PC 08-20-03 Meeting AgendaAGENDA
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The Board Room
Frederick County Administration Building
Winchester, Virginia
AUGUST 20, 2003
7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER TAB
1) Committee Reports ................................................. (no tab)
2) Citizen Comments .................................................. (no tab)
PUBLIC MEETING
3) Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone
821.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District.
This property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road
(Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east
of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are
identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A-31 A, 44-A-292, and
44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District.
(Mr. Mohn).......................................................... (A)
4) Other
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
5401665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
MEMORANDUM
173 ==0
_�� .7M'/An4�iSf,ki ,..., }}s.... + 1 v.._..��.� �.me4.lihl,F..!ui�_L..�cSLiA.
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission �,
FROM: Christopher M. Mohn, AJCP, Deputy Planning Director
DATE: August 1, 2003
RE: Rezoning # 06-03 of Stephenson Village
As you are aware, the public hearing for the subject rezoning application was held during the
Planning Commission's meeting on July 16, 2003. At that time, public input was received and the
applicant was provided an opportunity to respond to questions and concerns raised by various
speakers. The applicant subsequently requested that the Planning Commission delay further action
regarding the application for aperiod ofthirty (3 0) days. The public hearing was formally concluded
and the Planning Commission voted to table the application as requested by the applicant.
Continuation of the Planning Commission's consideration of the subject rezoning application has
been scheduled as a public meeting item on the August 20, 2003 meeting agenda. As of the date of
this memorandum, the applicant has not offered any changes to the application and the policies of
the Comprehensive Policy Plan applicable to the site remain unmodified. With the exception of a
brief update regarding the action to table, the content of the staff report prepared for this application
is unchanged from that which was originally provided for the public hearing. A copy of the staff
report is attached for your reference.
It is reiterated that the public hearing for the subject application was formally closed on July 16,
2003. As such, members of the general public seeking to address the Planning Commission
regarding this application should be encouraged to speak during the time reserved for citizen
comments.
Please do not hesitate to contact me directly should you have any questions or concerns regarding
this matter.
CMNnhd
Attachment
O-.\Agendas\COMMENTS\REZONING\Staff Report\2003\StephensonVillagePCCoverMemo.wpd
107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
REZONING APPLICATION #06-03
STEPHENSON VILLAGE
Staff Report for the Planning Commission Public Meeting
Prepared: June 27, 2003
Updated: August 1, 2003
Staff Contact: Christopher M. Mohn, AICP, Deputy Director
This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the
Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this
application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues
concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report. As this
application proceeds through the legislative review process, the response or method of resolution for
each issue offered by the applicant and/or recommended by the Planning Commission or Board of
Supervisors will be stated in the text of this report.
Reviewed Action
Planning Commission: 07/16/03 - Public Hearing Tabled
Planning Commission: 08/20/03 Pending
Board of Supervisors: 09/10/03 Pending
PROPOSAL: To rezone 821.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to R4 (Residential Planned Community).
LOCATION: The property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town
Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east
of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North).
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall
PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 44-A-31 [portion]; 44 -A -31A; 44-A-292; 44-A-293
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Agricultural/Unimproved
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING AND PRESENT USE:
North: Zoned RA (Rural Areas)
South: Zoned RA (Rural Areas)
East: Zoned RA (Rural Areas)
West: Zoned RA (Rural Areas)
Use: Agricultural/Residential/
Unimproved
Use. Agricultural/Residential/
Unimproved
Use: Agricultural/Residential/
Unimproved
Use: Agri cultural/Residential/
Unimproved
REZ 906-03, Stephenson Village
Page 2
August 1, 2003
INTENDED USE: Residential Planned Community comprised of mixed housing types totaling
2.800 dwelling units with 250,000 square feet of commercial uses (190,000
square feet - retail; 60,000 square feet - office) and 44 acres dedicated for public
school and recreation uses. The applicant has proposed to serve the development
with a multi -modal transportation system consisting of a major collector road, a
system of pedestrian and bicycle trails, and a linear park trail within the Hiatt Run
Corridor. The gross residential density proposed for this development is 3.40
dwelling units per acre.
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Dept. of Transportation: All roads providing access to the site will experience "significant
measurable impact" from proposed development. However, proffered transportation improvements
appear to be adequate to address traffic impacts. Please seethe attached letter dated 02/21/03 f-om Ben
Lineberry, Jr. P.E., Transportation Assistant Resident Engineer, VDOT Edinburg Residency.
Fire Marshal: Proposed standards for private streets, culs-de-sac, alleys, and common driveways will
allow adequate fire protection access. Applicant's proposed use of home sprinkler systems in certain
housing types is a "first" for Frederick County and is commended as a positive life safety measure.
Please see the attached comment sheet dated 03/03/2003 fom Timothy L. Welsh, Assistant Fire
Marshal.
Clearbrook Fire & Rescue Co.: No comment offered. Please see the attached letter dated
02/26/2003 from Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S. on behlaf of Chief Tommy Price.
County Engineer: Concerned that Homeowner's Association responsibility for private curbside trash
collection will be ineffective without an enforceable guarantee. It is further noted that any such
guarantee must be fully enforceable without County intervention. Please see attached letter dated
05/05/03 from H.E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E., Director of Public Works.
Frederick -Winchester Service Authority: Adequate capacity is available at the Opequon Water
Reclamation Facility to accommodate the projected sewage flows of the proposed development. The
conceptual plans for the sewer system for Stephenson Village include infrastructure capable of
eliminating capacity concerns involving the Abrams Creek Interceptor. It is recommended that an
adequately sized pumping station site be provided pursuant to Frederick County Sanitation Authority
standards to enable ultimate expansion of the station to a regional facility. Moreover, the main sewage
collector line should be adequately sized and appropriately routed to enable future extension of the
collection system to off-site development. Please see the attached memorandum dated 02/12/2003 from
Jesse W. Moffett, Executive Director.
Sanitation Authority: Capacity in the existing sewer lines, especially the Frederick -Winchester Service
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 3
August 1, 2003
Authority Abrams Creek Trunk Main, is limited. While the majority of the flow generated by the project
may be within the capacity of the existing lines, it is prudent to have a pump station built sometime
during this development to transmit sewage directly to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility.
Gravity lines will need to be sized to convey sewage from areas in the watershed outside the
development and from the SWSA in the Clearbrook/Rest Church Road area. Please see the attached
comment sheet with attachment dated 02/12/2003 from John G. Whitacre, Engineer, and W. H. Jones,
P.E., Executive Director.
Historic Resources Advisory Board: No adverse comments were offered regarding this application.
However, the HRAB did offer the following suggestions to the applicant: (1) avoid bisecting the
battlefield preservation tract with the proposed major collector road by locating the road on the
northeast portion of the tract; (2) avoid creation of a "false sense of history" along the major collector
road by limiting treatments to minimal landscaping comprised of indigenous plantings; (3) develop an
interpretive plan for the preservation tract; (4) consider conducting archaeological studies ofthe property
and ensure that artifacts are properly inventoried and preserved; and (5) consider preserving the Sam
Byers House on a large parcel of land. Please see attached letter from Rebecca Ragsdale, Planner I,
dated 01/27/03.
Parks & Recreation: Please see attached letter dated 02/04/03 from James M. Doran, Director of
Parks & Recreation.
Frederick County Public Schools: The proposed development is anticipated to generate a total of
1,156 students at project build -out. Pursuant to the outputs of the Frederick County Fiscal Impact
Model, the combination of proffered land donations and monetary contributions will meet the
recommended levels to mitigate projected capital facilities impacts. It is noted that continued residential
growth in Frederick County, to include the proposed development, will necessitate the construction of
new school facilities to accommodate increased student enrollments. Please see attached letter dated
03/20/03 from Al Orndorff, Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent.
County Attorney: Proffers appear to be in proper form. Please see attached comment sheet dated
04/28/2003 from Jay Cook, Assistant County Attorney.
Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed development will not have an impact on Winchester
Regional Airport operations. Although the proposed development lies within the Regional Airport's
airspace, it is located outside of the airport's Part 77 surface. Please see attached letter dated 02/12103
from Serena R. Manuel, Executive Director.
Planning & Zoning:
1) Site History The original Frederick County zoning map (U. S. G. S. Stephenson Quadrangle)
identifies the subject parcels as being zoned A-2 (Agricultural General). The County's
agricultural zoning districts were combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption
of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 4
August 1, 2003
corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re -mapping of the subject properties
and all other A-1 and A-2 zoned land to the RA District.
2) Location The subject site is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles
Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately
2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The parcels comprising the site are
located wholly within the Stonewall Magisterial District and are used primarily for agricultural
purposes. Numerous parcels adjoin the 821.7 -acre site, all of which are zoned RA (Rural Areas)
and are either undeveloped or established with residential or agricultural land uses.
3) Comprehensive Policy Plan The four parcels comprising this rezoning request are all located
within the boundaries of the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP). The properties are located
wholly within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The NELUP envisions the area
comprised by the subject parcels as developing with industrial land use. Indeed, this designation
is consistent with the overarching purpose of the NELUP, which is the facilitation of business
and industrial development in a well planned, coordinated manner. (Comprehensive Policy Plan,
p. 6-36, p. 6-39)
The policies of the Comprehensive Plan governing planned communities stipulate that such
development is to occur within the Urban Development Area (UDA). The NELUP does not
provide for the expansion of the UDA within the study area. Planned communities and other
forms of suburban residential development are therefore not accommodated within the bounds
of the study area. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.1, 6-60, 6-61)
The preservation of environmentally sensitive areas and significant historic resources is
encouraged by the NELUP. The area proposed for rezoning is adjacent to the core area of the
Stephenson's Depot battlefield (Second Battle of Winchester) and includes the Byers House
(#34-1124), both of which are identified by the Developmentally Sensitive Area (DSA)
designation. Resources identified as D SA constitute community and historical preservation areas
that are to be protected from incompatible land uses through the use of adequate buffers and
screening. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.1)
Consistent with the transportation policies of the Comprehensive Plan, the NELUP specifies that
proposed development should only occur if impacted road systems will function at Level of
Service (LOS) "C" or better. The NELUP indicates that improvement of roads to maintain this
level of service objective is the responsibility of the private property owner or developer.
(Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.2, 6-36.3, 7-5)
The land use policies of the Comprehensive Plan identify the planned community approach as
a preferred method for establishing new neighborhoods within the UDA. It is expected that
such communities consist of an appropriate balance between residential, service, and employment
uses. Indeed, by providing an environment wherein people can live, work, and shop, the planned
community approach promises to more effectively mitigate the impacts of new development on
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 5
August 1, 2003
the County as a whole. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-60, 6-61)
Planning Staff Comment
The applicable land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan promote the establishment
of non-residential land uses on the subject parcels. The proposed rezoning of the site to
accommodate a 2,800 -unit planned residential development is, therefore, inconsistent with
adopted policy.
It is noted that an extensive review of the NELUP was recently concluded, during which several
alternative land use proposals were considered by the Planning Commission and the Board of
Supervisors. One such alternative proposed that the subject parcels be designated for planned
community land use. However, this alternative was not adopted, and the industrial land use
designation applicable to the subject properties was ultimately retained.
4) Site Suitability/Environmental Features
Impact Analysis Statement (p. 2, 3. 4): The subject site contains a variety of environmental
features to include a perennial stream, flood plain, wetlands, steep slopes, and woodlands. The
applicant proposes to incorporate the conservation of these sensitive environmental features into
the overall development plan through a variety of proffered methods.
The applicant has endeavored to accomplish resource conservation through the identification of
two resource protection areas, which are identified as the Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetland
Intermittent Ravine Channel. The majority of the site's sensitive environmental features are
captured within these two areas, the protection of which will occur through a combination of
approaches, to include riparian buffers, easements, supplemental plantings, and development of
resource management plans in collaboration with relevant state and non-profit environmental
organizations. The proffered Generalized Development Plan delineates the location of the
proposed resource protection areas. (See Proffer Statement, p. 19 - 21 and Generalized
Development Plan, dated March 2003)
The environmental features present on the subject parcels do not represent an impediment to site
development. Such features may be described as follows:
A. Flood Plain: Flood plain data for the subject parcels is delineated on the Flood Insurance
Study Map for Frederick County prepared by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development, Community Panel #510063-0110-B, effective date July 17, 1978.
The majority of the site is located in Flood Zone C, which denotes areas of minimal
flooding located outside of the 100 -year flood plain. As reported by the applicant, 100 -
year flood plain, Flood Zone A, exists coincident with Hiatt Run, a perennial stream that
traverses the subject site. The applicant has proffered to protect identified flood plain
resources through a combination of easements and buffer areas adjacent to the 100 -year
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 6
August 1, 2003
flood plain comprising the Hiatt Run Corridor. Moreover, the applicant has proffered
that disturbance within the flood plain will be limited to establishment of the proposed
linear park trail system, to include the trail, pedestrian bridges, benches and signage. Any
disturbance within the designated flood plain area will be subject to the Flood Plain (FP)
District requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. [Frederick County Zoning Ordinance,
§ 165-31.B. (1)]
B. Wetlands: The National Wetland Inventory Map (Stephenson Quadrangle) produced
by the U.S. Department of the Interior identifies seven wetland features on the subject
site. The identified wetland features correspond with ponding areas adjacent to the
stream system that drains to Hiatt Run. The applicant proposes to incorporate these
wetland resources into the stormwater management plan for Stephenson Village and
further proffers to provide buffers adjacent to wetlands located within the Hiatt Run
Corridor. Pursuant to the environmental standards ofthe Zoning Ordinance, disturbance
of wetlands is only permitted in accordance with the requirements of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers or other qualified state or federal agency. [Frederick County Zoning
Ordinance, § 165-31.B. (3)]
C. Soils and Steep Slopes: The General Soil Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County,
Virginia indicates that the soils on the site are consistent with the Weikert-Berks-Blairton
soil association, which is the predominant association in Frederick County east of
Interstate 81. It is noted that the Weikert-Berks-Blairton soil association presents some
limitations to site development due to a seasonal high water table, depth to bedrock, and
slope. The management of such soil characteristics will be addressed through subsequent
site engineering activities.
Steep slopes (land areas of 50% slope or greater) are located within the eastern and
central portions of the site, generally coincident with the ravines and drainage ways
associated with Hiatt Run and the Hiatt Run stream valley. The applicant has proffered
the establishment of riparian buffers along the Hiatt Run Corridor, which will minimize
disturbance of steep slope areas located on the site. The applicant has acknowledged
that some disturbance of steep slopes will be necessary to accommodate planned
stormwater management facilities, pedestrian trail systems, and the proffered
transportation program. The Zoning Ordinance stipulates that no more than 25% of
steep slopes shall be disturbed or regraded. The management of steep slopes pursuant
to this disturbance limitation will be addressed through subsequent site engineering
activities. [Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, § 165-31.B. (6)]
D. Woodlands: Areas of mature woodlands exist on the site, most of which are coincident
with the Hiatt Run Corridor. Other woodland areas are dispersed throughout the site.
The applicant has proffered to preserve those woodland areas located within the Hiatt
Run Corridor through the employment of 100 -foot riparian buffers. The applicant has
further proffered to collaborate with the Virginia Department of Forestry to prepare a
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 7
August 1, 2003
forest management plan to guide conservation ofwoodland resources within the project.
5) Potential Impacts
A. Transportation
Impact Analys is Statement (p. 4 - 5): The traffic impact analysis (TIA) prepared for this
application calculated transportation impacts based upon the following proffered
development program:
• Residential: 2,800 dwelling units (mixed housing types)
• Retail: 190,000 square feet
• Office: 60,000 square feet
• Public: 550 pupil elementary school
Using traffic generation figures from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, 6' Edition, the
applicant projects traffic impacts for the development in terms of three phases that
correspond with years 2006, 2008, and 2015, respectively. For the purposes of the TIA,
2015 represents the year in which project build out will occur. The TIA indicates that
at project build out, the planned uses will result in the generation of 25,178 new average
daily trips (ADT).
The total ADT generated by the development is projected by phase as follows:
• Phase I (Year 2006):
10,570 ADT
• Phase II (Year 2008):
17,699 ADT
• Phase III (Year 2015):
25,178 ADT
The new trips generated by the development will be absorbed by an external road
network consisting of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), Martinsburg Pike (Route
11), and the Exit 317 interchange of Interstate 81. This external network will be linked
to the development via a proffered major collector, or "spine," road. The major
collector road is the principal organizing component of the project's internal
transportation system, and will ultimately consist of four travel lanes that will bisect the
development and connect Old Charles Town Road and Martinsburg Pike. (See
Generalized Development Plan, dated March 2003)
The applicant has proffered to phase construction of the major collector road pursuant
to trip volume benchmarks that will be measured through actual traffic counts recorded
at the entrance to the development. As enumerated by the proposed proffer, the major
collector road and related improvements will be planned, designed, and implemented
when the traffic counts reach 80% of specified trip volume benchmarks. Each
benchmark triggers development of a particular section of the major collector road
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 8
August 1, 2003
4 l� fr.r�swt.�1 4{-0 „-C),_ inriiratec that constnlctiori Of
and/or associated improvements. lV'l0r1 C0' . _> 1,,. ,.,. ���.,.
said improvements will be completed within eighteen (18) months of attainment of the
80% volume figure. (See Proffer Statement, p. 10, Section F.)
Based upon the proffered trip volume benchmarks, the incremental construction of the
major collector road will occur in relation to the three overall transportation phases as
follows:
• Phase I (2006): Fully constructed within development boundaries - four
(4) lane section extending from project entrance at Old
Charles Town Road to limits of the project.
• Phase II (2008): Extension of two (2) lane half -section from terminus of
four (4) lane section at development limits to Martinsburg
Pike; intersection with Martinsburg Pike will be aligned
with entrance to Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park.
Phase III (2015): Remaining additional lanes constructed between
development limits and Martinsburg Pike; construction
completed.
In addition to construction of the major collector road, the transportation program
proffered by the applicant includes signalization of off-site intersections, turn lane
additions and lane widening on external roads, and the provision of pedestrian and
bicycle lanes. The proffered traffic signalization agreements will involve the intersections
ofMartinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town Road, Old Charles Town Road and the major
collector road, and the entrance of Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park on Martinsburg
Pike, which will ultimately align with the terminus of the major collector road. (See
Proffer Statement, p. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)
The analysis anticipates that background traffic in the study area will increase by 5%
annually through 2010 and by 3% between 2010 to 2015. Moreover, estimated
background conditions assume development of 1,400,000 square feet of commercial and
industrial land uses in the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park during the same time period.
Background traffic is that which is not generated by the proposed development.
The TIA concludes that the improvements proffered by the applicant will ensure Level
of Service (LOS) Category "C" conditions or better on study area roads during peak
traffic periods throughout Phase I and Phase II. However, with the conclusion of Phase
III, at project build out, several study area intersections are projected to function at LOS
Category "D" during peak traffic conditions. (See "A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis
of Stephenson Village, " p. 11, 19, & 27).
REZ 906-03, Stephenson Village
Page 9
August 1, 2003
rmOT Comment All roads providing access to the site will experience "significant
measurable impact" from proposed development. However, proffered transportation
improvements appear to be adequate to address traffic impacts. (See attached letter
dated 02/21103 from Ben Lineberry, Jr. P.E., Transportation Assistant Resident
Engineer, MOT Edinburg Residency)
Planning Staff Comment The infrastructure policies of the Northeast Land Use Plan
(NELUP) stipulate that new development should only occur if impacted road systems
will function at Level of Service (LOS) Category "C" or better. Indeed, this NELUP
provision reinforces the general transportation policies ofthe Comprehensive Policy Plan,
which establish LOS Category "C" as the desired condition on roads adjacent to and
within new development.
The transportation program proffered by the applicant achieves the functional standards
established by policy until the latter stages of development, when the combined effect of
background traffic growth and new vehicle trips originating from the proposed
development yield diminished levels of service. Indeed, at project build out, peak hour
LOS Category "D" conditions are shown at several study area intersections, most
notably those intersections located at or near the Interstate 81 interchange.
B. Historic Resources
bWactAnall sis Statement (p. 8 -_91: As reported by the applicant, the Frederick County
Rural Landmarks Survey includes one structure located on the subject site, which is
identified as the Samuel Byers House (# 34-1124). This structure is identified as
potentially significant due to its architectural style. The applicant has proffered to
preserve and adaptively reuse this resource as they deem appropriate.
The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey further includes several potentially
significant resources that are located on properties adjoining the subject site.
Specifically, the Helm McCann property (# 34-703) and the Milburn Chapel and
Cemetery (# 34-950) are located to the west of the site and the Jordan Springs Hotel (#
34-110) is located to the southeast of the site. Also located near the project site is
Milburn Road (Route 662), which is identified by the 1995 Frederick County -
Winchester Battlefield Network Plan as a significant historic corridor as it provides a
linkage between areas associated with the Second and Third Battles of Winchester. The
Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) further identifies the Milburn Road corridor as a
developmentally sensitive area (DSA). The applicant has suggested that development
of the Stephenson Village planned community will not impact the viewsheds associated
with these off site resources.
The 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of
Virginia identifies the core battlefield area of Stephenson's Depot on property located
immediately adjacent to the subject site. The property containing this resource is not
REZ 906-03, Stephenson Village
Page 10
August 1, 2003
included in this rezoning application. However, as shown on the proffered Generalized
Development Plan (GDP), the major collector road planned with this project will traverse
a portion of core battlefield land. Moreover, the GDP depicts the development of mixed
residential land uses adjacent to the core battlefield area. (See Generalized Development
Plan, dated March 2003)
C. Sewer and Water
Impact Analysis Statement (p. 5, 6) : At full build -out, the planned residential community
is projected to equally impact the public water and sewer system, consuming and
conveying approximately 689,000 gallons per day (GPD) of water and wastewater,
respectively. Water supply will originate from the Global Chemstone Quarry and be
distributed from the Northern Water Treatment Plan via an existing 10 -inch water main
that will be supplemented by a planned 20 -inch line, both of which extend along
Martinsburg Pike. At present, this water source is yielding 1.5 million gallons per day
(MGD).
Sewage conveyance will occur through an 8 -inch sewer force main that will flow to the
Redbud Run Pump Station, which will convey the project's effluent to the Opequon
Water Reclamation Facility. The Frederick - Winchester Service Authority (FWSA)
reports that adequate capacity is available at the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility
to accommodate the projected sewage flows of the proposed development.
It is noted that all water and sewer infrastructure will be provided by the applicant
pursuant to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority's (FCSA) Route 11 North Sewer
and Water Service Area Plan, which was approved by the Board of Supervisors in 2002.
Included with this plan is the development of the Lower Hiatt Run Pump Station, a
regional facility that the applicant has proffered to construct.
7) Proffer Statement (dated .IanuM 8 2003 revised through April 24, 2003):
A proffer analysis report, dated April 16, 2003, was prepared for the applicant delineating staff
concerns regarding proffer language, implementation methods, and the structure of the proffer
statement. The applicant responded to this report with a revised proffer statement that addressed
staff concerns. The proffer statement included with this application is therefore acceptable to
staff as a technical document. Should this application be approved, staff is comfortable that the
proffer statement will result in the development program outlined by the applicant in the impact
analysis statement. A copy of the proffer analysis report is included with the review agency
comments attached with this staff report.
It is noted that the proffer statement for Stephenson Village is extensive, involving twenty-three
distinct sections. Arguably the most critical component of the proffer statement is the
Community Design Modification Document, which includes a series of nine requests for
modifications to certain provisions of the Frederick County Code. The viability of these requests
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 11
August 1, 2003
is dependent upon the approval of an amendment to Article VII of the Zoning Ordinance to
allow Code modifications with requests for R4 zoning. This proposed amendment is scheduled
for public hearings on the same dates as the subject rezoning application. The remainder of the
proffer statement is fundamentally dependant upon the regulatory flexibility sought through the
modification document.
Given the importance of these requests to the applicant's proffer statement and, therefore, the
overall rezoning proposal, staff has provided an overview of the modification process as well as
a detailed discussion concerning each request. Following the modification discussion, the
remainder of the proffer statement is briefly summarized by section.
A. Section 1: Community Design Modification Document (Proffer Statement, p. 2):
Background ofModification Concept: The applicant initially included a series oftwenty-
two requests for waivers from certain requirements of the Frederick County Code ('the
Code") applicable to planned residential developments with the proffer statement. The
majority of these waiver requests involved provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and
Subdivision Ordinance and were proposed as a means of facilitating the design plan for
Stephenson Village.
Exemptions and/or waivers to the requirements of the Code applicable to planned
residential developments are currently enabled pursuant to Section 165-72.0. of the
Zoning Ordinance, which states:
Other regulations. The planned community development shall conform with
all regulations of this chapter and the Frederick County Code unless
specifically exempted by this article.
This provision plainly articulates that an exemption or waiver cannot be legally proposed
or considered for a planned residential community except where said exemption is
expressly permitted by Article VII of the Zoning Ordinance. The provisions of Article
VII limit exemptions to proposals for alternative dimensional requirements and
alternative landscaping and buffering plans. As such, the majority of the waiver requests
originally sought by the applicant through the proffer statement were determined to not
be permitted due to the absence of language in Article VII specifically enabling the
desired exemptions.
It was recognized that an alternative method would be required for the applicant to
achieve the regulatory flexibility necessary for the Stephenson Village design concept.
As an option, staff proposed an amendment to Article VII that would expand
opportunities for modifications to ordinance provisions applicable to planned residential
development. Through this approach, an applicant for R4 zoning would be allowed to
seek modifications to any provision of the Code impacting physical development. The
applicant would be required to provide justification for the request to include a proposed
REZ 906-03, Stephenson Village
Page 12
1, /- -7
August
alternative - or "modified" - standard in lieu of the ordinance requirement for which the
modification was being sought. The applicant would further be expected to identify the
need or role of the alternative standard in the overall design concept. A blanket waiver
or exemption would not be permitted.
As envisioned by staff, following Planning Commission review, the Board of Supervisors
would consider and approve each modification request included with an R4 rezoning
application on its merits pursuant to the applicant's justification. Moreover,
modifications would be considered concurrent with the rezoning application and, if
accepted with the proffer statement, the alternative or modified standards would be
included as conditions of the rezoning approval. Such legislatively approved
modifications would serve as an effective means of accommodating the unique vision
expected with a planned residential community while simultaneously assuring the
relevance of both the public process and the public purposes of the Code.
The proposed amendment would replace the current language of Section 165-72.0. with
the following:
§ 165-72.0. Modifications; applicability of other regulations.
(1) An applicant may request as part of an application for rezoning to the R4
District that a modification to specific requirements of the subdivision
ordinance, this chapter or other requirements of the Frederick County
Code applicable to physical development be granted. The applicant shall
demonstrate that the requested modification is necessary or justified in
the particular case by a demonstration that the public purpose of these
ordinances, as applied to the particular case, would be met to at least an
equivalent degree by such modification. The Board of Supervisors may
approve or disapprove such request, in whole or in part.
(2) The applicant shall provide sufficient information to enable evaluation of
the request by the Board of Supervisors. Materials submitted should
include or be supplemented by: (a) specification of the code section(s) to
be modified and the proposed alternative standard; (b) exhibits
demonstrating application of the modified standard such as a detailed
plan and/or elevation drawing; and (c) identification of the relationship
of the modification to the overall community concept.
(3) The planned community development shall conform with all regulations
of this chapter and the Frederick County Code unless specifically
exempted by this article or modified by the Board of Supervisors through
the rezoning process.
The applicant accepted this option and staff is processing the proposed ordinance
amendment concurrently with this rezoning application. The applicant subsequently
condensed the original waivers into nine modification requests. These requests and the
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 13
August 1, 2003
applicant's justification for each are delineated through the Community Design
Modification Document, which is included as Exhibit F of this application.
If approved, each alternative design standard specified in the proffered Community
Design Modification Document will constitute a condition of rezoning approval, and will
therefore be incorporated as a provision of the Zoning Ordinance uniquely applicable to
Stephenson Village. As with any proffered condition, an adopted alternative design
standard may only be changed pursuant to Board of Supervisors approval through the
rezoning process delineated in Article II of the Zoning Ordinance. Indeed, unless
amended in accord with said provisions, an alternative design standard will apply to
development within Stephenson Village in perpetuity, regardless of action subsequent to
application approval either amending or deleting the underlying Zoning Ordinance
requirement.
It is noted that approval of both the proposed ordinance amendment and modification
document is critical to the viability of subsequent provisions of the applicant's proffer
statement. Indeed, disapproval or alteration of the amendment or any of the proposed
modifications will likely necessitate adjustments to the overall development program.
Should either the proposed amendment or the requested modifications be
disapproved, either in whole or in part, the remainder of the proffer statement and
the proffered Generalized Development Plan must be altered to reflect such action
rior to further consideration of this application.
Community Design Modification Document (Rezoning Exhibit F)
• Modification #1 - § 165-71. Mixture of Housing Types Required
The R4 District requirements stipulate that no more than 40% of the residential uses
in a planned residential community shall consist of duplexes, multiplexes, atrium
houses, weak -link townhouses, townhouses, or garden apartments or any
combination of said housing types. The applicant is requesting that this standard be
modified to allow housing types identified under the townhouse, multi -family, and
active adult categories included in the proposed "Mixed Residential Matrix" to
comprise a maximum of 60% of the residential uses in Stephenson Village.
The proposed "Mixed Residential Matrix" includes four categories of housing types:
single family dwellings, townhouse dwellings, multi -family dwellings, and active adult
dwellings. A minimum and maximum ratio is proposed for each category. The
employment of such ranges is intended to ensure a mix of housing types while
allowing for variation in the ultimate composition of the overall housing mix.
Specific housing types are identified under these categories, to include several that
are permitted and defined by the current Zoning Ordinance as well as new housing
types proposed in Section 21 of the Proffer Statement. (See Proffer Statement, p. 23,
24)
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 14
August 1, 2003
If A fodC ca -don #1 is approved, the proposed "Mixed Residential Matrix" will
govern the categorization of housing types and the residential mix for Stephenson
Village. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant 's justification)
Planning Staff Comment: The current requirement of § 165-71. ensures that single
family detached dwellings will comprise a minimum of 60% of the residential mix in
a planned residential community. As proposed by the applicant, non -age restricted
single family dwellings will comprise a minimum of 30% and a maximum of 64% of
the residential mix of Stephenson Village. In contrast to the current ordinance
requirement that yields a housing mix predominated by single family detached units,
the applicant's modified standard could result in the opposite scenario, with 51% of
the housing in Stephenson Village consisting of townhouse and multi -family unit
types.
It is noted that the applicant has committed to developing a minimum of 19% of the
project with active-adult/age-restricted units, which could be increased to a
maximum of 53% of the overall mix. In the event the latter ratio develops, the
predominant housing in Stephenson Village would be active-adult/age-restricted,
which could develop with either single family or multi -family unit types.
• Modification #2 - 165-69. Permitted Uses;
$
165-72.B(2) - Alternative Dimensional Requirement Plan
The R4 District requirements allow for all uses permitted in the RP District within
the planned residential community. Moreover, the Zoning Ordinance permits the
adoption of an alternative dimensional requirement plan for the residential uses
planned for the development. The applicant is requesting a modification to the
permitted uses section to allow the introduction of new housing types to complement
those permitted by the RP District. The new housing unit types are identified in
Section 21 of the Proffer Statement, and include the following: carriage house, non -
alley carriage house, cottage house, and courtyard cluster. This request also includes
modified standards for single family small lot and townhouse units, which are
permitted RP District housing types. (See Proffer Statement, p. 23, 24)
If Modification #2 is approved, the new housing types identified in Section 21 of the
Proffer Statement will be permitted in Stephenson Village pursuant to the
dimensional standards delineated in "Rezoning Exhibit F." Moreover, through
approval of this modification, alternative dimensional standards will be accepted for
single family small lot and townhouse housing types in lieu of the current RP District
requirements. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification)
Plannin�Staff Comment: The proposed new housing types represent a notable
departure from the typical suburban residential development experienced by
Frederick County under RP zoning. Indeed, these housing types and the
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 15
August 1, 2003
accompanying alternative dimensional standards are the foundation for the distinctive
residential form envisioned by the applicant for Stephenson Village. It is noted that
all relevant review agencies have examined the proposed dimensional standards and
determined that said standards satisfy all applicable technical requirements.
• Modification #3 - & 165-72.D. Commercial and Industrial Areas;
§ 165-72.M. Non-residential Land Use Phasing
The R4 District requirements stipulate that a minimum of 10% of the gross area of
a planned residential community shall be used for business and industrial land uses,
and that such uses shall not exceed 50% of the gross land area. Moreover, the
Zoning Ordinance requires that each phase of a planned community development
shall include a reasonable amount of non-residential land uses. The applicant is
requesting that both of these standards be modified to (1) allow a minimum of 4%
of the gross area of the proposed planned residential community to be used for
business land uses and (2) eliminate the requirement that non-residential uses be
integrated throughout the development in favor of centralizing business uses in a
single commercial node.
The applicant has proffered a development program that allocates approximately 4%
of the gross land area for commercial land uses, the majority of which will form a 26 -
acre commercial center (Land Bay V). The remaining business land uses are planned
within the mixed residential area (Land Bay III) and will comprise approximately 7
acres, which are likely to develop with a day care or other service-oriented use. The
applicant has guaranteed that a minimum of 60,000 square feet of commercial uses
will develop in Stephenson Village, with maximum possible business development
comprising 250,000 square feet (190,000 square feet of retail; 60,000 square feet of
office). (See Proffer Statement, p. 4, S, 16, & 17 and Generalized Development
Plan, dated March 2003)
If Modification #3 is approved, the applicant will be permitted to limit commercial
development to 4% of the gross land area of the planned residential community,
which equates to approximately 33 acres devoted to commercial land uses.
Additionally, this modification will relieve the applicant of the requirement that each
phase of development include non-residential land uses, thereby enabling commercial
development to occur entirely within a centralized node. Approval of this
modification is necessary for acceptance of both the applicant's proffered
development program delineated in Section 3 of the Proffer Statement, and the
proffered Generalized Development Plan dated March 2003. (See ` RezoningExhibit
F" for applicant's justification)
Planning Staff Comment: The non-residential component of a planned community
development is necessary to achieve a dynamic mixed use land use pattern that
facilitates efficiencies of form and function impossible through the one dimensional
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 16
August 1, 2003
residential focus of RP zoning. The R4 District therefore requires a mix of retail,
business/office, and light industrial land uses, which, when integrated with a mix of
housing types, provides internal service and employment opportunities accessible via
the community's multi -modal transportation system. The non-residential ratios
required by the ordinance are intended to ensure that the advantages of planned
community developments are maximized for both the residents of such communities
and the County as a whole. Without a diverse array of non-residential uses that
includes sufficient employment -oriented business and industry, the development
program for Stephenson Village will fail to achieve a land use pattern that is
distinguishable from other suburban residential areas of Frederick County.
• Modification #4 - § 165-72.F. Recreational Facilities
The R4 District requirements stipulate that one (1) recreational unit be provided for
every thirty (30) units developed within a planned residential community. The
applicant is requesting a modification to allow the monetary value of a "tot lot"
facility to represent the equivalent of one recreational unit. This value figure would
be applied to the recreational facilities being proffered by the applicant as a method
to quantify ordinance compliance. The applicant is not seeking a modification of the
recreational facility ratio required by the ordinance. Rather, the applicant is
proposing a means for evaluating the value of the proffered recreational facilities vis-
a-vis the required ratio.
If Modification #4 is approved, the monetary value of a tot lot facility will be the
equivalent of one recreational unit for the purposes of determining the number of
recreational units represented by the applicant's planned recreational facilities. (See
"Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification)
PlanniL7g Staff Comment: It is noted that the RP District requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance identify a tot lot as an example of a single recreational unit. No comment
has been formally submitted by the Department of Parks and Recreation concerning
the requested modification.
• Modification #5 - 165-72.I. Road Access
§
165-29A.04) Motor Vehicle Access
§ 144-24 C. C. 2(a), C.2.(b) Lot Access
The R4 District requirements stipulate that a planned community development be
developed with a complete system of public streets dedicated to the Virginia
Department of Transportation (VDOT). Moreover, both the Zoning Ordinance and
Subdivision Ordinance limit private road access only to those developments
comprised exclusively of single family small lot and multi family housing. The
applicant is requesting a modification of these road access standards to (1) allow for
a complete system of private streets within the active -adult portion of the community
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 17
August 1, 2003
(Land Bay IV), and (2) permit private access roads extending from public streets to
serve a maximum of five dwelling units, or ten dwelling units if the private access
road connects two public streets, within the mixed residential land bay (Land Bay
III). The applicant proposes that all private roads will be constructed to meet or
exceed VDOT public road standards. The remainder of the project will be served by
public roads as required by ordinance.
If Modification #S is approved, the active adult portion of Stephenson Village will
be allowed to develop with a complete system of private roads, regardless of the mix
of housing types provided. Moreover, in the mixed residential portion of the
community, private access roads will be permitted to serve no more than five (5)
single family dwelling units, or a maximum of ten (10) units if the private access road
connects two public streets. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's
justification)
Planning Staff Comment: The maintenance of private roads and access ways will be
the exclusive responsibility of the property owners through the governing
Homeowner's Association (HOA). The granting of this modification would enable
the creation of "flag" or "pipestem" lots, which can cause confusion for property
owners and result in administrative challenges for staff. At present, private road
access to single family lots is permitted only in the context of minor rural subdivisions
in the RA (Rural Areas) District. A minor rural subdivision involves no more than
three (3) lots. It is noted that the relevant review agencies have been consulted
regarding the dimensional standards proposed for the private roads and access ways,
and are satisfied that such standards will meet applicable technical requirements.
• Modification #6 - & 165-72.M. Phasing
The R4 District requirements stipulate that a phasing plan must be submitted that
identifies the year in which each phase of development will be completed. The
applicant is requesting modification of this requirement to eliminate the need to
specify the concluding year for each phase and to instead enable phasing of land bay
development to be determined at the time of master plan approval. The applicant has
committed to completing phases in a specified sequence in those cases where a
sequence or schedule is included with the Master Development Plan. However, the
applicant is seeking greater flexibility to develop multiple phases simultaneously and
to contract with a variety of builders who will operate on independent schedules.
The phasing of development of non -age restricted dwelling units will occur at an
annual rate of 8% pursuant to Section 2 of the Proffer Statement. (See Proffer
Statement, p. 3)
If Modification #6 is approved, land bay development within Stephenson Village
will not follow a schedule or plan delineating the overall sequence of development
or the concluding year of a given land bay's development. Phasing will be governed
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 18
August 1, 2003
exclusively by the proffered limitation on permits for non -age restricted dwelling
units specified in Section 2 of the Proffer Statement. Said provision stipulates that
non -age restricted dwelling units will be developed at a rate not to exceed 8%
annually. There is no phasing proposed for the active adult/age restricted housing
component of the project. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicants justification)
Planning Staff Comment: The applicant has proffered phasing mechanisms for
development of the non -age restricted residential component of the project as well
as the planned transportation system. Thus, the overall pace of development is
clearly defined, as is the timing and sequence of improvements comprising the
proposed transportation system. However, pursuant to this modification request,
the progression of development within each land bay and the coordination of
improvements during "multi -phase" development will remain undetermined until
Master Development Plan (MDP) approval. (See Proffer Statement, p. 3, 10, & I1)
• Modification #7 - § 165-72.G.(1) Buffers and Screening
Road efficiency buffers are utilized to lessen the impacts of interstate, arterial,
primary, and major collector roads on adjoining residential land uses. The R4
District requirements stipulate that road efficiency buffers shall be provided in
accordance with the specifications of § 165-37 ofthe Zoning Ordinance. As such the
inactive portion of a road efficiency buffer must be a minimum of forty (40) feet in
depth, measured from the edge of the right-of-way of a major collector road. The
inactive buffer area must contain the screening elements of a full buffer as defined by
ordinance. A road efficiency buffer also requires an active buffer component
comprised of forty (40) feet, for a total buffer distance of eighty (80) feet. The
applicant is requesting modification of the road efficiency buffer requirements to
allow variations in the width of the inactive buffer area required adjacent to the
planned major collector road. Pursuant to the applicant's illustrative renderings, the
inactive buffer width would be a minimum oftwenty five (25) feet. The applicant has
indicated that the screening requirements of the ordinance would be exceeded where
buffer distance is reduced.
If Modification #7 is approved, the road efficiency buffer required adjacent to the
planned major collector road will include an inactive portion that varies in width from
a maximum of forty (40) feet to a minimum of twenty (25) feet. Although the
distance buffer would be reduced in size, the screening comprising the inactive buffer
areawould exceed standard ordinance requirements. (See `RezoningExhibitF"for
applicant's justification)
Planning Staff Comment: The effective combination of distance and screening is
critical to the mitigation of traffic impacts on adjoining residential uses. As proposed
by the applicant, the significant enhancement of screening to off -set the reduction in
size of the inactive buffer is essential to ensure the mitigative value of the road
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 19
August 1, 2003
efficie::cy buffer. If granted, this modification would not impact the inactive portion
of the buffer, which the applicant will be required to provide as specified by
ordinance.
• Modification 98 - § 165-68. Rezoning Procedure
The R4 District requirements stipulate that a complete Master Development Plan
(MDP) shall be submitted with an application for R4 zoning. The applicant is
requesting modification of this request to allow submission of a proffered
Generalized Development Plan (GDP) at the time of rezoning instead of the complete
MDP. The GDP would identify the relationship of the project site to the surrounding
transportation network and adjoining land uses. Moreover, the GDP would provide
a general layout for the proposed development, organizing the entire acreage into
land bays identified for either residential or non-residential land uses. The GDP
would further include a table delineating the approximate size of each land bay as
well as housing types and ratios for residential land bays. The applicant would
submit MDP applications for review subsequent to rezoning approval, at which time
greater detail concerning land bay development would be provided. (See
Generalized Development Plan, dated March 2003)
If Modification #8 is approved, a proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP)
will be processed with this application instead of a detailed Master Development Plan
(MDP). MDP submission would follow rezoning approval pursuant to the
application sequence typical for development in other zoning districts as outlined by
the Zoning Ordinance.
Planning Staff Comment: The applicant has include a proffered Generalized
Development Plan (GDP) with this application and is seeking the requested
modification pursuant to discussions with staff. The level of detail required with a
complete Master Development Plan (MDP) is difficult to provide with a rezoning
application when considering a project of the scope and scale of Stephenson Village.
A proffered GDP will effectively represent the overall development concept and can
sufficiently guide the implementation of proffered conditions via subsequent
development applications.
• Modification #9 - X165-133.13. Master Development Plan, Contiguous Land
§165-141.A.(8) Master Development Plan, Contents
§ 165-141.B.Q,(4),(8) Master Development Plan, R4 Contents
The referenced provisions of the Zoning Ordinance govern the required scope and
contents of a Master Development Plan (MDP). Collectively, these provisions
stipulate that the entirety of a project site shall be included and planned under a single
MDP. Citing the size and scope of the Stephenson Village project, the applicant is
requesting modification of the referenced provisions to enable the submission of a
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 20
August 1, 2003
series of MDP applications to accommodate the incremental development of
Stephenson Village over time. Each successive MDP application will provide
aggregate development data for the project, effectively tabulating the status of the
project relative to the proffered development program and other proffered
conditions. The proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) will serve as the
guide for all MDP submissions.
If Modification #9 is approved, the applicant will be permitted to submit a series of
Master Development Plan (MDP) applications to address the incremental
development of the project. This process would occur in lieu of a singular MDP
accommodating the "total development" of the planned community. Each MDP
would provide aggregate development data thereby ensuring effective monitoring of
project status and conformity with proffered conditions. (See `Rezoning Exhibit F"
for applicant's justification).
Planning Staff Comment: The proffering of a Generalized Development Plan (GDP)
is appropriate for a project the size of Stephenson Village. A series of Master
Development Plan (MDP) submissions will facilitate the incremental implementation
of the development program that will be conceptually represented by the GDP and
detailed by the proffer statement. Indeed, through such an approach, each MDP will
serve as a discernable "building block" toward completion of the overall development
program. The modified process requested by the applicant would arguably not
compromise the comprehensive orientation of the MDP program.
B. Section 2: Phasing Plan to Minimize Sudden Impacts on County Services
(Proffer Statement, p. 2, 3)
• Additional Proffer Payment - The applicant has proffered to double the monetary
contribution to Frederick County for public schools for each student that exceeds "a
cumulative yearly total increase of 60 students per year." The additional monetary
payment of $3,925 will be adjusted every seven years to reflect the Consumer Price
Index (CPI).
• Limitation on Permits - The applicant has proffered that no more than 2,800
residential units will be developed within Stephenson Village. This unit limitation
results in a maximum gross residential density of 3.40 units per acre. The applicant
has further proffered to phase development of the non -age restricted units at a rate
of 8% per year. Active adult/age restricted housing and elderly housing are excluded
from the phasing program.
C. Section 3: Uses, Density and Mix of Housing Types
(Proffer Statement, p. 3, 4, S)
• Land Bay Breakdown Table - The applicant has proffered a Generalized
Development Plan (GDP) that includes five distinct land bays. The land uses planned
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 21
August 1, 2003
for these land bays have been proffered through the Land Bay Breakdown Table,
which sets the fundamental parameters for the development. The table may be
summarized as follows: Land Bay I - Elementary School (land dedication); Land Bay
II - Public Park (land dedication); Land Bay III - Mixed Residential (mix of single
family detached, townhouse, and multi -family units); Land Bay IV - Active Adult
(mix of unit types); Land Bay V - Commercial Center. The table further identifies
the minimum and maximum ratios permitted for the housing categories proffered
within each land bay.
• The total commercial area is proffered to consist of 33 acres that will be located
within Land Bays III and V, respectively. It is noted that the business uses planned
for Land Bay III, which is the mixed residential area, are intended to be
neighborhood -scale service-oriented uses. The planned 26 -acre commercial center
will serve as the principal commercial node for Stephenson Village and will be
located within Land Bay V.
• Open Space - The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel,
both ofwhich are proffered resource protection areas, total approximately 125 acres.
The applicant has proffered to disperse the remaining 121.5 acres of required open
space throughout the four residential land bays.
• Active Adult and/or Affordable Housing for the Elderly - The applicant has proffered
that active adult housing may comprise up to 53% of the total housing units in
Stephenson Village, which, if developed to this maximum ratio, would involve
development of active adult units in both Land Bay III and Land Bay IV. Regardless
of the ratio of active adult units, in no case shall the total number of housing units
exceed 2,800.
• HeM Commercial and Light Industrial Land Uses - The applicant has proffered to
exclude all uses permitted in the B3 (Industrial Transition) and M1 (Light Industry)
Zoning Districts, unless such uses are otherwise permitted in the B I (Neighborhood
Business), B2 (General Business), or RP (Residential Performance) Zoning Districts.
Truck stops are expressly prohibited.
D. Section 4: Applicant to Pay 100% of Capital Facilities
(Proffer Statement, p. S, 6)
• Fiscal Impact Model - The Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model
demonstrated a fiscal impact to capital facilities in the amount of $5,327 per
residential unit. The applicant has proffered to accommodate 100% of this figure
through a combination of monetary contributions and land donations. It is noted that
land donations are assigned a value of $30,000 per acre.
• Consumer Price Index (CPI) - All proffered monetary contributions will be adjusted
every seven (7) years to reflect the Consumer Price Index (CPI) - All Urban
Consumers (Current Series).
• Active Adult Contributions & Premium - Capital facilities that are not directly
impacted by active adult housing, such as public schools, will not receive a monetary
contribution for such housing. However, the applicant has proffered to pay a 50%
REZ 906-03, Stephenson Village
Page 22
August i, 2003
premium on proffer contributions for fire and rescue per each active adult unit, in
excess of the impact figure identified by the impact model. The applicant has also
proffered to pay a 100% premium for fire and rescue per each elderly housing unit.
These premiums are intended by the applicant to off -set the increased demand on fire
and rescue services common with such populations.
E. Section 5: Monetary Contribution to Develop Heritage Tourism
(Proffer Statement, p. 7)
Matching Funds - The applicant has proffered to make a direct contribution to
Shenandoah University Historical and Tourism Center in the amount of $75,000.
This contribution will be made in the form of matching funds intended to promote
heritage tourism.
Implementation Note: The above -referenced contribution is not enforceable by
Frederick County and will occur as a private transaction between the applicant and
Shenandoah University Historical and Tourism Center.
F. Section 6: Monetary Contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc.
(Proffer Statement, p. 7)
Direct Contribution - The applicant has proffered to make a direct contribution to
Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. in the amount of $200,000. The
proffered funding will be dispersed in four installments pursuant to development
thresholds identified by proffer. This contribution is intended to mitigate the impact
of the development on volunteer fire and rescue services.
Implementation Note: The above -referenced contribution is not enforceable by
Frederick County and will occur as a private transaction between the applicant and
Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc.
G. Section 7: Multi -Modal Transportation Improvements
(Proffer Statement, p. 7, 8, 9, 10, & 11)
Major Collector Road - The applicant has proffered to dedicate an 80 foot right-of-
way and construct a major collector road from the project entrance on Old Charles
Town Road through Stephenson Village, and across properties currently owned by
McCann and Omps to U. S. Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike). The major collector road
will ultimately be completed as a four lane boulevard constructed pursuant to VDOT
standards. The applicant has proffered to include landscaped medians and bicycle
lanes with the major collector road.
Major Collector Road Construction - The major collector road will be contracted in
phases, beginning with its development within Stephenson Village as a two lane half -
section. The major collector road will be constructed to its ultimate four -lane
configuration in increments, the development of which will be triggered by a series
of traffic volume thresholds measured through trip counters located at the project
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 23
August 1, 2003
entrance. The applicant has proffered that design of improvements will occur when
80% of a given volume threshold is reached and the completion of improvements
will occur within 18 months of the date of the 80% measurement.
• Active Adult Gated Community - The applicant has proffered that the entrance to the
active adult section of the development will be gated. The applicant intends to serve
the active adult community exclusively with private roads constructed to VDOT
public road standards.
• Old Charles Town Road Improvements - The applicant has proffered to complete all
necessary entrance improvements at the intersection of the major collector road and
Old Charles Town Road during the first phase of development. Moreover, the
applicant has proffered to execute signalization agreements with VDOT for the
intersections of Old Charles Town Road and Route I 1 and the major collector road.
Actual signalization will occur when warranted by VDOT. Pursuant to a specified
traffic volume threshold, the applicant has proffered to bond and commence
construction of a three -lane section of Old Charles Town Road from the Stephenson
Village entrance to Route 11.
• Interstate 81 Interchange Improvement Contribution -The applicant has proffered
to contribute $50,000 in matching funds for use by either VDOT or Frederick
County for improvements to the Interstate 81 - Route I 1 interchange at Exit 317.
H. Section 8: School and Ball Field Sites, Community Facilities and Public Use Areas
(Proffer Statement, P. 11, 12)
• School Site - The applicant has proffered to dedicate 20 acres of land to the
Frederick County School Board for use as a public school site. This site is shown on
the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) as Land Bay I. The applicant
intends to apply this acreage to the open space requirement for the development.
• Soccer and Ballfield Site - The applicant has proffered to dedicate 24 acres of land
to Frederick County or such other entity as Frederick County designates for public
recreation sites. This site is shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan
(GDP) as Land Bay II. The applicant intends to apply this acreage to the open space
requirement for the development.
I. Section 9: Recreational Amenities and Linear Park
(Proffer Statement, p. 13, 14)
• Recreational Center - The applicant has proffered to construct a recreation center
within the mixed residential area (Land Bay III). This facility may be located
anywhere within said land bay at the discretion of the applicant. However, the
location of the recreation center will be identified on the Master Development Plan
(MDP) applicable to this portion of the development. The applicant has proffered
that the recreation center will include a bathhouse and a 6 -lane, 25 meter competition
swimming pool. This facility is intended for use by residents of the development.
The bonding and completion of this amenity will occur pursuant to development
REZ 906-03, Stephenson Village
Page 24
August 1, 2003
thresholds spec' d UY
1— proffer.
• Active Adult Recreation Center - The applicant has proffered to construct a
recreation center within the active adult land bay (Land Bay IV) for use by residents
of the active adult community. The bonding and completion of this amenity will
occur pursuant to development thresholds specified by proffer.
• Pedestrian Trail Sidewalk System - The applicant has proffered to construct a
pedestrian trail or sidewalk system to link the recreation centers to the surrounding
neighborhoods.
• nt has proffered to dedicate afifteen-foot wide trail
Linear Park Trail - The applica
easement to the Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department for the purposes
of a linear park trail. The trail will be located within the Hiatt Run Corridor and
extend along the length of the corridor, a distance of approximately 3,800 linear feet,
as depicted on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP). The applicant
has proffered to construct a six-foot wide asphalt or concrete trail within the
dedicated easement. The applicant intends to apply the area of the Hiatt Run
Corridor, to include the trail, to the open space requirement of the development.
J. Section 10: Active Adult Age -Restricted Housing
(Proffer Statement, p. 14, 15)
• Deed Language - The applicant has included the language to be recorded with the
deeds for designated active adult age -restricted properties.
• Implementation Note - The provisions included in this section are not enforceable
by Frederick County. Implementation of rules and regulations concerning the
occupancy of designated active adult age -restricted units is the sole responsibility of
the applicant and/or the governing Homeowner's Association.
K. Section 11: Affordable Housing for the Elderly
(Proffer Statement, p. 15)
• Provision of Affordable Housing for the Elderly - The applicant has proffered to
develop affordable housing for the elderly at such time that 50% of the proffered
retail space (95,000 square feet) has been developed and pursuant to all necessary
state and federal approvals. Moreover, such housing will only be constructed if the
project qualifies for government funding dispersed through the Multi -Family Loan
Program and the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program or equivalent. The
applicant has proffered that should such funding prove unattainable, any units
planned for affordable elderly housing will be developed as active adult age -restricted
units.
L. Section 12: Preservation of Historical and Cultural Resources
(Proffer Statement, p. 16)
•
Byers House - The applicant has proffered to preserve the potentially significant
Samuel Byers House. The applicant has reserved the right to adaptively reuse the
REZ 906-03, Stephenson Village
Page 25
August 1, 2003
structure as they deem appropriate.
• Cemeteries - The applicant has proffered to identify and preserve any cemeteries
found on the project site.
M. Section 13: Commercial Center
(Proffer Statement, p. 16, 17)
• Commercial Center Location and Development - The applicant has proffered to
locate a commercial center on land identified as Land Bay V on the proffered
Generalized Development Plan (GDP). The applicant has proffered a maximum of
250,000 square feet of commercial land use in Stephenson Village, of which the
majority will be located in the commercial center. Smaller commercial nodes maybe
located within the mixed residential land bay (Land Bay III).
• Minimum Commercial Space Guaranteed - The applicant has proffered to construct
60,000 square feet of commercial space within the commercial center no later than
the issuance of the 1,500' non -age restricted residential building permit. The
applicant has further proffered to complete development of this space within 18
months of commencement of construction. The applicant has attached two caveats
to the timing of construction of the proffered commercial space. Notably, the
applicant reserves the right to delay commencement of commercial construction for
a two year period beyond the date of issuance of the 1,500"' residential building
permit should either of the following occur: (1) an elementary school has not been
constructed within the community; or, (2) a building permit is obtained for
development of a new grocery store within a three mile radius of the planned
Stephenson Village commercial center location.
N. Section 14: Rent Free County Office Space
(Proffer Statement, p. 17)
• Office Space - The applicant has proffered to provide up to 2,500 square feet of shell
space for a ten (10) year period within the commercial center for the location of a
public service satellite facility for Frederick County. Per the proffer, Frederick
County must build out and occupy the space within two (2) years of completion of
the base building. Should such occupancy fail to occur with the two year time
period, the space will revert back to the applicant.
O. Section 15: Community Design for a Strong Sense of Place
(Proffer Statement, p. 17, 18, 19)
•
Design - The applicant has proffered to coordinate design to ensure aesthetic
continuity throughout the development. Such continuity will be achieved through the
use of uniformly applied custom treatments, such as: custom street sign and fixtures,
standardized fencing, and community color themes. Also, the applicant has proffered
to employ decorative treatments at all entrance monuments. No illustratives detailing
REZ 906-03, Stephenson Village
Page 26
August 1, 2003
design features are provided with the proffer statement.
• Architecture - The applicant has proffered to employ the architectural styling
depicted on the housing unit type exhibits for the following housing unit types:
carriage house, non -alley carriage house, cottage house, and courtyard cluster. It is
further proffered that other housing types utilized in the development will incorporate
compatible architectural treatments.
• Fire Protection System - The applicant has proffered to install 13-D type sprinkler
systems in all courtyard cluster and cottage houses as well as in the garages
accompanying these housing types.
P. Section 16: Environmental Features and Habitat Preservation
(Proffer Statement, p. 19, 20, 21)
• Buffer and Conservation Easements - The applicant has proffered a one -hundred
(100) foot wide "non -disturbance" buffer adjacent to each side of Hiatt Run and the
Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel. This buffer will be located wholly outside of
platted lots. The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel
are located as shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) and are
designated by the applicant as resource protection areas.
• Flood Plain Buffer - No platted lot will be located closer than twenty (20) feet to the
limits of the 100 -year flood plain. The ten (10) feet of this buffer located
immediately adjacent to the flood plain will remain undisturbed. Should this area be
disturbed during development, it will be replanted as specified by proffer.
• Hiatt Run Corridor - As noted above, the Hiatt Run Corridor is identified as a
resource protection area by the applicant. The applicant has proffered a minimum
buffer of twenty (20) feet adjacent to all wetland preservation areas, which are
generally coincident with or in close proximity to the Hiatt Run Corridor. The
vegetation located on the south side of the corridor will be preserved and/or
reforested pursuant to a Forest Management Plan that will be developed with input
from the Virginia Department of Forestry. Moreover, the applicant has proffered to
install native plantings on the north side of the corridor in an effort to protect riparian
resources and enhance wildlife and bird habitats.
• Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel - As noted above, the Wetlands Intermittent
Ravine Channel is identified as a resource protection area by the applicant. The
applicant has proffered to provide native plantings within this area to form an upland
buffer. Individual platted lots may be located within this zone; however, clearing and
grading will be prohibited via restrictive covenants, with the Homeowner's
Association bearing responsibility for enforcement of said restrictions.
• Forest Management Plan - The applicant has proffered to prepare a Forest
Stewardship and Management Plan with technical assistance from the Virginia
Department of Forestry. This plan will identify native vegetation and tree clusters
to be preserved on the site and delineate resource management practices to ensure
effective conservation.
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 27
August 1, 2003
Q. Section 17: Community Curbside Trash Collection
(Proffer Statement, P. 21, 22)
• Commercial Trash Collection - The applicant has proffered that the proposed
development will be served by private trash removal contractors. The applicant
intends to assign full responsibility for enforcement of this proffer to the
Homeowners Association.
R Section 18: Water and Sewer Improvements in the Stephenson Area
(Proffer Statement, p. 22)
• Pump Station Construction - The applicant has proffered to dedicate land for a
regional pump station pursuant to the selection of said property by the Frederick
County Sanitation Authority (FCSA). The applicant has further proffered to
construct the pump station prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit in
Stephenson Village.
• Infrastructure Construction - The applicant has proffered to construct all water and
sewer lines required to serve private land uses within Stephenson Village in
accordance with the provisions of the FCSA Route 11 North Sewer and Water
-- � ----I �_ __4,,,,a ,ao „�+Pty, sized
Service Area Plan. Moreover, the appncan� lids pro11el Vu to czaenu adeq. atel,
water and sewer lines to the property boundary of all land dedicated for public uses.
S. Section 19: Comprehensive Plan Conformity
(Proffer Statement, p. 22)
• Public Facilities - Acceptance of the proffer statement will serve as the formal
authorization for the provision and location of those public uses and facilities
referenced in the proffer statement and on the Generalized Development Plan (GDP),
to include the extension of water and sewer lines, pursuant to Virginia Code Section
15.2-2232 and the Frederick County Code. No further review for Comprehensive
Plan conformance would be necessary.
T. Section 20: Creation of Homeowners Association(s)
(Proffer Statement, p. 23)
• This proffer provision acknowledges the applicant's responsibility to establish one
or more Homeowners Associations for Stephensons Village.
U. Section 21: Proffered Housing Types
(Proffer Statement, p. 23, 24)
• Unique Housing Types - The applicant has proffered the inclusion of several housing
types that will be new to the Frederick County market. Specifically, the following
unique housing types will be developed: Carriage House, Non -Alley Carriage House,
REZ 906-03, Stephenson Village
Page 28
August 1, 2003
Cottage House, Courtyard Cluster, and Elderly Housing. The applicant has also
proffered alternative dimensional standards for single family detached and townhouse
housing types, which the applicant refers to as "modified single family detached" and
"modified townhouse attached dwelling."
V. Section 22: Streetscape Design and Landscaping
(Proffer Statement, p 24, 25)
• Major Collector Road Landscaping - The applicant has proffered to provide
landscaped areas on each side of the major collector road as detailed in Exhibit D.
Such landscaping is proposed coincident with a request for modification of the road
efficiency buffer required by ordinance. The applicant has proffered to install
landscaping along the roadway as specified by proffer.
W. Section 23: Community Signage Program
(Proffer Statement, p. 25, 26)
• Entrance Signage - The applicant has proffered dimensions for the monument style
entrance signs to Stephenson Village. Moreover, entry features distinguishing the
neighborhoods within the community will be provided. No illustratives have been
provided for such signage.
• Freestanding Commercial Signs - The applicant has proffered that freestanding
commercial signs shall be monument style and will be limited in height to twenty (20)
feet. Such signs shall be spaced a minimum of one hundred (100) feet. Commercial
signage will incorporate design elements comprising the entrance features of
surrounding neighborhoods.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 07/16/03 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
This application is a request to rezone approximately 821 acres of RA -zoned property to the R4 District
to facilitate development of a planned residential community consisting of 2,800 dwelling units and
250,000 square feet of commercial uses with 44 acres dedicated for public uses. The Comprehensive
Policy Plan specifically addresses the planned land use of the subject parcels through the policies
adopted with the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP). These policies recommend the establishment of
industrial land use on the parcels. The requested rezoning is, therefore, inconsistent with the adopted
land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan.
It is important to reiterate that the modifications requested by the applicant are essential to the viability
of the proffered development program. Absent these modifications, the development parameters
proposed for Stephenson Village will not comply with the requirements of the R4 District.
REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village
Page 29
August 1, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 07/16/03 MEETING:
The required public hearing was conducted following presentations by Planning Department staff and
the applicant. Numerous citizens addressed the Planning Commission, offering both support and
opposition concerning the proposed rezoning. The public hearing was formally concluded following the
Commission's receipt of citizen comments and the applicant was given an opportunity to respond.
At the request of the applicant, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to table further
consideration and final action regarding the proposed rezoning for thirty (30) days. The subject
application was therefore scheduled as a public meeting item on the agenda of the Planning
Commission's August 20, 2003 meeting.
It is noted that Planning Commission Chairman Charles DeHaven abstained from the Commission's
deliberations and action regarding this application. Also, Shawnee District Planning Commissioner
Robert Morris was absent from the meeting.