acre.
The proffers from Rezoning #15-99 (Channing Drive) stated that townhouses, weak -link
townhouses and garden apartments would be prohibited within the development. It is
MDP #01-07, Sovereign Village - Revised
April 5, 2007
Page 5
noted that a multiplex unit is a separate housing type listed in the Frederick County
Zoning Ordinance and therefore would be a permitted housing type for the development.
A multiplex is an attached residence having three to four dwelling units. Units may or
may not have independent outside access. Units within multiplex structures may be
arranged side to side, back to back or vertically.
Staff Note: The proposed multiplex units are not intended to be nor resemble townhouse
type housing units, as townhouses are prohibited by the approved proffer statement.
The MDP which was reviewed by the Planning Commission on March 7, 2007
contained 216 single family urban detached units, 116 multiplex units and 12 acres
of commercial uses. The revised MDP for Sovereign Village shows the site as being
developed with 216 Single Family Urban Detached Units, 42 Single Family Detached
Zero Lot Line units and 64 Multiplex units. The revised MDP also shows the 12
acres of commercial land within the development in a different configuration than
previously reviewed.
The addition of the 42 zero lot line units provides more of a transition between the
existing single family urban units and the proposed multiplex units. The zero lot
line units are located along Rossman Boulevard, Canyon Road and Farmington.
The multiplex units are now located between the B2 zoned portion of the property
and the zero lot line units.
A single family detached zero lot line unit is a single family unit on an individual lot
with a lot size of 6,000 (minimum) to 7,000 (maximum) square feet (§165-65E). The
units are required to be set back off of the road and rear property line by 25' and
have a 10' maintenance easement at the side of the house. A copy of the restrictions
on this housing type from the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance has been
included in the agenda.
Transportation:
The MDP for Sovereign Village provides a commitment for the completion of Channing
Drive from Farmington Boulevard to Canyon Road within 12 months of final approval of
the MPD (built and open to the public). The MDP also states that this portion of
Channing Drive will be bonded (and associated right-of-way dedicated) prior to the MDP
receiving final signatures.
Staff understands that the intent of the Sovereign Village MDP notation is to secure the
completion of Channing Drive as soon as possible. As such, in order to achieve MDP
approval, the development team will need to provide the County with a monetary
guarantee ("letter of credit - LOC") and a Right -of -Way plat dedication for the
outstanding portion of Channing Drive. These documents are necessary to obtain final
MDP approval (signatures of the County Administrator and the Planning Director). The
other portion of the road notation simply states that the developer will construct the road
within 12 months of MDP approval; failure to do so, enacts the use of the bond for the
County to construct the road. Once staff is granted administrative approval authority for
the MDP by the Board, with road dedication and bond in hand, the MDP would be
positioned for approval.
MDP #01-07, Sovereign Village - Revised
April 5, 2007
Page 6
The rezoning proffers for the development provided for the construction of Channing
Drive as a major collector road as the road crossed the property. The developer of
Lynnhaven has constructed the northern and southern segments of this proffered road.
Via notes placed on the revised Sovereign Village MDP, the developer of Sovereign
Village will be completing this proffered road.
It is noted that the MDP for Sovereign Village also includes two new cul-de-sacs which
were not part of the original Channing Drive MDP. The revisions to the road network are
highlighted on sheet 3 of the MDP.
Recreational Amenities:
The MPD for Sovereign Village provides a note on sheet 3 that states that the proffered
community center will be built within 24 months of final approval of the MPD. The
community center is proffered to include a 3,000sf building, a pool and an outdoor multi-
purpose playing court.
lets, pafk b L'v uu+ .1
��,a
Due to the lot size, the multiplex units are required to provide one recreational unit
per 30 dwellings. The development will consist of 64 multiplex units and therefore
will have to provide a minimum of 2.13 recreational units. As indicated in the table
on sheet 3 of the MPD, the applicant is providing a total of 2.21 units for this area
which will consist of a tot lot and park benches.
F) Outstanding Issues
The MDP for Sovereign Village needs to address the following issues:
• Meets and Bounds should be provided on the MDP around the commercial
portion of the property (12 acres)
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 03/07/07 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
The master development plan for Sovereign Village depicts appropriate land uses and appears to
be consistent with the requirements of Article XVII, Master Development Plan, of the Zoning
Ordinance. The preliminary master development plan is also in accordance with the proffers for
Rezoning #15-99. All of the issues brought forth by staff and the Planning Commission should
be appropriately addressed prior to a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 03/07/07 MEETING:
The majority of the 21 citizens who spoke during the public comment portion of the meeting
were residents in the Sovereign Village development, with a few residents from the Lynnhaven
subdivision. Almost all who spoke said they based their decision on purchasing a home in
MDP #01-07, Sovereign Village - Revised
April 5, 2007
Page 7
Sovereign Village on the belief this was going to be a single -family -home neighborhood with a
recreational center and a pool. They believed the developers marketed the homes and
commanded prices based on the promises made with the original 1999 rezoning. The residents
were opposed to the proposed multiplex units because they believed it would negatively affect
the value of their homes, there would not be sufficient parking, and the increased traffic would
create congestion and deteriorate the roads. Many of the residents had questions on what the
proposed multiplex units would look like and how they differed from townhouses; they did not
think multiplex units surrounded by single-family homes would be in harmony with the existing
neighborhood. Others did not agree with more intense development on land with significant
slopes and wetlands. One speaker asked everyone in the audience who was opposed to the MDP
revisions to stand and about 75 people stood up.
The applicant said the proposal calls for four residences or less per multiplex unit; there will be
116 multiplex residences total; the proposed density is 2.3 units per acre, the original density was
2.4 units per acre; the proposed revision will have a total of 332 residential units, the original
called for 362 residential units, which is a reduction of 30 units; the projected number of school
children under the revised proposal is 73, as opposed to the original 85 school children; the
number of vehicle trips is reduced by 764 trips per day; the ordinance requires more than one
parking space per residential unit; the proposed revision includes a time deadline on the
completion of Channing Drive and the completion of the recreational center.
In response to questions from the Commission, the staff reported that the proffers in the original
rezoning do not have a time restriction for the completion of Channing Drive; but instead are
based on a trigger mechanism, specifically, when building permits are pulled. The original
proffer stated that before the County could issue the 474th building permit, Channing Drive
would have to be completed from Senseny Road to Fieldstone. The staff reported that the
County has issued approximately 390-392 building permits to date, which means there is another
84 building permits that can be pulled prior to having the road built. The proffer also states the
developer would provide a 3,000 square -foot recreation center with an outdoor multipurpose
playing court and a swimming pool; however, there is no trigger as to when this would be
constructed. The staff reported that the proposed MDP revision introduces a timing mechanism
which previously did not exist and provides assurance the recreational center would be built
within 24 months. Commission members inquired about the off-site transportation
improvements made with the original rezoning. Staff reported that contributions have been made
for signalization at Senseny and Greenwood Roads; and as improvements occur at Senseny and
Greenwood Roads with the Food Lion project, turning lanes will be installed. Although not
within the proffer, a signalization agreement has been signed with VDOT for a traffic signal at
Rossman Boulevard and Senseny Road. Staff added that the difference between a multiplex unit
and a townhouse unit is with dimensional requirements; the minimum lot size for a two or three
bedroom townhouse is just under 2,000 square feet and a multiplex is about 3,000 square feet.
Commission members understood the dismay expressed by Sovereign Village residents who
purchased their home with the understanding that Sovereign Village would be a single-family
residential community with a recreation center and pool. Commission members also understood
the concern expressed by residents that without having an adequate description of what the
multiplex units would look like, the units could take on various forms and they could not be
certain about what they were going to get. Commissioners recognized the importance of the
issue of harmony and compatibility through all stages in the development process. Some
MDP #01-07, Sovereign Village - Revised
April 5, 2007
Page 8
members were not convinced, however, that some form of multiplex unit couldn't be compatible
in a higher end, singe -family detached community. For that reason, they wanted to see more
details about the units proposed. Other members of the Commission did not think it was
beneficial to change the housing t; Ye for the benefit of a quarter mile of road, which could be
completed through other future developments.
A motion to table MDP 401-07 for 60 days was made and seconded to give the applicant time to
come back with more information on what the multiplex units would look like. This motion
failed by a tie vote.
A second motion was made and seconded to deny MDP 401-07 of Sovereign Village. This
motion failed by a majority vote.
A third motion was made and seconded to table MDP #01-07 for 45 days. This motion passed
by a majority vote. At this point, recommendations were made by the Commissioners about the
elements they wanted to see when the applicant came back to the Commission. Although not a
part of the motion, Commissioners said they would like to see architectural and elevation details
of the multiplex housing type, buffering details, and triggers, or any other concepts the developer
is willing to provide to convince the homeowners this is a better plan than the previous one.
(Note: Commissioners Watt, Ours, and Kriz were absent from the meeting.)
UPDATE FOLLOWING THE 03/07/2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
In an effort to address concerns raised at the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant has
revised the Master Development Plan to establish a transitioning housing type between the
existing single family dwellings and the multiplex units. The introduction of the detached zero
lot line housing type within the development assists in reducing the impacts of that the multiplex
units would have on the single family detached urban dwellings.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 04/18/07 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
The master development plan for Sovereign Village depicts appropriate land uses and appears to
be consistent with the requirements of Article XVII, Master Development Plan, of the Zoning
Ordinance. The preliminary master development plan is also in accordance with the proffers for
Rezoning #15-99. All of the issues brought forth by staff and the Planning Commission should
be appropriately addressed prior to a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.
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.
LoccTon Map
LYNNW.kr
z6ning
55
tf
3 53Blvd
■$ossi
■
I
0 n ■■ ;'■�
®1"!t•71�
MIM
0
�4S
OQ
�P�`a`�O� 65���� ®®o ■ I
■
■
>2 as.
•lVglV
A 209
e
►gyp;
IWO'&
■
vy,�� a�oo
o42 r
EVAN®.
117 MULAFI CK %-;ou nty, VA
Master Development Plan
NOW ## 01 -Ebb`
Application
Revised
Location in the Uunty Parcel ID:
65 - A - 39, 39A
Map Features
iii Application Zoning
S� Lakes/Ponds 61 (Business, Neighborhood District)
^^- Streams B2 (Business, General District)
Streets cw B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District)
v Primary 4CA, EM (Extractive Manufacturing District)
Secondary =w HE (Higher Education District)
+i. Tertiary a -'IP M4 (Industrial, Light District)
M2 (Industrial, General District)
+M
MI -11 (Mobile Home Community District)
MS (Medical Support District)
R4 (Residential, Planned Community District)
44D R5 (Residential Recreational Community District)
RAZ (Rural Area Zone)
RP (Residential Performance District)
i-ocanon to 'zurroundiny Area
ily gtiCK' CoG
'J
L125250 50et
�
Case Planner: Candice w�
MDP # Tff -07
ILL
I a n!nji gn 9 & as
ItossI! C 1 6 A
......... . . . . . .
mill"
I,
10.
Aie"Ph a I Map
Frederick County, Virginia Master Development Plan Application Package
APPLICATION
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Department of Planning and Development Use Only,
Date application received Applicxation # ZV _ 4
Complete. Date of acceptance
Incomplete. Date of return
1. Project Title: Sovereign Village -Revised Master Development Plan
2. Owner's Name Manning and Ross Developers, LLC
3.
4.
(Please list name of all owners or parties in interest)
Applicant:
Greenway Engineering
Address:
151 Windy Hill Lane
Winchester, VA 22602
Phone Number:
540-662-4185
Design Company:
Greenway Engineering
Address:
Same
Phone Number:
Same
Contact Name:
Kurt Pennington
5. Location of Property Route 657 (Senseny Road)
6. Total Acreage:
156.1 acres
7. Property Information
a) Property Identification Number (PIN):
b) Current Zoning:
c) Present Use:
d) Proposed Uses:
e) Adjoining Property Information:
Property Identification Numbers
North See attached
South
East
West
f) Magisterial District:
65-A-39, 65 -A -39A
RP/B2
Vacant
Single -Family, Multiplex, Commercial
Property Uses
Red Bud
S. 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:
Date: O 7
Special Limited Power of Attorney
County of Frederick, Virginia
Frederick Planning Web Site: www.co.frederick.va.us
to I
Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia,
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601
Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395
Planning office, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601
Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395
Know All Men By These Presents: That I (We)
(Name) Manning and Ross Developers, LLC -Greg Bancroft, managing member (Phone) (540) 723-9868
(Address) PO Box 27, Winchester, VA 22604
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
Deed Book 948 1760
Instrument No. 0 100 163 81 on Page and is described as
65 39A A
Parcel: 65 Lot: 39 Block: A Section: Subdivision:
do hereby make, constitute and appoint:
(Name) Greenway Engineering (Phone) (540) 662-4185
(Address) 151 Windy Hill Lane, Winchester, VA 22602
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 application for my (our) above described
Property, including:
❑ Rezoning (Including proffers)
❑ Conditional Use Permits
® Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final)
❑ Subdivision
❑ Site Plan
❑ Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment
My attorney-in-fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to
previously approved proffered conditions except as follows:
This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or
modified.
In witness thereof, I (j have herete-get my (o*) hand and seal this 5th day of August, 2005
Signature(s)
l
State of Virginia, CitCount of Frederick, To -wit:
I, Donna L. Me]iso, a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who
signed to the foregoing instrument and who I (are) known to me, personally appeared before me and has
ackno rafted the same before mein the jurisdiction aforesaid this 5th day of August, 2005.
My Commission Expires: February 29, 2008
Notary Public
§ 165-65 ZONING § 165-65
(2) Minimum total area per dwelling unit shall be 10,000 square feet.
(3) Minimum lot area shall be 8,000 square feet.
(4) Minimum yards shall be as follows:
(a) Setback from the road right-of-way: 35 feet.
(b) Side yards: 10 feet.
(c) Rear yard: 25 feet.
(5) Minimum lot width at setback shall be 60 feet.
(6) Minimum lot width at the road right-of-way shall be 30 feet.
(7) Minimum off-street parking shall be two per unit.
(8) Maximum building height shall be as follows:
(a) Principle building: 35 feet.
(b) Accessory buildings: 20 feet.
SINGLE-FAMIILY
DETACHED
........ . . .......
rr
rirrtrrr rrrr
rrr/
. •,1 1 rr j�rr
--.: . . . . . . ...............
E. [Amended 2-26-19971 Single-family detached zero lot line A
"single-family detached zero lot line residence" shall be a single-family
residence on an individual lot. The building is set on one of the side
property lines, with a maintenance easement on the adjoining lot.
(1) Minimum lot area shall be 6,000 square feet.
16587 12-15-99
§ 165-65 FREDERICK COUNTY CODE § 165-65
(2) Maximum lot area shall be 7,000 square feet.
(3) Maximum impervious surface ratio per lot shall be 0.40.
(4) Minimum yards shall be as follows:
(a) Setback from the road right-of-way: 25 feet.
(b) Rear yard: 25 feet.
(5) Minimum on-site building spacing shall be 25 feet.
(6) Minimum off-street parking shall be two per unit.
(7) Maximum building height shall be as follows:
(a) Principle building: 35 feet.
(b) Accessory buildings: 20 feet.
ZERO
LOT LINE
fit
111 1 .
(8) Supplemental regulations:
(a) The opposite side yard must be maintained clear of any
obstructions other than a three-foot eaves encroachment,
swimming pools, normal landscaping, removable patio covers
extending no more than five feet or garden walls or fences
not to exceed nine feet in height.
(b) The zero lot line side must not be adjacent to a road right-of-
way.
16 588 12-15-99
§ 165-65 ZONING § 165-65
(c) A maintenance easement of eight to 10 feet in width must be
obtained on the lot adjacent to the zero lot line side.
F. [Amended 10-27-1999; 8-9-20001 Single-family small lot Single-
family small lot housing shall be a single-family detached or attached
residence on an individual lot. No more than two units may be
attached together. The intent of this housing type is to provide an
alternative to conventional single-family lots that can be tailored to the
unique needs of specialized populations such as those of the older
person.
(1) Dimensional requirements shall be as follows:
(a) Minimum lot size: 3,750 square feet.
(b) Off-street parking spaces: 2.
(c) Setback from state road: 25 feet.
(d) Setback from private road: 20 feet.
(e) Rear yard: 15 feet.
(f) Side yard: Zero lot line option may be used with this housing
type. If chosen, the minimum side yard shall be 10 feet for
that yard opposite the zero lot line side. If not chosen, the
minimum side yard shall be five feet.
(g) When the attached option for the single-family small lot
housing unit is chosen, the minimum building spacing
requirement shall be 20 feet.
(h) Supplementary setbacks:
[11 With the single-family small lot housing type, decks may
extend five feet into rear yard setback areas.
121 Where single-family small lot housing abuts open space,
decks may extend up to 12 feet into rear yard setback
areas.
[31 Front porches, stoops and steps may extend eight feet
into front yard setback areas.
(2) A minimum of 20 landscape plantings shall be provided on each
individual lot. At least 1/4 of the landscape plantings shall be trees,
with the remainder being shrubs. The trees shall be a minimum
16589 9-25-2000
§ 165-65 ZONING § 165-65
(b) Side yard (one side only): 10 feet.
(c) Rear yard: 25 feet.
(3) Maximum building height shall be as follows:
(a) Principle building: 35 feet.
(b) Accessory buildings: 20 feet.
H. Multiplex. A "multiplex" is an attached residence containing three to
four dwelling units. Units may or may not have independent outside
access. Units within multiplex structures may be arranged side to side,
(Cont'd on page 16591)
16590.1 9-1-2000
§ 165-65 ZONING
§ 165-65
back to back or vertically. The average
number of dwelling units per
structure shah be four or less.
(1) Maximum gross density shall be
eight units per acre.
(2) Dimensional requirements shall be as follows:
Minimum Lot
Average Lot
Area per
Area per
Unit
Unit
Number of (square
(square Off -Street
Bedrooms feet)
feet) Parking Spaces
Efficiency 1,200
1,500 2
1 2,000
2,200 2
2 2,700
2,900 2.25
3 plus 3,000
31300 2.50
1
MULTIPLEX
(3) Maximum site impervious surface ratio shall be 0.50.
(4) Minimum yards shall be as follows:
(a) Setbacks shall be as follows:
[11 Thirty-five feet from road right-of-way.
[21 Twenty feet from parking areas or driveways.
(b) Side shall be 15 feet from perimeter boundaries.
(c) Rear shall be 25 feet from perimeter boundaries.
16591 12-15-99
§ 165-65 FREDERICK COUNTY CODE
§ 165-65
(5) Minimum building spacing shall be 30 feet.
(6) Maximum building height shall be as follows:
(a) Principle building: 35 feet.
(b) Accessory buildings: 20 feet.
I. Atrium house. An "atrium house" is a single-family attached, one-
story residence, with individual outside access to the dwelling unit.
The lot shall be enclosed by a wall at least six feet high. This wall shall
be constructed of similar or comparable materials as the house walls.
A private yard, herein called "an atrium," shall be included on each lot.
All living spaces, i.e., living rooms, den and bedrooms, shall open onto
the atrium. No more than six individual dwelling units may be attached
in any one building.
(1) Maximum gross density shall be eight units per acre.
(2) Dimensional requirements shall be as follows:
Minimum Average
Lot Area Lot Area
per per
Dwelling Dwelling
Unit Unit Off -Street Minimum
Number of (square (square Parking Lot Width
Bedrooms feet) feet) Spaces (feet)
1 2,000 2,200 2 35
2 2,700 2,900 2.25 35
3 plus 3,000 3,300 2.50 40
16592 12-15-99