Loading...
PC 03-21-07 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia March 21, 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) February 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 MHI (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-167, 55 -A -167A, 55-A-168, 55 -A -174A, 55 -A -174B, and 55 -A -174D. Mr. Ruddy....................................................................................................................... (B) 6) Rezoning #02-07 of Eastgate Commercial, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, to rezone 10.65 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for commercial uses. The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive (Route 642), in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 87-A-34, 87 -A -34B, 87-A-35, 87-A-36, 87-A-37 and 76-A-53. Mrs. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (C) FILE COPY PUBLIC MEETING 7) Master Development Plan #02-07 for Tasker Woods, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, PC, for 136 single family detached units, 130 townhouse units and commercial uses. The properties are located north of Tasker Road (Route 642), east and south of Macedonia Church Road (Route 756) and west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522), and are identified with Property Identification Numbers 76 -A -48A and 76-A-49, in the Shawnee Magisterial District. This Master Development Plan also depicts the cul-de-sac of Macedonia Church Road where it meets White Oak Road (opposite Old Macedonia Church). Mrs. Perkins........................................................................................ 8) Waiver Request of Leslie Hicks and Teresa Hicks, submitted by Artz and Associates, PLC, for an exception of Article V Design Standards, §144-31 Rural Subdivisions, C (3) Minor rural subdivisions, of the Code of Frederick County, Chapter 144 Subdivision of Land, to enable family division of a parcel of land on a right-of-way less than 50 feet. Mr. Cheran....................................................................................................................... (E) 9) Waiver Request of Hupps Ridge, LLC, submitted by Painter -Lewis, PLC, for an exception of Article V Design Standards, §144-17 Streets, G (1) Cul-de-sac, of the Code of Frederick County, Chapter 144 Subdivision of Land, to allow cul-de-sac length of approximately 3,200 feet, 2,200 feet more than the allowed 1,000 feet. Mr. Cheran....................................................................................................................... (F) 10) Subdivision Request of David E. Whitacre, to allow subdivision of 1.28 acres into three single family detached traditional housing lots. The property is located at the corner of Queens Way (Route 740) and E. Macedonia Church Road (Route 756), and is identified by Property Identification Number 75-A-102 in the Opequon Magisterial District. Mr. Cheran...................................................................................... ...... (G) ........................... 11) Other MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on February 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; 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; Barbara Van Osten, Board of Supervisors Liaison; and Lawrence R Ambrogi, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: City of Winchester Liaison STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; John A. Bishop, Transportation Planner; Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Susan K. Eddy, Senior Planner; 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. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the Planning Commission adopted the agenda for this evening's meeting. MEETING MINUTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the minutes of December 6, 2006 were unanimously approved as presented. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1966 Minutes of February 7, 2007 -2 - COMMITTEE REPORTS Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) — 1/25/07 Mtg. Commissioner Unger reported that the DRRS re-elected officers, Mr. Roger Thomas as Chairman and Mr. Gregg Unger as Vice Chairman_ Commissioner Unger said the DRRS discussed their work priorities for 2007; there are about five to six different items the subcommittee is planning to prioritize and study. He said the sign ordinance is now re -written and will be forwarded to the full Commission soon. Transportation Committee —1/29/07 Mtg. Commissioner Kriz reported that the Transportation Committee discussed the Rural Roadways Ranking System and after additional modifications, it will be sent forward to the Board of Supervisors; a recommendation was sent forward to combine the Public -Private Transportation Act of 1995 Policy with the Public -Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 Policy; a report was received from the Metropolitan Planning Organization; articles of interest were distributed and discussed; and the paving of MacDonald Road was also 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. PUBLIC HEARING Rezoning Application #21-06 of Willow Run, including Master Development Plan #15-06 for Willow Run, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 359.97 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District, with proffers, for commercial land uses and up to 1,390 residential units. The properties are located east of Route 37 and Merriman's Lane (Route 621), north of Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622), and south and west of the City of Winchester. The properties are further identified with P.I.N.s 53-A-90, 53-A-91, 53-A-92, 53 -A - 92A, 53 -A -92B, 53-A-94, 53-3-A, and 63 -A -2A in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Action - Seven Items of Modification Recommended for Approval Action — Alternative Buffer and Screening Plans Recommended for Approval Action — Rezoning 421-06 and Master Development Plan #15-06 Recommended for Approval Frederick County Planning Commission Yage 196 Minutes of February 7, 2007 D 0 jl F T -3 - Commissioners Mohn and Unger abstained from all discussion and voting, due to a potential conflict of interest. Senior Planner, Susan K. Eddy, reported the background information for the Willow Run Rezoning and Master Development Plan (MDP) applications. Ms. Eddy noted that a staff application briefing for this rezoning was held on December 19, 2006 because of the complexity of the application. She noted that the site is within the boundaries of the Urban Development Area (UDA), the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), and the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan (WJELUP). She noted that the land uses within the application generally comply with the WJELUP. Beginning with the residential aspects of the site, Ms. Eddy stated that the applicant is seeking up to 1,390 residential units (3.9 units per acre) and she pointed out the areas on the plan designated for single-family detached units, single-family attached units (townhouses, duplexes), multi- family (apartments, condominiums), age -restricted, and commercial. A matrix depicting the minimum and maximum number of units for each housing type has been proffered. She said the applicant has introduced about nine new housing types with smaller lot sizes, shallower setbacks, and taller structures than those typically found within the RP District. Moving to the commercial and transportation portions of the site, Ms. Eddy pointed out two separate commercial areas proposed by the applicant and noted the floor space proffered. She said the applicant has proffered there will be no on-site parking in front of commercial buildings, to restrict the commercial building materials, and to restrict the size of signs. She said this application provides for the roads and alternative modes of transportation called for in the WJELUP, as follows: the extension of Jubal Early Drive as an east/west through road and the construction of a new interchange at Route 37; construction of a major collector road to facilitate traffic movement in a north -south direction to provide a connection between Jubal Early Drive and Cedar Creek Grade; and, provision of alternative modes of transportation, such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and an interconnected system of multi-purpose trails and sidewalks. Ms. Eddy said the applicant has proffered to construct Jubal Early Drive through the property as a four -lane landscaped median section and will realign Meadow Branch Avenue. She next described the sequence of improvements: the improvements for Jubal Early Drive and Meadow Branch Avenue will be constructed prior to the 300'h residential building permit, the second phase will be constructed prior to the 450`h permit; and the final section of Jubal Early Drive and the re -alignment and construction of Merrimans Lane and the four new ramps will be constructed prior to the issuance of the 600''' permit. Bonding of the ramps will occur at the 300'h permit. Cidermill Lane in the City of Winchester will be extended into the Willow Run development, but it will be barricaded until the interchange is in place to discourage cut -through traffic. She pointed out the three proposed traffic signals. Referring to public facilities, Ms. Eddy said the applicant has not provided a school site. She said in lieu of the school site, the applicant has chosen to provide a monetary contribution of $1,000 for each of the non -age -restricted units (1,200-1,300 units) to be earmarked specifically for land purchase for a future school site. A number of recreational facilities have been proffered, i.e. a community center, an age -restricted community center, an outdoor pool, an extension of the Green Circle, and an internal trail system. Ms. Eddy said the applicant is willing to make available to the County a five -acre site within the commercial area for an aquatic center. Should the County choose to accept that, the value of the land the aquatic center would be constructed on would count towards the applicant's required recreational amenities and, in addition, if the County decides to build the aquatic center, the applicant will not build the community pool for the residents. Ms. Eddy proceeded to review the Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1968 Minutes of February 7, 2007 00aV 7 applicant's monetary proffers offered to mitigate the impacts of the development on the County's capital facilities, which were based on the County's old fiscal impact model. Ms. Eddy next discussed the environmental features on the site, and the proposed developmentally sensitive area (DSA) around the wetlands and the additional 50 -foot resource protection area (RPA). She said the only disturbance allowed within the two areas will be crossings for roads, utilities, pedestrians and bicycles; a landscape plan will be prepared for the wetlands area on the south side of Jubal Early Drive. Ms. Eddy next reviewed the six design modifications requested, which involved the MDP, permitted uses, a mixture of housing types, the commercial and industrial areas, the buffers and screening, and the road access. In addition, she said the applicant was seeking a modification to the front setback and to the building height limit in the commercial area. In conclusion, Ms. Eddy said the overall land use proposed is generally consistent with the WJELUP and the applicant is incorporating some of the neo -traditional recommendations from the UDA Study. Notable shortcomings identified by the staff included: Minimum proffered commercial floor space; few commitments to the layout and design of the commercial areas; erosion of the commercial core, if an aquatic site is developed; no school site; use of the old fiscal impact model; and the possibility of an incomplete road network, if residential construction ceases before the 600'' building pen -nit. Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, with Greenway Engineering, was representing three sets of property owners for the Willow Run rezoning application: Greystone Properties (Mr. James Vickers and Mr. Ritchie Wilkins), Miller and Smith, and the White family. Mr. Wyatt said that not only will both Greystone and Miller and Smith be the developers, but they will be the principal builders of the residential products as well. He noted that Greystone Properties and Miller and Smith have crafted a development agreement which sets the framework for how they will work jointly together, not only for the implementation of the infrastructure, but on building permit issuance, necessary easements, and property owner association documents. Mr. Wyatt reported that they also worked closely with local environmental experts, Dr. Woodward Bousquet, Shenandoah University's Director of Environmental Studies Program, and Mr. James Lawrence, the Director of the Green Circle Development Project, particularly on the northern part of the site containing the wetlands areas and the Abrams Creek Channel, in order to develop good environmental proffers for their project. Mr. Wyatt began by providing an explanation of how this new revised plan emerged from the one submitted back in December of 2005 and how the UDA Study had influenced its design. Mr. Wyatt's presentation included a discussion of the phased permitting program of 200 building pemuts per year and the residential design elements, with a mix of housing types, recreational amenities, a transportation network, and walkable environment. In his discussion on the neo -traditional design elements, Mr. Wyatt said they were seeking a reduction of the building restriction line in order to place structures closer to the street and the ability to exceed the building height requirement in order to provide second floor residential above retail. Mr. Wyatt then talked about the monetary proffers, land donations, regional transportation, and value components for the community. Mr. Wyatt said that although topographic challenges of this site are not conducive to the large pad sites needed for the construction of a school, they were offering a monetary contribution towards a school site in another location. Mr. Wyatt said that with this project, Jubal Early Drive will be completely constructed, the right-of-way is dedicated, Meadow Branch Avenue is realigned, frontage improvements will be made on Cedar Creek Grade, there will be a connection of Cedar Creek Grade and Jubal Early Drive, Merrimans Lane will be relocated, multiple signalization is being fully funded, the Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of February 7, 2007 Page 1969 -5— Route 37 north -bound and south -bound on -ramps will be constructed by the 600`x` building permit and bonded by the 300a'building permit. He commented about their work with the City of Winchester for the Jubal Early Drive extension in order to obtain the 80 -foot right-of-way. Mr. Wyatt concluded his presentation by noting that there was a concern at the staff application briefing on December 19, 2006, that if the aquatic center was designated for the commercial area, that floor area should not be credited towards the proffered commercial floor area; he said they have revised proffer B2 to clarify language so that does not occur. Another concern was with uses such as gasoline stations and "big box" retail. He said they have revised proffer B7 to prohibit gasoline stations and to limit "big box" retail by limiting the square footage of tenant space to 50,000 square feet, except for grocery stores, the aquatic center, movie theaters or indoor recreational centers. He said another concern raised was how key elements of the project are protected, if the developers fail. Mr. Wyatt said they have made some additional guarantees; specifically, the phasing program for delivering the major road infrastructure stipulates that everything is in place prior to 40% of building permits. Additionally, they have agreed to provide right-of-way and Jubal Early Drive is locked down from the City line to Merrimans Lane by the 2000' permit; the bonding for Route 37 by the 300a' permit; bonding for the community center by the 400'h permit; and there is bonding for the age -restricted community center at the subdivision design plan stage. Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak on the rezoning application, the modifications, and the MDP. The following persons came forward and spoke: Mr. Joe Hickman of the Back Creek District came forward to read a statement from Mr. David Worthington, a landowner in Frederick County, who could not attend this evening's meeting. Mr. Worthington's letter focused on environmental concerns, such as clear cutting of mature woodlands and the affects of clear cutting on the area's wildlife. He suggested that the applicant designate tree save areas of mature woodlands and provide connections with open space corridors for the protection of indigenous wildlife. Additionally, Mr. Worthington's letter expressed concern that the MDP showed two sections of residential housing within the RSA (Resource Protection Area). He knew ofno way for either the County or a homeowners association to keep those future residents from adversely affecting this environmentally -sensitive area and he asked the applicant to remove those housing units from the MDP. In conclusion, Mr. Worthington asked that the applicant protect the existing historic structures and properties. Dr. Woodward Bousquet, a resident at 17 East Leicester Street in Winchester, said that he coordinates the Environmental Studies Program at Shenandoah University and he was also the Co - Chair of the Abrams Creek Wetlands Preserve Management Committee which reports to the Winchester Parks and Recreation Department. Dr. Bousquet stated that Mr. Jim Lawrence and he began meeting with representatives of the applicant, Greenway Engineering and others, in 2004 to provide input on protecting the water quality and the wetlands and he had four comments on this proposal. 1) Dr. Bousquet said the plan takes appropriate steps to minimize impacts on wetlands and water quality and to mitigate unavoidable impacts on the wetlands. Many of those steps are required by provisions of the Clean Water Act, but the proffer goes beyond those requirements by providing the 50 -foot RPA, or the undeveloped buffer zone, along Whites Pond, Abrams Creek, and the wetlands areas. 2) He raised a technical concern regarding point Number 4 on Page 15 of the proffer statement regarding trees and shrubs recommended for the wetland areas. Dr. Bousquet said the wetlands are largely a marsh dominated by grassy plants, rather than a swamp wetlands dominated by trees. He said planting trees in this habitat would defeat much of the purpose and may cause the loss some of vegetation, which includes Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1970 Minutes of February 7, 2007 00aV 7 — 6 — more than a dozen species on Virginia's list of state rare plants. Dr. Bousquet hoped the landscaping plan sentence could be removed or modified. 3) Dr. Bousquet's third point focused on the fragmentation of the woodlands and breaking up of the wildlife corridor. He hoped that the County would look at all developments and examine the value of mature woodlands and wildlife corridors and develop ordinances that will afford better protection to those areas than is currently provided. 4) His fourth point was to commend the provisions of the plan for bicycle and pedestrian access and for the connection of the network of public and private trails and pathways in this development with the `ddinchester Green Circle. Ms. Maya White Sparks, of the Shawnee District, echoed Dr. Bousquet's and Mr. Worthington's comments and said she was in favor of restoring the marsh's natural vegetation and preserving the mature woodlands. She also suggested that the walkways be constructed of a porous material to reduce the amount of storm water runoff. Ms. White Sparks was pleased to see the developers, engineers, ecologists, and environmentalists working together to protect the Abrams Creek Wetlands and she hoped to see more of such cooperation as the urban areas continue to build out. She hoped the County's Department of Parks and Recreation would be able to protect the County's portion of the wetlands so they will remain a legacy for future generations. Ms. White Sparks said that urban development does not require the decimation of the natural landscape. She said that preserving natural landscapes and connecting greenways helps property values and tourism, helps people to de -stress, provides opportunities for exercise, enhances water quality by reducing erosion and storm water runoff, it mitigates flooding, and it reduces energy consumption. She thought it was time to take inventory of the entire county of all its precious ecologically -significant resources. She asked that this awareness be incorporated into all future urban planning. Mr. R. J. Turner, a resident of Back Creek District, said he was a property owner in the Shawnee District, Turner Enterprises, LLC at 2971 Valley Avenue. Mr. Turner wanted to know if Birchmont Drive would line up with the Homespun property on Cedar Creek Grade. Mr. Raymond M. Gritsko, a resident at 147 Meadow Lane in the Clayhill subdivision, Shawnee District, was concerned about the provision of water for all of the homes being constructed, as well as adequate wastewater streams. Ms. Carol A. Shafran, a resident at 1889 Clayton Ridge Drive, in adjoining Meadow Branch South, said her family recently moved here from Highlands Ranch, Colorado. Ms. Shafran was concerned about viewing the backs of the commercial areas in the proposed development; she was also concerned about the noise, the pollution, lighting, and exhaust from the road. Ms. Michelle Morris, a resident at 1881 Clayton Ridge Drive in the City of Winchester, said she lived close to the small area of commercial proposed in the project. Ms. Morris wanted to know if anyone was present to represent the City residents. She wanted to know what the County's setback guidelines were; she was concerned about viewing the back of the commercial uses with trash containers, the parking, and night-time lighting. Ms. Morris wanted to know the kind of commercial uses that were proposed; she was concerned about a 24-hour operation. In addition, she said there were overhead electrical lines along the City -County border and she asked if those lines would be placed underground. Mr. John Gavitt, a resident at 112 Ridge Court in the Gainesboro District, said he moved back to this area in 2000, after 25 years with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Mr. Gavitt said although it's impossible to save everything, he believed it was important to focus on the important areas, such as riparian areas and wildlife corridors and try to make a difference while there is time. He was concerned about the influx of people to this area over the last decade. He suggested that as a community, Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1971 Minutes of February 7, 2007 -7— everyone should look carefully at the important ecological areas because they will make a difference for the community's future quality of life. Ms. Chris Fasano, a resident of Meadow Branch South on Clayton Ridge Drive, said she recently moved here from New York. Ms. Fasano said that Clayton Ridge was an aesthetically - pleasing development and the trees were preserved. She was concerned about what she would be viewing from her residence towards this development; in particular, she was concerned about allowing an increase in the height of buildings and the increased amount of impervious areas. She said the project seemed to be decimating the land. Ms. Ann Casey, a resident at 2111 Stoneleigh Drive in Orchard Hills, said she lived adjacent to the proposed project and her concerns were much the same as the previous speakers. She was concerned about how the proposed development would look from her residence and she had questions on the buffer proposed between the two neighborhoods. Ms. Casey was concerned about the appearance of parking lots, lights, and trash receptacles, etc. No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public continent portion of the meeting. Mr. Wyatt returned to the podium and responded to the questions and concerns raised by the public. Commission members requested that staff provide further clarification on the flexibility the applicant is seeking in the MDP and clarification on the buffers between the commercial areas. Ms. Eddy said under Modification # 1, the applicant is asking for design flexibility because of the proffered MDP; they do not want to have to go through the entire rezoning process for a minor adjustment in design. She said an example of the flexibility desired would be for the percentages of environmental features, provided minimum ordinance standards are met, or the ability to alter the acreage in housing types, or the location and type of recreational facilities, provided minimum standards are met. Ms. Eddy said that if the modification became significant, it would be brought back before the Commission. Regarding the clarification of the separation buffers between residential and commercial, Ms. Eddy said the applicant is requesting 25 feet, a single row of evergreens planted closer together, some deciduous plantings, and no opaque screen. Commissioner Light said that it was his understanding that if a MDP or a rezoning petition changes significantly, the new proffer model would apply. Commissioner Light said this was a change of an entire zoning district and he asked why this was operating under the old model. Ms. Eddy replied that as part of this proposal, the applicant is requesting that the County allow them to use the older model because their application had been submitted just before the old model expired and they are doing a significant amount of transportation improvements. Commissioner Light asked if all of the roads achieved a Level of Service (LOS) "C." Ms. Eddy replied that the internal roads to the project certainly achieve LOS "C;" however, there are quite a number of other roads, mostly within the City of Winchester, but also some within the County, that will function at a LOS below "C." Those roads are Merrimans Lane and Cedar Creek Grade, Cedar Creek Grade and Route 37 Interchange, Cedar Creek Grade and Harvest Drive, Cedar Creek Grade and Valley Avenue, Valley Avenue and Jubal Early Drive, Amherst Street and Meadow Branch, and the Route 50 and Route 37 Interchange. She added that some of these roads would be less than LOS "C," regardless of this project. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1972 Minutes of February 7, 2007 0 0 � V T Commissioner Light inquired if a transportation study had been done by the County regarding the development of the remainder of the West Jubal Early Land Use Plan and what will be needed to mitigate the impacts of the potential development of the Solenberger/ Bridgeforth tracts. Ms. Eddy said the applicant's TIA clearly addressed the impacts of their own development. She said the Solenberger and Bridgeforth properties are within the UDA, but have not been rezoned; she said they would need to do a TIA. Commissioner Light asked what would happen if a transportation flaw is discovered with the Willow Run project at the 700th building permit. He asked if the County would have the ability to correct the problem. Ms. Eddy said no; she said the road improvements are based on the proffers. She said the applicant will build what they have proffered to build and are not committing to build more, if the TIA didn't get it right. Commissioner Light disagreed with having the value of the land for the County's five - acre aquatic site count towards the applicant's required recreational amenities. He thought the recreational units should not hinge upon whether Frederick County accepts this location as an in pool site. Connnissioner Light said the people buying into this development should be assured that recreational units are going to be in the area for this site. Other Commissioners were concerned about reducing the amount of commercial area, if the aquatic center was incorporated on this site. Ms. Eddy clarified that one pool is planned for the site, either an indoor public pool or an outdoor private pool will be constructed. She added that the square footage of commercial was not limited, with or without the County's aquatic center. Commissioner Light said it was his understanding that if a rezoning application significantly changed upon a re -submittal, then the new fiscal impact model should be used for the project. Since the requested zoning was changed from the previous submittal, Commissioner Light believed that was a major change and the County was not obligated to the old proffer model. Other Commissioners were willing to accept the use of the old fiscal impact model because of the substantial transportation improvements, particularly the Jubal Early connection, and the contribution towards the purchase of a school site, that were offered by the applicant. Commissioner Morris commented that as a member of the vision committee reviewing the potential for neo -traditional development in the UDA, he was pleased with the proposed project and the applicant's willingness to work with the County, VDOT, and other agencies on the proposed design. He surmised there was considerable "behind the scenes" work that needed to take place to bring the project to fruition. Chairman Wilmot announced that the Commission would first take action on the modification requests, then the alternative buffer and screening plans, and then the rezoning itself. It was decided that the applicant's request to reduce the front setback and to exceed the building height would be handled as Modification Request #7. Commissioner Morris made a motion to recommend the acceptance of all seven of the modifications to the R4 District requested by the applicant. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kriz and passed by a majority vote. BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of seven modifications to the R4 District requested by the applicant for proposed Rezoning Application #21-06 of Willow Run, as follows: Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1973 Minutes of February 7, 2007 0 0 1 V T Modification #1 - §165-68 Master Development Plan Modification #2 - §165-69 Permitted Uses Modification #3 - §165-71 Mixture of Housing Unit Types Required Modification #4 - §1.65-72D Commercial and Industrial Areas Modification 45 - §165-72G Buffers and Screening Modification #6 - §165-72I Road Access Modification #7 - §165-72B 20 -Foot Building Restriction Line and 50 -Foot Building Heil4ht The majority vote to recommend the acceptance of the modifications was: YES (TO ACCEPT MODIFICATIONS): Watt, Manuel, Morris, Oates, Wilmot, Thomas, Ours, Kriz, Triplett, Kerr NO: Light ABSTAIN: Unger, Mohn Commissioner Morris made a motion to recommend the acceptance of the alternative buffer and screening plans requested by the applicant with the MDP as allowed in §165-72G(2) of the R4 Zoning District regulations. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kriz and passed by a unanimous vote. BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend the acceptance of the alternative buffer and screening plans as requested by the applicant for proposed MDP #15-06 of Willow Run and as allowed by §165-72G(2) of the R4 Zoning District regulations. Conunissioner Morris made a motion to recommend the approval of Rezoning Application 421-06 of Willow Run, including proffered Master Development Plan # 15-06 for Willow Run, along with the additional proffers as offered by the applicant. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Knz and passed by a majority vote. BE IT RESOLVED, THAT by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Rezoning Application 921-06 of Willow Run, including proffered Master Development Plan 915-06 for Willow Run, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 359.97 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District, along with all additional proffers as offered by the applicant, for commercial land uses and up to 1,390 residential units. The majority vote to recommend approval was as follows: Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1974 Minutes of February 7, 2007 D (� �IJ^lf{ M -10 - YES (TO REC. APPROVAL): Watt, Manuel, Morris, Oates, Wilmot, Thomas, Ours, Kriz, Triplett, Kerr NO: Light ABSTAIN: Unger, Mohm The Commission encouraged the staff to keep the Planning Commission informed, if there are any variations made to the MDP for Willow Run. UDA and SWSA Expansion Request for Clearview, CPPA #06-06, submitted by Painter -Lewis P.L.C., to include 130.07 acres of land for residential land uses. These four parcels are located south of Hopewell Road (Rt. 672), adjacent to and behind the new Waverly Farm Rural Preservation Subdivision, and west of Interstate 81, adjacent to the I-81 Rest Area. The parcels are further identified with P.I.N.s 43-A-75, 44-A-1, 44-A-3, and 44-A-313 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Denial Commissioner Oates abstained from all discussion and voting on this item, due to a potential conflict of interest. Planner Candice E. Perkins reported that this is one of the two CPPA (Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment) requests the Board of Supervisors had asked to be given additional study. Ms. Perkins stated that the subject parcels are not located within the limits of any small area land use plan and are located over a mile from the Urban Development Area (UDA); the parcels are also outside of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Ms. Perkins stated that the applicant is requesting that the UDA and the SWSA be expanded to include these four parcels so the property can be developed as an age -restricted housing development. She said the extension of the UDA would enable all ages and residential housing types into this area. If rezoned at the maximum allowed density for the site, there is the potential for 520 residential wilts into this area. Ms. Perkins said the approval of this CPPA would introduce future high density residential land uses into an area with no adjacent high-density residential with a transportation network that is not designed to accommodate this use. In the past, the County has not extended the UDA in a non-contiguous manner. In addition, she said the Sanitation Authority has stated that while water is available, the sewer capacity in this area is insufficient to serve the existing land already within the SWSA. Ms. Perkins said the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) considered this request at their meeting on October 10, 2006. She said the CPPS's primary concern was that the character and context of the proposed use did not fit in with the surrounding rural land uses. She reported that the CPPS was satisfied with the current rural use of this area and unanimously recommended to the Planning Commission that the CPPA request be denied. Ms. Perkins reported that the Planning Connnission discussed this CPPA request at their November 1, 2006 meeting and it recommended to the Board of Supervisors that the application not move forward. The Board of Frederick County Planning Commission Page 19 / 5 Minutes of February 7, 2007 Supervisors discussed the item at their December 13, 2006 meeting and sent it forward so they could hear public input on the proposal. Mr. Thomas (Ty) Moore Lawson, an attorney with Lawson & Silek, P.L.C., was representing this CPPA application for Gary and Pamela Payne, the owners of the site called Clearview. Mr. Lawson said that several members of the Board of Supervisors were interested in receiving public input on the proposal. Mr. Lawson stated that a conditional rezoning application for this property has been filed with the Planning Department and it is for an age -restricted project. He said the project also involves sonic limited commercial to serve the age -restricted community. Chairman Wilmot inquired how many units were projected. Mr. Lawson cited the staffs projection of 520, however, he pointed out that schools would not be affected because the project is age -restricted. Mr. Lawson said they have done a traffic study encompassing six intersections and the Level of Service (LOS) is not degraded with this project. He said that only one intersection is affected, the intersection of Brucetown and Route 11, and their proffer provides a monetary contribution to address the future anticipated realignment of that intersection. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Ms. Louise Kitts, a resident on Waverly Road, questioned how the proposed development would be accessed. Ms. Kitts said that if access is intended by using Michael Drive, she wanted to point out that it is not a two-lane road and would not be wide enough for all of the traffic. Mr. Daniel Kline, an adjoining property owner in Fairview Estates, was opposed to cottage -style housing and commercial against his property. He said if this property was to be developed, he preferred to see the five -acre lots. Mr. Lawson returned to the podium to address the public comments. Mr. Lawson said that their pending rezoning application shows that Michael Drive is intended to be improved to a full VDOT-standard road. He said the rezoning is also proffering a heavy buffer package and green space to separate the project from the neighboring uses. Commissioner Light said the CPPS saw this as an existing five -acre lot subdivision area; the CPPS believed that if this project is approved, there would also be absorption of the Waverly Farm into the UDA. Commissioner Light said that this CPPA request has been run through the process and the Planning Commission has recommended denial every time. Commissioner Light then moved for denial of the CPPA request and this motion was seconded by Commissioner Kriz. Commissioner Thomas believed that any use of this area besides five acre lots would be an improvement. He felt that if there was some way to restrict this to an age -restricted community, it would be a benefit to the County. However, since the County did not have the ability to do that in a SWSA expansion, he thought it would be dangerous to expand the UDA and the SWSA, since it can not be restricted. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of February 7, 2007 Page 1976 -12 - BE IT RESOLVED, THAT by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend denial of the UDA and SWSA Expansion Request for Clearview, CPPA #06-06, submitted by Painter -Lewis P.L.C., to include 130.07 acres of land for residential land uses. The majority vote for denial of this CPPA was as follows: YES (TO REC. DENIAL): Watt, Manuel, Morris, Wilmot, Ours, Kriz, Triplett, Kerr, Light, Unger, Mohn NO: Thomas ABSTAIN• Oates 2007-2008 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for Frederick County. The CIP is a prioritized list of capital projects requested by various County departments and agencies. The CIP is created as an informational document to assist in the development of the County's annual budget. If adopted, the CIP is a component of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Action - Recommended Approval Planning Technician Kevin T. Hemy reported that the Planning Commission considered the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) at their December 6, 2006 meeting; the consensus of the Commission was that the projects proposed within the CIP were in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Mr. Henry stated that the proposed CIP includes 54 capital projects, 17 of them being new, which includes 11 new transportation projects. He said a significant addition to the CIP this year is the inclusion of Transportation Committee requests; the reason for the addition is that State Code now allows transportation projects to appear in the CIP. Mr. Henry said the addition of transportation projects to the CIP is in no way an indication that Frederick County will be independently undertaking these projects; holding of projects will continue to come from a combination of State and Federal funds, developer contributions, and revenue sharing. Mr. Henry continued, stating that of the remaining six new projects, four new projects have been requested by the public schools and include: 1) renovations to Apple Pie Ridge Elementary; 2) addition of classrooms at Bass Hoover Elementary; 3) the relocation of Frederick County Middle School to the Hayfield area; and, 4) the renovation of Frederick County Middle School to use as an administrative office building. Along with the school projects, the Regional Library has requested two new library locations be sought in the Senseny/ Greenwood area and Route 522 South area. Other projects in the 2007-2008 CIP have been carried forward from last year's CIP. Commissioner Light asked about the Route 37 engineering projected at $1,500,000 for two consecutive years or any road on the transportation portion. He asked if it was Frederick County money or VDOT money, or is it Frederick County money up front and then refimded back to Frederick County from VDOT. The County's Transportation Planner, John A. Bishop, replied that the Board of Supervisors could choose to fund a project under a certain situation; however, it is intended to be Federal and State fluids, or revenue sharing fiords that could represent some Frederick County funds. Mr. Bishop said there will be nothing outside of the nonnal procedures, aside from the fact that it is now appearing in Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of February 7, 2007 Page 19 / / the CIP. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments, however, no one came forward to speak. No other areas of concern were raised. The consensus of the Commission was that the projects proposed within the CIP were in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Upon motion made by Commissioner Ours and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the 2007-2008 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for Frederick County. The CIP is a prioritized list of capital projects requested by various County departments and agencies. The CIP is created as an inforinational document to assist in the development of the County's annual budget and will be a component of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. An amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Article V, RA (Rural Areas) District, Section 165-55, Setback Requirements Action - Recommended Approval with Modification Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, reported that the proposed amendment addresses setbacks in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. Mr. Cheran said the existing RA setbacks are in need of clarification and the proposed changes should clear up any confusion to adjoining land uses and avoid conflict with active agriculture uses. He said the changes would also apply to family division lots. In addition, Mr. Cheran reported that the Board of Supervisors recommended that a waiver be incorporated in the case the referenced setbacks would cause an undue hardship on existing parcels of record. Commissioner Oates referred to Section 165-55(A)(2) "... shall be determined by the primary use of the adjoining parcel... " Commissioner Oates said that since the first two uses, residential and agricultural/residential, are based on acreage and nothing more, he thought it would be appropriate to take out the residential and agricultural/residential component and simply state, "six acres or less - 50 feet; greater than six acres - 100 feet." Other Commissioners were in agreement. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments; however, no one came forward to speak. Upon motion made by Conunissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Ours, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of an amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Article V, RA (Rural Areas) District, Section 165-55, Setback Requirements, with the modification to base the setbacks for residential and agricultural/residential uses on acreage, rather than use. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1978 U U N Minutes of February 7, 2007 D F 7 =KIM Amendments to the Frederick County Code, Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, as follows: Subdivision of Land, Chapter 144, Article II, Definitions and Word Usage; Subdivision of Land, Chapter 144, Article V, Design Standards, Section 24(C)(2)(B), Lot Requirements; Zoning, Chapter 165, Article V, RA (Rural Areas) District, Section 54(B), Family Division Lots; Zoning, Chapter 165, Article V, RA (Rural Areas) District, Section 54(D), Rural Preservation Lots; and Zoning, Chapter 165, Article XXII, Definitions and Word Usage, Section 156. Action — Recommend Approval with Modification Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, stated that all of the proposed amendments being presented this evening are basically being done to clean-up and clarify language. He said all of the proposed amendments were brought before the Commission at a previous meeting for discussion. Chapter 144, Subdivision Ordinance, Article II, Definitions and Word Usage. Mr. Cheran explained this revision incorporates the same language for Definitions and Word Usage that is used in the zoning ordinance. Chapter 144, Subdivision Ordinance, Article V, Design Standards, Section 24(C)(2)(b), Distance of Lots from State -maintained roads. Regarding the distance of individual lots from a state -maintained road, Mr. Cheran said a typographical error was corrected by changing the words, "more than" to "less than." Commissioner Molui stated that the revised language indicates that the, "... individual lots shall be less than 500 feet," and in effect, it is 499 feet. Conunissioner Molm suggested that the language be written as, "...499 feet or less." Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Section 165-54(B)(1), Family Division Lots. Mr. Cheran reported that the Board of Supervisors recommended adding a time period whereby family division lots may remain with a fanuly member. Mr. Cheran said the State Code was changed last year to address this, specifying that it shall not exceed 15 years. He said that, although it has never been codified, current and previous zoning administrators for Frederick County have interpreted that family division lots conveyed shall remain with the family member for two years. Mr. Cheran said the proposed amendment states that the conveyed lot shall remain with the family member for five years. Conunissioner Oates wanted to make sure that the five-year time period is actually stated on the signed avadavat so whoever is doing the subdivision is fully aware. Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Section 165-54(D), Rural Preservation Lots. Mr. Cheran stated that this amendment deals with the 40% preservation lot that must remain intact. He said the language has been modified by identifying the preservation tract by name and to better clarify the intent of how this has been interpreted by current and previous zoning administrators, by specifying that whatever acreage is recorded at the court house must be preserved. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of February 7, 2007 Page 1979 -15 - Commissioner Oates believed the criteria for a rezoning should be the SWSA and not the UDA. Other Commissioners preferred the language remain as written. Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Section 165-156, Definitions, is an amendment to simply correct a typographical error. Mr. Cheran said the definitions for Full Screen and Landscape Screen were mistakenly reversed and this amendment will correct that error. Chainnan Wilmot called for public comments and the following person came forward to speak: Mr. John Goode, a resident of the Stonewall District, spoke to the amendment dealing with rural preservation lots. Mr. Goode said he questioned having the lots preserved in perpetuity because there may be a public need, such as a fire department or a school, and this lot may be an ideal location. Mr. Goode said he appreciated the spirit of the Commission desiring to make some technical corrections to the ordinances. He wanted to remind the Connnission, however, that if they ever had the opportunity to reduce the lot sizes, not necessarily increasing the density, he thought it would go a long way towards preserving the rural landscape. He believed two acres was still quite a considerable amount for someone to maintain. No one else came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Commissioner Thomas made a motion to recommend the approval of all five ordinance amendments for Chapter 144, Subdivision, and Chapter 165, Zoning, with the revision to Chapter 144, Subdivision Ordinance, Article V, Design Standards, Section 24(C)(2)(b), Distance of Lots from State - maintained roads to be written as, "... 499 feet or less." This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ours and unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby reconnnend approval of the amendments to the Frederick County Code, Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, as follows: Subdivision of Land, Chapter 144, Article lI, Definitions and Word Usage; Subdivision of Land, Chapter 144, Article V, Design Standards, Section 24(C)(2)(b), Lot Requirements, modified to be written as, "...499 feet or less;" Zoning, Chapter 165, Article V, RA (Rural Areas) District, Section 54(B), Family Division Lots; Zoning, Chapter 165, Article V, RA (Rural Areas) District, Section 54(D), Rural Preservation Lots; and Zoning, Chapter 165, Article XXII, Definitions and Word Usage, Section 156. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of February 7, 2007 Page 1980 -16- Appointment to CPPS Chairman Wilmot appointed Commissioner Rick Outs to serve on t he Corl-17pr eh er;sive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS). ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. by a unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, June M. Wilmot, Chairman Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1981 Minutes of February 7, 2007 N N a F V • C • REZONING APPLICATION #12-06 CARRIAGE PARD Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: March 5, 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 Pending Board of Supervisors: April 11, 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 March 6, 2007 Page 2 P ROP OSE D USES: Up io 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: Virminia 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, 2007 from 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 March 6, 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 412-06 — Carriage Place March 6, 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 latest proffer statement submitted on February 23, 2007. IIis 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 March 6, 2007 Page 5 PlanninL, & 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 MHI 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. 1-1] T fy"d T IVo 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 March 6, 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 project. 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 3 7, 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 March 6, 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 Suitability/Environment The Carriage Place 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 tlae 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 March 6, 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 south east as recommended by the HR,4B. 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 adjacentproperty to the west are proposed Rezoning #12-06 — Carriage Place March 6, 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 e��c-- t 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 alignment for the future Route 37 on/off ramp. TheApplicant asserts that the location of the Route 37 ramps west of Route 7's crossing ofAbram'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 7that were notpreviously 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 March 6, 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 7occur in a manner thatfully enables the implementation of thefuture 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 March 6, 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 propertyto the south. An emergency access interparcel 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 March 6, 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 Hrpt elementary school opened in the fall of 2006 opened above its programmed capacity. This is based upon tl:e 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 12`x' 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 $17,732forsinglefamily attached residential dwellings to mitigate the impact to the identified community facilities. 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 foreg neral 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 March 6, 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 125 I building permit. Further, that no direct access shall be permitted on the said collector road. This project is located within the Urban DevelopmentArea 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`x` 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 March 6, 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 March 6, 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 March 6, 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 GDPpropose 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 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. 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 March 6, 2007 Page 16 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 andAsh 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. Patton Harris Rust & Associates Engineers- Surveyors. Planners. landscape Architects. 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 February 23, 2007 HAND -DELIVERED Mr. Michael Ruddy Department of Planning and Development Frederick County, Virginia 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Carriage Park Rezoning Application Dear Mike: We have revised the Carriage Park rezoning application in response to issues that were raised at the Planning Comnussion meeting on November 1, 2006 regarding the proposed transportation network. I've attached a revised GDP and Proffer Statement that provide for a single signalized entrance to the property that will be design and constructed to accommodate the future southbound Route 37 on and off ramp. The location of the Route 37 ramp west of Route Ts crossing of Abrams Creek is dictated by current minimum curve radius standards which would preclude this ramp from aligning with existing Valley Mill Road. The revised proffer also provides for a potential future connection between the internal access road and existing Valley Mill Road. The internal road system has been located by proffer to accommodate expansion as warranted during future development of adjacent properties. I have also attached an addendum to the Transportation Impact Analysis which depicts the proposed impacts of the revised development plan as well as a revised comment from VDOT. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions. Sincerely, Patton Harris Rust & Associates Patrick R Sowers GC: Clay Athey Chuck Maddox Patrick R. Sowers From: Funkhouser, Rhonda [Rhonda.Funkhouser@VDOT.Virginia.gov] on behalf of Ingram, Lloyd [Lloyd.ingram@VDOT.Virginia.gov] Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 7:51 AM To: Patrick Sowers Cc: Ronald A. Mislowsky; Ingram, Lloyd; Copp, Jerry; Alexander, Scott; cperkins@co.frederick.va.us Subject: Carriage Park - Rezoning - Route 7, Frederick County The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Route 7. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT has reviewed the transportation proffers offered in the Carriage Park Rezoning Application dated January 25, 2006, revised January 27, 2007 and offers the following comments: * Proffer 12.2: This proffer raises some concern with VDOT, specifically whether there is sufficient crossover spacing between the proposed crossover and the existing Valley Mill/Route 7 crossover. There is also an access management concern as Route 7 is a primary route designed to carry large volumes of traffic efficiently. This proposed crossover would add an additional potential conflict point. This would also result in three possible signalized intersections on Route 7 within 25001. With no proposed connection to Valley Mill Road, the existing Valley Mill Road and Route 7 crossover would have to remain in place. Currently, VDOT has not determined if the proposed crossover location will be the connection of the future Route 37 south bound ramp. * Proffer 12.3: Acceptable. * Proffer 12.4: VDOT is disappointed this proffer has digressed from an open connection to the Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park to a gated emergency access, thus eliminating residents of the mobile home park the opportunity for access to a safer connection to Route 7. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation 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. Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment. Lloyd A. Ingram, Transportation Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation Edinburg Residency - Land Development 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, Virginia 22824 Phone #(540) 984-5611 Fax #(540) 984-5607 1 Page 1 of 1 John Bishop From: Alexander, Scott [Scott.Alexander@VDOT.Virginia.gov] Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 10:33 AM To: Bishop, John A. Cc: Ingram, Lloyd; Funkhouser, Rhonda; 'Eric Lawrence' Subject: Carriage Park Ramp Proposal John: To follow-up on/clarify our conversation on the proposed Carriage Park ramp location: By moving the proposed southbound (SB) ramps to the west, the geometries of the on-ramp improve slightly. However, a design exception would likely still be required, as it still does not meet the 70% mainline design speed geometry. ® The proposal negatively impacts the SB off -ramp, inducing a tighter -radius reverse curve and possibly requiring a new design exception not previously required. In general terms, I would expect that it would be more difficult to mitigate the new off -ramp design exception (decelerating from 65 mph into curve) versus mitigating the onramp (entering curve from turn movement off Rt. 7). Additional right-of-way may be necessary to compensate. . While the relocated ramp would eliminate a box culvert, it would increase the amount of property takings/condemnation required in the subdivision opposite of Carriage Park. e The new location results in a crossover spacing (Carriage Park road, Valley Avenue) of approximately 750', much less than the minimum desirable spacing of at least 1,000 feet. In light of the above, I find it difficult to describe the proposal as "beneficial". If you have any questions or would like to discuss further, don't hesitate to give me a call. Scott Scott Alexander Assistant Residency Administrator VDOT - Edinburg Residency 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 Phone: 540-984-5605 Fax: 540-984-5607 3/7/2007 Ronald A. Mislowsky From: Funkhouser, Rhonda [Rhonda.Funkhouser@VDOT.Virginia.gov] on behalf of Ingram, Lloyd j [Lloyd.Ingram@VDOT.Virginia.gov] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 1:46 PM To: 'Ronald A. Mislowsky' Cc: Copp, Jerry; Ingram, Lloyd; 'Clifford L. Athey Jr. (clay@npaalaw.com)'; 'Eric Lawrence' Subject: Carriage Park - VDOT Comments to Rezoning The documentation within the revised application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Route 7 and 659. These route are the VDOT roadways which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT offers the following comments on the recent revised transportation proffers: Safety - The removal of the street tie-in at Route 7 is a positive step for the safety of the public traveling Route 7 as well as the home owners of the proposed subdivision. While the proposed new location for the entrance into this subdivision will be via Route 659 is adequate, it does not address the County's ultimate design of the Eastern Road Plan. This would allow the traffic generated from this subdivision to utilize Route 7 via the relocated Route 659 and the proposed Haggerty Boulevard. Section 12.1 - Agree. Section 12.2 - Agree. if this roadway is planned to be taken into the State's system there appears to be some possible environmental issues that will need to be fully addressed to the satisfaction of the appropriate agency prior acceptance. Section 12.3 - While agreeing with the proposal, the location of this inter -parcel connector should be located at a spot that appears more conducive to fulfilling the long ierm transportation plans of the County. This includes the logical access point to the relocated Valley Mill Road from this property. Section 12.4 - Additional clarification is requested on this issue as the submitted document is somewhat vague in the description of the connection to Blue Ridge Mobile Horne Park roadway's typical cross section and location and composition. Section 12.5 - The proposed street tie-in at Route 659 (Valley Mill road), while a bit of an engineering challenge is the better location for the movement of traffic to and from the subdivision. The Section 12.5 proffer offers the signalization of the intersection of Route 7 and Route 659 along with improvements to the exiting lanes. Be advised that the intersection will need to meet all current VDOT standards in place at the time of "Road Plan Approval". The terms of when the signal would be required would be better stated as "when the intersection meets signal warrants as determined by VDOT the signal will be installed within 120 days". Section 12.6 - Agree. Section 12.7 - Agree. Section 12.8 - Agree. Section 12.9 - Agree. Long Term - There is some hesitation in fully supporting this rezoning due to it's potential impact on the long term transportation goals identified in the Frederick County Eastern Road Plan. While a significant amount of money is being pledged to the County for road improvements, once the rezoning is approved in its current format the incentive for the developer to participate in the relocation of Valley Mill Road will become a mute point . J Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all 1 right -o£ -way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. 'hank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment. Lloyd A. Ingram Transportation Engineer VDOT - Edinburg Residency Land Development 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 ('540) 984-5611 (540) 984-5607 (fax) signalization, and off - the State's right-of-way by this office and COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 3, 2006 Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates, 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Re: Preliminary Comments — Carriage Park Rezoning Application Dear Patrick: Thank you for forwarding to this office the Carriage Park rezoning application materials for our continued review. The TIA for this project is dated May 6, 2005, and the version of the proffer statement is dated February 2, 2006. The following letter is offered to assist you as you continue to address the issues associated with this rezoning application. Please also consider all comments previously offered by Mike Ruddy during various meetings on this project over the past few months. As customary, it is anticipated that these issues will be fully addressed through revisions to the application prior to its consideration by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. 1) Preliminary Matters a) The Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2204.C. requires that the CEO of the adjacent locality is notified if the property is within 1/2 mile of the boundary of the adjoining locality. Please demonstrate if this provision of the State Code is applicable with this application. 2) Impact Analysis and Proffer Statement a) The introduction to the project in the impact statement identifies a specific mix of housing types (69 single family detached, and 92 single family attached/ townhouse units). The TIA is based on a mix of 53 single family detached and 94 townhouses. The proffer statement simply states that the property will be developed to accommodate a maximum of 165 single family dwellings, types excluded. Please provide clarification and consistency between these three documents (Impact Statement, TIA, and Proffer Statement). b) Please provide clarification as to what elements of the GDP are proffered. The proffer statement states a maximum of 165 single family units, while the GDP �) offers a housing mix which totals 161 residences. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Mr. Patrick Sowers RE: Preliminary Comments - Carriage Park Rezoning Application August 3, 2006 Page 2 of 4 c) It is more appropriate, and indeed necessary, to identify and address the environmental features that exist on this site as part of the rezoning exercise. Areas with environmental constraints may exist on the property that warrant particular attention and should be a consideration of the rezoning application. In particular, there appears to be areas with critical slope and drainage issues on the property. d) Access to this property is described to be via a new entrance on Route 7. Route 7 is an arterial roadway with speed limits of 55 MPH. Establishment of a new entrance onto Route 7 is strongly discouraged. As you are aware, efforts are underway to enhance and relocate Valley Mill Road so that it serves as a major collector roadway. This enhancement will provide for a more efficient transportation network, providing an important link between Senseny Road and Route 7, by way of Haggerty Boulevard. All efforts should be made to implement a safer and more efficient use of Valley Mill Road as the primary access route to the proposed development. e) The proffer statement, in addressing transportation, states that the applicant will privately fiend all transportation improvements required for this project. It would be appropriate to identify these improvements within the proffer statement. f) The proffer statement (12.2) describes the right-in/right-out entrance on Route 7. A deceleration lane is offered, but not an acceleration lane. In considering that the traffic on this segment of Route 7 travels at speeds exceeding 55 MPH, it seems appropriate to consider extended length deceleration and acceleration land controls. g) While proffer statement 12.4 offers a gated inter -parcel connector with the adjacent mobile home park, it may be appropriate to offer flexibility in this inter - parcel connection in the event that the mobile home park is redeveloped into a compatible use in the future that would benefit from access through the proposed development. Such a connection would further promote limited and safe access to Route 7. h) The Carriage Park application is adjacent to several developed subdivisions, properties with pending development proposals, and other undeveloped properties. Opportunities for additional inter -parcel connectivity should be evaluated and pursued with this application. In particular, to the property to the southwest. Residential development of this intensity requires pedestrian accommodations. Interparcel pedestrian connectivity should also be a consideration of this application. i) I understand that the applicant intends to offer a fiscal contribution to offset identified road improvements associated with this project. It is important to recognize in the application that, based upon the open mix (not proffered) of Mr. Patrick Sowers RE: Preliminary Comments - Carriage Park Rezoning Application August 3, 2006 Page 3 of 4 residential uses proposed in the application, 165 single family attached units would be permitted. This would generate $495,000, as opposed to the $600,000 that has been mentioned during recent discussions. At issue is whether these contributions are adequate to address impacts generated by the development proposal. Clarification should also be considered as to how the transportation funds could be utilized to improve transportation impacts generated by this project. J) Consistent with County policy, it would be appropriate to ensure that any proffered transportation improvements associated with the application are provided at the beginning of the project. Any monetary contribution should be provided prior to the onset of the project and not at the time of individual building permit issuance. k) Water and wastewater evaluations provided in the impact statement should be viewed in relationship to other previously approved projects within the County. A combined and updated figure for water resources and wastewater capacity would be beneficial when determining the adequacy of the capacity and resources. 1) Recent rezoning applications have proffered that a private refuse collection service will be used to collect the solid waste generated by their particular project. It would be desirable for this application to consider such an approach. This is beneficial, as it potentially reduces the individual usage of the County's convenience sites. Reference to the number of single family attached units in the Solid Waste Disposal section should be removed unless the applicant is willing to proffer a specific mix of residential uses. I understand that modifications to the transportation proffers are forthcoming. Based on our discussion on July 28h, it is expected that the transportation component of this application will address: a demonstrated attempt to work with neighboring property owner on accessing Valley Mill Road from the proposed development; clarification as to when the proposed development entrance onto Route 7 would be closed or restricted; signalization and lane improvements or contributions you offered for a traffic signal at Route 7 and Valley Mill Road; and the linkage between the Carriage Park proposal and the other development applications your firm represents along the re -aligned Valley Mill Road corridor. Upon receipt of these written modified transportation components, staff will offer review comments on the same. Once you have addressed the above issues, as well as secured approval comments from the review agencies, it would be appropriate to formally submit this rezoning petition for consideration through the public hearing process. Formal submissions include all agency comment sheets, fully executed applications, proffer statements, Power of Y Attorneys, and review fees. Please refer to the rezoning application process for a complete listing of the elements necessary for formal application submission., Mr. Patrick Sowers RE: Preliminary Comments - Carriage Park Rezoning Application August 3, 2006 Page 4 of 4 Please feel free to contact Mike Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director, at any time regarding the above comments or the application in general. I look forward to continuing our participation in the review of this application. Sine rely, 8 E :c . Lawrence Planning Director ERL/bad cc: Clifford Athey Mike Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director q � I d`4 0 5� r�J 55 A 140 LAM50N, NORMAN fr FOSEMAFIE V, MCALLISTEF, TANS P £� TDHN E Red Bud 55 A 10l0A,q 8 Fotesf*al District FAB61T CFEEK, LP 9r !; r qCL! 45 1 Mq�R �x 55 A 1140 6LIlE FIDC,e ASSOCIATES 55 A 1to5S MCHALE, MATTHEW G A 13 DLAN 1141 GErE ETALS TR Fa �k 55 A It,S VALLEY LL FARM, U:. ea 55 4 4A Lesrp 9 GREY, ALICIA F T� Mc�Ee ss Lr MlCyAeL s I LL) 0 ¢w til Q 0 59 A TOLL VAv �P 55 A 210 THE CANYON �aa ca�n � as Road CenteAines - �akasracnes ®Tanks - :• mm� n' J�J..k� u.—. Breams ®��I W T aAs n�ltwal B Fenestral CiRncts l South Frederick Dldrict J Double Church Distnd l,> Red Bud 5foA Iq ?4f-/wINCHESTER fr TH6 fl N�Y_C 0 125 250 500 Feet REZ Ar' U - 06 Carriage Park Location Map ( 55 -A -161, 165A, 166, 167, 167A, 168, 174A, 1746, 174D ) 5�c 55 A 140 LAMSON, r4OFWN F-O5FMNF-lf Ji W-ALL(5TGF-, 7AN6 P 9, TDHN e Rea Bud 55 A 106 Ag & Forpstral District FA6451T CF -W, Ll?—Q "ilk CZ* Al ' 55 'j WHALE, MATTHEW 1:mp, est5lil, fS ai U LO 55 A TOLL VA A209 VLp A t3 OLAN J, VALLEY LL FARM, LL 55 4 4A (,v -6y, ALICIA F 155 P, 210 THE CANYON -id,— Road C-tldilll. "7 RP -5u JA Iq ymy 6-� Fr s 0 125 250 500 at[ Feet REZ it 1,'2-06 Carriage Park Zoning Map 55 -A -161, 165A, 166, 167, 167A, 168, 174A, 174B, 174D) tl oq "I 5 1l 55 N 14o LAMSON, NDF4APN 9, FDDfMAP-lF, 5 MCALLI$TER. 7ANE P L,:YDVAN F dr 55 N IOU Ag & Forestral District POW rgEcK, LP kv, 14-4.1 qH 55 P, 114G 15LLie F -WIC P110,00(-tNTE'D 55 A IU55 MCRALF, MATTHEW L 55A TOLL VA LF Al - �VALL FARM, LL -txv 55 N 7-10 THE CANYON 'k 13 DLIAIN 4 ,r,,,L .T,",, iNL s'- 55 4 4A (-FZY, ALlr-lA F Al 55 1 A RE Z;4 12 -06 Carriage Park Landuse Map (55- A - 161,165A, 166, 167, 167A, 168,174A; 174B, 174D) IL fl, 11 WINGNESTER Trolls 'k 13 DLIAIN 4 ,r,,,L .T,",, iNL s'- 55 4 4A (-FZY, ALlr-lA F Al 55 1 A RE Z;4 12 -06 Carriage Park Landuse Map (55- A - 161,165A, 166, 167, 167A, 168,174A; 174B, 174D) IL fl, 11 WINGNESTER •.fir ^ •!� .1 �. l 1e'1 ^' ;1ILL me ���,-;�.,1 "r�'"" `'� r`�'�j � �F ` •tit �-�.• "'i�'7�,� � Red Bud l a_g�=�1�—��(-•`�. µ Act 8 Forestraf District ■mom REZ 4! `ii 2 a 06 Carriage Park Aerial Map ( 55 - A -161, 165A,166, 167, 167A, 168, 174A, 174B, 174D ) January 2006 Carriage Park rROPOSE D PROFFE R STATE I'VE NT Carriage Park Proffer Statement PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ. # Q `0-: RA (Rural Areas) and MH1 (Mobile Home Community) to RP (Residential Performance) PROPERTY: 45.44 Acres +/-; Tax Map Parcels 55-A-161, 55 -A -165A, 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 requitement, unless otherwise specified herein. The term. "Applicant" as referenced herein shall include within its meaning all future owners and successors in interest. When used in these proffers, the "Generalized Development Plan," shall refer to the plan entitled "Generalized Development Plan, Carriage Park" dated January 5, 2006, as revised on January 25, 2007 (the "GDP"). Page 1 of 6 Carriage Park Proffer Statement l . LAND USE: 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 sum 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. 5. 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. 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 Carraa'ge Park Proffer Statement 7. PUBLIC SAFETY: 7.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the County of Frederick the suin of $503.00 per dwelling unit for public safety purposes, payable upon issuance of a building permit for each single family attached unit. 8. 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, (ii) 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 Carriage Park Proffer Statement 10. 11 12 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 be constructed in County Sanitation connection. All water and sewer infrastructure shall accordance with the requirements of the Frederick Authority and the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority 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. 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`h 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 Carriage 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 Property. 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 rnonths 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 LE Title: STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowled ed before me this JQ day of , 2007, by�c x r'_ My commission expiresU Notary Public f Page 6 of 6 0 I � • �/ w <� �• H ! •'� c ration, hams, Kust 6C HssoClates \ GENEPLIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 FREDERICK COUNTY PIRG/N14 Frederick County, Virginia OCT 6 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT AND REZONING APPLICATION MATERIALS FOR REZONING REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF CARRIAGE PARK Red Bud Magisterial District August 2006 Prepared by: Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 117 E. Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone: 540-667-2139 Fax: 540-665-0493 August 2006 Carriage Park Table of Contents I. Application Form II. Impact Analysis A. Site History and Project Background B. Location and Access C. Site Suitability D. Traffic E. Sewage Conveyance and Water Supply F. Site Drainage G. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities H. Historic Sites and Structures L Impact on Community Facilities III. Proffer Statement IV. Agency Comments V. Survey Plat and Deed VI. Tax Ticket January 2006 Carriage Park I. January 2006 Carriage Park Ii. IMPACT ANALYSIS August 2006 Carriage Park SUMMARY AND JUSTIFICATION The Carriage Park property lies wholly within the Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) of Frederick County, with direct access to both eastbound Route 7 and Valley Mill Road. The site is located in close proximity to the Haggerty project, which was successfully rezoned for residential land uses. The development of the Carriage Park property will continue to establish the development pattern in the Route 7 corridor and will provide for the integration of the project with adjacent properties should they develop in a manner harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan. The rezoning of the site for a single family residential development consisting of a maximum of 165 dwelling units is consistent with the vision of the Comprehensive Policy Plan, which expressly calls for suburban residential uses to predominate within the UDA. The site is generally located in an area designated for residential land use on the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan map. By using available land within the UDA, this - rezoning promotes a dynamic housing market within the county's designated growth area, reducing development pressures in the County's rural areas. The project density of 3.59 dwelling units per acre is well within the zoning guideline of 5.5 dwelling units per acre for parcels between 10 and 100 acres. The applicant is confident that the proposed rezoning includes a proffer program that will appropriately and effectively mitigate the impacts of this development while providing funding for regional transportation projects. The single family residential land use envisioned for the site is compatible with the development trend emerging in the area and is Map Features /^-\ /County Boundary Tax Map Boundary Community Centers � ]George Washington National Forest p Hamlets Lakes/Ponds ,,."",,,,/Streams r Sewer Water Service Area Urban Development Area Ro ad s/Trans portation f Interstates Primary Highways Secondary Roads Named Private Roads Unnamed Private Roads Proposed Route 37 Railroads Cities/Towns Middletown Stephens City 0 Winchester Agricultural Districts Double Church V Refuge Church South Frederick Zoning MW B7 (Business, Neighborhood District) F-71 B2 (Business, General District) ja B3. (Business, Industrial Transition District) an EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) @L4 HE (Higher Education District) (- M1 (Industrial, Light District) M2 (Industrial, General District) ON MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) IMM MS (Medical Services District) mM: R5 (Residential, Recreational Community District) 0 RA (Rural Areas District) RP (Residential Performance District) 1 1r 24 \ I rL+Lf 1 =r r � :.. ' r a :t• �4.52 E-" A iia 4_ ^. V; 1fVC• _ '_�; R erg x �en Spring fC y � T ��'• 1 "S A • eK 1 1r 24 \ I rL+Lf 1 =r r � :.. ' r a :t• �4.52 E-" A iia 4_ ^. 1 1r 24 \ I rL+Lf 1 =r r � :.. ' r a :t• �4.52 E-" A iia Factory tis PROJECT SI TE ss CARR/AGE PARK Patton, Harris,Rust & Associates, pc ZONING MAP 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 D FREOERlCK CDUIVTY, t//RGlNL4 VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 46 August 2006 Carriage Park consistent with the land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. As such, this rezoning request merits favorable consideration and approval. SITE BACKGROUND AND HISTORY The Carriage Park property consists of 45.44 acres of land located in the UDA within the Red Bud Magisterial District. Approximately 15.18 acres of the site are zoned MH1 (Mobile Home Community) while the remaining 30.26 acres are zoned RA (Rural Areas). Two existing homes reside on the site, but will not pose a hindrance to the intended development of the property. The site is located in an emerging residential area wherein public facilities have been installed through prior development and are readily available for extension into the site. Available facilities include water and sewer lines, and road infrastructure. The requested rezoning from RA (Rural Areas) and MHl (Mobile Home Community) to RP f (Residential Performance) will enable continued development within the UDA in accord with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. LOCATION AND ACCESS The Carriage Park property is bounded by Valley Mill Road to the East, Route 7 to the North, and Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park to the West (Figure 1). Access will be provided via a single entrance on Valley Mill Road near the intersection of Valley Mill and Route 7. Additionally, an interparcel connector will be provided at the Southern boundary of the property to facilitate access to both the adjacent parcel and Valley Mill Road in the future (Figure 2). As indicated by the Generalized Development Plan, new entrances on Route 7 will be avoided. An emergency access connection will be provided between the Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park to the West to allow two way emergency access. Current designs for proposed Route 37 align the off ramps with the future intersection of the Haggerty Spine Road and the existing intersection of Valley Mill Road and Route 7. As such, signalization of the Valley Mill intersection, which is proffered as part of this rezoning application, is needed as part of the large scope transportation planning effort . 47 AWN �11 XJ7 17 , N ..--.y .,.�". ,/'..." ._.+ = t c �-" ,- � ��, .._-.—. y .✓ J s F � 4 f � f F � S � � � f f � i i i ..._—'•,°_..., _.---_.."'`.�'."' "",,,...::_ ° .,q ,.. `^-;r � � r � �✓� 1 tri ' i P$ ( , ` � `i '`"�,+, , . , _ -w -•--•.. ti 1 -�;`"`���`-'�.�,. .,t�"'�•.. �;yry - may,,,,,,,,,,,„- � >y� ,3 , , ` `*,,_.�,,,�,-..---��,.• x ,,,�',J ,, t ``�-- � Crc AIf01V BWM �PROfF'ER 124' ,._.J � � t t r. - � ....-,._. r. � J i 1 p `' ,, •-„._�--^. „< < � �'.,,•r�, �•�. `-`"'"�” 'r s � F f `" �."""'".J.,_...-------- �� .' I - • r .---•....--_J . z ✓ s S M a.. ■t.� ^—�,� �Y : '�..,z�� a'H••-1 AiTACf rED R .1 pa to^ mow �r� ' 1 •t> 's .— '' ''_.. - ._ ._� � —3Oy.26Acr�� - '* � ti / � �.,u ,.,,. ''°.'� ,*.*. .��`J4 ZO.I�iINC���iS�a�.1 i � f A' 'jt�t'�,'jf r� `� j •'''s'r� � R005ED IONY,40,RP ,. '' '�.�'� -�. -may"..'--iii tf(tpti • j " ��. til j ; t� .F y •.%twr1lID.BLifFE(i aa' \•� �'' `"^ � � 1 ��' , } 1 °, � i �`� t F, as , � ,✓ �i �.r� ,: �l1 i � ,, � y , .�" �-,,. t� E � ._.,._.,_._.._...._•.��. i , �. a, � t , '`-m----.:-•--:.. `•rte--.. g0A EX 6NINC, -_Mf PROPOSER; ZbN;'P �' � �.�. '^� Thr„/ �".'r...a' .-�^"'• � ✓ fy � F[. / �`""., 1 e °�.,,�.,,.._.,�...r'. elk i � t Pa on e:Trssocla es, Pc lZE _Opal r* .4N .. � 17 E. Picadill SL Winchester, Virginia 22601 O g VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 � EDER/CK �G�RG/N/A RGUM£ 2 August 2006 Carriage Park along the Route 7 corridor. Future extension of Carriage Park access to Valley Mill Road to the South may allow future interparcel access, depending on future applicant desires should the adjacent property develop. SITE SUITABILITY The site does not contain conditions that would preclude or substantially hinder development activities. The following table provides an area summary of environmental features: Carriage Park Property Environmental Features Total Project Area 45.44 acres Area in Flood Plain 10.50 acres 23.1% Area in Steep Slopes .48 acres .01% Area m' Wetlands TBD TBD Lakes & Ponds 0.25 acres <.01% The General Soil Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Virginia indicates that the soils comprising the subject parcels fall under the Weikert-Berks-Blairton soil association, with the particular geology being Martinsburg shale and slopes ranging from 3% to 25%. Such geology is prevalent on land located east of Interstate 81 and is not identified as prime farmland by the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. The site is predominantly wooded and no history of agricultural use has been identified. Two stream channels traverse the property, including Ash Hollow Run which runs parallel to Route 7 at the Northern boundary of the property. Ash Hollow Run flows into Abrams Creek which crosses the Eastern boundary of the site prior to crossing under Route 7 and ultimately terminating at Opequon Creek. Riparian buffers required by ordinance will be preserved on either side of the stream channel. Additionally, the design of the project will respect the 100 year flood plain associated with these stream channels (Figure 3). The majority of sensitive environmental areas identified will be placed in permanent open space. The National Wetlands Inventory does not identify any wetlands on the Carriage Park property, however any potential wetlands associated with the stream channels will be located within the project's open space and identified by a wetlands delineation as part of the Master Plan phase of the tj�� � + \i ;.`......,�� � � i ��` .`"�. � f � .-,.�'".� ..oma, � � ��—� . .✓_.'�:'. �-,. , '._._ _ °✓ ��`� 111 l •,�'--, •� ` � \ ""� f � l /_' �._-.__------ „r i , ,/ t �� .. til f` f / !✓�� ,��_. —_' } s � � I� �. r � « �"" - r 1 ,f� ' � �.`1 S\ \� �`\`° � �' A�'", �`'r�-----.� \ } r + �t '' � t!�/'i � f ✓ �`, t j i i.. 1jr n`� l f j � � j i �i+ 1��� 7/ F e ,.•-'..��� i t YS'\� � t\l ,� i,L/�tl�+fa F !_''�—`: / jprt jt,€(i{/��•.//% �'��`�- �\�et .t L ,'� �� � vl,�; rt I� -� (� � � ...•�, �� y V •� � %r �! 11 � S3�\� rC7�".�,}� # � I�iiti�i7� � � ;r, `'t � � ��'.i(' �`�`�`�.. 1 t S� r�! J � r* J Y �V .��___. f_, ' ���}`, I �+}ut 1',i "``.—.--'�...�--.._.�-U 1 rf( .� Lt i � � v � 2 ti�l�� �, �} ' � � �.. �r{ll' f1 L t"`—•,ti1-~' � �..'`V t� t �.. � j1, , it) L ---'•i ��..�•`'_`,'r'---'ti ����1�4{ ��•� k ��'�..� f J � \ 3 � } � � f � � + 3 �{ t i � , � ! � 1 ,rf -------•--_--- rt t�° \ � //�• .J ( t } j {7 t , ---- r j 5..�--.ion ; i 1�`\ �,� \ ���\y` �\`^.....--''� /� "� �S�t.; -^--, «!�\..4. //f �f jfl�l�j/(tfj�� r j / ! /+��� :� j�•'"���-'.-._=���,\ -�/ }�l}i �\��-✓ i� ��,`\�- `r� ,�>�J �.!i�\\\\\..�' `.—' �^•' / f i Y• �`^,... � � �.Frti�;��1\\�\`�,�.�� ��,t,.._�..- ^'. ✓ �(�l � ° J�TIIt� \ Yl�„ 1,,!1.�� i � / t4 FIGURE 3 CARR/AGE PARK � Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc o \ \ G,' SITE CHARACTERISTICS MAP 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 O Q VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 fREDER/CK COUMY, WGYN/A FIGURE 3 August 2006 Carriage Park project. A small pond located on the Western portion of the property will be maintained within the open space required for the development as well. Steep slopes comprise a small portion of the Property. County regulations prevent disturbance of more than 50 percent of the identified steep slopes. As such, the proposed development scheme will disturb less than one-quarter acre of steep slopes at maximum. TRAFFYc A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was prepared for this application using composite data collected from other studies in the area as well as actual traffic counts. Using traffic generation figures from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition, the TIA projects that the proposed development will produce 1,348 vehicle trips per day (VPD). The TIA further indicates that study area roads and intersections have the capacity to accommodate the trips generated by this project at acceptable and manageable level of service conditions. It is important to note that approximately 15 acres of the site are currently zoned MH1 (Mobile Home Community). At a gross density of 8 units per acre as permitted by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, the site currently has the potential to yield nearly 120 mobile home units as a by - right use. Using the equation indicated for mobile homes by the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual 7th Edition, the portion of the Property zoned MH1 could yield 700 vehicle trips. Developing the remaining 30 acres of the site zoned RA as by -right residential would yield an additional 60 trips per day from six single family detached homes bringing the potential by -right traffic generation to a total of 760 vehicle trips per day. As such, the proposed development plan would produce only 588 vehicle trips per day in excess of the existing by -right traffic generation potential. Access to the site will be provided via a single entrance on Valley Mill Road. While a right -in right - out entrance to Route 7 would be substantially less expensive, the Applicant has proffered to avoid such a connection to prevent less safe U-turn movements that would result due to the grade separation between the east bound and west bound lanes of Route 7. Project generated as well as background traffic suggests the installation of a stoplight where Route 7 intersects Valley Mill Road. This signal is provided as a component of the Carriage Park proffer package. August 2006 Carria e Park Furthermore, in recognition of the importance of the future transportation system envisioned servicing the area in close proximity to the Property's location, the Applicant has proffered $5,000.00 per single family detached and $3,000.00 per single family attached dwelling towards transportation improvements within the vicinity of the site. Assuming a full build -out as stipulated by proffer of 165 dwelling units, this monetary contribution would total $641,000.00. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND WATER SUPPLY Sewer service will be provided to the site through connection with the existing line located in the Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park (Figure 4). Using a standard rate of 200 gallons per day/dwelling unit, it is projected that the proposed development would produce 32,200 gallons of sewer flow per day. Water service will be provided by connection to the existing 8 inch line that serves the adjacent Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park. Water consumption for the project will be roughly equivalent to the projected sewage generation of 32,200 gallons per day. SITE DRAINAGE Site drainage collects and leaves the site to the north and east via Ash Hollow Run and Abrams Creek prior to draining into Opequon Creek. It is anticipated that low impact development techniques including a buffer preserving existing vegetation along Route 7 and Valley Mill Road together with good erosion control practice will mitigate adverse stormwater discharge impacts. The preservation of riparian buffers and developing with respect to the existing floodplain will provide significant mitigation of nutrient losses. Actual specification of temporary and permanent facilities will be provided with final engineering and will comply with all County, State and Federal regulations. FIGURE 4 August 2006 Carriage Park SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES The following table shows a projection of solid waste generation as a part of this project. Unit Type Units Waste Generation Total Waste (lbs) Single Fan­iIy Detached 73 12 lbs/day 876 Single Famil Attached 92 1 9 lbs/day 1 828 Total 1,704 lbs Proffered curb -side pickup will be an improvement to solid waste issues associated with increased dumpster use in the County. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey does not identify any structures of historic importance on the subject site. According to the National Park Service Stud • of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valle of Vit i , the subject site is included in the battlefield study area of the Third Battle of Winchester with the northern portions of the site along Route 7 identified as core battlefield area. The Property's location coincides with the early phases of the battle when General Sheridan's Union troops advanced through Berryville Canyon towards Jubal Early's confederate troops just outside of Winchester. Portions of the battlefield in the vicinity of the site, such as the adjoining mobile home park, have lost integrity according to the National Parr Service study. Recognizing the importance of the Property's location with respect to the preliminary phases of the Third Battle of Winchester, the Applicant has proffered to maintain the existing tree coverage on the Property within 100 feet of the Property boundary along Route 7 and Valley Mill Road. Additionally, the Applicant has proffered $25,000.00 allocated for security fencing at historic Star Fort. October 2006 Carriage Park IMPACT ON COMMUNITY FACILITIES The Applicant has proffered monies greater than the impact indicated by the newest Frederick County Fiscal Impact Model to mitigate the projected fiscal impact on community facilities attributable to the proposed rezoning. It is important to note that the existing potential for 120 mobile home units would result in a negative fiscal impact of roughly $2,700,000 without the benefit of offsetting proffers. This rezoning application removes the potential for a by -right mobile home park while simultaneously proffering monies above the projected impact of the proposed 165 single family dwelling units. Specifically, the applicant has proffered to contribute $28,290 per single family detached unit and $20,731 per single family attached (i.e. townhome) at the time of building permit issuance. The total contribution is proffered to be allocated as follows: ■ Fire and Rescue: ■ General Government: ■ Public Safety: ■ Library: ■ Parks and Recreation: ■ School Construction: ■ Transportation: TOTAL: Single Family Detached $720.00 per unit $320.00 per unit $658.00 per unit $267.00 per unit $2,136.00 per unit $19,189.00 per unit $5,000.00 per unit $28,290.00 per unit Sinvle Family Attached $528.00 per unit $245.00 per unit $503.00 per unit $204.00 per unit $1,634.00 per unit $14,618.00 per unit $3,000.00 per unit $20,731.00 per unit Patton Harris Rust & Associates Eng neers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects. 10212 Governor Lane Boulevard Suite 1007 R+A Williamsport, Maryland 217 T 301.223.4010 • F 301 .223.6868 31 Memorandum To: Michael Ruddy, Deputy Director Organization/Company: Frederick County Planning Department From: Michael Glickman, PE Date: February 23, 2007 An Addendum to: A Trac LmOactAga l.cy it of Carriage Park, dated Project Name/Subject: September 08, 2006 PHR+A Project file Number: 13554-1-1 Per your request, Patton Harris Rust & Associates (PHR+A) has prepared this document as an addendum to the study titled: A Trac ImtTctAnal s�o Carria e Park, dated September 08, 2006, in order to address modifications in land use and site -access relating to the current Carriage Park development plan. The site will include 240 residential townhouse units with access provided via a proposed signalized site -driveway located along the south side of Route 7 between Woods Mill Road (Route 660) and Valley Mill Road (Route 659). Traffic analyses are provided in this memorandum for the intersection of Route 7/Carriage Park Site -Driveway during 2007 build -out conditions. All methodology remains consistent with that of the September 08, 2006 report. TRIP GENERATION Using the 7th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trig Generation Report, PHR+A has prepared Table 1 to summarize the trip generation for the proposed Carriage Park development. Table 1 Proposed Development: Carriage Park Trip Generation Summary 2007 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS PHR+A established 2007 build -out conditions in accordance with the methodology set forth in the September 08, 2006 report. Figure 1 shows the 2007 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at the intersection of Route 7/Carriage Park Site -Driveway. Figure 2 shows the respective 2007 build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS+ levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this memorandum. CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the proposed Carriage Park development are acceptable and manageable. With signalized traffic control, the intersection of Route 7/Carriage Park Site -Driveway will operate with levels of service "C" or better during 2007 build -out conditions. Page 1 of 3 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Coda Land Use Amount ADT In Out Total In Out Total Carriage Park 230 Townhouse/Condo 240 units 18 86 104 83 41 123 2,088 Total 18 86 104 83 41 123 2,088 2007 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS PHR+A established 2007 build -out conditions in accordance with the methodology set forth in the September 08, 2006 report. Figure 1 shows the 2007 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at the intersection of Route 7/Carriage Park Site -Driveway. Figure 2 shows the respective 2007 build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS+ levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this memorandum. CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the proposed Carriage Park development are acceptable and manageable. With signalized traffic control, the intersection of Route 7/Carriage Park Site -Driveway will operate with levels of service "C" or better during 2007 build -out conditions. Page 1 of 3 Patton Harris Rust & Associates Memorandum To: Michael Ruddy Page 2of3 No Scale AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) NEWAR"MROM-0 Figure 1 2007 Build -out Traffic Conditions Engineers • Surveyors • Planners • Landscape Architects Patton Harris Rust & Associates Memorandum T o : Michael Ruddy Page 3 of 3 No Scale Denotes stop sign control Denotes traffic signal control AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 2 2007 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service Engineers • Surveyors . Planners a Landscape Architects A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriage Perk Located in: Frederick County, Virginia Prepared for: Carriage Parr LLC 2022 Meadow Springs Drive Vienna, Virginia 22182 Prepared by: Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects. 300 Foxcroft Avenue, Suite 200 + Martinsburg, West Virginia 25401 R .J� T304-264.2711 F 304.264.3671 September 08, 2006 OVERVIEW Report Summary Patton Hams Rust & Associates, pc (PHR+A) has prepared this document to present the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Carriage Park development to be located along the south side of Route 7 (Berryville Pike), east of Route 660 (Woods Mill Road) in Frederick County, Virginia. The proposed project is to include 94 townhouses and 53 single-family detached residential units with access to be provided via a single site - driveway along the west side of Route 660 (Valley Mill Road). The proposed development will be built -out over a single transportation phase by the year 2007. Figure 1 is provided to illustrate the location of the proposed Carriage Park development with respect to the surrounding roadway network. Methodology The traffic impacts accompanying the Carriage Park development were obtained through a sequence of activities as the narratives that follow document: • Assessment of background traffic including other planned projects in the area of impact, • Calculation of trip generation for the proposed Carnage Park development, • Distribution and assignment of the Carriage Park generated trips onto the completed roadway network, • Analysis of capacity, and level vv^f Se, JiCe US-'- the 4 ` +1'^ �i..Y y' p y' Alit, L Version of ule hi vvay capacity software, HCS -2000, for existing and future conditions. EXISTING CONDITIONS PHR+A conducted AM and PM peak hour manual turning movement counts at the intersections of Route 7/Route 660 and Route 7/Route 659 (Valley Mill Road). In order to demonstrate worst-case conditions, the existing traffic volumes were then balanced between the two intersections. Additionally, PHR+A conducted the eastbound U-turn counts at the intersection of Route 7/Woods Mall Road since planned improvements would require this movement to be diverted to the Route 7/Valley Mill Road intersection in the future. ADT (Average Daily Traffic) were 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 8.0% as determined from traffic count data provided by Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). Figure 2 shows the existing ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at the intersections of Route 7/Route 660 and Route 7/Route 659. Figure 3 shows the respective existing lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All traffic count data and HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. PH'I±A A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriajze Park Project Number: 13554-1-0 September 08,2006 Page 1 I -AT In No Scale ' } e N" i�F J _{.%y. _ a' Fi�'vlJe $ i a erryvlflE_r'IKe Or '•"'+-.. of p �+•:.,s2 ;! SITE 1 JL -ff N --z Figure 1 Vicinity Map: Carriage Park in Frederick County, Virginia PHRn A Traffic Impact Analysis of Can is e Park Project Number. 13554-1-0 September 08,2006 Page 2 A Traffic Impact Analysis o Carriage Park PH Project Number: 13554-1-0 September 0Page 3 Page 3 J No Scale 14� 'ON kor 1000V*Q, A° Unsignalized Intersection SITEVZO d 0 Unsignalized -A Intersection 02 Denotes stop sign control * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 3 Existing Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Traffic .Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554-1-0 September 08,2006 Page 4 2007 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS In order to estimate the future growth rates and incorporate trips associated with specific "other developments" located within the vicinity of the proposed site, PHR+A - utilized the following report: A Trafc Impact Analysis of the Haggerty Property, by PHR+A, dated September 22, 2004. PHR+A applied an annual growth rate of five percent (5%) to the existing traffic volumes (shown in Figure 2) to obtain the 2007 base conditions. Based upon the 7th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report, PHR+A has provided Table 1 to summarize the trip generation for the "other developments" surrounding the site. Figure 4 shows the 2007 background ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area. Figure 5 shows the respective 2007 background 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. Table 1 "Other Developments" Trin Genpr_nfinn Snn,mai v Code Land Use Amount AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total ADT Red -Bud Run 210 Single -Family Detached 300 units 55 165 219 182 107 288 3,000 Total 55 165 219 182 107 288 3,000 Toll Borthers-Eddy's Lane 210 Single -Family Detached 80 units 16 49 65 55 32 88 800 Total 16 49 65 55 32 88 800 Other Developments along Channing Drive 210 Single -Family Detached 300 units 55 165 219 182 107 288 3,000 230 Townhouse/Condo 130 units 11 53 64 50 25 75 1,131 820 Retail 120,000 SF 107 68 175 339 367 706 7,645 Total 172 286 458 570 498 1,069 11,776 Fieldstone Development 210 Single -Family Detached 63 units 13 40 54 45 26 71 630 230 Townhouse/Condo 207 units 16 77 92 73 36 109 1,801 Total 29 117 146 118 62 180 2,431 Chadwell Property 210 Single -Family Detached 30 units 8 23 30 23 13 36 300 Total 8 23 30 23 13 36 300 Haggerty Property 210 Single -Family Detached 180 units 34 102 135 115 67 182 1,800 220 Apartment 60 units 7 27 33 33 18 51 511 230 Townhouse/Condo 60 units 6 28 34 26 13 40 522 Total 46 157 203 174 98 272 1 2,833 /� A_ Traffic Impact Analysis of Carnia e Park T T1 \ Project Number: 13554-1-0 (--j 1 September 08,2006 1 1 Page 5 No Scale ti N ti N 37)172 10 c.css)1 Sp "019(2108) (1234)1389 OM 2 o� �jr�jJ�I�J AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) IFigure 4 2007 Background Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park PH � Project Number: 13554-1-0 September 08,2006 Page 6 a No Scale SIVE V 0 r Unsignalized ~ Intersection Denotes stop sign control Denotes traffic signal control * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 5 2007 Background Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Tra{fic Impact Analysis o{Carriage Park PRAH Project Number: 13554-1-0 September 08,2006 Page 7 Signalized Intersection LOS—B(C) ( � L�z7nw, (W)C,�► SIVE V 0 r Unsignalized ~ Intersection Denotes stop sign control Denotes traffic signal control * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 5 2007 Background Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Tra{fic Impact Analysis o{Carriage Park PRAH Project Number: 13554-1-0 September 08,2006 Page 7 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 Carriage Park development. Table 2 Proposed Development: Carriage Park Trip Generation Summary TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT The distribution of trips, shown in Figure 6, was based upon local travel patterns for the roadway network surrounding the proposed Carriage Park development. Figure 7 shows the respective development -generated AM/PM peak hour trips and ADT assignments at key locations through out the study area. 2007 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS Carriage Park assigned trips (Figure 7) were added to the 2007 background traffic volumes (Figure 4) to obtain 2007 build -out conditions. Figure S shows the 2007 build- out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations through out the study area. Figure 9 shows the respective 2007 build -out lane geometry and AMIPM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the proposed Carriage Park development, assuming suggested improvements, are acceptable and manageable. Assuming plarmed study area intersection improvements, each of the intersections will operate with levels of service "C" or better during 2007 build -out conditions. P A Trac Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554-1-0 H September 08,2006 Page 8 AM Peak Hour PM Peak HourCode Land Use Amount ADT In Out Total In Out Total Carriage Park 210 Single -Family Detached 53 units 12 35 4,7 38 22 61 530 230 Townhouse/Condo 94 units 8 41 49 38 19 57 818 Total 1 20 76 96 76 41 118 1 1,348 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT The distribution of trips, shown in Figure 6, was based upon local travel patterns for the roadway network surrounding the proposed Carriage Park development. Figure 7 shows the respective development -generated AM/PM peak hour trips and ADT assignments at key locations through out the study area. 2007 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS Carriage Park assigned trips (Figure 7) were added to the 2007 background traffic volumes (Figure 4) to obtain 2007 build -out conditions. Figure S shows the 2007 build- out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations through out the study area. Figure 9 shows the respective 2007 build -out lane geometry and AMIPM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the proposed Carriage Park development, assuming suggested improvements, are acceptable and manageable. Assuming plarmed study area intersection improvements, each of the intersections will operate with levels of service "C" or better during 2007 build -out conditions. P A Trac Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554-1-0 H September 08,2006 Page 8 A- 1 Figure 6 PHRn Trip Distribution Percentages A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriaze Park Project Number: 13554-1-0 September 08,2006 Page 9 No Scale �0 It% (v 45(25) (4612 r� 7 ) I Figure 7 e ]e` AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) -4-A Average Daily Trips I PHR/� Trip Assignments A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554-1-0 September 08,2006 Page 10 No Scale 1s0),� 1280(140I),ft"", (2133) AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Figure 8 2007 Build -out Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554-1-0 PH September Page I6 Page 11 J_ 1�1 No Scale ,O -:Signalized I"Suggested Signalized •`� TotersectiI Improvement" LOS—B(_C) Sigualization Intersection LOS=B(C) ftft* 211 7 �► �Bj ; . SITE fe _ C Unsign alized Intersection Denotes stop sign control Denotes traffic signal control * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 9 2007 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carria e� Park PR+AProject Number: 13554-1-0 H September 08,2006 Page 12 REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning Staff. �, Fee Amount Paid S �qq - 26 Zoning Amendment Number /2-0.6 -Date Received p b d (, PC Hearing Date BOS Hearing Date The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicants: Name: Patton Harris Rust & Associates Telephone: (540) 667.2139 Address: 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 2. Property Owner (if different than above) Name: Carriage Place, LLC Telephone: 540.662.7160 Address: 22A Ricketts Drive Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, Virginia 22601 3. Contact person(s) if other than above Name: Patrick Sowers Telephone: (540) 667.2139 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location Map X Agency Comments X Plat X Fees X Deed of property X Impact Analysis Statement X Verification of taxes paid x Proffer Statement X 1 5. The Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned: Denver Quinnelly 6. A) Current Use of the Property: Mobile Home Park Residential & Vacant B) Proposed Use of the Property: SF Detached & Attached 7. Adjoining Property: SEE ATTACHED. PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING S. Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers). South & adjacent to Route 7 east & adjacent to Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park 2 In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for the applicant to provide information concerning the specifics of the proposed use. Otherwise, the planning staff will use the maximum possible density of intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on page 9 of the application package. 9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number: 55-A-161, 55 -A -165A, 55-A-166, 55-A-167, 55 -A -167A, 55 A-168, 55 -A -174A, 55 -A -174B, 55 -A -174D Districts Magisterial: Fire Service: Rescue Service Red Bud Greenwood Greenwood High School: Middle School: Elementary School: Millbrook JW Middle Red Bud 10. Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. Acres Current Zoning ZoninR Re uested 30.26 RA RP 15.18 MH -1 RP 45.44 Total acreage to be rezoned 11. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed Single Family Home 73 Townhome 92 Multi -Family Non -Residential Lots Mobile Home Hotel Rooms Office Retail Restaurant Square Footage of Proposed Uses Service Station Manufacturing Flex - Warehouse Other 3 1.2. 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 cert*fy that s plication and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (o knowl dge. Applicant(s) Date 0 Date 4 Carriage Park Rezoning Application Adjoining Property Owners Tax ID # Name Address Zoning 55-A-162 Baylis Investments, LLC 2332 Middle Road, Winchester, VA 22601 RA _Use Residential 55-A-163 Ba lis Investments, LLC 2332 Middle Road, Winchester, VA 22601 RA Residential 55-A-164 Robert E. & Gladdie R. Carter 1560 Valley Mill Road, Winchester, VA 22602 RA Residential 55-A-165 Valley Mill Farm, LC 8705 C Street, Chesapeake Beach, VA 20732 RA A ricultural 55 -A -165D Valley Mill Farm, LC 8705 C Street, Chesapeake Beach, VA 20732 RA Agricultural 55 -A -168A Brian Scott Williams 2718 Berryville Pike, Winchester, VA 22603 RA Residential 55-A-169 My -ton L. & Lorie M. Ace 11240 Cleveland Avenue, Ft. Myers, FL. 33907 RA Retail & Services 55-A-170 David Bragg P.O. Box 174, Clearbrook, VA 22624RA Residential 55-A-171 Three Way Partnership 504 Eagle Place, Winchester, VA 22601 RA Residential 55-A-172 William C. Whitmore, Jr. Etals P.O. Box 550, Purcellville, VA 20134 RA Residential 55 -A -174C Blue Rid e Associates 2432 Berr7ille Pike, Winchester, VA 22603 RA Residential 55-A-146 William D. Alexander 2663 Berryville Pike, Winchester, VA 22603 RA Residential 55-A-147 William A.'& Maria H. Balling 111 Burnt Factory Road, Stephenson, VA 22656 RA Residential 55-A-159 Thomas R. Baggerly, Sr. 8904 Telford Court, Bristow, VA 2013.6 RA Residential 55-A-160 William W. & Ruby Lee Beck 2851 Berryville Pike, Winchester, VA 22603 RA Residential 55-A-174 -Phyllis B. Holtkamp Etals C/O John Bradfield 8225 Cambourne Court, Gaithersburg, MD 20877 RA ARriculltural 55-4-1B Joseph D. & Amy H. Sowers 111 Edd s Lane, Winchester, VA 22602 RA Residential Special Limited Power of Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia Frederick Planning Web Site: ww'w.colredernick.va.us Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395 Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name)Denver. Quinnelly Carriage Place, LLC (Phone) 540-662-7160 (Address) 22A Ricketts Drive Winchester VA 22601 the owner(s) of all those tracts or parcels of land ("Property") conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by Instrument No.21857 & 21858 on Page and is described as Parcels: 55 -A -174A, 174D, 161, 166, 167, 165A, 174B, 167A, 168 Parcel: Lot: Block: Section: Subdivision: do hereby make, constitute and appoint: Name)John Callow, Chuck Maddox., Patrick Sowers, Clay Athey, PHRA Phone: 540-667-2139 (Address)117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200, Winchester, VA 22601 To act as my true and lawful attorney-in-fact for and in my (our) name, place, and stead with full power and authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described Property, including: X Rezoning (including proffers) Conditional Use Permits X Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) X Subdivision X Site Plan My attorney-in-fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously approved proffered conditions except as follows: This authorizatin shall e: modified. In witness there f (w Signature(s) _: •Mate of Virginia, City/goof 1, year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or my (our) hand and seal this day i- s To -wit: s r � 1 Notary Public to, aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally apps and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this �2 day of January 2006 Carriage Park V. SURVEY PLAT DEED AREA ZONED RA: 30.26 ACRES AREA ZONED MH1: 15.18 ACRES TOTAL AREA: 45.44 ACRES / \ /'J C tAT�b C 400, Z X22538"M �-- w ES --\ OU \ C�aiyg VALLEY ROAD CURVE TABLE 3M4, LINE TABLE, N1B'f2'3t� Basi g1RJE R.tDllb Cl LENGTH TNJ6ENT BCAWNB CNOROOFLTI YE RUMNO IEmw cz t n.tr BiJw JLJS• uesa,c a xezartaw ]xn' �� 55-((A))-I6SA mo_tf Gf ai0v' 21Ae' '� ]GEBY SVK atsi' ztlB'9' LS seza'aYrr vim' - LS V Z'W jj&W l5 55-((A))-1741) \ RtBV! E_ y t Yf ft LD a4 55_((Pi)-16 8 N Bas' tt\ I`t W � ZCNm_ IAn aC ��pyfa7C N\_7 O,• �' N 31 V1'21" C 52B_Sl'___ • 55 -((A)) -174A e�4•\ I `l i 55 -((A)) -167A IE Y I a ern � AREA ZONED RA: 30.26 ACRES AREA ZONED MH1: 15.18 ACRES TOTAL AREA: 45.44 ACRES /'J C tAT�b C Z X22538"M �-- w ES --\ OU \ C�aiyg VALLEY ROAD CURVE TABLE 3M4, LINE TABLE, N1B'f2'3t� Basi g1RJE R.tDllb Cl LENGTH TNJ6ENT BCAWNB CNOROOFLTI YE RUMNO IEmw cz t n.tr BiJw JLJS• uesa,c a xezartaw ]xn' �� 55-((A))-I6SA mo_tf Gf ai0v' 21Ae' '� ]GEBY SVK atsi' ztlB'9' LS seza'aYrr vim' - LS V Z'W jj&W l5 LD N Bas' tt\ AREA ZONED RA: 30.26 ACRES AREA ZONED MH1: 15.18 ACRES TOTAL AREA: 45.44 ACRES Carriage Park Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc ll: o ZONING BOUNDARIES 117 E. Picadilly 5t. Winchester, Virginia 22601 O VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 Q) FREDERICK COWTY WOW /'J C tAT�b C Z X22538"M �-- w ES --\ OU \ C�aiyg VALLEY ROAD 3M4, N1B'f2'3t� Basi Carriage Park Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc ll: o ZONING BOUNDARIES 117 E. Picadilly 5t. Winchester, Virginia 22601 O VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 Q) FREDERICK COWTY WOW VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1,500' AREA TABULATION: OWNER TABULATION: PARCEL ID AREA RECORDING REF. CURRENT OWNER(S) 55-((A))-161 0.2709 AC. DB 968, PG 1064 BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES 55-((A -165A 3.3439 AC. DB 968, PG 1064 BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES 55-((A))-166 6.5655 AC. DB 968, PG 1064 BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES 55-(_LA,)7167 2.2610 AC. DB 968, PG_ 1064 BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES 55_((A)) -167A 5.0531 AC. _ INST #030003917 BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES 55-( -168 0.2602 AC. INST #030022941 BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES 55 -((A)) -174A 18.5017 AC. DB 968, PG 1064, BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES INST #050020490 & INST #050020491 55 -((A)) -174B 55 -((A)) -174D 4. /592 AC. DB 958, PG 1064 4.4271 AC. DB 495, PG 51 & INST #050020489 TOTAL AREA 45.4426 AC. (THIS SURVEY) ALL AREAS: AS NOW SURVEYED A1,TH 0F Lf� o .- C) CORY M. HAYNES v No. 2539 q�®�oS LEGEND: INST # DB PG HPB AC IRF IPF 0 MON N /F R/W VDOT DRN SAN SEW ESMT 0 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION: I, CORY M. HAYNES, A DULY LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR !N THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, HEREBY CERTIFY, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, THAT THE PROPERTIES CONTAINED IN THIS SURVEY ARE THE SAME PROPERTIES CONVEYED TO JERRY L. & WINIFRED D. UPDYKE BY DEED RECORDED IN DB 495, PG 51 (ADJUSTED BY BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT RECORDED AT INST #050020489) AND TO BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES BY DEEDS RECORDED IN DB 968, PG 1064, INST #030003917 AND INST #030022941 (ADJUSTED BY BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENTS RECORDED AT INST #050020490 AND INST #050020491) AMONG THE LAND RECORDS OF FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA. BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES JERRY L. & WINIFRED D. UPDYKE INSTRUMENT NUMBER DEED BOOK PAGE HIGHWAY PLAT BOOK ACRES IRON ROD FOUND IRON PIPE FOUND IRON ROD SET (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) MONUMENT NOW OR FORMERLY CENTERLINE RIGHT OF WAY VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DRAINAGE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT UTILITY POLE SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE BOUNDARY SURVEY CERTAIN PROPERTIES OF BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES AND JERRY L & WINIFRED D. UPDYKE RED BUD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA UPDATED: 'SEPT. 8, 2005 SCALE: AS SHOWN DATE: AUG. 26, 2005 Patton H arris Rust & Associates,pc Engineers_ Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects, 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Pi4-R. Winchester, Virginia 22601 T 540.6672139 F 640.665.0493 curc-r . nr irm TITLE REPORT REVIEW: EXCEPTIONS listed in Schedule B - Section 2 of the Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation Case No. TC05-1080 & TC05-1081 with an effective date of 08/01/05 at 2:00 PM and received by PHR+A on 09/08/05 are addressed by item number as follows: 1. None of which the surveyor, has been advised, except as may be shown on the survey. AS TO ALL TRACTS: 2. Not a survey matter. 3. See survey. 4.-7. Not survey matters. AS TO TRACT ONE ONLY (PARCEL 174D): 8. R/W to Potomac Edison Co., DB 344, PG 248 - Does not affect Parcel 174D. 9. R/W to C&P Telephone Co., DB 182, PG 308 - Parcel 174D is subject to this esmt. Location is not determined. 10. R/W to FCSA, DB 693, PG 204 - Does not affect Parcel 174D (but does affect Parcel 174A - see survey). AS TO TRACT TWO ONLY (PARCELS 161, 165A, 166, 167 167A, 168, 174A & 174B): 11. Esmt to C&P Telephone Co., DB 806, PG 1596 - j Does .not affect. AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCELS 2-9 ONLY (PARCELS 161, 165A, 166, 167, 167A, 168 & 1748): 12. Exact acreage or square footage of land described in Schedule A - as shown on survey. AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCEL 2 ONLY (PARCEL 167A): 13. Matters on plat by Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S., DB 459, PG 197 - 12' R/W - shown on survey (also see note 9). 14. Matters on plat by David M. Furstenou, L.S., DB 938, PG 1505 - Powerline - shown on survey (other items not determined by this survey). AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCEL 4 ONLY (PARCEL 165A): 15. Matters on plot by Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S.. DB 443, PG 188 - Abrams Creek - shown on survey. AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCEL 5 ONLY (PARCEL 166): 16. Matters on plat by Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S., DB 280, PG 658-659 - 12' R/W - shown on survey; Abrams Creek relocated (VDOT Project No. 0007-034-101, C-501, PE -101, RW -201). See new location on sheet 4 of survey. AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCEL 6 ONLY (PARCEL 174B): 17. Matters on plot by Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S., DB 432, PG 263-264 - Abrams Creek - shown on survey. AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCEL 7 ONLY (PART OF PARCEL 167A): 18. Matters on plat by Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S., DB 284, PG 515 - see note 10. AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCEL 8 ONLY LTH p (PARCEL 167): �Q �' 19. Matters on plot by Gj Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S., e� 1 O DB 292, PG 412 - see note 9. O r U CORY M. HAYNES 9 No. 2539 gfgJos. NOTES: LINE TABLE CURVE TABLE LENGTH L7 CURVE I RADIUS LENGTH TANGENT BEARING CHORD DELTA C7 1457.44' 30&07' 153.60' S60'74'58"E 305.51' 12'01'56" C2 20.00' 51.26' 1 67.17' S07'09'13"W 38.34' 146'50'18" C3 200.36' 42.00' 21.08' 58634'39"W 41.92' 12'00'33" C4 378.09' 396.97' 218.98' S62'30'16"W 378.98' 60'09'20" C5 325.77' 117.60' 59.45' S22'05'07"W 116.96' 20'40'58" C6 348.63' 139.48' 70.68' 523'12'19"W 138.55' 22'55'21" C7 389.50' 77.82' 39.04' S40'23'26"W 77.69' 11'26'53" C8 1407.34' 152.80' 76.48' S5558'1 3"E 152.73' 6'13'15" C9 1407.34' 314.51' 157.91' S65'28'59"E 313.86' 12'48'16" TITLE REPORT REVIEW: EXCEPTIONS listed in Schedule B - Section 2 of the Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation Case No. TC05-1080 & TC05-1081 with an effective date of 08/01/05 at 2:00 PM and received by PHR+A on 09/08/05 are addressed by item number as follows: 1. None of which the surveyor, has been advised, except as may be shown on the survey. AS TO ALL TRACTS: 2. Not a survey matter. 3. See survey. 4.-7. Not survey matters. AS TO TRACT ONE ONLY (PARCEL 174D): 8. R/W to Potomac Edison Co., DB 344, PG 248 - Does not affect Parcel 174D. 9. R/W to C&P Telephone Co., DB 182, PG 308 - Parcel 174D is subject to this esmt. Location is not determined. 10. R/W to FCSA, DB 693, PG 204 - Does not affect Parcel 174D (but does affect Parcel 174A - see survey). AS TO TRACT TWO ONLY (PARCELS 161, 165A, 166, 167 167A, 168, 174A & 174B): 11. Esmt to C&P Telephone Co., DB 806, PG 1596 - j Does .not affect. AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCELS 2-9 ONLY (PARCELS 161, 165A, 166, 167, 167A, 168 & 1748): 12. Exact acreage or square footage of land described in Schedule A - as shown on survey. AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCEL 2 ONLY (PARCEL 167A): 13. Matters on plat by Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S., DB 459, PG 197 - 12' R/W - shown on survey (also see note 9). 14. Matters on plat by David M. Furstenou, L.S., DB 938, PG 1505 - Powerline - shown on survey (other items not determined by this survey). AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCEL 4 ONLY (PARCEL 165A): 15. Matters on plot by Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S.. DB 443, PG 188 - Abrams Creek - shown on survey. AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCEL 5 ONLY (PARCEL 166): 16. Matters on plat by Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S., DB 280, PG 658-659 - 12' R/W - shown on survey; Abrams Creek relocated (VDOT Project No. 0007-034-101, C-501, PE -101, RW -201). See new location on sheet 4 of survey. AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCEL 6 ONLY (PARCEL 174B): 17. Matters on plot by Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S., DB 432, PG 263-264 - Abrams Creek - shown on survey. AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCEL 7 ONLY (PART OF PARCEL 167A): 18. Matters on plat by Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S., DB 284, PG 515 - see note 10. AS TO TRACT TWO, PARCEL 8 ONLY LTH p (PARCEL 167): �Q �' 19. Matters on plot by Gj Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S., e� 1 O DB 292, PG 412 - see note 9. O r U CORY M. HAYNES 9 No. 2539 gfgJos. NOTES: 1. FREDERICK COUNTY TAX MAP REFERENCES: 55 -((A)) -PARCELS 161, 165A, 166, 167, 167A, 168 174A, 174B AND 176D. 2. PARCELS 174A & 174D (AND ADJOINING PARCELS 174C & 174E) DEPICTED HEREIN ARE BASED ON THOSE CERTAIN THREE (3) BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT PLATS PREPARED BY PHR+A, DATED APRIL 20, 2005, UPDATED JULY 7, 2005, RECORDED AT INST No.'s 050020489, 050020490 & 050020491 AND PURSUANT TO A CURRENT FIELD RUN SURVEY. 3. PARCELS 161, 165A, 166, 167, 167A, 168 & 1746 DEPICTED HEREIN ARE DERIVED FROM A CURRENT FIELD RUN SURVEY (DATE OF LAST FIELD INSPECTION = AUG. 26, 2005) PURSUANT TO RECORD INFORMATION; REFERENCE THE HEREIN LISTED INSTRUMENTS RECORDED AMONG THE LAND RECORDS OF FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA AND THE FREDERICK COUNTY TAX ASSESSMENT RECORDS. 4. CURRENT ZONING: RA AND MH1 (SEE SURVEY). 5. BASIS OF MERIDIAN SHOWN HEREIN IS A FIELD RUN GPS SURVEY CONDUCTED BY THIS FIRM WHICH TIES THIS PROJECT TO NAD 83, VIRGINIA STATE PLANE (NORTH ZONE) DATUM. 6. THE LOCATION OR EXISTENCE OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE OR DAMAGED AREAS OR WETLANDS (IF ANY) IS NOT DETERMINED BY THIS SURVEY. 7. ADJOINING PROPERTY INFORMATION SHOWN HEREIN IS DERIVED FROM INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM THE FREDERICK COUNTY MAPPING SERVICE (INTERNET WEBSITE gis.co.frederick.va.us) JUNE, 2005. 8. BASED ON THE HEREIN REFERENCED FIELD SURVEY, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN, THERE ARE NO APPARENT GAPS, GORES OR OVERLAPS OF WHICH THE SURVEYOR HAS ASCERTAINED OR BEEN ADVISED. 9. REFERENCE PARCEL 167; DB 968, PG 1064 AND DB 491, PG 284 APPARENTLY OMIT A LESS AND EXCEPT REFERENCE TO DB 459, PG 197 (PART OF DB 292, PG 410) WHICH CONVEYED A PORTION OF PARCEL 167 INTO PARCEL 167A. 10. REFERENCE PARCEL 167A; THE 0.66 ACRE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DB 284, PG 513 IS NOW PART OF (CONTAINED WHOLLY WITHIN) PARCEL 167A. 11. REFERENCE PARCEL 168; INST #030022941 (PARCEL 2, TAX MAP 55-A-168) APPARENTLY OMITS A LESS AND EXCEPT REFERENCE TO THE PLAT OF DIVISION RECORDED IN DB 520, PG 864. CURRENT PARCEL 168 IS IDENTIFIED AS "PARCEL B. 0.260 ACRES" ON SAID PLAT OF DIVISION. BOUNDARY SURVEY CERTAIN PROPERTIES OF BLUE RIDGENADSSOCIATES JERRY L & WINIFRED D. UPDYKE RED BUD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA UPDATED: SEPT. 8, 2005 SCALE: AS SHOWN DATE: AUG. 26, 2005 Patton Harris Rust & Associates;pc Engineers. Surveyors_ Planners. Landscape Architects. PHRA 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 T 540.667.2139 F 540.665.0493 «T LINE TABLE LINE BEARING LENGTH L7 N61'15'01"E 20.46' L2 S6542'25"E 19.04' L3 S28'24'45"W 93.31' L4 N57'07'1 4"W 39.11' L5 S51'46'30"W 162.46' L6 N52'23'22"E 183.91' L7 N66'41'36"E 94.26' L8 S51'15'39"W 43.10' L9 S15'15'39"W 100.00' N55`42'24"E 29.06' LI1 E0 N78'40'24"E 31.58' 2 S75'19'36"E 46.95' 1. FREDERICK COUNTY TAX MAP REFERENCES: 55 -((A)) -PARCELS 161, 165A, 166, 167, 167A, 168 174A, 174B AND 176D. 2. PARCELS 174A & 174D (AND ADJOINING PARCELS 174C & 174E) DEPICTED HEREIN ARE BASED ON THOSE CERTAIN THREE (3) BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT PLATS PREPARED BY PHR+A, DATED APRIL 20, 2005, UPDATED JULY 7, 2005, RECORDED AT INST No.'s 050020489, 050020490 & 050020491 AND PURSUANT TO A CURRENT FIELD RUN SURVEY. 3. PARCELS 161, 165A, 166, 167, 167A, 168 & 1746 DEPICTED HEREIN ARE DERIVED FROM A CURRENT FIELD RUN SURVEY (DATE OF LAST FIELD INSPECTION = AUG. 26, 2005) PURSUANT TO RECORD INFORMATION; REFERENCE THE HEREIN LISTED INSTRUMENTS RECORDED AMONG THE LAND RECORDS OF FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA AND THE FREDERICK COUNTY TAX ASSESSMENT RECORDS. 4. CURRENT ZONING: RA AND MH1 (SEE SURVEY). 5. BASIS OF MERIDIAN SHOWN HEREIN IS A FIELD RUN GPS SURVEY CONDUCTED BY THIS FIRM WHICH TIES THIS PROJECT TO NAD 83, VIRGINIA STATE PLANE (NORTH ZONE) DATUM. 6. THE LOCATION OR EXISTENCE OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE OR DAMAGED AREAS OR WETLANDS (IF ANY) IS NOT DETERMINED BY THIS SURVEY. 7. ADJOINING PROPERTY INFORMATION SHOWN HEREIN IS DERIVED FROM INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM THE FREDERICK COUNTY MAPPING SERVICE (INTERNET WEBSITE gis.co.frederick.va.us) JUNE, 2005. 8. BASED ON THE HEREIN REFERENCED FIELD SURVEY, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN, THERE ARE NO APPARENT GAPS, GORES OR OVERLAPS OF WHICH THE SURVEYOR HAS ASCERTAINED OR BEEN ADVISED. 9. REFERENCE PARCEL 167; DB 968, PG 1064 AND DB 491, PG 284 APPARENTLY OMIT A LESS AND EXCEPT REFERENCE TO DB 459, PG 197 (PART OF DB 292, PG 410) WHICH CONVEYED A PORTION OF PARCEL 167 INTO PARCEL 167A. 10. REFERENCE PARCEL 167A; THE 0.66 ACRE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DB 284, PG 513 IS NOW PART OF (CONTAINED WHOLLY WITHIN) PARCEL 167A. 11. REFERENCE PARCEL 168; INST #030022941 (PARCEL 2, TAX MAP 55-A-168) APPARENTLY OMITS A LESS AND EXCEPT REFERENCE TO THE PLAT OF DIVISION RECORDED IN DB 520, PG 864. CURRENT PARCEL 168 IS IDENTIFIED AS "PARCEL B. 0.260 ACRES" ON SAID PLAT OF DIVISION. BOUNDARY SURVEY CERTAIN PROPERTIES OF BLUE RIDGENADSSOCIATES JERRY L & WINIFRED D. UPDYKE RED BUD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA UPDATED: SEPT. 8, 2005 SCALE: AS SHOWN DATE: AUG. 26, 2005 Patton Harris Rust & Associates;pc Engineers. Surveyors_ Planners. Landscape Architects. PHRA 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 T 540.667.2139 F 540.665.0493 «T �RZN q` i---, S�p\V p�P��7�E Ll C A I ✓� c3°° i H1 "�/�� AO✓OSTEO � KSEE NOTE 55 -((A)) -,174A -SAO✓[/STEO (-S TE 2) 55 -((A)) -174D 1 ZONED: MH1 ZONED: MH1_ ZONLD RA % Z SAO✓l/S -22 (SEE NOTE 2) 55 -((A)) -174A N/F I/AZZEY IW/ZZ FARM, Z. C. /NST. ,010001,362 0 /NST. #01 00 028 74 \ ZONED.- RA \ .-g PMS P >>o Q) 'SSOC/A TES �B�690, PG 655 ZONED: E MN�-RA Ocr (A)1' I 55-((A)) \161�A , 166' ZONED:A l ' A Iry ,La -i' _j i 55-((A))-165, �1 Q ZONED: RAk. + c~/) W` 161 _'f - " Z 55-((A))-1748 ZONED: RA STATE ROUTE 6 VALLEY MILL Rn NOTE: SHEET NUMBERS ARE LOCATED IN, THE UPPER RIGHT CORNER OF EACH SCREENED OUTLINE. PARCEL 161 = SHEET 4 PARCEL 165A = SHEET 5 PARCEL 166 = SHEET 5 PARCEL 167 = SHEET 6 PARCEL 167A = SHEET 6PARCEL 168 = __p PARCEL 174S6T u A=SHEET7, 8 &/Uo� yy�' CF /fj PARCEL 1748 = SHEET 4 PARCEL 174D = SHEET 7'� CORY M. HAYNES v No. 2539 GRAPHIC SCALE O 150 300 600 1 inch = 300 ft. BOUNDARY SURVEY CERTAIN PROPERTIES OF BLUE RIDGENADSSOCIATES a JERRY L & WINIFRED D. UPDYKE RED BUD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA UPDATED: SEPT. B, 2005 SCALE: 1" = 300' DATE: AUG. 26 2005 Patton Harris Rust & Associates,pc Engineers. Surveyors- Planners. Landscape Architects. PRn 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 T 540.667.2139 F 540.665.0493 [HEFT z nc 3 a N O z 0 h b �- rn cn co w c� z o_ rr O Z M SS _767 566.1 ' C S, Co ro 109o''F z J �1 z J N O J I3: a3 °° (f) o�W N �00 O z W r I� O w oN a n_z _(0 00cr! r N tb O z w 00 a r - ►. A �R, F � COMM IyEAZ 7H OF 111ROINIA RLc_&A/rUOER OF OB 345 PG 2E SAN SEW ESMT HPE 5, PG 252 DB 580PG 338 rJ C2� SEE SHEET 3J , o 158.67' 55— ((A)) -174B _ 87-25'04-'\N_C3 4.7592 AC C4 ZONED: RA � EDGE OF PAVEMENT N Ov /KIT_ \��4 LTH C) co Q:- N OF G I Q O � CORY M. HAYNES a No. 2539 BOUNDARY SURVEY CERTAIN PROPERTIES OF BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES <rj AND 0)O ,-Awry JERRY L & WINIFRED D. UPDYKE C)) RED BUD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA UPDATED: SEPT. 8, 2005 SCALE: 1" = 100' DATE: AUG. 26, 2005 -Patton Harris Rust & Associates,pc GRAPHIC SCALE Engineers, Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects. 0 50 100 200 1.17 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 �I II Winchester, Virginia 22601 +A T 540.667.2139 1 inch = 100 ft F 540.665.0493 SHEET 4 OF ! IPF — —S11'1` 6'33 W 352.37' _ IPF 174A � 174A / h a ' / 167 / VIRGINIA STATE PLANE NORTH ` NAD 83 IRF NAD \ o 1 \1 � 167A \ 1 \ IP F \ X681 o�F cr \55-((A))-166 6.5655 AC L12 r, \ ZONED: RA 1 \ L11 �e 1 55 -((A)) -165A L10 oe s90/�A�F 3.3439 AC ZONED: RA \ '8Q 1 s F 1 Q� ABRAMS CREEK C9�� SO4'31'18'W � ��� of e 166.36' L1 17stB L9 �A11,TH OF off$ Lf� U r�,�_, r G Ofi�f1W01VW7AZ T1> OF 1/IRG//U/A BOUNDARY SURVEY CERTAIN PROPERTIES OF CORY M. HAYNES v REMA/NDER OF BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES No. 2539 OB J45, PG 28 ,AND 41 B Jos HPB 5, PG 252 JERRY L & WINIFRED D. UPDYKE [ SEE SHEET 3j RED BUD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA ��� svR`04 UPDATED: SEPT. 8, 2005 SCALE: 1" = 100' DATE: AUG. 26, 2005 Patton Harris Rust & Associates,pc 3 Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects. q GRAPHIC SCALE 0 7U ioo ioo Winchester, East Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Z F�{ PH -� Winchester, Virginia 22601 0 T 540.667.2139 1 inch = 100 ft_ F 540.665.0493 SHEET 5 OF 9 `o 55-��AJJ-174E p7, 52,.E �' \ 'V/F BLUE R/OGE IRF N188a'9a 8 0 CP �1 ASSOC/A TES01 OB 690, PG 655`6� 1 6, o 026, MHS r" a IBi U) IFF S2 ,1 J S�8�VRN ESMT U! o� 40 0 1 PO 669 LA 0I� v1� Dg 342, �riJ OC; IPF p C'1 Z W 174ALo d ^�O (O I 4 S3234'20"W L lF 135.05' IPF 535'17'48"W55 -((A))-167 2_06.06' IPF 2.2610 AC ZONED: RA S 8 /-9 N J 01� W a- 61 w fT1 � } � N j 55 -((A)) -167A M 5.0531 AC ZONED: RA a 1 L'ZW s a3 Y^\ W a FW o_ IPF 1(p W --3 226.81, N >- w 166 ¢ m -O" Li112 ~ X12 �B 280 ATE R/W m �> D8 459pG 66956 �10 N37-41 — 4. 180 45E a �O Q�PNF, S LTH �P o CORY M. HAYNES 9 No. 2539 9 �g�oS GRAPHIC SCALE 0 50 100 200 1 inch = 100 ft_ BOUNDARY SURVEY CERTAIN PROPERTIES OF BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES AND JERRY L & WINIFRED D. UPDYKE RED BUD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ! FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA UPDATED: SEPT_ 8, 2005 SCALE: 1" = 100' DATE: AUG. 26, 2005 Patton Harris Rust 8, Associates,pc Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects. r ` Wi East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 M[�)��,(//�\1 Winchester, Virginia 22601 T 540.6672139 F 540.665.0493 SHEET 6 OF U 0 0 0 z m 0 a n M J74C 00 :'I - 174Z- 74E 46o.16'----- 460.16'----- ADJUSTED ADJUSTED (SEE NOTE 2) 55 -((A)) -174D 4.4271 AC ZONED: MH1 0 A-4 0) 0 0 � z z otc IN co f-- 0 z W z Q a- 00 W InVI p Q Q z V) Q z_ C� g4A 17 / ny SCALE: 1" = 1000' _ _S84'17'10"E 320.55' s� sy 10 / ADJUSTED Go (SEE NOTE 2) w 55 -((A)) -174A a / 18.5017 AC i w / ZONED: MH1 & RA / w u1 I � w j� H �� ALT OF pr , zc� U CORY M. HAYNES a �41 No. 2539 Sh��1��6FPR2 I$los / v1R bUUNDARY SURVEY JP ,�Eo' CERTAIN PROPERTIES OF IF �I�S 20 BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES I AND N74.11'26:.w JERRY L & NNIFRED D. UPDYKE RED BUD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT 6N 76' TIPFFREDERICK COUNTY, RGINIA 30" AR VI UPDATED: SEPT. 8, 2005 OA1C SCALE: 1" = 100 DATE: AUG. 26, 2005 Patton Harris Rust & Associates,pc GRAPHIC SCALE Engineers. Surveyors, Planners. Landscape Architects. 0 50 100 200 1 117 East Piccadilly Street Suite 200 � RA Winchester, Virginia 22601 T 540.667.2139 1 inch = 100 ft. PHF 540.665.0493 SHEET 7 OF 3 0 C' } z z 0 n Q V 386. I ADJUSTED I (SEE NOTE 2) I 55 -((A)) -174A 18.5017 AC 1 ZONED: MW & RA 1 CO I NIS 0 z _O NI a a 1 Ow �I 00 �r o-j �;- i-- O w_ � N W0U( QCV bi CD ll lil X U) 0Uvtp1 W bi CO Om,- -tQm • � QO(no O Z I I I I I N74.1-- 2'W----_ 469_;,- GRAPHIC 6g_;, GRAPHIC SCALE 0 50 100 200 I I _I 1 inch = 100 ft. 10 1740 174Z - 1,740 74E 74A / O SCALE: 1 " = 1000' z m O Z r �p,LTH O� L H CORY M. HAYNES a No. 2539 g(8�os BOUNDARY SURVEY CERTAIN PROPERTIES OF BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES AND JERRY L & WINIFRED D. UPDYKE RED BUD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY,VIRGINIA UPDATED: SEPT. 8, 2005 SCALE: 1" = 100' DATE: AUG. 26, 2005 Patton Harris -Rust & Associates,pc Engineers, Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects. Pf East Piccadilly Suite 200 -R+A Winchester, Virginia 226022601 T 540.667.2139 4 F 540.665.0493 SHEET 8 OF 9 768 IPF IPF SS IRF 77-98 617 34 ^E 167 S72'05'58"E 158.05•IPF / ADJUSTED G (SEE NOTE 2) CO 155 -((A)) -174A N IIQ� 18.5017 AC /-C U� I ZONED: MW& RA /0., / NIZ / Ih N I � O �L 1674 OSS 0) w -N(D / _ I IPF K O W W Z Z O O N N — ) !Ul N O1p P 1740 0 °� fnI) N �J W c,r 0) J w 166 i IPF `S53-.24, 11655 / i 281 8�, 74A / O SCALE: 1 " = 1000' �9 IRF G l� \V' Ar ��`Pl�\�1 oo9�P e\� V p,LT H pF v CORY M. HAYNES No. 2539 9 a GRAPHICSCALE 50 00 Zoopomp I I� 1 inch = 100 ft. \BOUNDARY SURVEY CERTAIN PROPERTIES OF BLUE RIDGE ASSOCIATES AND JERRY L & WINIFRED D. UPDYKE RED BUD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA UPDATED: SEPT. B. 2005 SCALE: 1" = 100' DATE: AUG. 26, 2005 Patton Harris Rust $ Associates,pc Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects, 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 T 540.667.2139 F 540.665.0493 CHFFT o nc- i 3 0 0 0 LO n i • • REZONING APPLICATION #02-07 EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: March 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 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: 03/21/07 Pending Board of Supervisors: 04/11/07 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 10.65 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for commercial uses. LOCATION: The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive (Route 642). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 84-A-34, 87 -A -34B, 84-A-35, 87-A-36, 87-A-37 and 76-A-53 PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas) District and B3 (Industrial Transition) District PRESENT USE: Residential and Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant RA (Rural Areas) Residential/Vacant South: M1 (Industrial General) Use: Home Depot RA (Rural Areas) Residential/Agricultural East: B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant RA (Rural Areas) Residential N/A Route 522 West: MI (Industrial General) Use: Vacant Rezoning #02-07 Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 2 B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant RA (Rural Areas) Residential PROPOSED USES: Commercial uses REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 522 and 642. These routes are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Eastgate Commercial rezoning application dated November 13, 2006, revised February 21, 2007, addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance design, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip General 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 Marshal: Plan approval recommended. Public Works Department: Refer to Site Suitability: Provide this office with a copy of the wetlands study referenced under environmental features at the time of the master development plan (MDP) submittal or prior to the subdivision of the detailed site plan if a master development plan is not required. Refer to F. Site Drainage: The method proposed for stormwater management shall be defined in the MDP submission. Considering the layout of the proposed rezoning and previously rezoned B2 property, we suggest that regional stormwater management be evaluated for the proposed commercial development. Department of Inspections: No comment required at this time. Shall comment on site plans when submitted. Sanitation Authority: We will provide sewer and water service to this site. Frederick -Winchester Health Department: Health Department has no objection to the request as stated so long as existing or proposed drainfields and wells are not negatively impacted. Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided that states no residential units will be part of the rezoning, there will be no impact to the school population upon buildout. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed rezoning request for the Eastgate Commercial properly should not impact operations of the Winchester Regional Airport; therefore we are not requesting any special conditions for consideration. Historic Resources Advisory Board: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 3 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 h?storic 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. Frederick County Attorney: It is my opinion that the 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. The Proffer Statement should contain a specific proffer that the Transportation proffers will be made in conformity with the attached GDP. 2. Proffer 1.1 references No. l on the GDP. No. 1 is shown in two places on the GDP, one of which says "right -in, right -out." If this entrance is to be right -in, right -out, the proffer should so state specifically. 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. Planning Department: Please see attached letter dated February 2, 2007 from Candice E. Perkins, Planner H Planning & ZoninjZ: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephens City Quadrangle) identifies these properties as being zoned A-2 (Agriculture General). The County's agricultural zoning . districts were combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re -mapping of the subject property and all other A-1 and A-2 zoned land to the RA District. On August 14, 1991 the Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning #06-91 which rezoned parcel 76-A-53 to the B2, B3 and MI zoning districts. On August 13, 1997 the Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning #02-97. This rezoning depicts the current zoning designations of 76-A-53. 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 subject properties are within the limits of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Sewer and Water Service Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of planned commercial, and industrial development will occur. Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 4 The properties are within the limits of the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The plan shows this area with a commercial land use designation. The applicant is requesting a rezoning to the B2 (Business General) Zoning District and therefore this request is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. This rezoning application is for 18.88 acres and consists of six separate parcels and only the B3 portion of parcel 76-A-53 is being rezoned with this application; the remainder which is already zoned B2 will still be covered by Rezoning #02-97. Staff believes that parcel 76-A-56 in its entirety should be covered under this new rezoning application so that multiple proffer statements don't pertain to the same parcel. Also, including the entire project under one proffer statement will ensure consistent entrances and improvements throughout the entire development. Transportation The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan designates Tasker Road as an improved major collector (UD4). This application does not address the need for four lanes on Tasker Road. The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed industrial and commercial development; this application does not meet this requirement at all intersections. The Frederick County Bicycle Plan designates Route 522 as a short-term designated route. The applicant has proffered to provide a ten foot asphalt bicycle path along the frontage of their site for Route 522. Since the proffer says that the path will be provided along the property frontage, it will only apply to the portion being rezoned (PIN: 87-A-34, 34B, 35 and 37). Site Access This development has access on Maranto Manor Drive, as well as access onto Tasker Road once Maranto connects to Rainville Road, which has been proffered with this application. The proffers/GDP for this development state that this project will have two entrances on Maranto Manor Drive and a right-in/right-out onto Route 522. The remainder of parcel 76-A-53, which is not being rezoned with this application (covered by proffers from Rezoning #02-97), does not have any restrictions on the number or type of entrances on Route 522 or Tasker Road. The . right-in/right-out labeled as future on the proffered GDP is located on the remainder of 76-A-53 and not subject to this rezoning request. Staff Note: As stated under Land Use, staff believes that the entire 76-A-53 should be included under one rezoning application and since these parcels have access to Tasker Road and Maranto Manor Drive, access to Route 522 should be completely prohibited Rezoning #02-97 did not restrict access to Tasker Road Since the Tasker Road frontage of parcel 76- A-53 is not part of this rezoning, access is still unrestricted 3) Site Suitability/Environment It does not appear that the site contains any environmental features that would either constrain or preclude site development. There are no identified areas of steep slopes. A small area of wetlands has been identified on the southwest corner of the existing B-3 zoned property Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 5 adjacent to the existing self storage facility and there is a small man-made pond situated on the RA tract north of Maranto Manor Drive. The General Soils Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Vir inia indicates that the soils comprising the subject parcels fall under the Weikert-Berks-Blairton soil association, and the site consists of Clearbrook channery silt loam and Weikert-Berks channery silt loams. This soil type is not considered prime farm land. 4) Potential Impacts A. Transportation The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed industrial and commercial development. It is noted that even with the improvements that the applicant has proffered to provide, certain areas will still function below a Level of Service Category C (See discussion of TIA Conclusions for Route 522/Tasker Road Intersection and Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive Intersection). A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was prepared for this application using composite data collected from other studies in the area as well as actual traffic counts. The County's rezoning application requires applicants to model the worst possible scenario based on the use of the site. The worst case scenario for this site would be 428,074sf of retail uses. The TIA is based on 166,662sf of retail uses, 47,OOOsf of office uses and 224,660sf of warehouse/industrial uses. As stated in the applicant's impact analysis (Section D), the 224,660sf of warehouse/industrial could be generated from an adjacent land bay which is not part of this application. The potential 224,660sf should be included under the TIA's background traffic and not added in under the assumptions. Also, since the proffers for the rezoning do not proffer a particular use for this site, the worst case scenario should have been modeled; this application only accounted for 213,662sf of retail and office on this site instead of 428,074sf of retail which would be the worst case. The Conclusions from the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) state that the following are required: • Route 522/Tasker Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require traffic signalization along with an additional eastbound and northbound left turn lane. Staff Note: The signalization of Route 522 and Tasker was proffered with Rezoning #02- 97for Eastgate Commerce Center. Proffer 1.5from this rezoningproffers the additional eastbound turn lane and northbound turn lane. The proffer states that the applicant will also provide other improvements as deemed necessary by VDOT. While Proffer 1.5 provides for the improvements at the Route 522/Tasker Road Intersection as called for in the TIA Conclusions, it is noted that even with these improvements, this intersection will not function at a Level of Service C or better and therefore does not meet County requirements. Even with the installation of the two turn Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 6 lanes, PMpeak traffic will still function at a level of service D at the PMPeak Hour, the TIA has not offered a solution to achieve a LOS C. • Tasker Road/Rainville Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require traffic signalization and two (2) northbound left turn lanes. Staff Note: These improvements have been proffered by the applicant (Proffer 1.2) • Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require an additional eastbound left -turn lane. Staff Note: This improvement is being proffered by the applicant (Proffer 1.4) While Proffer 1.4 provides for the improvements at the Route 522/Maranto Manor intersection as called for in the TIA Conclusions, it is noted that even with this improvement this intersection will not function at a Level of Service C or better and therefore does not meet County requirements. Maranto Manor will function with a LOS D at the PM Peak Hour; the TIA has not offered a solution to achieve a LOS C. • Rainville Road/Maranto Manor Drive: This is a new intersection. It will be an unsignalized intersection with westbound left/right shared lane, northbound thru/right shared lane and a southbound left/thru shared lane. • Site driveway # 1 /Maranto Manor Drive: This is anew unsignalized intersection. It will require eastbound thru and right -turn lanes, westbound left and thru lanes and northbound left and right -turn lanes. Staff Note: The applicant has not addressed these lanes. • Site Driveway #2/Maranto Manor Drive: This intersection will require signalization along with eastbound separate left, and thru/right shared lanes; westbound separate left, thru, right turn lane; northbound separate left and thru/right shared lanes and southbound separate left, thru, right turn lanes. Staff Note: The signalization and the turn lanes underlined above have been proffered by the applicant (Proffer 1.3); the remaining lanes have not been addressed. • Site Driveway O/Route 522: This is a new right in/right out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. Staff Note: Site driveway #3 is located on parcel 76-A-53 but is not located within the area being requested for rezoning with this application. No proffers are associated with this entrance. • Site Driveway #4/Route 522: This is a new right in/out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. Staff Note: These turn lanes have not been addressed by the applicant. Also, no levels of service have been identified for this intersection, so it is unclear how it will function. Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 7 B. Sewer and Water Sewer and water service will be provided to the site by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority via a six inch force main and a 12 inch water line. Assuming a buildout of approximately 200,OOOsf, a standard rate of 200 gallons per day at 1,000sf of commercial space, it is anticipated that the proposed use will generate approximately 40,000 GPD of water consumption with equivalent sewer flows. C. Design Standards The proffers for the rezoning do not address any design features for this proposed development. Design standards should be incorporated into this development as they relate to access management, landscaping and signage. The Comprehensive Policy Plan states that landscape buffers should be established between the road and parking lots to promote a more pleasant environment. The applicant should consider providing additional landscaping along Route 522 to create a more aesthetically pleasing development [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-15]; street trees should also be provided along all public and internal roads. Limitations on the number and size of freestanding signs should be considered as well. The Comprehensive Policy Plan states that signage should be minimized along business corridors to reduce visual impacts and to ensure that the number of signs provided is not distracting. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-16] Route 522 signage should be limited (number and size) and only monument style signage should be utilized. 5) Proffer Statement — Dated November 13, 2006 (Revised February 9, 2007, February 10, 2007 and February 21, 2007) 1. Transportation 1.1 The applicant shall locate a right in/right out entrance to access the site in the general location depicted on the GDP. No additional entrances shall be located along Maranto Manor Drive between the identified entrance and Maranto Manor Drive's terminus at Route 522. Said improvements shall be subject to VDOT review and approval during site plan review. Staff Note: This does not restrict the portions of parcel 76-A-53 which are not part of this rezoning. 1.2 The applicant shall bond a traffic signal and two northbound left turn lanes at the intersection of Rainville Road and Tasker Road prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. 1.3 The applicant shall bond a traffic signal and the following turn lanes at the intersection of the future project entrance and the existing entrance for the Home Depot Distribution Center on Maranto Manor Drive: Southbound left turn lane, Southbound right turn lane, Westbound right turn lane, Westbound left turn lane, Northbound left turn lane, Eastbound Rezoning 902-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 8 left turn lane. The applicant shall bond said improvements prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit and shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. 1.4 The applicant shall bond an eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Maranto Manor Drive and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. 1.5 The applicant shall bond an additional northbound left turn lane, an additional eastbound left turn lane, as well as any additional improvements as deemed necessary by VDOT at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the property. The applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. Staff Note: This does not restrict entrances on Route 522 for the portion of parcel 76-A-53 since the entire parcel is not part of this rezoning. 1.6 The applicant shall locate a maximum of one right-in/right-out entrance along the property's frontage with Route 522. Said entrance shall be subject to review and approval by VDOT during site plan review. In the event that VDOT finds the proposed entrance acceptable, the right-in/right-out shall be located as generally depicted on the GDO. 1.7 The applicant shall construct the extension of Maranto Manor Drive to connect to existing Rainville Road. Said improvement shall be constructed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building on the property. 1.8 Transportation improvements shall be made in conformity with the GDP. 2. Pedestrian -Bicycle Trail 2.1 The applicant shall construct a ten foot public pedestrian -bicycle trail with an asphalt surface in lieu of sidewalks along the property frontage on Route 522. Staff Note: The proffer states that the path will be provided along the propertyfrontage, it will only apply to the portion being rezoned (PIN: 87-A-34, 34B, 35 and 37). 3. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development 3.1 The applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000) to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit. 3.2 The applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000) to Frederick County for Sheriff's Office purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit. Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 9 STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 03/21/07 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The land use proposed in this rezoning is consistent with the Eastern Frederick County Long Range land Use Plan. The TiA as modeled does not represent the full impact of -what could happen on the site. the applicant should consider including the entire parcel 76-A-53 in this rezoning application. All intersections should be modeled to reflect a LOS C or better and Tasker Road should be addressed. Elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address the goals of the County. The applicant should be prepared to address theses issues. A recommendation bV the Plannin,- Commission to the Board of Supervisors concernin,a this rezonin,- application would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adeguatelV address all concerns raised bV the Plannin- Commission. February 2, 2007 Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates 117 E. Piccadilly Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-565! FAX: 540/665-6395 RE: Proposed Rezoning of the Eastgate Commercial Property Dear Patrick: I have had the opportunity to review the draft rezoning application for the Eastgate Commercial Property. This application seeks to rezone 11.81 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District and 8.23 acres from the B3 (Industrial Transition) District to the B2 (Business General) District. Staff's review comments are listed below for your consideration. 1. Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The site is within the limits of the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The plan shows a portion of this property with a commercial designation. The proposed B2 Zoning is a business use and is generally consistent with the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan as it relates this area. 2. Additional Property. There are two additional properties owned by Wrights Run LP which have not been included with this rezoning; PIN's 87-A-36 and 87-A-37 are central to this rezoning and currently zoned RA. These properties will need to be included in this rezoning. 3. Rezoning #02-97. Rezoning #02-97 currently covers PIN# 76-A-53. This proposed rezoning only covers the B3 portion of 76-A-53. Parcel 76-A-53, in its entirety, should be included with this rezoning application so that everything within the project is included under the same proffers. Including the entire project under one proffer statement will ensure consistent entrances and improvements throughout the entire development. 4. Transportation Levels of Service. The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed industrial and commercial development. This application clearly does not achieve a Level of Service C. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22501-5000 Page 2 Mr. Patrick Sowers RE: Proposed Rezoning of Eastgate Commercial Property February 2, 2007 5. Rezoning Application — Proposed Uses. The application states the rezoning is for 47,OOOsf of office and 166,OOOsf of retail uses. The proffer statement does not call for a specific use. Unless a specific use and square footage is proffered, the County will assume the maximum possible development (retail) as per the County's application, combined with the maximum possible floor space. At the maximum possible use, there is the potential for 428,074sf of retail uses. A proffer to limit the square footage of this development to no more than what the TIA was based on would be appropriate (see issue on assumptions below). 6. Traffic Impact Analysis -Assumptions. The TIA is based upon 166,662sf of retail uses, 47000sf of office uses and 224,660sf of warehouse/industrial uses. As stated under section D of your impact analysis, the warehouse/industrial uses could be generated from the adjacent land bay (potential industrial). The potential industrial should be included under your background traffic, not your assumption, and your TIA should be based on what could actually be developed on the site (428,074sf of retail). 7. Maranto Manor Drive. Maranto Manor Drive needs to connect to Rainville Road; this application does not provide any assurances for the required continuation of this road. 8. Tasker Road. The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan designates Tasker Road as an improved major collector. Full implementation of the four -lane major collector road design would be appropriate along 76-A-53. 9. Site Access. This development has access on Maranto Manor Drive as well as access onto Tasker Road once Maranto connects to Rainville Road. The proffers/GDP for this development state that this project will have two entrances on Maranto Manor Drive and a right-in/right-out onto Route 522 and Rezoning #02-97 does not place any restrictions on the number or type of entrances on the remainder of 76-A-53. As stated in comment 3, the entire 76-A-53 should be included under one rezoning application and access to Route 522 should be completely prohibited. Also, Section C (Location and Access) of your impact analysis states that access will be provided through the existing B2 zoned acreage by a northern entrance on Tasker Road and an eastern entrance on Route 522. The referenced Tasker entrance is not shown on the GDP and there is no mention of this access anywhere in the proffer statement. 10. TIA Background Development. On sheet 6 of the Background Development, please clarify what project developments 9-11 consist of and on sheet 7 under the Artrip project, there is no soccer complex. Page 3 Mr. Patrick Sowers RE: Proposed Rezoning of Eastgate Commercial Property February 2, 2007 11. Traffic Impact Analysis — Route 522/Tasker Road Intersection. The TIA calls for this intersection to be signalized and to have a new eastbound and northbound left turn -lane. While Rezoning #02-97 proffered the installation of the signalization, there is no commitment for the installation of the turn lanes. It is noted that even with the installation of the two turn lanes, PM peak traffic will still function at a level of service D. As this application is not proffering any of the needed turn lanes, it would be beneficial to see what the LOS would actually be with only the previously proffered signalization. 12. Transportation Proffer 1.2. Proffer 1.2 provides for the traffic signal at the intersection of Tasker/Rainville but does not provide the two northbound left turn lanes called for in the TIA conclusions. These turn lanes are required to maintain a level of service C. 13. Transportation Proffer 1.3. Proffer 1.3 provides for the traffic signal at the intersection of the project entrance and the Home Depot entrance on Maranto Manor Drive but does not account for any of the turn lanes called for in the TIA conclusions. 14. Transportation Proffer 1.4. Proffer 1.4 provides for the eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Route 522/Maranto Manor as called for in the TIA conclusions. It is noted that even with this improvement, this intersection will not function at a level of service C or better and does not meet County requirements. 15. Other Traffic Improvements. As stated in the TIA conclusions, there are various transportation improvements which are necessary to maintain a LOS C or better. The following improvements (in addition to comments 11-13) have not been addressed: • Rainville Road/Maranto Manor Drive turn lanes • Site Driveway 1 /Maranto Manor Drive turn lanes • Site Driveway 3/Route 522 turn lanes • Site Driveway 4/Route 522 turn lanes 16. Bike Path. Front Royal Pike is identified on the Frederick County Bicycle Plan as a short term destination. Provide a bike trail in this location. 17. Design Standards. The proffer statement includes nothing that relates to design standards (building facades, parking lot locations, landscaping, signage etc.). Buildings should be placed adjacent to the roads and the parking lots placed Page 4 Mr. Patrick Sowers RE: Proposed Rezoning of Eastgate Commercial Property February 2, 2007 behind the buildings, especially along Tasker Road and Route 522. Street trees should be provided along all public and internal roads and specific types of building materials should be utilized within the project. Limitations on the number and size of freestanding signs should be considered as well. Route 522 signage should be limited (number and size) and only monument style signage should be utilized. 18. Agency Comments. Please provide appropriate agency comments from the following agencies: Historic Resources Advisory Board, Virginia Department of Transportation, Frederick County Department of Public Works, Frederick County Fire Marshall, Frederick County Department of Parks and Recreation, Frederick County Sanitation Authority, Frederick -Winchester Health Department, the local Fire and Rescue Company and the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority. The proposed proffers have been forwarded by staff to the Frederick County Attorney. Once attorney comments are received by the Planning Department, they will be forwarded to your office. Attorney comments are required for acceptance of the rezoning application. 19. Special Limited Power of Attorney. Provide a power of attorney for the property owners. 20. Fees. The fee for this application includes a $3,000.00 base fee plus $100.00 per acre, and a $50.00 public hearing sign fee. This is based on fees as of January 27, 2005. Fees may change. All of the above comments and reviewing agency comments should be appropriately addressed before staff can accept this rezoning application. Please feel free to contact me with questions regarding this application. Sin,�erely, / 1 Candice E. Perkins, AICP Planner lI Attachments cc: Wrights Run, LP, 2800 S. Shirlington Road, Suite 803, Arlington VA 22206 Steven & Mary Ritter, 3022 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 CEP/bad Rezoning REZ # 02 - 07 Application Eastgate ofnmorda-1 Parcel ID: 87 - A - 3413; 35; 36 Location in the County 87 - A - 37, 76 - A - 53 87-A-34 Map Features 01 REZ0207_EastgateCommercial A Lakes/Ponds ^— Streams Streets Primary Secondary '�. Tertiary SWSA !J 0 125 250 50J3 et 4 2� Case Planner: Candice Sac. vS D V7 0 ,� V O�E 9 h� fi 9. �� Q o D 16 P a oti m 0 1 BAKER 76 A 59F �o m 15.01 ac. o�ti� r \ A 55 �S ygRpF Taske 16 \ 2.5 at Sp9 S9 \d eq ✓ SHEN VALLEY \ yr 76 A 53H OA L 17.57 ac. 76 56 a�4o 3.75ac. Sao S3P ..,t RABADI WRIGHTS RUN 0R76 A 59G 76 A53 25.33 ac. 83.01 a 16 . pAa 9 a1'L55ac. rdr �a z Ste~ HOME DEPOT RITTER 87 Aj34 ' o 76 A 53G7 ac. y = 60.67 ac. z 522 m�� h �ry9hjsp �- •wn �" +� BISHOP 87 A 31 (/� a `�°��Q m �Gy, O 10.03 Q ac. �^ 61 ya° C' J p � 61 t'^h Qsm y A O50 ,a. ZR 'Y 25 v� O .rars.•.- ac. m wyn N m 6 8 � �> a A� GIBBON la, ac. a c 6155gac• 87 A 16B 154.05 ac. NEWCOME 87 A 53 4 ac. 1 Rezoning REZ # 02 - 07 Application Eastgate ofnmorda-1 Parcel ID: 87 - A - 3413; 35; 36 Location in the County 87 - A - 37, 76 - A - 53 87-A-34 Map Features 01 REZ0207_EastgateCommercial A Lakes/Ponds ^— Streams Streets Primary Secondary '�. Tertiary SWSA !J 0 125 250 50J3 et 4 2� Case Planner: Candice Frederick County, Location in the County Application Eastgate Commercial Parcel ID: 87 - A - 3413; 35; 36 87 -A -37,76-A-53 87-A-34 Map Features a REZ0207_EastgateCommercial Zoning t3 Lakes/Ponds B1 (Business, Neighborhood District) Streams B2 (Business, General District) Streets 4%v Primary f B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) y> EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) Secondary s HE (Higher Education District) '�. Terciary O M1 (Industrial, Light District) SWSA M2 (Industrial, General District) 40 MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) MS (Medical Support District) R4 (Residential, Planned Community District) dW R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) RAZ (Rural Area Zone) RP (Residential Performance District) Location in Surrounding Area REZ # Off - Dl Land -use flap Frederick County, Location in the County Map Features REZ0207_Ea stgateCommercial fS Lakes/Ponds �^ Streams Streets Primary Secondary �r Tertiary SWSA Rezoning REz # 02 - 07 Application Eastgate Commercial Parcel ID: 87 - A - 3413; 35; 36 87 -A -37,76-A-53 87-A-34 Location in Surrounding Area PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ # r =0 Rural Areas (RA) — 10.65 acres and Industrial Transition (B3) 8.23 acres to Bus-^ess General (B2) PROPERTY: 18.88 acre +/-; Tax Map Parcels 87-A-34, 34B, 35, 36, 37 and portion of 76- A-53 (the "Property") RECORD OWNER: Wrights Run, LP; Real Tech, LLC; Steven and Mary Ritter APPLICANT: Wrights Run, LP PROJECT NAME: Eastgate Commercial ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: November 13, 2006 REVISION DATE(S): February 9, 2007 February 10, 2007 February 21, 2007 The undersigned hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property ("Property"), as described above, shall be in strict conformance with the following conditions, which shall supersede all other proffers that may have been made prior hereto. In the event that the above referenced B2 conditional rezoning is not granted as applied for by the applicant ("Applicant"), these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and shall be null and void. Further, these proffers are contingent upon final rezoning of the Property with "final rezoning" defined as that rezoning which is in effect on the day following the last day upon which the Frederick County Board of County Supervisors (the "Board") decision granting the rezoning may be contested in the appropriate court. If the Board's decision is contested, and the Applicant elects not to submit development plans until such contest is resolved, the term rezoning shall include the day following entry of a final court order affirming the decision of the Board which has not been appealed, or, if appealed, the day following which the decision has been affirmed on appeal. The term `Applicant" as referenced herein shall include within its meaning all future owners and successors in interest. When used in these proffers, the "Generalized Development Plan," shall refer to the plan entitled "Generalized Development Plan, Eastgate Commercial" dated November 12, 2006 revised February 9, 2007 (the "GDP"), and shall include the following: 1. Transportation 1.1 The Applicant shall locate a right in/right out entrance to access the site in the general location depicted on the GDP. No additional entrances shall be located along Maranto Manor Drive between the identified entrance and Maranato Manor Drive's terminus at Route 522. Said improvements shall be subject to VDOT review and approval during site plan review. (See 1 on GDP) 1.2 The Applicant shall bond a traffic signal and two northbound left turn lanes at the intersection of Rainville Road and Tasker Road prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 2 on GDP) 1.3 The Applicant shall bond a traffic signal and the following turn lanes at the intersection of the future project entrance and the existing entrance for the Home Depot Distribution Center on Maranto Manor Drive: Southbound left turn lane, Southbound right turn lane, Proffer Statement Eastgate Commercial Westbound right turn lane, Westbound left turn lane, Northbound left turn lane, Eastbound left turn lane. The Applicant shall bond said improvements prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit and shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 3 on GDP) 1.4 The Applicant shall bond an Eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Maranto Manor and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 4 on GDP) 1.5 The Applicant shall bond an additional northbound left turn lane, an additional eastbound left turn lane as well as any additional improvements as deemed necessary by VDOT at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 5 on GDP) 1.6 The Applicant shall locate a maximum of one right-in/right-out entrance along the Property's frontage with Route 522. Said entrance shall be subject to review and approval by VDOT during site plan review. In the event that VDOT finds the proposed entrance acceptable, the right-in/right-out shall be located as generally depicted on the GDP. (See 6 on GDP) 1.7 The Applicant shall construct the extension of Maranto Manor Drive to connect to existing Rainville Road. Said improvement shall be constructed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building on the Property. 1.8 Transportation improvements shall be made in conformity with the GDP. 2. Pedestrian -Bicycle Trail 2.1 The Applicant shall construct a 10 foot public pedestrian -bicycle trail with an asphalt surface in lieu of sidewalks along the Property frontage on Route 522. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development 3.1 The Applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit for the site. 3.2 The Applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) to Frederick County for Sheriff's Office purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit for the site. SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES Page 2 of 5 Proffer Statement Respectfully submitted, Wrights Run, LP By: #&14 Date: 12, - 1-01 STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: Eastgate Commercial The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this `4'`day of 2007, by My commission expires Notary Public R Page 3 of 5 Proffer Statement Respectfully submitted, Real Tech, LLC Date: �''1'61 Eastgate Commercial STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The fore oing instrument was acknowledged before me this D day of y 2 2007, by 14 1 A r,�- Som My commission expires 0Y1,31 2 D"t) 7 Notary Public ' Y;,� /,t D� LJ A /y\ r Page 4 of 5 Proffer Statement Respectfully submitted, Steven Ritter By: Date: A — P___ 0 7 STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE F! EDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: Eastgate Commercial Tf- ,rj,-Ie foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2007, by My commission pines - J- 144.2 1_2 9 - Notary Public 4,f - Mary Ritter By: Date: STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing 'instrument was acknowledged before me this, , day of 2007, by M19P, My commission ices il—F- Notary Public jA4 Page 5 of 5 Eastgate Commercial Impact Analysis Statement EASTGATE COMMECIAL PROPERTY REZONING - IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT NOVEMBER 2006 A. INTRODUCTION The 20.04 acre Eastgate Commercial site is comprised of 6 parcels located North and South of Maranto Manor Drive in close proximity to the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522 — Front Royal Pike (See figure 1). A 8.23 acre portion of the site was zoned B3 as part of Eastgate Commerce Center in 1997. The remaining 11.81 acres of the property is zoned RA (Rural Areas) (See Figure 2). This analysis seeks to identify any impacts to Frederick County associated with rezoning the Property to the B-2 (General Business) zoning district. Combining these two areas with the large adjacent tract of B-2 would create a more unified development that is in accordance with the vision set forth in Frederick County's Comprehensive Plan. Figure 3 depicts the envisioned zoning designation for the property. Development of this site as a commercial center would serve as a transitional area between the more intensive uses located in the Eastgate Industrial Park and the residential development pattern prevalent along Tasker Road. Additionally, the subject rezoning would help to provide an increasingly viable commercial node at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522. The property is located outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA) boundary but wholly within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The applicant is confident that the proposed rezoning includes a proffer program that will appropriately and effectively mitigate any impacts of this development. The commercial land use envisioned for the site is consistent with the land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan and would serve as a valuable amenity to the residential development that prevails in the vicinity of Tasker Road. B. COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN The Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan is the sole plan indicating the future land use designation of the subject site. Through this document, the Comprehensive Policy Plan envisions commercial uses along the eastern end of Tasker Road (See Figure 4). Areas outside of the UDA but within the SWSA are intended for commercial and/or industrial use per the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. As the subject acreage is located within the SWSA boundary, is has the right to public sewer and water for non- residential purposes. The proposed rezoning of the subject acreage from B-3 (Industrial Transition) and RA (Rural Areas) to B-2 (General Business) is consistent with the land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. t 1, _ • a 'r 17= fY k\ y1 ! Y .. 4 a " P AS. f.l. F n ' A f 'tA n ' A f 'tA l! y 7 � [AS MA TE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust &Associates, pc 7. LOCATION MAP 117 E. Picadilly St, Winchester, Virginia 22601 p Q VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2 1 EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust &Associates, pc 4x p ry y CURRENT ZONING 117 E Fhdly 5t. Vkhestef. ftna 22601 p• VS E (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 ` FAMEAWK C06 7n VIRC.W FIGURE 2 FIGURE 3 EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc Ilkro Cb- PROPOSED ZONING 117 E Picadihy St Winchester, Virginia 22601 O y VOICE (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 ` O f1P£QERiC'K COMM 1MN14 FIGURE 3 4 . 4._ t I;. J ♦ rT r YM �r R • C F4' a �. 11.=,rrt�•�, K ; ^ t �' ;rv'ayr,n�n tr;•nt PROJECT SITE Eastern County Long Range l; Land Use Plan Ao NU* (aanwa !NFra�aertie; ear, O, -1 +SFr EASTCA TE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust &Associates, pc N, I LONG RANGE LAND USE PLAN 117 E. Picadilly 5t. Winchester, Virginia 22601 Q VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 Qr) FREDERICK COUNTY, WROINIA FIGURE 4 Eastgate Commercial C. SUITABILITY OF THE SITE Site Background and History Impact Analysis Statement A portion of the site is part of the Eastgate Commerce Center that was originally rezoned in August of 1991 to allow both commercial and light industrial uses. In 1997, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors approved a new rezoning application resulting in the subject site's current land use designations. In 2004, Frederick County amended the Comprehensive Policy Plan, expanding the Sewer and Water Service Area to the south of the original Eastgate Commerce Center to envelop the Home Depot Distribution Center in addition to several RA zoned parcels along Front Royal Pike. This expansion brought the RA zoned area of the Eastgate Commercial site into the SWSA. Location and Access The property is located south of the terminus of Tasker Road (VA Route 642) at Front Royal Pike (VA Route 522 South) within the Shawnee Magisterial District. The site is located on either side of Maranto Manor Drive with Route 522 bordering the site to the East, an existing self -storage facility and Adelphia facility to the West, and The Home Depot Distribution Center to the South. Access will be provided through the existing B2 zoned acreage by a northern entrance on Tasker Road and an eastern entrance on Route 522. The properties located South of Maranto Manor Drive will access Maranto Manor with a right- in/right-out access located on the Property Frontage with Route 522 (See Figure 5). Currently, Maranto Manor provides a connection from Route 522 to the Home Depot entrance before ending at a temporary cul-de-sac. In accordance with the currently approved Master Plan for the Property, the connection of Maranto Manor to Rainville Road will be provided as Eastgate Commerce Center continues to develop. Site Suitability The Eastgate Commercial site represents a unique opportunity to create a more cohesive commercial development. The property is bound by roadways on three sides, which, in effect, presents the subject area as a single site despite its multiple parcels and different zoning designations. This rezoning seeks to solidify that notion and ensure that development at the site is performed in a unified manner that best serves the community. It is important to note that this application seeks a conditional rezoning of the RA portion of the property concurrent with a down -zoning of the B-3 acreage. The site does not contain conditions that would preclude or substantially hinder development activities. The following table provides an area summary of environmental features: Environmental Features Total Project Area 20.04 Acres Area in Flood Plain 0.00 Acres 0.0% Area in Steep Slopes 0.00 Acres 0.0% Area in Wetlands TBD Acres 0.0% Lakes & Ponds 0.24 Acres 1.2% FIGURE 5 Eastgate Commercial Impact Analysis Statement Data from the National Wetlands Inventory indicates that there are no identified wetlands or waterways located on the site. A field analysis, however, revealed the location of a possible wetlands area on the southwest corner of the existing B-3 area adjacent to the existing self storage facility. The very limited size of this environmental feature and its unobtrusive location would not deter development activity. A small, man-made pond is situated on the RA tract north of Maranto Manor Drive. Without any natural inflow or outflow, this feature will likely not fall under federal or state regulations (See Figure 6). The General Soil Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Virginia indicates that the soils comprising the subject parcels fall under the Weikert-Berks-Blairton soil association. The predominant soil types on the site are Clearbrook channery silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes (map symbol 9B) and Weikert-Berks channery silt loams, 7 to 15 percent slopes (map symbol 41C) as shown on map sheet number 48 of the survey. This soil type is not considered prime farmland. The characteristics of this soil type and any implications for site development are manageable through the site engineering process. D. TRANSPORTATION A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was prepared for this application using composite data collected from other studies in the area as well as actual traffic counts. Using traffic generation figures from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, 7`h Edition, the TIA projects that the proposed development will produce 13,957 vehicle trips per day (VPD). The TIA further indicates that study area roads and intersections have the capacity to accommodate the trips generated by this project at acceptable and manageable level of service conditions. It is important to note that the TIA does not take into account the existing traffic generation potential of the 8.23 acres of the site are currently zoned B3. Additionally, the TIA includes potential traffic generation from a potential industrial land bay located south of the property that could use the Maranto Manor access point in the future. This land bay is not part of this rezoning and represents only about 1,500 of the total trips, but was included as part of the study to facilitate good planning practices for a potential future rezoning. As such, the proposed development plan would produce fewer trips than the 13,957 trips projected by the TIA. Nevertheless, the applicant has proffered to address the transportation improvements indicated by the TIA as being necessary in order to accommodate a level of service (LOS) C or higher for the affected intersections. These proffered improvements include: - Signalization at the intersection of Tasker Road and Rainville Road. - Signalization of the future project entrance and the existing entrance to the Home Depot Distribution Center on Maranto Manor Drive. - Installation of an Eastbound left turn lane at the existing signalized intersection of Maranto Manor Drive and Route 522. `. -/ � SCS f i \ FIGURE 6 , i A r I i i 33 t , / f r EASFGA TE COMMERCI% L Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc � �, I �• ENI/1F01VMFNTAL FFA TURFS 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 0 0 (5 CONTOUR DATA VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 ' FREDERICK COUNTY; VIRGINIA FIGURE 6 Eastgate Commercial Impact Analysis Statement The TIA also indicated the need for signalization at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522. This signal was proffered as part of the earlier Eastgate Commerce Center rezoning. E. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND WATER SUPPLY Sewage and water service will be provided to the site by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority via a 6" force main and a 12" water line. Assuming a build out of approximately 200,000 square feet a standard rate of 200 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of commercial space, it is anticipated that the proposed use will generate approximately 40,000 GDP of water consumption with equivalent sewer flows. F. SITE DRAINAGE Site drainage collects and leaves the site to the south, as it drains to Wrights Run. It is anticipated that high quality erosion control practice will mitigate adverse stormwater discharge impacts. Actual specification of temporary and permanent facilities will be provided with final engineering and will comply with all County, State and Federal regulations. G. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL Solid waste will be transferred to the Frederick County landfill by commercial carrier. Assuming 25 lbs/1,000 square feet of floor area, solid waste generation is projected to be approximately 5,000 pounds per day. H. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey does not identify any potentially significant structures on the subject acreage or within close proximity of the properties. The subject properties are not located within the study boundary or core area of any identified Civil War battlefield. I. IMPACT ON COMMUNITY FACILITIES The Frederick County Fiscal Impact Model was run to assess the likely impact of the proposed project on capital facilities. The output module generated by this analysis indicated that the proposed land uses would result in a net positive fiscal impact. Nevertheless, the applicant has proffered to contribute a total of $4,000 to Frederick County for Fire and Rescue Department and Sheriff's Office purposes, respectively. This contribution is offered in recognition of the unique demands on public safety services commonly associated with commercial development. A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning Located in: Frederick County, Virginia Prepared for: Wrights Run, L.P. 2800 S. Shirlington Road Suite 803 Arlington, VA 22206 Prepared by: Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Engneers. Surveyors. Planners. LcndsccpeArchitects. P ][� 300 Foxcroft Avenue, Suite 200 + Martinsburg, West Virginia 25401 T 304.264.2711 F 304.264.3671 October 25, 2006 OVERVIEW Report Summary Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc (PHR+A) has prepared this document to present the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Eastgate Rezoning development located along the west side of Route 522 (Front Royal Pike), south of Tasker Road, in Frederick County, Virginia. The proposed development is comprised of 166,662 square feet of retail/commercial, 47,000 square feet of office and 224,600 square feet of warehouse/industrial development. Access to the proposed development will be provided via two (2) site -driveways to be located along Moranto Manor Drive (planned future roadway) and two (2) right in/out only site -driveways to be located along Route 522. Build -out will occur over a single transportation phase by the year 2010. Figure 1 is provided to illustrate the location of the proposed Eastgate Rezoning development with respect to the surrounding roadway network. Methodology The traffic impacts accompanying the Eastgate Rezoning development were obtained through a sequence of activities as the narratives that follow document: • Assessment of background traffic including growth rates and other planned projects in the area of impact, • Calculation of trip generation for the proposed Eastgate Rezoning development, • Distribution and assignment of the Eastgate Rezoning development generated trips onto the completed study area road network, • Analysis of capacity and level of service using the latest version of the highway capacity software, HCS -2000, for existing and future conditions. EXISTING CONDITIONS Patton Harris Rust & Associates (PHR+A) conducted AM and PM peak hour manual turning movement counts at the intersections of Route 522/Tasker Road, Tasker Road/Rainville Road and Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive. PHR+A established the ADT (Average Daily Traffic) along each of the study area roadway links using an average "k" factor (the ratio of PM peak hour traffic volumes to 24-hour traffic volumes) of 8% as determined from the 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 network. Figure 3 shows the respective existing lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour 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 of Eastzate Rezoning PH J� Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 1 Tt No Scale Winchester Regional Airport Figure 1 Vicinity Map: Eastgate Rezoning, in Frederick County, Virginia A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning PH Project Number: 13612-1-3 R+A October 25, 2006 Page 2 71 t teFrAin t. Park f �• f I . f i SI �i Winchester Regional Airport Figure 1 Vicinity Map: Eastgate Rezoning, in Frederick County, Virginia A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning PH Project Number: 13612-1-3 R+A October 25, 2006 Page 2 No Scale Figure 2 P HR+A AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Existing Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning - Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25. 2006 Page 3 No Scale Denotes stop sign control U Denotes traffic signal control * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) —JL fi%--z Figure 3 Existing Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A_Tra{fc Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 P R+A October 25, 2006 HPage 4 2010 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS PHR+A applied a conservative annual growth rate of five percent (5%) to the existing traffic volumes (shown in Figure 2) to obtain 2010 base conditions. In order to incorporate trips associated with the specific future "other developments" located within the vicinity of the proposed site, PHR+A utilized the following reports: 1) Traffic Impact Analysis for the Home Depot Distribution Center @ Eastgate Rezoning, by Vettra Company, dated October 2002; 2) A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of CrosMointe Center, by PHR+A, dated September 2003; 3) A Trak Impact Analysis of Freedom Manor, by PHR+A, dated July 2004; 4) A Phased Trak Impact Analysis of the Villages at Ar rip, by PHR+A, dated December 2004 and 5) A Trak Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows, by PHR+A, dated April 2005. Based upon the 7 t Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report, PHR+A has provided Table 1 to summarize the trip generation for the "other developments" surrounding the site. Figure 4 shows the 2010 background ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area network. Figure 5 shows the corresponding 2010 background lane geometry and AMIPM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning PH J� Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 5 Table 1 2010 "Other Developments " Trin Generation Summary Code Land Use ---1 Amour' - - AM Peak Hour In Out Total In PM Peak Hour Out Total ADT Background Development # 1 Home Depot Distribution Center - Phase 2' 150 Warehousing 252,000 SF 65 14 79 21 62 82 927 Background Development # 2 The Shenandoah - Phase 2Z --- Mixed Land Use ---- 478 336 814 704 773 1,477 17,094 Background Development # 3 Development West of Site on Tasker Road 210 Single -Family Detached 300 Units 55 165 219 182 107 288 3,000 Background Development # 4 Wakeland Property 820 Retail 80,000 SF 84 53 137 259 281 540 5,874 Background Development # 5 #11 Elementary School and Admiral Byrd Middle School 520 Elementary School 640 stud. 110 76 186 2 5 6 826 522 Middle School 850 stud. 223 168 391 66 61 128 1,377 Total Trips 332 244 577 68 66 134 2,203 Background Development # 6 Freedom Manor 210 Single -Family Detached 120 units 23 70 93 80 47 126 1,200 Background Development # 7 Tasker Woods 210 Single -Family Detached 120 units 23 70 93 80 47 126 1,200 230 Townhouse/Condo 199 units 15 74 90 71 35 106 1,731 710 Office 179,000 SF 263 36 299 47 232 279 2,089 Total Trips 302 180 482 198 313 511 5,020 Background Development # 8 Cedar Meadows 251 Elderly Housing - Detach 140 units 14 23 37 38 24 63 721 Background Development # 9 820 Retail 191,665 SF 141 90 231 462 500 962 10,365 Background Development #10 710 Office 35,990 SF 73 10 83 20 99 119 607 Background Development #11 710 Office 22,216 SF 1 50 7 56 1 18 86 104 419 Note 1: The existing Home Depot Distribution center will be expanded by 252,000 or Note 2: Trip generation values are taken directly from the report: Home Depot Distribution Center @ Eastgate A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 PH + October 25, 2006 Page 6 Table 1 (cont.) 2010 "Other Developments " Trip Generation Summary Code Land Use Amount AN' Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour ADT In Out Total In Out Total Background Development # 12 Artrip (Phase 2) Land Bay A 210 Single -Family Detached 102 units 20 60 81 69 40 109 1,017 230 Townhouse/Condo 438 units 29 140 168 135 67 202 3,811 820 Retail 10,000 SF 24 15 39 66 71 137 1,520 Land Bay B 210 Single -Family Detached 37 units 9 27 36 28 16 44 373 Land Bay C 488 Soccer Complex 3 field 2 2 4 43 19 62 214 Total Tris 84 244 328 340 214 554 6 935 Total Internal 1 1 2 16 16 31 107 Total "New Trips" 83 243 326 325 198 523 6,828 Background Development # 13 Crosspointe Center (Phase 2) 210 Single -Family Detached 775 units 138 414 552 435 245 679 7,750 230 Townhouse/Condo 200 units 15 74 89 73 36 109 1,740 253 Elderly Housing - Attach 100 units 4 3 7 6 4 10 348 710 Office 90,000 SF 151 21 171 31 150 180 1,224 820 Retail 440,000 SF 236 151 386 801 868 1,669 17,673 Total Tris 544 661 1,205 1,346 1,302 2,648 28,735 Total Internal 80 80 159 330 330 660 6,954 Total Pass -by 29 29 58 125 125 250 2,651 Total "New Trips" 435 553 988 890 847 1,737 19,130 A Traffic Impact Analysis oANumbeate Rezoning PH + Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 7 No Scale I 522 0 f 0 Ta m, s� o � any Qg9�J8 OJJ 6S l6 � ray 8j�j \ J✓�`� Z� 4�I69jZ8� � ii 1 C ✓ `�v^' �,hA�� 13012° a^► `'f�� � � 9�� I�~29✓ � =w��` �• ting �5g1171 �, �J �5 ol��a ✓✓�✓`n� f �s9 SITE #3 r °�oj3;>� 0 � q O v 1 � h Mamnlo Maoot � N" \d o a %,63(208) SITE E dom 376(72) (254)78 0)0 (21)67 0�% N o N o 1 AM Ptak Hour(PM Peak Hour) _ Figure 4 2010 Background Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning PHf-�+-A Project Number: r25,2006October 25, 2 e 8 Page 8 No Scale Signalized"Suggested Intersection Improvements" LOS=C(C) Signalization % NB - 1 Left qj er Unsignalized Intersection s Unsignalized Intersection cv 0 (7& * � Manor j� ive N io cc)B d L Intersection x X11 SITE 5:0"o 1 SITE Signalized "Suggested Intersection Improvements" LOS=C(C) Signalization NB - 1 Left �Ll �askerRcad ���� `n �a Signalized 522 Intersection I,OS=C(C) Denotes stop sign control u Denotes traffic signal control * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 5 2010 Background Lane Geometry and Levels of Service PHP A Tra c /mpactAnalVsic o umbEasteate Rezon3612-1-3ng Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 e9 Page 9 a Signalized "Suggested [ntersection Improvements" LOS=C(C) New Intersection � Manor j� ive N io cc)B d L Intersection x X11 SITE 5:0"o 1 SITE Signalized "Suggested Intersection Improvements" LOS=C(C) Signalization NB - 1 Left �Ll �askerRcad ���� `n �a Signalized 522 Intersection I,OS=C(C) Denotes stop sign control u Denotes traffic signal control * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 5 2010 Background Lane Geometry and Levels of Service PHP A Tra c /mpactAnalVsic o umbEasteate Rezon3612-1-3ng Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 e9 Page 9 TRIP GENERATION PHR+A determined the number of trips entering and exiting the site using equations and rates provided in the 7th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report. Table 2 was prepared to summarize the total trip generation associated with the Eastgate Rezoning development. Table 2 Proposed Development: Eastgate Rezoning Land Bay Code Land Use Amount AM Peak In Out Hour Total In PM Peak Out Hour Total ADT A 820 Retail 124,146 SF 109 69 178 347 375 722 7,816 B 820 Retail 42,516 SF 57 37 94 171 185 356 3,895 C 710 Office 47,000 SF 90 12 103 22 109 131 746 D 110 Light Industrial 112,300 SF 91 12 103 13 97 110 737 D 150 Warehousing 112,300 SF 74 16 90 18 54 72 764 Total 421 147 568 571 820 1,391 13,957 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENTS The distribution of trips was based upon local travel patterns for the roadway network surrounding the Eastgate Rezoning development. PHR+A utilized the trip distribution percentages shown in Figure 6 to assign the proposed Eastgate Rezoning trips (Table 2) throughout the study area. Figure 7 shows the respective development -generated ADT and AM/PM peak hour trip assignments. 2010 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS The Eastgate Rezoning assigned trips (Figure 7) were then added to the 2010 background traffic volumes (Figure 4) to obtain 2010 build -out conditions. Figure 8 shows the 2010 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area. Figure 9 shows the respective 2010 build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are provided in the Appendix section of the report. A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastzate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 P R+A October 25, 2006 HPage 10 No Scale "D„ Figure 6 Trip Distribution Percentages A Traffic Impact Analvsis of Eastgate Rezoning P A+Project Number: 13612-1-3 PH October 25, 2006 Page 11 No Scale 522 os� 7 �0 a 1� 3SJ� i 40 `4&9� A >>512IJ I1► ti f veg3 tr r�s0(43) 522 • LAND BAY LAND BAY „B„ „A„ .ro Manotp �J ar w 7 LAND BAY d - qt „C^ ✓ N VA.,, 23(69) LAND BAY ` „A„ 1� 3(19)64(55) LAND BAY (129)41 WJ ,0) „D„ (52)16®� r � 44)52 -0%CP o m c �~ m (5'3110 `id+ lti�lti�16'~ j�2 522J AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) nT T��� l"N Figure 7 Development -Generated Trip Assignments A L ralttc impact Hnatysis w custxute 1-4—uix Project Number: 13612-1-3 R+A October 25, 2006 PH Page 12 Average Daily Trips T AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Lo Figure 8 2010 Build -out Traffic Conditions PAH A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgaumber:te Rezon3612-1-3ng Project Number: 13612-1-3ROctober 25, 2006 Page 13 Signalized "Suggested Intersection Improvements" LOS=C(C) Signalization NB - 1 Left �� EB - 1 Left No Scale n X1 Signalized __1 "Suggested Intersection Improvements" jaskerR1 LOS=C(C) Signalization 1 T INB - 2 Left I r asker� ��C 522 3 60c, gad JC� 522 Sigualized"Suggested ntersection Improvements" �q o LOS--C(C) EB -1 Left 7� J 0 J `to e. Signalized 522 Unsignalized Intersection 522 Intersection` LOS=C(F) Unsignalized Intersection s '�k' •'� Unsignalized a Intersection �� of 9I�0"Suggested Improvements" LAND BAY LAND BAY New Intersection "B" "A" Unsignalized e Intersection or 0 Mara nto Mah Ma to Manor , Signalized "Suggested Dr N If ntersection Improvements" LAND BAY d —y d LOS=C(C) New Intersection ✓�' %WO CICS LAND BAY �1 0 r Marantr Manor LAND BAY Driven D. (C)B q1t d n Denotes stop sign control a ® Denotes traffic signal control * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement A AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) LPT TP+/ Figure 9 2010 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A 7 ralpc Impact Analysts 01 caaixute AEzum,x Project Number: 13612-1-3 PR+A October 25, 2006 HPage 14 CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the Eastgate Rezoning development, assuming suggested improvements, are acceptable and manageable. Based upon PICS -2000 results, each of the study area intersections will operate with overall levels of service "C" or better during 2010 build -out conditions. The following reiterates the suggested roadway configuration required for each of the study area roadway intersections during 2010 build- out conditions: • Route 522/Tasker Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require traffic signalization along with an additional eastbound and northbound left -turn lane. • Tasker Road/Rainville Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require traffic signalization and two (2) northbound left - turn lane. • Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive: In order to maintain acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require an additional eastbound left -turn lane. • Rainville Road/Maranto Manor Drive: This is a new intersection. It will be an unsignalized intersection with westbound left/right shared lane, northbound thru/right shared lane and a southbound left/thru shared lane. • Site Driveway #1/Maranto Manor Drive: This is a new unsignalized intersection. It will require eastbound thru and right -turn lane, westbound left and thru lane and northbound left and right -turn lane. • Site Driveway #2/Maranto Manor Drive: This intersection will require signalization along with eastbound separate left, and thru/right shared lane; westbound separate left, thru, right turn lane; northbound separate left and thru/right shared lane and southbound separate left, thru, right turn lane. • Site Driveway #3/Route 522: This is a new right in/out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. • Site Driveway #4/Route 522: This is a new right in/out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning R+A Project Number: r25,2006HOctober 25, 2006 Page 15 REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning Stq� ;1 13(71 X12 Fee Amount Paid -S Zoning Amendment Number Date Received v'7 PC Hearing Date 1 7 BOS Hearing Date / The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicants: Name: Patton Harris Rust & Associates Telephone: (540) 667.2139 Address: 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 2. Property Owner (if different than above) Name: Wrights Run, LP Telephone: (703) 820-2500 Address: 2800 S Shirlington Road, Suite 803 Arlington, VA 22206 Name: Real Tech, LLC Telephone: (703) 820-2500 Address: 2800 S Shirlington Road, Suite 803 Arlington, VA 22206 Name: Ritter, Steven G & Mary M Telephone: Address: 3022 Front Royal Pike Winchester, VA 22602 3. Contact person(s) if other than above Name: Patrick Sowers Telephone: (540) 667.2139 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location Map X Agency Comments X Plat X Fees X Deed of property X Impact Analysis Statement X Verification of taxes paid X Proffer Statement X I 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: Allan Hudson Steven & Mary Ritter 6. A) Current Use of the Property: Residential/Vacant B) Proposed Use of the Property: Commercial 7. Adjoining Property: SEE ATTACHED. 8. Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers). The Property is west of Route 522 South (Front Royal Pike) immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for the applicant to provide information concerning the specifics of the proposed use. Otherwise, the planning staff will use the maximum possible density of intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on page 9 of the application package. 9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number: 87-A-34, 34B, 35, 36, 37 and 76-A-53 Magisterial: Fire Service: Rescue Service: Shawnee Millwood Millwood Districts High School: Middle School: Elementary School: Millbrook Admiral Byrd Armel 10. Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. Acres Current Zonin Zoning Requested 10.65 RA B2 8.23 B3 B2 18.88 Total acreage to be rezoned 2 11. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed Single Family Home Townhome Multi -Family Non -Residential Lots Mobile Home Hotel Rooms Office Retail Restaurant 12. Signature: 47,000 166,000 Square Footage of Proposed Uses Service Station Manufacturing Flex - Warehouse Other I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors' public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right-of-way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (ouur)/�knowledge. Applicant(s) " && Date Wrights Run, LP t..,141," Date Real Tech, LLC 4 _ Dates G1 Steven Ritter }✓%r >.,_ `;`, i�� Date Mary Ritter 3 Adjoining Property Owners Rezoning Owners of property adjoining the land will be notified of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors meetings. For the purpose of this application, adjoining property is any property abutting the requested property on the side or rear or any property directly across a public right-of-way, a private right-of-way, or a watercourse from the requested property. The applicant is required to obtain the following information on each adjoining property including the parcel identification number which may be obtained from the office of the Commissioner of Revenue. The Commissioner of the Revenue is located on the 2"d floor of the Frederick County Administrative Building, 107 North Kent Street. Name Address Property Identification Number (PIN) Name: Orville Comer 2903 Front Royal Pike Property #: 76 -A -57A Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Orville Comer 2903 Front Royal Pike Property #: 76-A-57 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Floyd & Kay Ritter 141 Bridgeport Ln Property #: 76-A-58 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Robert Price 307 Caroline Ave Property #: 87-A-38 Stephens City, VA 22655 Name: Bob & Louise Price 2997 Front Royal Pike Property #: 87-A-39 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Diana Heishman 3029 Front Royal Pike Property #: 87-A-40 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: John Bullock 3049 Front Royal Pike Property #: 87-A-41 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Samuel Plasters, Jr. 3046 Front Royal Pike Property #: 87-A-33 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Julia Bishop 114 Orchard Dr Property #: 87-A-31 Midwest City, OK 73110 Name: Home Depot USA, Inc. P.O. Box 105842 Property #: 76 -A -53G Atlanta, GA 30348 Name: Cable Holdco Exchange V, LLC P.O. Box 173838 Property#: 76 -A -53F Denver, CO 80217 Name: S & W, LLC 720 S Braddock St Property #: 76 -A -53E Winchester, VA 22601 Special Limited Power of Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia Frederick Planning Web Site: www.coXrederick,va.ns Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395 Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) Wrights Run LP (Phone) 703.820.2500 (Address) 2800 S Shirlington Road, Suite 803, Arlington, VA 22206 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 on Page and is described as Tax Map Parcel 76-A-53; 87-A-35; 87-A-36; 87-A-37 Subdivision: do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) Patton Harris Rust & Associates (Phone) 540.667.2139 (Address) 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200, Winchester, Virginia 22601 To act as my true and lawful attorney-in-fact for and in my (our) name, place, and stead with full power and authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described Property, including X Rezoning (including proffers) _ Conditional Use Permits X Master Development PIan (Preliminary and Final) _ Subdivision Site Plan My attorney-in-fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously approved proffered conditions except as follows: This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or modified. <14 In witness thereof, I (we) have hereto set my (our) hand and seal this L-) day o 200 , Signature(s) State of Virginia, City/County--of�. Y' f C Jo -wit: --L Q f) k -"A 5 C, lo I, LA , ' ` I C' , n _ 1 e f a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared before me and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this l�~ day of _P , 200 �. moi%U My Commission Expires: Notary Public 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, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395 Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) Real Tech LLC (Phone) 703.820.2500 (Address) 2800 S Shirlin ton Road Suite 803 Arlington, VA 22206 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 on Page and is described as Tax Map Parcel 87 -A -34A; 87 -A -34B _ Subdivision: do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) Patton Harris Rust & Associates (Phone) 540.667.2139 (Address) 117 E. Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Winchester Virginia 22601 To act as my true and lawful attorney-in-fact for and in my (our) name, place, and stead with full power and authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described Property, including X Rezoning (including proffers) _ Conditional Use Permits X Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) _ Subdivision Site Plan My attorney-in-fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously approved proffered conditions except as follows: This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or modified. In witness thereof, I (we) have hereto set my (our) hand and seal this day of rr2�., 200, Signature(s) 1-61, N ao nn j State of Virginia, City/County of C C -' To -wit: fl iron) I LJ 3,1/x__ I 1A ' �� p -tom —,a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument persona ly appeared before we and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this day of /�e_h _, 200 7 . 11 1 My Commission Expires: X/ �J 2-6 Notary Public GY` co Special Limited Power of Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia Frederick Planning Web Site: www.co.frederick.ya.us Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395 Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) Steven G. & Mary M. Ritter (Phone) (Address) 3022 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 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 501 on Page 255 and is described as Tax Map Parcel 87-A-34 Subdivision:__ do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) Patton Harris Rust & Associates (Phone) 540.667.2139 "Address) 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200, Winchester, Virginia 22601 1'o act as my true and lawful attorney-in-fact for and in my (our) name, place, and stead with full power and authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described Property, including X Rezoning (including proffers) _ Conditional Use Permits X Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) _ Subdivision Site Plan My attorney-in-fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously approved proffered conditions except as follows: This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or modified. In witness thereof, I (we) have hereto set my (our) hand and seal this _` day of 1r 2002, State of Virginia, City/Ge .of ,To -wit: s1 -L,,, g-, , i r=a2 �-Il lf? f .` ► c'� I,_r<'_,?. a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aioi eswd, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared before me and has acknmviedged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this `` day of�"p 200. ��rrrt.a cr My Commission Expires:=E"B 2r- �`.G'6�`-, Votary Public oe.es' \ r; $i EX. 63 Ex. �sw4NENr S�ppE t � B NB�H PENT — / cj / S / rr `% hl l 3 hN �r /2 r � f NzapgoS —� / �1 \ EX. RA \ be fah i EASTGA TE COMME-RC/AL 0 o I (b ZONING BOUNDARY � a FREMR/CK COUNTY, 19RUNM EXISTING RA — 10.65 ACRES EXISTING B3 — 8.23 ACRES TOTAL — 18.88 ACRES Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 :7 • :� MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #02-07 TASKER WOODS Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: March 1, 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: 03/21/07 Pending Board of Supervisors: 04/11/07 Pending LOCATION: The properties are located north of Tasker Road (Route 642) east and south of Macedonia Church Road (Route 756) and west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 76 -A -48A and 76-A-49 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Vacant/Agricultural B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant/Agricultural ZONING & PRESENT USE OF ADJOINING PROPERTIES: North: RA (Rural Areas) South: RA (Rural Areas) B2 (Business General) Ml (Light Industrial) East: RA (Rural Areas) West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential, church & cemetery Use: Residential Vacant Industrial & vacant Use: Residential Use: Residential PROPOSED USE: 136 single family detached units, 130 townhouse units and 18.89 acres of commercial uses MDP #02-07, Tasker Woods March 1, 2007 Page 2 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Vir1linia Department of Transportation: The master development plan for this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 642, 636 and 756, the VDOT facility which would provide access to the property. VDOT has reviewed the MDP submittal and finds it acceptable. 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 approved as submitted. Frederick County Public Works: Refer to Sheet 2 of 4: Indicate (label) the existing ponds if that will be utilized as stormwater management (SWM) facilities. If these ponds will be used as SWM facilities, it will be necessary to evaluate their structural integrity prior to submission of the subdivision design phase. Also, retention and detention designs will necessitate operation and maintenance requirement with the detailed design submission. Refer to Sheets 2 and 3: Provide this office with a copy of the detailed wetlands study. Delineate the wetland areas using legends which stand out from the existing contour lines. Also, the calculations of the disturbed wetlands should consider the necessity for draining the existing ponds to improve the integrity of the existing dams. Staff Note: An approval comment from the Public Works department will be required before this MDP can be administratively approved. Frederick County Sanitation Authority: 2°a review - approved Frederick -Winchester Service Authority: No comments. Frederick County Inspections Department: No comment required at this time. Shall comment on lots at the time of subdivision submittal. Frederick County — Winchester Health Department: Health Department has no objection if public water and sewer are provided. GIS Department: Prospect Drive has been approved and added into the Frederick County Road Naming and Structure numbering system. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed rezoning request for Tasker Woods should not impact business operations of the Winchester Regional Airport; therefore we are not requesting any special conditions for consideration. MDP #02-07, Tasker Woods March 1, 2007 Page 3 Department of Parks and Recreation: Plan appears to meet the recreational unit and open space requirements. The proposed trail meets Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department standards. The 84' X 50' basketball court, with six foot apron, meets requirements as long as construction includes a minimum of a 2" (S-5) asphalt surface over a minimum of 4" (21 A) base. Basketball goal units to be commercial grade and installed according to manufactured recommendations. The proposed pool, with 2,400 square feet of surface area, is appropriate for this development. The 4,900 square feet community center is appropriate for this development. Total lot areas appear to be located in appropriate locations. Equipment to be approved prior to installation. The monetary proffer appears to be appropriate to address the impact this development will have on the capital facility needs of the Parks and Recreation Department. Staff Note: The Parks and Recreation Department stated that the development would be providing a 4,900sf community center; the MDP does not make reference to the actual size of the structure and the rezoning did not stipulate a minimum size. The applicant should provide the actual size of the community center they will be constructing within the Tasker Woods development on the MPD. Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided, it is anticipated that the proposed 126 single family homes will yield 20 high school students, 16 middle school students and 28 elementary school students, and the 199 townhouses will yield 19 high school students, 18 middle school students, and 38 elementary school students for a total of 139 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 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. Frederick County Planninll Department: Please see attached letter dated December 29, 2006, signed by Candice E Perkins, Planner II. 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. MDP #02-07, Tasker Woods March 1, 2007 Page 4 B) Location The properties are located north of Tasker Road (Route 642) east and south of Macedonia Church Road (Route 756) and west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522). C) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephens City Quadrangle) identifies these properties as being zoned A-2 (Agriculture General). The County's agricultural zoning districts were combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re -mapping of the subject property and all other A-1 and A-2 zoned land to the RA District. The Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning Application 409-06 for Tasker Woods on September 27, 2006. This action established 60.29 acres of RP (Residential Performance) and 18.89 acres of B2 (Business General) Zoned property. D) Intended Use The development will consist of 136 single family detached units, 130 townhouse units and 18.89 acres for commercial uses. Residential development is limited to 90 permits per calendar year. 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. 1-1] Land Use Compatibility: The site is partially located within the Urban Development Area (UDA) and entirely located within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The properties are within the area of the Tasker Woods Land Use Plan, which was adopted in 2005. The plan states that the north portion of the Tasker Woods area is planned for residential use and the southern portion is planned for commercial use. The Tasker Woods site was rezoned in conformance with the Tasker Woods Land Use Plan. Environment. No steep slopes exist on the property. No portion of this site is within the 100 -year flood plain according to the Flood Insurance Study Map for Frederick County. Transportation: The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan designates Tasker Road as an improved major collector. It designates Macedonia Church Road/White Oak Road, west MDP #02-07, Tasker Woods March 1, 2007 Page 5 of Route 522, as a new major collector. During the rezoning process, the applicant committed designing the full four lane roadway for Macedonia Church Road with a landscaped median from Route 522 to White Oak Road. The applicant will be constructing two additional lanes and a landscaped median for the first 200 feet (to achieve a four lane section) of Macedonia Church Road west of Route 522. The road will then transition into a three lane section and then to a two lane section to align with the existing White Oak Road. This roadway will also contain turn lanes as directed by VDOT. The Frederick County Bicycle Plan designates Tasker Road as a short-term designated route. The Tasker Woods Land Use Plan calls for an interconnected system of multipurpose trails and sidewalks through out the development. As shown on the MDP, existing Macedonia Church Road is intended to be cul-de-sac'ed where it meets White Oak Road at the Macedonia Church near Route 522. Traffic that currently utilizes this roadway to access Route 522 will be rerouted though the Tasker Woods development once the roadway is vacated. It is noted that a public hearing (VDOT and Frederick County) will be required before the Macedonia Church Road right- of-way can be vacated. This public hearing cannot happen until the alternative route is constructed through Tasker Woods so that the old network can be removed. Recreational Amenities During the rezoning for the Tasker Woods property, the applicant proffered to provide a community center with a 2,400sf pool, a full basketball court, two tot lots and a picnic shelter. The applicant will also be installing 10 foot asphalt trails as indicated on the MDP. Staff Note: The Parks and Recreation Department stated that the development would be providing a 4,900sf community center; the MDP does not make reference to the actual size of the structure and the rezoning did not stipulate a minimum size. The applicant should provide the actual size of the community center they will be constructing within the Tasker Woods development on the MPD. Proffers — Please see attached copy of approved proffers for Tasker Woods. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 03/21/07 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The master development plan for Tasker Woods 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 #09-06. All of the issues brought forth by 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 MDP 902-07, Tasker Woods March 1, 2007 Page 6 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. COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 December 29, 2006 Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust and Associates, PC 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Preliminary Master Development Plan for Tasker Woods Property Identification Numbers (PINs): 76-A-48 & 76-A-49 First Review Dear Patrick: Please adequately address each of the comments listed below prior to formal submission of the preliminary master development plan referenced above: Preliminary Review Comments: 1, Proffers. On the coversheet the signature page and the GDP need to be legible. 2. GDP. This MDP is not in "substantial conformance" with the proffered GDP. 3. Project Summary. On the coversheet, provide the total allowed units and the actual number being constructed with the development and the density. 4. Macedonia Improvements. Sheets 4 and 5 both show improvements to Macedonia Church Road. Sheet 4 is difficult to read because of the aerial and the information should be shown on sheet 5. 5. Macedonia Church Road Closure. The MDP shows that Macedonia Church Road will have a cul-de-sac. This change will require a public hearing through VDOT and the MDP will not be processed until this has been completed and approved. 6. Dedications. On sheets 2 and 3 show any applicable right-of-way dedications that are necessary. 7. Residential Sheet. Sheet 2 is labeled "residential area" and sheet 3 is labeled "commercial area"; however, there is a section of residential shown on sheet 3. Also all the residential dimensional requirements are shown on sheet 3. Revise the titles of the sheets to correspond to what is actually on the sheets. 8. Open Space. There is an area labeled OS that doesn't appear to be open space as indicated on sheet 2. 9. Townhouse Parking Lot. As indicated on sheet 2 within the Phase II Townhouse area, remove the outline of the parking lot. 10. Recreational Amenity Summary. This table on sheet 2 does not reflect the community center requirement (three units per 30 dwellings). 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Mr. Patrick Sowers RE: Tasker Woods MDP December 29, 2006 Page 2 11. Townhouse Requirements. On sheet 3 provide the dimensional requirements for townhouse. lots. 12. Pocket Park. Remove the outlines of the facilities as indicated on sheet 2 and label what is going to be provided. 13. Road Efficiency Buffer and Zoning District Buffer. On sheet 2 the REB is difficult to see and needs to be shaded to show the location. The trail also needs to be delineated better. The zoning district buffer is also difficult to see and should be shaded as well. 14. Buffer Details. On sheet 3, the plantings shown with the REB detail are incorrect. The zoning district buffer shown on sheet 3 needs to be revised as indicated (inactive buffer goes against residential). The 25' buffer needs to have the adjacent properties labeled as indicated. 15. Road Details. Label which roads will be constructed to which detail. A detail for the private streets within the townhouses needs to be provided. 16. Traffic Signal. On sheets 2 and 5 show the signal at the intersection of 522 and Macedonia. 17. Macedonia Church Road Improvements. A detail that shows Macedonia Church Road needs to be provided. 18. Street Trees. Street trees within the commercial area need to be shown as indicated in proffer 16.1. In order to continue the review of this Master Development Plan, you will need to submit a complete MDP application, a signed and notarized Special Limited Power of Attorney Form, all review agency comments and review fee, to this department. Once this information is received, and all review comments addressed, staff will schedule the application for review by the Planning Commission. Review comments are required from the following agencies: Frederick County Fire Marshal, Frederick County Department of Building Inspections, Frederick County Department of Public Works, Frederick County Department of G.I.S., Frederick County Health Department, Frederick County Parks & Recreation, Frederick County Sanitation Authority, and the Virginia Department of Transportation. Please do not hesitate to contact me with questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Candice E. Perkins Planner II CEP/dlw Attachment cc: Allden, LLC, 2800 Shirlington Road, Suite 803, Arlington VA 22206 Frederick county, Master Development Location in the Gounty Location in Surrounding urea Frederick Counter, Master Development Location in the County Map Features Application ZenhV t3 Lakes/Ponds Bt (Business, Neighborhood District) .... Streams B2 (Business, General District) Streets Z, Primary 4w B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) 41 EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) Secondary : HE (Higher Education District) '�. Tertiary • M1 (Industrial, Light District) M2 (Industrial, General District) +r MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) 40 MS (Medical Support District) R4 (Residential, Planned Community District) ! R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) RAZ (Rural Area Zone) RP (Residential Performance District) Location in Surrounding Area IE PA, P76R9p41)' 76gMPgfLL 31,74 CA 10 ac. f03B \ J PINE 76 A 81 23.59 ac. �5 p76 LLDfN 7:59ac86 t\\. STROSNIDER 76 A 78 f �V � Armel Rd ALLDEN % n w ��P 1 , i76 A 49 % ,�.. ' y A6 ac. m nn c51 rn 522 x �flEHRJ 76 A 49A 10.9966 ac � 9 2 co .v'— 9,i pkti - 76 q EN ,� C \!r'\ a. ALLDEN • 652ac51 -TI-`,76'A-•48A ?6 44V 2913 ac # /'. STROSNIDER 7SHEFL4N 76 A 51C $SA 9.44 ac. lac' - - — SNIDER 76 A 61 2 ac, i �r )s9ijgc WRIGHTS RUN FA - 76 A 53� o.. ljjq S'�q 83.01 ac i 76EANE 7 fLMq 6>ZSA SS0CIATES jdq �� cF $ �- 8.32 ac. 2.325.'29 ac3B Frederick County, VAi, Location in the County Master Development Plan MDP # 02 - 07 Application Tasker woods Parcel ID: 76 - A - 48A; 49 Map Features Application Long Range Land Use L• Lakes/Ponds Rural Community Center w.. Streams Residential Streets - Business ^.� Primary ® Industrial Secondary <Ix� Institutional �. Terciary ' Recreation Historic C;_N Mixed -Use ® Planned Unit Development Location in'5urroundiny Nrea 0*� 0 125 250 501 eetCase Planner. Candice Frederick County, VA Master ID'Ovielopment Plan MDP #02-07 Application iasKer opds Location in the, Gounty Location in Surrounding Area 0 125 250 5010 Frederick County, Virginia Master Development Plan Application Package APPLICATION MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN Department of Planning and Development Use Only Date application received Complete - Date of acceptance _ Incomplete - Date of Return 1. Project Title: Tasker Woods Application,q _4-)- —0�7 2. Owner's Name: Allden, LLC 2800 Shirlington Rd, Ste 803 Arlington, VA 22206 *Please list the names of all owners or parties in interest: Denver Quinnlley and Allan Hudson 3. Applicant: Patton Harris Rust & Associates pc Address: c/o Patrick Sowers 117 E. Piccadilly St. Winchester VA 22601 Phone: (540) 667-2139 4. Design Company: Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Address: 117 E. Piccadilly Street Winchester, VA 22601 Phone Number: (540) 667-2139 Contact Name: Patrick Sowers Frederick County, Virginia Master Development Plan Application PackaLre APPLICATION, cont'd MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN 5. Location of Property: North of Tasker Road (Route 642), East and South of Macedonia Church Road and west of Front Royal Pike Route 522). 6. Total Acreage: 79.18 Acres 7. Property Information: a) Property Identification Number (PIN): b) Current Zoning: c) Present Use: - d) Proposed Use: 76 -A --48A & 76-A-49 RP and -B2 Vacant SF Detached, SF Attached and Commercial e) Adjoining Property Information: SEE ATTACHED f) Magisterial District: Shawnee 8. Is this an original or amended Master -Development Plan? Original- X Amended I have read the materia4 cluded in this package and understand what is required by the Frederick County Dep ,pent o Pi ging and Development. I also understand that the plaster development plan shaIT i ude co tguous I nd under single or coirunon ownership. All required material will be co p} xe sun of my master development plan application. �!'�L11►11/�►��ii��/� .. - ..fly'' 2 Tasker Woods Property Owner Designation (within V2 mile radius of property) Tax ID # Name Address Zonin Use 76 -A -31A Macedonia Cemetery Assoc. 1941 Macedonia Church Road, White Post, VA 22663 RA Religious 76-A-32 Macedonia Methodist Church 1941 Macedonia Church Road, White Post, VA 22663 RA Religious 76-A-86 George E. Bagley 2000 Macedonia Church Road, White Post, VA 22663 RA Residential 76-A-85 Lane M. Reed 2456 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 RA Residential 76 -A -49D Isabelle Kastak 2490 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 RA Residential 76-A-84 Harry E & Phyliss J. Saville 2492 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 RA Residential 76 -A -49B Minne Mae Butler 2584 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 RA Residential 76 -A -49C Roger L. & Joan F. Strosnider 2606 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 RA Residential 76 -A -49A David S. & Pamela B. Lehr 2678 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 RA Residential 76-A-51 C Clifton R. Strosnider 173 Armel Road, Winchester, VA 22602 RA Residential 76-A-48 Betty J. Tinsman 1804 Macedonia Church Road, White Post, VA 22663 RA Residential 76 -A -47B William & Loretta Heflin 113 Tadpole Lane, White Post, VA 22663 RA Residential 76-A-36 Richard & Catherine Palmer 1789 Macedonia Church Road, White Post, VA 22663 RA Residential 76-A-35 Wayne E. Wilkins 1847 Macedonia Church Road, White post, VA 22663 RA Residential 76-A-34 Gary E. Whitacre 1861 Macedonia Church Road, White Post, VA 22663 RA Residential 76-5-55 Glen M. & Hattie P. Borrer 1873 Macedonia Church Road, White Post, VA 22663 RA Residential 76-5-59 Elizabeth Properties, LC P.O. Box 480, Stephens City, VA 22655 RA Residential 76-5-61 Elizabeth Properties, LC P.O. Box 480, Stephens City, VA 22655 RA Residential 76-5-62 Elizabeth Properties, LC P.O. Box 480, Stephens City, VA 22655 RA Residential G� D 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, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395 Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) _ Allden, LLC (Phone) (Address) 2800 Shirlington Road, Ste 803 Arlington, VA 22206 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 Year: 2004 Instrument Number: 4069 Deed Book on Page and is described as Parcel: 49 & 48A Lot: Block: A Section: 76 Subdivision: do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) Charles Maddox, Patrick Sowers, John Callow, Clay_AtheL Ron Mislowskv (Phone) 540-667-2139 T'`,ddress) 117 E. Piccidilly Street Winchester, VA 22601 o act as my true and lawful attorney-in-fact for and in my (our) name, place, and stead with full power and authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described Property, including X Rezoning (including proffers) _ Conditional Use Permits X Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) X Subdivision X Site Plan My attorney-in-fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously approved proffered conditions except as follows: This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, ort� it is otherwise rescinded or modified. In witness thereof, I (we) have hereto set my (our) hand aAseal,�is 27 h day"Anu2006, Siguature(s State of Virginia, City/C.eivaL}c of I, ��i r 7 Sof K� �� a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared before me and ha acknowledged the same bef e e in the jurisdiction aforesaid this day of �, 206-- . 1RtSFj `/.� �'iryr�llrIllssion Expires: � —,30— Qep F taryPublic (EP: s r • .y • M • • r ir . •i �• r AMENDMENT Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: Septerriber 6, 2006 - Recommended Approval BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: September 27, 2006 @ APPROVED DENIED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING #09-06 OF TASKER WOODS WHEREAS, Rezoning #09-06 of Tasker Woods, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, to rezone 60.281 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District and 18.897 acres from RA District to B2 (General Business) District, totaling 79.178 acres, with proffers for up to 319 residential units and for commercial use., -was considered. The properties are located north of Tasker Road (Route 642), east and south of Macedonia Church Road (Route 756) and. west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522), in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers (PINS) 76- A -49A and 76-A-49. WHEREAS, the PIanning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on September 6, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on September 27,2006; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plant; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to revise the Zoning District Map to change 60.281 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District and 18.897 acres fi om RA District to B2 (General Business) District. Totaling 79.178 acres, with proffers for up to 319 residential units and for commercial use, as described by the application and plat submitted, subject to the attached conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and the property owner. PDRes. #30-06 This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 27th day of September, 2006 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chaiiinan Aye Barbara E. Van Osten Nay Gary Dove Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye A COPY ATTEST ,.t' John R. RQy, Jr. Frederick County Administrator Jay E. Tibbs (For John R. Riley, Jr.) Deputy County Administrator PDRes. #30-06 Tasker Irloodr Pmffe Statement 2006 PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT ' REZONING: RZ. # `-off, : RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) 60.281 acres +/- and B2 (General Business) 18.897 acres +/- PROPERTY: 79.178 Acres +/- Tax Map Parcels 76 -A -48A, 76-A-49 (the "Property") RECORD OWNER Allden, LLC APPLICANT: Allden, LLC PROJECT NAME: Tasker Woods ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: March 15, 2006 REVISION DATE(S): June 12, 2006 July 5, 2006 July 21, 2006 August 11, 2006 August 16, 2006 August 18,2006- September 13,2006 September 19, 2006 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/B2 conditional rezoning is not granted as applied for by the. applicant ("Applicant"), these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and shall be null and void. Further, these proffers are contingent upon final rezoning of the Property with "final rezoning" defined as that rezoning which is in effect on the day following die last day upon which the Frederick County Board of County Supervisors (the "Board") decision granting the rezoning may be contested in the appropriate court. If the Board's decision is contested, and the Applicant elects not to submit development plans until such contest is resolved, the term rezoning shall include the day following entry of a final court order affirming the decision of the Board which has not been appealed, or, if appealed, the day following which the decision has been affirmed. on appeal. The 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 proffeted requirement, unless otherwise specified herein. The term "Applicant" as referenced herein shall include within its .meaning all fixture owners and successors in interest. When used in these proffers, the "Generalized Development Plan," shall refer to the plan entitled "Generalized Development Plan, Tasker Woods" dated Januar 15, 200E revised August 16, 2006 (the "GDP"), and shall include the following: Page I of 8 Tasker Foods Proffer Statemejit 1. LAND USE: 1.1 Residential development on the Property= shall not exceed 319 units. The mixture of single: family detached and. attached units shall be designated at the time of Master Development Plan and shall not generate more than 2,931 average daily trips (ADT). 1.2 The_ project. shall be developed pursuant to an annualized phasing plan. Building permits for no more than 90 dwelling units shall be issued within any calendar year. 1.3 Commercial development on the B2 zoned portion of the Property shall not exceed 179,000 square feet. 2. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO. TT -IE 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, this Tasker Woods Proffer Statement, and in substantial conformity with the GDP as approved by the Board. 3. FIRE & RESCUE: 3.1 The Applicant shall contribute. to the Board the sutra. of $720.00 per single fainly, detached dwelling unit for fire and rescue purposes, payable: upon the issuance of a building permit for each detached unit. 3.2 The Applicant shall contribute to the .Board the sum of $528.00 per single family, attached dwelling unit for fire and rescue purposes, payable. upon the issuance of a. Building permit for each attached unit. 4. SCHOOLS: 4.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $19,189.00 per single family, detached dwelling unit for school purposes, payable upon the issuance of a building permit for each detached unit. 4.2 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $14,618.00 per single family, attached dwelling unit for school purposes, payable upon. the issuance of °a building permit for each attached unit. 5. PARKS & OPEN SPACE: 5.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $2,136.00 per single. family, detached dwelling unit for recreational purposes, payable upon the issuance of a building permit for each detached unit. Page 2 of 8 Tacker Waadr Prof r Sty fervent 5.2 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $1,634.00 per single family, attached dwelling unit for recreational purposes, payable upon the issuance of a building permit for each attached unit. 5.3 Prior to issuance of the 100`}' building permit the Applicant shall construct a community center, including a 2,400 square foot pool and full basketball court, in the location depicted on the GDP. Other recreational improvements shall include a minimum of two tot lots and a picnic shelter in the locations depicted on the GDP. Said improvements shall count towards the recreational unit requirement for the proposed development. 5.4 The Applicant shall construct a ten foot asphalt public hiker -Biker trail in the locations depicted on the GDP. Along the Property frontage on Tasker Road and the portion of Macedonia Church Road identified as a major collector said trail shall be constructed in lieu of the adjacent sidewalk. Said improvements shall count towards the recreational unit requirement for the proposed development. 6. LIBRARIES: 6.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $267.00 per single family, detached dwelling unit for library= purposes, payable upon the issuance of a building permit for each detached unit. 6.2 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $204.00 per single family, attached dwelling unit for library purposes, payable upon the issuance of a building permit for each attached unit. 7. PUBLIC SAFETY: 7.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $658.00 per single family, detached dwelling unit for public safety purposes upon issuance of a building permit for each detached unit. 7.2 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $503.00 per single family, attached dwelling unit for public safety purposes upon issuance of a building permit for each attached unit 8. GENERAL GOVERNMENT: 8.1 The.Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $320.00 per single family, detached dwelling unit for general governmental purposes upon issuance of a building permit for each detached unit. 8.2 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $245.00 per single family, attached dwelling unit for general governmental purposes upon issuance of a building permit for each attached unit. Page 3 of 8 Tasker lFoodr Prover Statement 9. CREATION OF HOMEOWNERS' AND PROPERTY OWI ERS' 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, (ii) common buffer areas located outside of residential lots; (iii) common solid waste disposal programs by a commercial collection company, (iv) responsibility* for the perpetual maintenance of any street, perimeter, or road buffer areas, all of which buffer areas shall be located vrithin easements. to be granted to the HOA if platted within residential or other lots, or otherwise granted to the HOA by appropriate instrument, (y) responsibility for payment for maintenance of streetlights and (vi) maintenance of BMP's and stormwater conveyance channels: 9.2 The Applicant shall establish a start-up fund for the Tasker Woods HOA that will include an initial lump suxn payment of V2,500.00 by the Applicant and an .additional payment of $100,00 for each platted lot within the Tasker Woods community of which the assessment for each platted lot is to be collected at the time of initial transfer of tide and to be directed to the Tasker Woods HOA fund. Language Nvill be incorporated into the Tasker Woods HOA Declaration of Restrictive Covenant Document and Deed of Dedication that ensures the availability of tliese funds prior to the transfer of ownership and maintenance responsibility from the Applicant to the Tasker Woods HOA. The start up funds for the Tasker Woods HOA 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. 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. Page 4 of 8 Tager Irloodi Proffer Statement 11. ENVIRONMENT: 11.1 Stortnswater management and Best Management Practices (B1V1P) 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 lav 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 Tasker Woods," prepared by Patton Harris Rust & Associated, dated Februray 2, 2006 with addendum dated July 11, 2006 (the "TIA"). The Applicant shall privately fund all transportation improvements required of this project. 12.2 The Applicant shall install or bond a traffic signal at the intersection of Route 522 and Macedonia Church Road prior to issuance of the 50`h building permit unless otherwise directed by Frederick County and/or VDOT. 12.3 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $1000 per single family, detached dwelling and $500 per single fanAy, attached dwelling for transportation improvements to the Tasker Road corridor upon the issuance of a building permit for each unit. 12.4 The Applicant shall design Macedonia Church Road as a four lane roadway with landscaped median from the road's intersection with White Oak Road to the intersection with Front Royal Pike. The Applicant shall construct Macedonia Church Road from itsintersection with Front Royal Pike as a four lane roadway with a landscaped median for a minimum distance of 200 feet prior to transitioning to a three lane section that then transitions into a two lane section that aligns with the existing two lane. section of improved White Oak Road at Canter Estates. Said roadway shall also include turn lanes as directed by VDOT. Said improvement shall be completed prior to issuance of the 50`h building permit. Improvements to Macedonia Church Road shall also include the construction of an iron fence along a portion of the frontage of the Macedonia Church property and consolidation of the current church entrances into a single access point as depicted on the GDP. The Applicant shall dedicate right of sway necessary to achieve an 80 foot right of way to allow full implementation of a major collector roadway between existing White Oak Road and Front Royal Pike that will not negatively impact the existing graveyard at Macedonia Church. (See 1 on GDP) 12.5 Direct access to individual lots from the portion of Macedonia Church Road designated as a major collector shall be prohibited. Page 5 of 8 Tasker ►F%orfs Pmffer Staterueut 12.6 Access to commercial portions of the Property shall be provided via the future roadway connecting the. commercial and residential portions of the property as indicated on the GDP. Said connection between residential and commercial portions of the Property shall be made prior to occupancy of any building constructed on the portion of the Property zoned B2. Commercial entrances on Tasker Road shall be prohibited. 12.7 The Applicant shall enter into a signalization agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation that is binding for a period of five years from the date of final rezoning approval with an option for an .additional five years for the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Marcel Dritre and the proposed entrance on Tasker Road. In :addition, the Applicant shall be responsible through said agreement, for the installation of a Southbound left turn lane on the proposed internal collector road as well as:a westbound right turn lane on Tasker Road at the subject intersection. If or when, in the opinion of VDOT, a traffic signal and/or the turn lanes are regiured, die Applicant shall provide funds including any necessary bond to construct improvements at said intersection. 12.8 The Applicant shall dedicate 27 feet of right of way from the center line of the portion of Macedonia Church Road. not identified as a :major collector prior to issuance of the 5e building permit. 13. HISTORIC.MARKER 13..1 The Applicant shall install a historic marker ° collaboration with Macedonia Church that notes the historical significance of Macedonia Church. 14. COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARDS 14.1 All buildings within the commercial area of the Property shall be constructed using compatible architectural style and materials. The principal facade in addition to any facade fronting Tasker Road of all commercial buildings shall be limited to one or a combination of the following materials_ cast stone, stone, brick, glass, wood, stucco or other high quality, long lasting masonry materials. 15. COMMERCIAL SIGNAGE 15.1 Freestanding commercial signage along Tasker Road shall be limited to a single monument style sign at the proposed internal collector road entrance at Tasker Road. Maximum height for all signs located on the Property shall be 20 feet. 15.2 Pylon style signs shall be prohibited on the Property. Page 6 of 8 Tasker T!% odr Proffer Statemelrt 16. STREET TREES 16.1 The Applicant shall locate street trees along the road frontage of both Tasker Road and the proposed internal minor collector road within the commercial land bay of the Property to enhance the visual characteristics of both corridors. Said street trees shall be planted a maximum of 40' apart and shall be planted prior to occupancy of any building constructed on the portion of the Property zoned B2. SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES Page 7 of 8 Tasker lVoods Pm f%r Statement R espe, By: Title: STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thisqday of t) E , 2006, bar r�.n v �r �- QLr cr ti nr> l is n `��141ltiltt/ My conunnission expires l "3� U� ��.'� �g-fINA I`��i, Notary Public : `V QNW*-. e)F All , :'```, ''�tttt,tt14,4�1 Page 8 of 8 if CONSOLIDATE CHURCH ENTRANCES o v `y TO SINGLE ACCESS P❑INT IRON FENCE 04,; CGMMUNITY CENTER `°, & POCKET PARK `.. SF DET VKMAE I ] Y SF 14ED CFf/ATT HE TOWNHOWS>` 4 , f.._ IL t ` puBLAcy= E'ZDN RA 0 2 = �, r, r F'RO SED USE- dr ;t O E�2Gz TA.SKER WOODS lit:Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc E oGENERALIZED DEVELOPWNT PLAN 117 E. PicodiV St. Viinchester, Wginio 22601 O Q VOICE: (540) 6fi7-2139 fAX; (540) 665-0493 FREDERICK CDUATY WRCINIA COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development MEMORANDUM 540/665-5651 FARC: 540/665-6395 TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator 1" RE: Waiver Request — Teresa Hicks DATE: March 5, 2007 On behalf of Ms. Teresa Hicks, Artz and Associates, PLC, is requesting a waiver of Article V Design Standards, § 144-31 Rural Subdivisions, (C) (3), Minor rural subdivisions of the Code of Frederick County, Chapter 144 Subdivision of Land to enable family division of a parcel of land for on a right- of-way less than 50 feet. This two (2) acre parcel will be conveyed to Teresa Hicks by John C. Russell, Jr., as noted on the affidavit for a family division. The property is located on Pasture Lane off Caldwell Lane (Route 717), in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and is identified by Property Identification Number 63-4-3. Ms. Hicks is unable to acquire a fifty (50) foot right-of-way though the twenty (20) acre parent tract from Caldwell Lane (Route 717). The applicant has included in the agenda a petition from adjoining property owners declining to grant Ms. Hicks a 20 foot easement across their property. Therefore, this waiver request is to provide relief from the 50 foot right-of-way requirement. A proposed 30 foot access right-of-way, which is shown on the attached plat, will provide right -of way access to Caldwell Lane (Route 717). A recommendation from the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors is requested. 1IZiIL:1ITS I Attachments 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 § 144-30 FREDERICK COUNTY CODE § 14431 monuments shall be of stone or precast concrete, not less than four (4) inches square or four (4) inches in diameter and appropriately_ scribed with vertical and horizontal controls. . § 144-31. Rural subdivisions. The requirements of this section shall apply to all subdivisions of land zoned RA (Rural Areas) under Article V of Chapter 165, Zoning, of the Frederick County Code. A. Design standard exemptions. Rural subdivisions shall be exempted from the following design standards: (1) Section 144-17L, Curbs and gutters. (2) Section 144-18, Sidewalks and pedestrian walkways. (3) Section 144-19, Streetlights. (4) Section 144-25, Utilities and easements. B. Major rural subdivisions. (1) Any subdivision which results in a cumulative total of more than three (3) lots being divided from a single parent parcel within the RA (Rural Areas) Zone shall be considered a major rural subdivision. Lots described in § 165-54B, Family division lots; and § 165-54C, Agricultural lots, of Chapter 165, Zoning, of the Frederick County Code, shall not count toward this three -lot limit. Prior to review and approval of final plats for such divisions, a preliminary sketch plan must be reviewed and approved by the Zoning Administrator. (2) Access. All roads serving lots within a major rural subdivision shall be built to the Tertiary Subdivision Street Standards of the Virginia Department of Transportation and dedicated to Frederick County for eventual acceptance into the state secondary road system. [Amended 6-9-19931 C. Minor rural subdivisions. (1) The division of the following types of lots are permitted under the regulations for minor rural subdivision: 14434 10-25-93 § 144-31 SUBDIVISION OF LAND § 144-32 (a) Lots described by § 165-54B, Family division lots; and § 165-54C, Agricultural lots, of Chapter 165, Zoning, of the Frederick County Code. (b) Lots described in § 165-54A, Traditional five -acre lots, and § 165-54D, Rural preservation lots, provided that a total of no more than three (3) such lots may be created from any one (1) parcel under these regulations. (2) Shared private driveways. Vehicular access to minor rural subdivisions may be provided by means of shared private driveways. The owners of lots provided with access via such driveways shall be responsible for the improvement and maintenance of said driveways. When shared driveways are used, the Subdivision Administrator shall be provided with copies of the deeds of transfer. Such deeds shall contain the following language: The proposed shared private driveway is not built according to street standards of and will not be maintained by the Virginia Department of Transportation, or the County of Frederick. The improvement and maintenance of said driveway shall be the sole responsibility of the owners of lots which are provided with access via the driveway. Said shared private driveways will not be considered for inclusion into the state secondary system until they meet the applicable construction standards of the Virginia Department of Transportation. The cost of bringing said driveways to acceptable standards shall not be borne by the Virginia Department of Transportation nor by Frederick County. (3) Minimum width for shared private driveway. The minimum right- of-way width for a shared private driveway shall be fifty (50) feet. § 14432. Property owners' associations. A. Intent. The intent of this section is to require the establishment of a nonprofit organization to be known as the "property owners' association." The property owners' association shall be created by the subdivider. The property owners' association shall be financially responsible for its own operations and shall be charged with the continuous maintenance and management of all common areas, 14435 10-25-93 Frederick County, VA Wavier Request V%YAV # 01 - 07 Application Teresa Parcel ID: Location in the County 63 - 4 - 3 Map Features ® Application Zoning S Lakes/Ponds Bt (Business, Neighborhood District) StreamsB2 (Business, General District) Streets Im B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) PrimaryF EM (E)tractive Manufacturing District) Secondary Ob HE (Higher Education District) '�. Terciary 40 M1 (Industrial, Light District) M2 (Industrial, General District) +r>f MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) MS (Medical Support District) R4 (Residential, Planned Community District) is R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) RAZ (Rural Area Zone) RP (Residential Performance District) � Winehss/sr 4 C j ? S/sphsne'c!y )�v gnir Location in Surrounding Area 4�CK CSG ' 0 125 250 VVrr��SOFeet Wit'. Case Planner: Mark EFGINVESTMENTS 63 A 116C 51.37 ac. CALDWELL RUSSELL 63 4 2 12.13 ac. F�q� G� S QG`9 yG dq vC' 20.5 ac. i Wrnchisfsr Vir�k�fi RUSSELL 63 A 116 67 ac. EVANS 63 4 5A 20.79 ac. 6� ryac• Fp63N� .Sr4, 6 4 1?q,TS Sdc• Wavier Request WAV ## 01 - 07 Application Term Hicks Parcel ID: Location in the County 63-4-3 Map Features C:j Application £4 Lakes/Ponds — Streams Streets ^, Primary Secondary '� Tertiary RUSSELL m � f �aN -tGS F�q� P y � S QG`9 m dq vC' EVANS 63 4 5A 20.79 ac. 6� ryac• Fp63N� .Sr4, 6 4 1?q,TS Sdc• Wavier Request WAV ## 01 - 07 Application Term Hicks Parcel ID: Location in the County 63-4-3 Map Features C:j Application £4 Lakes/Ponds — Streams Streets ^, Primary Secondary '� Tertiary RUSSELL 63 4 3 20.5 ac. i Wrnchisfsr Vir�k�fi •c oy�S s dS �p HALDEMAN_- 64 A 24 e3 04yF 280 ac. $byhens�c;�r v'r'gtuf Location in Surrounding Area �ePJ� 0 �� v. ("fid" � 125 250 50�eet w p ° 0 y+; �& Case Planner: Mark WAIVER/EXCEPTION REQUEST APPLICATION 1. Applicant: Name: Leslie & Teresa Hicks Telephone: (540) 869-9574 Address: 107 Berwick Lane Stephens City, VA 22655 2. Property owner (if different than above): Name: John C. Russell, Jr. & Frances L. Russell Address: 207 Caldwell Lane Winchester, VA 22602 3. Contact person (if other than above): Name: Michael M. Artz, L.S. Telephone: 540-667-8750 Telephone: 540-667-3233 4. Wavier request detailed (include specific ordinance requirement to be waived): Ordinance —Subdivision of Land: 144-31C 3 To allow for a 30' R/W 5. Property Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance form nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers): Caldwell Lane (VA Rte 717) +/- 1,450' (0.27 MI) to Papermill Road (VA. RTE. 644) & Pasture Lane (30' R/W) 6. Parcel Identification/ Location: Parcel Identification Number: TM#63-4-3 Magisterial District: Shawnee District 7. Property zoning and current use: Zoned: RA District Current Use: Agricultural Existing/recorded f 8. Attachments: Adjoining Property Owners List: and Proposed -Plats OFFICE USE ONLY: Fee: $500 enclosed: Jr6 ©' Receipt. 5-9 51 COUNTY of FREDERICK Q � Department of Platnaulg aaxl Lnevelognaealt 107 lOtth Tient Street �j'liac:�l2�te1'. 11'a?IILa 2_'6c)i-St1C1� Telephone: 540::665-5651 FAX; 540,66'5-6305 WAIVER/EXCEPTION REQUEST APPLICATION 1. Applicant: Name: Leslie & Teresa Hicks Telephone: (540) 869-9574 Address: 107 Berwick Lane Stephens City, VA 22655 2. Property owner (if different than above): Name: John C. Russell, Jr. & Frances L. Russell Address: 207 Caldwell Lane Winchester, VA 22602 3. Contact person (if other than above): Name: Michael M. Artz, L.S. Telephone: 540-667-8750 Telephone: 540-667-3233 4. Wavier request detailed (include specific ordinance requirement to be waived): Ordinance —Subdivision of Land: 144-31C 3 To allow for a 30' R/W 5. Property Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance form nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers): Caldwell Lane (VA Rte 717) +/- 1,450' (0.27 MI) to Papermill Road (VA. RTE. 644) & Pasture Lane (30' R/W) 6. Parcel Identification/ Location: Parcel Identification Number: TM#63-4-3 Magisterial District: Shawnee District 7. Property zoning and current use: Zoned: RA District Current Use: Agricultural Existing/recorded f 8. Attachments: Adjoining Property Owners List: and Proposed -Plats OFFICE USE ONLY: Fee: $500 enclosed: Jr6 ©' Receipt. 5-9 51 9. List of Adjoining Properties: The following names and addresses are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to the property for witch the waver or exception is being sought, including properties at the sides, rear, and in front of (across street from ) the subject property. (Use additional pages if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of the application. MI16 EFG, LC Address: 340 W. Parkins Mill Rd; Winchester, VA22602 Property Id#: TM# 63-4-2A John C. Russell, Jr. Address: 285 Caldwell Lane.; Winchester, VA 22602 Property ld#: TM# 63-4-2B AC Self Storage, LLC Address: 225 Caldwell Lane; Winchester, VA 22602 Property Id#: TM# 63-4-4A1 William P. Caldwell, Jr. Address: 237 Caldwell Lane; Winchester, VA 22602 Property Id#: TM# 63-4-4B1 Marie Evans Address: 170 Harrison Lane; Winchester, VA 22602 Property Id#: TM# 63-4-5A Paul M. Haldeman, Jr. Trust Address: 1835 Valley Ave.; Winchester, VA 22601 Property Id#: TM# 64-A-24 Cecil S. Jones, Jr. Address: 300 Laurelwood Dr.; Winchester, VA 22602 Property Id#: TM#63-4-1D Cecil S. Jones, Jr. Address: 300 Laurelwood Dr.; Winchestcr, VA 22602 Property Id#: TM#63-4-1A Tina C. & Michael S. Haack Address: 200 Pasture Lane; Winchester, VA 22602 Property Id#: TM# 63-4-2C Address: Property Id#: Address: Property Id#: Address: Property Id#: Address: Property Id#: Address: Property ld#: Address: Property ld#: Address: Property Id#: Affidavit for Family Division I, John C. Russell Jr. of (address) 285 Caldwell Lane affirm that I am the owner of a certain parcel of land identified as (GPIN) TM##63-4-3 on the Frederick County tax map and is located along or near Route (nearest public road) Caldwell Lane (VA RTE 717). I hereby affirm that I am familiar with the prerequisites of Section 15.1-466 A.12. and 13. of the Code of Virginia and the requirements and provisions of 165-54 B., Chapter 165, Frederick County Code, Zoning Ordinance; and 144-15, 144-31 C. and 144-39, Chapter 144, Frederick County Code, Subdivision Ordinance. I will convey by deed legally authorized portions of the above identified property to the following immediate family member(s) as defined in the Code of Virginia, Section 15.1-466 A. 12., 1950, as amended. Name Teresa Flicks Relationship Dauahter Age cif Acreage children? 2.00ac I further affirm that this division of land is for the accommodation and use of the listed family member(s) and will not be used to circumvent the applicable subsection of the Code of Virginia, and that I have not previously conveyed a lot to this family member under paragraph 165-54 B., Chapter 165, Frederick County Code, Zoning Ordinance. gnature, Property Owner/ rantor State of Virginia County of Frederick notary public in and for the state and county aforesaid, do hereby cert fy that this day, I -&CV S zoo -7- personally appeared before me and acknowledges the above affidavit dated s, --- -?:- that that affirms division of land under the family division procedure Given under my hand this S day of lr 2007 2_WA,Q-1X (Votary Public My commission expires Amanda K Lightner NOTARY PUBLIC COMMOnwealth of Virginia MY COMMission Expires 04/30/2010 To Whom It May Concern.- We, oncern: We, the owners of property located on the right-hand side of Pasture Lane, a 30' right of way off of Caldwell Lane, do not grant Teresa R. Hicks and Leslie W. Hicks a 20' easement across our property for ingress and egress. �L[ ". ' Date Phyll,f� B. Russell Date Theron J. Russell c XL.�Pj4 Date 1(�00 /Oto Julie R. Ruble Date V�Lo, Vicki Russell Heirs to James E. Russell, deceased 3/31/06 Parcel # 63 A 116B ;t e�_,e�r�cc� �'. Date��Etic,J Patrica R. Caldwell Robert E. Caldwell, deceased November 4, 1998 Parcel # 63 4 2 "/_t_' . �/G�tDate Ti C. Haac �`� v� )%3 .A v`� Date Michael S. Haack Parcel # 63 4 2C FAMILY DIVISION of LOT 3, RUSSELL DIVISION John C. Russell, Jr. & Frances L. Russell TM #63-4-3 Deed Book 384, Page 76 January 8, 2007 Shawnee District, Frederick County, Virginia VICINITY SKETCH I, Michael M. Artz, a duly authorized land surveyor, do hereby certify that the land hereby subdivided and dedicated to the Commonwealth of Virginia is in the name of John C. Russell Jr., & Frances L. Russell and was acquired as stated in the Owner's Certificate. I further certify that these tracts are properly and accurately described and are within the boundaries of the original tracts. Certified Land Surveyor The undersigned fee simple owners hereby certify that the land herein subdivided and dedicated to the Commonwealth of Virginia is all of the remaining land acquired by John C. Russell Jr., & Frances L. Russell by deed dated November 13, 1471 and recorded in Deed Book 384, Page 76. Said deeds being of record in the Clerk's Office of Frederick County, Virginia. This Subdivision and Road Dedication to the Commonwealth of Virginia as it appears on the accompanying plats is with the free consent and in accordance with the desires of the undersigned owners of said land and the same is hereby confirmed and submitted for record in the Clerk's Office of Frederick County, Virginia. John C. Russell Jr. Frances L. Russell STATE OF VIRGINIA; GITY/COUNTY OF l- UC(AALtK- to -wit: The foregoin owners consent and dedication was acknowledged before me this / day of LLr9 , 20 0 4-. % My commission expires Notary Public U CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL This Subdivision and Road Dedication to the Commonwealth of Virginia is approved by the undersigned in accordance with existing subdivision regulations and may be admitted to record. date Frederick County Subdivision Administrator !L-1-3 a .) ate Winc est - F derick Count Health De tment date colis DepaAmentfffransportatlovnj Amanda K Lightner SHEET 1 NOTARY PUBLIC Commonwealth of urginia My Commission Expires 04130010 / 1 r0 HEIG $ LUNUCNUFT a ENICEyQ E 644 WESTWOOD ' M522 SITE WESIWODU IESTE f 644 s /`,7'4 '�` ' LAUPEIWC& 9C\ t�.,rh,'id A� ® `'A` s!.� • `9 ,p3 II `Mem a • --� -AD R 07 I, Michael M. Artz, a duly authorized land surveyor, do hereby certify that the land hereby subdivided and dedicated to the Commonwealth of Virginia is in the name of John C. Russell Jr., & Frances L. Russell and was acquired as stated in the Owner's Certificate. I further certify that these tracts are properly and accurately described and are within the boundaries of the original tracts. Certified Land Surveyor The undersigned fee simple owners hereby certify that the land herein subdivided and dedicated to the Commonwealth of Virginia is all of the remaining land acquired by John C. Russell Jr., & Frances L. Russell by deed dated November 13, 1471 and recorded in Deed Book 384, Page 76. Said deeds being of record in the Clerk's Office of Frederick County, Virginia. This Subdivision and Road Dedication to the Commonwealth of Virginia as it appears on the accompanying plats is with the free consent and in accordance with the desires of the undersigned owners of said land and the same is hereby confirmed and submitted for record in the Clerk's Office of Frederick County, Virginia. John C. Russell Jr. Frances L. Russell STATE OF VIRGINIA; GITY/COUNTY OF l- UC(AALtK- to -wit: The foregoin owners consent and dedication was acknowledged before me this / day of LLr9 , 20 0 4-. % My commission expires Notary Public U CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL This Subdivision and Road Dedication to the Commonwealth of Virginia is approved by the undersigned in accordance with existing subdivision regulations and may be admitted to record. date Frederick County Subdivision Administrator !L-1-3 a .) ate Winc est - F derick Count Health De tment date colis DepaAmentfffransportatlovnj Amanda K Lightner SHEET 1 NOTARY PUBLIC Commonwealth of urginia My Commission Expires 04130010 FAMILY DIVISION of LOT 3, RUSSELL DIVISION John C. Russell, Jr. & Frances L. Russell TM #63-4-3 Deed Book 384, Page 76 January 8, 2007 Shawnee District, Frederick County, Virginia PRIVATE DRIVEWAY The proposed private driveway/road is not built according to street specifications of and will not be maintained by, the Virginia Department of Transportation or Frederick County. The improvement and maintenance of said driveway/road shall be the sole responsibility of the owners of lots which are provided with access via the driveway/road. Said driveway/road will not be considered for inclusion into the state secondary system until it meets the applicable construction standards of the Virginia Department of Transportation. The cost of bringing said driveway/road to acceptable standards shall not be borne by the Virginia Department of Transportation nor by Frederick County. Sheet 2 ±1,450' (0.27 MI) /- SHEET 3 OF 5 TO PAPERMILL ROAD (VA. RTE. 644) �R�� /-(5.03') AC SELF 2,554 sq. ft. ff• �A,�,�� \N° �C L (101.52)STORO, LLC (0.0586 AC.) IvPREHC," /L7 ZONING: M1 —1 USE: COM. 5' STRIP HEREBY DEDICATED TO THE �1 G1 �6 6p gR- ON PIPES / NOTES COMMONWEALTH OF 1. BOUNDARY SHOWN HEREON WAS DETERMINED BY VIRGINIA C3 FOUND I A FIELD RUN SURVEY PERFORMED BY ARTZ & % ASSOCIATES ON SEPTEMBER 26, 2006. l o_. 7. THIS PIAT IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND (5.07') is �J I RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. 3. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. RUSSELL 4. ALL ADJOINING PROPERTIES ZONING AND USES AS NOTED. SEE SHEET 5 FOR OWNER INFORMATION. © 5. SEE SHEET 5 FOR CURVE AND COURSE DATA. ZONING: RA 6. FAMILY LOT 1 IS A FAMILY CONVEYANCE FROM USE: RES. I I JOHN C. RUSSELL, Jr. (FATHER) TO TERESA HICKS `t (DAUGHTER). rn CO I m CALDWELL o Op O = POINT EF6, LC I I • = REBAR SET ZONING: RA (UNLESS NOT OTIiERWISE) O Z USE: RES. ZONING: RA rn , I o USE: RES. CD o i o AREA TABULATION \ � RESIDUE EXISTING: \ Z 118.3024 TM #63-4-3 20.3610 AC. �O \ LO PROPOSED: 9iS�\ I ACRES FAMILY LOT 1 2.000 AC. DEDICATION 0.0586 AC. "b" RESIDUE 18.3024 AC. IRON PIPE FOUND N I h°s EVANS 0 o HAACK\\ 1 VSo;1 �B OOSo�3� O \ �p5 �]O rs ZONING: RA ( ZONING: RA \ FAMILY LOT 1�p USE: AG. Q USE: RES. REBAR 20000 SOey FOUND ACRE5 cS (SEE SHEET 4) NEW 30' R/W LTH OF HEREBY ADDED EP 1 - TO EXISTING %pG, 0' RAW 5g�0 50 �oo, EET 4) S XRN MICHAEL M. ARTZ r JONES No. 1951 CHD ZONING: RA - 07 USE: RES. 1R' lzs`9" SUR'40 FINAL PLAT`�� FAMILY DIVISION of JONES \ HALDEMAN O / `'`� F LOT 3 ZONING: RA ZONING: A / USE: RES. . USE: AG. RUSSELL DIVISION SHAWNEE DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA YFENCERNER SCALE: 1":: 200' DATE: JANUARY8,2007 UND 'RESENT OWNER: Artz and Associates, PLC A Subsidiary of Valley Engineering PLC JOHN C. RUSSELL, Jr. & FRANCES L. RU55ELL LAND SURVEYING LAND PLANNING DEVELOPMENT 16 E.st Piccadilly SI—t TM #63-4-3 DB 384 PG 76 WINCHESTER, VA. 22601-4740 TEL 540-667-3233 FAX 540-667-9188 PROJECT #21875 TOLL FREE 1-boo-7ss-73zo NOTES: 1. BOUNDARY SHOWN HEREON WAS DETERMINED BY A FIELD RUN SURVEY PERFORMED BY ART7 do ASSOCIATES ON SEPTEMBER 2G, 2006, 2. THIS PLAT IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. 3. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. 4. CONTOUR INTERVAL IS 1 FOOT. ELEVATIONS ARE ASSUMED. 5. PROPOSED WELL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MEETING ALL HEALTH DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS DURING INSTALLATION. 6. ALL ADJOINING PROPERTIES ZONING AND USES ARE AS NOTED. SEE SHEET 5 FOR OWNER INFORMATION. 7. INGRESS/EGRESS OVER AND ACROSS PASTURE LANE TO BE GRANTED BY APPROPRIATE OWNERS IN A SEPARATE DOCUMENT. 8. THIS LOT IS A FAMILY CONVEYANCE FROM JOHN C. RUSSELL, Jr. (FATHER) TO TERESA HICKS (DAUGHTER). EFG, LC 0 ZONING: RA A USE: RES. �G o O HAACK \ O ZONING: RA\ \ USE: RES. \_ , SHEET 4 OF 51 O =POINT O = REBAR SET (UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE) CALDWELL (D ZONING: RA USE: RES. Y ` X NEW 30' R/W IT 9 - ADDED TO THE EXISTING ASs 30' R/W (PASTURE LANE) FOR THE BENEFIT OF FAMILY LOT 1 JONES ZONING: RA USE: RES. N � o 00 Z N V "J �a a� PROPOSED ;1 FAMILY LOT 1 DRAINFIELD N 1 \ 2.0000 ,1 ;I Lj 1 ACRE5 ��� PROPOSED WELL 6 RESIDUE / yL 18.3024 ACRES L8 (REF. COURSE) 319.69' L9 N 6434'02" E N 31'21'55" E L10 S 45'35'56" E RESIDUE 63.65" \\� IRON PIPE FouND EVANS 18.3024 N 15'35'46" W 96.16' L73 ACRE5 132.88' L14 S 58738'42" E 153.42' L15 S 07'42'08" E ZONING: RA L16 S 35'59'45" E 50.00' USE: AG. �� 30.00' s s s s 3O N 36'04'24" W 50.29' L19 OSQuy 30.07' y`L REBAR FOUND / L8 Y ` X NEW 30' R/W IT 9 - ADDED TO THE EXISTING ASs 30' R/W (PASTURE LANE) FOR THE BENEFIT OF FAMILY LOT 1 JONES ZONING: RA USE: RES. N � o 00 Z N V "J �a a� PROPOSED ;1 FAMILY LOT 1 DRAINFIELD N 1 \ 2.0000 ,1 ;I Lj 1 ACRE5 ��� PROPOSED WELL 6 RESIDUE / yL 18.3024 ACRES L8 N 83'36'19" E 319.69' L9 N 6434'02" E 64.62' L10 S 45'35'56" E 110.60' L11 S 6955'19" W 119.52' L12 N 15'35'46" W 96.16' L73 N 24'25'26" W 132.88' L14 S 58738'42" E 153.42' L15 S 07'42'08" E 124.64' L16 S 35'59'45" E 50.00' L17 S 54'00'15" W 30.00' L18 N 36'04'24" W 50.29' L19 N 54'33'04" E 30.07' tlu("MICHAEL H OF `pi�DETA,IAL PLA`T'ofFA1!/lIL Y LOT 1 M. 1ARTZ11. 1951FAMILY DIVISION of LOT 3, RUSSELL DIVISIONg-0�7SHAWNEE DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE: 1" =100' DATE: JANUARY 8, 2007 PRESENT OWNER: Artz and Associates, PLC JOHN C. RUSSELL, Jr. & FRANCES L. RUSSELL LAND SURVEYING SubsEYYINGING of Valley Engineering, PLC LAND PLANNING DEVELOPMENT TM #63-4-3 DB 384 PG 76 16 E°=` P °d.Ily Street WINCHESTER, VA. 22601-4740 TEL 540-667-3233 FAX 540-667-9186 TOLL FREE 1-800-755-7320 PROJECT #21875 SHEET 5 OF 5 LINE TAX MAP NAME DEED O 63-4-2A EFG, L.C. #020010079 U 63 -fl -6b JUm C. KUJJCLL, Jr. 438/2�I © 63-4-4A1 A C SELF STORAGE, L.L.C. #020006256 O 63-4-4BI WILLIAM P., Jr. & JEAN P. CALDWELL 701/624 O 63-4-5A ROBERT W. & MARIE EVANS 683/601 O 64-A-24 PAUL M. HALDEMAN, Jr. #010009261 - PARCEL 1 © 63-4-1D CECIL S. JONES, Jr. 529/25 O 63 -4 -IA CECIL S. JONES, Jr. 511/334 CD 63-4-2C MICHAEL 5. & TINA C. HAACK 922/783 CURVE RADIUS ARC LENGTH CHORD LENGTH CHORD BEARING DELTA ANGLE C1 870.00' 143.79' 143.63' N 68"10'03" E 9'28' 1 1" C2 735.00' 229.93' 228.99' N 63'56'26" E 17'55'26" C3 865.00' 142.12' 141.96' N 68'11'44" E 9'24'50" C4 740.00' 231.49' 230.55' N 63'56'26" E 17'55'26" LINE BEARING DISTANCE L1 N 72'54'09" E 124.37' L2 N 5458'43" E 7.27' L3 S 40'58'54" E 106.55' L4 S 00'55'23" W 29.94' L5 N 36'06' 17" W 210.43' L6 N 72'54'09" E 129.56' L7 N 54'58'43" E 7.79' ADJOINING OWNERS and CURVE & COURSE DATA for FAMILY DIVISION of LOT 3, RUSSELL DIVISION SHAWNEE DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA DATE: JANUARY 8, 2007 H OF l MICHAEL M. ARTZ ➢ No. 1951 (-g-a7 _.,tir�ND SUR'4E�o T''ESENT OWNER: Artz and Associates, PLC A Subsidiary of Valley Engineering, PLC OHN C. RUSSELL, Jr. & FRANCES L. RUSSELL LAND SURVEYING LAND PLANNING DLVELOPMENI 16 East Piccadilly Street TM #63-4-3 DB 384 PG 76 WINCHESTER, VA 22601-4740 TEL 540-667-3233 FAX 540-667-9100 PROJECT //21875 TOLL FREE 1-000-755-7320 / • C 'COUNTY of F RUE DE ICK MEMORANDUM Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 Frederick County Planning Commission FAX: 540/665-6395 FROM: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator RE: Waiver Request — Hupps Ridge, LLC DATE: March 5, 2007 Painter -Lewis, PLC, on behalf of Hupps Ridge, LLC, owners of an approximately 108 acre RA (Rural Areas) zoned tract of land, is proposing a twenty-one (2 1) lot rural preservation subdivision on this undeveloped property. The property is located on Hunting Ridge Road (Route 608), approximately one half mile north of the intersection with Glaize Orchard Road (Route 682), in the Gainesboro Magisterial District, and is identified by Property Identification Number 21-A-4. This proposed rural preservation subdivision layout is illustrated as exhibit 1, attached with this application. The applicant is requesting a waiver of Article V Design Standards, § 144-17 Streets, (G) (1), Cul- de-sac, of the Code of Frederick County, Chapter 144 Subdivision of Land to allow cul-de-sac length of approximately 3,200 feet, 2,200 feet more than the allowed 1,000 feet. Chapter 144 Section 17 (G) (1), of the Code of Frederick County specifies that: Cul-de-sac permanently designed as such, shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) feet in length. The Planning Commission may waive this requirement in cases where extreme topography or other factors make it impractical In no case shall the street serve no more than twenty five (25) lots. The turnaround provided shall have a right -a -way radius of not less than fzfty (50) feet and a paved radius of not less than forty-five (45) feet. Loop streets are preferred to cul-de-sac, where possible. The applicant believes extreme topography of the property renders the property unusable to accommodate a cul-de-sac less than is required by County Code. To achieve full use of this property, a waiver request is needed due to lot lines following a ridge line, whose side slopes are too steep for loop roads. The cul-de-sac will serve twenty-one (21) lots and have a right-of-way distance of not less than fifty (50) feet and a paved radius of not less than forty-five (45) feet. VDOT and the Frederick County Fire and Rescue Department had no adverse comments regarding this proposed waiver, as this road will be built to state standards. This proposed waiver ofthe 1,000 foot cul-de-sac length may be justified due to the extreme topography of this property. Staff would recommend any alterations to this proposed layout be resubmitted for consideration by the Planning Commission. A recommendation from the Planning Commission is requested. MRC/bad Attachments 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 0 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Frederick County, Wavier Request Location in the County Location in Surrounding Area IAV #lT2 - 07 Location Map Frederick County, Wavier Request Location in the Gounty Location in Surrounding Area COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street ! Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Telephone: 540%665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 WAIVER/EXCEPTIONS REQUEST APPLICATION 1. Applicant: Name: (,MV 6, {SLC ' �l�f 1 Lffili,'iS Telephone: 90 - to b 5"7'7 3 Address: IIS - 3tev \ /ar- f - VVjnche,sitr, VA 0341 2. Property owner (if different than above): Name: Hupp 5 E iage . L( -c _ �e P/�/r Telephone: 4 O' ._ &S -;U)O Address: � (D � GO 1-n l -y1 Jrl weal i -h Ci 3. Contact person (if other than above): Name: N' A Telephone: UA 4. Waiver request details (include specific ordinance requirements to be waived): woilret' is J-t;rnq inUes ted Jrtro �or-i l `� -l7; C�/ _ �e t exlre ne fyPo h y, fhe. /of lr�s 6i/oma a ridge line LJ hCoe aide -SlOpes 0-M iz30 S Af-r--p &r /COP 'j -&O' 6&. -Fpje cui-dc---vx wit serve 21 lots okT-I sha htG'e- 0 rt o-cy &Siat)6c n/' N - /e5s fico,, 5-6 W ccw} a- po ti %o1 I-Dct i Us 6t nvf 1c -';L -H- n qS 5. Property Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers): Rok Ae W , f4unt1 f R (cict--, [?(A O-rp rO)�, YZ mi IC N6Y+h of I 'rC-K "-d RA L/ 6. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number 0 Magisterial District: G w r!sS b o r6 7. Property zoning and current use: Zoned: KA District Current Use: v a co n t 8. Attachments: Adjoining Property Owners List Existing/recorded and Proposed Plats OFFICE USE ONLY: Fee: $500 enclosed: Receipt #: rW (S Adjoining Property owners Subdivision Waiver Application The Oaks At Braddock Crossing 21-A-4 Name Address Name: Helm, Richard S. Address: P.O. Box 2077 Winchester, VA 22604 Property # 21-A-22 Name: Gardner, Eugene Address: 986 Old Bethel Church Rd. Winchester, VA 22603 Property # 21 -A -6H Name: Gardner, Eugene Address: 986 Old Bethel Church Rd. Winchester, VA 22603 Property # 21 -A -6F Name: Gardner, Eugene Address: 986 Old Bethel Church Rd. Winchester, VA 22603 Property # 21 -A -6E Name: Gardner, Eugene Address: 986 Old Bethel Church Rd. Winchester, VA 22603 Property # 21 -A -6G Name: Philpott, Martin Address: 611 Manito Trl. Winchester, VA 22602 John & Dianne L. Property # 21 -A -2M Name: Wince, Craig D. & Address: 2295 Hunting Ridge Rd. Winchester, VA 22603 Kelly J. Property # 21 -A -2L Name: Bowser, Michael J. Address: 2315 Hunting Ridge Rd. Winchester, VA 22603 & Haley -Bowser, Jennifer Property # 21 -A -2N Name:Deutsch, Maurice Address: 2389 Hunting Ridge Rd. Winchester, VA 22603 Property # 21-A-20 Name:Silver Lake, LLC Address: 13 S. Loudoun Street Winchester, VA 22601 Property # 21-A-3 Name: Athey, Donald E. & Address: 422 Gray Avenue Winchester, VA 22601 Jo Ann Property # 21-A-34 0 SUBDIVISION REQUEST #05-07 DAVID E. WHITACRE w. b Staff Report for the Planning Commission w Prepared: March 6, 2007 Staff vontact: Mar' R, Ciieran, Zoning Administrator This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist in the review of this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Reviewed Action Planning Commission 03/21/07 Pending Board of Supervisors: 04/11/06 Pending LOCATION: The properties are located at the corner of Queens Way (Route 740) and E. Macedonia Church Road (Route 756). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 75-A-102 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: RP (Residential Performance) Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: North: Residential Performance South: Residential Performance East: Residential Performance West: Residential Performance Use. Residential Use: Residential Use: Residential Use: Residential SUBDIVISION SPECIFICS: Subdivision of 1.28 acres into three (3) single-family detached traditional housing lots. Subdivision Request 905-07, David E. Whitacre March 6, 2007 Page 2 Department of Transportation: No comments Fire and Rescue: No comment Sanitation Authority: No comments Planning: This proposed subdivision will create a total of three (3) new residential building lots, with one (1) of the lots having an existing structure. The lot size(s) will be between 15,000 and 21,000 square feet in size. These three (3) new lots comply with the dimensional requirements of the single-family detached traditional urban housing type, in particular the minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet. These proposed lots will have direct frontage on Queens Way (Route 740) and E. Macedonia Church Road (Route 756). Based on lot size, street lights, curb and gutter, sidewalks and open space are not required. The lots in the vicinity of the subject subdivision are generally 15,000 to 20,000 square feet in size in established neighborhoods, with established homes. This proposed subdivision will be consistent with the surrounding neighborhoods, and located within the UDA and SWSA as indicated by the 2003 Comprehensive Policy Plan of Frederick County. Staff Review: The Subdivision Ordinance requires that land divisions in the RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District, without an approved master development plan, be presented to the Board of Supervisors for final approval (Chapter 144-12-B). The Master Development Plan (MDP) requirement may be waived under Section 165-134A of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance provided: 1) A proposed subdivision contains ten (10) or less traditional detached single-family dwelling units. 2) The proposed subdivision is not an integral portion of a property proposed or planned for future development. 3) The proposed subdivision is harmonious with the surrounding properties and land uses. 4) The proposed subdivision does not affect the intent of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, and Code of Frederick County Chapter 144; Subdivision of Land. This proposed subdivision appears to meet the requirements for a waiver from the MDP requirements; the applicant has been granted a waiver of the MDP requirements. This project contains land zoned RP and does not have an approved MDP; therefore, Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors review and action on the Subdivision request is necessary. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR 03/21/07 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The proposed subdivision appears to satisfy agency and ordinance requirements, and has had the Master Development Plan (MDP) requirement waived. These proposed lots comply with the dimensional requirements of the single-family detached traditional urban housing type. A recommendation from the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors regarding this subdivision request is desired. Subdivision Request #05-07, David E. Whitacre March 6, 2007 Page s Staff is seeking administrative approval authority; therefore, a recommendation from the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors regarding the subdivision request is desired. All issues and concerns raised by the Planning Commission will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for their consideration. Frederick County, Wavier request WAV # 03 - 07 Whitacre Location in the county Map Features E- i Application Zoning Lakes/Ponds Bt (Business, Neighborhood District) Streams B2 (Business, General District) Streets 7 Primary 4w B3 (Business, industrial Transition District) OW, EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) Secondary 140 HE (Higher Education District) Terciary • M1 (Industrial, Light District) M2 (Industrial, General District) ! MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) MS (Medical Support District) R4 (Residential, Planned Community District) ® R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) RAZ (Rural Area Zone) RP (Residential Performance District) Location in Surrounding Area 0 125 250p '0heet al Map [11 Frederick County, Wavier Request Whitacre Location in the County Map Features CJ WAV0307_DavidEWhitacre C Lakes/Ponds w Streams Streets v Primary Secondary '4 Terciary Location in Surrounding Area 0 125 250 . eet APPLICATION for MINOR RURAL SUBDIVISION Applicant/Agent: v �` L—, �t Address: CV E- 4 Phone Number: Owner's Name if different from ap lip cant): Address: Phone Number: PARCEL INFORMATION (Check One) Minor Rural Subdivision: i/ Zoning District:_ Number of Lots: Total Acreage Subdivided: "Family variance" lot? (y/n) Property Location (please give State Route # and name, distance an/�d direction from intersection): Magisterial District: ()ire-� Fri.. Property Identification Number (P.I.N.): 0 P - (Parent Tract) FEES: ****For Office Use Only**** ► $100.00 parent tract + $100.00/lot Fee amount enclosed by applicant: $ Receipt #: Received by: Date: (Initials) 9. fist of Adjoining Properties: The following names and addresses are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to the property for which the waiver or exception is being sought, including properties at the sides, rear, and in front of (across street from) the subject property. (Use additional pages if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this application. -7-", y r vv� �l Ja Address -7 (` O E 61'a-C-CA�, Fa Property ID # % 5 -i r r _ Address Property ID # ��--��+ 04 i9 L Fo Pe i-co,,� Address G G Property ID # — D - E1 6 ` A'tI b i 2 �c Address _ G.'����d perry ID # 9 _ ei TT Address CWV Property ID # Address Property ID # Address 0 Property ID # _ 914 Address l 0 O51 ��� Property ID #eTM , 13 Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # - Page 2- OALI d Use Applications\Application Forms\waiver request form.wpd FINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION OF THE LAND OF DAVID E. WHITACRE OPEQUON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA TAX MAP: 75-A PARCEL 102, SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE ZONED: R- P USE: RESIDENTIAL I, LARRY C. HIMELRIGHT, A DULY AUTHORIZED LAND SURVEYOR IN THE STATE OF VIRGINIA, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE LAND EMBRACED IN THIS SUBDIVISION IS THE LAND THAT .WAS ACQUIRED BY DAVID E. WHITACRE BY DEED DATED JUNE 13, 1997 AND DEED DATED MAY 30, 2006 AND RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA IN DEED BOOK 881, PG. 1443 AND INSTRUMENT NO. 060015598. GIVEN R MY HAN HIS FIFTH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2006. h �y57 __-L-ARRY C. HIMEL IGHT DATE OWNER'S CERTIFICATE THIS SUBDIVISION OF THE LAND OF DAVID E. WHITACRE IS WITH THE FREE CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DESIRES OF THE UNDERSIGNED OWNER OWNER DATE OWNER'S CONSENT ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS\5A DAY OF 2fC - 2005 �3�aDll) MY COMMISSION EXPIRES �n � .x2&A NOTARY PUBLIC APV O ALS r4 Tl L. G. HIMIIELr i G T ? :- i••lo. DATE FIR RICK CO. SANITATION AUTHORITY DATE SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATOR DATE PREPARED BY HIMELRIGHT 8 ASSOCIATES, PLLC PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS 694 RED BUD ROAD, STRASBURG, VA. PHONE 465-8767 OCTOBER 5, 2006 EXHIBIT "Avg SHEET I OF 2 s S5 -01'32"E cQF (Ld D o ROUle 756 168.68 V) NED —CNUi3CH—ROS'® CENTERLINE CED®NIA R\ ul,_ V l N E M 1P _�- OW.1 HEREBY DEDICATED TO 3 u) \ ¢ (50' R. �I. .229 SQ. FT. yA__.--�� d, z 169.65 = � � COMMONWEALTH O NEW R.O W 0l O Ex. R•D W• S57°01'32"E — 82.00 � cj � � 87.65 M °41'38 Ol" DELTA O. H. WIRE ARC 20.01. — RADIUS 676.90 I � CHORD 20.01 w I I � 33'I8"E > � CHI) BR6 S59 35' BRL. I35' BRL. I11 � I o m I LOT "A" :C 0 0.2 1 =.1' - OD 115,311 Sal. FT 0 CJ In 00000 Ly - 400 l_ U Qcr LZ m o O1 1 0 f Z to � 1 1 w 3 .' W m r C, r' LOT "C" W F- o cn o GO— o �. N N 1fa 21, 258 SO. FT W 7' w z r` �W ° N ASSIGNED PIN NO. M h' 60"1 l0 = 75A-102 z fn oN O m I 25' BRL. 25' BRL. Q ? 0_ U , O = ASSIGNED PIN NO. z - Q V U 75A -102-A o S N. o, W 81.71 102 01 N53°26'14"W 183.72 La {u 510' BRL. a w ? m 0 F- cc oo LOT "B» �, o Z LL Er a 18, 572 SO. FT. m M o m � > (0 WI aI =_ m 0 In M N I W d• N M Lo ce ASSIGNED PIN NO. / ' 00 M 75A-102-8 G`Ire) aDNz ppCnO0C9 N O V) 0 Q fa -" D 0_ J U 0 0 Wp > Q cr- U U a N53°26'14"W I8O.08 I N. OR F. "NICHOLS" D. B. 607, PG. 629 DENO ES IROtICgIN SET T. M. 75-A-IO3 DENOTES EXISIl`�PG PIN ZONED: R -P OR PIPE USE: RESIDENTIAL L. G. H1,MFIRI�HT 0 50 loo --419. 1314 :1 .- SCALE SHEET 2 OF 2