PC 03-07-07 Meeting AgendaAGENDA
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The Board Room
Frederick County Administration Building
Winchester, Virginia
March 7, 2007
7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB
1) Adoption of Agenda:
Pursuant to established procedures, the Planning Commission should adopt the Agenda for
themeeting............................................................................................................... (no tab)
2) January 17, 2007 Minutes and Staff Briefing Minutes of December 19, 2006 — Willow Run
Rezoning.......................................................................................................................... (A)
3) Committee Reports.................................................................................................. (no tab)
4) Citizen Comments.................................................................................................... (no tab)
PUBLIC HEARING
5) Conditional Use Permit #0207 for Keith Rogers and Sandra Rogers for a Public Garage
without Body Repair. This property is located at 2204 Fairfax Pike, Route (Route 277), and
is identified with Property Identification Number 87-A-89 in the Opequon Magisterial
District.
Mr. Henry......................................................................................................................... (B)
PUBLIC MEETING
6) Master Development Plan #01-07 for a MDP which reflects revisions to Sovereign
Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, for 216 single family detached units and 116
multiplex units. 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..................................................................................................................... (C)
7) Other
FILE COPY
0
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 January 17, 2007.
PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Shawnee District; Roger L_ Thomas, Vice Chairman/ Opequon
District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Gregory S. Kerr, Red Bud
District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Gary R_ Oates, Stonewall District; John H. Light, Stonewall
District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek
District; H. Paige Manuel, Member -At -Large; and Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Legal Counsel.
ABSENT: Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; City of Winchester Liaison.
STAFF PRESENT: Eric R Lawrence, Planning Director; Michael T_ Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director; Mark
R Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Kevin T. Henry, Planning Technician; Bernard Suchicital,
Planner I; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk.
CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Upon motion made by Commissioner
Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Ours, the Planning Commission adopted the agenda for this evening's
meeting.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) — 1/16/07 Mtg.
Commissioner Oates reported that the HRAB discussed the I-81 Distribution Center; this
applicant is submitting an application to rezone 59 acres to M 1 (Industrial Limited) District; the property is
located just north of Cedar Hill Road and just south of the Flying J Exit along Route 11. Commissioner Oates
said the HRAB had concern about two houses --one located on the property, which the applicant agreed to see if it
would qualify for the State Registry; and the house across the road, next to the spring, which the applicant agreed
to screen and buffer their portion along Route 11. Commissioner Oates said those were the two recommendations
sent forward by the HRAB.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1953
Minutes of December 20, 2006
0
Ll 11 n
F
7�j
-2 -
Sanitation Authority — 1/16/07 Mtg.
Commissioner Unger reported that Mr. Steve Rust gave a presentation to the Sanitation
Authority on the Operations Division. He said Mr. Rust talked about the purchase of a new truck which will
enable employees to investigate leaks without digging up the ground with a backhoe or calling Miss Utility.
Commissioner Unger also reported that the County is continuing to use about five million gallons of water per
day.
Winchester Planning Commission (WPC) — 1/169/076 Mtg.
Commissioner Ours reported that the first order of business for the Winchester Planning
Commission was to re-elect Ms. Susan Masters as Chairman and Mr. Nate Adams as Vice -Chairman. He also
reported that the City Planning Commission will be scheduling a meeting with City Counsel to address an update
on the Comprehensive Policy Plan; they gave administrative approval for a TGI-Fridays restaurant, to be located
on Pleasant Valley Road; and they are also nearing completion on an update to the City Corridor Enhancement
Standards.
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.
PUBLIC HEARING
Urban Development Area (UDA) Study Policy — Consideration of amendments to the Frederick County
2003 Comprehensive Policy Plan, Chapter 6, Land Use, to modify the land use policy text to reflect the
land use policy proposal fo r the urban areas of Frederick County, promoted by the UDA Study.
Action — Recommended Approval
Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that the land use proposal for the Urban
Development Area (UDA) promotes a proactive and creative approach to land use planning for the County's
urban areas. Mr. Ruddy stated it was a vision aimed to meet the growth demands of the community, assure a
sustainable community, and maintain a high quality of life for the citizens within the urban areas of the County.
He noted that both the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors held discussions during the months of
November and December of 2006 and provided valuable input and direction to the staff and the UDA working
group. Mr. Ruddy said that the public hearing this evening is the first step in the public hearing process. He said
4 f 41... ,..11 L a r'h 6 of the Com rehensive Policy
that < ,e policy proposal w; %e inserted directly into the land use chapter, � apter p
Plan, and will provide a positive alternative to the land use policy presently within the plan. Mr. Ruddy proceeded
to give the Commission and the public a summary of the land use proposal.
Frederick County Planning Corxirnission
Minutes of January 17, 2007
Page 1954
-3 -
Commissioner Unger inquired if any studies had been done on the trips this new proposal would
create. Mr. Ruddy said that one of the benefits of an integrated mix of land use is generally a reduction in the
amount of trips in favor of alternative modes of transportation, such as pedestrian access, possibly bus lines or
transit opportunities. Mr. Ruddy said there will be a need, however, to continually evaluate the transportation
network to accommodate the land uses, i.e. to continue to evaluate and build upon the County's Eastern Road
Plan to accommodate the development in the appropriate locations.
Commissioner Thomas asked if a time line had been established to revise the ordinances and to
write the Green Zone design standards in order to implement this land use proposal; he asked whether a separate
zoning classification or an overlay district was envisioned. Mr. Ruddy replied that an aggressive approach is
envisioned for this to happen very quickly; he said a combination of both a separate zoning classification and an
overlay district is preliminary envisioned.
Commissioner Thomas asked if any templates for the zoning classification standards had been
researched. Mr. Ruddy replied there were many available and many communities have implemented this
successfully; he said the APA (American Planning Association) has put out a model ordinance that embraces
these ideas.
Chairman Wilmot next opened the public hearing and called for public comments. There were
no public comments and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing.
Commissioner Kriz referred to Page 2 of the text where it is stated that, "...this choice is in
addition to the land use concepts presently identified in the Comprehensive Policy Plan." Commissioner Kriz
emphasized that this choice is in addition to and does not replace any land use concepts in the plan.
No other issues were raised and the Commission unanimously endorsed the plan.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett,
BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend
approval of Urban Development Area (UDA) Study Policy and the amendments to the Frederick County 2003
Comprehensive Policy Plan, Chapter 6, Land Use, to modify the land use policy text to reflect the land use policy
proposal for the urban areas of Frederick County, promoted by the UDA Study.
(Note: Commissioner Morris was absent from the meeting.)
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of January 17, 2007
Page 1955
Rezoning #22-06 for Southern Hills, submitted by William H. Gordon Associates, to rezone 15.53916 acres
from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (Business General) District, with proffers, and 90 acres
from RP (Residential Performance) to RP (Residential Performance) with revised proffers for residential
and commercial uses. The properties are located approximately 2,800 feet south of the intersection of
Route 277 and Town Run Lane. The properties are further identified with P.I.N.s 85D-1-1-1 through
85D -1-1-95B, and 85-A-138 in the Opequon Magisterial District.
Master Development Plan #16-06 for Southern Hills, submitted by William H. Gordon Associates, to
rezone 15.53915 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (Business General) District, with
proffers, for residential and commercial uses. The properties are located approximately 2,800 feet south
of the intersection of Route 277 and Town Run Lane. The properties are further identified with P.I.N.
85D-1-1-1 through 85D -1-1-95B and 85-A-138 in the Opequon Magisterial District.
Action — Recommended Approval with Proffers & Stipulations
Chairman Wilmot announced that the rezoning and master development plan (MDP) for
Southern Hills will be presented together.
Commissioner Manuel said that he would recluse himself from all discussion and voting on both
the rezoning and the MDP, due to a potential conflict of interest.
Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that in 2001, the Board of Supervisors
approved Rezoning #01-01 to rezone 105 acres from RA to RP which enabled the construction of 250 single-
family detached homes on the site. He said additional proffers were provided with that rezoning and included a
Generalized Development Plan (GDP), the construction of area transportation improvements, an easement to the
adjacent properties, preservation of an access to an existing family cemetery, and monetary contributions to offset
impacts on community facilities and off-site transportation improvements. Mr. Ruddy said the applicant has
submitted this rezoning request which seeks to rezone a 15 -acre portion of the property from RP to B2 and to
amend the proffers associated with the original rezoning. He said in general, the revised proffer statement
provides for a mix of land uses and housing types, an improved project layout depicted on the revised GDP, and
and provide for the dedication to the County of a 100 -foot right-of-way for the future connection and construction
of Warrior Drive through the property, which would ultimately align with the I-81 Interchange 307. Mr. Ruddy
identified the location of the dedication to the Commission. Mr. Ruddy said the recently -adopted Eastern Road
Plan identifies Warrior Drive, a new major collector road, in this general location.
Mr. Ruddy stated that the applicant is requesting the approval of 88 single-family detached
residential units and no more than 232 single-family attached residential units; this is a potential net increase of
70 units above the previously -approved 250 units. He said the applicant's request to rezone approximately 15
acres of commercially -zoned land introduces a commercial component to the project, which will be a highly
visible location with access via Town Run Lane and Warrior Drive. Mr. Ruddy said that the project generally
maintains its consistency with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; the introduction of the
commercial component and the modifications to the proffer statement to address the future construction of
Warrior Drive are positive additions to the project which would not have a negative impact on surrounding
properties. In addition, he said the long-term transportation planning efforts of the community would be able to
be implemented with this rezoning.
Mr. Ruddy, said the MDP was generally consistent with the original plan and he proceeded to
review the design details of the plan with the Commission, pointing out the townhouse section, the open and
recreational space, the family cemetery, the Warrior Drive extension, and the recreational facilities. Mr. Ruddy
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of January 17, 2007
Page 19`
-5 -
noted that a waiver request dealing with the length of the private streets is proposed to facilitate the proposed
design. He pointed out that several sections go beyond 500 feet from a future state -maintained road. Mr. Ruddy
said the revised MDP depicts appropriate land uses, it is consistent with the requirements of the zoning ordinance,
and it is in conformance with the proposed rezoning application.
Commissioner Unger had questions on the dedication of land for Warrior Drive and if there were
any stipulations. Mr. Ruddy responded that the land would be given outright to the County within 90 days of a
written request by the County; he explained that at this point in time, no portion of the road will be constructed by
the developer.
Commissioner Unger also raised questions about the number of additional school children that
could be generated by the addition of townhouses and the affect on traffic. Mr. Ruddy estimated there would be
35 additional school children, using .5 children per unit at 70 units; he said evaluation of the transportation
proffers approved with the original rezoning determined that those improvements would accommodate the
development proposed in the revised plan.
Members of the Commission asked why the new fiscal impact model wasn't run on the new
proposal, or at least the additional units, to determine that impact. Mr. Ruddy stated that the new model scenario
has a calculation for each housing type, rather than a true mixed use; he said the calculation would be 70 units
times 15,000 to determine the impact of the additional units beyond that which was originally approved.
Commissioner Mohn said he appreciated the collaborative effort to assess whether the originally -
approved transportation improvements were adequate for the impacts of the revised project and he believed that
once Warrior Drive was constructed with the relocated interchange, the transportation would work well; however,
a Traffic Impact Analysis to accommodate the commercial development was not available to evaluate the impacts
and he raised the possibility of the commercial development occurring before Warrior Drive is constructed. Mr.
Ruddy said there is no doubt the commercial component would truly be viable with the relocation of Interchange
307 and Warrior Drive. Mr. Ruddy added that the 15 -acre commercial site will be somewhat reduced with the
right-of-way for Warrior Drive and the environmental areas; it was the staffs opinion that the improvements
currently being constructed, along with the future signalization of Stickley Drive and Route 277, could
accommodate what was being proposed. Commissioner Mohn asked if this was the approach the staff will take
with subsequent applications; specifically, if there are a significant amount of proffered improvements along a
corridor, then a TIA may not be required to be submitted. Mr. Ruddy didn't foresee this being done on a regular
basis with future applications; he said this application was a very unique situation because it was a previously -
approved project and endorsed for 250 single-family detached houses with really no ability to get the long-range
transportation improvements in place.
Commissioner Thomas stated that even if the commercial results in about ten acres of
developable area, the amount of traffic generated will dwarf the amount generated by the additional townhouses.
Commissioner Thomas believed two things were needed: a traffic analysis was needed for the commercial area to
determine its impact on the transportation system; and secondly, a phasing plan for the development was needed
so that all the commercial and residential development does not come on line before Warrior Drive is built. The
phasing plan will limit the commercial and residential over time and total build -out could not occur until Warrior
Drive is constructed.
Com-missioner Unger expressed doubt that Warrior Drive constructed at this location would have
any benefit for the public, at least until it crosses I-81. Commissioner Unger questioned how this revised plan
had any benefits for the County; he said the applicant is not providing any extra proffers, particularly for schools,
and there is no offer to construct the road. He asked if internal streets were going to be built to VDOT standards.
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of January 17, 2007
Page 1957
Mr. Douglas Flemming, counsel for the property owners, Arcadia Development Company,
Arcadia Southern Hills, LLC, and the Southern Hills Homeowners Association, Inc., came forward to introduce
himself and Mr. Donald Miller, Arcadia's Chief Operating Officer, Ms. Carla Koffey, Arcadia's Director of
Planning and Engineering, and Mr. Mark Dick and Mr. Harold Plants of William H. Gordon & Associates. Mr.
Flemming stated that Note #1 on the original Southern Hills MDP, approved in August of 2003, contained a
notation that prior to submittal of the Phase 3 Design Plan, the owner will meet with County Officials to
determine the status of the relocation of Interstate 81 Exit 307 Interchange. He said in compliance with that
requirement, the owners representatives met with County representatives and discussed the issue of the exit and
the interchange. During one of the subsequent meetings, the possibility of building attached town home units and
adding a commercial component to the Southern Hills property in exchange for dedicating the right-of-way for the
future Warrior Drive Extended was discussed.
Mr. Mark Dick, a principal at William H. Gordon Associates and a landscape architect, said this
project was an opportunity to review a previously -approved plan and attempt to develop something better. The
opportunity was to take a project consisting of 250 single-family homes and to accommodate a primary goal of
the County to extend Warr] or Drive. Mr. Dick said that when a major road, like Warrior Drive, is planned through
a subdivision, careful thought must be given to planning the adjacent uses. He said the layout resulted ]n a mixed-
use development, with the commercial uses along the major corridor, and it allowed them to broaden the
demographics and integrate another housing type. He described the natural buffer between the single-family and
the townhouses, and a constructed and natural buffer between the townhouses and the commercial. Mr. Dick
calculated nine acres of developable commercial area, resulting ]n 118,000 square feet of commercial floor space.
Mr. Dick said the developer would agree to perform a revised TIA as part of the development of the first section
of the commercial propert3•, so the impacts associated with the commercial use are known and quantified.
Mr. Dick said they will be constructing the internal streets to VDOT's structural and horizontal
geometric standards, but not the vertical geometric standards. He said the challenge with VDOT streets within a
townhouse subdivision is that you can not front townhouses on the streets; which means no garage access to the
townhouse and no parking along VDOT streets.
Regarding a question from Commissioner Oates about whether the private streets layout would
accommodate school bus pick-up, Mr. Dick replied that school buses would be able to get back to the cul-de-sacs
within the town home section and turn around; he said there were also a number of locations within the
subdivision that would work for pickup. Commissioner Oates wanted the applicant to contact VDOT before the
request went forward to the Board of Supervisors; he said if the turning radius was any tighter and if there was
parking on interior streets, VDOT may prefer the subdivision have one or two pickup points. Commissioner
Thomas suggested that the applicant also check with Fire and Rescue, because if there was any question about the
interior roads being unable to accommodate school buses, then there will also be problems with fire trucks
because they were larger than school buses.
Chairman Wilmot next called for public comments on both the rezoning and the master
development plan. The following person came forward to speak:
Mr. Gary Scothorn, an adjoining property owner to the east, stated that three years ago when this
project was initially approved, the adjoining residents did not want townhouses. Mr. Scothom said the roads will
not handle all of the traffic generated by the addition of townhouses. He believed that if the County needed the
road, there were other ways of getting it.
No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the
hearing.
Frederick County Planning C"nimission
Minutes of January 17, 2007
Page 1958
Mr. Douglas Flemming returned to the podium and responding to the citizen comment, he stated
that the town homes built by Arcadia are quite beautiful and will be high quality. Mr. Flemming explained to the
Commission that when Arcadia engineered and constructed frontage improvements for Phase One, along Town
Run Lane, they also constructed improvements for portions of Phases Two and Three; they also blasted and
installed sanitary and storm sewer and water; and they constructed the entire pump station. He commented that
all of this construction had been paid for in advance. Mr. Flemming said that if this new plan is approved, a
portion of these improvements are absolutely of no use to them; they will have to discard what they have done and
redo portions again.
Mr. Dick said they were willing to agree to the Commission's recommendation to establish a
phasing plan with regards to the commercial development and they would be willing to state that no more than
25% of the commercial area will be developed until Warrior Drive is constructed. Commissioner Light thought
phasing should be based on trip generation with the TIA study because the surrounding areas are developing
concurrently; he said the Route 277 corridor overall is completely over -loaded and currently operating under LOS.
Mr. Dick said the commercial development was a long ways out; he said they don't know at this point what the
uses will be, whether it will be office uses or retail uses. After Warrior Drive is close to construction, they will
have a good idea about what the market forces are and what kind of commercial development they want to do.
Mr. Dick believed that doing the TIA at the time of the first phase of the commercial and by limiting the
commercial to 25% until Warrior Drive is constructed, the County is well protected and it allows Arcadia to
formulate some good plans for uses on the property.
Commissioners asked the applicant about the possibility of incorporating an annualized phasing
program for the residential portion dealing with building permits or certificates of occupancy.
Commissioner Unger was not satisfied with the proffers that had been offered with the
application; nor was he convinced that this portion of Warrior Drive would benefit traffic movement.
Chairman Wilmot asked the Planning Director, Mr. Lawrence, if the location of Warrior Drive
been identified. Mr. Lawrence replied that over the previous seven months, the County Planning Staff has been
working closely with the Town of Stephens City and VDOT on the best location for the relocated interstate
interchange and the location for Warrior Drive; he said its location can not be moved further north or south.
Due to the transportation concerns expressed by the Commission, Ms. Carla Koffey, Arcadia's
Director of Planning and Engineering, accepted a 10% construction limit on the commercial area until the
construction of Warrior Drive; in addition, she said they would limit the residential construction to no more than
75 building permits per year, cumulative. Ms. Koffey explained that their traffic is being directed out to Stickley
and Route 277 and significant transportation improvements proffered by the Racey tract are underway, which
include right and left turn lanes off of Stickley Drive, turn lanes off of Route 277, and a traffic signal, which they
contributed to in the amount of $100,000.
Although the transportation issues in this area remained a concern for the Commission, most of
the members agreed that acquiring the right-of-way for Warrior Drive; along with the additional stipulations
offered by the applicant, made this a better plan than what was previously approved.
Commissioner Thomas made a motion for a recommendation of approval of Rezoning #22-06
with the followirm stipulations, based on the applicant's offered proffers: 1) no more than ten percent of the
commercial property be developed before Warrior Drive is constructed; and, 2) the phasing plan for the
development of the residential will be no more than 75 units per year, which will be cumulative through the
development of the residential property. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ours and was passed by a
majority vote:
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of January 17, 2007
Page 1959
am
BE IT RESOLVED, THAT by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby
recommend approval of Rezoning 922-06 for Southern Hills, submitted by William H. Gordon Associates,
to rezone 15.53916 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (Business General) District
and 90 acres from RP (Residential Performance) to RP (Residential Performance) for residential and
commercial uses with proffers and the following stipulations offered by the applicant: 1) no more than ten
percent of the commercial property to be developed before Warrior Drive is constructed; and, 2) the
phasing plan for the development of the residential will be no more than 75 units per year cumulative
through the development of the residential property.
The majority vote was as follows:
YES (TO REC. APPROVAL): Oates, Light, Thomas, Ours, Kriz, Triplett, Kerr, Mohn, Wilmot
NO: Unger, Watt
ABSTAIN: Manuel
(Note: Commissioner Morris was absent from the meeting.)
Upon motion made by Commissioner Ours and seconded by Commissioner Thomas,
BE IT RESOLVED, THAT by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby
grant a waiver of Section 144-24C(2)b of the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance to implement the
proposed layout for the townhouse portion of the Southern Hills project and will allow units to be located
more than 500 feet from a state -maintained road, but not more than 800 feet. The majority vote was as
follows:
YES (TO REC. APPROVAL): Oates, Light, Thomas, Ours, Kriz, Triplett, Kerr, Mohn, Wilmot
NO • Unger, Watt
ABSTAIN• Manuel
(Note: Commissioner Morris was absent from the meeting.)
Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Ours,
BE IT RESOLVED, THA'T by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby
recommend approval of Master Development Plan #16-06 for Southern Hills, submitted by William H.
Gordon, Associates, for tt-e development of 88 single-family detached and 232 single-family attached
residential uses and futures commercial uses according to the proffers approved with Rezoning #22-06.
Frederick County Planning Co emission
Minutes of January 17, 2007
Page 1960
The majority vote as follows:
YES (TO REC. APPROVAL): Oates, Light, Thomas, Ours, Kriz, Triplett, Kerr, Mohn, Wilmot
NO: Unger, Watt
ABSTAIN: Manuel
(Note: Commissioner Moms was absent from the meeting.)
PUBLIC MEETING
Conditional Use Permit #09-06 of Joyce Myers for a kennel at 625 Town Run Lane (Rt. 1012). The
property is identified with P.I.N. 85-A-137 in the Opequon Magisterial District.
Action — Recommended Denial
Planner Kevin T. Henry reported that the proposed conditional use permit (CUP) was presented
as a public hearing item on November 15, 2006 and was tabled to allow the applicant time to provide solutions to
the conditions that were challenging to meet, given the status of the property at the time. Mr. Henry briefly
reviewed the outstanding issues that were raised at the November 15 meeting. He said concern was raised about
outdoor kennels on this property and members of the Commission believed the construction of a facility with
inside kennels would be more appropriate. A second issue was the number of dogs in relation to the size of the
parcel and the minimum amount of distance between this property and the adjoining RP -zoned development to the
north. Mr. Henry said that a site visit by the staff confirmed the applicant had not addressed these concerns since
the previous meeting and has not contacted the staff to assist in understanding the conditions. He said the
applicant has been in violation of the ordinance since June 9, 2006.
Mr. Henry said this violation was before the General District Court, but was extended on several
occasions to allow time for legislative action to take place on the CUP. Mr. Henry presented a copy of a letter
from the applicant, dated January 12, 2007, requesting that this item be tabled for this evening's meeting. A
second letter, dated January 17, 2006, makes reference to a February 27, 2007 court hearing, which would follow
legislative action by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting scheduled for February 14, 2007.
Mr. Henry stated that it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to make a decision
on this application to avoid a repetitive cycle between the court system and the County's legislative bodies. Mr.
Henry next read a list of recommended conditions, should the Commission find the use to be appropriate.
Mr. Thomas (Ty) Moore Lawson, an attorney with Lawson and Silek, P.L.C., was representing
the property owner and applicant, Ms. Joyce E. Myers. Mr. Lawson said they attended the court hearing on
December 5, 2006, which turned out to be a preliminary hearing and the judge set a court date of February 27,
2007. Mr. Lawson explained that they asked the court for an earlier hearing date to deal with the legal issues,
particularly with the definition of a kennel; he explained that the ordinance states that a kennel operation is for
compensation and Ms. Myers is purely charitable and has been recognized by the IRS as such. Mr. Lawson said
the judge did not instruct him or the County to resolve this legislatively before coming back; in fact, the judge
understands that the applicant is trying to resolve the issue of whether or not they meet the definition of a kennel.
Mr. Lawson added that Ms. Myers has voluntarily removed some of the structures on her property used to house
animals and she has also reduced the number of animals. Mr. Lawson requested that this application be tabled in
Frederick County Planning Commission n n n Page 1961
Minutes of January 17, 2007 I U I � ,
-10—
order for the court trial and hearing to take place.
Commissioner Oates asked Mr. Lawson if he had considered taking this through the Board of
Zoning Appeals process, since it deals with the zoning ordinance. Mr. Lawson replied that the County chose to
charge Ms. Myers criminally; therefore, they were in a criminal proceeding and there is no avenue to this matter to
the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Commissioner members asked to hear comments from their legal counsel. Mr. Lawrence
Ambrogi, legal counsel for the Planning Conunission, agreed that it may be out of the County's jurisdiction to
deal with this application until a resolution takes place in the criminal court. Mr. Ambrogi said that if there were
a conviction in the general district court, the parties have a right to appeal it to the circuit court. He added that
since the Planning Commission acts in an advisory capacity to the Board of Supervisors, he did not foresee a
problem with the Commission acting on the CUP.
Chairman Wilmot called for public comments and the following person came forward to speak:
Mr. Douglas Flemming, attorney on behalf of the owners of the Southern Hills property, the
adjoining property to the north, said the owners are concerned about the location for this type of use. He said the
kennel will abut the first four houses that will be built and will present a difficult situation for perspective
purchasers of the planned community. Mr. Flemming said they believed Ms. Myers intentions are laudable,
however, they do not think this is the proper location for this type of operation. Mr. Flemming said that they
have offered to work with Mr. Lawson to try to find another location for Ms. Myers that would be more suitable.
Mr. Flemming said they own other properties in the county that could be made available for Ms. Myers; he said
the owners are hopeful this is something they can continue to talk about.
No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the
meeting.
Members of the Commission applauded the intentions of Ms. Myers for what she was attempting
to do; however, some members believed the location of the facility was not appropriate. Other Commission
members believed this use could work at this location, if the applicant met all of the recommended conditions.
They believed the County had an avenue to pursue, if noise from barking dogs created a nuisance.
A motion Nvas made by Commissioner Ours and seconded by Commissioner Thomas to
recommend denial of CUP #09-06 of Joyce Myers for a proposed kennel. This motion passed by a majority vote.
BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend denial of
Conditional Use Permit 409-06 of Joyce Myers for a kennel at 625 Town Run Lane (Rt. 1012), by the following
majority vote:
YES (TO DENY): Mohn„ Kerr, Triplett, Kriz, Ours, Thomas, Light, Manuel, Watt, Unger, Wilmot
NO: Oates
(Note: Commissioner Morris was absent from the meeting.)
Frederick County Planning Coriarnission
Minutes of January 17, 2007
Page 1962
Mo
A request submitted by Dewberry for a landscape buffer waiver request for Master Development Plan
904-06 of Brookland Manor. This request is for a waiver of Article IV, Supplementary Use Regulations,
Section 165-37C(3), Interior Residential Screening, and Section 165-37B(1), Landscape Screening of
Chapter 165, the Zoning Ordinance. The properties are located on Brookland Lane, off Valley Mill Road.
The are identified by P.I.N.s 54-2-5 and 54-2-6 in the Red Bud Magisterial District.
Action — Approved
Mr. Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director, reported that Master Development Plan (MDP) 904-06
for Brookland Manor was approved by the Board of Supervisors on July 26, 2006. This project is for 68
townhouses and one historical residential out -lot, on 8.83 acres at the southern terminus of Brookland Lane. Mr.
Lawrence stated that as this project has moved through the development stages, it was discovered that two ofthe
buffers required by ordinance present a challenge to install and, more importantly, staff is not sure they will
provide a necessary benefit.
Pointing out the vicinity of the barns, the old historic house, and the proposed townhouses, Mr.
Lawrence said the ordinance requires a residential separation buffer to soften and lessen the impact of the
proposed townhouses on the adjacent single-family homes. He stated that the single-family homes sit on a bluff
approximately 70 feet above the future townhouses and he noted the location of an adjacent floodplain. Mr.
Lawrence said that not only would it be a challenge to plant the required buffer in the floodplain, it would also be
difficult because of the terrain. In addition, he said it did not seem logical to plant the trees lower than the
townhouses, especially when the townhouses are 70 feet lower than the adjacent single-family.
Mr. Lawrence said that instead of installing the full residential separation buffer, the applicant is
proposing to provide a trail system in the floodplain area before the terrain becomes a challenge and to include
some landscaping. Although it will not meet the screening requirement, he said it would present an attractive
setting with flowering trees and landscaping and will not impede the flow of the water. The first request,
therefore, is for the allowance of the modification of the residential separation buffer to provide for the trail
system and ornamental landscaping, in lieu of standard landscaping.
Moving to the second request involving the historic dwelling, Mr. Lawrence stated that through
the approved MDP, a parcel will be created around the single-family dwelling with townhouses on the balance of
the property. He said the County ordinance requires an interior separation buffer, which is a ten -foot landscaped
screen surrounding the single-family dwelling and requires a double row of evergreen trees. Mr. Lawrence
explained that if a double row of trees is placed around the historic house, the charm of the historic structure will
have been compromised and hidden behind rows of pine trees. He said the applicant has proposed to continue the
pine trees on the north side and on the southeast side, but where the historic house fronts on the road system, they
would like to install a picket fence and some flowering trees. Mr. Lawrence believed this would soften the
appearance of the location of the house and preserve its history.
Mr. Lawrence said that in exchange for removing some of the required landscaping on the
internal buffer, as well as the landscaping required on the residential separation buffer to the west, the applicant is
proposing to establish Homeowners Association (HOA) seed money. He explained the applicant would take the
money that would have been put into landscaping and place it into the HOA seed fund, so when the HOA is
officially turned over to the homeowners, the homeowners will have funds to maintain their landscaping or
parking areas, etc. Mr. Lawrence said the staff believes this is a fair compromise.
Frederick County Planning Commission flj
j 1 nA
�J�Page 1963
Minutes of January 17, 2007 IIfl],
-12-
Commssion members asked who would own the historic house. Mr. Lawrence said the historic
house will be sold as a single-family residence.
Mr. David Frank with Dewberry commented that the historic house has presented a unique
opportunity for this project. In the spirit of saving the historic house, he believed they've done a good job at
looking at the overall aesthetics and the value of the community and, in addition, making sure those values were
not lost in the development scheme.
Chairman Wilmot called for public comments; however, no one came forward to speak.
Commissioner Kerr made a motion to approve the waiver request for landscape screening and
interior residential screening. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Mohn and unanimously passed.
BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve a
request submitted by Dewberry for a landscape buffer waiver request for Master Development Plan #04-06 of
Brookland Manor. This request is for a waiver of Article W, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165-
37C(3), Interior Residential Screening, and Section 165-37B(1), Landscape Screening of Chapter 165, the Zoning
Ordinance.
OTHER
Planning Commission Liaison to the City of Winchester Planning Commission
Chairman Wilmot circulated a sheet with meeting dates for the City of Winchester Planning
Commission. Chairman Wilmot requested that Planning Commissioners sign up for attendance at one of the
meetings so that the liaison duties to the Winchester Planning Commission could be shared.
ADDointments to Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPPS):
Chairman Wilmot appointed Commissioners Morris, Oates, Mohn, Kriz, Light, and Wilmot to
the CPPS. Other people working on the CPPS will be Ms. Marjorie Copenhaver, Ms. Sue Teal, Mr. Jay Banks,
Mr. J.P. Carr, Ms. Diane Kerns, Mr. James W. Golladay, Jr.; Mr. H. Wellington Jones; and Mr. Al Orndorff.
Appointments to Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS):
Chairman Wilmot appointed Commissioners Oates, Unger, Kerr, Watt, Manuel, Triplett, and
Thomas to the DRRS. Other people working on the DRRS will be Mr. Claus Bader; Mr. Whitney Wagner; and
Mr. Kevin Kenney.
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of January 17, 2007
Page 196/
-13 -
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 9:07 p.m. by a unanimous
vote_
Respectfully submitted,
June M. Wilmot, Chairman
Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of January 17, 2007
Page 1965
STAFF APPLICATION BRIEFING MINUTES
OF THE
WILLOW RUN REZONING
Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in
Winchester, Virginia on December 19, 2006,
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PRESENT: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman; Gary W. Dove, Gainesboro District;
Gene E. Fisher, Shawnee District; Charles S. DeHaven, Jr,, Stonewall District; and Philip A. Lemieux, Red Bud
District.
PLANNING COMMISSION PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Shawnee District; Robert A. Morris,
Shawnee District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Gregory S. Kerr,
Red Bud District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Gary R Oates, Stonewall District; John H. Light,
Stonewall District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; and H. Paige Manuel, Member -At -Large,
STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director; Susan
K. Eddy, Senior Planner; and Candice E. Perkins, Planner 11.
APPLICANTS PRESENT: Ritchie Wilkins, John Conrad, Evan Wyatt, and Mike Perry
CALL TO ORDER
Planning Commission Chairman, June Wilmot, called the briefing to order at 12:00 p.m.
Chairman Wilmot welcomed all who attended, which included members of the Planning Commission, the Board
of Supervisors, and the Planning Department staff. Chairman Wilmot announced that the purpose of this briefing
was to receive an informal, but detailed, briefing from the staff on the Willow Run rezoning application which had
recently been re -submitted to the Planning Department. Chairman Wilmot announced that no actions will be
taken at this briefing. A public hearing will take place, as required by State and County Codes, during a future
Planning Commission meeting.
STAFF PRESENTATION
Senior Planner, Susan K. Eddy, informally presented Rezoning Application 416-05 of Willow
Run to the group present, as follows: The applicant is requesting the rezoning of 359.97 acres from RP
(Residential Performance) to R4 (Residential Planned Community) for residential use (up to 1,390 units) and
commercial use with proffers. The applicant's proffers include a MDP (master development plan), alternate
design standards and housing types, a proffered matrix, and a new Route 3 7 interchange. The residential portion
will have single-family detached, townhouses, small -lot, and multi -family housing types. Ms. Eddy showed slides
of the proposed housing layouts. The commercial area will consist of 32.4 acres, however, more acreage is
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of December 19, 2006Pjl
Page 1928
sAn
�
-2 -
planned after Merriman's Lane is realigned and five acres less is planned, if an aquatic center is constructed. A
slide was shown indicating the commercial portion. Highlights of the transportation discussion included a review
of the extension of Jubal Early Drive; the Route 37 interchange ramps; the realignment of Merrimans Lane; and
the realignment of Meadow Branch Avenue.
Proposed phasing of the development was described. The Jubal Early Phasing consisted of City
to second intersection by the 300'b permit; second intersection to first commercial intersection by the 450"' permit;
first commercial intersection to ramps by the 600"' permit; and four new ramps by the 600"' permit. Other
proposed road phasing included the realignment of Meadow Branch Avenue by the 300"' permit; the realignment
of Mernmans Lane by the 600"' permit; the construction of Birchmont Drive, between Cedar Creek Grade and
Jubal Early Drive, by the 200' permit; and turn lanes at Birchmond Drive/Cedar Creek Grade by the 200" permit.
Proposed signalization was designated for Jubal Early and Meadow Branch Avenue, Jubal Early and Merriman
Lane, and Cedar Creek Grade and Birchmont Drive.
A proposed school site had not been included. However, the possibility of an aquatic center on
site was raised, along with continuation of the green circle. Other recreational aspects of the development
proposed a general community center proffered by the 600"' permit; an age -restricted community center
designated by the 60''' permit; a homeowners association pool, if there is no aquatic center; and internal trails were
proposed.
Monetary proffers were based on the old proffer model and included, $9,078 per non -age -
restricted unit; $1,000 per non -age -restricted unit for school site acquisition; $2,000 per age -restricted unit; an
extra $50,000, and $100 per unit, for fire and rescue; and $100,000 to the City for road improvements.
Members of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors discussed the proposal.
Numerous questions were raised and comments were made as follows:
• The aquatic center should not count towards the proffered minimum commercial square footage.
• What is the catalyst to decide if the aquatic center should go on this property?
• Jubal Early Drive and the Route 37 interchange should be bonded and dedicated from the onset of
development to avoid issues similar to those experienced with the Channing development.
• Has the right-of-way for the southwest corer of the Route 37 interchange been secured to assure the
proffered improvernents will occur?
• Who will maintain the proposed alleys?
• Staff should get a legal opinion on the proffered road system to avoid a repeat of Channing Drive.
• The County should plan for failure and presume that the development will cease at 599 building permits.
How is the road system guaranteed?
• Will there be numerous HOAs, or a single one for the entire development? Or both?
• The recreation center should be bonded in advance to guarantee its conformance with the proffers.
Frederick County Planning Coanmission
Minutes of December 19, 2006
Page 1929
-3 -
The briefing came to a conclusion after everyone had an opportunity to raise questions and make
comments. Those in attendance believed they had gained a better understanding of the proposed application. No
action was required or made.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to discuss, the briefing adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
June M. Wilmot, Chairman
Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1930
Minutes of December 19, 2006
•
•
J
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #02-07
KEITH ROGERS AND SANDRA ROGERS
w Staff Report for the Planning Commission
.,3 Prepared: February 16, 2007
Staff Contact: Kevin T. Henry, Planning Technician
This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the
Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this
request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter.
Reviewed Action
Planning Commission: 03/07/07 Pending
Board of Supervisors: 03/28/07 Pending
LOCATION: This subject property is located at 2204 Fairfax Pike (Route 277).
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 87-A-89
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE:
North: RA (Rural Areas)
South: Clarke County
East: Clarke County
West: RA (Rural Areas)
Zoned: RA (Rural Areas)
Land Use: Residential
Land Use: Vacant
Land Use: Agricultural
Land Use: Agricultural
Land Use: Commercial
PROPOSED USE: Public garage without bodywork
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The application for a Conditional Use Permit for this property
appears to have a measurable impact on Route 277, the VDOT facility which would provide access
to the property. Prior to operation of the business, a commercial entrance must be constructed to our
standards to allow for safe egress and ingress of the property. Any work performed on the State's
right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. The permit is issued by this office and
requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage.
CUP #02-07, Keith Rogers and Sandra Rogers
February 16, 2007
Page 2
Fire Marshal: Plans approved as submitted.
Inspections Department: Building shall comply with The Virginia Uniform Statewide Building
Code and Section 311, S (Storage) of the International Building Code. Other Code that applies is
CABO Al 17.1-03 Usable and Accessible Buildings and Facilities. Sign shall be permitted as Utility
use group and structural plan with foundation detail is required for review. Note the requirements in
the International Plumbing Code for a grease oil interceptor to be installed in the pipe system if floor
drains are installed. HC parking and building access shall be provided to the new structure.
Winchester -Frederick County Health Department: Health Department has no objection as long
as only residents of property use bathroom and no customer usage.
Planning & Zoning: Public garages without auto body repair are permitted in the RA (Rural Areas)
Zoning District with an approved conditional use permit, provided that all repair work takes place
entirely within an enclosed structure and all exterior storage ofparts and equipment is fully screened
from adjoining properties. There will be no vehicle sales, nor unrelated repair sales, allowed with
this permit.
This application was originally delayed due to entrance way issues. The applicant could not meet
driveway spacing requirements given the road frontage of the property. Planning staff recommended
the use of an inter -parcel connection through the adjoining parcel. The adjoining parcel to the west
(T.M. 87-A-90) contains an existing commercial entrance, used for a farm market. Within the
application is a letter from Mr. McDonald (property owner to the west), granting permission to the
applicant to use the existing commercial entrance. There is an existing dwelling on the applicant's
property. The existing residential entrance will be closed off, via curb, prior to any business
activities taking place on site.
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. The applicant is proposing to
build a 60'x30' (1800 sq. ft.) garage with a 30'x40' (1200 sq. ft.) screened parking area behind the
garage. The applicant has requested a 32 sq. ft. sign, but staff has suggested reducing the square
footage to 25 sq. ft. to remain consistent with previous permits.
It is a requirement of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance within Section 165-47 that a RA
(Rural Areas) Zoning District property is allowed up to five (5) inoperable motor vehicles, if they are
properly screened. In accordance with Section 165-51 V, all repair work shall take place entirely
within an enclosed structure. Also within this provision, storage of parts and equipment shall be
screened by an opaque fence.
During an on-site inspection of the property, the applicant seemed satisfied of the conditions staff
had proposed. Given the following conditions and willingness of the applicant to implement the
CUP 90207, Keith Rogers and Sandra Rogers
February 16, 2007
Page 3
conditions, staff believes that the proposed use could operate on the subject property without
significant impact on the surrounding community.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 03/07/07 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
Should the Planning Commission find this use appropriate, Staff would recommend the following
conditions:
I . All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times.
2. 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.
3. 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 87-A-89.
4. The existing residential driveway accessing from Fairfax Pike will be removed via curb,
prior to business activities.
5. 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 four (4) vehicles at a time, including
storage.
7. 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.
8. The auto repair business is permitted a maximum of four (4) employees.
9. All repair activities shall occur entirely within an enclosed structure which shall not
exceed 1,800 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, is not permitted.
12. Any expansion or change of use shall require a new Conditional Use Permit.
Following the requisite public hearing, it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to
offer a recommendation concerning this application to the Board of Supervisors.
f
t
1
GIBSON t
87 3 B f
95.57 ac.
a f
a 1
t 1
Y b
jj[ r
i
a
ROBERTSON p'
87 A 93 77
3.14 ac.
f A#
4�
Clarke
MCDONALD 7 County, VA
87 A 90 w m
baa co
ROBERTSON
87 A 92 -
11.25 ac.
c
{{
f
t
F' r
f
r'
Frederick d':%nntu VA
Conditional Use Permit
CUP #02-07
Application
Keith & Sandra
Rogers
Parcel ID:
87-A-89
Location in the County
Map Features
a CUP0207_KeithSandraRogers Zoning
Q Application
B1 (Business, Neighborhood District)
LS Lakes/Ponds
B2 (Business, General District)
^- Streams
c. B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District)
® Buildings
aU EM (Extractive Manufacturing District)
'U Streets
• HE (Higher Education District)
Mt (Industrial, Light District)
-� M2 (Industrial, General District)
• MH1(Mobile Home Community District)
MS (Medical Support District)
�. R4 (Residential, Planned Community District)
OW R5 (Residential Recreational Community Distri
RAZ (Rural Area Zone)
RP (Residential. Performance District)
-j-� Frederick -County
Clarke
County, VA
Location in Surrounding Area
�� 4lCK •CDG
�. 0 125 250 Q ,t
P.14fk
Q�
GIBBONON S ,
87 3 A
522
33.7 ac. Q
t`
i
GIBSON
0
87 3 B r
95.57 ac. �\ r
VIP
�7 j Clarke
County, VA
R0& O
8i F?Ts
3 Qa 0H
n
oor
Y�
T
d
7.
t
1'
f
P
i
� r
F
Frederick
%Count , ® A
Conditional Use Permit
CUP # 02 - 07
�\
Appli-kation
Keith & Sandra
Rogers
Parcel ID:
87-A-89
Location in tha County
Map Features
L= CUP0207_KeithSandraRogers Zoning
Application
B1 (Business, Neighborhood District)
aS Lakes/Ponds
B2 (Business, General District)
«- Streams
B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District)
Ob Buildings
40 EM (Extractive Manufacturing District)
$ Streets
• HE (Higher Education District)
• M1 (Industrial, Light District)
- M2 (Industrial, General District)
�w MH1(Mobile Home Community District)
40 MS (Medical Support District)
•- R4 (Residential, Planned Community District)
R5 (Residential Recreational Community Distri )
RAZ (Rural Area Zone)
RP (Residential Performance District)
Frederick -County
Clarke
County,VA
G� ✓ 41CK CDG
0 125 250 weet '4
Frederick C=ol==t,y, VA
Conditional Use Permit
Location in the County
CUP #02-07
Application
Keith & Sandra
Rogers
Parcel ID:
87-A-89
Map Features
C2 CUP0207_KeithSandraRcgers
Zoning
0 Application
_ 61 (Business, Neighborhood District)
0 Lakes/Ponds
- B2 (Business, General District)
r-- Streams
B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District)
'% .Streets
EM (Extractive Manufacturing District)
HE (Higher Education District)
spa M1 (Industrial, Light District)
. • M2 (Industrial, General District)
40 MH1 (Mobile Home Community District)
f MS (Medical Support District)
4 R4 (Residential, Planned Community District)
iD R5 (Residential Recreational Community Dist
RAZ (Rural Area Zone)
RP (Residential Performance District)
Clarke
County, VA
Location in Surrounding Area
L
LJ'
_I' O�CK COG
=i 0 i5 150
'DFDeet
;Submittal Deadline 'P Iq 0�
FEB'P/C Meeting
'BOS Meeting a o
APPLICATION 'FOR'CONDITFONAL USE PERMIT
FREDERICR---COUNTYf, VIRGINIA
1. AL1-licant (The applicant if the owner other)
NAME:
ADDRESS:
TELEPHONEe.,"�
2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties in interest of
the property:
3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and
include the route number of your road or street)
� <,,—Q ,I' eE� .��e&- z r'1 a e-
4 . The property has a road frontage of�, �,J feet and a
depth of�5�. feet and consists of J,�,-���, acres.
(Please be exact)
5. The property is owned by f, 7 c� �,) j �S6,S a`�S
evidenced by deed from�qcrecorded
(previous owner)
in deed book no. a % on page , as recorded in the
records of the Clerk of the tifituit Court, County of
Frederick.
6. Tax(Parcel)Identification
Magisterial District
Current Zoning f ?
7. Adjoining Property:
USE
North 9,�Q Cis
East CSL j
South i -
Nest 1
(I. D.) No..��1...--
ZONING
A
K4K r la 1-&� ,'vim !
8. The type of use proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept.
before completing)
/0"
9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be
(constructed :'d X r� c� c4/�,c, -, f�Ili
�,✓IDiU-ed""I / a-GC.J�G�i'�i F�7(lJ' /�f'7Ci7C�7� /Yf
,
10. The following are all of the individuals, firms, or
corporations owning property adjacent to both sides and rear
and in front of (across street from) the property where the
requested use will be conducted. (Continue on back if
necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this
application:
NAME �4,P./ 6 A, ,0,,0 Q,,�XDDRESS ,<%S�C�
PROPERTY ID#
NAME <.__ _,42 o 44 ADDRESS, %/A/�� '�
PROPERTY ID# ;� %•��� s,g5 7S� �:
NAME
PROPERTY ID#
NAME
PROPERTY ID#
NAME
PROPERTY ID#
NAME
PROPERTY ID#
NAME
PROPERTY ID#
NA' M
PROPERTY ID#
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
AID, DRiSS
11. Please use this page for your sketch of the -property. Show
proposed and/or existing structures on the property, including
measurements to all property lines.
12 . Additional comments, if any: ��"c��os pc/ Z e kD /aid Tlv`-e-
re,�Da.ir /e ,&C?1n , o� &,1�10%Es
%/a /-d G2 7`X �i� y7 /fir i11 ��Slr�esS
I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application
and petition the governing body of Frederick County, Virginia to
allow the use described in this application. I understand that the
sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed
at the front property line at least seven (7) days prior to the
first public hearing and maintained so as to be visible until after
the Board of Supervisors' public hearing. Your application for a
Conditional Use Permit authorizes any member of the Frederick
County Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors or Planning and
Development Department to inspect your property where the proposed
use will be conducted.
Signature of Applicant
Signature of Owner
Owners' Mailing Address
Owners' Telephone No.
TO BE COMPLETED BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
USE CODE:
RENEWAL DATE:
I understand that Keith and Sandra Rogers are requesting a conditional use
permit for an automotive repair garage at their property located at 2204 Fairfax
Pike, White Post. Frederick County has indicated to Keith that he use the
commercial entrance located on our adjoining property at 2180 Fairfax Pike. We
consent to the use of this commercial entrance for access to the Rogers'
property at 2204 Fairfax Pike.
Gary McDonald
,&I"', X 0",-4 Z-/,/
Sharon McDonald
i
FS
o -air, r eat rS(/B
Z N RFsacn�vJ
Ifo. .�4 4a%
c, I� stgso 1/3 Q
If
nl 50, BR
m I PIN 87—A -89
I 1.0552 ACRES
(ADJUSTED AREA)
0.6433 ACRES o
(OWGINAL AREA)
9 F �s o; I I ZONED: RA USE RESIDENTIAL
I
F--
I
Qm N
� o
�
N CONC. PAD
o 3 I Z IM,H PDOL
o
T a m
C3 (n 13:: o �I 29.3' �=i =:)
n
ONESTORY
I zCr
N 1 RICK DWELLING B
69.5 2204
qj W
I
N fa
1 I
N
d'
1
I m I1
1
1 1 m
I_1
LEGEND
IRF - IRON ROD FOUND I ISI
CMF - CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND Ia;
IRS - IRON ROD SET TELEPHONE I a
BRL - BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE RISER B0�(
FH - FIRE HYDRANT U
WS - WATER VALVES I N
¢�bsSo,
—x-- FENCE UNE SFG+
rd - WOOD UTILITY POLES#1
- OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES Ov%G� 7639,
I%L
GRAPHIC SCALE 2j>
,00o so ,00 soo
NOTES 1 inch >= 100 ft.
1. NO 77TLE REPORT FURN/SHED.
2. PROPERTY IDEN 77FICA 77ON NO. 27—A-12, 87—A-90 & 90A
J. EASEMENTS OTHER THAN SHOWN MAY EXIST.
4. THE BOUNDARY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THIS PLAT IS BASED ON AN
ACTUAL FIELD RUN SURVEY
MADE ON MA Y 25, 2004.
BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT
TH OF y
1
BETWEEN THE LANDS OF
�
SAD/E U BENTON
AND
KEITH F. ROGERS & SANDRA S. ROGERS
o as ge
OPEQUON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT — FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
o. QOlW7
GREENWA Y AAA ;'S7ERIAL DIS7PWCT — CLARKE CQUN. TY, VIRGINIA
1 t . �` T 4 I
JUNE 7, 2004
_yND SU
ID 6174BLA2 SHEET 2 OF 2
DAF
EET
MARSH & LEGGE 560 NORTH LDUDOUN� HESTER VIRGIN 522601
PHONE
Land Surveyors, P. L.C. 5403 667-0469
'= w �bbtlouthern
SAN - 'G�/eapt
��*o �-
36 I I ® 64H Uinose r = 340
�] o La
� SITE 3'
�Y
,
4E
I
636
m �
mclm Y IAP /� Kopf
SCALE.1"-2000' m 7
A ® 0
APPROVED BY
SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATOR DA TF
OWNER'S CERTIFICATE
THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING BOUNDARY LINE ADJU57M£NT OF THE LANDS OF SADIE M. BENTON,
TRUSTEE OF THE SADIE M. BENTON 7RUST AGREEMENT [PIN 27—A-121 AND THE LAND OF KE17H F.
ROGERS AND SANDRA S. ROGERS [PIN 87—A-891 AS APPEARS /N THE ACCOMPANYING PLAT, IS WITH
THE FREE CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DESIRES OF THE UNDERSIGNED OWNERS,
l PROP.R/ETOR-S AND 7RUS7FES, IF ANY.
SANDRA--S, ROGER.-,
NOTARY PUBLIC
STA 7F OF `
9-TY/COUNTY C rec�eY r c� b I S - Zi �i BY SADIE M.
THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME ON
(DATE)
XPIRES -
BENTON. o, MY COMMISSION EXPIRES-2--
IOTARY PUBLIC)
STATE OF
CITY/COUNTY
THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME ON BY KEITH F.
ROGERS AND SANDRA S. ROGERS (DA 7F)
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES
(NOTARY PUBLIC)
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES
(NOTARY PUBLIC)
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICA TE
l HEREBY CER77FY THAT 7HE LAND CONTAINED IN 77,1IS BOUNDARY UNE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE
]RUST AGREEMENT [PIN 27—A--12]
LAND OF SADIE M. BENTON, TRUS7£E OF THE SADIE M. BENTON
BY DEED DATED 9 MARCH 2004, AS RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 401 AT PAGE 453 AND 7HE LAND OF
KEITH F. ROGERS AND SANDRA S. ROGERS [PIN 87—A-891 BY DEED DATED 25 SEPTEMBER 2002, A5
NUMBER 020016779 IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
RECORDED AS INS7RUMENT
OF CLARKS COUNTY, VIRGINIA AND FREDERICK COUNTY, WRG/N1A.
BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT
OF
BETWEEN THE LANDS OF
Q
SADIE Y BENTON
AND
& SANDRA S. ROGERS
KEITH F. ROGERS
OPEOUON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT — FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
No 001 97
GREENWA Y MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT — CLARKE COUNTY, V/RG/NIA
JUNE 7, 2004
�RkD
sUBQ���4
ID 6174BLA2 SHEET 1 OF 2
OAF
-r MARSH & L5WINCHESTER, VIRGINIAS226%j-L
.vV
PHONE 540 667-0466
Land Surveyors, P.L.C. FAX 540
-� ) 667-0469
86
FREDERICK COUNTY
7S
�—
wn SHAWNEE DISTRICT SECTION.
OPFOUON DISTRICT
REVISED: 10/15/2003
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #01-07
SOVEREIGN VILLAGE - REVISED
Staff Report for the Planning Commission
Prepared: February 16, 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 Pending
Board of Supervisors: 03/28/07 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)
South: RP (Residential Performance)
RA (Rural Areas)
East: RP (Residential Performance)
West: RP (Residential Performance)
B2 (Business General)
Use:
Residential
Use:
Residential
Use:
Residential
Use:
Residential
Use: Residential/Vacant
Use: Vacant
PROPOSED USE: 216 Single Family Urban Detached units and 116 Multiplex Units (2.3 units
per acre density), and 12 acres of commercial use.
MDP #01-07, Sovereign Village - Revised
February 21, 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 #01-07, Sovereign Village - Revised
February 21, 2007
Page 3
Department of Parks and Recreation: Please fmd 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 Plex 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.
Planning & Zoning:
A) Master Development Plan Requirement
A master development plan is required prior to development of this property. Before a
master development plan can be approved, it must be reviewed by the Planning
Commission, Board of Supervisors and all relevant review agencies. Approval may only
be granted if the master 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.
MDP #01-07, Sovereign Village - Revised
February 21, 2007
Page 4
C) Site History
The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identified
the zoning for the acreage within the master development plan as A-2 (Agricultural
General) District. 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 #08-2000 which was for the entire
Channing Land Bay. The original MDP for the Channing Drive project included the
developments now 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 revisions for Sovereign Village shows the site as being
developed with 216 Single Family Urban Detached units and 116 Multiplex Units, and 12
acres of commercial land uses. This revised MDP introduces the multiplex housing type,
and two additional cul-de-sacs for single family detached urban dwellings.
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. 1-11
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 units per acre.
MDP #01-07, Sovereign Village - Revised
February 21, 2007
Page 5
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
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.
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.
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
NIDP #01-07, Sovereign Village - Revised
February 21, 2007
Page 6
community center is proffered to include a 3,000sf building, a pool and an outdoor multi-
purpose playing court.
Due to the lot size, the multiplex units are required to provide three recreational units per
30 dwellings. The development will consist of 116 multiplex units and therefore will
have to provide a minimum of 3.8 recreational units. As indicated in the table on sheet 3
of the MPD, the applicant is providing a total of 7.82 units for this area which will consist
of tot lots, park benches, a gazebo and a trail.
F) Outstanding Issues
The MDP for Sovereign Village needs to address the following issues:
• A detail for the trail within the multiplex area needs to be provided in the MDP.
• 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.
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.
lil�b I -R&
MDP #IM - 07
T% -re i g e ised_r, Lom"ap
MDP #Tl - 07
r
LEM
L)
ZolTrng Map
MDP #Vl - 07
�Z-
Lvwb. -I'm
Id
I -
OEM
! Lk i..,a� I F � --,T! .�D� ATrial Map 1111
OIL
I 4;A I mm �ww. amw L 14,61s, R"ov, -
t lax
h
14- wool' I
Frederick County, Virginia Master Development Plan Application Package
APPLICATION
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Department of Planning and Develops ieAst I k C► ly.
T
Date application rcceived 4, e� Applin. ation #
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
6. Total Acreage:
7.
8.
Route 657 (Senseny Road)
156.1 acres
Property Information
a) Property Identification Number (PIN):
U
) Current Zoning:
c) Present Use:
d) Proposed Uses:
e) Adjoining Property Information:
Property Identification Numbers
North See attached
South
East
West
fl Magisterial District:
65-A-39, 65 -A -39A
RP/B2
Vacant
RP/132
Single -Family, Multiplex, Commercial
Property Uses
Red Bud
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: J
Date: `I d 7