Loading...
PC 06-01-05 Meeting AgendaFILE COPY AGErm Ltv FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia June 1, 2005 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) May 4, 2005 Minutes .............................. ............... (A) .......................................................... 2) Committee Reports.................................................................................................. (no tab) 3) Citizen Comments.................................................................................................... (no tab) PUBLIC HEARING 4) Revocation of Conditional Use Permit #17-04 of Edwin and Zucely Elvira, for a landscaping business. The property is located directly behind AC Self Storage (225 Caldwell Lane), south of Papermill Road (Route 644) and is identified with Property Identification Number 63-44C in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Mr. Cheran ...................................................................................................................... (B) 5) Rezoning #07-05 for Manning Property to rezone 9.442 acres from M2 (General Industrial) District to B3 (Industrial Transition Business) and IA (Interstate Overlay) District and 2.736 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B3 (Industrial Transition Business) and IA (Interstate Overlay) District. These properties are located approximately 350 feet south of the intersection of Rest Church Road (Route 669) and Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), between Martinsburg Pike (Route 11) and I-81 and continuing south to Duncan Run, south of the Whitehall Exit (Exit 323), in the Stonewall Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers (PINs) 33A -A-12, 33A -A-13, 33A -A-14, 33A -A-15, and 33A -A -15A. Mr.Ruddy........................................................................................................................ (C) 6) Rezoning #08-05 of Canter Estates Section V, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to revise proffers concerning the rezoning of 103.74 acres to RP (Residential Performance) District. The properties are located on the west side of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) adjacent to Canter Estates Section III, in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers (PINS) 76-A-22, 76-A-23, and 76B-1-5-312 through 385. Mr.Ruddy........................................................................................................................ (D) DISCUSSION 7) Ordinance Amendment — Article IV -Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165 -30 - Signs, G -Height, H -Size (Business Signs) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance Mr.Cheran ..................................................................... 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 May 4, 2005 PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/ Opequon District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Pat Gochenour, Red Bud District; Marie F. Straub, Red Bud District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; and Richard C. Ours, Opequon District, June M. Wilmot, Shawnee District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; H. Paige Manuel, Member -At -Large; Barbara Van Osten, Board of Supervisors' Liaison; and Lawrence R Ambrogi, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; and David Share, City of Winchester Liaison. STAFF PRESENT: Eric R Lawrence, Planning Director; Mark R Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Susan K. Eddy, Senior Planner; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p,m. MINUTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the Planning Commission minutes of April 6, 2005 were unanimously approved as presented. COMMITTEE REPORTS Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) - 04/28/05 Mtg. Commissioner Unger reported that the DRRS had three ordinance amendments on their agenda for discussion: a proposed amendment to remove business signs as a permitted use in the RA (Rural Areas) District; a proposed amendment to remove "advertising specialties -wholesale; and a proposed amendment to address inter -parcel connectors. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1506 Minutes of May 4, 2005 Do 11 M -2 - PUBLIC HEARING Consideration of the revocation of Conditional Use Permit #30-99 of Winchester Motor Service (The Van Man) to operate a public garage without body repair. The property is located at 2372 Berryville Pike (Rt. 7 East) and is identified with P.I.N. 55-A-102 in the Red Bud Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Revocation Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R Cheran, reported that the Planning Commission considered the revocation of this conditional use permit (CUP) at its February 2, 2005 meeting, but deferred action for 90 days to allow the property owner time to come into compliance with the conditions ofher permit and with the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Cheran stated that the violations included tractor trailers, debris, and tires on the property. He said that staff has visited the site on various occasions, and as recently as this morning, and found the site not to be in compliance with the conditions set forth in CUP 430-99. Mr. Cheran added that the Frederick County Fire Marshal and the Frederick County Solid Waste Coordinator have both started cases on this property. A member of the Commission inquired if the proceedings initiated by the Solid Waste Coordinator and the Fire Marshal would continue if the Planning Commission revokes the CUP. Mr. Cheran replied yes; he said that those two agencies enforce a separate code other than the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and their proceedings will continue. Mr. Cheran added that if the Board of Supervisors decides at their May 25 meeting that revocation is warranted, the staff will proceed with criminal charges the very next day. Ms. Sheila W. Beach, the owner of the property, stated that her reason for not completely complying is a financial one. She said that she can not afford the expense involved to have the tires and other materials hauled away and, she can not get a bank to lend her the money. Ms. Beach said she did, however, have all but one of the tractor trailers removed from the property. She said she has personally made nine trips to Zuckerman to dispose of steel and gasoline tanks, and she has also removed over 60 bags of garbage. Ms. Beach remarked that her previous tenants left her with all of the debris. She said she will continue to work on cleaning up the property. Chairman DeHaven called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Michael A. Hopkins, an adjoining property owner, believed the Planning Commission should not allow the CUP to continue until the property has been cleaned up. Mr. Hopkins said that he has not seen much change in the appearance of the property and he believed there was more than one trailer remaining on the property. Mr. Michael D. Groll, an adjoining property owner, recalled that at the February 2, 2005, Planning Commission meeting, Mrs. Beach said that she would evict the lessee for violating the lease agreement and remove the tires, cars, two mobile homes, and other debris. In addition, she agreed to evict the operator of the tractor -trailers, which constituted a fleet -maintenance facility. Mr. Groll said that he has lost countless hours of sleep due to the noise coming from tractor -trailer refrigeration units which run during the night. Mr. Groll said that it has been four months since a violation letter was issued to Ms. Beach and two months since the Planning Commission's meeting. He said that as of yesterday, at noon, the piles of tires remain, the mobile homes remain, Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1507 Minutes of May 4, 2005 Do N a F T -3- a non -working vehicle is on the property, including debris, and there are more tractor -trailers than there were on February 2. Mr. Groll requested that this CUP be immediately revoked He believed that if the CUP was not revoked, the violations on the property, vmuld be repeated in the future. There was no one else who wished to speak and Chairman DeHaven closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Chairman DeHaven asked Ms. Beach if the tenants had been evicted from the property and Ms. Beach replied yes. Commissioner Ours said that when he visited the site earlier today, there appeared to be persons in residence in the smaller building to the right of the garage area; he said there were stickers on the door stating they accepted Visa and Mastercard. Commissioner Ours asked what business was operating there. Ms. Beach replied that it was the trucking business. She said that the operator of the trucking business was told by both Mr. Cheran and herself that he was not in the proper zoning district to conduct his business. She also found out that he did not have a business license. Commission members believed the property needed to be cleaned up and then, afterward, if there was a legitimate use, there was always an opportunity for the property owner to come in and apply again for a conditional use permit. Upon motion made by Commissioner Straub and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend the revocation of Conditional Use Permit 430-99 of Winchester Motor Service (The Van Man) to operate a public garage without body repair at 2372 Berryville Pike (Rt. 7 East). (Commissioner Watt was absent from the meeting.) Consideration of a proposed amendment to the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan to alter the Eastern Road Plan. Changes include roads and proposed roads between Berryville Pike (Rt. 7) and Senseny Road (Rt. 657), east of Greenwood Road (Rt. 656). The alterations are in the Red Bud Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Approval Senior Planner, Susan K. Eddy, reviewed the proposed revisions of the Eastern Road Plan with the Commission. The first proposed revision was to classify the new spine road, proffered with the Haggerty rezoning, as a major collector road and to show the extension of this major collector road down to Senseny Road Ms. Eddy assured the Commission that this new collector is not meant to be a replacement for a future Rt. 37 in this area; Rt. 37 remains clearly shown on the Eastern Road Plan as a new major arterial road. Ms. Eddy stated, however, that because this major collector road would provide a connection between Senseny Road and Rt. 7, other elements of the Eastern Road Plan in this area are being re-examined as well. The second proposed modification to the Eastern Road Plan described by Ms. Eddy was for a new major collector road to be established between a re-routed Valley Mill Road and the spine road on the Canyon, LC property. She added that land was reserved in this area for such a future road through the proffers associated with the Haggerty rezoning. Ms. Eddy noted that the advantages to this new proposal are that less traffic would use Morning Glory Road and the one -lane bridge section of Valley Mill Road; in addition, the majority of traffic in the area would access Rt. 7 Frederick County Planning Cornrmssion rage 1 gtsuMinutes of May 4, 2005 MON at a signalized intersection. Ms_ Eddy reported that the Transportation Committee considered the Eastern Road Plan revisions at their meeting of March 1, 2005, and unanimously recommended approval; and the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) considered the revisions at their meeting of March 14, 2005 and recommended approval. In addition, discussions were held by the Planning Commission at their meeting on April 6, 2005 and by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on April 13, 2005. Commissioner Straub raised the issue of who would be responsible for the rerouting of Valley Mill Road; she was concerned about the construction traffic during the development of the Haggerty property. It was noted that the re -alignment of Valley Mill Road was not likely to occur until the properties it traverses develop. It was also noted that the spine road would have to be built prior to building permits being issued for the Haggerty property. Chairman DeHaven next called for public comments and the following person came forward to speak: Mr. Gary Adams, one of the owners of Goldies, LC property, said that the owners of Goldies, LC have been trying to sell their property since January of 2005 and they were advised by the Planning Department staff that a rezoning approval would be contingent on the construction of the road by the developer. Mr. Adams explained to the Commission his unsuccessful pursuits to acquire an access for his property through adjoining parcels. He believed that access via the Stafford property was a possibility; he said the Staffords favored the Eastern Road Plan because it would re-route the traffic off of the one -lane bridge and would eliminate their responsibility to fund road construction. Mr. Adams asked if the Commission could possibly get something in place or get a commitment from the Staffords that they were willing to provide an easement. Chairman DeHaven stated that he understood Mr. Adams' concerns; however, the Planning Commission did not have the authority to act on Mr. Adams' request. Members of the Planning Commission supported the proposed revisions to the Eastern Road Plan and no outstanding issues of concern were raised. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Straub, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the proposed amendments to the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan to alter the Eastern Road Plan. Changes include roads and proposed roads between Berryville Pike (Rt. 7) and Senseny Road (Rt. 657), east of Greenwood Road (Rt. 656). The majority vote was as follows: YES (REC. APPROVAL): Straub, Unger, Morris, Light, DeHaven, Thomas, Ours, Kriz, Triplett, Manuel, Wilmot NO: Gochenour (Commissioner Watt was absent from the meeting.) Frederick County Planning Commission rags "U' Minutes of May 4, 2005 Do 0 8 V -5 - PUBLIC MEETING Consideration of the endorsement of a limited access line break at Virginia State Route 37 for the development known as Kernstown Commons. This property is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Rt. 11 and Rt. 37 in Kernstown. The property is identified with P.I.N. 75-A-10 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. A public meeting for the endorsement of the limited access line break is required by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) and the Commonwealth Transportation Board before the application can be accepted for their review. Action — Recommended Endorsement of the Limited Access Line Break Ms. Candice Perkins, Planner, reported that the Planning Department received a request from Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, PC (PHR&A) on behalf of the project known as Kernstown Commons for the endorsement of a limited access line break. She noted that this was the same property that was recently considered by the Planning Commission, at their March 2, 2005 meeting, for Master Development Plan (MDP) approval. She said the MDP for this site was approved by the Board of Supervisors with conditions at their March 23, 2005 meeting. Ms. Perkins explained that the MDP before the Commission in March had a total of three proposed entrances: two full, and one right-in/right-out. This limited access endorsement request is only for the northernmost full commercial entrance and the right-in/right-out has been eliminated from the project. The entrance that the applicant is requesting the break for will be signalized and aligns with the off ramp of Rt. 37. Ms. Perkins continued, stating that the request for endorsement of the limited access line break is the first step for the applicant to begin the review process with the Commonwealth Transportation Board, who will ultimately decide if this break will be granted. Mr. Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E., Senior Vice President with PHR&A, was present to represent the Nerangis Orange Partnership, the owners of Kernstown Commons. Mr. Maddox presented some history which led up to the requested endorsement. He said the Commonwealth Transportation Board will consider this break after the County has indicated there is no Comprehensive Policy Plan issue with entering the site at the points indicated. Commissioner Light was concerned about the adequacy of the right-hand turn lanes coming out of the site; he said that as traffic comes out of the project towards the bridge, they will be turning into 45 mph traffic without the benefit of an acceleration lane. Mr. Maddox said that there will be sufficient room underneath the bridge for road improvements; he did not anticipate there would be a problem. Commissioner Straub inquired if the applicant intended to provide an inter -parcel connector with the property to the north. Mr. Maddox replied that it is the intention of the developers of that property to submit a request similar to what the Commission is considering this evening. He said that all of this is consistent with what VDOT would like to see occur. Mr. Maddox said that these intersections, both this one and at the terminus of Rt. 37, will need to be signalized. Board Liaison, Barbara Van Osten, asked Mr. Maddox why the secondary entrance would not also be signalized. In addition, she inquired how Mr. Maddox's proposed design fit in with preliminary thoughts on the Rt. 37 exit over I-81, with regard to the Crosspoint development. Mr. Maddox replied that the majority of traffic coming off Rt. 37 would go straight across the intersection and not make a turn. He then provided an explanation of the various traffic scenarios being studied for the Crosspoint development. Chairman DeHaven next called for public comments, however, no one came forward to speak. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1510 Minutes of May 4, 2005 n) Q. Members of the Planning Commission believed the requested limited access break did not conflict with the intent of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unaniniously recommend the endorsement of a limited access line break at Virginia State Route 37 for the northern full commercial entrance for the development known as Kernstown Commons. DISCUSSION Consideration of a request by Greenway Engineering to include approximately 267 acres of land, known as the Solenberger-Bridgeforth Property, into the Urban Development Area (UDA). The properties are located north of Cedar Creek Grade (Rt. 622), east of Rt. 37 and west of the City of Winchester. The properties are identified with P.I.N.s 63-A-1 (only the portion east of Rt. 37), 63 -A -1A, 52-A-310, 63 -A -1E, 63 -A -2L, 63-A-21), and 63-A-213 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Also, the consideration of proposed modifications to the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan (WJELUP), an element of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The WJELUP includes properties bounded by Cedar Creek Grade (Rt. 622) to the south, Rt. 37 to the west, Merriman's Lane (Rt. 621), and the City of Winchester to the north and east. No Action Required At This Time Commissioner Unger said that he would abstain from all discussion of this matter, due to a possible conflict of interest. Senior Planner, Susan K. Eddy, said that the discussion item is a request by Greenway Engineering to include approximately 267 acres of land, known as the Solenberger-Bridgeforth Property, into the Urban Development Area (UDA); also included, are proposed modifications to the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan (WJELUP). She said that both of these would constitute modifications to the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Planner Eddy reviewed the modifications to the Comprehensive Policy Plan with the Commission. She said that a key component to the WJELUP area is transportation. She said that existing transportation plans call for Juba] Early Drive to be extended to Rt. 37 with anew interchange at Rt. 37, which has been included in this plan. She said that also included is a new collector road, going from Jubal Early extended through the project down to Cedar Creek Grade. In addition, existing plans call for improvements to Cedar Creek Grade itself, as well as interchange improvements at Cedar Creek Grade and Rt. 37. Planner Eddy said the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommitee (CPPS) considered this request at a number of meetings and they were generally supportive of the UDA expansion request for the Solenberger-Bridgeforth properties. They directed staff to modify the existing WJELUP, rather than to create an entirely new plan. She added that the focus of much of the CPPS's discussion was transportation and, specifically, how an interchange at Jubal Early Drive and Rt. 37 could be constructed. At the CPPS's meeting on April 11, 2005, the members agreed to revise the transportation wording included within the WJELUP, as follows: "The development of new road systems, including a new interchange at Rt. 37, new signalization, and improvements to existing road systems are all elements of this plan. It will be the responsibility of private Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of May 4, 2005 Page 1511 -7 - property owners and developers to ensure that these improvements are made. The financial responsibility will rest primarily with private property owners and developers, although they may be able to demonstrate how a partnership, possibly with the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), the City and/or the County, will accomplish the necessary road improvements. No rezoning should be approved until the County is certain that the transportation impacts of development will be mitigated." Commissioner Thomas pointed out that the designation of commercial and residential areas, as well as the County's transportation goals stated within the WJELUP portion of the Comprehensive Policy Plan, is not binding on the developer or property owner, but merely states the intent of the plan. He said that it would be up to the Planning Commission and other bodies at the time of rezoning to assure that the vision was implemented. Planner Eddy added that this is a long-range land use plan and future proposed rezonings would be compared to the plan to see if they conformed with the plan. Board Liaison, Ms. Barbara Van Osten, inquired if a school site had been discussed. Ms. Eddy stated that the text of the WJELUP clearly calls for a school site; however, a specific location on the plan has not been designated. Ms. Van Osten also asked if the road connecting Jubal Early to Cedar Creek Grade would be a two-lane or four -lane road. Ms. Eddy believed it was intended to be a four -lane road. Mr. Evan A. Wyatt with Greenway Engineering, the design fum representing both the Solenberger and Bridgeforth families in the UDA expansion request, stated that during discussions with the CPPS, they believed the language pertaining to the road network, particularly the Rt. 37 interchange, was a little too rigid and might make conformance to the Comprehensive Plan difficult. Mr. Wyatt said that they have proposed a somewhat softer language, which was included in the Commission's agenda. He said their biggest concern with the Rt. 37 interchange was not their desire to participate, but the fact that it goes across Rt. 37 onto land that is outside of the study area. He suggested that attempting to acquire properties, and to have the property owners responsible for setting forth the process to get an access break, may be in excess of the intent of a Comprehensive Policy Plan. Board of Supervisors' Liaison, Barbara Van Osten, asked if the proposed improvements to Cedar Creek Grade would extend across the full southern boundary of the Bridgeforth property. Mr. Wyatt stated that the Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS) called for four lanes on Cedar Creek Grade from the City of Winchester out to Rt. 37. Mr. Wyatt remarked that he was a member of the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), serving on the Technical Advisory Committee, and the modeling of this study mirrors the same suggestion that Cedar Creek Grade should have four lanes. He pointed out that the WJELUP recommends four -lanes for Cedar Creek Grade, but does not specifically state the distance on either side. Commissioner Straub inquired if the improvements to Cedar Creek Grade would be public- private or solely state. Mr. Wyatt stated that there is a clear expectation in the intent of the land use plan and the Comprehensive Policy Plan that not only the internal roads are to be constructed, but improvements to Cedar Creek Grade, as well as improvements to outlying roads. He said the concern expressed by the property owners is the possibility that they may be the ones solely responsible for bringing a solution to the table. Mr. Wyatt suggested that the regionalized benefits, such as a new interchange on Rt. 37 or adding additional lanes to the 37 mainline, should be a cooperative effort between the City, the County, VDOT, and the property owners. Commissioner Thomas inquired if VDOT had commented on another interchange. Planning Director Eric R Lawrence stated that although he could not respond on behalf of VDOT, the current MPO studies are identifying this future interchange. Mr. Wyatt added that the policy committee of the MPO called for Jubal Early Drive with a new interchange as one of their recommendations. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1512 Minutes of May 4, 2005 F MIN Chairman DeHaven called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. RJ. Turner, Back Creek District, stated that he and his wife owned property at the northeast comer, south of Cedar Creek Grade. Mr. Turner said that he understood that the UDA was originally supposed to have 2.3 houses per acre; he said the UDA Study currently in progress may suggest as many as three houses per acre. Mr. Turner said that he was surprised this evening to hear that it is going to be four houses per acre in the WJELUP. Furthermore, Mr. Turner said that last year, three of his clients applied in June for inclusion into the UDA and were rejected. Mr. Turner was puzzled as to why this request was now being discussed. Mr. Turner added that Cedar Creek Grade is so unique that it is becoming a tourist attraction; he asked about the possibility of establish a green area on the north side of Cedar Creek Grade, perhaps 100 feet, to create a buffer. Ms. Abbe Gordon, owner of property within the WJELUP, asked for someone to point out her house on the display map and tell her how close the proposed four -lane road would be to her home. Chairman DeHaven explained to Ms. Gordon that this was a conceptual plan; therefore, the final location of the road had not yet been determined. No other citizens wished to speak and Chairman DeHaven closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Chairman DeHaven believed that UDA-style development was the highest and best use for these parcels. He said the transportation issues were a concern, however, many good solutions have been proposed. Chairman DeHaven said that preliminary discussions with VDOT have indicated that approval for the interchange would be difficult at this time. He said this leads him to believe that a more immediate solution needs to be sought and arry development that occurs within this area will need to contribute. However, for the immediate solution, it seemed the north -south connection between Cedar Creek and extended Jubal Early could be accomplished. Chairman DeHaven believed that all of the possible solutions needed to be pursued. Regarding the specific paragraph on transportation, he said the only basic difference between the CPPS's text and the applicant's is that the applicant is separating the interchange issue from the other transportation issues. Chairman DeHaven said that he preferred to use the applicant's suggested wording, dated April 4, 2005 Members of the Commission were divided in their view on which transportation text they preferred to see within the WJELUP. Some strongly favored the wording produced by the CPPS because it clearly stated that transportation impacts must be mitigated and the interchange needed to be included in that mitigation. They argued that transportation mitigation is the main issue for development in the rural areas. Other Commission members believed the wording proposed by the applicant was reasonable and should be implemented. They argued that it would be impossible to build a development with this amount of homes and mitigate traffic impacts by 100%. Some Commissioners suggested that the County Attorney should review the text, while others believed the City of Winchester needed to contribute to the interchange. Furthermore, some members of the Commission did not like the idea of placing additional land in the UDA while the committee was in the middle of a UDA Study; they believed the UDA Study should be completed before this request was considered. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1513 Minutes of May 4, 2005 Do 0 M V 7_13 mom Discussion of the Tasker Woods Land Use Plan (TWLUP); the TWLUP identifies future land uses and a transportation plan and could result in extension of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) and the Urban Development Area (UDA). The study area includes approximately 183 acres and is bounded by Front Royal Pike (Rt. 522) to the east, Tasker Road (Rt. 642) to the south, Macedonia Church Road to the north, and Macedonia Church Road and the portion of White Oak Road between Macedonia Church Road and Tasker Road (Rt. 642) to the west. The TWLUP is in the Shawnee Magisterial District. No Action Required At This Time Senior Planner, Susan K. Eddy, stated that the staff had received a request by Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates (PHR&A) to include land within the Tasker Woods area into the Urban Development Area (UDA). Ms. Eddy said that the Board of Supervisors, at their February 9, 2005 meeting, directed the Planning Commission to establish a land use plan and recommendations regarding the inclusion of the requested 89 acres of land in the Tasker Woods area into the UDA. She said that while the Board of Supervisors resolution directing the study included only two parcels, the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) considered it reasonable to study the entire area, of approximately 183 acres, bounded by Tasker Road, Front Royal Pike (Rt. 522), and the current 2004 UDA boundary. She said the proposals, collectively called the Tasker Woods Land Use Plan (TWLUP), would form an element of the Comprehensive Policy Plan, if adopted. Ms. Eddy next described the elements of the TWLUP for the Commission. Ms. Eddy added that during the CPPS meeting on April 11, 2005, CPPS members were agreeable to the mix of uses on the sites owned by the applicant; they also agreed that commercial uses were appropriate south of the intermittent stream as these sites were adjacent to commercial/industrial land on Tasker Road. She said that no agreement was reached, however, on the small parcels north of the intermittent stream along Rt. 522. Some of the members believed these sites could be residential, even multi -family, while still others believed the sites could be industrial or commercial. She said that no consensus among the CPPS members was reached, and the small parcels along Rt. 522, north of the intermittent stream, are shown in white; i.e., no future land use designation Ms. Eddy continued, stating that the proposed land use plan includes a mix of residential and commercial uses; it proposes that the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) be extended to cover all parcels designated as residential and commercial, approximately 153 acres of the study area; and it also proposes that the UDA be extended to cover only the areas identified for residential use, approximately 57 acres. She said the CPPS considered this request at their meetings on March 14 and April 11; at the meeting of April 11, the CPPS recommended approval of the TWLUP. Commissioner Morris inquired if the staff had heard from any of the property owners along Rt. 522 about whether they would like to be included in the UDA. Ms. Eddy stated that she has heard from some property owners and several were present this evening. Mr. Clay Athey, representing Alden LLC, came forward to introduce himself and Mr. Allen Hudson. Mr. Athey provided the Commission with some history of their property and how it evolved to become a part of the TWLUP. He reported that in consideration of the growing congregation at the Macedonia United Methodist Church, they will not request industrial uses across the street from the church, the commercial uses will continue in an area below the stream, across from Mr. Hudson's other commercial properties. Mr. Athey said they have done considerable work on their proposed transportation system and the improvements planned will not require a new interchange. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of May 4, 2005 DP ENVY Page 1514 -10 - Chairman DeHaven called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. David Lear, a property owner along Rt. 522, requested that his property be included in the SWSA. He said that his property adjoins the proposed future housing; he pointed out all of the surrounding areas that are currently served. Mr. George Bagley, a property owner located to the south of the intersection of Rt. 522 and Macedonia Church Road, said that he moved to this location 20 years ago into what he thought would be his retirement home. He said he did not have any objections to the overall plan being proposed He proceeded to tell the Commission, however, how his home and property were affected by the widening of Rt. 522 and then the improvements on Macedonia Church Road. Mr. Bagley thought the TWLUP called for Macedonia Church Road to be four lanes and that is where he had a problem; he asked if a traffic study had been done to justify that recommendation. Mr. Bagley was concerned because all of his landscaping would, once again, be demolished, as well as a wall he had constructed. Mr. Bagley said that he went through seven years of very irritating times dealing with VDOT and all of the construction and earth moving on his property with the Rt. 522 widening and Macedonia Church Road improvements. The possibility of more truck traffic noise from Macedonia Church Road, in addition to the noise from Rt. 522, would only add to the disturbance that Mr. Bagley said he had to endure. Mr. Jim Sumption stated that he farmed a 57 -acre portion of this study area for a number of years. Mr. Sumption said that he was not aware of a proposal to four -Lane Macedonia Church Road; in fact, his parents and grandparents are buried in the cemetery there and he would be very upset if a four -lane road was to go through there. Another citizen came forward and stated that she struggled for over a year to build a house on her five acres. She was distressed to learn about the possibility that five homes could be constructed on the lot directly behind her. Mr. Charles E. Maddox, Jr. with PHR&A, the design and engineering firm representing the owner of the two properties in this application, explained that White Oak Road, through Canter Estates, was built as a two-lane section, with turning lanes at the intersections and roadside ditches, and this is exactly what is envisioned for Macedonia Church Road. He said it would be an improvement over existing conditions; however, the primary improvement would certainly shift away from the cemetery and the church as it went forward. Commissioner Thomas believed the uses proposed for this property were appropriate in this area. However, because the LUP did not include all of the properties between Tasker Road and Rt. 522 (white areas on the plan), he considered this proposal to be incomplete and he was against further processing of it until a consolidated plan could be established and evaluated on all issues. Commissioner Thomas said that if this plan moves forward, the County is, by default, telling property owners they will be surrounded by high-density residential, whether they want it or not. His reasoning was based on the buffers required for commercial development; he said it would render those properties undevelopable, except for residential. Commissioner Thomas was adamant about planning for the whole area to ensure an efficient road plan, adequate water and sewage, drainage, and the protection of wetlands. He stated that unless the plan is for the entire area, he would vote against it. Other Commission members agreed. While other Commissioners said they were not in favor of leaving areas of the LUP without a designated use, they were hesitant to assign either commercial or residential use without a specific proposal from an applicant or a consensus from the committee on what the use would be. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1515 Minutes of May 4, 2005 D LI n V V -11 - Commissioner Wilmot said she had recommended during the CPPS meeting that this area ofthe LUP not be designated for a particular use at this time and to allow the properties to be studied more thoroughly. Commissioner Wilmot said that in her experience, designating land for commercial use to prevent houses from being constructed was the worst possible reason to make land commercial. She also expressed concern for the landowners in this area who may not be aware of the discussions taking place. Mr. Clay Athey returned to the podium and raised concerns about the possibility for his application to be held hostage to this entire LUP. He noted that although he initiated the original application, it was the Planning Staff who made the decision to expand to the Rt. 522 boundary for consideration as a LUP. Mr. Athey said there seemed to be a consensus with his 89 acres and the other acreage to the south; however, the uncertainty was only with respect to this particular acreage to the north. He believed the property owners in this area were appropriately being made aware and were becoming involved through the process as it moved forward. Mr. Athey remarked that the existing zoning for these property owners will not change; only the potential future land use planning was the focus of discussion. Both Commissioner Straub and Commissioner Gochenour raised concerns about considering a request for expanding the UDA and the S W SA, while the subcommittee was in the middle of a UDA Study. They wanted to see the UDA Study completed before the Commission considered any further requests to place additional land in the UDA. Ms. Eddy came forward to specifically address the property owners in the undesignated areas (white areas) of the plan. Ms. Eddy assured these property owners that this was not a proposal to change the zoning of their properties. She added that this was solely a discussion item at this time and there would be additional opportunities to become involved. She urged any property owners to get in touch with her for information and, in addition, she would gladly forward any and all comments to the Board of Supervisors. Discussion of an amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Article VI, Residential Performance (RP) District, Section 165-64, Recreation Facilities, to allow waivers of recreational facilities for housing types with lot sizes less than 5,000 square feet. No Action Required At This Time Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, stated that the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS), at their meeting of March 24, 2005, discussed a request from Greenway Engineering for an amendment to the zoning ordinance for the allowance of a waiver of the community center requirement for single-family small lot subdivisions containing less than 50 lots. Mr. Cheran stated that the DRRS was in favor of this proposed ordinance change, with the discussion centering on the number of lots and how an equivalent recreational value could be demonstrated. Mr. Evan A. Wyatt with Greenway Engineering stated that this subject began to be discussed with the submittal of their age -restricted project entitled, Westbury Commons. Mr. Wyatt said that the issue was whether or not it was appropriate for an 11 -unit community to have a community center building because the responsibility for the maintenance of the facility would probably exceed the capabilities of the residents of the subdivision. Mr. Wyatt said that if the community center requirement is waived, the development will still have Frederick County Planning Conunission Page 1516 Minutes of May 4, 2005 10 to provide a recreational dollar equivalent in another fashion. Commission members asked what other kinds of amenities could be substituted for the community center. Mr. Wyatt said the proposed ordinance provides considerable flexibility. He said that one option would be to eliminate the meeting facility and replace it with some other desired recreational amenities, such as walking trails, gazebos, intensive landscaping, etc; or, it could be a split, where a portion of the money would be provided to the County's Parks and Recreation Program and a portion of the money used for on-site amenities for the proposed development. Commission members were in favor of allowing a recreational facility waiver to be pursued for small lot subdivisions and they supported this proposed amendment as presented. Discussion of an amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, Article V, Design Standards, Section 24C, Lot Requirements, regarding waivers of public street requirements for age -restricted communities. No Action Required At This Time Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, stated that the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS), at its meeting of March 24, 2005, discussed a request from Greenway Engineering to amend the subdivision ordinance to allow a waiver of the public street requirements in age - restricted communities, regardless of the housing types. Mr. Cheran reported that the DRRS supported the proposed amendment with the recommendation that private streets be built to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) standards. Mr. Cheran explained that the proposed waiver would apply only to proffered age -restricted communities and would include all of the listed housing types. Mr. Evan A. Wyatt with Greenway Engineering stated that the need for this text amendment came about because of the increasing numbers of age -restricted communities being developed in the area and the desire of the residents of those communities to have gated facilities for security reasons. Mr. Wyatt said that while the ordinance allows private streets in the R5 District, and the flexibility to request a private street system exists in the R4 District, the opportunity does not exist in the RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District. Mr. Wyatt explained that a public street element is required in the RP District, which prevents an RP community from being gated. He said the ordinance states that all lots within an RP subdivision must be within 500' of a state - maintained road or the Planning Commission may grant a waiver for up to 800' from a state -maintained road. Mr. Lawrence suggested that the amendment language specifically include the term, "proffered" age -restricted community in order to guarantee that the County is granting a waiver for this specific type of community. Commissioner Thomas suggested that the wording describing required VDOT standards for road construction specifically state, "vertical structural section," rather than just "cross section" so there is no misunderstanding about what it expected. Commission members supported the concept of the amendment and commented that the opportunity for a waiver in some of the other districts will probably need to be considered. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of May 4, 2005 Page 1517 -13 - OTHER VIRGINIA CITIZENS PLANNING ASSOCIATION (VCPA) Commissioner Morris announced that the Virginia Citizens Planning Association (VCPA) will be sponsoring the Certified Planning Commissioners Program again this year. In addition, VCPA will be offering for the first time, on May 31, 2005, a one -day program entitled, "The Legal Foundations of Defensible Planning and Zoning Practices." He explained that the program will be exploring a variety of topics, including recent Supreme Court decisions regarding zoning and planning, and issues considered by the Virginia General Assembly. Commissioner Morris said that if anyone is interested in seeking further information, to please contact the Planning Staff. APPOINTMENT OF H. PAIGE MANUEL TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS & PROGRAMS SUBCOMMITTEE (CPPS) Chairman DeHaven announced the official appointment of Commissioner H. Paige Manuel to the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS). F\1fflA); fu�1� No further business remained to be discussed and the Planning Commission adjourned by a unanimous vote at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman Eric R. La ATence, Secretary Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1518 Minutes of May 4, 2005 ® nD , u TO: FROM RE: DATE: COUNTY of FIREDERICK Department of ,Planning and Development 540/665-5651 MEMORANDUM FAX: 540/665-6395 Frederick County Planning Commission Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrate f Revocation of Conditional Use Permit #17-04 for Edwin and Zucely Elvira May 20, 2005 The Frederick County Board of Supervisors approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP) #17-04 for Edwin and Zucely Elvira on September 22, 2004, for a landscaping business, with the following conditions: All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. No more than ten (10) employees and nine (9) business vehicles/equipment shall be allowed on site as a part of this conditional use permit. 3. No sale of nursery stock will be allowed on site. 4. A six (6) foot opaque fence shall be constructed to screen this use from residential uses to the east. 5. Any expansion or modification of facilities will require a new Conditional Use Permit. Violation of Conditions: Staff received a complaint regarding violations of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance at this property. Staff inspected the property on April 27, 2005. The inspection of the site revealed the lack of a six foot opaque fence required as part of the Conditional Use Permit to screen the landscaping business from adjacent residential properties. A letter of violation was issued, as was a notice of revocation for violations of the conditions of Conditional Use Permit 17-04. These violations constitute a violation of the conditions placed on Conditional Use Permit 17-04, approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on September 22, 2004. 107 North Kent Street, Suide 202 , Winchester, Virginia 22561-5000 Revocation of Conditional Use Permit # 17-04 — Edwin and Zucely Elvira May 20, 2005 Page 2 Staff conclusions for the 06/01/05 Planning Commission meeting: The holder of Conditional Use Permit 11-03 is in violation of the above -referenced conditions with regards to the zoning violations that staff has received. A recommendation from the Planning Commission for revocation of Conditional Use Permit 17-04 would be appropriate. This recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisor for their consideration. 63 A 116C EFG INVESTMENTS, LLC 63 A 138 BURRIS, JOSEPH 63 A 139 YD, PHYLLIS ;63 A 134 63 A 141 SHUMAKER, MABEL E EST MILLER, GRAYSON & LORETTA ' 63 A 135 63 A 136 * NEWLINII WISE & VIRGINIA; FAIRCLOTH, JAMESiR �.' ' ` 63 �\ S•� ' P 63 A 137 ROBERTB &,SUSAN C ` F'� RP M F O so NO y5 63 4 4 LYNN, KATHERINE R. , 63 4 4131 CALDWELL, WILLIAM P JR 63 p\.py�0 63 A 124 EFG INVESTMENTS, LLC t` 63 A 147 MARTIN;,CLAYTON M & BONNIE J �\ 63 A 149', MARTIN, CLAYTON M & BONNIE:J- RP »t' 63D 1 1 63 4 5A �� LAYMAN, DENNIS•JAMES EVANS, MARIE 63D-"1 �2 SLONAKER; HUGH G. &,NAOMI F. 63D 1 5 TEVAULT, JAMES A(J 636 2 SYKES, I Map Features Revocation of CUP# 17 - 04 ~Brn Edwin & Zucely Elvira Lakes/Ponds /N/ Dams Appli-b- /\/ Culverts Parcels Agricultural Foreztral Districts Streams ^ 1 Retaining Walls Dcul ChWoh (63 - 4 - 4 C ) Buildings Road Centerlines - Refuge church N VW'Tanks S.uth Frederick 0 50 100 200 "., Trails S Feet ', � Parcels ABrlcultural 8 Forestral Distrlets !, Double Church Refuge Church USouth Frederick Revocation 0 50 100 200 Feet Bridges Application~ N C.1—ts Lakes/Pond, OOV Dams Streams hs Retaining Walls Buildings Road Centerlines Tanks %, Trails ', � Parcels ABrlcultural 8 Forestral Distrlets !, Double Church Refuge Church USouth Frederick Revocation 0 50 100 200 Feet CERTIFIED MAIL April 28, 2005 Mr. and Mrs. Edwin Elvira 108 Twig Court Stephens City, VA 22655 ■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. * Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. ® Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: MR. & MRS. EDWIN ELVIRA 108 TWIG COURT STEPHENS CITY, VA 22655 ,ti Signature El Agent �F Address v B. Received by (Printed Name) C. Date of Delive _j I ( / --.,*') A-5 D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑ Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No 3. Service Type p Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail ❑ Registered WReturn Receipt 4@ A @P&hardi ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes 2. Article Number 7003 1010 0000 9035 0993 (Transfer from service labL. _ PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt .� 102595-02-M-1 RE: CUP #17-04 for Edwin and Zucely Elvira Property Identification Number (PIN): 63-44C Dear Mr. and Mrs. Elvira: On April 27, 2005, I visited the above -referenced property in response to a complaint regarding violations of Conditional Use Permit #17-04. My inspection of the site revealed the lack of a six foot opaque fence required as part of Conditional Use Permit #17-04 to screen the landscaping business from adjacent residential properties. In accordance with Section 165-21 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, the Board of Supervisors may revoke a Conditional Use Permit for any violation of the conditions placed upon the Conditional Use Permit. This letter is to inform you that your Conditional Use Permit (CUP) # 17-04 is being scheduled for revocation at a public hearing on June 1, 2005. This action is due to violations of the conditions placed on CUP # 17-04. You will receive further notice from this office in regards to the time and location of this public hearing. Please do not hesitate to contact me regarding any questions that you may have at (540) 665-5651. �T_ a = � � r- tea•'_ � Sincerely, rn EF Cl�i�E'547➢ A S �Ifr I 4i f� "` tt A".^. Ln R. Can o Zoning Administrator Er E3 PRS/MRC/dlw a 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winches In ri C3 a E3 Sent To MR. & MRS. EDWIN ELVIRA 0 tti SYress, ... ....... Jl ()8e MIG _C.O'[7RT a._ ....... e-». or PO®oxnto.__-..S,TEP.HENS-_-CIT-Y., VA -_----------2-2.6-x35--=_-._.. pity, Siafa, sIP;-�7 Postage Cerlilled Fee Postmark Return trReciept Fee Here (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (EndOrSem _nt i2equired) Total Postage & Fees E3 Sent To MR. & MRS. EDWIN ELVIRA 0 tti SYress, ... ....... Jl ()8e MIG _C.O'[7RT a._ ....... e-». or PO®oxnto.__-..S,TEP.HENS-_-CIT-Y., VA -_----------2-2.6-x35--=_-._.. pity, Siafa, sIP;-�7 C: • • REZONING APPLICATION #07-05 MANNING PROPERTY Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: May 18, 2005 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, 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: 06/01/05 Pending Board of Supervisors: 06/22/05 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 9.442 acres from M2 (General Industrial) District to 133 (Industrial Transition) District and IA (Interstate Overlay) District and 2.736 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to 133 (Industrial Transition) District and IA (Interstate Overlay) District with proffers. The total acreage to be rezoned 133 and IA with proffers is 12.178 acres. LOCATION: The properties are located approximately 350 feet south of the intersection of Rest Church Road (Route 669) and Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), between Martinsburg Pike (Route 11) and I-81 and continuing south to Duncan Run, south of the Whitehall Exit (Exit 323) MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBERN: 33A -A-12, 33A -A-13, 33A -A-14, 33A -A-15, and 33A -A -15A PROPERTY ZONING: M2 (General Industrial) District and RA (Rural Areas) District. PRESENT USE: Vacant and Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: RA (Rural Area) South: RA (Rural Area) East: RA (Rural Area) West: 133 (Industrial Transition) Use: Commercial — Gas Station Use: Vacant Use: Residential/Vacant Use: Commercial — Truck Stop PROPOSED USES: Gasoline Service Station (No proffered restriction on uses) Rezoning #07-05 — Manning Property May 18, 2005 Page 2 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: VirL,inia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Route 11. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to this property. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Manning Property (Mr. Fuel/Arogas) rezoning application dated August 2004 and lane configuration drawings submitted by Triad Engineering on April 6, 2004 addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. All transportation proffers offered in the August 2004 rezoning application and impact analysis statement shall be implemented to the satisfaction of VDOT and Frederick County prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plan 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 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: Water supplies for firefighting shall meet the requirements of Frederick County Code 90-4. Fire lanes and markings and signage required at all fire hydrants, fire department connections and all normal and emergency access points to the structure(s). Materials for onsite spill control and cleanup should be provided when vehicle fueling commences. Fire hydrant locations and Fire Lane markings shall be addressed during the site planning process. Plan approval recommended. Public Works Department: Please see attached letter dated November 9, 2004 from Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., Director of Public Works. Frederick -Winchester Service Authority: No comment. Sanitation Authority: The applicant is one of two parties that participated with the Sanitation Authority to make the extension of water and sewer to the Rest Church area possible. The applicant's participation has reserved 12,000 gallons per day of wastewater capacity for this property. Adequate capacity exists to exceed the potable water demands required for the proposed use of this property. The applicant has given easements to the Authority for the extension of water and sewer lines to the west of I81. This will allow Flying J's on-site facilities to be abandoned. Frederick -Winchester Health Department: The Health Department has no comments; since all sewage and water will be handled by Frederick County Sanitation Authority. Department of Parks & Recreation: No comment. Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided which states that no residential units will be part of the rezoning, there will be no impact to the school population upon build -out. Rezoning #07-05 — Manning Property May 18, 2005 Page 3 Frederick County Attorney: Please see attached letter dated from Mr. Bob Mitchell, Jr. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U. S.G.S. Inwood Quadrangle) depicts the zoning of the 9.4 -acre portion of this proposal as M2 (General Industrial) District with the balance of the property that makes up this rezoning request as being A2 (Agricultural General) District. The acreage zoned A2 (Agricultural General) District was reclassified as RA (Rural Area) District on February 14, 1990 when the Board of Supervisors adopted a comprehensive revision to the Zoning Ordinance. in 1999, Rezoning Application RZ 10-99 was submitted to the County for a request similar to the one currently presented as RZ07-05. The rezoning proposal consisted of 10.2 acres initially and was later reduced to 9.4 acres in January of 2002. Multiple issues of concern and inconsistencies with the Comprehensive Plan were identified during the review and consideration of RZ10-99. Ultimately, the applicant withdrew Rezoning Application RZ10-99 on June 12, 2002. The applicants have since moved forward with this new application which attempts to address the issues and impacts associated with the rezoning and provide a greater amount of consistency with the goals and policies of The Comprehensive Plan and the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan. It should be pointed out that a considerable amount general activity has occurred since the previous attempt to rezone the property which has a relationship to the latest rezoning request. This activity includes modifications to the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan, transportation improvements completed by The Virginia Department of Transportation associated with Interstate 81, Exit 323, Rest Church Road (Route 669), and it's intersection with Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), and water and sewer infrastructure improvements currently under development by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. 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 pian for the future physical development of Frederick County. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 1-1] Rezoning #07-05 — Manning Property May 18, 2005 Page 4 Land Use The parcels comprising this rezoning application are located within the County's 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. In addition, the Manning property is located within the area encompassed by the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan. The Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan envisions commercial land uses on the property. The Manning Property application proposes a rezoning of entirely commercial land use which provides for a large area of commercial opportunity in conjunction with the Interstate 81 and Exit 323. A goal of the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan is to provide for interstate business development opportunities to take advantage of this feature. Further, the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan seeks to concentrate business uses at strategic locations along the Route 11 North corridor. The Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan provides additional guidance for development opportunities through promoting a sensitive approach to the existing land uses along Martinsburg Pike, Route 11, through the provision of greater setbacks, buffers and screening, and coordinated signage along Martinsburg Pike in an effort to enhance the appearance of the Route 11 corridor. This enhanced corridor appearance and function goal is further promoted with the discouragement of individual lot access along Route 11. The opportunity presents itself for the application to commit to providing such corridor design standards along the Martinsburg Pike corridor, advancing a key initiative of past and potentially future County planning efforts. This approach should take into consideration those existing parcels that contain residential uses directly across Route 11 from the subject property. The Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA's) seek to ensure the existing residential clusters are protected from the impacts of new development through the provision of adequate buffers and screening. The existing residential properties would be offered protection through the County's existing buffer and screening regulations. However, the applicant has the opportunity to enhance the existing regulations to further meet the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. It should be noted that the recently approved Rutherford Farm LLC, and North Stephenson, Inc. rezoning applications provided additional consideration for landscaping and signage to enhance the corridor appearance goals of the Comprehensive Plan. A similar approach may be desirable with this application to address these elements of the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan with a greater amount of clarity. Presently, the Architectural Concept Plan lacks clarity and provides no commitment to achieving these goals. Transportation The Frederick County Northeast Land Use Plan provides the guidance regarding future arterial and collector road connections in the Northeastern portion of the County by identifying needed connections and locations. Plans for new development should provide for the right-of-ways Rezoning 407-05 — Manning Property May 18, 2005 Page 5 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). Proposed commercial development within the boundary of the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan will necessitate improvements to existing road systems and the construction of new road systems. The land use plan identifies Woodbine Road as a new collector road in the vicinity of this project. The recent rezoning of the Sempeles property, RZ02-04, addressed the relocation of this new major collector road to Woodbine Road. The new truck entrance proposed with the development of the Manning property is planned in alignment with Woodbine Road which, in con. unction with the signalization of this intersection, will facilitate traffic movement associated with the development of both projects. As noted above, the recently approved Sempeles rezoning application addressed some of the transportation issues of this area and the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan. Also addressed in the Sempeles application is the construction of an industrial access road from Route I I North at its intersection with Rest Church Road to Woodbine Road, the modification of the existing signalized intersection at Rest Church Road and Route 1 I from a 3 -way to a 4 -way signal, and the participation in a signalization agreement involving partial cost sharing for a signal at the Woodbine Road/ Route 11 intersection The construction of additional improvements to Woodbine Road to improve this road to a major collector road standard and enhancements to the future signal would be determined with future TIA's and by VDOT in conjunction with the future development within the Sempeles project. Improvement to Martinsburg Pike (Route 11) to a four -lane facility is an identified goal of the Land Use Plan as are improvements to the configuration of Rest Church Road. The business corridor policies of the Comprehensive Plan are also applicable to this project. In particular, the business corridor policies that specify that raised medians are employed at all intersections along business corridors and that provisions should be made for bicycle accommodations at intersections and in a manner consistent with the adopted bicycle plan. Route 11 is identified as a Bicycle Route in the transportation section of the Comprehensive Plan. 3) Site Suitability/Environment The 12.178 -acre site has approximately 1380 feet of road frontage along Martinsburg Pike (Route I1 North). In addition, the property is provided with approximately 1,440 feet of frontage on Interstate 81. Located about 350 feet south of the intersection of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11) and Rest Church Road (Route 669), and in the immediate vicinity of Exit 323 of Interstate 81, the subject property is ideally located to take advantage of the business development opportunities provided by the interstate and Route 11. The development of such an opportunity is an objective of the Northeast Land Use Plan. Rezoning 407-05 — Manning Property May 18, 2005 Page 6 The acreage that makes up this property does not contain areas of steep slopes or mature woodlands. Duncan Run provides the southern boundary for the Manning property. Associated with Duncan Run are areas identified by the FEMA National Flood Insurance Program Map - Community Panel #510063-0075-B as being within the 100 year floodplain. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey does not identify potentially significant historic resources or historic district on, or within, the proximity of this acreage. Efforts have been made by the applicant in the proffer Statement to address two of the environmental objectives of the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan. This effort includes the provision of electric stations for the 31 truck parking places to minimize the air quality impacts associated with this application and the implementation of oil water separators and additional stormwater management treatments to minimize non point source pollution impacts associated with the development of this project. 4) IA (Interstate Area) Overlay District The applicants have requested approval of an IA (Interstate Area) Overlay District designation for the 12.178 -acre site, should they be successful in obtaining a B3 (Industrial Transition) District zoning. Properties that contain this overlay designation at Exit 323 are those within the Whitehall Business Park located on the west side of Interstate 81. The Whitehall Business Park is the location of the Flying J Center. Section 165-118 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance states that in order for a property to qualify for an IA Overlay District designation, it must conform to the Idealized Interchange Development Pattern recommendation in the Comprehensive Policy Plan, permit uses such as general merchandise stores, gasoline service stations, eating and drinking establishments, or lodging establishment, and must not have an adverse impact on adjoining properties whose primary use is residential. The request to approve an Interstate Area Overlay District designation may be appropriate when considering the proposed use of the property and the adjacent properties which currently posses the IA designation. 5) Potential Impacts A. Transportation Traffic Impact Analysis. The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared for this application projects that the development of a travel center that consists of 12 gasoline pumps, 11 diesel pumps, a convenience mart and a 1,500 square foot fast food restaurant would generate 4,818 vehicle trips per day. It should be noted that the Architectural Site Plan depicts a travel center that consists of 12 gasoline pumps, 11 diesel pumps, and an 8,400 square foot service station with convenience mart. The report was developed with primary truck access to the project to being via a new entrance which intersects Rezoning #07-05 — Manning Property May 18, 2005 Page 7 with Route 11 at Woodbine Road. General access would be via two additional locations, an independent entrance and exit located further north on Route 11. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to ensure that a level of service (LOS) C or better is achieved with the approval of proposed industrial, commercial, and planned unit developments. It is important to understand that the TIA assumes that the transportation improvements identified as being needed to obtain a level of service C or better are implemented. It should be ensured that the various improvements identified with each development are guaranteed and implemented in a coordinated and timely manner. The vehicle for ensuring this occurs is the proffer statement. The TIA for this project concludes that the traffic impacts associated with the 2005 build -out conditions are acceptable and manageable and a level of service (LOS) C or better is achieved assuming the full build out of the project as identified on the architectural Site Plan. The 2010 traffic analysis, which includes the Sempeles property, also identifies that a level of service C or better is achieved. However, it should be pointed out that the build out lane geometry identified in Figure 8 of the TIA is not wholly consistent with the Architectural Site Plan at the Rest Church intersection with Route 11. General Transportation. It is important to recognize that in addition to addressing the TIA, the transportation related elements of the Comprehensive Plan should be addressed and incorporated into the rezoning application. Several of these broader community concepts that recognize important community corridor appearance goals are identified in the report. In addition, it is critical that this rezoning application addresses the right-of-way needs of the project and the Comprehensive Plan. As identified on the Architectural Site Plan, sufficient right-of-way would be available to achieve the proposed improvements to Route 11. However, insufficient right-of-way is available and has not been obtained to facilitate an ultimate four -lane improvement to Route 11. The facilitation of the Comprehensive Plan objectives of providing for an ultimate four lane Route 11 with appropriate accommodations for turning movements, raised medians for access management, and bicycle accommodations does not appear to have been fully considered as part of this application. The importance of addressing these needs is significant in this location as it is the primary point of access, the northern gateway, to Route 11, Frederick County, and Virginia. It is necessary to ensure a quality, well functioning gateway to the community for all users. It is noted, however, that the opportunity may exist to further such goals and improvements with the future redevelopment of the properties located along the east side of Route 11. This would maintain the existing centerline of Route 11 and provide for a balanced alignment of Route 11, but is reliant upon future redevelopment that may not be forthcoming. The TIA for this project indicates that there is a critical unsignalized movement at this intersection with the build out lane geometry for outbound trucks making a left turn onto Route 11 North. Figure 8 of the TIA represents that this same intersection will operate at a LOS C five Rezoning #07-05 — Manning Property May 18, 2005 Page 8 years after the build out of the project. However, this is with the future installation of a signal at this location. The County is of the belief that the signalization of this intersection should occur concurrent with the development of this project and prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for the facility. This approach would ensure a safer condition at this intersection, minimize the future impacts to vehicles traveling on Route 11, and eliminate a critical unsignalized turning movement. Recent experiences in Frederick County with similar facilities would confirm that this approach is prudent and warranted. The applicant has addressed this concern in the Proffer Statement. The applicant, regarding the transportation improvements, should provide a final point of clarification. It should be demonstrated that the lane configuration drawings submitted by Triad, dated April 6, 2005, and made reference to in VDOT's approval comments, are the same as and/or reflect the lane configurations identified on the Architectural Site Plan proffered as part of the Proffer Statement. B. Sewer and Water New commercial land uses located within the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan are recommended to be developed with public water and sewer service. Individual package treatment plants are prohibited as a means to accommodate new commercial development. Unlike the original rezoning application for this property, this current application, RZ07-05, provides for the development and connection to the public water and sewer system in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. As previously noted in the comments offered by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority, the applicant is one of two parties that participated with the Sanitation Authority to make the extension of water and sewer to the Rest Church area possible. The applicant's participation has reserved 12,000 gallons per day of wastewater capacity for this property. According to the Sanitation Authority, adequate capacity exists to exceed the potable water demands required for the proposed use of this property. The applicant has given easements to the Authority for the extension of water and sewer lines to the west of Interstate 81. This will allow Flying J's on- site facilities, directly across Interstate 81 to be abandoned. Construction of these public improvements by the Sanitation Authority is currently in progress. Wastewater generated by this project will be treated at the Opequon Waste Water Treatment Plant. C. Other The Architectural Site Plan that is proffered provides a certain level of commitment as to the development and layout of the property. It is very important to point out that the site plan is not presently being reviewed for complete conformance with County site plan regulations. It is general in nature for the purposes of illustrating the proposed project. With this in mind it would Rezoning 407-05 — Manning Property May 18, 2005 Page 9 be beneficial for this application and the Proffer Statement to provide additional clarity with regards to any commitments that are anticipated that are above and beyond what County and State Ordinances currently provide for. Particular attention should be paid to the adjacent residential uses and the mitigation of the impacts of the newer, more intensive, development on these existing residential land uses. Consideration to the previously mentioned corridor appearance goals has a bearing on this comment. 6) Proffer Statement — Dated May 4, 2005 The valid elements of the applicants proffer Statement provide for the following: A) Monetary Contribution. A monetary contribution in the amount of $10,000.00 to Frederick County, to be provided at the time a building permit is first issued, is proffered in an effort to mitigate the impacts associated with this development on Fire and Rescue Services and the Sheriff's Office. The sum of $5,000.00 is proffered for Clearbrook Fire and Rescue Services and $5,000.00 is proffered for the Sheriff's Office. B) Architectural Site Plan. The Applicant has proffered an Architectural Site Plan that depicts the general layout of the site. The purpose of providing such a generalized development plan is to provide the locality with assurances that the project will develop as portrayed, in substantial conformance with the Architectural Site Plan. Providing further clarification within the Proffer Statement could eliminate the lack of clarity regarding certain aspects of the Architectural Site Plan, in particular regarding the landscaping, buffering, screening, and signage along Route 11 and the Interstate 81 frontage. It is impossible to determine if the applicant is providing anything above what would be required by ordinance. Recognizing the location of the property and the adjacent residential uses the applicant should seriously consider addressing this further. It is also recognized that the applicant is seeking the Interstate Area Overlay District designation to take advantage of the opportunity enhanced visibility from the Interstate will provide. However, a cohesive and aesthetically pleasing approach to signage along Route 11 would be desirable. C) Transportation. The Applicant is proffering a full right turn lane along the frontage of their property, three commercial entrances along Route 11 with the main truck entrance in alignment with Woodbine Road, the construction of two left turn lanes for traffic turning onto Rest Church Road (Route 669) from Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), to enter into a signalization agreement for the intersection of Route 11 and Woodbine Road, and to ensuring that the signal will be complete prior to occupancy of the facility. Omitted from the Proffer Statement is a commitment that provides for the participation in a signalization agreement at the intersection of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11) and Rest Church Road (Route 669) similar to the above identified proffer, any commitment to providing the Rezoning #07-05 — Manning Property May 18, 2005 Page 10 ultimate four -lane section of Route 11, and the dedication of sufficient right-of-way to accommodate this improvement. It has been noted that the opportunity may exist in the future to achieve this improvement with the development of parcels along the east side of Route 11, D) Environmental Protection. The Applicant has proffered to provide electric stations for the 31 truck parking spaces and to implementing oil and water separators and additional stormwater management best management practices to address the environmental impacts of this project. Pursuant to the comments provided by Mr. Mitchell, additional clarification should be provided regarding these measures which should be incorporated into the Proffer Statement. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 06/01/05 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Manning Property rezoning application is generally consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan as described in the staff report. Elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure they fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan, in particular, the Northeast Frederick Land Use 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 following: 1) The Commission providing concurrence with VDOT that the transportation proffers and the lane configuration drawings offered with the rezoning application are satisfactory. 2) The Applicant's satisfying all of the comments offered by the County's Attorney. 3) The Applicant providing additional clarification regarding any enhanced landscaping, buffering, screening, and signage along Route 11 and Interstate 81. Following the required public hearing, a recommendation regarding this rezoning application to the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission._ HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & WILBUR C. HALL (1892-1972) THOMAS V. MONAHAN (1924-1999) SAMUEL D. ENGLE O. LELAND MAHAN ROBERT T. MITCHELL, JR. JAMES A. KLENKAR STEVEN F. JACK50N DENNIS J. MCLOUGHLIN, JR. A PARTNERSHIP OF PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1 7 EAST MARKET STREET -ESBURG, VIRGINIA TELEPHONE 703-777-1050 .. Fp MITCHELL I MAY 20 A i 9 EAST SOSCAWEN STREET ' WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA TELEPHONE 540.662.3200 FAX 540.652.4304 E-MAIL lawyers@hallmonahan.mm May 19, 2005 Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Director Frederick County Department of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 PLEASE REPLY TO: R O. BOX 848 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22504-0848 Re: Manning (Arogas, Inc.) Proposed Proffer Statement Dear Mike: I have reviewed the above -referenced Proposed Proffer Statement. 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, and is legally sufficient as a proffer statement, subject to the following: 1. For purposes of ease of reference, I would suggest that the heading on the Proffer Statement be set forth as shown on the attached sheet. This heading is consistent with most other proffer statements which have been recently filed with the County. 2. As the property owners are identified as "Applicants" on the attached form heading, I would recommend that the word "Applicants" be capitalized throughout the proffer statement. 3, Under the section labeled "Preliminary Matters", the last sentence should be amended to read: "These proffers shall be binding upon the Applicants, and their legal successors, heirs, and assigns." HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Frederick County Department of Planning & Development May 19, 2005 Page 2 4. Under the section labeled "Monetary Contribution", the first portion of the first sentence is redundant. Accordingly, this section, in its entirety, should read as follows: "The Applicants will pay to Frederick County, at the time a building permit is first issued, the sum of $5,000.00 for Clearbrook Fire and Rescue and $5,000.00 for the Sheriff's Office." 5. Under the section labeled "Site Development Plan", I have the following comments: A. It would appear that this section is mislabeled. I do not believe that there is a site development plan. The plan which is attached to the proffers had an original title of "Concept Plan", but has the label "Architectural Site Plan" hand lettered on it. Throughout the Proffer Statement, it seems to be referred to as the Architectural Site Plan, so I would recommend that this section be labeled "Architectural Site Plan." B. The first sentence in this section merely states what is required under the County ordinances, does not constitute a proffer, and can be deleted. C. This section should be reworded in its entirety to state "The property will be developed in substantial conformity with the attached Architectural Site Plan of Triad Engineering, Inc., dated April 5, 2005." 6. Under the section labeled "Street Improvements", I have the following comments: A. There should be an introductory sentence prior to the lettered subparagraphs which states as follows: "The following road improvements shall be completed by Applicants prior to occupancy;" HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN be MITCHELL Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Frederick County Department of Planning & Development May 19, 2005 Page 3 B. Subsection (a) should be divided into two separate subsections. The first subsection should state: "The Applicants shall construct curb and gutter and storm sewer along the property frontage on U.S. Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike) to Woodbine Road (Va. Route 669)." The second subparagraph should state: "The Applicants shall widen U.S. Route 11 to provide 12 foot wide lanes consistent with VDOT commercial standards." C. The two sentences of subparagraph (b) should be divided into two separate subparagraphs. The first sentence states that the center line intersections of the commercial truck entrance and Woodbine Road are aligned. However, it does not appear that the center lines are aligned on the attached Architectural Site Plan. This needs to be clarified. The second sentence, in a separate subparagraph, should state "The Applicants shall construct two (2) 40 foot wide commercial entrances for automobiles to VDOT standards." D. As it is my understanding that the County's position is that the signalization must be installed prior to occupancy, subparagraph (c) should be reworded to state as follows: "The Applicants will enter into a signalization agreement for the Woodbine Road/U.S. Route 11 intersection and will fund up to 100 percent of the cost of the signalization, which signalization will be completed and installed prior to Applicants' occupancy of the property." E. Subparagraph (f) should be reworded to state as follows: "The location of entrances and the above referenced road improvements shall be in substantial conformity with the attached Architectural Site Plan." 7. The section labeled "Design Features" should be deleted. The Architectural Site Plan has been made a part of the proffer in an earlier section, and the referenced photograph is not an appropriate proffer. HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN be MITCHELL Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Frederick County Department of Planning & Development May 19, 2005 Page 4 8. With respect to the section labeled "Additional Site Proffers", I have the following comments: A. The first sentence of subparagraph (a) appears to merely state current regulations which already apply. In any event, subparagraph (a) appears to be satisfactory as stated. B. More details should be provided in subparagraph (b) as to where utilities would be placed underground. Does the proffer refer to service lines on the property only, or are there existing above -ground utilities which will be placed underground? C. Subparagraph (c) appears to merely state existing regulations. D. More details should be provided in subparagraphs (d) and (e). I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for this specific site, as it is my understanding that that review will be done by the staff and the Planning Commission. If there are any questions concerning the foregoing, please contact me. truly yours, k Robert T. Mitchell, Jr. RTM/glh Attachment PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ. # Industrial General (M-2) and Rural Areas (RA) to Industrial Transitional District (B-3) and Interstate Overlay District (IA) PROPERTY: 12.178 Acres ("the Property") Tax Map Parcels 33A -A-12, 13, 14, 15, 15A RECORD OWNER: T. Pat Manning and Audrey A. Manning APPLICANTS: T. Pat Manning and Audrey A. Manning PROJECT NAME: Aerogas, Inc. ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: April 25, 2005 REVISION DATE(S): N/A November 9, 2004 Mr. Stephen Gyurisin Triad Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 2397 Winchester, Virginia 22604 RE: Rezoning Application for the Manning Property Frederick County, Virginia Dear Mr. Gyurisin: COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Public Works 540/665-5643 FAX: 540/678-0682 We have completed our review of the proposed rezoning of the Manning property from M-2 and RA to B-3. Based on this review, we offer the following continents: 1) In the second paragraph under location and site background, the discussion indicates a proposed rezoning from M-2 and RA to B-3 (IA). In the next sentence, the discussion indicates that this represents a downzoning from M-2 to B-3. If this change represents a downzoning, comment on what best describes the change from RA to B-3. In our opinion, the incorporation of the RA property is the critical link in a successful project at this location. 2) Under Site Suitability, the analysis indicates that no wetlands have been identified on the site. Indicate if a wetland study has been performed on the southern end of the property within the Duncan Run flood plain. If not, a wetland study should be performed to determined if the "wet area" located on the southern end of the property is actually a wetland and needs to be protected especially in the area proposed for the stormwater detention basin. 3) We will require the design and implementation of oil separators to augment the BMP facilities being proposed under the discussion of stormwater management. This requirement should be reflected in the discussion of stornwater drainage. 4) Provide an estimate of the amount of solid waste that will be generated by the proposed development. The coirunent related to "no additional solid waste facilities will be required for the proposed development" is not appropriate unless you can demonstrate that the proposed waste generation will not adversely impact our existing solid waste facilities. 5) Under the proffer statement, street improvements, item c., the applicant indicates he will enter into a signalization agreement involving partial cost sharing for the Woodbine Road/U.S. Route I I intersection. The applicant further states that the timing of this signalization will be determined by the Virginia Department of Transportation. This 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Manning Property Rezoning Page 2 November 9, 2004 signilization is critical to the success and safety of the transportation link to this project. The proposed site plan indicates that all the truck traffic will enter and exit at this location. Therefore, we will require that the signalization be installed and functional prior to issuing a building permit. A note to this effect shall be placed on the site plan. 6) Proffer "d." under street improvements indicates that the applicant will construct two (2) 250 foot left turn lanes on U.S. Route 11 for traffic turning onto Rest Church Road from U.S. Route 11. This configuration shall be shown on the enclosed architectural site plan. Also, before approval is granted for the proposed rezoning, the applicant shall provide evidence that sufficient right-of-way is available at this intersection and along the improvements alignment to accommodate the two (2) turn -lanes for their full length including transitions and future road expansions. 7) Under Additional Site Proffers, item c. the applicant has indicated that no structures shall be constructed within the flood plain along Duncan Run. We concur with this proffer and will interpret this statement to include stormwater management facilities and related drainage structures. 8) Under attachments, we observed that the applicant included a list of signatures of adjacent property owners who are favorable to Mr. Fuel's proposed rezoning. Please indicate why the Jemungs and their neighbors were not included on this list. I can be contacted at 665-5643 if you should have any questions regarding this proposed rezoning. Sincerely, R � Q Harvey E. Strhwsnyder, Jr., P.E. Director of Public Works HES/rls cc: Planning and Development file A:gym anWngpro p rezcom.N, p d OUTPUT MODULE I OUTPUT. ULE APPLICANT Arogas Net Fiscal Impact LAND USE TYPE B3 Truck Stop REAL EST VAL $1,400,324 Costs of Impact Credit: Credits to be Taken for Future Taxes Paid (NPV) Required Total Potential Adjustment For FIRE & RESCUE = 1 (entered in Cur. Budget Cur. Budget Cap. Future CIP/ Capital Faciltiies col sum only) Oper Cap Equip Expend/Debt S Taxes. Other Tax Credits Revenue- Net Capital Net Cost Per I (Unadjusted) Cost Balance _Facilities Impact Dwelling Unit Fire and Rescue Department $3,032 I Elementary Schools $0 $0 $0 $3,032 #DIV/O! Middle Schools---- $0$0 $0 ---_ High Schools $O $0 $0 $0 #DIV/0! Parks and Recreation $0 ---- Public Library $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #DIV/O! Sheriffs Offices $0 $0 $436 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #DIV/O! � Administration Building $0 $436 $436 $0 #DIV/0!$0 Other Miscellaneous Facilities $0 $1,046 $1,155 $0 $0 $0 #DIV/0! I $2,201 $2,201 $0 #DIV/0 r I SUBTOTAL LESS: NET FISCAL IMPACT $3,032 $1,482 $1,155 $451,143 $0 $2,637 $2,637 $395 #DIV/0! NET CAP. FACILITIES IMPACT $451,143 $451,143($4511,1431#QIwo! I I $0.1_#DIV/o! INDEX: "1.0" If Cap. Equip Included 1,0 INDEX: "1.0" if Rev -Cost Bal, "0.0" if Ratio to Co Avg: 0.0 Rev -Cost Bal = 1.000 ------------------------------------- ----- PLANNING DEPT PREFERENCES 1.0 1.0 ------------------------ -------------- Ratio to Co Avg 1.342 METHODOLOGY: 1 -------------------------- --------------------- ------------------------ Capital facilities requirements are input to the first column as calculated in the model, --------------------- ---------------------- __________ ____________________ _____ 2. Net Fiscal Impact NPV from operations calculations is input in row total of second column (zero if negative); included are the one-time taxes/fees for one year only at full value. 3. NPV of future oper cap equip taxes paid in third column as calculated in fiscal impacts. A. NPV of future capital expenditure taxes paid in fourth col as calculated in fiscal impacts. 5. NPV of future taxes paid to bring current county up to standard for new facilities, as calculated for each new facility. 6. Columns three through five are added as potential credits against the calculated capital facilities requirements. These are adjusted for percent of costs covered by the revenues from the project (actual, or as ratio to avg. for all residential development). NOTE. Proffer calculations do not include include interest because they are cash payments up front. Credits do include interest if the projects are debt financed. ------------------------- ------------------ ------------------------- NOTES.- Model Run Date ---------------------- 11!15104 MTR ----------------------------------------- -- ------ "'-------"--"'-"-'-------------- ----- I Project Description: Assumes 8,400 square foot Service Station on 12.178 acres zoned B3 District. I I I Due to changing conditions associated with development in the County, the results of this Output Module may not be valid beyond a period of 90 days from the model run date. I I-------------------------- ---------------- Map Features a. .... � � s N� a.ms �..� a� �g w�i• - �, a Roaa cenmmnes c' s Rezoning # 07 - 05 Manning Property ( 33A - A -12,13,14,15,15A ) 0 75 150 300 Feet MANNING 33A 4 12 AR 4L G 4 33A 4 15A' mile JOHNSON 33 A 91 NINJ- 3n t ;,, 77 �, ml d(j le Ridge stc'mr'. . '-�A A 54 liw� I -W 71- SEMPELES 34 A 4 Map Featuros Rezoning # 07 - 05 Manning Property Road Cantarlinas N 33A - A -12,13,14,15,15A W*l E 0 75 150 300 S .1 Feet ml d(j le Ridge stc'mr'. . '-�A A 54 liw� I -W 71- SEMPELES 34 A 4 PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Numbers: 33A -((A))-12; 33A -((A))-13; 33A -((A))-14; 33A -((A))-15; 33A -((A)) -15A Stonewall Magisterial District Manning Property Preliminary Matters Pursuant to Section 15.2-2296 et. Seq., of the code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and the provisions of the Frederick County ' Zoning Ordinance with respect to conditional rezoning, the undersigned applicant hereby proffers the following terms and conditions in the event the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall approve Rezoning Application # ©'7 -057 for the rezoning of 9.442+/- acres from the Industrial, General District (M2) designation to Industrial Transitional District (133) & Interstate Overlay District (IA) and 2.736+/- acres from the Rural Areas (RA) designation to Industrial Transitional District (133) & Interstate Overlay District (IA). The total acreage of Industrial Transitional District (133) with IA would therefore be 12.178+/- acres. Development of the subject property shall be done in conformity with the terms and conditions set forth herein, except to the extent that such terms and conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the applicant and such be approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors in accordance with Virginia law. In the event that such rezoning is not granted, then these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and of no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon the applicant and their legal successor or assigns. Monetary Contribution The undersigned, who owns the above described property,- hereby voluntarily proffers that if the Board of Supervisors for the County of Frederick, Virginia approves the rezoning for the 12.178+/- acres, with frontage along US Route 11 in the Stonewall Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia from M2 and RA to B3 and IA, the undersigned will pay to Frederick County, at the time a building permit is issued, the sum of $10,000. This -monetary proffer provides for $5,000 for Clearbrook Fire and Rescue and $5,000 for . Sheriff's Office. Site Development Plan The development of the subject property and the submission of any Master Development Plan or Site Plan shall be in conformance with all pertinent County regulations. Voluntarily proffered is the attached Architectural Concept Plan including the following improvements: REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Numbers: 33A -((A))-12; 33A -((A))-13; 33A -((A))-14; 33A -((A))-15; 33A -((A)) -15A Stonewall Magisterial District Manning Property (See attached architectural site plan, hereby proffered and made a part hereof) Street Improvements a. Along the property frontage on U. S. Route, 11 (Martinsburg Pike) to Woodbine Road (VA Sec. Rt. 669), the applicant shall construct curb and gutter and storm sewer with a 12' lane widening consistent with VDOT commercial standards. b. The applicant shall construct a commercial truck entrance to VDOT standards with centerline intersection aligned with the centerline intersection of Woodbine Road (VA Sec. Rt. 669) and U.S. Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike). The applicant shall also construct two (2) 40' commercial entrances for automobiles. c. The applicant shall enter into a signalization agreement involving partial cost sharing for the Woodbine Road/US. Route 11 intersection. The timing for ultimate signalization of the intersection will be determined by VDOT. Subject only to VDOT timing for ultimate signalization for the Woodbine Road/US. Route 11 intersection, applicant will fund up to 100% of the cost of signalization and complete the signalization prior to occupancy. d. The applicant shall construct two (2) 250' left turn lanes on US Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike) for traffic turning onto Rest Church Road (VA Sec. Rt. 669) from US Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike). e. All US Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike) improvements will be consistent with VDOT standards f. See Architectural Site Plan made a part hereof REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Numbers: 33A -((A))-12; 33A -((A))-13; 33A -((A))-14; 33A -((A))-15; 33A -((A)) -15A Stonewall Magisterial District Manning Property Desicn Features a. See Architectural Site Plan made a part hereof b. See attached photograph, Mr. Fuel #6, made a part hereof. Additional Site Proffers a. Storm water runoff resulting from improvements constructed within the Duncan Run Watershed shall receive treatment as required by the Virginia Storm water Management Regulations, First Ed. 1999, Chapter 2, Table 2-3 which results in the highest order of storm water control existing under Virginia law. The stormwater pond shall be lined with impervious liner materials to preclude any possible groundwater impacts. b. All utilities shall be underground. c. No buildings or pavement shall be constructed within the Flood Plain along Duncan Run. d. Oil water separator(s) will be implemented. e. Electric stations to be provided for the 31 truck parking spaces. The conditions proffered above shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors in interest of the Applicant and Owner. In the event the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grant said rezoning and accepts these conditions, the proffered conditions shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to other requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code. Respectfully submitted, PROPERTY OWNER By: G� By: «� 4, r , T. Pat Manning Audre" A. Manning Date: —4 —0j'—Date: S� �� REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Numbers: 33A -((A))-12; 33A -((A))-13; 33A -((A))-14; 33A -((A))-15; 33A -((A)) -15A Stonewall Magisterial District Manning Property Date: S707—E 07-- t _ _ 0-6?t AI Ty The foregoing instrumen was acknowledged before me this day of by AV-nAoV �l1�NNiiu My commissio xpires 05 0 Deo Notary Public AUDRN J. PAULE Notary Public - Missouri St. Charles County My Commission Expires May 3, 2006 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT Manning Property Impact Analysis Statement 06 May 2005 A. Location and Site Backl4round The following Impact Analysis Statement is provided in summary form for the property known as the "Manning Property". The property is located in the Stonewall Magisterial Distract. The property is located along US Route 11, Martinsburg Pike with 1-81 frontage, approximately 350 feet south of the intersection of US Route 11 and Virginia Secondary Route 669. The property has approximately 1380 feet of frontage on US Route 11. The property is located between US Route 11 and Interstate 81 with approximately 1440 feet along the interstate. The parcels to be rezoned total 12.178+/ - acres. Approximately 9.442+/- acres of the property is currently zoned General Industry (M-2). Approximately 2.736+/- acres of the property is currently zoned Rural Areas (RA) - The requested rezoning is to change the current 12.178+/- acres from General Industry (M-2) and Rural Areas (RA) to Industrial Transitional (B-3) and Interstate Overlay (IA). In addition to the B-3 use, the IA zoning is requested to allow an interstate road sign on the site. There are no residential units proposed as part of this rezoning. Four residential structures will be removed and incorporated into the project. A site development plan for the proposed use has been prepared in accord with all local and state regulations. The portion of the property proposed for rezoning is located outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA), but inside the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Analysis of environmental and physical characteristics of this property to be rezoned indicates that there is opportunity for development as envisioned for the B- 3 use. There are no environmental features that limit the development. Sewer and water service will be provided by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. All appropriate utilities are available to the site for the proposed zoning and use. The rezoning of the 12.178+/- acres of the property fits within the guidelines of present planned policy for the area. In summary: - The Northeast Land Use Plan identifies this property as being planned for a business development use, and envisions "commercial land uses which cater to the interstate traveler." - The property is located along an important transportation corridor. - The proposed use results in a decrease in traffic impact compared to a by - right traffic impact under the current M-2 zoning. The proposed rezoning/use also is accompanied with proffers for infrastructure improvements to US Route 11 between Woodbine Rd. and Rest Church Rd. Manning Property Impact Analysis Statement 06 May 2005 - Detailed traffic studies have been conducted as part of the site development process for County and VDOT reviews. - The property is located within an interstate interchange area. - Environmental limitations are identified allowing for the commercial development as envisioned. - Fiscal impacts are recognized and remain very positive for the proposed change of zoning. Comprehensive Plan Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan The single most important consideration in the proposed downzoning is the Frederick County Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP). Chapter 165 from the Zoning Code states in the very first paragraph under Intent, purpose; "it is intended that this chapter provide one means to achieve the goals set forth in the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan." The Northeast Land Use Plan is the culmination of "two visioning meetings in January 2000 at the Stonewall Elementary School, votes on identified issues by participants and comments associated with a prepared questionnaire. The Comprehensive Plans and Programs Sub -Committee (CPPS) utilized this information to establish objectives for the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan." Through the years there have been multiple public discussions and hearings on the Northeast Land Use Plan; Planning Commission approval, Board of Supervisor approval, Planning Staff recommendation and much input from land use law experts and citizens. In late 2003, Frederick County again amended the Northeast Land Use Plan to accommodate the Sempeles Rezoning consisting of 112.27 acres located east and adjacent to Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North) and north and adjacent to Woodbine Road (Route 669). This amendment was approved in order to "Relocate a Planned Major Collector Road (Woodbine) and to propose Business Land Use" (in lieu of M-1 use). The present RA and M-2 zoning of the 12.178 -acre site conflicts with the policies of the adopted Northeast Land Use Plan: 1. "Proposed industrial land uses should be developed within master planned areas which discourage individual lot access on the Martinsburg Pike (Rt. 11 North) corridor. "---" "Adjacent to railroads." 2. "Proposed industrial, commercial — development should only occur if impacted road systems function at a Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better." Current by -right traffic impact for the 9.442 M-2 acres exceeds the proposed impact for the rezoned project. A LOS of C cannot be achieved Manning Property Impact Analysis Statement 06 May 2005 under the current M-2 zoning, given the by -right traffic impact and the by - right access for some uses, without Rt. 11 infrastructure improvements. This proposed B-3 rezoning and use is in harmony with the Frederick County Northeast Land Use Plan and its adopted policies governing land use and zoning issues. Policies "Ensure that public water and sewer --- development proposals" "Ensure that adequate LOS for all road systems are maintained or are achieved as a result of future development proposals" "Provide for interstate business development opportunities on the eastern - -- sides of Interstate 81 interchanges." "Concentrate business uses at strategic locations along the Rt. 11 North Corridor." "Discourage --- random industrial land uses along Rt. 11 that are incompatible with adjacent existing land uses." 2. Transportation "Identify appropriate locations for signalized intersections to maintain or improve LOS" (Woodbine Road, VA Sec Rt. 669) "Encourage the expansion of Rt. 11 to a four -lane roadway" "Minimizing new driveways and intersections with Rt. 11 North" The Northeast Land Use Plan is site specific, and use specific: "Business and Commercial land uses are proposed along the Martinsburg Pike corridor --- east side of I-81, Exit 323, ___." "It is envisioned that commercial land uses which cater to the interstate traveler will be developed along the I-81 interchange area." "The development of business and commercial land uses is encouraged at designated signalized road intersection." (Rest Church, Woodbine) Manning Property Impact Analysis Statement 06 May 2005 B. Site Suitability The site is well suited for development. According to the 2000 Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan, the property is within the Interstate Interchange Area. The revised Northeast Land Use Plan (adopted August 12, 2003) labels this property as being planned for a business use. The proximity of the property to US Route 11 and Interstate 81 makes it a highly desirable site for B-3/IA zoning. 100 Year Flood Plain A portion of the parcel is within the designated areas of the 100 -year flood. This area is located along Duncan Run, which forms the southern property line. No buildings or pavement are planned within the flood area. A portion of the stormwater retention pond will be within the flood area. Wetlands Wetlands have been identified on the site. There will be no disturbance of wetlands. Steep Slopes The property generally slopes to the south and east. The land is situated between two major highways and is gently sloping toward US Route 11 and Duncan Run. Slopes are less than 15%. Mature Woodlands The site contains no mature woodlands. Soils There are no critical soil areas on the site. Comprehensive Planning The property is located with frontage along I-81, near an existing interchange, is compatible with IA zoning policies and procedures and is within the Frederick County Sanitation Authority's Sewer and Water Service Area. The planned rezoning is compatible with all Frederick County comprehensive planning and land use designations and policies. The Frederick County Northeast Land Use Plan has designated this area for future business development. The planned use of this property is also consistent with Comprehensive Planning guidelines regarding ideal interchange development patterns along I-81. Note: The current RA and M-2 zoning of the property is in conflict with the Frederick County Northeast Land Use Plan. A heavy industry zoning district is not envisioned and made part of the Northeast Land Use Plan. B-3 zoning, as proposed, brings this property into conformance with the currently adopted Northeast Land Use Plan and envisioned land use. Locational Manning Property �:1111i)k 19S Triad Engineering, Inc. www.triad-winc.com SCALE 0.2 0.1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Miles 1:24,000 06 May 2005 Current Zoning roll 1Ilter change 323 'Ovmvih iteh, .aii Zoning 0 B2 O RA B3 =M1 j EM M2 Key F=eatures Interstate 81 US Route 11 Duncan Run WV Line SWSA Line Woodbine Road (Sec. Rt. 669) Rest Church Rd. (Sec. Rt. 669) Triad Engineering, Inc. 200 viation Dr. P.O. Box 2397 Winchester, VA 22504 (540) 997-9300 SCALE 0 0.050.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Miles 1:10,000 DATE: 06MAY05 Current Land Use of Interchange 323 Whitehall Land Use Commercial i Industrial 0 Residential 0 Vacant Key Features Interstate 81 Duncan Run US Route 11 ----- - VA/WV Line SWSA Line .., Woodbine Road (Sec. Rt. 669) Rest Church Rd. (Sec. Rt. 669) L RIAD als Triad Engineering, Inc. www.triad-winc.com SCALE 0 0.050.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Miles 1:10,000 1" = 1000' 06MAY05 a 0 0 Wq fes; oodbine Road 0 0 ♦,► — — ---- — _, AIL —1 ■ AN _ ■ m � — — RA Zoning US Route 11 Scale M-2 Zoning — Interstate 81 0 125 250 soo iso � ^- Duncan Run "HAD Feet Triad Engineering, Inc. 1:3,600 1" = 300' www.triad-winc.com P'. oposed Zoningof the Mannin Interstate 81 L I Duncan Run I Exit 323 Whitehall SITE B-3 Zoning with IA 12.178 Acres Property Rest Church Road VA Sec. Rt. 669 US Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike) Woodbine Road VA Sec. Rt. 669 I,J Site Duncan Run SCALE US Route 11 0 125 250 500 750 1,000 "VIAD interstate 81 Feet 1:3,600 1" = 300' als Triad Engineering, Inc www.triad-winc.com Manning Property Impact Analysis Statement 06 May 2005 C. Surrounding Properties The site to be rezoned is bordered on the north by the Exxon convenience store/service station zoned RA. To the east of the site is US Route 11, Martinsburg Pike, with single family residential homes located on the eastern side of US Route 11 across from a portion of the site's frontage. Also to the east is the Sempeles property, recently rezoned to include 100 acres of Industrial (M-1) and 10 acres of Commercial (B-2). To the south of the site is vacant land zoned RA which borders an auto body shop, recently rezoned to B-3. Along the western side of the property is the northbound lane and exit ramp of Interstate 81. West of 1-81 is the Flying J, which was rezoned to B-3 circa 1996. Manning Property Impact Analysis Statement 06 May 2005 D. Traffic According to the most recent Traffic Impact Analysis of the property prepared by Mr. John Callow of PHR+A. dated July 20, 2004, the traffic impacts associated with the property development and its projected build -out are acceptable and manageable. All study area intersections maintain acceptable levels of service "C" or better for 2005 build -out conditions. The planned truck entrance to the site will have its centerline aligned with the centerline intersection of Woodbine Road (VA Sec. Route 669) and US Route 11. The applicant has proffered terms and conditions regarding the design of this commercial entrance and its signalization. The property will have 1380 feet of frontage on US Route I1 (Martinsburg Pike), for access. US Route 11 links with Rest Church Road (VA Sec. Route 669), approximately 350 feet north of the site. US Route 1 i is a three -lane road that has an 80 -foot right-of- way. Rest Church Road is a four -lane road with an approximate 60 -foot right-of-way width and taper; there is an additional right-of-way at I-81 and US Route 11. The intersection of US Route 11 and Rest Church Road is signaled, with a dedicated turning lane in both directions on US Route 11. Rest Church Road intersects with I-81 (Exit 323) approximately 250 feet from US Route 11. The applicant has proffered terms and conditions regarding the frontage along US Route 11. A complete Traffic Impact Analysis has been prepared and reviewed with VDOT. A copy is attached and made part of this application. 11 .Is � ( •.� as i.ru�'�'�� ., MUM- Outstanding Concrete Consft-ucdon 2000 Arogas Inc. Builders Concrete & Supply Co., Inc. Midwest Concrete Studio One Architects Manning Property Impact Analysis Statement 06 May 2005 E. Sewal4e Treatment There are no known limiting factors for the conveyance of sewage and sewage treatment from this property. The site is located within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The applicant has reserved 12,000 gallons per day capacity with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA). Manning Property Impact Analysis Statement 06 May 2005 F. Water Supply There are no known limiting factors for supplying this site with water. The site is located within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Manning Property Impact Analysis Statement 06 May 2005 G. Drainage The site has no identified drainage problems. The southern portion of the site is located within a recognized flood area along Duncan Run. The property slopes generally from the west to the east and drains south toward Duncan Run. There are no streams or ponds located on the site, except Duncan run that forms the southern property line. An increase in storm water runoff can be expected with any development on the property. Storm water management will be provided in accordance with the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165. Further, the storniwater facility will be designed and engineered so that the quali and quantit of stormwater retained and discharged will meet all applicable environmental and development standards. Manning property Impact Analysis Statement 06 May 2005 H. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities No additional solid waste disposal facilities will be required for the proposed development. Tipping fees are $38.00 per ton. A private solid waste hauler will handle collection. A service station with an 8400 S.F. convenience market has a GPV unit value of 0.1, or 840/day. This will result in a waste flow increase of less than 1/10 of 1% at the existing landfill. Manning Property Impact Analysis Statement 06 May 2005 I. Historic Sites and Structures The site contains no known historic sites or structures as listed on the National Register. Manning Property Impact Analysis Statement 06 May 2005 J. Community Facilities Education A positive fiscal impact to education facilities is anticipated. Emergency Services The Frederick County Sheriff's Department provides police protection. The fire and rescue facility designated to serve this site is the Clearbrook Fire and Rescue Company located south of the site in Clearbrook. No additional fire and rescue facilities will be required for the area proposed to be rezoned. Parks and Recreation A positive fiscal impact to parks and recreation facilities is anticipated. APPLICATION REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning Staff. Fee Amount Paid $ IJ, ia'T FO Zoning Amendment Number Date Received 5-A D PC Hearing Date t v J BOS Hearing Date o The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicant: Name: T. Pat Manning & Audrey A. Manning Address: PO BOX 580 C/O: MR. PAT MANNING ST. PETERS, MO 63376 2. Property Owner (if different than above) Name: T. PAT MANNING & AUDREY A. MANNING Address: P.O. BOX 580, ST. PETERS, MO 63376 3. Contact person if other than above Name: PAT MANNING Telephone: 636-947-0255 Telephone: (636) 947-0255 Telephone: 636-947-0255 FAX: (636)-896-0197 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map 0✓ Agency Cornments F ✓ Plat ffi Fees I I Deed to property Impact Analysis Statement �✓ Verification of taxes paid Proffer Statement 11 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: T. PAT MANNING & AUDREY A. MANNING 6. A) Current Use of the Property: VACANT and RESIDENTIAL (RA PORTIONS) B) Proposed Use of the Property: GASOLINE SERVICE STATION (SIC 5541) (See Attached Site Plan) 7. Adjoining Property: PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING 33A -(A)-11 COMMERCIAL RA 33A -(A)-25 VACANT RA 33A -(A)-26 RESIDENTIAL RA 33A -(A)-27 RESIDENTIAL RA 33A -(A) -27A RESIDENTIAL RA CONTINUED ON ATTACHED SHEET 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): Approximately 350+/- feet south of the intersection of VA Secondary Route 669, and US Route 11, Martinsburg Pike, located between US Route 11 and 1-81 and continuing south to Duncan Run. This property is south of Exit 323 (Whitehall Exit). 12 ADJOINING PROPERTIES (CONTINUED) PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING 33-(9)-1 COMMERCIAL B-3 33A -(A)-28 RESIDENTIAL RA 33A -(A)-29 RESIDENTIAL RA 33A -(A)-30 RESIDENTIAL RA 33A -(A)-31 VACANT RA 33A -(A)-33 RESIDENTIAL RA 33A -(A)-34 VACANT RA 33A -(A)-91 (adjusted) VACANT RA 33A-(1)-22 RESIDENTIAL RA 33A-(1)-23 VACANT RA 33A-(1)-24 RESIDENTIAL RA 34-(A)-2 VACANT B2 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 2nd floor of the Frederick County Administrative Building, 107 North Kent Street. Name and Property Identification Number I Address Name Funkhouser H.N. and company P.O. Box 2038, Winchester, VA 22604 Property # 33A -(A)-11 Name Semples, George M. and Carol T. 331 Woodbine Road, Clearbrook, VA 22624 Property # 33A -(A)-25 Name Pope, Leslie Osborne 136 Jordan Drive, Winchester, VA 22602 Property # 33A -(A)-26 Name Ellis, Dolores Esther 4568 Martinsburg Pike, Clearbrook, VA 22624 Property # 33A -(A)-27 Name Molden Real Estate Corp. 2400 Valley Avenue, Winchester, VA 22604 Property # 33A -(A) -27A Name Helsley, Roger L. and Phyllis A. 497 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 Property # 33A -(A)-28 Name Curry, Thelma M. and Robin A. Light 4592 Martinsburg Pike, Winchester, VA 22624 Property # 33A -(A)-29 Name Kitts, Fred Milton and Rebecca A. 4600 Martinsburg Pike, Winchester, VA 22624 Property # 33A -(A)-30 Name Smallwood, Donald Y. and Barbara N. 108 Juliet Lane, Bunker Hill, WV 25413 Property # 33A -(A)-31 Name Larrick, Delmar B. Jr. and Cynthia K. 4622 Martinsburg Pike, Clearbrook, VA 22624 Property # 33A -(A)-33 15 Nance and Property Identification Number I Address Name Middle Ridge Traditional Stone 1 P.O. Box 1004, Berryville, VA 22611 Property # 33A -(A) 34 Name Jennings, Thomas Roy and Mary P. 4514 Martinsburg Pike, Clearbrook, VA 22624 Property # 33A-(1)-22 Name Shanholtz, Sharon A_ 3733 Dort Place, Columbus, OH 43227 Property # 33A-(1)-23 Name Shanholtz, Sharon A. 3733 Dort Place, Columbus, OH 43227 331 Woodbine Road, Clearbrook, VA 22624 Property # 33A-(1)-24 Name Semples, George M. and Carol T. Property # 34-(A)-2 Name DeHaven, Manuel C. 4273 Martinsburg Pike, Clearbrook, VA 22624 Property # 33-(A)-91 Name CFJ Properties DBA Flying J Travel Center P.O_ Box 150310, Ogden, UT 84415 Property # 33-(9)-1 Name Property # Name Property # Name Property # Name Property # Name Property # Name Property # Name Property # 16 Information to be Submitted for Capital Facilities Impact Model 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 staffwill use the maximum possible density or intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on Page 9 of the application package. 9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number SEE ATTACHED SHEET Magisterial: Fire Service: Rescue Service Stonewall Clearbrook : Clearbrook Districts High School: James Wood Middle School: Frederick County Elementary School: Stonewall 10, Zoning Change: List the acreage included u7 each new zoning category being requested. Acres I Current Zoning Zoning Requested 9.442 M-2 B-3 and IA 2.736 RA B-3 and IA /1. / `7V 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 homes: N/A Townhome: N/A Multi -Family: NIA Non -Residential Lots: 1 Mobile Home: N/A Hotel Rooms: N/A Square Footage of Proposed Uses Office: Service Station: 8400 Retail: Manufacturing: Restaurant: Warehouse: Other: 13 PROPERTIES TO BE INCLUDED IN THIS REZONING APPLICATION 33A -(A)-12 33A -(A)-13 33A -(A)-14 33A -(A)-15 33A -(A) -15A 12. Signature: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors' public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right-of-way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. Date: Applicant(s): T. PAT MANNING o Date: AUDREY ACAAANNING Owner(s): Date: T. PAT MANNING �✓li,-Ut�� Date: AUDREY A. M4NING 14 Adjoining Properties to thle MPrnna L.r(n roianning zkne US Route 11 Scale /"ir �/ Duncan Run Interstate 81 0 125 250 500 750 1,000 IM, O ��" Feet 1:3,600 1" = 300' Triad Engineering, Inc. www.triad-winc.com SURVEY PLAT E 7 I iI,-- AVU.. I -.�; I 1A = Nf P LA I"T E.I'lk R I -.D' n , 4TA t, 31757 ACR ES, s I,. A ("L, 0 R UA N L; E 1 ilr.'i Vi 1. E I Mir UNDERSIGNED OWNED, VROPREIORS, A.ND -fRMTIEZ,;. OWNER DATE k:f)WI-40KW;-7ALTH OF Vlfk',INIR --' DW=FRErE-RpQ-', i "07. A I 2i T A R Y Sk Do L PUBLIC 01 �, 1) :;��Y II it -,WOSE RAME IS; SIGc,!-;.0 To 'I L 11 R; .1, U'V." ANkYF:,, *7z�,%F A - THE S CAY OF--,-;LLS2- BEFOIRE PE hu W SAM GM -N .1 N R IS-,' I -AND THIS DAY -"-Fl -4:t—`-'�- ' I HEREBY 1*,.* -- lilt .'-( THAI IHZ*S SUHVEY -N-3 1,AJ-( MFOR&K-AIGN 51iooi HERE% A BASED ON AN Ak:TIJAL FrELL) HUN SlLJfr.rM- MADF UNPUlz MY sur1mvis /t1`: I'` -fl-IA- 'PA, ;T IM H V 's HE RC iUiC NO A� REN -�R0AC, IENV ol 1, Ti'-V,I-1 'UMSE SHOWN OR NWED. PLAT !-ZHOWRIM Dollitic'.kRY LINIE ADd U -S-1 ]M.Etl T fiF I WEF.!j [HIL LAN!D OF i%;,ANL)i--I- -.;. DLHAVEN leV gl, a .,: . JUME T ZA03 rz ST-ZAICNALL kmoisu:im� nis-r F F , i-E-DERKX CC-IRM7. VEGINIA 1-14TE: JUNE U. 20U.5 SCALE: -I' - I TRIAD 04GINE-ERMG, INC. —10 P I' , 4A A.".71CAN DR WE WNCH-a-T::RR, IV gc� J�q M4101 0`57-SSIDD RkK (540) 607-MU'D SHEET 1 OF 4 0 7- m-aw I m .. 11- sni, T7 C.A WK110 Lli 4.30./Plf, 1.57 711-1 3-3 PRUL ?l !mi] 125'1/;:C 1-57 7j�f PFr;L 12 vid"i 1"m Tix I iI,-- AVU.. I -.�; I 1A = Nf P LA I"T E.I'lk R I -.D' n , 4TA t, 31757 ACR ES, s I,. A ("L, 0 R UA N L; E 1 ilr.'i Vi 1. E I Mir UNDERSIGNED OWNED, VROPREIORS, A.ND -fRMTIEZ,;. OWNER DATE k:f)WI-40KW;-7ALTH OF Vlfk',INIR --' DW=FRErE-RpQ-', i "07. A I 2i T A R Y Sk Do L PUBLIC 01 �, 1) :;��Y II it -,WOSE RAME IS; SIGc,!-;.0 To 'I L 11 R; .1, U'V." ANkYF:,, *7z�,%F A - THE S CAY OF--,-;LLS2- BEFOIRE PE hu W SAM GM -N .1 N R IS-,' I -AND THIS DAY -"-Fl -4:t—`-'�- ' I HEREBY 1*,.* -- lilt .'-( THAI IHZ*S SUHVEY -N-3 1,AJ-( MFOR&K-AIGN 51iooi HERE% A BASED ON AN Ak:TIJAL FrELL) HUN SlLJfr.rM- MADF UNPUlz MY sur1mvis /t1`: I'` -fl-IA- 'PA, ;T IM H V 's HE RC iUiC NO A� REN -�R0AC, IENV ol 1, Ti'-V,I-1 'UMSE SHOWN OR NWED. PLAT !-ZHOWRIM Dollitic'.kRY LINIE ADd U -S-1 ]M.Etl T fiF I WEF.!j [HIL LAN!D OF i%;,ANL)i--I- -.;. DLHAVEN leV gl, a .,: . JUME T ZA03 rz ST-ZAICNALL kmoisu:im� nis-r F F , i-E-DERKX CC-IRM7. VEGINIA 1-14TE: JUNE U. 20U.5 SCALE: -I' - I TRIAD 04GINE-ERMG, INC. —10 P I' , 4A A.".71CAN DR WE WNCH-a-T::RR, IV gc� J�q M4101 0`57-SSIDD RkK (540) 607-MU'D SHEET 1 OF 4 0 7- m-aw I ACCESS �AIGHWAY QQV VARMS) TF Fri -4� *,0 a. 0, C, ou -a,, a WMBE MGM 14 load F T/ JUNE S. 2003 fN i HW L L C, D E H AV -- NMANUEL C. DEHAVEN ':;ADJUSTED PARCEL 91 ADJUSTE:D PARCEL 12 5.17-77 A& 10,5180 AC 'ANT Lk -KE. VI.: % 122.17' LZ r: IT 1 PKIFICKY L 1.%4 L N7754'20 --W 151m, P 111T -1-1 IL PLIJ SPOWNG HUMMAY IJ.'41--- Al,)J`lJ!;l&WNll THE LAND OF loiANIUEI, C. DEI-',N%IEN STONOM&L. (13SMIC1' Fr-,.,E0ERICK CUMOY, VIW"iW'IA WTE; JUNE 9, 2UO:S SSC l— 1' — loo' TRIAO 200 1 ATIO:,! DFaVE WaINCHF-SIER, (540) 007-43OU FAX' (5412) M—Y701) 'i;LIEI-T 2 OF it W-01—noW. _ _ 1 r.`!IYI 1 5 I- J ;,2. +{- 1 171!.1 IN IINT_ �, l ZONO. ,RA I::r_ RE51JEt1r r.L `s' r � S f' ' ' x' 3_. 1'I C� 1+I �, GO= dt" :1E'l�Ll=! :{f ���. r., 11(._,11.47=�.`I' :;1=x:.�..1. .:>'a -(11_a n_t t.,. S l f t {-1 t i 1' . 17+7!1 U ... fig` .Frit 1.1 51. •5 4 1?IL�) ; w'a • Gu'RuT1:Y Im }' pI:ti 15 Do Irsf'Pf: SGr�� !1 i tZt.1 t{ =171 E`}: trlt 'JrE RETU N14S1. I { 'bS'1 1 `�'L 1010 46' (71)1AL` i....� _, _ ^c ;;• "1-:�:i ,Jt INSf P'il. 3.!iGo(e:�22 LMD.); Re, USE M.SM171051_ j{ _ ---------- -- triANJFIR G'_ DEI Il'tiVEN, -- -- - ADJUSTED PARCEL i� ��'�;iez 10.5180 Au .w A-021 1-h 5153 LI!5E-. VACANT Gr 77 I �" ' 'i .. a .•e x'1-1 .111 1t ''ni}�� 41 I:itl lrl[1z«1;;1' LUNE AIJIIJ:::1MU41i LiE-1WEEhI V014 Fri THE LAND OF m i I I L E'RWERICK B..tJU,--JPf, V.W.iMA DAM-: ..UNE' S, .003 'SCALE: 1` ICU' `:EE SHEEF r Imo;'�I.LM EN''GIMEERWI , lidC. FLIP, ,'Lr.ti�_ T—SLE., Uk.' I RNE :Illtatill cif r VIRC--ANIA I - ; 7• :1) ;5137-9.`.•:71: FAIX (•5.,.1{x1) 6W. 2260 Wile ­7,,fw,% i UR ic?l CHCRU WIfAll r.z-Tk w—'5, ve-IF, $2 117'4-e' 5m%A" j't;';TG.1T 2577.55- s i c3c, 1 S'!w 753.45, NIP 5y I V'_ '044141, . " 'a xl . 4X� NMI m UTZ, MRS 77 OUT r 0 WE 9, 2003 ADJUSIED, PARC12 EL IAer.".6791AE' r Y21 Vil- P PIA1 CKILOIDARYY IINE ADJUST} UCl- er-TWEEm THE (AND OF MIANOF I -L C. DEHA.VEN 44GVSTERIAL C11TIHICY REDERICK !CrJU�Ijy. 14FGINIA I:V,JF-! lu:,,z' u, 2003 SCALF: 10V "WO TRIAD Etll::INEETZINGI 114(l. ',4414'H -ST R, VNE (5,40); 667-9.3.11; i -AX f,.5-10) 60>7-2260 4 Of 4 07-03-C251 '044141, . " 'a xl . 4X� NMI m UTZ, MRS 77 m R N�_Zlizj 4p 0 WE 9, 2003 ADJUSIED, PARC12 EL Y21 HO, J*f Vel, IED I' , `, rw USK VACANT ' 1 !I.-. r IRF or R i t LAI 1 L 4.3.0v I1 3 c I I rri I A" t lit 1Rj L- s 1r., rt i F -W RTC, 1BADO, ,'R I V A n•4 -r', SWMI 1-1 PIA1 CKILOIDARYY IINE ADJUST} UCl- er-TWEEm THE (AND OF MIANOF I -L C. DEHA.VEN 44GVSTERIAL C11TIHICY REDERICK !CrJU�Ijy. 14FGINIA I:V,JF-! lu:,,z' u, 2003 SCALF: 10V "WO TRIAD Etll::INEETZINGI 114(l. ',4414'H -ST R, VNE (5,40); 667-9.3.11; i -AX f,.5-10) 60>7-2260 4 Of 4 07-03-C251 '044141, . " 'a xl . 4X� NMI m UTZ, m R N�_Zlizj 4p 0 WE 9, 2003 XD PIA1 CKILOIDARYY IINE ADJUST} UCl- er-TWEEm THE (AND OF MIANOF I -L C. DEHA.VEN 44GVSTERIAL C11TIHICY REDERICK !CrJU�Ijy. 14FGINIA I:V,JF-! lu:,,z' u, 2003 SCALF: 10V "WO TRIAD Etll::INEETZINGI 114(l. ',4414'H -ST R, VNE (5,40); 667-9.3.11; i -AX f,.5-10) 60>7-2260 4 Of 4 07-03-C251 � _._ ' | m,m (Rom vown) ` Ts yy/ vamp - REZONING APPLICATION #08-05 CANTER ESTATES, SECTION V Staff Report for the Planning Commission Meeting Prepared: May 18, 2005 Staff Contact: Michael T_ Ruddy, 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: 06/01/05 Pending Board of Supervisors: 06/22/05 Pending PROPOSAL: To revise proffers associated with Rezoning Application RZ11-02, Danford Ridge/Canter Estates Section V, which rezoned 103.74 acres to RP (Residential Performance) District with proffers. LOCATION: The properties are located on the west side of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) adjacent to Canter Estates Section III. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 76 -A -22,76-A-23, and 76B-((1))-5-312 through 76B-((1))-5-385 PROPERTY ZONING: RP (Residential Performance) District PRESENT USE: Vacant (under development for residential use) ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential/Agricultural South: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential East: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Vacant PROPOSED USES: 250 Single Family Homes (Previously approved) REZ #08-05, Canter Estates Section V Page 2 May 18, 2005 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation: The Generalized Development Plan for this property appears to have a measurable impact on Front Royal Pike, Route 522; and Clydesdale Drive, Route 1507. These routes are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the current access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Canter Estates Section V rezoning application dated April 22, 2005 address transportation concerns associated with this request. As discussed, however, we would respectfully request that Proffer Statement #5 include the option of providing the funds directly to Frederick County should Revenue Sharing Funds become available. We appreciate the cooperation of the applicant in resolving potential safety concerns along the Route 522 Corridor in the revised Generalized Development Plan. 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 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. Planning & Zoning: Site History: In 1998, the County considered rezoning application #019-98, a request to rezone the subject properties from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance). This application contained various proffered conditions, such as: • Monetary contributions totaling $4,087.97 per lot. • Generalized Development Plan illustrating road access which included a connection to Route 522 (with a median cross-over), provisions for future Warrior Drive and Parkins Mill Road extended. • Maximum of 250 single-family lots; no multi -family. Rezoning application #019-98 was approved by the Board of Supervisors on January 27, 1999. In 2002, the applicant submitted a request to revise the Proffered Conditions associated with the above rezoning. This request, RZ 11-02, was approved by the Board of Supervisors on November 13, 2002. More specifically, the applicant submitted rezoning application RZ11-02 in an effort to revise the existing proffered conditions relating to the General Development Plan's transportation network. The proffer revisions reduced the project's entrance on Route 522 from a primary to a secondary entrance. This change eliminated the previously proffered improvements to Route 522 which established a median break/cross-over. The proposed entrance onto Route 522 was approved as a secondary entrance to the project and would be a right-in/right-out configuration. The primary access to this development was therefore endorsed as being through Canter Estates Section III to Clydesdale Drive and its intersection with Front Royal Pike (Route 522). Canter Estates, Section III, provides an REZ 908-05, Canter Estates Section V Page 3 May 18, 2005 entrance on to Route 522 at an existing median break. All other proffers remained consistent with the original rezoning application. In May of 2005, Canter Estates Section V, Phase 1, was subdivided and the lots contained within this subdivision, parcels 76B-((1))-5-312 through 76B-((1))-5-385, were legally recorded in the Frederick County land records by the property owner. Request to Revise Proffered Conditions: The applicant has submitted the current rezoning petition, RZ08-05, in an effort to further revise the existing proffered conditions relating to the Generalized Development Plan's transportation network. The proposed proffer revisions would eliminate the previously reduced entrance on Route 522 and would eliminate approximately 800 feet of proposed state road construction from Route 522 into the project. The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) had previously discussed the elimination of this entrance with the applicant to address a potential safety concern regarding the proffered entrance along Route 522. In addition, the proffers provide that the applicant will enter into a signalization agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) for the purpose of providing traffic signalization at the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and Clydesdale Drive. The applicant is proffering to be responsible for 50 percent of the cost of the traffic signalization at this intersection. Presently, nearly 100 percent of the traffic utilizing the existing median crossover at Clydesdale Drive and Route 522 is generated by the existing Canter Estates development. The original development is part of the non -proffered Tasker Road Land Bays Master Development Plan. Signalization of this intersection was not previously accommodated and funding has not been identified at this time for the balance of the cost of signalization. However, the proffer has been written in such a way that the developer's contribution could be used by the County or State to leverage additional funds such as revenue sharing. Future development of properties to the west of Canter Estates Section V, which would include the partial development of Parkins Mill Road, would enable an additional connection and provide for enhanced distribution to and from the Canter Estates Section V development. The revised Proffer Statement also provides two additional modifications. Firstly, the applicant has endorsed a Master Development Plan commitment regarding the future dedication of the right-of-way for the future Parkins Mill Road at no cost to Frederick County. With the incorporation of this commitment into the Proffer Statement, the County is provided with an additional assurance that the right-of-way for this road including the interparcel connection to the adjacent Artrip property would be available at such time the County requests it. Secondly, the proffer has been modified to eliminate previous references to the depiction and reservation of Warrior Drive on the southwestern portion of this property. It has been determined that the alignment of Warrior Drive does not traverse the Canter Estates Section V property. Rather, the alignment of Warrior Drive goes directly from Wakeland Manor into the Artrip Property. REZ #08-05, Canter Estates Section V Page 4 May 18, 2005 The revised proffer's for the rezoning are summarized as follows: (Revised Proffer Statement — Dated May 12, 2005) • The Applicant has proffered a total payment in the amount of $4,087.97 per lot to offset the impact to Frederick County associated with this development. - same ;elineate The applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan that is intended to the road systems that will serve the residential lots and the future location of Parkins Mill Road. — modified 1. The applicant proffers that no more than 250 single family lots shall be developed on the 103.74 acres to be zoned RP District. No multi -family units shall be constructed on this property. — same 2. The applicant has provided that the development of the property shall provide for a street layout connecting with Brabant Drive in Canter Estates Section III, and for a connection to the future extension of Parkins Mill Road. — same 3. The applicant will conduct a traffic impact study for development within the property and improvements to Front Royal Pike and the interior roads will be constructed by the applicant as determined by VDOT. — same 4. The applicant proffers to maintain the steep slope and environmental areas that are located along the property line bordering the Opequon Creek to preserve the viewshed of the Frederick Hall historic structure — same 5. The applicant shall enter into a signalization agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) for the purpose of providing traffic signalization at the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and Clydesdale Drive. The signalization agreement will provide that the applicant will be responsible for 50 % of the cost for signalization at this intersection. The 50 % cost may be provided to Frederick County and utilized as the local match for revenue sharing funds or other like funds if deemed appropriate by VDOT. - new 6. The applicant has provided a proffer that provides for the dedication of right-of-way for the reserved future Parkins Mill Road at no cost to Frederick County. This right-of-way dedication will be provided at no cost to Frederick County within 90 days after receiving a written request from Frederick County. — new (replaces Warrior Drive Proffer) STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 06/01/05 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The subject properties are presently zoned RP and the proposed residential development of the property remains consistent with the original rezoning application in terms of density, housing type, and layout. The project maintains its consistency with the goals and policies of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. The revision to the transportation proffers address an identified concern of the Virginia Department of Transportation and provides partial funding for the signalization of Clydesdale Drive and Route 522. REZ #08-05, Canter Estates Section V Page 5 May 18, 2005 Following the requirement for a public hearing, a recommendation by the Planning Commission to the Board of! 5u�-pervisors concerning this rezonin application would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission A 15 ARTRIP, W F JR 76 A3'-:,� • _ 1 ! P 1a8 --- -- i!1 o 1522 S�/ - x v 6 ✓"� 76 A 19 f 64 75 A 99A WINCHESTER ARTRIP, LLC 61 9� rn t 76 A 22c" Y 1• 76 A 23 JASBO, INC JASBO, INC 22S o <�. c 75 A 101 WAKELAND MANOR LAND TRUST75 A 100 WAKELAND MANOR LAND TRUST Map Features A lication /\/ Bridges PP N cu'vents 3 Parcels Lakes/Ponds /V Dams Agricultural B Forestral Districts w- Steams /V Retaining Walls 0 Dwipla Ct-oh N Buildings Road Centerlines n Refuge ch—h Tanks N O South Frederick W OOV E Trails S 76 A 938 -' A:7:—: i. - 76 A 92 SEE, AUDREY M �i LAKE JUANITA g d Rezoning # 08 - 05 Canter Estates Sec 5 (76 -A -22,76-A-23) 0 250 500 1,000 Feet 76 A 90A FREDERICK COUNTY SCHOOL A 76 ,A a RTRIP T� 75 A 99A WINCHESTER•ARTRIP, LLCi 76 •A' 22 Ij 76;A 123 JASBO INC iN, JASBO INC V. ............. PX, C 1037 ..' 0, - A'99 V'R "v, A W, v, T7 15� X-100 75 A 101—WAKELAND MANOR LAND TRUST: 'Jv WAKELAND,MANOR LAND TRUST Z� gh —4 Map Features 9Application ^/ BBridges Application/'V W-fts Pa -1, L 1I -%V Dams Agricultural& For.11,.1 Districts St.— I,. Retaining Wall. Double Church Buildings Road Centerlines Refuge Church N Tanks South Frederick W E Trails * S 76 Rezoning # 08 - 05 Canter Estates Sec 5 (76 -A -22,76-A-23) 0 250 500 1,000 Feet f .r SERE ,,AUDREY M LAKEJUAN17-A ut 76 A 90A PROFFER STATEMENT Greenway Engineering April 22, 2005 Jasbo, Inc. Rezoning Revised May 12, 2005 JASBO, INC. PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ# Residential Performance (RP) with Conditions to Residential Performance (RP) with Modified Conditions PROPERTIES: 103.74 -acres +/- Tax Parcels 76-((A))-22; 76-((A))-23 and 76B -((I))-5-312 through 76B -((I))-5-385 RECORD OWNERS APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: REVISION DATA: Preliminary Matters Jasbo, Inc. Jasbo, Inc. Canter Estates — Section V October 4, 2002 May 12, 2005 Pursuant to Section 15.2-2296 et. seq. of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), and the provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 165 of the Code of Frederick County, VA) with respect to conditional zoning, the undersigned applicant hereby proffers that in the event the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall approve Rezoning Application # to modify the proffer statement that received conditional zoning approval as a part of Rezoning Application #011-02 which rezoned 103.74 acres from the Residential Performance (RP) District with conditions to Residential Performance (RP) District with modified conditions, development of the subject property shall be done in conformity with the terms and conditions set forth herein, except to the extent that such terms and conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the applicant and such be approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors in accordance with the said Code and Zoning Ordinance. In the event that such rezoning is not granted, then these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and have no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon this applicant and their legal successors, heirs, or assigns. The subject property, more particularly described as the lands owned by Jasbo, Inc. (the "Applicant") being the remainder of Tax Map Parcel 76-((A))-22 and 76-((A))-23 and Tax Map Parcels 76B-((1))-5-312 through 76B-((1))-5-385 as further described by Instrument No. 050007491 in the Frederick County Clerk of the Circuit Court Office. Pile #2291B/EAw Greenway Engineering April 22, 2005 Jasbo, Inc. Rezoning Revised May 12, 2005 Monetary Contribution To Offset Impact Of Development The undersigned owners of the above-described property hereby voluntarily proffer that in the event rezoning application # is approved, the undersigned will pay to the Treasurer of Frederick County, Virginia the following amount: $ 3,484.29/lot for Frederick County Public Schools $ 591.06/lot for Frederick County Parks and Recreation $ 12.62/lot for Frederick County Fire and Rescue This payment, totaling $4,087.97/lot, is intended to offset the additional cost to Frederick County due to an increased demand on public services and will be paid at the time of the building permit issuance for each residential building lot. Generalized Development Plan The Applicant hereby proffers to develop the 103.74 -acre property in substantial conformance with a Generalized Development Plan prepared by Greenway Engineering and dated April 2005 and approved as part of the rezoning application. The Generalized Development Plan is intended to delineate the road systems that will serve the residential lots and the location of the future extension of Parkins Mill Road. Voluntarily proffered is the attached Generalized Development Plan including the following improvements: 1. The Applicant hereby proffers that no more than 250 single-family lots shall be developed on the 103.74 acres to be zoned RP District. No multi -family units shall be constructed on this property. 2. The Applicant hereby proffers that the development of the subject property shall provide for a street layout connecting with Brabant Drive in Canter Estates — Section III, and for a connection to the future extension of Parkins Mill Road on the west side of Front Royal Pike (Route 522). 3. A traffic impact study will be conducted using Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) procedures for the development within the subject property. The traffic impact study will be conducted during the Subdivision Design Plan process. Improvements to Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and the interior roads will be constructed by the applicant as determined by VDOT. 4. Steep slope and environmental areas, as defined by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, that are located along the subject property line bordering Opequon File #229113/EAW 2 Greenway Engineering April 22, 2005 Jasbo, Inc. Rezoning Revised May 12, 2005 Creek shall be maintained to preserve the viewshed of the Frederick Hall historic structure (#34-143). The location of Frederick Hall and the area along the subject property line bordering the Opequor. Creek are provided on the Generalized Development Plan and on the required Master Development Plan for the subject property. 5. The Applicant will enter into a signalization agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) for the purpose of providing traffic signalization at the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and Clydesdale Drive. The signalization agreement will provide that the Applicant will be responsible for 50% of the cost for traffic signalization at this intersection. The 50% cost for traffic signalization may be provided to Frederick County and utilized as the local match for Revenue Sharing Funds or other like funds if deemed appropriate by VDOT. 6. The Applicant will provide language within the deed of dedication for Canter Estates Section V that provides for the dedication of right-of-way for the reserved future Parkins Mill Road at no cost to Frederick County. This right-of-way dedication will be provided to Frederick County within 90 days after receiving a written request from Frederick County. Signatures The conditions proffered above shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors in the interest of the Applicant and owner. In the event the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grants this rezoning and accepts the conditions, the proffered conditions shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to other requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code. Respectfully Submitted: C Shoemaker, President Commonwealth of Virginia, City/County of b-reckri c;., To Wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Date ih /6 day of IA'ct ,� Notary Public My Commission Expires ilz �, .r .-3c, File #2291B/EAW 3 APPLICATION REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning Staff` ()&Fee Amount Paid t;1 Zoning Amendment Number Date Receive 8 PC Hearing Date (,, 05' BOS Hearing Date by 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. 2. 3. Applicant: Name: Greenway En ineering Telephone: (540) 662-4185 Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester VA 22602 Property Owner (if different from above) Name: Jasbo, Inc. (Beverley B. Shoemaker President) Telephone: (540)869-1800 - Address: P.O. Box 480 Stephens Cily, VA 22655 Contact person if other than above Name: Evan Wyatt, AICP Telephone: (540) 662-4185 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map ® Agency Comments Plat ® Fees Deed to Property ® Impact Analysis Statement ❑ Verification of taxes paid ® Proffer Statement 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: Jasbo Inc (Beverley B. Shoemaker, Presidents 6. A) Current Use of the Property: Residential B) Proposed Use of the Property: Residential 7. Adjoining Property: PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING 75 -((A)) -99A Agricultural RA 75-((A))-100 & 101 Wakeland Manor RP 76-((A))-13 Agricultural RA 76-((A))-18 Residential RA 76 -((A)) -18A Residential RA 76-((A))-19 Residential RA 76-((A))-20 Residential RA 76-((A))-21 Residential RA 76B-2-3-196 thru 211 Canter Estates RP 8. Location: The property is located at (give exact located based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route number): The subject roperty is located on the west side of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) adjacent to Canter Estates - Section III in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Information to be Submitted for Capital Facilities Impact Model 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 or intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on Page 9 of the application package. 9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number 76-((A))-22 & 76- ((A))-23 Magisterial: Fire Service: Rescue Service: 10. 11. Shawnee Millwood Millwood Districts High School: Middle School: Elementary School: Millbrook Admiral Byrd Armel Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. Acres Current Zoning Zoning Requested 103.74 RP RP Total Acreage to be rezoned The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed Single Family homes: 250 Townhome: Multi -Family Non -Residential Lots: Mobile Home: Hotel Rooms: Square Footage of Proposed Uses Office: Service Station: Retail: Manufacturing: Restaurant: Warehouse: Other 12. Signature: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors' public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right-of-way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the bet of my (our) knowledge. Applicant(s): Date: 4- Z l 16G - Owner (s): Date: 4-22-05 Canter Estates - Section V Location Map April 2005 engineering -� Special Limited Power of Attorney RCounty of Frederick, Virginia �f Planning office, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395 Know All Men By These Presents: That I (We) (Name) Jasbo, Inc. Beverly Shoemaker, President) (Phone) (540) 869-1800 (Address) P.O. Box 480, Stephens City, VA 22655 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 # 935 on Page 1531, and is described as Parcel: 76 Lot: 22 Block: A Section: _V Subdivision: Canter Estates Parcel: 76 Lot: 23 Block: A Section: _V Subdivision: Canter Estates do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) Greenway Engineering (Phone) (540) 662-4185 (Address) 141 Windy Hill Lane, Winchester, VA 22602 To act as my true and lawful attorney-in-fact for and in my (our) name, place and stead with full power and authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning application for my (our) above described Property, including: ® Rezoning (Including proffers) ❑ Conditional Use Permits ❑ Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) ❑ Subdivision ❑ Site Plan My attomey-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 (+ 200 5 Signature(s) of Virginia, City/County of Frederick, To -wit: a N6t ry Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify ary � that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument and who I (are) known to me, personally appeared before me and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this l Z day of ; � �, 200 :5 J � , ti My Commission Expires: t -c' vu ��� 2e? Notary Public PLAT r112VF TAW F DB 887 - PG 1116 CURS I RAMS T!Rqj CHORD Cl I 707.33' 468.71 I 468ZU I 611',fOOt?bY CZ 1008.85 1 8"r 1 83.7!7 1 801'ogm IRS COR.R;P lJ4,"ED 'r— 4r POST P'�'hER` Ilp r 1 I' IRF 7 ii -"F Nf41624'E 17,4Y COR. COR. OST ii PIN 76-A-23 7WERF IRF i� 66.9324 ACRES li3rY 37 688'64481 RS 222 RS L7. F. EX. 20' F.C.S.A. SEWER Sf0'25�(75Y ^SRI°• 1 ESM•T (DB 689• -PG 72) IRF IRS X11 � •. o I1 &� $P D Yi II rRAc..�11849,ry1• � s EX. N.V.P.C. DB 213 -PG 250 (UNDEFINED WIDTH) 0/H POWER LINES IPF PIN 76-A-22 ;i 36.8059 ACRES 14 �iI Naz54'12'E EJC 20' 'i� � IR FCSA WATER do ESMI'S %` 61$+r DB 793 -PG 356 P� a ' IRF IRF IRF - +" RF i4R :.EY IR f �\ U.$ 18.19')" z NOTES: �FRaVTkr 1� 28' wHIIEv`R IVmlI1.JV11 I. NO TITLE REPORT F)1RNISHED. �/W� 6AK 2. EASEMENTS MAY EASI THAT ARE NOT � SHOWN ON THIS PLAT. 3. INF -IRON ROD FOUND a0 •1;F " \ IPF - IRON PIPE FOUND IRS - IRON ROD SET 4. THE INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON IS BASED UPON AN ACTUAL FIELD RUN ELECTRONIC SURVEY MADE ON JANUARY 26, 1998. 5. PROPERTY UNE ADJOINING WINCHESTER ARTRIP LIMITED PARTNERSHIP WAS REESTABLISHED ACCORDING TO DESCRIPTION SHOWN IN DEED OF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT AS RECORDED IN DEED BOOP( 713 AI PAGE 406- I SCALE: 1" = 4Q0' DATE FEBRUARY 26 1998 o �AL'CII O kDL'rL ctns C. L �CNo. 901197 aid DWG. wmmuRD oun ary 5urvey of the Land of DANFOKD RIDOE PROPERTIE5, L.C. Raed Book 832 - Paga 829 Opequon and Shawnee Maelateriml Dletrlars Frederick County Vlrginla IV ARSI$ & LEGGE Land Surveyors, P.L.C. 139 North Cameron Street Whwhester, Virginia 72601 (140) 66,7008 Far: (SW) 667-0164 cQ 0 ;r) 01 CQ 0 cq tv it FREDERICK #MLL AMA%. MARK 0. SSW M No.022837 Z, I N (2L, V) ce. > w z o A if zn 4z ----- - -- ----- LD aye APRIL 2005 AML IFAT&S, f f ,`'i � � fj/ tir I "=300, WED BY: EAW 22919 T oV I COUNT' of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM 1. TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrator RE: Discussion: Changes to 165-30 G & H of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance; Business Signs DATE: May 18, 2005 The Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) at its April 28, 2005, meeting reviewed and discussed proposed changes to Section 165-30 G & H of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. These proposed changes would regulate business signs in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance allows business signs to have a maximum height of 35 feet and 100 square feet in area. A standardized franchised sign may have up to 150 square feet in area. The DRRS believes this permitted use is not in keeping with the rural character of Frederick County. This permitted use will add typical commercial singnage to the rural areas of the county. The DRRS would propose adding a standard height and area size for business signs in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. The current and proposed ordinance section(s) are in bold print below for your review. 165-30 G. Height. No sign shall exceed the maximum height requirement for the zoning district in which they are located. Business signs located in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District shall not exceed ten (10) feet in height. All signs other than business signs shall be no more than ten (10) feet in height. No freestanding business entrance sign shall exceed five (5) feet in height. 197 North XeriE Street, Suite 202 • Wkid-kes6er•, Virginia 22601-5000 Discussion — Changes to 165-30 G & H May 18, 2005 Page 2 156-30 H. The following restrictions shall apply to the size of signs: (1) No business sign or directional sign shall exceed 100 square feet in area. Standardized, franchised signs may exceed 100 square feet in areas but shall not exceed 150 square feet in area. In the B-1 Neighborhood Business District and RA Rural Areas Zoning District, no business signor directional sign shall exceed 50 square feet This proposed ordinance amendment is presented as a discussion item to enable the Planning Commission to raise issues and seek clarification. Staff will be available to respond to your questions. Comments raised during this discussion will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for their consideration. MRC/bad