PC 05-04-05 Meeting AgendaAGENDA
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The Board Room
Frederick County Administration Building
Winchester, Virginia
May 4, 2005
7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB
1) April 6, 2005 Minutes.....................................................................................................(A)
2) Committee Reports.................................................................................................. (no tab)
3) Citizen Comments.................................................................................................... (no tab)
PUBLIC HEARING
4) 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 (Route 7 East) and is identified with Property
Identification Number 55-A-102 in the Red Bud Magisterial District.
Mr. Cheran...................................................................................................................... (B)
5) Eastern Road Plan. Proposed amendment to the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy
Plan to alter the Eastern Road Plan. Changes include roads and proposed roads between
Berryville Pike (Route 7) and Senseny Road (Route 657), east of Greenwood Road (Route
656). The alterations are in the Red Bud Magisterial District.
Mrs. Eddy........................................................................................................................ (C)
PUBLIC MEETING
6) Limited Access Break for Kernstown Commons - Endorsement of a Limited Access
Line Break (for VA Route 37) for the development known as Kernstown Commons. This
property is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Route 11 and Route 37 in
Kernstown, in the Shawnee Magisterial District and identified by Property Identification
Number (PIN): 75-A-10. The public meeting for the endorsement of the limited access line
break is required by the Virginia Department of Transportation and the Commonwealth
Transportation Board before they formally accept the application for their review.
Ms. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (D)
FILE COPY
DISCUSSION
7) To consider a request by Greenway Engineering to include approximately 267 acres of
land into the Urban Development Area (UDA). The properties are located north of Cedar
Creek Grade (Route 622), east of Route 37 and west of the City of Winchester. The subject
properties are identified by Property Identification Numbers (PINS) 63-A-1 (only the portion
east of Route 37), 63 -A -IA, 52-A-310, 63 -A -1E, 63 -A -2L, 63 -A -2D, and 63-A-213 in the
Shawnee Magisterial District.
Also, to consider proposed modifications to the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan
(WJELUP), an element of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The Western Jubal Early Land
Use Plan covers properties bounded by Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622) to the south, Route
3 7 to the west, Merriman's Lane (Route 62 1) and the City of Winchester to the north and the
City of Winchester to the east.
Mrs. Eddy........................................................................................................................ (E)
8) Discussion — Tasker Wood Land Use Plan (TWLUP) - To consider a proposed Land
Use Plan for the Tasker Woods Area (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
1.83 acres and is bounded by Front Royal Pike (Route 522) to the east, Tasker Road (Route
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 (Route 642)
to the west. The TWLUP is in the Shawnee Magisterial District.
Mrs. Eddy........................................................................................................................ (F)
9) Discussion - Changes to Frederick County Code, Article VI, RP Residential
Performance District, Section 165-64, Recreation Facilities. This is a request from
Greenway Engineering regarding waivers of recreational facilities for housing types with
lot sizes less than 5,000 square feet.
Mr. Cheran ...................................................................................................................... (G)
10) Discussion - Changes to Frederick County Code, Subdivision of Land, Article V, Design
Standards, Chapter 144 Section 24C, Lot Requirements. This is a request from
Greenway Engineering regarding waivers of the public street requirement for age- restricted
communities.
Mr. Cheran...................................................................................................................... (H)
11) Other
r-�
u
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 April 6, 2005
PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/
Opequon District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Pat Gochenour, Red
Bud District; Marie F. Straub, Red Bud District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon
District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; June M. Wilmot, Shawnee
District; H. Paige Manuel, Member -At -Large; Barbara VanOsten, Board of Supervisors' Liaison; and Lawrence
R. Ambrogi, Legal Counsel.
ABSENT: Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; David Shore, City of Winchester Liaison
STAFF PRESENT: Eric R Lawrence, Planning Director; Michael R Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director, Mark
R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Susan K. Eddy, Senior Planner; Candice Perkins, Planner; and
Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk.
CALL TO ORDER
MINUTES
Chairman-DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
-------------
Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the Planning
Commission minutes of March 2, 2005 were unanimously approved as presented.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) — 3/24/05 Mtg.
Commissioner Unger reported that the DRRS discussed a waiver provision for recreational
facilities for housing types with lot sizes less than 5,000 square feet. Also discussed was a waiver provision for
public streets accessing small -lot subdivisions. He said the DRRS is recommending that the roads be built to
VDOT standards and the developer could use them as private streets, if desired.
Fredrick County Planning Commission
Page 1487
Minutes of April 6, 2005
Do
p f n
-2—
Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPQ— 04/11/05 Mtg.
Commissioner Light reported that the CPPS has been working on the UDA (Urban Development
Area) Study. He said that a meeting is scheduled for Monday evening, April 11, 2005.
Chairman DeHaven added that the Ad -Hoc Committee, the Planning Commission, CPPS, and
Board is actively meeting Monday and Thursday evenings on the RA (Rural Areas) Study.
PUBLIC HEARING
An Amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article VI, RP (Residential
Performance) District, Section 63, Open Space Requirements. This proposed amendment would enable a
reduction in the required open space when enhanced recreation improvements are provided.
Action — Recommended Approval
Planning Director Eric R Lawrence reported that the Planning Staff has been working with
Greenn-ay Engineering; to devel3p a new ordinance amendment which would address open space requirements 14:�-.- - _
the RP District and also, the recreational amenities that would be provided within the open space. Mr. Lawrence -
said that although the current ordinance requirements contain considerable allowance for open space, the open
sp :e weas being created tend not to be very uscful. At thee same time, the development community is asking f� f
more flexibility in designing open space so it would be more attractive. -
Mr. Lawrence said the proposed ordinance amendment would allow opportunities for a developer
to seek a waiver, which would allow them to reduce the required open space for their project, in exchange for
providing additional recreational amenities. Mr. Lawrence proceeded to give the Planning Commission some
examples of how the amendment would work.
Commission Straub inquired if the recreational units would be in -lieu of the contribution
proffered to the Parks & Recreation Department during rezoning. Mr. Lawrence replied no. He said that this
would be above and beyond what the ordinance requires for the project prior to seeking the open space waiver and
in addition to whatever requirements already existed for the property, such as proffers.
Commissioner Ours inquired if there was a definition for recreational amenity. Mr. Lawrence
said that the zoning ordinance contains a list of the types of recreational units. Mr. Lawrence added that the
benefit of this new process is that the recreational amenity would have to be approved by the Parks & Recreation
Department and ultimately, by the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation from the Planning Commission.
He further added that this request will take place at the master development plan stage.
Fredrick County Planning Commission Page 1488
Minutes of April 6, 2005
Dir
L
LI U
L!
n
—J—
Mr. Lawrence further explained that this opportunity provides greater flexibility for the
development community, possibly allowing more houses in a project, but the exchange is to provide better
amenities for the residents of the community. In no case may a developer exceed the maximum densities that
have been established for the particular project, whether that number was established through a proffer or whether
it was established through the County's gross density requirements of the zoning ordinance.
Commission.
Mr. Evan A. Wyatt with Greenway Engineering was also available to answer questions from the
Chairman DeHaven called for public comments, however, no one came forward to speak.
Commissioner Thomas commented that his only concern with this amendment was the potential
increase in management and operational costs for the homeowners associations that will be responsible for these
amenities in the open spaces. He said there could be a problem, if the facilities are not maintained; however, the
amendment does provide the development community with a more flexible environment.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Kriz,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend
approval of the adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article VI, RP
(Residential Performance) District, Section 63, Open Space Requirements, to enable a reduction in the required
open space when enhanced recreation improvements are provided.
(Note: Commissioner Watt was absent from the meeting.)
Conditional Use Permit 902 -OS of Horizon moldings, LLC for a landscape business to be located at 3636
Front Royal Pike (Rt. 522). This property is identified with P.I.N. 87-A-88 in the Shawnee Magisterial
District.
Action — Recommended Approval with Conditions
Planner Patrick Sowers reported that this proposed conditional use permit (CUP) is for a
landscape contracting business that will take place on a two -acre parcel of land located in the RA (Rural Areas)
Zoning District. He said the proposed use shall have no more than six employees at any one time and all work
will be done off site. Mr. Sowers handed out an updated sketch which showed a six-foot opaque fence around the
entire property except for the existing structure and the front yard; the updated sketch showed that the parking
had been moved behind the opaque -fenced area. He added that the applicant plans to construct four storage bays
for stone, mulch, topsoil, and sand at the southern portion of the property; parking will be provided for employees
and equipment and will not contain more than four business vehicles and two trailers. Mr. Sowers added that the
applicant has stated there will be no retail sales of nursery stock on the site.
Mr. Sowers continued, stating that there were no negative comments from any of the reviewing
agencies. He said that based on the staff's evaluation, the limited scale of the proposed use should have no
impact on surrounding properties. Mr. Sowers next read a list of reconnnended conditions, should the
Commission find the use to be appropriate.
Fredrick County Planning Commission Page 1489
Minutes of April 6, 2005 Do U U & V 7
MIC
Commissioner Thomas remarked that the applicant does not own the property, but is in the
process of buying the property. He said that if the County grants the CUP, it would be granted to someone who
docs not own the property, but may purchase it. Mr. Sowers replied that he understood the sale is pending the
CUP approval. Planning Director Eric R Lawrence added that the property owner has signed the affidavit
granting the applicant the right to go through the CUP process. He said that if the Board grants the CUP, it will
go with the property, which the property owner has authorized.
Mr. R Jerry Fletcher, the applicant, said that his intentions are for this to be a minimum facility
to support his existing operations in Frederick County. Mr. Fletcher said that he does not do retail work or any
work for homeowners whatsoever; he does not want to open this site to the public. He added that he will
primarily store stone, silt fence, and stakes, however, no chemicals will be stored on the site.
Commissioner Gochenour inquired about the use for the house. Mr. Fletcher said the house will
be used as an office and no one will live there on a permanent basis.
Chairman DeHaven asked Mr. Fletcher if he was comfortable with all the conditions mentioned
by the staff and Mr. Fletcher replied that he was.
Commissioner Wilmot inquired if Mr. Fletcher was planning to use this site only temporarily
until his primary operation gets underway. Mr. Fletcher replied that he was uncertain at this time; he said he
would like to use this facility as long as possible.
Chairman DeHaven next called for public comments and the following persons came forward to
speak:
Mr. John Goode, a resident of the Stonewall District, said that he was one of the owners of the
property and the owners did grant Mr. Fletcher the right to proceed. Mme. Goode commented that one of the
provisions of the rural areas suggests that the Ciiw- ty should be more open to allowing businesses within the rural
areas. He thought this was an opportunity to accomplish that; he said the property is on four -lane highway and
there is a flea market doom the street.
Mr. Montle W. Gibson, Jr., a resident at 155 Castle Bridge Court, said that his property
surrounds this parcel on three sides. Mr. Gibson believed the applicant conducted grading on his property to
install the septic system; he noted that the leach fields go within five feet of his property line. He also commented
about damage to trees and pipes he had installed. He said the entire rear area of the Horizon Holdings property
drains into his pond; he commented that this is where he keeps registered horses and thoroughbred cattle. Mr.
Gibson mentioned that if deliveries are made to the landscaping business by tractor trailer off of Rt. 522, there is
no place to unload or turn around and he believed a site plan should be required.
Ms. Rita Wilson, one of the co-owners of the property, came forward and stated that a new septic
field was not installed, they simply modified the existing system.
Commissioner Gochenour expressed her concern about the grading that was possibly done on
Mr. Gibson's property, the removal of trees, and the possible impact of drainage on Mr. Gibson's pond.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Morris and seconded by Commissioner Thomas,
Fredrick County Planning CommissionN�Vv
6�' Page 1490
Minutes of April 6, 2005 N
-5 -
BE IT RESOLVED, That by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Conunission does hereby
recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit #02-05 of Horizon Holdings, LLC for a landscape business to be
located at 3636 Front Royal Pike (Rt. 522), with the following conditions:
1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times.
2. No members of the general public will be allowed on site.
3. No more than six employees, four business vehicles, and two trailers shall be allowed on site as part of
this conditional use permit.
4. Screening consisting of a six-foot opaque fence shall screen all materials and vehicles from adjacent
properties.
5. No sale of nursery stock will be allowed on site.
6. Piles of dead grass clippings, brush, and/or tree trimmings shall be stored within a four-sided opaque
fenced area or disposed off site.
7. Any expansion or change of use, including any increase in the number of employees or equipment, will
require a new conditional use permit and an engineered site plan.
8. Only one sign shall be permitted on site; the sign shall not exceed four square feet in area, per Section.
165-30(H)2 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance.
The majority vote was as follows: -
YES (TO APPROVE): Wilmot, Manuel, Triplett, Kriz, Ours, Thomas, DeHaven, Light, Morris, Unger, Straub
NO: Gochenour
(Note: Commissioner Watt was absent from the meeting.)
Rezoning Application 903-05 of North Stephenson, Inc., submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone
79.13 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District and RP (Residential Performance) District to Ml (Light
Industrial) District with proffers. The properties included in this rezoning front on the east side of
Martinsburg Pike (Rt. IIN), just north of the I-81, Exit 317 north bound off -ramp, and immediately
northeast of Redbud Road (Rt. 661). The properties are identified with P.I.N.s 43-A-150, 43-A-151, 43 -A -
151A, 43-A-152, 43C-3-2, 43C-3-3, 43C-3-4, 43C -3-4A, 43C-3-5, and 43C -3-7A.
Action — Recommended Approval with Proffers
Fredrick County Planning Commission
Page 1491
Minutes of April 6, 2005
L`�
0
n
Deputy Planning Director Michael T. Ruddy presented a detailed overview of the North
Stephenson, Inc. rezoning application involving site history, conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan,
site suitability and environment, potential impacts; and the applicant's proffer statement. Some of the highlights
of Mr. Ruddy's presentation included that the parcels comprising the rezoning application are located within the
County's Urban Development Area (UDA), the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), and are encompassed by
the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan. He said the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan envisions a mix of
commercial and industrial uses- however, the North Stephenson, Inc. project proposes a rezoning of entirely
industrial land use which would enhance the ability to provide for a greater area of industrial opportunity in
conjunction with rail access. Mr. Ruddy noted that the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan encourages a sensitive
approach to the existing land use along Martinsburg Pike (Rt. 11); he said the proposed application does provide
a prohibition on commercial entrances along the western property line adjoining Redbud Road, but does not offer
one along Rt. 11. He added that accommodations for the realignment of Redbud Road, due to I-81 improvements,
have been made by the applicant in accordance with the Eastern Road Plan.
Mr. Ruddy continued, describing the key road improvements needs that directly related to this
rezoning application, specifically, the improvements to Martinsburg Pike (Rt. 11) to a four -lane facility and the
construction of a new major collector road from Rt. 11, at its intersection with the Rutherford's Farm Industrial
Park, through the Stephenson's Village project to Old Charles Town Road He said that coordination of the
commitments between the Stephenson Village project and the North Stephenson, Inc. rezoning should be clarified
to a greater extent than is presently offered because of the integral relationship between the two developments.
Mr. Ruddy explained that the County would like to ensure that the major collector road section is consistent
throughout the length of the project and that the responsibilities of the various parties are clear and coordinated.
He pointed out that the applicant's proffer indicates they will construct portions of the major collector road, based
on future TIAs for individual industrial users, rather than a commitment to provide construction through the limits
of their property as identified in the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plait. -
Regarding some of the possible impacts, Mr. Ruddy noted that a maximuiTr of 800,000 square
feet of total floor areas has been proffered and evaluated; however, the applicant has not pa vffrad a commitment
to limit the permitted uses on the property. He said that potential traffic impacts may vary depending on the
specific uses on the site; in fact, the TIA for this project demonstrates that the signalized intersection of Rt. 1 I
and the new major collector road will function at a level of service (LOS) D, assuming the full build out of
800,000 square feet of industrial land use.
Mr. Ruddy concluded his review by noting that particular attention should be paid to ensuring
the Commission is comfortable with the applicant's approach to the future relocation of the Redbud collector
road; to ensuring that the commitments as to the design, right-of-way dedication, and construction of the new
major collector road are fully addressed and clarified in the application; and to the opportunity that is presented to
address corridor appearance elements along Martinsburg Pike.
Commissioner Gochenour commented about the property being located in the vicinity of the
Third Winchester Core Battlefield Area and she was concerned about the impacts of this development on the
preserved Civil War battlefield land. Commissioner Gochenour also raised concerns about the development of
this property because of its karst features. She had further concerns about water availability.
Mr. Evan A. Wyatt with Greenway Engineering, the design engineers representing the applicant
for this project, came forward to address questions from the Commission.
Fredrick County Planning Commission rage 14Y/
Minutes of April 6, 2005 0 L! LI nA
U Y
-7 -
It was Commissioner Thomas' opinion that this was a good project and he believed the County
needed more M 1 property; however, he thought that transportation was one of the primary issues that needed to
be further addressed with this project. He proceeded to ask the applicant for a more detailed explanation of some
of the transportation -related proffers and the trip generation study by PHR&A.
Commissioner Straub inquired about the two residential properties along Rt. 11 that were not
included in the rezoning; she asked if screening and buffering would be provided for those properties. Mr. Wyatt
said that over the years, the Omps family has purchased the adjoining residential lots as they have become
available and will continue in that pursuit. He said that the properties that develop around these two RP parcels
will have to meet the buffer and screening requirements of the ordinance
Mr. Lloyd Ingram and Mr. Jerry Copp of VDOT were available to answer questions from the
Commission. Commissioner Thomas asked how VDOT planned to negotiate between multiple developers on this
project and which sections of the spine road each party would build. Mr. Ingram replied that the spine collection
road that will tie into Rt. 11 will be generated by a fust -user and the size of demand will determine how much of
the roadway will be built. Commissioner Thomas also asked when Redbud Road will be closed and relocated.
Mr. Ingram said it will not be closed until it is determined what is going to happen with I-81. He said that if the
off -ramp is shifted over, it will definitely close at that time, or if there is an opportunity prior to that, such as a
safety concern, it would be relocated earlier.
In response to questions from the Commission about how VDOT was going to coordinate the
three developers to ensure construction, VDOT's resident engineer, Mr. Jerry Copp, pointed out that this was not
a VDOT project, but it was a Frederick County project. Mr. Copp said that VDOT has been working with
Frederick County to hopefully get the network in place that Frederick County wants, but to also get the right road
network for the future trafEc that will be coming. Mr. Copp said thatitwas not up to VDOT to ensure that these
roads are built; it was up to Frederick County to ensure that the roads are built.
Commissioner Light asked if there was a- Generalized Transportation Plan produced by VDOT - -
that -covers' everything in place that could be attached to this proffer so that all parties, the Rutherfords Farm,
Stephensons Village, and North Stephenson, Inc., know what needs to happen. Mr. Copp replied no; he said that
it was up to Frederick County to tie the three different proffered projects together.
Chairman DeHaven next called for public comments and the following person came forward to
speak:
Mr. Donald Shockey, managing partner for Stephenson Associates, explained that they own the
land east of the railroad tracks and are neighbors to the Omps. Mr. Shockey said that they are in support of the
requested rezoning and hope the Commission will view it favorably.
Mr. Wyatt returned to the podium and stated that everything shown on the display, with the
exception of the dual turn lanes on Rt. 11 and the continuous right turn lane contained in the proffer, has already
received an approved public improvement plan, where VDOT, the Sanitation Authority, and the County
Engineering Department have reviewed and given their approval signatures. Mr. Wyatt assured the Commission
there was considerable control and that a physical road site plan has been approved. He added that there will also
be a plan for the north -south connection through the Omps property.
Fredrick County Planning Commission
Minutes of April 6, 2005
10
D
0
,�%,
Page 1493
7
;
ISM
Commissioner Light believed the right-of-way for the spine road needed to be wider than 50' in
order to provide expansion for future growth on Red Bud, beyond the railroad tracks heading east. He also
believed future growth capacity should be provided at the Rt. I I/Redbud Road intersection, for traffic moving
towards the Rt. 37 interchange. In addition, Commissioner Light said he would prefer to see a plan attached to
the rezoning package and proffer statement detailing the transportation plan that has been conceptually agreed
upon.
Commissioner Thomas remarked that he understood the developer's need for flexibility;
however, the rezoning package did not have sufficient detail to address the transportation issues to his
satisfaction. He agreed with Commissioner Light that a generalized site plan or a land use plan showing the
combined road plans for the three projects could possibly facilitate completion of the conceptual road network.
He was concerned about how the County and VDOT were going to facilitate this, negotiating with three different
developers, on who will build what and what will be the trigger points for construction. He also believed the
developer should build relocated Redbud Road.
Despite these transportation issues, the majority of members agreed this was a good project at
the appropriate location and the proposed use was needed in the County. They also recognized that the
transportation improvements will be dictated by the uses that come on line. It was noted that all three developers
have assured the County through their proffers that if their use triggers the transportation need, they will address
that need.
Upon motion made by Commission Light and seconded by Commissioner Kriz,
BE IT RESOLVED., That by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby
recoznmefl d approval of Re7ornng Application 403-03 of Nl orh Stephenson, 3nc,,-submitted by Greenway
Engineering, to rezone 79.13 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District and RP (Residential Performance) District to
MI (Light Industrial) District with proffers.
The majority vote was:
YES (REC. APPROVAL W/ PROFFERS): Straub, Unger, Monis, Light, DeHaven, Thomas, Ours, Kriz,
Triplett, Manuel, Wilmot
NO: Gochenour
(Note: Commissioner Watt was absent from the meeting.)
PUBLIC MEETING
Master Development Plan #06-05 of Meadows Edge (previously the Racey Tract), submitted by
Christopher Consultants, Ltd., for 228 single-family detached dwelling units. The property is located east
of I-81, 0.5 miles south of Fairfax Pike (Rt. 277), east of Town Run Lane (Rt. 1012), adjacent to the
existing Woodside Estates and Ridgefield Subdivisions. The property is identified with P.I.N. 85-A-140 in
the Opequon Magisterial District.
Fredrick County Planning CommissionD
Minutes of April 6, 2005
0 n
D
!' &
V
�jPage 1494
LI
MOM
Action — Recommended Approval
Planner Candice E. Perkins reported that this master development plan (MDP) application is to
develop 228 single-family detached cluster dwelling units on a 105.6 -acre tract of land, zoned RP (Residential
Performance). Ms. Perkins stated that the MDF appears to be consistent with the requitemenis of the zoning
ordinance and with the proffers submitted at the time of rezoning. She next proceeded to review the proffers with
the Commission.
Mr. Bryan Condi, manager with Centex Homes, the applicant, presented the MDP to the
Commission and answered questions.
Commissioner Thomas inquired about the connections to adjoining subdivisions. He questioned
the road width designated on the plan for traffic calming; he thought the standard VDOT minimum was 12 feet,
which would allow for a 24 -foot road width, not the 20' indicated on the plan. Mr. Condi replied that they will
use VDOT's minimum standards and will adjust the width on their plan, if needed.
Commissioner Thomas next asked Mr. Condi about phasing and when the connections to
adjoining developments were going to take place. Mr. Condi said that the connections to Woodside I and
Woodside II can not take place until the intersection improvements of Double Church Road and Fairfax Pike are
completed, which they anticipate to be at the end of Phase II. He added that the pool is required to be built by the
150th building permit, which is also at the end of Phase 11.
Commission members noted that as soon as the connections -are made, there will be cut-through
cinstriiction traffic. Mr. Condi referred to one -of th�;.proffers which specifiethat no construction vehicles are
permitted to use adjoining subdivisions' entrances as access to the Meadows Edge site. Mr. Condi said that he
has already expressed to the residents of the adjoining subdivisions that if this occurs, they need to report the
incident to either himself or the Countv.
Chairman DeHaven asked Mr. Condi if he had resolved the Scothom's and the Young's access
issues. Mr. Condi replied that they have met with the Scothoms and the Youngs on several occasions. He said
the access issues have not yet been completely resolved, but they are pursuing a satisfactory resolution that will
accommodate both parties. Mr. Condi believed that the alternative access they have offered to provide via
Stickley will be a better solution for these two residences than the Ridgefield Avenue exit. He explained that
there is no signalized intersection via Ridgefield Avenue; however, Stickley will be coming up to signalized
intersection, which will allow for better movement and easier departure.
Commissioner Morris recalled that the County had envisioned a future east -west road corridor
through this area and he asked if any provisions had been made for this corridor. Mr. Condi replied that through
their proffers, a right-of-way provision through the southern portion of the property has been made, should the
County request it. He pointed out the entrance that was being designed for a collector road, if the corridor was
required.
Chairman DeHaven called for public comments and the following persons came forward to
speak:
Fredrick County Planning Commission
Minutes of April 6, 2005
0
OMPY
Page 1495
-10 -
Mrs. Jane Young came forward to speak on behalf of her husband, herself, and Gary and Linda
Scothorn regarding the access issue. Mrs. Young stated that a private, farm -use road was needed; she did not
think the residents of the new subdivision would want to deal with manure trucks and hay wagons going through
their streets. She said that in addition to the private access road, they also asked for a state -maintained
egress/ingress off of the cul-de-sac to their property. Mrs. Young expressed her concern because when they
initially made the request, the developers said they would not be able to provide both accesses, it would have to be
one or the other. Mrs. Young said they believe that both accesses are necessary. In addition, on the proposed
farm -use road, there is one section where the elevation is about 10 or 10.5% and they have questioned the
steepness of the grade, especially in the winter.
Ms. Stephanie Salt, a resident of Woodside Estates II, had concerns about the drainage issues.
Ms. Salt said the developer had made a good -faith effort to come in and conduct some drainage work for her; she
said the work did not help the situation, but she did appreciate the effort. She reported having water flowing
across her property each time it rains. Ms. Salt wanted to know if the new development's storm drains were going
to be independent of the storm drains within Woodside Estates. She said the existing storm drain overflows the
collection pond in Woodside Estates and there has been considerable flooding on the other side of Trunk Drive.
In addition, Ms. Salt was also concerned about the elevations of the proposed Woodside lots coming down the
slope towards her property.
Mr. Condi stated that he was aware of Mrs. Salt's drainage problems and planned to redirect the
drainage during grading work, so that runoff will flow back into their own storm sewer system.
There were no other citizens wishing to comment, so Chairman DeHaven closed the public
comment portion of the meeting. - -
Commission members were concerned about reaching a solution to the access issue involving the
Youngs and Scothorns. Chairman DeHaven encouraged Mr. Condi to;work out this issue before the Board -of
Supervisors' review of the MDP.
The Planning Commission believed the MDP met the requirements of the zoning ordinance and
was also in accordance with the proffers submitted at rezoning. Members of the Commission were pleased with
the detail provided with the plan and believed the applicant had satisfactorily addressed the impacts of the
development
Upon motion made by Commissioner Ours and seconded by Commissioner Kriz,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend
approval of Master Development Plan 406-05 of Meadows Edge (previously the Racey Tract), submitted by
Christopher Consultants, Ltd., for 228 single-family detached dwelling units.
(Commissioner Watt was absent from the meeting.)
Fredrick County Planning Commission� Page 1496
Minutes of April 6, 2005 H
f "1 & F
-11 -
DISCUSSION
A proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Policy Plan to alter the Eastern Road Plan. Changes will
include existing roads and proposed roads between Berryville Pike (Rt. 7) and Senseny Road (Rt. 657),
east of Greenwood Road (Rt. 656). The alterations are within the Redbud Magisterial District.
Senior Planner Susan K. Eddy stated that this discussion item is a Comprehensive Policy Plan
amendment to modify the Eastern Road Plan. Ms. Eddy said that two specific revisions to the Eastern Road Plan
are under consideration: 1) Anew major collector road between Senseny Road (Rt. 657) and Berryville Pike (Rt.
7); and 2) Modifications to the classification and location of several adjacent existing and proposed roads. Ms.
Eddy described in detail the additions and modifications proposed. Ms. Eddy stated that the Transportation
Committee considered the proposals at their meeting of March 1, 2005 and unanimously recommended approval.
Subsequently, the Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) recommended approval on a
majority vote at their meeting of March 14, 2005.
Chairman DeHaven expressed concern over the intersections of the new spine road with Rt. 7
and with Senseny Road. Chairman DeHaven did not want to create bottlenecks when Rt. 37 is built and Rt. 37
intersects Rt. 7 and Senseny Road. He gave as an example the existing intersections at Redbud Road, Interstate
81, and Rt. 11 North where too much traffic is brought across to intersect with existing roads that are already near
or exceeding capacity. He recognized the benefits of the connection in the near term, but he did not want to create
a future bottleneck.
Commissioner Straub agreed. She pointed out a similar situation with Senseny Road, which is a
heavily -raveled, two-lane road that bottlenecks at both ends. Commissioner Straub hoped to see some.
improvements to Senseny Road as well.
Chairman DeHaven called for public corrzniernf,: and the following peryonss, cw me fo>m and to
speak:
Mr. Larry Edmunson, a resident on Greenwood Road, said that one of the proposed major
collector roads is shown through his property. Chairman DeHaven replied that it is a part of what has been
proposed as the Eastern Road Plan; however, it could not take place without Mr. Edmunson's or a successive
owner's participation.
Ms. Lisa Riggleman-Gross came forward to speak for her mother, who owns property on
Senseny Road, adjacent to the Canyon, LC property. Ms. Riggleman-Gross said that when Rt. 37 comes to
fruition, it will divide their property once and the spine road proposed in the Eastern Road Plan will divide her
family's property yet a second time. She was concerned about how this will impact her family's property in the
future. Ms. Riggleman-Gross also had concerns over the configuration of the intersection of the spine road, Rt.
37, and Senseny Road.
Fredrick County Planning Commission
Page 1497
Minutes of April 6, 2005
D
LI L!
n
V
V
-12 -
OTHER
UPDATE ON THE REVOCATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 930-99 OF WINCHESTER
MOTOR SERVICE (THE VAN MAN)
Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R Cheran reported that as of today, the status of
the property has not changed. Mr. Cheran said the Fire Marshal is aware of the situation on the property and the
County's recycling coordinator has cited the property owner. Mr. Cheran stated that the CUP will be brought
back to the Planning Commission for their recommendation on May 4, 2005.
ADJOURNMENT
No further business remained to be discussed and the Planning Commission adjourned by a
unanimous vote at 10:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman
Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary
Fredrick County Planning Commission
Page 1498
Minutes of April 6, 2005
M
R n
C
•
•
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator G�-G" E�-
RE: Revocation of Conditional Use Permit #30-99 for Winchester Motor Service
("The Van Man")
DATE: April 21, 2005
The Frederick County Board of Supervisors approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 00-99 for Winchester
Motor Service on January 26, 2000, to operate a Public Garage without Body Repair on property identified
with P.I.N. 455-A-102 in the Red Bud Magisterial District. This CUP was approved with the following
conditions:
1) All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times.
2) Fire Marshall comments to be -complied with within 30 days of permit approval.
3) All work shall be accomplished within an enclosed structure.
4) Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements; sign shall not
exceed four (4) square feet.
5) No outdoor storage of equipment associated with the business.
6) No more than five (5) vehicles awaiting repair shall be permitted.
7) Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday.
8) No expansion of the legally non -conforming salvage yard will be permitted.
9) Any change of use or expansion of the business 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 December 21, 2004, and noted the presence of
tractor trailers, debris, and tires located on the property. A letter of violation was issued, as was a notice of
revocation for violations of the conditions of Conditional Use Permit 30-99. These violations constitute a
violation of the conditions placed on Conditional Use Permit 30-99, approved bythe Frederick County Board
of Supervisors on January 26, 2000.
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Wincizester, Virginia 22601-5000
Frederick County Planning Commission
CUP 430-99 Winchester Motor Service
April 21, 2005
Staff conclusions for the 02/02/05 Planning Commission meeting: The holder of Conditional Use Permit
30-99 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' 0-99 would be
appropriate. This recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisor for their consideration.
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY & ACTION OF THE 02/02/05 MEETING: The property
owner reported that, with the help of her attorney, the lessee is being evicted from her property for violating his
lease agreement. The owner stated that she has removed approximately $1,500 worth of tires in the previous
two weeks; however, she needed additional time to remove the remaining tires and debris left by her tenants.
She said that she did not want to lose the CUP because it would affect her ability to generate income to clean
up and maintain the property. Her long-term plans were to clean up the property the best she could, fill it in,
and then sell the property.
Four adjoining property owners spoke to the Commission about the poor appearance of the property, referring
to it as an "eye sore" and a "real mess." Along with the parking of tractor -trailers, which was the original
source of initiating the CUP revocation, the adjoining property owners reported seeing tires, mobile homes,
drurus which possibly contained chemicals, an abandoned vehicle, and debris. They also reported observing_..
fluids from vehicles and drums being emptied onto the ground and they were concerned about the long-term
environmental affects this type of activity has had on the property over the years, especially the creek thatruns.
through thomiddle of the site. They were also concerned about the safety -issues, because neighborhood
children play in the area, .and the appearance, because of the proximity of their neighborhood and an adjoining
battlefield site. One adjoining property owner reported observing someone living in one of the mobile homes,
evidenced by lights at night and a portable toilet.
Commission members agreed the property needed to be cleaned up and they recognized the property owner's
intentions to clean up the property. Nevertheless, they believed the drums needed to be investigated to
determine if chemicals were present, the property and creek needed to be evaluated for pollution, the mobile
homes needed to be inspected to find out if they were habitable, and a site inspection needed to be conducted
to determine the overall status of the property. It was decided that the Zoning Administrator would coordinate
a site visit which included the County's engineer, the building official, the fire marshal, and possibly, an agent
from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ).
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to table the revocation of this CUP for 90 days to allow the
property owner time to clean up the site and to come into compliance with the CUP; and, at the end of the 90 -
day period, this CUP will come back to the Planning Commission for action with a staff report containing an
evaluation of site clean-up and CUP compliance. If the owner is in compliance and the recommendation of the
Commission is for the continuation of the CUP, the staff will automatically schedule an additional site visit in
six months to verify that the property continues to be properly maintained and the owner remains in
compliance with the conditions of the CUP.
Frederick County Planning Commission
CUP #30-99 Winchester Motor Service
April 21, 2005
As of April 21, 2005, there has been no change in the status of this property. The Fire Marshal has visited the
site, as has the Recycling Coordinator and charged the property owner with violations of the County Code.
Staff has visited the property and has met with the property owner to discuss the violations of Conditional Use
Permit 30-99 (CUP 30-99). The property is not in compliance with the conditions of CUP 30-99. These
violations include:
1. A trucking operation.
2. Unused tires and debris.
3. Inoperable vehicles.
Staff conclusions for the 04/04/05 Planning Commission meeting:
The holder of Conditional Use Permit 30-99 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 30-99 would be appropriate. This
recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisor for their consideration.
(Note: Commissioners Kriz and Light were absent from the meeting.)
SHEILA M
W
t
04,
i
s
o�
N s1
r0 w
n�
f
{` w
'9
90
Y
�'t�
G9y
T
SSS
c
v'
ca
RP
9s
�"
S
O,yC22So
b yQ
rte.
S
4
`y Q
ry6°`�2�G`r
O
o
�
SHEILA M
W
t
z
w
r
v
�
O2
h
v ee
ca
�
OQ
b yQ
S
4
`y Q
ry6°`�2�G`r
O
o
�
AL
V
N
zL
1'r
J
BB
N
h
y
V
ty
sb
Z
m
at
cj
NtN
1299
/
/f
♦
�
Ca�a�rY
�� apo
�
5
Map Features
/�/ Bridges
Applicalion ^/ Culverts
U Lakes/Ponds **V Dams Agrkultural & Potestral Distriets
W.- Streams /\ Retaining Wells Double Church
Buildings Road Centerlines �j::;}.' Refuge Church N
T-. a�•, South Frederick
N W E
..,� Trails
S
RfD@UORUN LLC
RP
/ O
3
�
`
O2
h
r
ca
�
OQ
S
4
`y Q
ry6°`�2�G`r
O
o
�
CUPR#30-99
Winchester Motor Service
(55-A-102)
0 75 150 300
Feet
r�
COUNTY of FREDERICK
rof Planning and Development
540/665-5651
MEMORANDUM FAX: 540/665-6395
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Susan K. Eddy, AICP, Senior Planner �SY—e'
RE: Public Hearing — Revisions to the Eastern Road Plan
DATE: April 18, 2005
Introduction
The Frederick County Eastern Road Plan is an element of the Comprehensive Policy
Plan. The Eastern Road Plan covers the eastern portion of the County and describes
existing and proposed roads according to their functional classification. The
Comprehensive Policy Plan states that 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 also be improved as necessary by adjacent
development to implement the intentions of the plan.
The first map (attached) shows in detail the relevant section of the existing Eastern Road
Plan. The second map shows in detail the proposed revisions. The third map shows the
Eastern Road Plan as it is proposed to be adopted.
Proposed Revisions
The construction of a new road from the southern end of the Canyon, LC property, as
shown on map 2, north to a signalized intersection with Berryville Pike (Route 7) was
proffered with the Haggerty rezoning. (This road has also been referred to as the spine
road.) The first proposed revision to the Eastern Road Plan is to classify this spine road
as a major collector road and to show the extension of this major collector road to
Senseny Road (Route 657). This major collector road would be parallel to Route 37 and
would not be a replacement for the future Route 37.
The proposed major collector road provides a connection between Senseny Road and
Route 7 in the far eastern portion of the county. Therefore, the future connection shown
on the Existing Eastern Road Plan between Senseny Road and Route 7 (via Morning
Glory Drive, a new road through three properties to the north, and Valley Mill Road
(Route 659)) is proposed to be deleted.
-1-
107 Porth Iden,' Street, Suite 202 ® Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Discussion Item — Revisions to the Eastern Road Plan
April 18, 2005
Instead, it is proposed that a new major collector road be established between a re-routed
Valley Mill Road and the spine road on the Canyon LC, property. The Haggerty
rezoning included a proffer that land on the proposed route of such a road on the Canyon,
LC property would be reserved for access to adjacent properties. Advantages of this
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 the traffic in the area would
access Route 7 at a signalized intersection.
Transportation Committee
The Transportation. Committee considered these proposals at its meeting of March 1,
2005. Mr. Jerry Copp, Resident Engineer with the VDOT Edinburg Residency, was in
attendance to answer questions. Committee members questioned the location of the
spine road and the future Route 37, particularly at its intersection with Route 7. Mr.
Copp assured committee members that it appeared possible to accommodate both the
spine road and the future Route 37 in this area. Detailed design would take place at a
later stage. The Transportation Committee unanimously recommended the proposed
revisions to the Eastern Road Plan.
Comprehensive Plan and Programs Subcommittee
The -Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPP$)- considered these plan
revisions at its meeting on Ma'-rch-14, 2005. Members expressed concern that the spine
road would prejudice the future Route -37 in this area. They also had -concerns over the
intersection of Route 37 and the spine road at Ratite 7 -and at S-eriseny ad.. In addition
it was noted that building a spine road rather than portions of Route 37 was a waste of
resources. Members voted 11-1 to recommend approval of the revised Eastern Road Plan
to the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission — Discussion Item
The Planning Commission considered these plan revisions at its meeting on April 6,
2005. Planning Commissioners expressed concern over the intersections of the new
spine road with Route 7 and with Senseny Road. Commissioners did not want to create
bottlenecks when Route 37 is built and Route 37 intersects Route 7 and Senseny Road.
Commissioners also expressed concern over traffic today and in the future on Senseny
Road itself.
Two members of the public spoke. A resident of Greenwood Road had questions over
the timing of road construction. The owner of the property adjacent to the Canyon, LC
property to the south, Mrs. Lisa Riggleman, spoke as well. She pointed out that Route 37
will divide her property and the proposed spine road would further divide her property.
She stated this would impact her property should the family ever develop the property.
Mrs. Riggleman also had concerns over the configuration of the intersection of the spine
road, Route 37 and Senseny Road.
-2-
Discussion Item — Revisions to the Eastern Road Plan
April 18, 2005
Board of Supervisors — Discussion Item
The Board of Supervisors considered these plan revisions at its meeting on April 13,
2005. One member of the public spoke on this item during the citizen comment portion
of the Board meeting. Mr. Tim Stafford, the owner of Valley Mill Farm on Valley Mill
Road, spoke in support of the proposed revisions.
Members were generally pleased with the proposed revisions. One Suprvisor had
concerns with the spine road running parallel to the future Route 37. Mr. Ben Lineberry
with VDOT stated that VDOT favored both the spine road and a parallel Route 37,
because the spine road would address commuter traffic by funneling it to Route 7. The
Board voted unanimously to send the proposed revisions to the Eastern Road Plan
forward for public hearing. (Motion by Dove, second by Forrester.)
Following the required public hearing, a recommendation regarding this
Comprehensive Policy Plan revision to the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate.
Attachments
SKE/bad
-3-
1FJfz
. 'r
y � �
a.
s'
52
37
50
Pi Rd_ -
Rd ` � -
50
�
_ .
>
j 5 -
j IBJ i
37 � son
m
CedarCrer c
/\ / f; SPIT -g Rd
a - c 522
S G �Ipsq�en ChurcA Ln Of [ � � /3y
` P G,
i
iy 501
Qd
Miff Rd N
�� iA-'ice, Para
WE
522
S
%�h�d \-
��,!� /V County Boundary
County Roadways
Prima Roads
/V Secondary Roads
/ Tertiary Roads
/V New Major Collector
277 ,r
�VsNew Minor Collector
1 y % /q Improved Major Collector
^ + Improved Minor Collector
/VNew Major Artery
i
May 11, 2005
IFrederick County, Virginia Department of Planning & Development
C�
•
•
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planntng and Development
540/665-5651
FAIL: 54C/665-6395
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Candice E. Perkins, Planner Il � �':
DATE: April 15, 2005
RE: Request for Endorsement of Limited Access Line Break for Kernstown
Commons
The Frederick. County Department of Planning and Development has received a request from
Patton Harris Rust & Associates, PC, for an endorsement of a limited access line break for the
project known as Kernstown Commons. This property is located at the southeast corner of the .
intersection of Route 11 and Route 37 in Kernstown. As you may recall, this is the same
property that was recently brought forth to the Planning Commission at their March 2, 2005
meeting for their Master Development Plan (MDP). The MDP for this site was approved by the
Board of Supervisors with conditions at their March 23, 2005 meeting. The MDP provided
depicted three entrances (two full commercial entrances and a right-in/right-out only), the
southern entrance met the appropriate VDOT distance spacing; however, the two northern
entrances would require a limited access break from VDOT. The request that has been submitted
to the county is only asking for the endorsement of a limited access line break for the northern
full commercial entrance; the right-in/right-out has been eliminated from the project. The
entrance that the applicant is requesting would be signalized and aligns with the off ramp of
Route 37.
The request for this endorsement of the limited access line break is the first step for the applicant
to begin the process for review from the Commonwealth Transportation Board, which will
ultimately decide if this break will be granted. A recommendation to the Board of Supervisors is
being requested of the Planning Commission by the applicant. Ultimately, a resolution regarding
this break in access is being sought form the Board of Supervisors. Included with this memo is
the request for the endorsement as well as a map of the site provided by the applicant.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact me.
CEP/bad
r
107 North Kent Streei, Suite 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
WATTS, 63 A
O
75A 6 B 41 A
VANCO, LLC
75A 6 B 41
VANCO, LLC
AP
O
s�F�Qj��S
71'0' 7 ,
Fs
81
!�c P J���c� sgO�cy2q q
O
tea. oA�s
dos v
l F`C
q
HORTON NVES 2 NTS, LLC
75 A 2B
VALLEY PIKE, LLC 75 3 21
JFGARDEN OF EDEN,��C
M.
75 A 10
ORANGE PARTNERS, LLC
75 A 11C
t AUTO SALES, INC
75 A 10A
WINCHESTER -81 L L C
0
Limited Access Line Break
For Kernstown Commons
(75-A-10)
0 250 Sao
1,000 1,500
Feet
75 A 90
GLAIZE DEVELOPMENTS, INC
GLAIZE
75 A 89
GLAIZE DEVELOPMENTS, INC
INC
53 A37
37
, r
WA
IL
4 ,� • 1
i 7 E41A f
vANCD, Lir �7 r 37
/ ..
rVb}It:O LLC 37IL
;#
�f1'PO'<
ALI
� � ,.j\ ,+yt*' ��•' _' "�Cj � . , � t yjid .iJi�:` F'a;}c'�fJF " .� �':
75 A SO ,!
�o�p�� { M`• y� ,, _ 3 A DEVELOPMENILS, INC
64
Elk
�: .�: �' �,� ,,{ ♦ . •�.y aid 'n . ' ` 1
F �ORT{SX?
75 A 11C
SALES, I
�;,LAfeJr'✓c 1r1EJCiS,b$c
A _ 28
VALK � LLM'+,, 75 "3 21 N LlG �s '.4 1 . � � �� � , 5
E
F
ED ; A <. 7 . $qe
N9 r
/ GARDE�.lRr i�Flrl_diYLNIS,INC ..
A Limited Access Line Break
0D5M For Kernstown Commons N
(75-A-10) w E
750 500 1.000
�. 1,500
Feet
gilbert w. cliffo: d & associates —:—
a division of Patton Harris Rus & Associctes, ac
Encineers- Surveyors_ Planners. Landscape Arcnitects. _ � 0
MAR 2
March 25 2005
Mr. Eric R.Lawrence, AICP ~�-
Director of Planning
Department of Planning and Development
County of Frederick, Virginia
107 N. Kent St.
Winchester, Virginia 22601
RE: Kernstown Commons
Subject: Request for Endorsement of Limited Access Line Break
Dear Mr. Lawrence:
This correspondence is a formal request on behalf of Orange Partners, LLC for
CORPORATE: Frederick County's endorsement of a break in the limited access line of VA Route
chantilly 37. The break is sought to allow an entrance to the proposed Kernstown Commons
VIRGINIA. OFFICES: lifestyle center at the existing intersection of U.S. Route 11 and the southbound
Chantilly interchange ramps of VA Route 37. The Commonwealth Transportation Board
Bfi rgewoter (CTB) possesses sole authority for granting limited access line breaks, but will only
F-ederick5burg consider such proposals following the completion of public hearings and -an
[eesburg affirmative review by the local governing body. The requested endorsement is
Richmond therefore required to initiate the formal review process by the Virginia Department
Virginia Bea":h of Transportation (VDOT) and, ultimately, the CTB.
Winchester
Woodbricge The subject property is zoned B2 (Business General) and consists of 31.5327 acres.
WoRATORIES: The site is located on the east side of U.S. Route 11 (galley Pike), south and
chantilly adjacent to VA Route 37, comprising the southeast quadrant of the VA Route 37
Fredericksbu-g interchange area. The limited access line for VA Route 37 extends south along the
MARYLAND OFFICES: east side of U.S. Route 11, to include approximately 630 feet of the subject
Baltimore property's frontage.
Columbia
Frederick Baekaround and Tusfific Now
Germantown
Holywood The initial and preferred design of Kernstown Commons included two points of
WEST VIRGINIA access from US Route 11, and was the basis for early land planning efforts as well as
OFFICE: negotiations with prospective commercial tenants. Under this favored scenario, the
Martinsburg primary entrance would be located opposite the southbound ramps of VA Route 37
and a secondary entrance would be situated further south on the site. The
T 540.667.2139 circulation pattern enabled by this arrangement would promote ideal emergency
F 540.665.0493 services access while also allowing ease of customer access via alternative entrance
1 17 East Piccadi'ly Strepoints.
Winchester, `dA, t
22601
The alignment of the primary entrance with the exit ramps of VA Route 37 would
permit destination trips to move directly from VA Route 37 into the site. The
availability of this entrance would result in the efficient management of project -
generated trips, as traffic could access the site without performing the circuitous
series of turns on US Route 11 necessary if only one entrance was provided. The
provision of a primary entrance aligned with the exit ramps was therefore
recognized as advantageous both in terms of the operation of Kernstown
Commons and function of US Route 11. The preliminary Master Development
Plan (MDP) for the project depicted this preferred entrance arrangement, and was
subsequently circulated for review agency comment.
Research conducted by VDOT during its review period revealed the presence of the
limited access line along the frontage of the property. The impact of the limited
access line on project design was profound, as the preferred primary entrance was
required to be eliminated pending approval of the limited access line break. As
such, the MDP for Kernstown Commons formally submitted to Frederick County
included a single entrance for project access, the location of which was generally
consistent with that of the original secondary entrance (see MDP #04-05,
Kernstown Commons). This MDP received authorization for administrative
approval from the Board of Supervisors on March 23, 2005, with the understanding
that the limited access break request would be brought back for County review as a
separate action item.
If ultimately approved by the CTB, the limited -:access line -break sought by Orange
Partners, LLC would allow the installation of the primary project entrance as
originally planned opposite the southbound VA Route 37 exit ramps. It is noted
that the preliminary plans for the project also included a right-mi/right-out entrance
north of the proposed primary entrance. This entrance has been eliminated from
the project scope and is not proposed with this request. Attached is an exhibit
depicting the entrances proposed for Kernstown Commons as well as the location
of the existing limited access line.
The proposed limited access line break is essential to realizing the full development
potential of Kemstown Commons, the design of which promises its emergence as
the premier commercial destination for both citizens and guests of Frederick
County. The proposed primary entrance conforms with sound site planning
practices by enabling multiple access points for project -generated traffic. As stated
previously in this letter, the availability of multiple entrances will promote a safer
and more efficient commercial project, as access will be maximized and the safety
risks posed by a single access point eliminated. Approval of the requested limited
access line break is imperative for such improved site design to be achieved. As
such, the request by Orange Partners, LLC merits favorable consideration and
endorsement by Frederick County in order to allow its full evaluation by VDOT
and the CTB.
Proposed Process -or Public We and Endorsement
The VDOT process for initiating limited access break proposals requires that
advertised public hearings be conducted as a precursor to action by the local
governing body. The VDOT Edinburg Residency has indicated that these public
hearings may be held coincident with the Planning Commission and Board of
Supervisors meetings during which the proposal is scheduled for review. It is
therefore requested that the limited access line break request for Kemstown
Commons be included as a public hearing item on the April 20, 2005 Planning
Commission agenda, to be followed by a Board of Supervisors public hearing on the
next appropriate agenda. Assuming approval by the Board, a resolution formally
endorsing the limited access break is desired.
Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions or concerns
�+ regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
PATTON HARRIS RUST & ASSOCIATES, pc
A10�.
C.E. Maddox, Jr., P.E., Senior Vice President
CEM/kf
Attachment
cc: John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator
Jerry A. Copp, Transportation Resident Engineer, VDOT
Lloyd A. Ingram, Transportation Engineer — Land Development, VDOT
Steve Nerangis, Orange Partners, LLC
Christopher Mohn, AICP, PHR+A
6 ,aEUNEATED UMITED ACCESS UNE
1 -1s -os j 1
5 REVISIONS PER COUNTY STAFF COMMENTS 13-15-05 ? ; ;
4 ;ADDED ROUTE 11 IMPROVEMENTS
3 iAODED STOPUGHf PER C. MOHN
.1-20-05 I '
2�—REVISIONS PER LINKED ACCESS UNE
ft 22-pa-1--'---� ....._i
1 :REVISED LOT NUMBERS PER OWNER
9 2-04-
LTH OF ;. 17. Cl f or -..3i ..} so"
U
- - — -so-2;p.
PROPOSED
LIMITED ACCESS
LINE BREAK
KERNSTOWN COMMONS
COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA
CEM =URVIE
~. .,
Dr'
TWP I�- MARCH 2005
CMM V N
®iTPdTY ®f FREDERICK
Pe of Planning and. Development
540/665-5651
MEMORANDUM FAX: 540/665-6395
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Susan K. Eddy, AICP, Senior Planner SKC-
RE: Discussion Item — Request for Expansion of the Urban Development
Area (UDA) and Proposed Modifications to the Western Jubal Early
Land Use Plan
DATE: April 21, 2005
This is a request for an expansion of the Urban Development Area (UDA) to include the
Solenberger/Bridgeforth properties (CPPA application #08-04).
The Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) first discussed this
request at their meeting on September 13, 2004. CPPS members were generally
supportive of this request and suggested that a land use plan accompany this UDA
expansion request. Staff was directed to modify the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan
(as adopted by the Board of Supervisors on February 11, 2004) to incorporate the whole
quadrant bound by the City of Winchester to the east, Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622) to
the south, Route 37 to the west and Merriman's Lane and the City of Winchester to the
north. (Two very small parcels in this area, not part of the Solenberger/Bridgeforth
properties, are therefore also included in the proposed UDA expansion.)
The item was further discussed at CPPS meetings on October 11, 2004, November 8,
2004, March 14, 2005 and April 11, 2005. The focus of much of the discussion was
transportation, specifically how an interchange at Jubal Early Drive and Route 37 could
be constructed. At the CPPS meeting on April 11"', members agreed to revised
transportation wording. I would note that the applicant's representative, Mr. Evan Wyatt
of Greenway Engineering, had proposed alternate text for one paragraph. While this was
not accepted by the CPPS, a copy is attached for your information.
A modified version of the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan and an accompanying land
use map, as endorsed by the CPPS on April 11th, is attached.
107 North Kept Street, Suite 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Request for Expansion of the UDA and Proposed Modifications to the WJELUP\
April 21, 2005
Page 2
Staff is seeking comments from the Planning Commission regarding this UDA expansion
request and the proposed modifications to the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan that
could be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors during their discussion of this request.
SKE/bad
Attaclunents
WJELUP — Draft Dated April 4, 2005
Applicant suggested wording for the 6tn paragraph on transportation
The development of new road systems, including a new interchange at Route 37, new
signalization and improvements to existing road systems are all elements of this plan. It will be
the responsibility of private property owners and developers to insure that the transportation
improvements identified in this land use plan are accounted for through construction, right-of-
way dedication or both. It is expected that the identified transportation improvements will be
accomplished by property owners and developers through land development activities within the
study area. However, it is reasonable to expect that regionalized improvements such as a new
interchange at Route 37 and associated improvements to the Route 37 mainline between the
Cedar Creek and Route 50 West interchanges will be accomplished through partnerships,
possibly including public-private partnerships with the Virginia Department of Transportation,
Frederick County and/or the City of Winchester. No rezoning should be approved until the
Board of Supervisors is certain that the transportation impacts associated with land development
proposals within the study area are adequately mitigated.
- 3 -
UDA EXPANSION REQUEST -
4�cK eO� SOLENBERGER/BRIDGEFORTH PROPERTIES &
w e PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE WESTERN JUBAL
EARLY LAND USE PLAN
Staff Report for the Planning Commission Meeting
Prepared: April 18, 2005
Staff Contact: Susan K. Eddy, AICP, Senior Planner
This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the
Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in the discussion of this
request. It may also be useful to others interested in this comprehensive planning matter.
CPPB:
CPPS:
CPPS:
CPPS:
CPPS:
Planning Commission:
Board of Supervisors
Reviewed
09/13/04
10/11/04
11/08/04
03/14/05
04/11/05
05/04/05 (Discussion)
05/25/05 (Discussion)
Action
Discussed
Discussed
Discussed
Discussed
Recommendation forwarded
Pending
Pending
PROPOSAL: To expand the Urban Development Area (UDA) by 267 acres and to revise the
Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan.
PLANNED USE: Residential and Mixed Use (Commercial and Residential)
LOCATION: The properties are located east of Route 37, north of Cedar Creek Grade (Route
622) and west of the City of Winchester.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee
PROPERTY ID NUMBERS FOR UDA EXPANSION: 63-A-1 (only the portion east of
Route 37), 63 -A -IA, 52-A-310, 63 -A -1E, 63 -A -2L, 63-A-21), 63A-213
Solenberger/Bridgeforth Properties
April 18, 2005
Page 2
PLANNING STAFF EVALUATION:
Existing Conditions
The subject sites, as well as the adjacent properties, are presently zoned RA and are in residential
and agricultural uses. Parcels southeast of the subject sites are zoned RP (Residential
Performance District) and are being developed for age -restricted Housing (the Village at Harvest
Ridge). Sites further to the east in the City of Winchester are zoned High Density Residential
District (HR) and Residential Office District (RO-1) and contain a mix of housing types with
some offices along Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622).
Comprehensive Policy Plan
Land Use Plan
The subject properties proposed for UDA expansion are not included in any of the small
study area land use plans included in the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan.
The properties adjacent to the north (previously known as the White/Marshall properties)
are included in the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan (WJELUP) adopted by the Board
of Supervisors on February 11, 2004. The WJELUP calls for both residential use and a
mix of residential and commercial uses.
Staff Comment: The Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPB), when
they considered this UDA expansion, requested that staff modify the Western Jubal Early
Land Use Plan (adopted February 11, 2004) to include a wider area including this UDA
expansion area. A modified version of the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan, as
proposed by the CPPS is attached.
Transportation
The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan does not cover this portion of
the County. The Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan
identifies transportation improvements north of the subject UDA expansion properties.
These improvements include the extension of Jubal Early Drive to an urban divided four -
lane standard, a new interchange with Route 37 and a major collector road in a north -
south direction to connect Jubal Early Drive and Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622).
The Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS) Plan identifies improvements to
Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622) from the existing rural two-lane standard to an urban
four -lane divided standard and calls for improvements to the Cedar Creek Grade/Route
37 interchange. In the immediate vicinity, the WATS Plan calls for the extension of
Jubal Early Drive from Meadow Branch Drive to Route 37 (to an urban four lane
standard) and the construction of a new interchange at Route 37 and the extended Jubal
Solenberger/Bridgeforth Properties
April 18, 2005
Page 3
Early Drive. The WATS study also calls for the widening of Route 37 to six lanes from
Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622) to the extended Jubal Early Drive.
Policies endorsing the transportation improvements called for in the above mentioned
plans in the Western Jubal Early Area are included in the attached plan.
Community Facilities and Service
This proposed UDA expansion, together with the land already planned for residential
development north of the these sites, would lead to a large number of school age children
concentrated in a small area that is unprecedented in the western part of Frederick
County. It will be incumbent upon future development within the overall WJELUP area
to provide sites for school facilities, to mitigate the impact of the large number of school
children resulting from this development. Language to this effect is included in the
attached plan. The Frederick County School Board passed a resolution on January 18,
2005 requesting that the West Jubal Early land Use Plan include 25-30 acres for a multi -
campus school site and further that the school site be consistent with the Community
Facilities and Services policies of the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan.
It may also be necessary to provide other public facilities in this area to serve this new
development. It would then be necessary for future development to provide a site for
other public facilities to mitigate the impact resulting from this development. Language
to this effect is included in the attached plan.
The Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) does not currently serve this area.
The FCSA would be the water service provider and the sewer service provider for this
geographic portion of the County unless their Board grants the authority for service to the
City of Winchester Public Utilities.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PROGRAMS SUBCOMMITTEE (CPPS) SUMMARY
& ACTION OF 09/13/04 MEETING:
The CPPS was generally supportive of this UDA expansion request. Concerns were raised,
however, on a number of topics. Primary concerns were the impact of this proposed
development on the transportation network and the impact on schools and other public facilities.
The CPPS suggested that a land use plan be prepared to accompany this UDA expansion request.
Staff was directed to modify the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan (as adopted by the Board of
Supervisors on February 11, 2004) to incorporate the whole quadrant bound by the City of
Winchester to the east, Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622) to the south, Route 37 to the west and
Merriman's Lane and the City of Winchester to the north.
Solenberger/Bridgeforth Properties
April 18, 2005
Page 4
COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PROGRAMS SUBCOMMITTEE (CPPS) SUMMARY
& ACTION OF 10/11/04 MEETING:
The CPPS was generally supportive of this UDA expansion request. Staff presented a modified
version of the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan (as adopted by the Board of Supervisors on
February 11, 2004) to incorporate the whole quadrant bound by the City of Winchester to the
east, Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622) to the south, Route 37 to the west and Merriman's Lane
and the City of Winchester to the north. CPPS members discussed the modified plan, but felt
that staff had not clearly articulated their concerns over transportation, particularly the planned
interchange at Jubal Early Drive and Route 37 and their concerns with schools and other public
facilities.
The applicant requested that the proposed school site not be identified on a map, but rather be
described in the text with the final location and alignment remaining flexible to ensure that it
conforms to final engineering studies and School Board considerations.
The CPPS directed staff to further modify the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan to take
account of CPPS concerns and the applicant's concern with an identified school site.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PROGRAMS SUBCOMMIT'T'EE (CPPS) SUMMARY
& ACTION OF 11/08/04 MEETING:
Staff presented a further modified version of the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan.
Transportation improvements, especially the new interchange at Jubal Early Drive and Route 37,
were discussed. Possible public/private partnerships were considered. Action on this item was
deferred until the next CPPS meeting. Staff was directed to revise the Western Jubal Early Land
Use Plan text on transportation improvements to add back in language on public/private
partnerships.
The applicant submitted a letter to the Planning Department dated December 2, 2004 requesting
that the Solenberger/Bridgeforth UDA Expansion be taken off the agenda of the CPPS until
March, 2005.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PROGRAMS SUBCOMMITTEE (CPPS} SUMMARY
& ACTION OF 03/14/05 MEETING:
Staff presented a further modified version of the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan. Members
again voiced concern over the text in the WJELUP on transportation and directed staff to come
up with alternate wording.
Solenberger/Bridgeforth Properties
April 18, 2005
Page 5
COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PROGRAMS SUBCOMMITTEE (CPPS) SUMMARY
& ACTION OF 04/11/05 MEETING:
Staff presented a further modified version of the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan. The
applicant's representative, Mr. Evan Wyatt of Greenway Engineering, proposed alternate
transportation wording for one paragraph. The CPPS endorsed the staff proposed wording and
endorsed the plan that is attached.
Staff is seeping comments from the Planning Commission regarding this UDA expansion
request and the proposed modifications to the Western .Tubal Early Land Use Plan that
could be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors during their discussion of this request.
Attachment
Discussion Item for the Planning Commission— Western Jubal Early
Land Use Plan (WJELUP)
April 21, 2005
WESTERN JUBAL EARLY
LAND USE PLAN
(Originally adopted by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors - February 11, 2004)
Revised draft endorsed by the CPPS -April 4, 2005
Guiding Principles
A new community of over 600 acres is planned in a portion of the County where previously there
was little but farmland. The area contains sensitive environmental features and these will be
preserved. This new community will be primarily residential with a mix of commercial and
residential uses. The community will be linked by an efficient road system, multi-purpose trails
and sidewalks.
Lard Use
Residential
The land included within the Western Jubal Early Land Use Plan (WJELUP) represents a
transitional area between the City of Winchester and the rural areas of western Frederick County.
The WJELUP area is distinguished by its pristine environmental resources and prime farmland
soils and has, therefore, historically supported both agricultural and low density residential land
uses. Adjoining land within the City of Winchester has developed extensively with urban and
suburban residential uses, most notably within the Meadow Branch, Morlyn Hills, Meadow
Branch South, and Orchard Hill subdivisions. Additionally, suburban residential land use has
been established within the UDA adjacent and north of the WJELUP area through the
Merriman's Chase subdivision.
The predominant land uses envisioned within the WJELUP area are urban and suburban
residential uses. The residential designation is intended to continue the established land use
pattern in the vicinity of the WJELUP area. As such, new residential development within the
WJELUP area is expected to consist primarily of single family detached and single family small
lot units, and be compatible with the design of existing residential uses on adjoining property.
The gross residential density for residential developments within the WJELUP area should not
exceed four dwelling units per acre.
Discussion Item — WJELUP
April 21, 2005
Mixed Use
Areas of mixed residential and commercial land use are designated along the planned route of
the Jubal Early Drive extension and near the intersection of Cedar Greek Grade and Route 37.
The mixed use development pattern is intended to provide commercial services and employment
opportunities that are accessible for residents within the WJELUP area and the adjacent
community via alternative modes of transportation, such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
Enhanced accessibility is anticipated through the integration of land uses within the mixed use
areas and the connection of such areas to the surrounding residential neighborhoods by a network
of multi-purpose trails and sidewalks. It is further expected that residential and commercial uses
will be designed and configured in an integrated, not segregated, manner to ensure development
of a visually distinctive and functionally efficient community.
The residential component of areas designated for mixed use development is not to exceed 75%
of the gross project land area for mixed use development, with the remaining acreage reserved
and planned for commercial use. Gross residential densities within mixed use areas should be
consistent with those of the surrounding residential neighborhoods and, therefore, not exceed
four dwelling units per acre. Residential densities in the mixed use areas are envisioned to be
achieved through a mixture of housing types.
The commercial component will comprise at least 25%, but no more than 50%, of the gross
project land area for mixed use development. The commercial component is envisioned to
consist of neighborhood scale commercial uses and high-end office uses. Priority will be given to
neighborhood scale commercial uses as these will serve the needs of residents and create focal
points for the new community. Strip commercial development is strongly discouraged.
Consolidated entrances will be encouraged to avoid multiple -entrances along Jubal Early Drive,
Cedar Creek Grade and the new collector road. Other uses that might be acceptable in the areas
planned for mixed uses are religious uses and local government uses.
Transportation
Future road networks are proposed for the WJELUP area which will link it to Jubal Early Drive,
Route 37 and Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622).
The Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS) identifies Jubal Early Drive extending in an
east -west direction from its terminus in the City of Winchester to a new interchange with the
Route 37 western by-pass. This plan, therefore, incorporates the extension of Jubal Early Drive
and the construction of the interchange at Route 37. The extension of Jubal Early Drive and the
interchange at Route 37 are critical to addressing regional transportation problems.
The extension of Jubal Early Drive through this portion of the UDA is envisioned as an urban
divided four -lane cross-section that includes landscaped medians as well as pedestrian and
bicycle facilities. The final location and alignment of Jubal Early Drive should remain flexible
-2-
Discussion Item — WJELUP
April 21, 2005
to ensure that the development of the future extension conforms to final transportation studies
and engineering.
A major collector road is planned to facilitate traffic movement in a north -south direction to
provide a connection between Jubal Early Drive and Cedar Creek Grade. This road is envisioned
as an urban divided four -lane cross-section that includes landscaped medians as well as
pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The location shown on the plan is general with the precise
location of the north -south collector road remaining flexible.
The Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS) also identifies improvements to Cedar
Creek Grade. Cedar Creek Grade is proposed to be widened to four lanes from the Winchester
City line to Route 621, Merrimans Lane. The WATS study further identifies improvements to
the Cedar Creek Grade/Route 37 interchange. The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan
Bicycle Plan also identifies Cedar Creek Grade as a short-term destination route. Therefore, this
plan incorporates improvements to Cedar Creek Grade, to a four lane divided highway with a
bicycle lane, and improvements to the intersection of Route 37 at Cedar Creek Grade.
The development of new road systems, including a new interchange at Route 37, new
signalization and improvements to existing road systems are all elements of this plan. It will be
the responsibility of private property owners and developers to ensure that these improvements
ares 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 Virginia
Department of Transportation (VDOT), the City and/or the County will accomplish the
necessary road improvements. No rezonings should be approved until the County is certain that
the transportation impacts of development will be mitigated.
Another critical transportation component of the WJELUP is alternative modes of transportation,
such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities. This plan, therefore, calls for an interconnected system
of multi-purpose trails and sidewalks. The County should also encourage the extension of
existing bus routes to serve the area. Ideally bus stops will be located at the mixed use centers
and within the development.
Environment
The WJELUP designates environmental resources associated with the Abrams Creek corridor as
Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA). These areas should be preserved through the
development process with improvements limited to required road crossings and passive
recreational amenities. A conservation oriented approach to the design of residential and mixed
use projects within the WJELUP area is encouraged to maximize DSA preservation. As such,
the precise study and identification of DSA designated resources should occur as a critical first
step in the design process for all development in the WJELUP area. Completion of this resource
inventory and the delineation of preservation areas are to be followed and accommodated by
-3-
Discussion Item — WJELUP
April 21, 2005
layouts and engineering for building sites, lots, drainage and infrastructure. Full gross density
credit will be provided for DSA designated land conserved through the development process.
A portion of the Green Circle Trail, as developed by the City of Winchester, has been
constructed on the north side of the Winchester -Western Railroad. The WJELUP envisions
completion of this portion of the trail to Merriman's Lane. Additionally, a connector trail should
be developed that extends from the existing trail along the railroad right-of-way to Cedar Creek
Grade as an enhancement to the Green Circle Trail. The connecting trail should be located to
enhance the interaction of the user with any environmental features or view sheds that are
conserved through implementation of the WJELUP. The pedestrian/bicycle network developed
in the WJELUP area should provide for a continuous flow from the Green Circle.
Historical Resources
One potentially significant historic structure is located in the southwestern corner of the
WJELUP area. The house is identified in the Lake's Atlas of 1885 as the Stuart Brown House,
and has been identified as a potentially significant property in the Frederick County Rural
Landmarks Survey (#34-1239). Protection of this structure is encouraged.
Education/Public Paciities f
Thee-WJELUP area contains over 600 acres and the majority of this land is envisioned to be
- developed for residential uses. It is estimated that up to 2,400 dwellings could be built in the
study area. This could generate up to 1,680 new students for the Frederick County School.
System. This number of students concentrated in such a small area is unprecedented in the
western part of Frederick County. It will be incumbent upon future development within the
WJELUP area to provide a site for school facilities, to mitigate the impact of the large number of
school children resulting from development in the WJELUP area. This is consistent with the
Community Facilities and Services policies in the Comprehensive Policy Plan.
Any school should be sited centrally within the study area to enable the maximum number of
students to walk or bike to school. Schools quickly become the focus of a new community
when they are at the center of the community. The final location and alignment of any school
site should remain flexible to ensure that it conforms to final engineering studies and School
Board considerations.
It may also be necessary to provide other public facilities in this area to serve this new
development. It would then be necessary for future development to provide a site for other
public facilities to mitigate the impact of the large number of residents resulting from
development in this area.
-4-
Discussion Item — WJELUP
April 21, 2005
Parks
The WJELUP area should contain a well defined park and open space system for both active and
passive recreation. Central to this open space will be the Abrams Creek corridor which should
be preserved as a developmentally sensitive area. Neighborhood parks should also be located
within the study area. As defined in the Comprehensive Policy Plan, neighborhood parks
provide limited types of recreation for the entire family within easy walking distance. Examples
of potential facilities in a neighborhood park include a playground, a swimming pool and tennis
courts. The neighborhood parks should be located near the school and or neighborhood center
and away from major streets. Also part of the park network will be the interconnected trail
system as described above.
-5-
Western
Jubal Early
Land Use Pian
April 2005
Map Features
• y 0
�sA
j •.�•
Winchester City Boundary
r
\
�
Streams
Lakes/Ponds/Wetlands
Planned Transportation
/A\/
Road ROW
/V
Road CL
Railroads
Western
Jubal Early
Land Use Pian
April 2005
Map Features
• y 0
UDA/SWSA
j •.�•
Winchester City Boundary
/V
Parcels
Streams
Lakes/Ponds/Wetlands
Planned Transportation
/A\/
Road ROW
/V
Road CL
Railroads
Existing Trails
Proposed Trails
Planned
Land Use
Developmentally Sensitive
Mixed Use
Residential Use
Future Interchange
N
W E
s
0 500 1,000
Feet
0._
Created by
Frederick County Planning11
April 11, 2005
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Susan K. Eddy, AICP, Senior Planner e
�UNTY of FREDERICK
Planning and Development
5401655-5551
FAX: 5401565-6395
RE: Discussion Item — Tasker Woods Land Use Plan (TWLUP)
DATE: April 20, 2005
The Frederick County Board of Supervisors at its meeting on February 9, 2005 directed
the Planning Commission to study and return to the Board of Supervisors a land use plan
and recommendations regarding the inclusion of 89 acres of land (parcel 76-A-49 and 76-
A -48A) in the Tasker Woods area into the Urban Development Area (UDA).
While the Board of Supervisors resolution calling for this study included only two
parcels, the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CAPS) at its meeting of
February 14, 2005 considered it reasonable to study the entire area (approximately 183
acres) bounded by Tasker Road. Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and the current (2004)
UDA boundary.
The CPPS considered this UDA expansion request at its meeting of March 14, 2005. Mr.
Charles E. Maddox Jr., P.E. of Patton, Harris and Rust Associates and Mr. Clay Athey,
both representing the owner of the two properties directly mentioned in the Board
resolution, presented an all -residential scheme to the CPPS. CPPS members made a
number of suggestions for a mixed-use plan. The applicant was requested to consider a
mixed use plan for the area given its location adjacent to both residential and industrial
development.
At the CPPS meeting on April 11, 2005, Mr. Maddox presented a revised plan for the
sites within the applicant's control that incorporated residential and commercial uses and
a new collector road. CPPS members were agreeable to the mix of uses on the sites
owned by the applicant. Discussion then focused on the other parcels in the study area.
Members agreed that commercial uses were appropriate south of the intermittent stream
as these sites were adjacent to commercial/industrial land on Tasker Road,
107 North Rent Strut, Sui_-e 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000
Discussion Item — Tasker Woods Land Use Plan (TWLUP)
April 20, 2005
Page 2
No agreement was reached on the small parcels north of the intermittent stream along
Route 522. Some CPPS members believed these could be residential, even multi -family,
given the close proximity to jobs. Others believed these sites could be industrial or
commercial. Three residents from the Tasker Woods neighborhood, including the pastor
of the Macedonia Methodist Church, spoke to the CPPS. They gave general support to
the applicant's mix of commercial and residential uses, but were not supportive of
industrial uses within the study area. No further consensus was reached, and thus the
small parcels on Route 522, north of the intermittent stream, are shown in white; i.e., no
future land use designation, on the proposed land use plan (attached).
The proposed land use plan includes a mix of residential and commercial uses. It is
suggested that the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) be extended to cover all
parcels designated as residential (yellow) and commercial (orange), approximately 153
acres of the study area. It is also suggested that the Urban Development Area (UDA) be
extended to cover only the areas identified for residential use (yellow), approximately 57
acres of the proposed 153 SWSA acres. Thus it will be very clear which parcels within
the SWSA are suitable for a residential rezoning.
Staff is seeking comments from the Planning Commission regarding this request that
could be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors during their discussion of this request.
SME/ bad_ 11 - - - .-
Attachment
__
Attachment
Y.
' COGy TASKER WOODS LAND USE PLAN (TWLUP)
Staff Report for the Planning Commission Meeting
Prepared: April 18, 2005
.M Staff Contact: Susan K. Eddy, AICP, Senior Planner
1»,
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 the discussion of this
request. It may also be useful to others interested in this comprehensive planning matter.
CPPS:
CPPS:
Planning Commission:
Board of Supervisors
Reviewed
03/14/05
04/11/05
05/04/05 (Discussion)
05/25/05 (Discussion)
Action
Discussed
Recommendation forwarded
Pending
Pending
PROPOSAL: To consider a proposed Land Use Plan for the Tasker Woods Area (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).
PLANNED USE: Residential and Commercial
LOCATION: The study area includes approximately 183 acres and is bounded by Front Royal
Pike (Route 522) to the east, Tasker Road (Route 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 (Route 642) to the west.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee
PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 76-A-42 (the portion north of Tasker Road), 76 -A -47A, 76 -A -
47B, 76-A-48, 76 -A -48A, 76-A-49, 76 -A -49A, 76 -A -49B, 76 -A -49C, 76 -A -49D, 76 -A -49E, 76-
A-50, 76-A-51, 76-A-5 IA, 76 -A -51B, 76 -A -51C, 76-A-52, 76-A-53 (the portion north of Tasker
Road), 76 -A -84,76-A-85, 76-A-86
PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas) District and B2 (Business General) District — Parcel
76-A-53
PRESENT USE: Single Family= Residences, Agricultural and Vacant
Tasker Woods Land Use Plan (TWLUP)
April 18, 2005
Page 2
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
North:
RA (Rural Area)
Use:
Residential and Religious
RP (Residential Performance)
Use:
Residential
South:
B2 (Business General)
Use:
Vacant
MI (Light Industrial)
Use:
Industrial
East:
RA (Rural Area)
Use:
Residential
West:
RA (Rural Area)
Use:
Residential
PLANNING STAFF EVALUATION:
Comprehensive Policy Plan
Land Use
The Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan does not show any specific
land use for most of the study area itself. Only the land north of Tasker Road, near the
intersection with Route 522 is shown as business use. The land immediately south of the
study area is planned for industrial and commercial uses. Residential and commercial
uses are now proposed for the study area and these are described in the attached plan.
The currently zoned B2 parcel (76-A-53) and three parcels north of Tasker Road in the
west end of the study area (parcels 76-A-42, 76 -A -47A and 76 -A -47B) are currently in
the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). None of the study area is currently within
the Urban Development Area (UDA). Proposals to extend the SWSA and the UDA are
included in the proposed plan.
Transportation
Route 522 (Front Royal Pike) is classified as a minor arterial road. The Frederick County
Eastern Road Plan designates Tasker Road and White Oak Road as improved major
collectors and shows a new major collector linking the north end of White Oak
Road/Macedonia Church Road with Route 522. The provision of this major collector
road will be the responsibility of developers in this area. A signalized intersection at
Route 522 and Macedonia Church Road will also be the responsibility of developers in
the area. The proposed plan discourages individual entrances on these major collector
roads.
The plan calls for a new minor collector road, beginning at the intersection of Tasker
Road and Marcel Drive, extending northward through the site. The purpose of this road is
to connect the residential uses of the community with the commercial uses and provide
access to the small parcels on Route 522. Another critical transportation component of
this plan is alternative modes of transportation, such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
This plan, therefore, calls for an interconnected system of multi-purpose trails and
sidewalks.
Tasker Woods Land Use Plan (TWLUP)
April 18, 2005
Page 3
Community Facilities and Services
The proposed plan calls for a well defined park and open space system for both active
and passive recreation. This should include an interconnected trail system. At the
rezoning stage, all applicants will need to address community facilities and services.
Design Considerations
The Tasker Woods area is at a prominent junction along Route 522. The proposed plan
calls for heightened design standards, including increased landscaping and reduced
signage.
Site Suitability/Environment
Environmental features in the plan area include several ponds and four intermittent streams. The
proposed plan calls for these to be protected and form part of the open space network.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PROGRAMS SUBCOMMITTEE (CPPS) SUMMARY
& ACTION OF 03/14/05 MEETING:
The CPPS considered the UDA expansion request at its meeting of March 14, 2005. Mr. Charles
E. Maddox Jr., P.E. of Patton, Harris and Rust Associates and Mr. Clay Athey, both representing
the owner of the wo properties, directly mentioned in the Board resolution, an all -residential
scheme to the CPPS. CPPS members made a number of suggestions for a mixed-use plan. The
applicant was requested to consider a mixed use plan for the area given its location adjacent to
both residential and industrial development.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PROGRAMS SUBCOMMITTEE (CPPS) SUMMARY
& ACTION OF 04/11/05 MEETING:
At the CPPS meeting on April 11, 2005, Mr. Maddox presented a revised plan for the sites
within the applicant's control that incorporated residential and commercial uses and a new
collector road. CPPS members were agreeable to the mix of uses on the sites owned by the
applicant. Discussion then focused on the other parcels in the study area. Members agreed that
commercial uses were appropriate south of the intermittent stream as these sites were adjacent to
commercial/industrial land.
No agreement was reached on the small parcels north of the intermittent stream along Route 522.
Some CPPS members believed these could be residential, even multi -family, given the close
proximity to jobs. Others believed these sites could be industrial or commercial. Three residents
from the Tasker Woods neighborhood, including the pastor of the Macedonia Methodist Church,
spoke to the CPPS. They gave general support to the applicant's mix of commercial and
residential uses, but were not supportive of industrial uses within the study area. No further
Tasker Woods Land Use Plan (TWLUP)
April 18, 2005
Page 4
consensus was reached, and thus the small parcels on Route 522, north of the intermittent stream,
are shown in white; i.e., no future land use designation, on the proposed land use plan (attached).
The CPPS agreed to forward the proposed Tasker Woods Land Use Plan to the Planning
Commission as a discussion item.
Staff is seeking comments from the Planning Commission regarding these proposals that
could be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors during their discussion of this item.
Tasker Woods Land Use Plan
(Endorsed by the CPPS — April 11, 2005)
Introduction
The Tasker Woods area presents a unique opportunity to transition a rural area wedged between
rapidly developing residential neighborhoods and established industrial uses. The boundaries of
this land use plan are Tasker Road, Route 522 (Front Royal Pike) and the 2004 Urban
Development Area (UDA) boundary.
A new community is being created which will have residential and commercial uses. The area
contains sensitive environmental features and these will be preserved. The community will be
linked by an efficient road system, multi-purpose trails and sidewalks.
Land Use
The Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan, adopted prior to this plan, does not
show any specific land use for most of this area. The land north of Tasker Road, near the
intersection with Route 522, is shown as business use. At present, all of the plan area is zoned
RA, with the exception of one parcel north of Tasker Road, which is zoned B2. This B2 zoned
parcel and three parcels north of Tasker Road on the west end of the plan area are in the Sewer
and Water Service Area (SWSA) as of April 2005. None of the land use plan area is in the
Urban Development Area (UDA) as of April 2005.
The land to the east of the plan area is in residential and agricultural use and is zoned RA (Rural
Areas). The land immediately to the west is in residential use and is zoned RA. Further to the
west is the Canter Estates development which is zoned RP (Residential Performance District)
and contains single family detached houses. Immediately north of the plan area are Macedonia
Methodist Church and Macedonia Cemetery, both zoned RA. To the south is the Eastgate
Commerce Center which is zoned Ml (Light Industrial District) and contains light industrial
uses, and adjacent parcels zoned B2 (Business General District) which are vacant.
The plan area is made up of 183 acres, with 21 parcels in multiple ownerships. Three large tracts
(86 acres) in the center of the plan area are in common ownership. A key component for the
future of this area will be to integrate the numerous small parcels along Route 522 into the wider
community.
UDA/SWSA
This plan provides for the extension of the SWSA to those areas shown as residential and
commercial on the land use plan (attached), and the extension of the UDA only to those areas
shown as residential on the land use plan.
Residential
The northwest part of the Tasker Woods area is planned for residential use. Single family
detached residences are encouraged along Macedonia Church Road to continue the residential
pattern established to the west. Single family attached units could be accommodated in the
Tasker Woods Land Use Plan
April 21, 2005
center of the site. Giver the relatively flat topography and square shape of the central portion of
the site, this area could ideally be laid out in a grid pattern.
Other uses that might be acceptable in the areas planned for residential use are religious uses and
local government uses.
Commercial
Commercial uses are planned for the land immediately north of Tasker Road. This will serve to
buffer the residential uses from the industrial uses south of Tasker Road. The commercial
component is envisioned to consist of neighborhood scale commercial uses and office uses.
Priority will be given to neighborhood scale commercial uses as these will serve the needs of
residents and create focal points for the new community. Strip commercial development is
strongly discouraged. Consolidated entrances and inter -parcel connectors will be encouraged to
avoid multiple -entrances along Route 522, Tasker Road and the new collector road.
Undesignated Areas
The small parcels along Route 522, north of the stream, are suitable for a variety of uses. At
present, no particular use is shown for these parcels and the SWSA and UDA boundaries do not
cover this area. If redeveloped in the future, consolidated entrances and inter -parcel connectors
will be encouraged to avoid multiple -entrances along Route 522--.--
Parks
22-_
Parks
The Tasker Woods area should contain a well defined park and open space system for both
active and passive recreation. Neighborhood parks, possibly in cooperation with the church to
the north, should be provided in central locations and be inter -connected. If the residential
streets are designed in a grid pattern, the parks could be laid out as squares with the houses
facing onto the square. Also part of the park network should be the interconnected trail system
as noted above.
Environmental Features
Environmental features in the study area include several ponds and four intermittent streams.
These should be protected and form part of the open space network for the area.
Transportation
Route 522 (Front Royal Pike) is classified as a minor arterial road. Minor arterial roads are
major roads providing important travel routes through portions of the County. Higher speeds
and free traffic flow are maintained over large portions of minor arterial roads. Therefore,
individual entrances on Route 522 are discouraged.
The Frederick County Eastern Road Plan designates Tasker Road and White Oak Road as
improved major collectors and shows a new major collector linking the north end of White Oak
Road/Macedonia Church Road with Route 522. The provision of this major collector road will
be the responsibility of developers in this area. A signalized intersection at Route 522 and
-2-
Tasker Woods Land Use Plan
April 21, 2005
Macedonia Church Road will also be the responsibility of developers in the area. This plan
Iart'er discou�ages individual en�rances on these major collector roads.
This plan calls for a new minor collector road, beginning at the intersection of Tasker Road and
Marcel Drive, extending northward through the site. The purpose of this road is to connect the
residential uses of the community with the commercial uses and provide access to the small
parcels on Route 522. Other roads throughout the area will be minor collector roads or local
roads.
Another critical transportation component of this plan is alternative modes of transportation,
such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities. This plan, therefore, calls for an interconnected system
of multi-purpose trails and sidewalks. Given the close proximity of residential, commercial, and
industrial sites, all of them relatively flat, a walkable environment is easily achievable.
Design Principles
The Tasker Woods area is at a prominent junction along Route 522. Heightened design
standards are appropriate in this area.
As stated above, the area is a relatively flat area and lends itself well to a grid pattern, for both
the residential and commercial components. Other design features that compliment a grid
pattern are short streets, shallow setbacks and alleys. These are therefore encouraged.
Landscape features that are encouraged include saving existing mature trees, the planting.of. ...
street trees, and the landscape screening of parking facilities. Another important landscape
feature should be landscaping along Route 522, similar to that required for residential use along
an arterial road.
The commercial uses should be encouraged to coordinate and limit signage. Off-site signs
should be discouraged and monument signs encouraged.
All of the plan area should be provided with sidewalks and footpaths to encourage interaction
between uses and walkability.
Attachment
-3-
COUNTY of >FR DI,:RliCK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
=EMOIRANDUM
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrators% <-_
RE: Discussion: Changes to Section 165-64 of the Frederick County Zoning
Ordinance
DA'L'E: April 18, 2005
The Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) at its March 24, 2005, meeting
reviewed and discussed a request from Greenway Engineering to amend Section 165-64 of the
Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. This proposed change to this section will allow the waiving by
the Board of Supervisors of the community center requirement for single-family small lot
subdivisions that contain less than fifty (50) lots. The DRRS was in favor of this proposed ordinance
change. The current and proposed ordinance section(s) are included for your review. (See
attachments)
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 Supei visors for
their consideration.
MRC/bad
Attachments
107 North Ken* Street, Suite 292 •'Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Proposed Community Center Text Amendment
- -a
§ 165-64. Recreational facilities
A. Housing types with lot sizes of less than 5,000 square feet shall provide the
following recreational units of equivalent recreational facilities for each 30
dwelling units. All such developments shall contain at least one such recreational
unit. In addition, developments containing single-family small lot housing shall
provide a community center that provides for the equivalent of three age-
appropriate recreational units for each 30 dwelling units. The facilities shall be in
a configuration and location that is easily accessible to the dwelling units that they
are designed to serve. The design and amount of facilities shall be approved by
the Planning Commission in conjunction with the Administrator and the
Department of Parks and Recreation, using the following recreational unit as a
guideline. The design of such facilities shall be approved at the time of site plan
review.
-- 1) The Board of Supervisors may provide a waiver for the community
center requirement specified in § 165-64A in single-family small lot
�� _ subdivisions that contain less than 50 lots. This waiver may be requested
by the applicant during the consideration of the Subdivision Design Plan
if no Master Development Plan is required. The applicant is required to
demonstrate how an equivalent recreational value of three recreational
units for each 30 dwelling units, prorated is being provided within the
project, to the County, or a combination of both as a condition of
requesting approval of a waiver by the Board of Supervisors.
§ 165-64 FREDERICK COUNTY CODE
§ 165-64. Recreation facilities.
§ 165-64
A. Housing types with lot sizes of less than 5,000 square feet shall
provide the following recreational units or equivalent recreational
facilities, for each 30 dwelling units. All such developments shall
contain at least one such recreational unit. In addition, developments
containing single-family small lot housing shall provide a community
center that provides for the equivalent of three age-appropriate
recreational units for each 30 dwelling units. The facilities shall be in a
configuration and location that is easily accessible to the dwelling units
that they are designed to serve. The design and amount of facilities
shall be approved by the Planning Commission, in conjunction with the
Administrator and the Department of Parks and Recreation, using the
following recreational unit as a guideline. The design of such facilities
shall be approved at the time of site plan review. [Amended
10-27-19991
B. A recreational unit is designed to meet the recreational needs of 30
dwelling units. The units may be broken into smaller units or added
together to meet the needs of the total development. An example
recreational unit shall be as follows:
(1) Tot -lot:
Quantity Equipment
1 Slide (8 feet high, 16 feet long)
1 set Swings (10 feet high, 4 seats)
1 Climber (13 feet, geodesic)
2 Spring animals
1 Sandbox
1 Whirl (10 feet in diameter)
(2) Or any equivalent recreational facilities including:
(a) Swimming pools.
(b)
Tennis courts.
(c)
Half basketball courts.
(d)
Athletic fields.
(e)
Picnic shelters.
16584 12-15-99
§ 165-64 ZONING § 165-65
(f) Community center. [Added 10-27-19994]
(g) Other recreational facilities.
§ 165-65. Dimensional requirements.
The following dimensional requirements shall be met by uses in the RP
Residential Performance District. The Administrator shall make the final
determination as to the classification of housing types. Unless otherwise
specified, all housing types shall be served by public sewer and water.
A. Single-family detached rural traditional. A "single-family detached
rural traditional residence" shall be a single-family residence on an
individual lot with private yards on all four sides, without public sewer
and water.
(1) Minimum lot size shall be 100,000 square feet
(2) Minimum yards shall be as follows:
(a) Setback from the road right-of-way: 60 feet.
(b) Side yards: 15 feet.
(c) Rear yard: 50 feet without public sewer and water.
(3) Minimum lot width to maximum depth ratio shall be 1 to 3.
(4) Minimum off-street parking shall be two spaces per unit.
(5) Maximum building height shall be as follows:
(a) Principle building: 35 feet.
(b) Accessory buildings: 20 feet.
B. Single-family detached traditional. A "single-family detached
traditional residence" shall be a large -lot single-family residence with
private yards on all four sides without required common open space:
(1) Minimum lot area shall be 1-5,000 square feet.
(2) Minimum yards shall be as follows:
(a) Setback from the road right-of-way: 35 feet.
(b) Side yards: 10 feet.
4 Editors Note: This ordinance also provided for the relettering of former Subsection B(2)(f) and Subsection B(2)(g).
16585 12-15-99
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrator
RE: Discussion: Changes to Chapter 144, Section 24C Subdivision of Land
DATE: April 18, 2005
The Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) at its March 24, 2005, meeting
discussed a request from Greenway Engineering to amend Chapter 144, Section 24 C, Subdivision of
Land. This proposed change to this section will allow the waiving by the Board of Supervisors of the
public street requirements in age -restricted communities. The DRRS felt this proposed text change
should have a requirement that private streets should be built to Virginia Department of
Transportation (VDCT) standards. The current and proposed ordinance section(s) are included for
your review. (See attachments)
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
Attachments
107 North Kent Street-, Suite 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22501-5000
Proposed Age -Restricted Community Private Street Text Amendment
§ 144-24C. Lot Access
All lots shall abut and have direct access to a public street or right-of-way dedicated for
maintenance by the Virginia Department of Transportation.
(2)(a) Lots in subdivisions to be used for the following housing types, as defined by
Chapter 165, Zoning, need not abut public streets:
Duplexes
Multiplexes
Atrium houses
Townhouses
Weak -link townhouses
Garden apartments
Single-family small lot housing
(2)(b) When such lots do not abut public streets, they shall abut private roads, parking
lots or access easements. The length and extent of private roads, driveways and parking
aisles providing access easements. The length and extent of private roads, driveways and
parking aisles providing access to lots shall be minimized, and public streets shall be
provided in larger subdivisions when substantial distances are involved. Individual lots
shall be no more than 500 feet from a state -maintained road, as measured from the public
street along the access route. The Planning Commission may allow lots to be located as
much as 800 feet from a state -maintained road in cases where enhanced circulation is
provided with a driveway loop.
(2)(c) The Board of Supervisors may provide a waiver to the public street requirement
u specified in Section 144-24C to allow for a complete system of private streets within
age-restricted communities. This waiver may be requested by the applicant during the
consideration of a Rezoning Application or during consideration of the Master
Development Plan. The applicant is required to provide a conceptual design which
demonstrates the proposed private street system layout and provides for the cross
section dimensional base and pavement detail that meets or exceeds VDOT standards
as a condition of requesting approval of a waiver by the Board of Supervisors.
§ 144-24 SUBDIVISION OF LAND § 144-24
dimensional requirements. Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at
right angles to straight front lot lines or radial to curved front lot lines.
C. Lot access. All lots shall abut and have direct access to a public street
or right-of-way dedicated for maintenance by the Virginia Department
of Transportation.
(1) Multiple -frontage lots. Corner lots with public street frontage on
two adjacent sides shall be allowed. Double -frontage lots with
public street frontage on two streets that do not intersect at the
lot shall be avoided, except where required to prevent direct
access to collector or arterial streets. Lots with public street
frontage on more than two sides shall be avoided.
(2) Multifamily and single-family small lot housing. [Amended
10-27-19991
(a) Lots in subdivisions to be used for the following housing
types, as defined by Chapter 165, Zoning, need not abut
public streets:
[1 ] Duplexes.
[2] Multiplexes.
[3] Atrium houses.
[4] Townhouses.
[5] Weak -link townhouses.
[6] Garden apartments.
[7) Single-family small lot housing.
(b) When such lots do not abut public streets, they shall abut
private roads, parking lots or access easements. The length
and extent of private roads, driveways and parking aisles
providing access to lots shall be minimized, and public streets
shall be provided in larger subdivisions when substantial
distances are involved. Individual lots shall be more than 500
feet from a state -maintained road, as measured from the
public street along the access route. The Planning
Commission may allow lots to be located as much as 800
feet from a state -maintained road in cases where enhanced
circulation is provided with a driveway loop.
14431 12-15-99