Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
PC 02-05-03 Meeting Agenda
AGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia FEBRUARY 5, 2003 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) December 18, 2002 Minutes ............................................. (A) 2) Committee Reports .................................................. (no tab) 3) Citizen Comments .................................................. (no tab) PUBLIC HEARING 4) Rezoning #02-03 of the Winchester Medical Center, submitted by Clifford & Associates, Inc. to rezone 50.0540 acres from B2 (Business General) to B2 (Business General) with revised proffers, and 51.9676 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to MS (Medical Support). This property is located north and adjacent to Route 50 and west and adjacent to Route 37, and is identified with Property Identification Number 53-A-68 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. (Mr. Mohn)........................................................... (B) DISCUSSION ITEMS 5) Request for Extension of Sewer and Water Services, submitted by Tim and Denise Thomas, for the extension of water and sewer to approximately one acre of land. This is a request for extension of water and sewer outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The property is located on the east side of Double Church Road, immediately east of the Hartwood and Woodside subdivisions and is identified with Property Identification Number 86 -A -71A in the Opequon Magisterial District. (Mr. Lawrence) ....................................................... (C) 6) Request for Extension of Sewer and Water Services, submitted by Robert Trenary, for the extension of water and sewer to approximately 80 acres of land. This is a request for extension of water and sewer outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The property is located on Forest Lakes Drive, south of Fairfax Pike and Hudson Hollow Road, and is identified with Property Identification Numbers 86-A-211 and 86- A-212 in the Opequon Magisterial District. (Mr. Lawrence) ....................................................... (D) 7) Discussion of the Northeast Land Use Plan (Mr. Lawrence) ........................................................ (F) 8) Other MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on December 18, 2002, PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/ Opequon District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; Robert A. Moms, Shawnee District; Pat Gochenour, Red Bud District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; William C. Rosenberry, Shawnee District; and Jay Cook, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Marie F. Straub, Red Bud District; Gene E. Fisher, Citizen at Large; Robert Sager, Board of Supervisors' Liaison; and Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison. STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Planning Director, Jeremy F. Camp, Planner II, Patrick T. Davenport, Zoning Administrator; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. COMMITTEE REPORTS Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) - 12/17/02 Mtg. Commissioner Gochenour reported that the HRAB discussed the following: the Shenandoah Valley Battlefield Foundation's presentation entitled, `Battlefield Clusters," given by John Hutchinson, Program Manager for Resource Protection; two rezoning proposals, the North Stephenson, Inc. and the Shenandoah Valley Lime Corporation by Greenway Engineering. Commissioner Gochenour reported that the HRAB has decided to meet on a more frequent basis in 2003. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 18, 2002 Page 984 -2 - PUBLIC HEARING Rezoning Application #08-02 of Bowman/Shoemaker (tabled at the 9/4/02 and 11/20/02 meetings), submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 10.09 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to B2 (Business General) District. This property is located south on Fairfax Pike (Rt. 277), approximately 800 feet east of the intersection of Rt. 277 and Double Church Road (Rt. 641), and is identified with Property Identification Number 86-A-81 in the Opequon Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval Planner Jeremy F. Camp stated that the Planning Commission tabled this rezoning proposal at their meetings of September 4, 2002 and November 20, 2002 due to transportation concerns related to Phase II of the development. Planner Camp explained that since the November 20, 2002 meeting, the applicant has revised Proffer B7 in an attempt to address the concerns of the Planning Commission. He said the revisions include: 1) the limitation of Phase Il to no more than 250 vehicle trips per day until Fairfax Pike (Rt. 277) is improved; and, 2) the limitation of development of Phase II, unless a detailed traffic study can be submitted for each site plan which proves that an acceptable level of service can be maintained on Fairfax Pike. Planner Camp said the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has reviewed the revised proffer statement and concluded that it does satisfy their transportation concerns; the County Attorney has also reviewed the revised proffer statement and had no additional comments. Planner Camp said that the Planning Staff continues to express concern regarding the rezoning application, due to the fact that the subject property is not located with the Urban Development Area (UDA) or the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Mr. Evan A. Wyatt with Greenway Engineering, representing the owner, Beverly B. Shoemaker, stated that if this rezoning is approved, several triggers have been established for the Phase II development: 1) the Board of Supervisors must include the property within the SWSA before any development occurs; 2) after the property is incorporated in the SWSA, additional vehicle trips generated will be limited to 250; and, 3) a traffic study verifying that the Level of Service (LOS) on Rt. 277 is adequate to accommodate the first 250 trips or no development will occur in Phase II until the Rt. 277 improvements are in place. Chairman DeHaven called for public comments, however, no one came forward to speak. Commissioner Rosenberry asked for specifics on what was meant by "improvements to Fairfax Pike (Rt. 277)." Mr. Wyatt stated that a few years ago, VDOT provided funding for preliminary engineering design work to be done on the Rt. 277 corridor, from I-81 to just east of Rt. 636. The purpose of the exercise was to allow for adequate right-of-way, as properties developed, and not to place buildings or parking lots too close. He said the reference in the proffer is the actual engineering document that VDOT and the Commonwealth Transportation Board approved for that section of Rt. 277. Basically, on this portion, it will be two travel lanes in each direction. Commissioner Gochenour had questions for the applicant on how the Phase II development would be limited. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 18, 2002 Page 985 -3 - Commissioner Morris commented that businesses outside of the SWSA have historically been granted approval by the Commission and Board to be connected to sewer. He asked the staff if they saw any conflict with the applicant's phasing plan which stated that the property would be included in the UDA and the SWSA before any further development and the fact that sewer could be extended into the area through precedent without inclusion in the SWSA. Director Lawrence replied that the Board of Supervisors will ultimately make the decision as to whether or not this property proceeds with Phase I1 because the Board must approve all SWSA expansion requests, as well as an extension of sewer service. The Commissioners believed the revised proffers submitted by the applicant had addressed the traffic concerns that were raised. Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Ours, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Rezoning Application #08-02 of Bowman/Shoemaker, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 10.09 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to B2 (Business General) District with the revised proffers as submitted by the applicant. PUBLIC MEETING A request of Michael F. Ferraro and Linda D. Ferraro for a waiver to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 144, Subdivision Ordinance, Section 144-31C(3), which would enable them to subdivide their property without the necessary 50 -foot right-of-way width for a private shared driveway. This waiver, if approved, would apply to this specific subdivision request. Any future subdivision requests for this property would be required to meet the requirements of Section 144-31C(3). (This request was returned to the Planning Commission by the Board of Supervisors for further consideration.) Action - Recommended Denial Commissioner Watt stated that he would abstain from discussion and voting on this request due to a possible conflict of interest. Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mr. Patrick T. Davenport, stated that the Planning Commission voted to recommend denial of this waiver request at their public meeting of October 16, 2002. He said that subsequently, at the November 13, 2002 meeting of the Board of Supervisors, the Board voted to send the Ferraro's waiver request back to the Planning Commission for additional consideration, due to the fact that the applicant's attorney had included proposed restrictive covenants in the Board's agenda that would be placed upon the two new parcels, if allowed to be subdivided. He said that these proposed covenants were not included in the November 13, 2002 agenda package for the Commission. Administrator Davenport stated that the covenants would restrict each parcel to use a separate right-of-way and would also restrict each parcel to constructing one single-family dwelling. Administrator Davenport added that Frederick County does not enforce private restrictive covenants. Mr. Robert T. Mitchell, Jr., representing the applicants Michael F. and Linda D. Ferraro, Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 18, 2002 Page 986 -4 - stated that the Ferraros would like to subdivide their 109 -acre parcel into two lots, one of approximately 35.51 acres and one of approximately 73.47 acres, which would constitute a minor rural subdivision. Mr. Mitchell stated that the Ferraros are requesting a waiver of the Subdivision Ordinance, Section 144-31C(3), which requires a minimum width for a private shared driveway to be 50 foot in width. He explained that the Ferraros are prepared to terminate the right of Tract 1 (73.47 ac.) to use the northern right-of-way and they wiii terminate the right of Tract 2 (35.51 ac.) to use the southern right-of-way; he noted that the result would be for each right-of-way to serve only one lot. Mr. Mitchell said the Ferraros are also prepared to place a permanent restrictive covenant on their property stating that as long as Tract 1 is utilizing the southern right-of- way for access, there will never be more than one single-family residence on Tract 1. He said the same covenant would be applied to Tract 2, that as long as Tract 2 is utilizing the northern right-of-way for acees, there will never be more than one single-family residence on Tract 2. Mr. Mitchell said they have actually prepared the Deed of Subdivision and Declaration of Restrictions which would be placed in the land records and would be permanent restrictions of the property. Commission members discussed with Mr. Mitchell the enforcement process. Mr. Mitchell pointed out that if there is any attempted violation of the restrictive covenants in the future, any one of the property owners along the right-of-way would have the right to seek an injunction to enforce the restrictive covenants. Commission members pointed out that this process would involve costs to the property owners seeking the injunction. A question from the Commission was also raised as to who is responsible for maintaining right-of-ways. Mr. Mitchell said that in the absence of a written maintenance agreement, the general situation is that those who use the right-of-way have maintenance responsibility. Mr. Mitchell added that to his knowledge, neither of the two right-of-ways have a written maintenance agreement that applies to all the properties over which the right-of-way traverses. Chairman DeHaven next called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Ms. Mary Catherine Lynch, an attorney representing Mr. Allen Lafollette, stated that in her research of the land records she observed that the Ferraros have a recorded right-of-way on their deed for the northern right-of-way, but she cannot find a recorded right-of-way for the southern road. Ms. Lynch stated that there is a question in her and her client's minds regarding the status of that southern right-of-way. Ms. Lynch added that they also have concerns about who will be enforcing the Ferraro's proposed deed restrictions. She agreed that everyone has the avenue of going to court to enforce an issue; but noted that it seemed a burdensome task for someone to have to do when they have not created the situation to begin with. She further added that to make these roads easily passable, it may require taking down timber, and she questioned whether this was something one person has the right to do on another person's property. Mr. John Watt, Jr. asked if this was a precedent -setting request and he also questioned what would happen during the Winter and Spring months when the road becomes impassable. Mr. Joe Marple, an adjoining property owner to the north, agreed with the other concerns raised by persons who spoke. Mr. Marple was concerned with the fact that the burden for enforcement would be placed on the adjoining landowners; he said that he had already spent enough money in legal fees on this matter and did not want to have to spend more in the future. Mr. Marple added that the right-of-ways are narrow and difficult to traverse in the Winter. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 18, 2002 Page 987 -5 - Mr. Patrick Huntley, owner of property just north of the Ferraro's property, said that he was opposed to granting of the waiver requested. Mr. Huntley said that he did not wish to incur any additional costs based upon Mr. Ferraro's request to subdivide his property. Mr. Huntley believed that granting this waiver request would set a precedent to further subdivide the property in the future. Mr. Mitchell returned to the podium and addressed some of the concerns raised by the citizens who spoke. Commission members did not believe it was reasonable to expect the surrounding property owners to have to go to court to enforce ordinances that they didn't have when they bought their properties. They did not believe it was reasonable to expect the neighbors to hire lawyers and go to court to enforce deed restrictions. Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend denial of a request of Michael F. Ferraro and Linda D. Ferraro for a waiver to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 144, Subdivision Ordinance, Section 144-31C(3),whichwouldenablethemtosubdivide theirproperty without the necessary 50 -foot right-of-way width for a private shared driveway. (Note: Commissioner Watt abstained from voting.) DISCUSSION ON THE 2003-2004 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN No Action Required at This Time Deputy Planning Director Christopher M. Mohn reported that the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) has been actively engaged in the development of the draft 2003-2004 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) since its October meeting. Deputy Director Mohn said the CPPS's process culminated at its December 9, 2002 meeting during which the CPPS finalized the project prioritization table and unanimously endorsed the CIP. Deputy Director Mohn summarized the following points regarding the draft 2003-2004 CIP: 1) the proposed CIP consists of 30 capital projects, which is an increase over the 28 projects included in the previous CIP; 2) all of the projects included with the previous CIP will be carried over to the proposed 2003- 2004 CIP with the exception of Millbrook High School; funding for the County's third high school has been completed and construction is well underway; and 3) the proposed CIP includes three new capital projects: land acquisition along Bufflick Road to facilitate the regional airport's noise attenuation program, development of a lake, trails, and parking with two irrigated multi-purpose fields at Sherando Park, and the development of an access road with parking and trails at Sherando Park. Deputy Director Mohn noted that the public schools and the Department of Parks & Recreation had expressed concern that the evaluation process resulted in some of their higher priority projects dropping below some of their lower priority projects in the proposed CIP. Deputy Director Mohn added that department directors of the various departments were Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 18, 2002 Page 988 present to answer any questions from the Commission. A question from the Commission was raised regarding whether or not the draft CIP had been reviewed by the County's budget committee, based on the Commission's discussions last year on dollar figures in the CIP. Deputy Director Mohn replied that the draft CIP had been forwarded to the Finance Director for review and comment. Another question raised concerned the breakdown for some of the items listed in the CIP and whether future proffers were going to reflect these specific projects. Planning Director Eric R. Lawrence replied that the figures for the Capital Facilities Impact Model are derived from the CIP. He said the County receives the cash proffer and then the Finance Department will dispurse the funds accordingly. Chairman DeHaven called for public comments, however, no one came forward to speak. No other issues were raised by the Commission. Commissioners believed the CIP was appropriate and ready for a public hearing. DISCUSSION ON THE WOODLANDS ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS No Action Required at This Time Planner Jeremy F. Camp came forward to present and discuss the proposed amendments for "Project Woodlands." Planner Camp reported that the Board of Supervisors directed the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) to revise the current woodlands ordinance earlier this year and several proposed amendments to the ordinance have been developed by the DRRS over the past several months as an alternative to the current woodland regulations. Planner Camp explained that the primary goals of the amendments are: 1) to eliminate the need for future woodland disturbance waivers without jeopardizing environmental preservation; 2) to improve the landscaping standards of Frederick County; and 3) to create a concise ordinance that encourages creative development practices. Planner Camp proceeded with a computerized presentation for the Planning Commission. Commissioner Thomas, Chairman of the DRRS, commented that the DRRS examined the entire environmental protection features section contained in the ordinance and essentially reworked the entire ordinance concerning topographic features and other features for protection of sensitive areas. He said the proposed amendments are much more extensive than simply a "woodlands ordinance" revision. Commissioner Gochenour raised the issue of citizen participation in the development of the proposed ordinance amendments. Planner Camp explained that the DRRS is composed of diversified individuals throughout the community, including both average citizens as well as those with considerable expertise_ Planner Camp stated that in developing the actual language for the proposed amendments, it is helpful to receive input from experts in a particular field; he said that after the language has been developed, the County will proceed with numerous public hearings for the community's input. Commissioner Rosenberry believed the proposed amendments set a new higher standard for landscaping for subdivisions within the community; however, he was concerned that the idea of "woodlands preservation" was being eliminated with the proposed revisions. Commissioner Thomas explained that the DRRS focused on developing revisions that would discourage developers from clear -cutting entire areas of Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 18, 2002 Page 989 -7 - woodlands. Commissioner Thomas pointed out that the DRRS's goal was to preserve woodlands as much as possible through incentives, and also to encourage developers to plant trees in areas where there are none. Commissioner Ours stated that the County's current ordinance doesn't clearly define woodlands. He said that on numerous past occasions, the Commission considered properties where it was said that woodlands existed; but, in actuality, what existed were overly -mature wooded areas or scrub brush. Commissioner Ours stated that with this new concept, old or scrub brush areas will be removed and new trees and landscaped areas will be planted which, in the long run, are much more aesthetically pleasing than what currently exists. He believed that by establishing definitions, a much better ordinance will be promoted. Commissioner Gochenour raised the question as to who would make the decision regarding whether or not a tree area should be preserved. Commissioner Thomas replied that basically, the decision is made by the property owner. He said the problem now is that the current ordinance encourages developers to cut down trees and what the DRRS has attempted to do is improve or eliminate the section of the ordinance that encourages developers to clear-cut sites. He said DRRS has sought to encourage developers, by a profit - based motive, to either develop new woodlands, or new treed areas, or to preserve existing treed areas. He stressed that this is the whole intent behind the proposed amendments. Commissioner Thomas commented that if the proposed amendments are adopted this year by the Board of Supervisors, the DRRS expects to be working on the ordinance over the next year by making modifications and improvements. Chairman DeHaven commended the DRRS for the creative and innovative work; he believed the proposal was headed in the right direction. He commented that it was fairly complex, however, it offered incentives for preservation of existing treed areas while ensuring a percentage of vegetative cover on areas over the long term. Other members of the Commission agreed. Chairman DeHaven raised the issue of administration, implementation, and oversight for long-term on the proposals. No action was taken by the Commission at this time. OTHER VIRGINIA CITIZENS PLANNING ASSOCIATION Planning Director Eric R. Lawrence announced that according to the Virginia Citizens Planning Association Newsletter, Commissioner Morris has been chosen as the new president of that association as of October, 2002. CITIZEN COMMENT Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 18, 2002 Page 990 Mr. Alex McDowell, a resident of Back Creek District, stated that he has been in the Winchester/ Gore area for 50 years now and he is disturbed by what is happening in this area. Mr. McDowell said he used to live in Annapolis, Maryland, and it used to be a beautiful place with the trees and the countryside; however, it is a disaster now. He commented that he observed the County Counsel go through just what the Commission is going through. He said that eventually, the State Department of Natural Resources imposed restrictions on Anne Arundel County and now, homeowners must have permission before cutting trees on their property. Mr. McDowell hoped it would not come to that in Frederick County. PLANNING COMMISSION'S FIRST MEETING OF 2003 Chairman DeHaven reminded the Commission that the first meeting in January 2003 will be on the 15"' due to the New Years Day holiday on January 1, 2003. Chairman DeHaven wished everyone a joyous Holiday Season and New Year. ADJOURNMENT unanimous vote. No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. by a Respectfully submitted, Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 18, 2002 Page 991 • J • REZONING APPLICATION #02-03 WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER - WEST CAMPUS Staff Report for the Planning Commission Meeting Prepared: January 22, 2003 Staff Contact: Christophe. M. Mohn, A'.(. -'P 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 methods) of resolution for each issue proposed by the applicant(s) andlor recommended by the Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors will be stated in the text of this report. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 02/05/03 Pending Board of Supervisors: 02/26/03 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 50.0540 acres from B2 (Business General) to B2 (Business General) with revised proffers, and 51.9676 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to MS (Medical Support). LOCATION: This property is located north of (and adjacent to) Route 50, and west and adjacent to Route 37. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 53-A-68 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: B2 (Business General) District Present Use: Vacant Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) District Present Use: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District Use: Agricultural South: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District Use: Residential & Commercial East: City of Winchester Use: Medical Campus - Hospital West: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District Use: Residential & Agricultural PROPOSED USE: Commercial and Medical Support Uses. REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 2 January 24, 2003 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: Please see letter dated 12/20/02 from Ben Lineberry, Jr. P.E:, Transportation Assistant Resident Engineer, located in Section VI ofthe applicant's rezoning materials. Fire Marshal: Recommendations: Automatic sprinkler system and fire alarm system. Emergency vehicle access comments to be identified during the site plan process. The half full condition of the Northwest Tank should be corrected to provide adequate water supplies in the event pump booster service becomes disabled. Inspections: No comment required at this time. Shall comment at the time of site plan review. County Engineer: We have no comments at this time. Health Department: Health Department has no objections as long as public water and sewer are used. Sanitation Authority: The proposed method of supplying water and sewer service to the site should be adequate. The Authority would like the Winchester Medical Center to consider letting the Authority install a production well on this site. The location of this well could be determined by hydrogeological data and the development plan of the Center. Historic Resources Advisory Board: Please see letter from Rebecca Ragsdale, Planner I, dated 11/25/02, located in Section VI of the applicant's rezoning materials. Frederick -Winchester Service Authority: Please see attached memo from Jesse W. Moffett, Executive Director, dated 10/01/02, located in Section VI of the applicant's rezoning materials. Parks & Recreation: No comment. Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided in the rezoning application, Frederick County Public Schools has no comment at this time. County Attorney: With the two changes, proffers appear to be in proper form. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed rezoning request for the referenced property appears to be outside the airspace of the Winchester Regional Airport; therefore, Federal Aviation Administration form 7460-1 will not be required to be filed. Uses under the rezoning request will not impact airside operations at the Winchester Airport. City of Winchester: Please see memo from Tim Youmans, Planning Director, dated 01106103, located in Section VI of the applicant's rezoning materials. REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 3 January 23, 2003 Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County zoning map (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) identifies the subject parcel 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 corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re -mapping of the subject property and all other A-1 and A-2 zoned land to the RA District. On February 12, 1997, the Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning #006-96 which rezoned 51.0540 acres of the property from RA to B2 (Business General). The portion of the property subject to this rezoning and associated proffers is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Route 50 West and Route 37. The remainder of the site retained the RA zoning designation. 2) Location The subject parcel is located immediately north and adjacent to Route 50 West, and west and adjacent to Route 37. According to the VDOT functional classification system, both Route 50 West and Route 37 are major arterial roadways. The land use abutting the subject property to the north and west is agricultural and residential, with a mix of commercial and residential uses located across the Route 50 right-of-way to the south and the Winchester Medical Center campus located across the Route 37 right-of-way to the east. 3) Comprehensive Policy Plan The 50.0540 acres ("Tract 1 ") of the site located adjacent to the Route 50 right-of-way is located within the Phase One boundaries of the Round Hill Community Land Use Plan with the remaining 51.9676 acres ("Tract 2 ") located within the boundaries of the Route 37 West Land Use Plan. The property is located wholly within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Both of the applicable land use plans envision the development of business/office land uses subject to the availability of central sewer and water facilities. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-41, 6-51) The Round Hill Community Plan recommends the employment of design techniques to ensure the contextual compatibility of new commercial development in the Round Hill Community. Such techniques are intended to preclude the visual disruption of the Route 50 corridor while also promoting development whose configuration and appearance reflects the established character of the Round Hill Community. It is also noted that strip commercial development is explicitly discouraged within the Round Hill Community. The B2 District is a zoning designation capable of facilitating the business/office development envisioned by the Round Hill Community Land Use Plan. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-49) As described by the Route 37 West Land Use Plan, business/office land uses should complement the activities of the Winchester Medical Center and the myriad uses associated with its operation. Such complementary uses are envisioned to develop in an integrated campus -like setting that includes a range of retail service uses catering to the medical establishment, as well as the surrounding community. The MS (Medical Support) Zoning District was especially designed to accommodate such development and may, therefore, be considered consistent with adopted REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 4 January 23, 2003 lard use policy for this area. (Comprehensive Policy Plan; p. 6-39) Planning Staff Comment and Issues: The inclusion of the entire acreage of the site with this application provides a means of integrating development that is integral to ultimate Plan conformance. Indeed, the employment of a common set of proffers and a unifying Generalized Development Plan promotes development with the cohesiveness necessary to achieve the interrelated objectives of the applicable land use plans. ISSUE: Critical to avoiding strip development and promoting contextual compatibility is building design. Through the deliberate coordination ofmaterials, colors, style, building massing and other architectural features, buildings within a project can establish a consistent theme that is immediately identifiable to the public. When coupled with the use of unified landscaping, comprehensive signage, and the creative design of such customary site features as lighting fixtures, common building design elements will facilitate development that both reflect and enhance the unique character of the surrounding community. The proposed proffers reference the use of private covenants to ensure that individual uses employ design techniques that complement other uses internal to the commercial development to achieve a "cohesive entity." While this arrangement supports coordinated design within the development, it does not necessarily facilitate design that is either compatible with the surrounding community or complementary to the Route 50 corridor. Establishing compatibility in the context of the surrounding community can be assured by including with this application a set of minimum standards for building design in addition to any deeded covenants. In particular, standards should be considered that: 1) limit the scale of buildings on development sites nearest the Route 50 right-of-way, 2) result in the finishing of all exterior sides of a building or structure with similar materials and/or architectural treatments, 3) identify exterior materials and/or architectural treatments that will visually unify all buildings and structures, and 4) explicitly preclude the use of certain exterior building materials (i.e., corrugated metal, cinder block). As written, the applicant's proffer concerning building materials does not control or limit the types of materials permitted within the project. Moreover, although the proffers suggest that building design and site features such as exterior lighting will be coordinated, no minimum standards or details are provided to ensure that such coordination will indeed occur during development or that the ultimate design of the project will be compatible with the surrounding community (see Proffer Statement, p. 2 and 3 of 3). ISSUE: By stating that signage will be of "similar style and materials," the applicant's proffer statement acknowledges in general terms the integral role of signage to the overall quality of the project and its ultimate compatibility with the surrounding community (see Proffer Statement, p. 2 of 3). However, the applicant does not provide a set of minimum standards or design REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 5 January 23, 2003 guidelines to ensure that signage installed in the project will form a coordinated and visually integrated system. The applicant could address this concern through the provision of a comprehensive sign plan that coordinates the design and general location of signage to be erected within the proposed development. Overall project design and corridor appearance would be enhanced by limitations on the total number of freestanding signs within the project and restrictions of such signage to monument -type structures that share common design characteristics. Moreover, the provision of a system of directional signage that is coordinated to ensure consistency of appearance and efficiency of movement throughout the site would be appropriate. A proffered comprehensive sign plan would be unique to this project and would supercede the sign regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. Ideally, subsequent rezoning petitions along the Route 50 corridor would include similar plans that employ complementary design guidelines for signage. Such an approach would facilitate attainment of high aesthetic standards and consistency of appearance along the corridor which would, in turn, ensure that new development is respectful of, and compatible with, the established character of the Round Hill community. ISSUE: The landscape design features proffered with this application are an effective means of unifying the development both internally and with the surrounding community. Such features will certainly contribute to realization of the "cohesive entity" promoted by the applicant and are, therefore, essential elements of this rezoning proposal. It is noted, however, that the proffers approved with the DeGrange rezoning (#06-96) include greater detail concerning the design of some of these features than are offered by the proposed proffers. Given the importance of these features to overall project design, illustrations concerning the landscape features should be enhanced and, at a minimum, be equivalent in detail to those originally approved with the DeGrange rezoning (see Proffer Statement, p. 2 of 3 and Generalized Development Plan). 4) Site Suitability The applicant has identified areas of steep slopes and woodlands near the northernmost boundary of the site (see Impact Statement, Figure 4A). The site is reported to be underlain by Ordovician limestone formations, which the applicant suggests will support development with proper geotechnical control. 5) Intended Use The applicant states that the ultimate intent of the proposal is to develop uses that are consistent with the needs of health planning and integrated with the existing medical center campus. Specifically, the applicant proposes to employ the MS District on the northern portion of the site ("Tract 2") for a diverse array of medical service and support uses, to include, but not limited to: office, warehousing/distribution, nursing home, and age-restricted/elderly housing. The southern portion of the site ("Tract 1 ") would remain B2 and be used for commercial uses that would also support the established medical community, such as: business hotel, retail/shopping center, bank, restaurant, and research and development. The applicant suggests that the array of B2 uses originally envisioned for Tract 1 through the DeGrange rezoning has been extensively modified to be less intensive and more complementary to the health care system. REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 6 January 23, 2003 Planning Staff Comment and Issues: ISSUE: The extensive modification of B2 uses referenced in the Impact Statement is not formally proposed by the applicant elsewhere in the application. Therefore, in its present form, this proposal would enable the development of any use permitted in the B2 District on Tract 1 of the site. 6.) Potential Impacts a) Transportation Impact Analysis Statement: The applicant's traffic study considers the build -out of the subject property with two transportation phases by the year 2012. The study and its recommendations assume that ultimate access to the site will be provided through the combination of the project's Route 50 entrances, the intersection of the proposed major collector road with Route 522 North, and the Valley Health System/Route 37 interchange. The impact analysis indicates that the transportation system serving the site currently functions at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or higher, with the exception of an unsignalized driveway that operates internally at an LOS "E" during PM peak hour traffic. Phase 1 development is projected to occur through 2006, during which all access to the site is achieved via site entrances from Route 50. With the exception of construction of a section of a planned major collector road, all proffered transportation improvements are proposed to occur during Phase 1 prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy within the project. The applicant's analysis assumes background traffic that grows at the historical annual rate of 5.0% and further includes traffic generated by the WWW, L.C. commercial project envisioned immediately west of the site. Based on trip data contained in the sixth edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report, the applicant projects the Average Daily Trips (ADT) generated by the project to be 9,198 by 2006, with AM/PM peak hour trips of 875 and 1,027, respectively. The applicant reports that traffic generated by the project at the conclusion of Phase 1 will result in study area intersections functioning at an LOS "D" or better. Phase 2 development is projected to occur from 2006 through 2012. All proffered transportation improvements will have been provided by 2012, to include construction of a section of a major collector road included in the Route 37 West Land Use Plan. The applicant's Phase 2 analysis assumes a six -lane Route 50, western access to the Valley Health System (VHS)/Route 37 interchange, and extension by others of the planned major collector road to its intersection with Route 522 North. Again, projected background traffic reflects an annual growth rate of 5.0% and further reflects traffic anticipated with the WWW, L.C. commercial project by 2012. The applicant estimates that at the conclusion of Phase 2, the project will generate 19,761 ADT, with AM/PM peak hour trips of 1,607 and 2,334, respectively. The applicant reports that traffic generated by the project at build -out will result in study area intersections functioning at a LOS "C" or better. REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 7 January 23, 2003 VDOT Comment: The proposed development will have significant measurable impact on Routes 50 and 37, respectively. VDOT is satisfied that the improvements proposed by the applicant will adequately address transportation concerns through the first phase of development, which is projected to culminate in 2006. All of the Phase 1 improvements are expected to occur prior to issuance of the first building permit within the project. At present, VDOT will not permit an access break on Route 37. Therefore, as development proceeds beyond 2006, additional traffic analysis will be required to further examine the impacts to Routes 37, 50, and 522 and confirm the adequacy of proposed Phase 2 improvements. Planning Staff Comment and Issues: ISSUE: Pursuant to adopted transportation policy, roads located adjacent to and within new development are expected to operate at no less than a Level of Service "C"(Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 7-5). As noted above, the Impact Statement submitted with this application reports that Phase 1 traffic conditions will involve intersections on adjoining roads functioning at an LOS "D." The traffic generated by this project will, therefore, diminish the LOS of the surrounding transportation network from current conditions, despite implementation of the vast majority of the applicant's proffered transportation improvements. ISSUE: As shown on Figure 14 of the traffic analysis, the Level of Service at 2012 build -out consists of several intersections functioning at an LOS "D," particularly during the PM peak hour. The applicant's summary statement that the transportation system will operate at an overall LOS "C" by 2012 is, therefore, not accurate. Moreover, the assumptions built into the Phase 2 transportation scenario are decidedly not guaranteed. While it is fair to predict that efforts will be made by the applicant to achieve western access to the VHS/Route 37 interchange, such action will require the ultimate approval of the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB), the attainment of which is inherently unpredictable. Extension of the planned major collector road will likely be dependant upon the transition of the RA land located north of the subject property to suburban land use. The viability of this transition, and hence the road extension, will rely upon the positive alignment of myriad interests and influences that routinely challenge accurate prediction, such as those of individual land owners, future elected officials, and the market. It would therefore be instructive for the applicant to provide an additional traffic scenario that projects the impact on adjoining roads at 2012 build -out in the absence of these assumed improvements. ISSUE: The applicant does not show a direct connection between the proposed west campus and the existing east campus of Winchester Medical Center until 2012 build -out. It is further noted that this connection is not included with the applicant's proffered transportation improvements. Indeed, any traffic seeking to move between the two campuses will be required to travel REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 8 January 23, 2003 externally on adjacent roads, most likely Route 50. This arrangement contributes to a less efficient transportation system and further limits the functional integration of uses planned on the proposed west campus with those on the existing campus. ISSUE: At the request of staff, the applicant agreed to analyze the cumulative transportation impacts of this application and the forthcoming WWW, L.C. rezoning proposal. The WWW, L.C. proposal will seek the rezoning of approximately 71 acres located west of the subject parcel from RA to B2, with the intended uses consisting of a shopping center, offices, and discount superstore. This effort was promoted as a means of comprehensively addressing the transportation impacts of concurrently developing large-scale commercial projects through the coordinated phasing and construction of necessary improvements. Although the traffic analysis for this proposal included WWW, L.C. generated trips as background data, the applicant has not specified measures to coordinate transportation improvements between the two projects and does not provide assurances that traffic impacts on the Route 50 corridor will be mitigated in a comprehensive, integrated, and an effective manner. ISSUE: Route 50 is identified for short-term development of bicycle facilities in the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Such non -motorized systems are considered integral to the creation of a complete networked transportation system for Frederick County and the City of Winchester. The County has adopted the Bicycle Plan for the City of Winchester and Frederick County as a guide for the development of non -motorized facilities (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 7-3, 7- 14,7-17). Provisions for the development of bicycle facilities are not included with either phase of transportation improvements proposed with this application. b) Historic Resources Impact Analysis Statement: The subject property is located near two properties included in the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey Report, which are identified as the Old Hoover House (ID# 34-467) and Fruit Hill Farm (ID# 34-1410). Only Fruit Hill Farm is listed as potentially significant in this report. The subject property is located within the National Parks Service study area for the Second Winchester battlefield but is wholly outside of identified core battlefield areas. The Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) considered this application at its November 19, 2002 meeting. The HRAB offered no adverse comments concerning this proposal. Moreover, no recommendations were provided regarding the treatment of the resources located proximate to the site. C) Water and Sewer Impact Analysis Statement: The applicant states that the Route 50 corridor is to be served by a regional sewage pump station capable of providing 500 gallons per minute of wastewater flow transfer to the Sunnyside collection system located on Route 522 North. Moreover, it is noted REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 9 January 23, 2003 that water service will be obtained through connection to the northwest water storage tank via a 20" stub line and easement that will extend along the west side of Route 37. The applicant states that the 20" main is adequate for delivery volumes necessary for planned uses. The proposed system is to be constructed by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority through developer commitments (see Impact Statement, Section E and Figure 6). 7) Proffer Statement 1. Street Improvements: The applicant proposes a series of seven (7) transportation improvements with this application, to include: (1) addition of eastbound left turn lane, 200' in length, on Route 50; (2) restrict egress onto Route 50 to the intersection with Route 1317 and provide an acceleration/deceleration lane across the entire frontage of the site; (3) at Route 1317 intersection, provide two left turn lanes and one right turn lane for exiting traffic; (4) addition of lanes to the Route 37 exit ramps; (5) signalization of Route 50 intersection with Route 1317; (6) addition of left turn lane on Route 50 for eastbound traffic at eastern signal serving Route 50/Route 37 interchange; and (7) development of a 1,800 -foot section of the major collector road included in the Route 37 West Land Use Plan, which will be five lanes in width within an 80 -foot right-of-way extending north from Route 50. All proffered improvements will be completed prior to issuance ofthe first certificate of occupancy within the development, with the exception of the major collector road section. Planning Staff Comment: Despite the improvements proffered by the applicant, the trips generated by this proposal will result in a diminished level of service along the Route 50 West corridor. As noted previously, the relative effectiveness of these improvements at project build -out will ultimately depend upon the completion of several off-site transportation improvements that are beyond the direct control of the applicant. However, the applicant has not provided analysis of the impact on Route 50 should these assumed improvements fail to materialize nor do the proffered improvements address such a worse case scenario. At a minimum, the applicant should establish the development threshold beyond which the project's traffic impacts will exceed the mitigative value of the proffered improvements and agree to limit development to that threshold should the off-site improvements remain incomplete. Moreover, the applicant does not provide a timetable or trigger for construction of the proffered section of the major collector road. 2. Landscape Design Features: The applicant has proffered landscape design features that include a thirty-foot (30') green strip along the Route 50 frontage of the site, a landscaped green area along the north side of the main entrance, a landscaped focal link with the Route 50/Route 37 interchange, and centrally located open space area (formerly known as DeGrange Park), and a 10 -foot landscaped buffer along the western property line. REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 10 January 23, 2003 Planning Staff Comment: The proffered landscape design features are equivalent to those approved with the DeGrange rezoning that are currently applicable to the B2 portion of the site. As noted previously, staff prefers that the applicant provide greater detail concerning the configuration and design elements intended for the proposed focal link with the Route 50/Route 37 interchange. The proposed location of this focal point should be confirmed to be within the viewshed of the referenced interchange. Additional design information would also be valuable regarding the open space area proposed north of the site entrance. The 10' landscaped buffer along the western property line may eventually be bisected by a planned roadway connecting the subject property with the WWW, L.C. site; therefore, the additional landscaping planned for this area would be more beneficial as supplemental screening along the portion of the western boundary adjacent to the established residential uses. As currently proposed, no additional screening or buffering is shown adjacent to these residential uses_ Moreover, additional detail specifying the plantings that will comprise the 30 -foot landscaped green strip adjacent to Route 50 should be provided. As written, minimal landscaping could be installed within the strip, which would technically satisfy the proffer. 3. On Site Development: The applicant proffers that structures will be designed with facades composed of materials such as, but not limited to, concrete masonry units (CML, brick, dryvit, glass, stucco, wood and/or other simulated materials. The applicant further proffers that all buildings will be constructed using compatible architectural styles and that signage will be composed of similar styles and materials. The proffers indicate that all building within the property will be developed as a cohesive entity so that all development elements work together functionally and aesthetically. A set of covenants and restrictions will be recorded with each deed stipulating these design provisions. PlanningSStaff Comment: As noted previously, the proffered site development provisions do not contain minimum standards to ensure coordination of materials, architectural styles, building configuration, or signage. Indeed, the proffer addressing building materials effectively permits building facades to be composed of any material, as the language clearly stipulates that acceptable materials are not limited to those presented in the proffer. The proposed proffers undoubtedly reflect the intention of the applicant to seek high-quality design throughout the development. However, the absence of minimum standards ostensibly allows design to be dictated exclusively by the developer or individual tenant without consideration for whether it is compatible or complementary to the surrounding community. As written, the proffered site development conditions do not provide ample assurance to the County that ultimate building and site designs will be either coordinated or appropriate in the context of the Round Hill community and Route 50 corridor. 4. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development: The applicant proffers to pay the sum of $25,000.00 to the Round Hill Fire and Rescue Company, the sum of REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 11 January 23, 2003 $5,000 to the Sheriffs Office, and the sum of $5,000 to the County Administration building. The total $35,000.00 payment is proposed to be made at the time of the first building permit for either Tract 1 or Tract 2. Planning Staff Comment: As per the Fire Marshal's comment, the sum proffered to the Round Hill Fire and Rescue Company is not adequate to relieve the net capital facilities impact to Fire and Rescue services, regardless of the positive net fiscal impact of the proposed development. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 02/05/03 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: It is acknowledged that the zoning districts proposed through this application are fundamentally consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Policy Plan applicable to the subject property, specifically the Round Hill Community Land Use Plan (Phase 1) and the Route 37 West Land Use Plan. However, as noted in the preceding sections, numerous issues of concern exist concerning this proposal, which can be summarized as follows: • Project Design - The applicant has provided only vague assurances that building and site design will be coordinated in a manner that is compatible and complementary to the Round Hill community. No minimum standards concerning building materials, exterior treatment of buildings, building placement and scale relative to Route 50, or signage have been proposed through the applicant's proffer statement. • Transportation - As per the applicant's traffic analysis, the Level of Service of the transportation system serving the site is diminished from the current "C" to "D" upon completion of the first phase of the proffered transportation plan. The flow of traffic is generally improved at project build -out in 2012, although several intersections are projected to function at a Level of Service "D." Moreover, the projected conditions at build -out assume that certain off-site transportation improvements will be completed and available by 2012, notably western access to the VHS/Route 37 interchange and extension of the planned major collector road to Route 522 North. The applicant is unable to guarantee the availability of such access and therefore cannot ensure that the traffic conditions will be as projected by 2012. The Comprehensive Policy Plan establishes the expectation that a Level of Service "C" will be maintained both within a proposed development and on adjacent roads. The proffered transportation plan does not ensure conformance with this policy objective. The applicant should be prepared to address the issues identified in this staff report and any other concerns raised by the Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors. 0-wgendas\COMMENTSIRFZONING1Staff Kepon120D3\WMC Wes[ Ca pusmpd REZ # 02 - 03 Winchester Medical Ctr. "Vilest Campus" PINs: Rezoning Application r Y \ 01�gr -,Yw i ,_ ,L e11'Y Pil{ l ' •k µk S. wlhi r}�r N� f"" { 'i }�,'dy, 3 r�? ;tt0.g �yi � �� : �1 � ' I � �'N.w. !. . Fy q, ![y� a . .( r`f•,�[�fd$ # %`. �^ • �4 at �41}� 42., l? iY ..t+ 1, `"�'`°r",fi 1T,ya,�3 �R x'Z `: •� .ail t � iq } � fid. o a� i �'; `;'y "��i ���a 4 ,jl Z; f % ag i M4r . is y S4 i s .xk 1 s M r � 'S •" r v { JI.. d" { �, �C s ;Jell F:f ( "� Kl �-1 .t ,L.• ^�$� h v7 r, � �° �.� � 'P$r" .a�� 4-�y .��_ Y � tic 4 e? �4Pa+,�lell,.,;e *"-'.,.'►° ID Ser .«%+ _ ,a`�.� �.'f FkI� a {� �*�Y� Y�•1+" H.P �P� u':Zt .. �� � ` S � 7 d/ 741 Tom+ `���'— eti� �`�! rrL-lY >• � r 'r � +� w •�N �, v"�%. ~1 I 'Y 7�' ;[ y�7 w hr a f Ic, Y Yrk• ^�. # A;1 d (x 8 1�i 3 try '+*' �^ijPr` yYC JLfI '4A A.,.. A � . w'r farm `. Iii P y y ?ymK�d" :.' ,p. P ,'•. `' � iG'±%d�'«.R�.z:".� � C�... i �` Ra,.E .. 4. •.�'�a]'1—^tyY .2C4s:;r .i�Cr .4.ii_ .:k � �.�\ �[; Winchester Medical Center Property Route 50 West Prepared by: Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 `A Winchester, Virginia 22601 J A N — 9 2003 540-667-2139 F reder.ick County, Virginia IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT AND "ZOM ATG APPLICAUON MATERIALS FOR REZONING RESEW AND APPROVAL OF THE WINCHESTER MIEDICAL CENTER ROUTE 50 WEST "WEST CAMPUS" Gainesboro Magisterial District January, 2003 Prepared by: Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 117 E. Piccadilly Street - Suite 200 Winchester, Nl�irginia 22601 Phone: 540-667-2131 Fax: 540-665-0493 E-mail: gwcaram@earthy et Table of Contents L Application IL Summary IM Impact Analysis A. Project Background B. Location and Access C. Site Suitability D. Traffic E. Sewage Conveyance and Water Supply F. Site Drainage G. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities H. Historic Sites and Structures I. Impact on Community Facilities IV. Frederick County Impact Model V. Proffer Statement VL Agency Comments VIL Survey Plat and Deed VIIL Tax Ticket IX. Appendix Ii APPLICATION REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. I. Applicant: Name: Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates Inc. Telephone- 667-2139 Address: c/o Charles E. Maddox,Jr. P -E_ VP 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester VA 22601 2, Property Owner (if different than above) Name: Winchester Medical Center Address: P.O. Box 1334 Winchester, Virginia 22604 3. Contact person if other than above Telephone: 536-8620 Name: Charles E. Maddox Jr_ P.E. Telephone: 667-2139 _ G_W. Clifford & Associates Inc. 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location Map X Agency Comments X Plat _ X Fees X — Deep of property X Impact Analysis Statement X Verification of taxes paid X Proffer Statement X I S. The Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned.- Winchester ezoned: Winchester Medical Center, Inc. 5. A) Current Use of the Property: B) Proposed Use of the Property: 7. Adjoining Property: PARCEL ID NUMBER USE Vacant Medical ZONING S. Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers). North and adjacent to Route 50 and west and adjacent to Route 37. 2 Information to be Submitted for Capital Facilities Impact Model In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for the applicant to provide information concemmg the specifics of the proposed use. Otherwise, the planning staff will use the maximum possible density of intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on page 9 of the application package. 9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number 53-A-58 Districts Magisterial: GainesboroHigh School: Fire Service: Round hill Muddle School: Rescue Service: Round Hill Elementary School: James Wood Fred Co. Middle Apple Pie Ridge 10. Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. 11. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed (See Attached Table 1) Single Family Home Townhome Multi -Family .Non -Residential Lots Mobile Home Hotel Rooms Office Retail Restaurant Square Footage of Proposed Uses (See Attached Table 1) Service Station Manufacturing Warehouse Other 3 12. Signature: J .{we), the undersigned, do hereby_ respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors' public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right-of-way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify_that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. Applicant{s} Date6w:�: - / U Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E., VP — ilbertW. Clifford & Asso sates, Inc. Owner(s) Date Winchester edical Center, Inc. Date 53-A-69 53-A-73 Fruit Hill Orchard, Inc., P.O. Box 2368, Winchester VA 22604 Pa Zot RA 53 -A -A c & Elva Huffman 194 Echo Lane, Winchester, VA 22603 Fruit Hill Orchard, Inc., P.O. Box RA 53-A.-74 2368, Winchester, VA 22604 Bernard & Carob n Turner, 424 W. RA 53-A-75 Cecil Street, Winchester, VA 22601 Nancy Johnson 2054 Northwestern Pike Winchester VA 22603 RA 53 -3-1 53B-3-1 Robert Johnson, 2054 Northwestern Pike, Winchester, VA 22603 RA RA 53B-3-5 Farmers Livestock Exchange, Inc., P.O. Box 2696, Winchester, - 22604 Dennis & Fe RP 53B-3-6 Bucher, 182 Maple Road, Winchester, VA 22603 Dennis & Peggy Bucher, 182 Maple Road, RA. 53B-3-7 Winchester, VA 22603 Laban &Bole n Hod son, 2061 Northwestern Pike, Winchester, 53B-3-8 53-A-83 VA 22603 Dennis K. & Peggy S. Bucher, 182 Mar le Road, Winchester, VA 22603 RA RA 53-A-84 Farmers Livestock Exchan e,. Inc., P.O. Box 2696, Winchester, VA 22604 L RA 53-A-1 nn' Andersen, 1983 Northwestern Pike, Winchester, VA 22603 Fruit Hill Orchard, RA 53-A-2 Inc., P.O. Box 2368, Winchester, VA 22604 Fruit Hill Orchard, Inc., P.O. Box 2368, Winchester, VA 22604 RA RA _Residential Residential Residential Vacant Residential Business Residential Residential Business Residential cultural II GENERAL CRITERL4 AND ,SUMMARY Winchester Medical Center n. General Criteria and Summary ImpactAnalysis Statement Winchester Medical Center (WMC) purchased the 102 acre deGrange property in order to expand services for the Center and Valley Health Systems (VHS)_ This was a logical expansion which represented the only available land adjacent to the 160 acre campus which is located within the City of Winchester. The property is separated from the main campus by VA Route 37 and shares common frontage on U_ S _ Route 50. During the year 2001 WMC worked closely with the Frederick County Planning Commission (FCPC) and Board of Supervisors (FCBOS) to create a Medical Support District ordinance to guide the development of major medical service facilities in Frederick County. The MS district has been chosen to guide the planning for Tract 2 of the deGrange tract that is presently zoned RA- Tract 1 has been previously rezoned to B-2 by action of the BOS in 1997. This rezoning petition maintains the front 50 acres (Tract 1) as B-2 and rezones the north 52 acres (Tract 2) to MS (see Figure 1). The concept plan approved with the B-2 rezoning in 1997 has been modified to reflect a new scope of potential uses and a new transportation plan which implements the MS concept on this site. The Tract 1 (B-2) proffers remain the same as approved except for update editing. New proffers are added in support of the new MS zone_ The potential land uses proposed will soften the transportation impacts predicted by the earlier B-2 zone proposal to the degree that overall generated traffic is less for the 102 acre parcel than predicted for Tract 1 (50 acre) alone. Also the petition reflects the effect of the new Route 37 interchange on area traffic, which has been built by WMC since the 1997 proposal_ The concept plan (Generalized Plan) has been adjusted to reflect the current Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan. !y/NCHESTER MED/CACENTER PROPERTY gilbert w. cliff ord M & associates, mc. L OC/; TlOIV �qP Engin:7- Figure rs Land Planners Water Quality N 11E. Picadilly St Winchester, Urginio 22691 FREDERICK CDUNiY U/RG/N/A -L VOICE: (540) 2139 FAX: (540) fi65-0493 [MAIL: gwcfiff@mnsinc.com 1 !` r `FUTURE EXTENSIpN- ' T0"US�ROUTE /S(3--' rf 1i AT ROUt_803i rTk V. 14 '� " ate- - ��'3 '` _ '* � / _ _ +�;•80>%i� •,.'' - -i�� � � '- .`\ `'� ��_._ -- AIr Le C `y� '� �✓I �� - - `� `_____—, --� — I , "\ � J' ' -/�� ._ l�'! l- �'` ', _-` ,, 1'\`` �_— _ �ly :_ kN co !4//NCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER PROPERTY a Z Praperty gilbert w. ctifford & associates, inc. I _GENERALIZED DEVROPMENT PLAN Sheet Eno1°°B Law water I o O VEST CAMPUS' 1 Of 117 E Plcoal St Vmchcst>x, V rgWo 22601 FREDERICK COUNTY, WG/MM 2 VOCE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-M93 ENA : gr dMmnsir.com ` I PROPOSED MAJOR . t \; ,'\' _ � _ ., •,;,,,,,%.;f`1 � , ,,: ,E:;,;-�-�s ,; cam_;•' \' �" '+ —��� __ , _ �..;_\..;,,,, _ti COLLECTOR :t �;Cy\`_ ��;`��,;. i �,w `,. .j. 4''-.�'•.•\ -`wti - \'^'�,..���`� •�`' _ �-�^Q��=_rr ��y --�;_�is�t .� ` 5. {, �� r i� -: �,1�-,``\.� :'\'�\•F;\ice,' � '-sc� •; `-� t�;=, 4��:�ti ��"-: \ ' •- r.. � . f - y. - r'�, I ` J, `/ `; - r•-__ !/.�-` ,fir} -�, - _•.----�-� ----- __- '�;�\;': SACT z2 � �� I __, ���\ ,{{;� �� l-!, ,�,`..=�% ,� �'' W-NNf _ — — --- -- —-------- --- ---- --- --- - ---- - - - ----ems - — ---- — --- 1 I / J PA ! 1 ' 0 - � /'1i✓firiJ=�\! 8�3 CC YYi , i r ri W/NCHFSTf-R MEDICAL CENTER PROPERTY :a p GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN 'Wf-ST CAMPUS" FREDEREff COUNTY, WRG/NU L MS Property gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. Sheet Bvheem band PW#w rs water Dually of 117 E Pica* 5t Wnaesbe, Vufoa 22601 2 IVIXE (540) 667-2139 FAX, (540) 665.0493 0ML- gn ff@mnsinc.can III IMPACT ANAL PSIS Winchester Medical Center III. Impact Analysis A. Site Background and History ImpactAnalysis Statement The Winchester Medical Center continues to plan for the future medical service support needed in the region_ This proposal includes the addition of 102 acres to the 160 acre medical campus existing within the City of Winchester and adjacent to Route 37 and U.S_ Route 50. The purchase of the deGrange parcel represents a logical and needed expansion of the overall campus to consolidate a number of uses that had been implemented in diverse locations due to space planning over the years and to propose new uses necessary to the continuing and increasing needs for medical services in the region_ Tract 1 of deGrange was planned for intensive B-2 use in 1997 when Frederick County implemented the B-2 zone for that property. The 1997 planning for the rear 52 acre Tract 2 was for a range of M-1 uses as discussed at that time. This impact analysis proposes a new range of uses consistent with the needs of health planning and proposes a plan to integrate the new tract with the existing campus by means of transportation improvements. (See Table 1 and Figure 2). Many uses needed within this new district are B-2 in nature and are logically located on the original Tract 1 50 acre parcel_ For this reason the proposed zoning of this parcel has not changed, however, the range of uses has been extensively modified. Thinchester Medical Center Table 1 Winchester Medical Center Rezoning Site Use Summary U.S. Route 50W Corridor Frederick County, Virginia ImpactAnalysis Statement ITE Amount Code Land Use Quantity Unit deGrange Existing B-2 (50-0540 Ac) Tract 1 312 Business Hotel 100 Rooms 760 Research & Development Park 23 Acres 200,000 SF 820 Shopping Center 162,325 SF 12 Drive -In Bank 2,400 SF 832 H -T Restaurant 250 Seats 10,000 SF Tract 2 150 710 750 620 253 MS from RA (51.9676 AC) Warehousing (Distribution Center) Office (Administration Building) Office Park Nursing Home (150 beds) Elderly Housing - Attached 10 Acres 160,000 SF 108,900 SF 15 Acres 160,000 SF 150 Beds 80 Units Age restricted (no children) n k 17 ? WINCHESTER UMCW CLVTI? PROPERLY g1lbert w. Clifford & associates, inc. Erghows Land Pkmem Water OugMy 17 E Pkug� SL Wmfm%tw, vj4ria 22601 FAL. (540) 6M_M3 DWL g fREDERICI( COUNTY, WRGINA MM- (540)1667-11 39 - Fiqure 2 9, inchester Medical Center B. Location and Access ImpactAnalysis Statement The location of the site is shown on Figure 1 as well as the current land uses_ The aerial photograph background was prepared in February 2002 and reflects current conditions. Access to the site is the same as proposed in the deGrange rezoning by way of a major collector connection with U.S. Route 50 just west of the Route 37 interchange. The range of adjacent uses has remained the same since 1997 which includes a small residential area along Route 50 and with the remaining uses being agricultural primarily apple orchard along the western and northern boundary of the site. Some commercial expansion has occurred across U.S. Route 50, which is a 7-11 store at the corner of the proposed major collector roadway connection with U -S. Route 50. This is located on the Livestock Exchange property_ The Frederick County Comprehensive Plan for the Round Hill Community proposed a land use plan (Figure 3) Tract 1 the WMC site is contained within the urban development area and the sewer and water service area Tract 2 is immediately adjacent and outside of the UDA and SWSA. It is proposed that the approval of this rezoning will modify the sewer and water service area line to include the remaining 52 acre parcel proposed for MS uses. Lands to the immediate west have been planned for business and commercial uses and current planning on at least one of these parcels has been coordinated so as to produce a compatible transportation plan consistent with the comprehensive plan requirements. WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER TY gilbert w. Clifford & associates, inc. L COMPREHENSIVE- PLAN BOWN LOW Pbmom 117 E goodily SL OWNW, ftm 2MI =M- (540) 667-2139 F& (540) 0-0493 OWL qwdllftmsr� FROBFICK C064w, WROWN C7;no ina WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER TY gilbert w. Clifford & associates, inc. Wdu OUW COMPREHENSIVE- PLAN BOWN LOW Pbmom 117 E goodily SL OWNW, ftm 2MI =M- (540) 667-2139 F& (540) 0-0493 OWL qwdllftmsr� FROBFICK C064w, WROWN C7;no ina Winchester Medical Center ImpactAnalysis Statement C.. Site Suitabilit The site is ideally suited for the B-2 and MS support district designation. Slopes on the site are generally less than 4% except in the northern and northwest comers of the site Where some slopes approaching 30% are found. The steeper sloped portions of the site will be preserved in proposed open space and buffer areas during master planning. The site has a great deal of visibility from the VA Route 37 corridor. Planning for uses on this site is to respect this view shed by the proper orientation of buildings and architecturally significant structures. Site drainage generally flows from west to east in the northern Tract l area and from north to south in the Tract 2 area. The site is underlain by Ordovician limestone formations which have characteristic clay lenses between rock outcrops. The development potential of sites of this nature have been proven to be effective with proper geotechnical control. Appropriate attention need be made to groundwater issues and impacts since this site lies within the hydrologic recharge areas of Frederick County. The site can be served by the extension of sewer and water services from the Frederick County Sanitation Authority by use of a regional pump station located near- the interchange of Route 37 and US. Route 50. This pump station would transfer wastewater to the Sunnyside sewer collection system as discussed in a later section of this report. This is the same system proposed in the 1997 rezoning plan. f � 1 tp o P,dlly` Prop � WINCHESTER MED/CAL CENTER PROPERTY zPkmam w . gilbert w. Clifford & associates, inc. 1Q O I R iTEsUirAeiL/TY6,�,�w��,, t17 E P'rcad�yi ,St mer, Ym�rna 71601 1 FREDERICK CDUN7Y, I9RC/Nl4 W10E: (5W) 667 2139 FNC• (540) S55 -D493 EWA.: pdrffOmr>sinc.com Figure 4 / 1 / \ ,7!~___---J''_,`1� 'j�{I '°. \. `•\ __`-`ir•. `, \''.\•'. •.\', y r � tri; 1' I Iir I �\` et \ ,•'?< `,,. , �.� \`, l\�.'`.�`. •`\al �` m `f 'i` y i i % `. lily �� J i{'a.\`.'t If l�'�/ f' � ' j t of V i m` ; •'fi1 � (' !!—= "%--%'=,'�! -"-; •' L � 1 tp o P,dlly` Prop � WINCHESTER MED/CAL CENTER PROPERTY zPkmam w . gilbert w. Clifford & associates, inc. 1Q O I R iTEsUirAeiL/TY6,�,�w��,, t17 E P'rcad�yi ,St mer, Ym�rna 71601 1 FREDERICK CDUN7Y, I9RC/Nl4 W10E: (5W) 667 2139 FNC• (540) S55 -D493 EWA.: pdrffOmr>sinc.com Figure 4 ti rl NI -- - — ---------- ill J © / i; j �-`J'it;` ��r6''.f � yil //�� '/ r���lil'lij li•,___�,�y-',1;`.�[t \\ l fW �,,:.\ `� .�, _�_ * `� `� \' , '. � _ _ __ Esc- -- � t if,' -,•FII, 1 �� ti�~�`- '+F\,�\�ti, tib, a ',\'.�.���•. �.�,\ -- _ '� - _ _ - � ;;( '\�; -w `' ..•y. '..-�- .-Yy-„ ;rh' ► �t `—_ ,�)�i; �— E nom. ,` J} ; _ • t � y ySi0P S6.'OPE _ 2,1 If 'r-`• ;,,�,�; — ` pi,"ice -- - _- - s ) ------------- 10 Maw E rj.`\\ co WINCHESTER MEDICAL CSNTD? PROPERTY gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc- SITE SU/TAB �t /L/TY „«m � �r�nnr�^e watoroL"y FREDERICK COUNTY 117RCIN,4 VOICE (540) 667-21397 E FAX 54pSL w� r93r�'W nia ��I t � ( } gwcGffOmnsmc.com Figure 4A Winchester Medical Center D. Traffic Impact Analysis Statement A complete transportation study was conducted in between late 2001 and September 2002 for this site and is attached by reference. This transportation study properly reflects the impact of the new transportation interchange on VA Route 37 which serves the existing Valley Health Center campus and offers the potential for western access to future planning for Frederick County in the area between U.S. Route 50 and U.S. Route 522. The key feature of this rezoning proposal is the proper orientation of the major collector roadway called for in the comprehensive plan to a proposed interchange point appropriately west of the new WMC interchange to allow for proper transportation function. See Figure 5A, 5B and 5C. This proposed intersection was found to be too close to a proposed western access point as shown on the current comprehensive plan. Also the proposed major collector properly aligns with the proposed intersection with U.S. Route 522 that has been planned since 1997 as a result of the Winchester Equipment Company application for rezoning and subsequent construction of the facilities. Meetings have been held in order to confirm that the relocation of the proposed major collector is not more adverse to the -interest of adjacent agricultural uses than that proposed earlier. Also the location of this major collector provides better access to future planned uses along U.S. Route 50 to the west and does not disrupt the campus style planning for the Winchester Medical Center. The Agency review period on this rezoning request has included an exhaustive review of traffic impacts from this proposal as well as the VVW proposal which is working its way towards hearing later in the spring of 2003. After several traffic study modifications at the request of VDOT and staff an appropriate regional plan has evolved which is acceptable to VDOT. The nature of the revised transportation proffer follows closely with a combined and phased improvements plan which is summarized by consultant letter of 18 December 2002 and included in the appendix of the report. The principle elements of the plan are: (1) All proffered road improvements are to be constructed at the beginning of -Phase 1 development. (2) The northbound Route 37 ramp improvement is a responsibility of the WWW application but if required by WMC prior to WWW development, this work (#13 in appendix) will be constructed by WMC pursuant to reimbursement agreement with W Y OV. (3) Applicant to provide automatic trip count monitoring at the U.S. Route 50 connection. (Major connector intersection). (4) As generated traffic reaches 9,200 TPD (Phase 1 generation) a new traffic study is to be commissioned which will evaluate impacts in light of regional changes in traffic and roadway improvements on Route 50, Route 37 and major (Revised 117/03) Winchester Medical Center ImpactAnalysis Statement collectors. Acceptable levels of service shall be predicted in order to proceed beyond Phase i levels. Since levels of service "D" occur in background without the proposed development, a level of service `D" will be the controlling criteria for regulatory response. (5) Appropriate regulatory oversight and details are to be worked out during the master plan approval phase of development and will include reviews by VD©T and County agencies as appropriate. An important finding and conclusion of the transportation plan is that WMC is allowed the full range of traffic generation allowed under combined Phase 1 conditions under current zoning (by right) and that the proposed proffer modification represents a significant improvement to traffic planning in the Route 50 corridor over existing planning. The comprehensive approach developed regionally allows Frederick County to provide important new resources for health care, business and commercial without the risk of adverse traffic conditions. This plan provides for acceptable and manageable progress towards implementation of the Frederick County comprehensive pian. (Revised 1/7J03) 7- 7 EX R13POSED MAJOR C13LLECT13R ROADWAY /FUTURE INTERSECTION .__ —__Fl3R WESTERN ACCESS Asht- -1 pt Lq Ln I rlKl' p fig WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER PROPERTY 7 gilbert w. clifford associates, inc. COUP1?SHfiVS1Vf- TRANSPORTATION PLAN / Engh"m Land m Water Ouafty 1 f RLD&ICK QUVY 117 E Picacwl SL wjnchesbn vqjnjO 2201 (540) 667-2139 FAX- (540) 665-0493 BUL. g=ftmnsim.cornj Fl-gure 5A I i`— r rte! \♦ 1 jt '� ! 1 ' � Iii �\ r—'`\ 1 \\ ` /! — `\tel f ♦ \.-f \FUTURE -pEXTON 7ENS[ .-To— US f -OU AT ROU8031! r'`• f i \ ♦ I � � � moi' �; t,I { !_ F� -,�'\ `,0�',\`' l '.,•ir,•;y�- .' ! % t 1 1 J ' / \ k ,. f= � j �r ,,�5 `� � t t q� \� -.'`,. \'.•`.,-.', \ ,,.i t�\ i���� ,' _ ♦`,,, r iii\,' \I -_`_-__ - \� �� � �i ;a; fm;,'o\'�l �. `�� Arl (F, b ; _-_____- _=--�_ '•,-'_t'� _ _ t i `� 1 /� r,l`, i j ') I m S ; ; / V moi- 1+',- '/ _BOLL O - E OR '`' %\RAG -71C6 —E2— .,��s, t ` J— J � ice♦ \ � \i/�-�=_�""".=%"'r f'' il° - 17 cO WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER PROPERTY giibert w. Clifford &associates, in c. ` 11�� TRANSPORTATION PLAN 5,dne v Land PWram water a,alty t�j 117 E P -I W4 5t Vind ter, *06a 22601 FREMR/CK COUNTY, WRCIAM VOM (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 DML' gwdf�— Figure 5B I \ \ \ i f / r-- -- -------------- it — — -- if �s1�1`i �� �i'�J iiia •` : 1"I �_ 870 v �. �;♦ r .� � \ %` \[ \ � _ _ �—moi:= L � ; _� � a s.-'•i% -i'; 1f,' ,!'�-� 1 'wr,''�',,. m, ; i t._� t,� r�_ - �� I , f / % .i•' "' -i =✓J,/1 \ --- - , ` \\\ �A�CT f ' i f \ 1••'\-• „{.. ` y? ; :'t - -- ---- ',�\��,` =� �Li ,lei r,, `•,in`;C�: _-__�g,;; <;: 1 _:-`\ '711; % E%F -'- -- '- _- _ -- _ �;�. `:--__`_ 1:/ 1/. ;`(, Jl`\\`; `Cam,`=:; :•,\`.ti _ - ' \ \` 1 \ C� _ .raw-- --•- - --- ------------------�- _.tom-.T-_----�- -- =-------="�-_-'- _ sz -_--,.—_- -.> r / WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER PROPERTY I` gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. \� S/TE SU/TABIL/TY Eng,wwv Land Plamwe Water OuaRy 'J \ O N 117 C P=loy St Wchester, Wgin 22601 FREDERICK COUNTY 14RGIN4 VOICE (540) 667-2139 FIVE (540) 05-0493 EWUL• gwd tOmmkr-com Figure 5C A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and DegranCY ge Properties Located in. Frederick County, Virginia Prepared for: Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 117 :East Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 prepared by_ Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Engineers_ &jrvevors_ Banners. Landscape Trhitects_ 2D8 Church Street S E Leesburg, i�rginia 20175 RAF 703_;77. 703.77i.-372 3i25 PH November 8, 2002 (Revised) Report Summary This study considers the traffic impacts associated with the build -out of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties located north of US Route 50, one-half mile west of VA Route 37, in Frederick County, Virginia. The site includes a mixture of land uses with access ultimately provided via the Route 50 site -driveways, the Route 522/Major Collector intersection and the Route 37/Valley Health Systems interchange. The Major Collector is called for by the County Comprehensive Plan. The project will be built -out in two (2) transportation phases by the year 2012. Methodology The traffic impacts accompanying the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties were obtained through a sequence of activities as the narratives that follow document: • Calculation of trip generation for the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties, • Assessment of background traffic including other planned projects in the area of impact, • Distribution and assignment of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties generated trips onto the completed road network, • Analysis of capacity and level of service with the newest version of the highway capacity software, HCS -2000, for existing and future conditions. EXISTING CONDITIONS Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc (PHR+A) conducted AM and PM peak hour manual turning movement counts at the intersections of Route 50/Route 803, Route 50/ Major Collector, Route 50/Route 37 SB ramps and Route 50/Route 37 NB ramps. 24-hour "tube" counts (in 15 -minute increments with vehicle classification) were conducted along Route 50, west of Route 37, as well as along each of the Valley Heath Systems/Route 37 interchange ramps. In order to determine the ADT (Average Daily Traffic) along the remaining study area roadways, PHR+A utilized the 24-hour counts along Route 50 to calculate a "W' factor of 0.10 (the ratio of PM peak hour traffic volumes to 24-hour traffic volumes). Figure 1 shows the existing (2002) ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 2 shows the respective existing lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All traffic count data, vehicle classification data and HCS -2000 level of service worksheets are provided in the Appendix section of this report. A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties November 8, 2002 n- i No Scale h~ !3, 418 (983) C 524��� 2�Oftft � (I8 �1N26X O I1t ' So (393 3gg(II46) �1 SITE s U � O Is o 0 1(4) 447(1443) 1 i t 60(67) % .6(7) Route 50 4 501(1$10) (S)1 (107014 (995)1420♦ ) t r ) 87r� (S)4� v o e (z)2� ., r Figure I Existing Traffic Conditions L §P Valley Health Systems Interchange Avenge Daily_Traffic p A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties TRANovember 8, 2002 No Scale Signalized Intersection LOS = C(C) C(C) C ft..*ute Signalized B)C %%.*Route Sp Intersection LOS=QQ SITE 0 _o U Unsignalized o Intersection Route 50 *(B)A % cso) �� Unsignalized �oJ Intersection Figure 2 PuRA Y Valley Health Systems Interchange AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) * Denotes Critical Unsienalized Movement Existing Lane Geometry and Level of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties November 8, 2002 -D— PHASE 1 (2006) The purpose of this Phase 1 scenario is to maximize the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties development while maintaining a four -lane Route 50. All traffic will enter and exit the site via the proposed Route 50 site -driveways. Additionally, PHR+A included a proportional amount of WWW Property trips as background traffic. 2006 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS In order to accurately depict future. conditions within the study area, PHR+A considered all trips associated with the WWW Property through Year 2006. Using the 6th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report, PHR+A has prepared Table 1 to summarize the trip generation for the 2006 WWW Property. The trips shown in Table 1 were reduced to account for retail pass -by trips as well as internal trip interaction between office and retail land uses. A detailed summary of internal and pass -by trip generation reductions is provided in the Appendix section of this report. Table 1 WWW Property 2006 Trip Generation Summary ITE Code Land Use Amount AM Peak Hour In Out Total PM Peak Hour In Out Total ADT 750 Office Park 5 acres 350 30 381 34 194 228 2,241 813 Discount Superstore 135,000 SF 127 122 248 253 263 516 6,101 820 Shopping Center 25,000 SF 43 27 70 121 I31 252 2,745 r° 520 1 179 1 699 1 408 1 588 1 995 111.137 1 In addition to the trip assignments relating to the background development described in Table 1, an historical growth rate of 5% per year (compounded annually) was applied along Route 50, Route 803 and Route 37 NB/SB ramps_ Figure 3 shows the 2006 background ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 4 shows the respective 2006 background lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 level of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. PHASE 1 TRIP GENERATION The number of trips produced by and attracted to this site were established using ITE's Trip Generation ReRort, 6th Edition. Table 2 shows the trip generation results for the proposed Phase 1 Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties. The trips shown in Table 2 were reduced to account for retail pass -by trips as well as internal trip interaction between office and retail land uses. A detailed summary of internal and pass -by trip generation reductions is provided in the Appendix section of this report. pA Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties TRA November 8, 2002 r _F 4 No Scale N �� r' (42g) 06-7).j 5 ;011 M X400(249) N o`" �=536(1737) 1 7381 Rout 50 5)88 �♦ dP (1170 10) ) t e (1680)1912 ry (10)5 n o 0 (2)2 �o00 Figure 3 P"R+A % � 6(7) i F. I000(2064) R r^4 `� VaIley Health Systems Interchange AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) 2006 Background Traffic Conditions A Trak Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Svstems and Degrange Properties November 8, 2002 In- — x No Scale -l- �'= Denotes Free -Flow Lane AM .Peak Sour ('NI Peak Sour) Figure 4 2006 Background Lane Geometry and Level of Service p A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties 14RANovember 8, 2002 Pave 6 � SITE C) � t Valley Health Systems O Signalized Intersection � Interchange B)C Intersection LOS = C(C) C(b) = oou Signalized (C)C � Roote Sp Intersection LOS=C(B) 1► �� l� C)��� �Q -l- �'= Denotes Free -Flow Lane AM .Peak Sour ('NI Peak Sour) Figure 4 2006 Background Lane Geometry and Level of Service p A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties 14RANovember 8, 2002 Pave 6 SITE O Signalized o Intersection LOS = C(C) 3 .. d 0 Q 4— +� e7oute 50 ~� ` *4 (C)C ..+ 1 Unsignalized / 40° Intersection -l- �'= Denotes Free -Flow Lane AM .Peak Sour ('NI Peak Sour) Figure 4 2006 Background Lane Geometry and Level of Service p A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties 14RANovember 8, 2002 Pave 6 Table 2 Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties Phase 1 Trin Genernfinn Gvmr" ry PTE Land UseAM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ADT in In Out Total In Out Total Code Fa11eyHealth SysterrarProperty 150 Warehousing (Distribution Center) 5 acres 63 25 88 25 47 73 383 710 Office (Administration Building) 50,000 SF 94 13 107 23 112 135 779 750 Office Park 5 acres 350 30 381 34 194 228 2,241 620 Nursing Home 24,000 SF 7 4 10 4 6 10 164 253 Elderly Housing - Attached 80 units 4 2 6 5 3 8 278 Sub -total 518 74 592 91 363 434 3,846 Degrange Property 312 Business Hotel 50 rooms 17 12 29 19 12 31 364 760 Research & Development Park 5 acres 70 13 84 9 68 77 398 820 Shopping Center 25,000 SF 43 27 70 121 131 252 2.795 912 Drive-in Bank 2,400 SF 17 13 30 66 66 131 805 832 H -T Restaurant 7,600 Sr- 37 34 70 50 33 83 991 Sub -total 184 100 284 264 I 310 I 574 5,352 TotalI 1 702_..J. 173 i 875 1 355 1 672 11,027 9,198 2006 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT The distribution of trips was based upon local travel patterns for the road network surrounding the site. Figure 5 represents the trip distribution percentages into and out of the proposed Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties. Figure 6 shows the respective development -generated AM and PM peak hour trips and ADT assignments along the study area roadway network_ 2006 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS The proposed Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties assigned trips (Figure 6) were added to the 2006 background traffic (Figure 3) to obtain 2006 build -out conditions. Figure 7 shows 2006 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 8 shows the respective 2006 build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 level of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. 2006 CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the proposed Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties are acceptable and manageable. All study area intersections (with improvements) maintain acceptable levels of service `D' or better for 2006 build -out conditions_ A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties ;r% November 8, 2002 11 Figure 5 VHS & Degrange _ Trip Distribution Percentages A 1'rathc Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties P"R+ANovember 8, 2002 No Scale jj (35)98 9IS) 0 N 3 U 420(83),tom. 199(76) -2(-5)** Route 50 1 j ( **(-25}0 (60)109... 1 Ir a IN $ %-' 363 (13 (304)72 19�(65 Valley Health Systems Interchange M AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) ** Denotes Pass -by trip reduction Figure 6 VHS & Degrange -- Phase Z Development Generated Trip Assignments A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties November 8, 2002 AW No Scale {677)7` (678)1 /lQ ftw* L� 717004 _O U `b O ,400(249) 4.M 555(1820) �, o" %.205(83) 73(81) 4--998(205-9) Route 50 J I L ir� 0(0) (60)109...p (1205)1807..0, o o (1655)1-902..+% � o 00 (2)2 40 � ti 363(13 (1988)�85 izoz�X13 ti Figure 7 0� Valley Health Systems Interchange • e Alii Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) VHS & Degrange - 2006 Build -out Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties -i- November 8, 2002 No Scale Osti �' Signalized 4Intersection 0~f 13(c) LOS = C(D)ft f! ( LiC �o out f` �► O��C yam► Route 50 Signalized Intersection �1► LOS=C(C) �� q r` - m SITE 0 Signalized o Intersection LOS = C(C) Signalized 3 Intersection t i t� G � LOS = C�) o d Q � g(C) Route _% ♦.— B(D) 50 ,�, (C)D ..� y C D ""♦ O kUnsignalized � Z Valley Health Systems Interchange � Denotes Free -Flow Lane AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 8 `SSS & Degrange 2006 Build -out Lane Geometry and bevel of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties -{- November 8. 2002 „_ -- T 7 PHASE 2 (2012) The purpose of this Phase 2 scenario is to included the entire Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties development while maintaining a six -lane Route 50. Traffic will enter and exit the site via the Route 50 site -driveways, the Route 522/Major Collector intersection and the Route 37/Valley Health Systems interchange. Additionally, PHR+A included the entire WWW Property as background traffic. 2012 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS In order to accurately depict future conditions within the study area, PHR+A considered all trips associated with the WWW Property through Year 2012. Using the 6th Edition of TTE's Trip Generation Report, PHR+A has prepared Table 3 to summarize the trip generation for the 2012 WWW Property. The trips shown in Table 3 were reduced to account for retail pass -by trips as well as internal trip interaction between office and retail land uses. A detailed summary of internal and pass -by trip generation reductions is provided in the Appendix section of this report. Table 3 WWW Property 2012 Trin Ge.ne.raiian Cnmmary ITE Land Use Amount AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour l In Out Total In Out Total Code 750 Office Park 35 acres 702 61 763 136 769 905 6,304 813 Discount Superstore 135,000 SF 127 122 248 253 263 516 6,101 820 Shopping Center 150,000 SF 124 79 203 394 427 821 81847 Total1 953 i 262 11,215 1 782 11,459 i 2,242 i 21,252 In addition to the trip assignments relating to the background development described in Table 1, an historical growth rate of 5% per year (compounded annually) was applied along Route 50, Route 803 and Route 37 NB/SB ramps. Figure 9 shows the 2012 background ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 10 shows the respective 2012 background lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 level of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. PHASE 2 TRIP GENERATION The number of trips produced by and attracted to this site were established using TTE's Trip Generation Report, 6th Edition. Table 4 shows the trip generation results for the proposed Phase 2 Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties. The trips shown in Table 4 were reduced to account for retail pass -by trips as well as internal trip interaction between office and retail land uses. A detailed summary of internal and pass -by trip generation reductions is provided in the Appendix section of this report. A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties f + November 8, 2002 o 0 No Scale h Figure 9 Health Systems derchange RUTWITIMOMMMS AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) 2012 Background Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties �� November 8 2002 No Scale q�ZN 4� N C(C (C)C = rte Signalized Intersection LOS=C(C) , Signalized Intersection LOS = C(C) 3 a Q. AL6 Figure 10 X Valley Health Systems Interchange � Denotes Free -Flow Lane AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) 2012 Background Lane Geometry and Level of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties November 8. 2002 Table 4 Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties Phase 2 Trip Generation Summary Tf E AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Code Land Use Amount ADT In Out Total In Out I Total ValleyHealth Systems Property 150 Warehousing (Distribution Center) 710 Office (Administration Building) 750 Office Park 620 Nursing Home 253 Elderly Housing -Attached 10 acres 90 35 125 43 80 122 645 108,900 SF 176 24 200 34 167 201 1,417 15 acres 468 41 508 75 422 497 3,595 24,000 SF 7 4 10 4 6 10 164 80 units 4 2 6 5 3 8 278 Sub -total 744 105 849 160 678 838 6,100 egrange Property 312 Business Hotel 100 rooms 34 24 58 37 25 62 727 760 Research & Development Park 23 acres 324 62 386 43 313 355 1,831 820 Shopping Center 162,325 SF 130 83 213 415 450 864 9,308 912 Drive-in Bank 2,400 SF 17 13 30 66 66 131 805 832 H -T Restaurant 7,600 SF 37 34 70 50 33 83 991 Sub -total 542 216 758 610 886 1,496 13,661 Total 1,286 1 321 11,607 1 770 11,564 12,334 1 19,761 2012 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT The distribution of trips was based upon local travel patterns for the road network surrounding the site. Figure 11 represents the trip distribution percentages into and out of the proposed Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties. Figure 12 shows the respective development -generated AM and PM peak hour trips and ADT assignments along the study area roadway network. 2012 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS The proposed Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties assigned trips (Figure 6) were added to the 2012 background traffic (Figure 3) to obtain 2012 build -out conditions. Figure 13 shows 2012 build -out ADT and AX"M peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 14 shows the respective 2012 build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service_ All HCS -2000 level of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. 2012 CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the proposed Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties are acceptable and manageable. All study area intersections (with improvements) maintain acceptable levels of service `C' or better for 2012 build -out conditions. P"RA A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties November 8, 2002 KJ Figure 11 VHS & Degrange - 2012 Trip Distribution Percentages ;tum '1� A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties A -Y, -#- �' November 8. 2002 P"R+A Valley Health Systems Interchange 1 AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) ** Denotes Pass -by trip reduction A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties November 8, 2002 -0— 1 '7 A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties November 8, 2002 t r--, 7Q r No Scale o a J Valley Health Systems Interchange 5 1108),66��O �g1 p(82p)835oute5 0 (305)80{425)�{206g(2234)242 ) r L ��Qfi e M ITE a 0 U cd c r- Q '`269(187) 754(2514) 130(68) ♦v � oy M 98(109) 4. 1069(2602) 0(0) L ' Route 50 j ir^ (150)156 �� {1627)2467�.� (130)1-99 tr (2 042)2455 tr ; (13)7rrr� +n o o (2)2�� p �e+ '-.244(222 (2488)2549 �`Y299(2662) D - AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties November 8, 2002 t r--, 7Q Valley Health Systems Interchange 7�= Denotes Free -Flow Lane AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties T A � November 8 2002 F - APPENDIX Table 1A WWW Property 2006 Pass -by and Internal Trip Interaction Reduced AMPeakHour PM Peak flour Trips Goingto/from Land Use In Out Total In Out Total ADT Percentage Office Retail 18 16 34 40 43 83 961 10.8% Pass -by Retail 25 22 48 56 59 115 1,334 15.0% Retail Office 16 18 34 43 40 83 961 Reciprocal Total Retail Internal Trips 18 16 34 40 43 83 961 10.8% Total Retail Pass -by Trips 25 22 48 56 59 115 1,334 15.0% Total Retail "New" Trips 126 111 236 277 292 569 6,601 Total Office Internal Trips Total Office Internal Trips 16 18 34 43 40 83 961 Reciprocal Total Office "New" Trips 334 12 347 (8) 154 145 1,280 Total Internal Total Internal 34 34 69 83 83 166 1,922 Total Percentages Total Percentages 7% 19% 10% 20% 14% 17% 17% 14.8% Total Pass -by 25 22 48 56 59 115 1,334 Total Percentages Total Percentages 5% 12% 7% 14% 10% 12% 12% 10.2% Total "New Trips" 460 123 583 269 446 715 7,881 Total Percentages Total Percentages 88% 68% 83% 66% 76% 72% 71% 749% Total Trips 520 179 699 408 588 995 11,137 Total Percentages 100% Total Percentages 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100.0% Table 2A Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties Phase 1 Pass -by and Internal Trip Interaction Reduced A.MPeakHour PMPeakllour Trips Going to/from Land Use In Out Total In Out Total ADT Percentage Office Retail 18 14 31 43 42 85 836 18.2% Pass -by Retail 14 11 26 35 34 70 689 15.0% Retail Office 14 18 31 42 43- 85 836 Reciprocal Total Retail Internal Trips 18 14 31 43 42 85 836 182 Total Retail Pass -by Trips 14 11 26 35 34 70 689 15.0% Total Retail "New" Trips 64 50 114 158 153 311 3,067 Total Office Internal Trips 14 18 31 42 43 85 836 Reciprocal Total Office "New" Trips 592 81 674 77 400 477 3,772 Total Internal 31 31 62 85 85 169 1,671 Total Percentages 4% 18% 7% Z4% 13% 16% 18% 144% Total Pass -by 14 11 26 35 34 70 689 1 Total Percentages 2% 6% 3% 10% S% 7% 7% 5.8% Total "New Trips" 657 131 788 235 553 788 6,838 Total Percentages 94% 76% 90% 66% 82% 77% 74% 798% Total Trips 702 173 875 355 672 1,027 9,198 Total Percentages 100% I0o% 100% 100% 100% 100%. 100% 100.0% Table 3A WWW Property 2012 Pass-hv and Internal Trin Tn terarfinn Reduced AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips Goingto/from Land Use In Out Total In Out Total ADT Percentage Office Retail 32 26 58 83 89 172 1,928 12-9% Pass -by Retail 38 30 68 97 103 200 2,242 1.5.0% Retail Office 26 32 58 89 83 172 1,928 Reciprocal Total Retail Internal Trips 32 26 58 83 89 172 1,928 12.9% Total Retail Pass -by Trips 38 30 68 97 103 200 2,242 15.0% Total Retail "New" Trips 181 145 326 466 497 963 10,778 162 Total Office Internal Trips 26 32 58 89 83 172 1,928 Reciprocal Total Office "New" Trips 676 29 705 47 686 733 4,376 Reciprocal Total Internal 58 58 117 172 172 345 3,857 Total Internal 57 Total Percentages 6% 22% 10% 22% 12% 15% 18% 15.0116 Total Pass -by 38 30 68 97 103 200 2,242 47 Total Percentages 4% 12% 6% 12% 7% 9% 11% 8.6% Total "New Trips" 857 174 1,030 513 1,183 1,696 15,153 1,285 Total Percentages 90% 66% 85% 66% 91% 76% 71% 76.4% Total Trips 953 262 1,215 782 1,459 2,242 21,252 19,761 Total Percentages 100% 100% 100% 100% 200% l00% l00% 100.0% Table 4A Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties Phase Pass -by and Internal Trip Interaction Reduced AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips Going to/from Land Use In Out Total In Out Total ADT Percentage Office Retail 33 24 57 96 100 196 2,021 18.2% Pass -by Retail 28 20 47 80 82 162 1,665 15.0% Retail Office 24 3.3 57 100 96 196 2,021 Reciprocal Total Retail Internal Trips 33 24 57 96 100 196 2,021 18.2% Total Retail Pass by Trips 28 20 47 80 82 162 1,665 15.0% Total Retail "New" Trips 123 87 210 354 366 720 7,417 Total Office Internal Dips 24 33 57 100 96 196 2,021 Reciprocal Total Office "New" Trips 1,078 157 1,236 140 919 1,059 6,6.37 Total Internal 57 57 114 196 196 393 4,042 TotalPereentges 4% 18% 7% 25% 13% 17% 20% 150% Total Pass -by 28 20 47 80 82 162 1,665 Total Percentages 2% 6% 3116 10% 5% 7% 8% 6.0% Total "New Trips" 1,201 245 1,446 494 1,285 1,780 14,054 Total Percentages 93% 76% 90% 64% 82% 76% 71% 79.0% Total Trips 1,286 321 1,607 770 1,564 2,334 19,761 TotalPereentges IDD% 100% 106% l00% I0o% 200% 100% 100.0% Winchester Medica[ Center E. Sewage Cogye ance and Water Sppplly Impact Analysis Statement In 1997 a means of providing sewer and water to the Route 50 corridor was created in coordination with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. This plan as shown on Figure 6 provides for a regional sewage pump station capable of providing 425 gallons per minute of wastewater flow transfer to the Sunnyside collection system located on the U.S. Route 522 corridor in Frederick County. This provides for approximately 250,000 gallons per day capacity to the Round Dill service area. Also the provision for the 4 million gallon northwest storage tank has provided for a 20" stub line and easement that allows extension of water service from the current Frederick County system along the west side of VA Route 3 7 to the Route 50 intersection with Route 3 7. The half full condition in the Northwest Tank provides an operating elevation of 955 MSL. The expected high and low elevations on the WMC site for uses are 860' and 800' respectively. This provides a minimum and maximum pressure of 67 psi and 41 psi which is acceptable for the use. FEgher rise structures allowed in the NIS zone may rewire pump booster service for fire flow pressure gradients. The 20" main is very adequate for delivery volumes. This system is to be constructed by the FCSA through developer commitments in accord with FCSA policy and procedures. 1 PROP, WATER SYSTEM 1( NW `\TANK SYSTEM n P'.. Lora �,, ! \� � co W/NCNESTER MEDICAL CENTER PROPERTY gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. SEWER & WATER PLAN Enghm. t—,a I l.rram water a,a>fty ti117 E PicadiE St Nincheste, Voginia 22601 FROERICK MIN7Y WRGIUM WCE: (540) 567-2139 FAX (540) 665-(M3 DAL' gwciiffemnsiaccom Figure 6 Winchester Medical Center Winchester Medical Center Rezoning Water Use/Wastewater Flow Summary U.S. Route 50W Corridor Frederick County, Virginia ImpactAnalysis Statement ITE 10 Amount Office (Administration Building) Unit Value SF Office Park Code Land Use Quantity Unit (GPI) Elderly Housing - Attached Total Units Tract 1 312 Business Hotel 100 Rooms 50 g/roorn 5,000 760 Research & Development Park 23 Acres 1,000 g/acre 23,000 820 Shopping Center 162,325 SF 0.2 g/SF 32,465 12 Drive -In Bank 2,400 SF 0.2 g/SF 480 832 H -T Restaurant 250 Seats 50 g/seat 12.500 Subtotal 73,445 Tract 2 150 710 750 620 253 Warehousing (Distribution Center) 10 Acres Office (Administration Building) 108,900 SF Office Park 15 Acres Nursing Home (150 beds) 150 Beds Elderly Housing - Attached 80 Units 600 g/acre 0.2 g/SF 1,000 g/acre 150 g/bed 200 g/unit Subtotal 6,000 21,780 15,000 22,500 16.000 81,280 Total 154.725 Winchester Medical Center F. Site Drainage ImpactAnalysis ,Statement Drainage from the Tract 1 area generally travels from north to south and crosses U.S. Route 50 on the west side of the interchange with VA Route 37, At this point the drainage channel is well defined with adequate carrying capacity by culvert pipes under U -S. Route 50. A storm water management plan will be prepared as a part of the master plan and site plan phases which will provide rates of storm water discharge that will not exceed the capacity of the downstream channel. The northern Tract 2 generally flows from west to east across VA Route 37 and into the City of Winchester's storm water systems entering Town Run at Amherst and Boscawen Streets. The City is engaged presently in a storm water management plan improvement to handle the storm discharges from this watershed. The Winchester Medical Center has constructed substantial storm water management facilities on its City campus intended to handle ultimate upstream uses. Additionally, storm water management facilities within the planned MS district will be provided to supplement the improvements already in place on the Winchester Medical campus in the City. See attached Figures 7A and 7B_ A complete storm water management plan is to be presented at Master Development Plan consideration. %jJ •�` r f ` r t J rte♦ '\�^\ —, / i it ` rr ` �_`�'�]�.�'' �`� �,1,,"' � �- f' --'� 1 1 /� �l@�-- �\'i /r �--�,5+�,� -i•tl \�\, � i ;'` res .-r`��, .' `C\\\\ t i _C3 ti. 1' A' r� • �����:- 11 JE:._. � _ L� ,�} i / i 4� + � .l . �� / i j`lril W, r� 1 r i = F -fit -- \ -4, I WINCHESTER MED/CAL CENTER PROPERTly I` v o STORM PLAN ,i ter. ,�•� �"' • "�__ � / f ��� � \ -4, I WINCHESTER MED/CAL CENTER PROPERTly I` v o STORM PLAN fr� gilbert w, ciifford 4%& associates, inc. LwW ftmom water Om* 117 E Picodily St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 KMCE (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 EM41-- grdif(AmnsinC_com Figure 7A i' } f fr� gilbert w, ciifford 4%& associates, inc. LwW ftmom water Om* 117 E Picodily St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 KMCE (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 EM41-- grdif(AmnsinC_com Figure 7A t`t i �� ; 'i L f �'' iii iii � J --- � � - I � � ! t j •,1�`}, l' , \ 1.1 /X' 7!,%�Il,i//r/ —870 ZZ, wo sya 01 -- —Jl !''I•,'�7 1 ~� .1\,, 1\�: •--�._ - J--�-J�t'" \\. _l �, 1j r.�`, _ �Ir y:; •_�}k', �_ - — �`- : \ , / 1 1 f • i/" moi'-`--;\i !,'�; �� ; j� A, _ ,..-.---------• �-__------ - - — — =- �'� � _;>�—Y- � --amu-=== . =#k'Z711=moi -j - _ '- law LM ;' per• y - _ - , _ � \ I! r,s �- !\ f Ap WINCHESTER MED/CAL CENTERc PROPERTY gilbert w. Clifford &associates, inc. Q) STORM PLAN Enchmm era P,,,,,.. water Oudy IF�j 117 F- F =dMy St ftheste , Yironio 22601 FRED,-RICK COUNTY, 141 WM YOKE (540) 667-2139 FA)C (540) 665-0493 OM- pcGff rmiw.= Figure 7B Winchester Medical Center G_ Solid Waste Disposal Facilities ImpactAnalysis Statement The WMC will provide contract solid waste disposal via contract with commercial hauler. Solid waste generated shall be disposed in the Frederick County Landfill facility. An estimate of daily tonnage is shown on the attached table. Winchester Medical Center Impact Analysis Statement Winchester Medical Center Rezoning Solid Waste Generation Summary U.S. Route 5OW Corridor Frederick County, Virginia ITE Amount unit Value Code Land Ilse Quantity unit (GPVY Total Tract I - 312 Busyness Hotel 100 Rooms 5 :4/room 500 760 Research & Development Park 23 Acres 20 -4/acre 460 820 Shopping Center 162,325 SF ti_431 NSF 1,623 � 12 Drive -In Bank 2,400 SF 0.01 #ISF 24 832 H T Restaurant 250 Seats 2 Alseat 500 Subtotal 3,107 Tract 2 150 Warehousing (Distribution Center) 10 Acres 200 4/acre 2,0010 710 Office (Administration Building) 109,900 SF 0-01 -4/SF 1,089 750 Office Park 15 Acres 100 Macre 1,500 6213 Nursing Rome (150 beds) 150 Beds 10. 4/bed 1,500 253 Elderly Rousing - Attached 80 Units 10 #iunit 800 Subtotal 6,889 Total 9,996 Estimated Solid Waste/Day 5 tons/day (Revised 1.17103) YPinchesterMedical Center H. Historic Sites and Structures Impact-lnalysis Statement Two historic structures exist within proximity to the proposed campus. The only significant structure is located well to the north and this project will not impact the site significantly. A number of civil war actions occurred in the vicinity such as the route to contact of confederate forces in the Second Battle of Winchester however, this site lies outside of NPS zone battlefield designations and will result in the loss of no significant historic preservation potential. (See Figure 8). im Potentially Number Description Si cant �..y 3 - On -Site: None Identified ' Off -Site A2 '> g 1410 Fruit Hill Farm Yes 467 Old Hoover Place No N111VCHE5TER IVE0/CAL CENTER gilbert w. Clifford & cssocifltes, Inc. QRURAL LANDMARK STUDY Engineers Land Planners water Ouality N117 E. Picodilly St. Wirchester, Virginia 22601 FREDERICK COUNTY, uiRcrNia VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX' (540) 665-0493 EMAIL; gwdiff@mnsinc.com f � Potentially Number Description Si cant �..y 3 - On -Site: None Identified ' Off -Site A2 '> g 1410 Fruit Hill Farm Yes 467 Old Hoover Place No N111VCHE5TER IVE0/CAL CENTER gilbert w. Clifford & cssocifltes, Inc. QRURAL LANDMARK STUDY Engineers Land Planners water Ouality N117 E. Picodilly St. Wirchester, Virginia 22601 FREDERICK COUNTY, uiRcrNia VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX' (540) 665-0493 EMAIL; gwdiff@mnsinc.com ff inchester Medical Center I. Impact on Community Facilities ImpactAnalysis Statement There will be a level of impacts on certain community facilities resulting from this proj ect. The expansion of health care facilities will provide regional efficiency and provide improved health care services_ The first responder (Round IFill Fire and Rescue) will see increased departmental emergency calls as the result of the build out of these facilities_ There will be no measurable impact on schools and parks. Solid waste volumes will increase as estimated with payment to the landfill in accordance with disposal requirements (per enterprise fund). There will also be some impacts on County Sheriff and Administrator operations_ Of note is that, by agreement with Frederick County, the facilities to be created within the "West Campus" are taxable pursuant to County codes and this presents a substantial $9+ million dollar positive impact as reported in the County Impact Model_ Regardless of this finding, the Winchester Medical Center has chosen to provide a cash proffer to the affected CIP agencies as shown in the voluntary proffer, which is a part of this application. The Capital Impact Model provides an estimate of impacts which are mitigated by proffers attached. IV FREDERICK COUNTY IMPACT MODEL ITPUT MOL PLICANT; 53A68 Net Fiscal Impact NO USE TYPE Medical Support Costs of Impact Credit: Credits to be Take AL EST VAL $52,273,780 Required (entered in Cur. Budget Total Potential Adjustment For Cur. Budget Cap, Future CIP/ tE & RESCUE 9 Capital Faciitiies col sum only) Qper Cap Equip Expend/Debt S. Taxes, Qther Tax Credits (Unadjusted.) Revenue- Cost Balance Net Capital Net Cost Per F..acillties .Impact Dwelling Unit. e and Rescue Department $194,917 )mentary Schools ,$0 $0 $0 $194,917 $2,436 ddle Schools $0---' 1h Schools $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 irks and Recreation $621767 $14,146 blic Library $10,912 $14,146 $14,146 $48,622 $608 $3,052 eriff's Offices $6,458 $36,059 $0 $1,319 'ministration $3,052 $37,378 $3,052 $37,378 $7,860 $98 $0 $0 Building $8,288 $0 ter Miscellaneous Facilities $10,574 $81,587 $90,077 $0 $0 $8,288$ 1 04 $171,663 $171,663 $0 $0 SUBTOTAL $293,916 $117,646 $90,077 $18,517 LESS: NET FISCAL IMPACT $9,153,251 $226,239 $226,239 $67,677 $846 NET CAP. FACILITIES IMPACT $9,153,251 $9,153,251 $913,?1 . $j14�t� 0 p INDEX: "1.0" If Cap. Equip Included 1.0 INDEX: "1.0" if Rev -Cost Be[, "oA" if Ratio to Co Av g: 0.0 Rev -Cost Bal = 1.000 - PLANNING DEPT PREFERENCES 1.0 1.0 -------------- Ratio to Co Avg = 1.342 ----------------------------- - _THODOLOGY 1. Capital facilities requirements are input to the first column as calculated in the model. 2. .Net Fiscal Impact NPV from operations calculations is input in row total of second column (zero if negative); included are the one-time taxes /fees for one year only at full value. 3. NPV of future oper cap equip taxes paid in third column as calculated in fiscal impacts. 4. NPV of future capital expenditure taxes paid in fourth colas calculated in fiscal impacts, 5. NPV of future taxes paid to bring c urrent county up to standard for new facilities, as calculated for each new facility. 6. Columns three through five are added as potential credits against the calculated capital facilities requirements. These are adjusted for percent of costs covered by the revenues from the project (actual, oras ratio to avg. for all residential development). ATE: Proffer calculations do not include include interest because they are cash payments up front. Credits do include Interest -------- ------ ----------------------- _-----------------------•----------------- if the projects are debt financed. ------------------ - _-• - )TES: Model Run Date 09!09/02 ERL oject Description: Assumes 360,000 sq. ft. R&D/Office. 10,000 sq. ft, restaurant, 160,000 sq, ft, warehousing, and 80 age res tricted dwelling units on 104 acres B2 and MS Districts, ie to changing conditions associated with development in the County, the results of this vtput Module may not be valid beyond a period of 90 day s from the model run date. 2001 MODEL v PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Number 53-((A))-68 WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER "West Campus" Preliminary Matters Pursuant to Section 15.1 - 491.f et. seq., of the code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and the provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance with respect to conditional zoning, the undersigned applicant hereby proffers that in the event the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall approve Rezoning Application # for the rezoning of 51.9676 acres from Rural Area (RA) Zoning District to the Medical Services (MS) Zoning District, development of the subject property shall be done in conformity with the terms and conditions set forth herein, except to the extent that such terms and conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the applicant and such be approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors in accordance with Virginia law. Also within this tax parcel is 50.0540 acres zoned B-2 which will remain B-2 after rezoning. The proffers which exist on the 50.0540 acre parcel have been included in this proffer statement and together with the added proffers constitute the complete proffer for the entire tract of 102.0216 acres. Should this petition for rezoning not be approved by the Board of Supervisors then the existing proffer statement for the B-2 tract will remain in effect and these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and of no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon the applicant and their legal successor or assigns. General Development Plan The development of the subject property, and the submission of any Master Development Plan shall be in conformance with all pertinent County regulations and shall be in substantial conformity with the .Generalized Development Plan, dated September 2002, sheets 1 of 2 and 2 of 2, which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Street Improvements The Applicant shall design and construct all roads on the subject property consistent with the County's adopted Round Hill Land Use Plan for the area, and according to uniform standards established by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), and as may be provided in these proffers as illustrated on the Generalized Development Plan which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. ❑ On U.S. Route 50 at the intersection of Route 1317, a 200 feet left turn lane for eastbound traffic will be provided. (#1) ❑ On U.S. Route 50, an acceleration/deceleration lane will be added across the entire U.S. Route 50 frontage of the site, and the only exit on U.S. Route 50 will be located at the Route 1317 intersection. Curb and gutter will be provided along the entire frontage. (#2) ❑ At the VA Route 1317 intersection, traffic leaving the site will be provided two left turn lanes, (on left turn with through movement) and one right turn lane. (#3) ❑ Lanes will be added to the VA Route 37 exit ramps to allow dedicated right and left turn lanes (#4) as follows: - At U.S. Route 50NA Route 37 western signal, Southbound right tum - 200 feet with transition to provide full 2 lanes at intersection. (Revised 1/7/03) Page 1 of Rezoning Request Proffer Property Identification Number 53-A-68 Gainesboro Magisterial District At U.S. Route 50NA Route 37 eastern signal, Northbound left turn - 200 feet with transition to provide 3 lanes at intersection including a dedicated left, a left with through and right turn lanes. ❑ A traffic signal will be provided at U.S. Route 50 and VA Route 1317 intersection. (#5) ❑ An additional left turn lane will be provided on U.S. Route 50 for the eastbound traffic at the US Route 50NA Route 37 eastern signal. (#6) ❑ A major collector road, 1800 feet in length and 5 lanes wide, with 80 feet right of way (#7) Transportation items 1 through 6 shall be constructed during the initial site development phase of the project and shall be either complete or bonded for completion prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit. Landscape Design Features The development of the subject property, and the- submission of any Master Development Plan shall include the following landscape design feature provided in these proffers and as illustrated on the Concept Plan dated December 1996 which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. ❑ A thirty foot (30) landscaped green strip along the US Route 50 frontage portion of the site. (#8) ❑ A landscaped green area along the north side of the main entrance. (#9) ❑ A landscaped, open, green visual focal link without structures with the US Route 50 and 3 7 interchange area. (#10) ❑ A central open space area, currently shown as deGrange Park, planned as part of the area rising in the west portion of the property. (#11) ❑ A ten foot (10) landscaped buffer area along the western property line landscaped with white pine evergreen trees or an equal plant species, with white pines to be a minimum of four feet (4') in height when planted and planted at ten foot (10') intervals. (#12) On Sight Development All structures shall be designed to meet the following standards: ❑ Materials utilized for the facades of the buildings shall include but not be limited to concrete masonry units (CMI) brick, architectural block, dryvit, or other simulated stucco (EFIS), real or simulated wood and/or glass. ❑ All building within the development on the property shall be constructed using compatible architectural style and materials, and signage for such buildings shall be of a similar style and materials. (Revised 1/7/03) Page 2 of 3 Rezoning Request Proffer Property Identification Number 53-A-68 Gainesboro Magisterial District ❑ All building within the property shall be developed as a cohesive entity, ensuring that building placement, architectural_ treatment, parking lot lighting, landscaping, trash disposal, vehicular and pedestrian circulation and other development elements work together functionally and aesthetically. The Applicant shall record and include in each deed as. well as provide Frederick County with a complete- set of Covenants and Restrictions pursuant to site design developed and approved by Frederick County at the time of master plan. Property owners shall be notified of conditions relating to adjoining" active agricultural operations. Monetary. Contribution to Offset Impact of Development The undersigned, who owns the above described property hereby voluntarily proffers that if the Board of Supervisors for the County of Frederick, Virginia approves the rezoning for the 51.9676 acre tract 2, lying on the north side of U.S. Route 50 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia from RA to MS and approves the revised planning for the 50.0540 acre tract 1, the undersigned will pay to Frederick County for the Round Hill Fire and Rescue Company the sum of $25,000.00, the Sheriff's Office the sum of $5,000.00 and the Administration Building the sum of $5,000.00 for a total payment of $35,000.00, at the time the first building permit on tract or tract 2 is issued. The conditions proffered above shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors in interest of the Applicant and Owner. In the event the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grant said rezoning -and accepts these conditions, the proffered conditions shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to other requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code. Respectfully submitted, PROPERTY OWNER ` By; �� Vr`b �J �U Date: STATE tOF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: '.r The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 9lf� day of 0_. 2003, by C. ' My commi Sion expires Notary Public — (Revised 1/7/03) Pa: e 3 of 3 Ali `FUTURE EXTENS(QN ,JO -US ROU - ----- AT ROUTF-803i f vac .,tea :`,, t \ ,-• ,�` `.\` rlli;i"::,��.-,;i ;�.,� k -__m 0 ♦ ( �, \ 1 r 1 i, Ciy 7:__- -82Q \`. 3 -'-�1,;`•�-----'P RnP,O-QED � M�fCJ(�F�'--= ; �, ` Q : �OLLEjCfiOR r--) co WINCHESTER MED/CAL CENTER PROPEFTY 5r2 property gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. ij O GENERALIZED DEIiELOPMENT PLAN Sheeteghwe Lard Pkmwv qy� y "WEST CAMPUS" I O ti of 117 E 6y 5L ffimbeda, Vwcp'nm 22601 FREOLR/CK COUNTY, PIRGINA 2 YOKE (540) 667-2139 FAX (50) 665-D493 DAL gwdffemnsinc= ;1% 1 %�+ 1 rte._♦ '11 \ � y / ly}•.1,,i lok St(tilll,%I!—_.T„1�11r-- '' PROPOSED MAJORCOLLECTOR r p :H 7! fes--, 1-�,t%710f11�J C !2C, 000 s. } '� \ - /',�—�Ro F cp WINCHESTER MED/CAL CENTER PROPERTY MSProperty Y' 11` gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. -ea O GENERALIZED DEI ELOPMENT PLAN Sheet VEST CAMPUS” 2 Er41eom Land Pkmwm wets ouaRY {V Of 117 E Ptmdtlly St w inchester, vwr miQ 22601 fRMER/CK COUNTY, WROIN14 2 _ YOZE (540) 667-2139 FAX (540) 665-0493 BUL• grciiff@rmmcinc mm ;' fl�,`f' i• ��1;.;'j1`11\l t1,:}, Y e,� � ': t k JF -T rte• cr�C+ ._ \ � 1-�,t%710f11�J C !2C, 000 s. } '� \ - /',�—�Ro F cp WINCHESTER MED/CAL CENTER PROPERTY MSProperty Y' 11` gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. -ea O GENERALIZED DEI ELOPMENT PLAN Sheet VEST CAMPUS” 2 Er41eom Land Pkmwm wets ouaRY {V Of 117 E Ptmdtlly St w inchester, vwr miQ 22601 fRMER/CK COUNTY, WROIN14 2 _ YOZE (540) 667-2139 FAX (540) 665-0493 BUL• grciiff@rmmcinc mm ;' fl�,`f' i• ��1;.;'j1`11\l t1,:}, Y e,� � ': t k JF -T 1-�,t%710f11�J C !2C, 000 s. } '� \ - /',�—�Ro F cp WINCHESTER MED/CAL CENTER PROPERTY MSProperty Y' 11` gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. -ea O GENERALIZED DEI ELOPMENT PLAN Sheet VEST CAMPUS” 2 Er41eom Land Pkmwm wets ouaRY {V Of 117 E Ptmdtlly St w inchester, vwr miQ 22601 fRMER/CK COUNTY, WROIN14 2 _ YOZE (540) 667-2139 FAX (540) 665-0493 BUL• grciiff@rmmcinc mm Vi AGENCY COA MENTS November 25, 2002 Mr. C.E. Maddox, Jr., P.E., Vice President Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-565 RE: Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) Comments . Winchester Medical Center Rezoning - Route 50 West and Route 37 Dear Chuck: FAX: 540/665-6395 The Fre on-ek County Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) considered the referenced proposal during their meeting ofNovember 19, 2002. The HRAB reviewed information associated with the 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley and information associated with the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey Report. ^� Historic Resources Advisory Board Comment The 102.02 -acre parcel proposed for rezoning for B2 (Business General) and MS (Medical Support) is located within the study area of the Second Battle of Winchester._ Located adjacent to the property are two structures listed in. the Rural Landmarks SurveyRe_port: Old Hoover House (ID# 34-467) and the Fruit Hill Farm (ID# 34-1416). Fruit Hill Farm is listed as potentially significant mi the report. The HRAB considered the proposed use of the property for the Winchester Medical Center's west campus as indicated by the applicant. There were no adverse comments by the HRAB regarding this rezoning request. Please contact me if you have questions regarding this comment from the HRAB. Sincerely,AVA Rebecca A. Ragsdale Planner I 111901,117,01'1 ,a9 � pec II ,� '- COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY Philip A. Shucet 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE COMMISSIONER EDINBURG, VA 22824 December 20, 2002 VDOT Comments to Winchester Medical Center Rezoning JERRY A. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 50 and 37. Routes are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation improvements as discussed in the December 171 2002 meeting with Richard Wilkins, Chuck Maddox, John Callow, Sam Clem, Chris Mohn, Jerry Copp, and myself and as further detailed on the attached sheet address the transportation concerns associated with the first phase (2005) of this development. As discussed in said meeting, these improvements will be made prior to the first building permit being issued. Also as discussed in the above mentioned meeting, VDOT currently will not allow an access break on Route 37. As further development of these parcels continue, additional Traffic Impact Analyses will be required to further examine the impacts to Routes 37, 50 and 522. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual Sixth Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signalization, and off-site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment. Ben H. Lineber r., P.E. Trans. Asst. Resident Engineer BHL/rf Attachment Rezoning Comments Winchester Medical Center Virginia Department of Transportation Applicant's Name: Gilbert W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. Phone: (540)667-2139 Flailing Address: c/v Charles E. Maddox, Jr. P.E. VP 117 E. Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Winchester. VA 22601 - Location of Property: North and adjacent to Route 50 and west and adjacent to Route 37. Current Zoning: B-2 Zoning Requested: B-2 Acreage: 50.0540 RA MS 51.9676 Virginia Department of Transportation Comments See attached comments from VDOT dated'Decemb r 20, 2002 �K - - - � n VDOT Signature & Date: 12/20/02 ?ixce t t�dorya�r=e etu-is or'toelican J Rezoning Comments Mail to: Winchester Regional Airport Attn: Executive Director 491 Airport Load Winchester, VA 22602 (540) 662-2422 Winchester Medical Center Winchester Regional Airport Hand deliver to: Winchester Regional Airport Atte: Executive Director 491 Airport Road Winchester, VA [,Applin nt: Pleasc 11 Q the infar rat on a acc ra l x as possibly n ordcx to asset the-, znchter Iegiol Air ori vet thre7 fttach a copy oou�r application rm,. Iocafwn maP� proffer st te�r►e t, impact analysisanti any Qil�ex. pert n offormation Applicant's Name: Mailing Address: Location of Property: Gilbert W. Clifford & Assoc.. Inc. cfo C. E_ Maddox., Jr-, Pte., VP 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 Phone: (540)667-2139 North and adjacent to Route 50 and west and adjacent to Route 37. Current Zoning: B-2 Zoning Requested: B-2 Acreage: 50.0540 RA MS 51-9676 Winchester Regional Airport Signature & Date: X l 3k ctrce to Winchester Regional Airport 1'Iease Return 'Phis Porn to_the A,.piieaf .� v"'",� .wry .r-. - - - L t� +;: 1'� ik - - *tom. ;{ -. - a` �.-s. :. � , a ' � ��,- . - t - »� Y: }i 1 v4 .� i }'w _ fir: y «<"' z � . `, an - f c .r . 1 rt x • f]r - a«� - T , 4. .. o y a }` a- rte+ i T k � , " - s '4 " r'� ; ♦ g v iii r tt _ .'{u r i ', �, r 1_ to- J 3. -� a•.f. 'r 'x 3 C .y. , f Ih- r !, s• r y; ��.. 3 ? z - - �,. ei ro.m-,-m t -..., - _ rl 'v.-' - ..s r-ve`1 '`<. r..'S ' X t .fit f .£ F�.K"� rr., `;- t ""-,h J ,tin; �' '°" fes-. s L-� 1 r 7 Y_ P �� k m— i r- - {3+ -cY F! J Z �.MW;. 9z, .z ,,� �.,. ;..: r _ `4- � - 6 L' -I— - �i "" }� t i xt t 1 f � '$� -- s "`ti �' a F .� rus. «. r'x a. k *.. `� E , z ? ' - crr _ g y �v'-A' ,._� r s �' n 7g• k f _ ( f.i��,t 5 c�- ,� JFy �'�' Ck � f- 1 Y fir - ..,- Y`'. .yt-,a. �u�. , ', ,y. F L as r '`-4, r_ Y�.. : - .+r, -'- 'Z :z �s 1 r 3 J is c r J src - _ r rL 4./ .� `ev , - , F k.r iSi�n�€'FY -PM tom!"$ .- ��- � 'A`C j I - ,r r � �� t 1 - 1; M1 rte" ham( ". e +� ;*-tom �r _ '` r r..2 A' s s , "` `"',A..t:i r� •%-- �- 1 ..-- s^'- `�,ytl,� _ ^ - -e° _ } *. a !>, -^ �t� ,l t x. + s "`may s �x i2 y. s. ": t`�#` '' k scamsf7 .`�"" ^Y fes, , „t �. +.r G �. ff r- .., - i--.x Edi -no-.... E o:� .z F x r 4 y' r c� w n Z r a F f 4 ). 7 i r , �-„ .g r ..e i:`.,, Wit" 1 w _. fi . _; F- tY f a-tel ',�`� f F - ` , Th i - "� r ..5, K .� ...� r , - '�w r .: r4 .( £x�r.:.•,-x-5`4 x i{ ,' 4 `fix, �` ry n ; y r- - � -� t _ �` F� , , II i�`�- � `�.'"`. ,6 �.as.. E - q.- "'.R_ . . , - ^ �,. _ - N 1, s. -it y:..�'_`� .A ( y-�` 3^i - r--�,. �- i r � -+..4 is J`�' f . � ,�, � c .� Z � - c - was , -- o- t..E ° !'r�3- -r �"' S ,rf ; �. y ice-" s r t -- c ... - rt - ..s�G' .,�'.'..- �z �'.' � a `s. ,r '�. yii> .� x r} ' 3 ,� -`-3� �, r`- ��'.`i --'� s r r - .e,.- -.:r y �- - 3 4 T �h t s�, z- s yr _ r r Y" ._... .. .�'. _ s F 1 -4 !WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER~ . gilbert w. Clifford & associates, inc. j `• AIRPORT STUDY B,� t� P± water ouebty� ti 117 E Picadill St Yfinchester, Virginia 22601 fh'EDER/CK COUNN VIRGINIA VOICE- (5d0) 667-?t39 FAY- (W. ) Ff5-0443 FQA17- �. dif nn4n.�,nm SERVING THE TOP OF VIRGINIA WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT 491 AIRPORT ROAD WfNCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22602 (540) 662-2422 November 13, 2002 Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Incorporated 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Re: Rezoning Comments Winchester Medical Center Property Route 50 West Winchester, Virginia Dear Mr. Maddox: The proposed rezoning request for the referenced property appears to be outside the airspace of the Winchester Regional Airport therefore Federal Aviation Administration form 7460-1 will not be required to be filed. Uses under the rezoning request should have no impact on airside operations of the Winchester Regional Airport. Thank you for providing us the opportunity to review these plans and for supporting the operations of the Winchester Regional Airport. Sincerely, �50'1-x Serena R. Manuel Executive Director Rezoning Comments Winchester Medical Center Frederick County Sanitation Authority Mail to: Frederick Co. Sanitation Authority Attn: Engineer P_0. Bax 1877 Winchester, VA 22604 (540) 868-1061 Hand deliver to.- Frederick o:Frederick Co. Sanitation Authority Attn: Engineer 315 Tasker Road Stephens City, VA plica t-- please fix btrt;:the. jn 'arrnal on as �ce�xratel� possible 4n_ t�rder �o assts! the. sanitation r #horn ` wr h; their :ieV i .attach a ci�p�applic�t�ua. farmr, lr►catza . maLLt , proffer state ent, irnpac analysis,, and any otlre pertinent rn forzptron. Applicant's Name: Gilbert W. Clifford & Assoc. Inc. Phone: (540)667-2139 Mailing Address: clo Charles E_ Maddox, Jr. P.E. VP 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 Location of Property: North and adjacent to Route 50 and west and adjacent to Route 37. Current Zoning: B-2 .Zoning Requested: B-2 Acreage: 50.0540 RA MS 51.9676 Sanitation Authority Coi iments See attacbed. Sanitation Authority Signatt Notice to Sauitation A b2tarri Tbis IForm.to the ppl cast Rezoning Comments Winchester Medical Center Page 2 Frederick County Sanitation Authority The proposed method of supplying water and sewer service to the site should be adequate. Rezoning Comments Winchester Medical Center Frederick County Department of Public Worlis Mail to: Frederick Co_ Dept of Public Works Attn: Director of Engineering 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5643 Hand deliver to: Frederick Co. Dept. of Public Works Attn: Director of Engineering Co. Administration Bldg., 4`h Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Appl}came; Please fi11 alit the mform- ation as;accuraiel: possible order"t.6assiA the Depar€ nt o Public a ks_ with the r revi ttach a copy of your app lrc�tio form, Ioeation map, pro€fer stateneitt, impacE.nal his, anti aay, other_ pertiteti Applicant's Name: Mailing Address: Location of Property: Gilbert W. Clifford & Assoc. Inc. c/o Charles E. Maddox- Jr P E VP 117E, Piccadiffv Street Suite 200 Wmehester, VA 22601 North and adjacent. to Route 50 and west and adjacent to Route 37. Phone. X540)667,2139 Current Zoning: B-2 Zoning Requested: B-2 Acreage: 50.0540 R MS 51.9676 Department of Public Work's We- qu v 0,C) C o Public Works Signature & Date: noticeDept of Publi e `'orfs P se Return Ius Icsrm #o thePplicn ]0 CITY OF WINCHESTER, VIRGWIA MEMORANDUM TO: Chuck Maddox FROM: Tim Youmans Rouss City Hall 15 North Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 540-667-1815 TDD 546-722-0782 RE: REZONING COMMENTS FOR WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER RTF 50 WEST "WEST CAMPUS" IN FREDERICK. COUNTY DATE: January 6, 2003 Thank you for providing an opportunity for the City to review and comment on the rezoning proposal for the DeGrange tract in Frederick County that you submitted on behalf of Winchester Medical Center: The Rezoning Application Package that you sent to me for City of Winchester comments was also reviewed by City Manager Ed Daley, Economic Redevelopment Director Jim Deskins, Utilities Director Frank Sanders, and Public forks Director Gary Lofton. The major concern of the City is traffic impacts as addressed in the Traffic Impact Analysis done by PHR+A. Figure 7 in the study calls for a 35.fi°lo increase in ADT over a four year period along the segment in the City just east of the Rte 37 northbound ramps. Of interest is the change in Level of Service (los) at the ramps. With the lane widening proffers (#4 and 96), some movements get better (e.g, the northbound off -ramp goes from los `F' to los `D'). Others, such as the eastbound Route 50 movement approaching the northbound Rte 37 ramps go from los `B' down to Ios `D' during the PM Peak hour, I don't understand why the two existing intersections at the Rte 37 ramps are shown as "Unsignalized" in Figure 2 since they are both currently signalized. The report also shows an existing double -left movement from the northbound off -ramp, but there is only a single existing left -turn lane. The seven Street Improvements proffers called out in the Proffer Statement in Section V of the rezoning application report appear to mitigate many of the traffic impacts, but there is no timeframe identifying when these improvements will be undertaken relative to the land . development. In order to better evaluate the impacts, it would be helpful to see a schedule of these improvements relative to the development sequence (e.g. relative to building or occupancy permits). Traffic Proffers #4 & 6 of greatest interest to the City since they affect traffic movement on the east side of Rte 37 along Amherst Street. Thank you for your patience wftile I was awaiting review and response from other City departments. Please call if you have any questions. Rezoning Comments Winchester Medical Center Frederick County Inspections Mail to: Frederick County Inspections Dept 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5651 Hand deliver to: Frederick County Inspections Rept. Co_ Administration Bldg., e Floor 107 N_ Dent Street Winchester, VA 22601 I 4pplic4nt ,=. 'lease X11 c ut the it for iatinn as accurately a possible in or 1a ass the 1sttric Fesources Ad�doz Board w the �e��evu Atlach a Gop of y+�a�r application f rr�n; lacatio � ,map, p of 'er statcmea�t, iAt act analysis, end any other p!Tti�tent informations _ Applicant's Name: Gilbert W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. Phone: (540) 667-2139 Mailing Address: c% C. E. Maddox3r. P.E_ VP 117 E. Piccadilly Street. Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 Location. of Property: North and adjacent to Route 50 and west and adjacent to Route 37. Current Zoning. B-2 Zoning Requested: B-2 Acreage: 50.0540 un A. 1V1J � 1.yn � o Inspection (Department's Comments jYQ COMMQVr AFQOfl�F�) Ar 1. t AJ. Signature & Date: L.. Iotce sectic�rzs Dept. — Please R Tans F€�rm to tie hcan 23 149 r?.W L/L� Rezoning Comments Winchester Medical Center Frederick — Winchester Health Department Mail to: Frederick Winchester Health Dept Attu: Sanitation Engineer 107 North Kent Street Winhchester, VA 22.601 (540) 722-3480 Hand deliver to: Frederick -Winchester Health Dept. Attn: Sanitation Engineer 107 North Kent St., Suite 201 Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 722-3480 - Mailing Address: cfo Charles E. Maddox, Jr_ P -E. VP 117 E. Piccadilly Street_ Suite 200 mchester.VA 22601 Location of Property: North and adjacent to Route 50 and west and adjacent to Route 37. Current Zoning: B-2 Zoning Requested: B-2 Acreage: 50.0540 PA ISIS 51.9676 Frederick — Winchester Health Department's Comments J Signature & Date: ntt* n Department Please Retarn=T'lis Form to the Applicant Rezoninn Comments Winchester Medical Center Frederick— Winchester Service Authority Mail to: Fred -Wine Service Authority Attn_ Jesse W Moffett, Executive Director P.O_ Box 43 Winchester, VA 22,604 (540) 722-3579 Hand deliver to: Fred -Wine Service Authority Attn. Jesse W. Moffett Co. Administration'Bldg., l" Floor 107 N_ Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Apj licaniti: Please fl1 oui the inf'orrna�ion as aec a l as possib e 1�-order to assist the inchest r Regional Air -rt with then Tevi� v Attach �, colt' pf. youar atrplicaiic�n farm, 16"€iod rrtap, prolzer s to n ntx ir�r pact analvsas, end any. otlaca- pert henf iuformatior�;` Applicant's Name: Gilbert W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. Phone: (540)667-2139 Mailing Address: c/o C_ E. Maddox, Jr., P.E_, VP 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 Location of Property: North and adjacent to Route 50 and west and adjacent to Route 37. Current Zoning: B-2 Zoning Requested: " B-2 . Acreage.: 50.0540 Fred -Wine Service Authority Comments: naPittC ter= hA Signature & Date: L- t 7 10 -2- N 2-Notsce t4 Fred=Wfii r Service Auth o city , P [case - Return This -Form -to theA hears Memo To: Charles E. Maddox— G.W. Clifford &A ociates, Inc From: Jesse W. Moffett — Executive Director Date: October 1, 2002 Re: Winchester Medical Center— Route 50 West -'West Campus" Based on the flows presented in the application I direct you to the narrative regarding Sewer Conveyance and Water Supply. I believe the correct statement would be a regional sewage pump station with a capacity of 500 gallons per minute or 720,000 gallons a day. It is my understanding that this flow will be transported through the FCSA collection system to the Abrams Creek Interceptor with a discharge at the Greenwood Metering Station. The FWSA is presently evaluating the Greenwood Station along with the ability of the Abrams Creek Interceptor to handle anticipated future flows. Early indications are that some future provisions will need to be made to accommodate flows that are presently anticipated to be transported through this interceptor to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility. I have not further comments. • Page 1 Rezoning Comments Winchester Medical Center Frederick County Department of Parr & Recreation Mail to: Frederick County Dept_ of Parks & Recreation 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5678 (land deliver to: Frederick County Department of Parks & Recreation Co_ Administration Bldg, 2�d Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 A pplcarnt. , Pie f l aut :the irdOrmatan asccr�y as poibl.or�r:a asi ih T3epartz ertt o P�zrl & iecreat on wit t.thcirrevie :.Atta+ch a copy of our:app.Iic-tion; map; prolr ste�nent, ii�iact dnalyss, anis ani":` other p�;•timient Applicant's Name: Gilbert W. Clifford & Assoc_, Inc. Phone: (540)667-21.39 MOing Address: c/o Charles E. Addox, Jr_ P -E. IVs' 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester VA 22601 Location of Property: North and adjacent to Route 50 and west and adjacent to Route 37. Current Zoning. B-2 Zoning Requested: B-2 Acreage: 50.0540 RA_ NIS 51.9676 Dept. of Parks & Recreation Comments 12 Rezonin6 Comments Winchester Medical Center Mail to Frederick Co. Fire Marshal 107 N Kent St. Winchester, VA 22501 (540) 665-6350 Frederick County Fire Marshal Hand deliver to: Frederick Co. Fire & Rescue Dept Atte: Fire Marshal Co. Administration Bldg., I' Floor 107 N_ Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Applicant's Name_ Hilbert W Clifford & Assoc__ Inc. Phone_ (540)667-2139 Mailing Address: c/o Charles E. Maddox, Jr. F -E. VP 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 Location of Property: North and adjacent to Route 50 and west and adjacent to Route 37. Current Zoning: B-2 Zoning Requested: B-2 Acreage: 50.0540 MS 51.9676 Fire Marshal's Comments Fire Marshal's Signature & Date �ti notice to ViarsI al Piease return is_ ornt o the pp li -ant I'�• �l Control number RZ02-0012 Project Name Winchester Medical Center Address 117 E.Piccadiliy Street Automatic Sprinkler System Yes Other recommendation Emergency Vehicle Access Not Identified Siamese Location Not Identified Date received 9/27/2002 City Winchester Tax ID Number 53-A-68 Date reviewed 10/3/2002 Applicant G.W.Clifford & Associates State Zip VA 22601 Fire District 15 Recommendations Automatic Fire Alarm System Yes Emergency Vehicle Access Comments To be Identified during the site plan process. Requirements Hydrant Location Not identified Roadway/Aisleway Width Adequate Date Revised Applicant Phone 540-667-2139 Rescue District 15 Election District Goinesboro Residential Sprinkler System No Fire Lane Required Yes Special Hazards Yes Access Comments The half full condition of the Northwest Tank should be corrected to provide adequate water supplies in the event pump booster service becomes disabled. Additional Comments The monetary contribution to Round Hill Volunteer Fire & Rescue does NOT meet the Offset of Impact of Development according to the proffer model. The tax revenue generated on the completed protect does not fund Round Hill VFD to provide services, it is shared in the County General f=und. e � s Plan Approval Recommended Reviewed By Signature Yes Timothy L. Welsh Title � `� "dents An i - , j -• `'. ami Frederick CountyPublic Schools Administrative Assistant to Visit us at www.frederick.kl2va.us the Superintendent September 30, 2002 C.'E. Maddox; Jr., P.E-, Vice President Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Winchester Medical Center e-mail. omdorfa@fi,ederickk12va.us Dear Mr. Maddox: This letter is in response to your request for comments concerning the rezoning application for the Winchester Medical Center tracts, 1 & 2, North and adjacent to Route 50, and West and adjacent to Route 37. Based on the information provided in the rezoning application, Frederick County Public Schools has no comment at this time. Sincerely, 9f Al Orndorff Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent Rezoninz Comments- Winchester Medical Center Superintendent of Frederick Co. Public Schools Mail to: Frederick Co. Public Schools Atte: Superintendent P.O. Box 3508 Winchester, VA 22,604 (540) 662-3888 Hand deliver to: Frederick Co. Public Schools Attn: Superintendent School Administration Bldg. 1415 Amherst St_ Winchester, VA 22601, APticant: Pease fill c� the infvrniacir a$ accuatel s posshle i:orero assist the uperiaitendent of Pnbhc chools witl his r +env_;' attach a opy- o 'yourapplication firm, location mai, larvffer statement, impact :anaIy �s; and any i�ther p rtrnent: ial"t��=mnt�€ozz;; Applicant's Name: Gilbert W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. Phone: (540)667-2139 'v&iling Address- c/o Charles E. Maddox, Jr- P.E. VP 117 E.. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 Location of Property: North and adjacent to Route 50 and west and adjacent to Route 37. Current Zoning: B-2 Zoning Requested: B-2 Acreage: 50.0540 RA NIS 51.9676 Superintendent of Public Schools' Comments Superintendent Signature & Date Notic€:h,�)l uperiutenent -Please Return This I�rtirm to t[e 4pplicant Rezoning Comments Winchester Medical Center Frederick County Attorney Mail tv• Frederick County Attorney Co_ Administration. B14, Suite 202 1.07 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-6383 Hand deliver to- Fredenck County Attorney Co. Administration Bldg., Suite 202 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA Applicant's Name: Gilbert W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. Phone: (540)667-2139 Mailing Address: c/o Charles E. Maddox, Jr_ RE_ VP 117E Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 _ WWinclrester, VA 22601 Location of Property: North and adjacent to Route 50 and west and adjacent to Route 37, Current Zoning: B-2 Zoning Requested: B-2 Acreage: 50.0540 RA MS 51.9676 County Attorney's Commen Y�&p Assistant County Attorney' Signature .& Date: ea r ThisFor" the A h 0 VII SUR VEYPLAT & DEED lll��SmrN J TAApsm & LzwE mol No; 1. t'll f—lid. 21 wryay Auspa 26, 19%, N, PM, GRAPHIC SCAW VIII TAX TILT December 10, 2002 Mr. Charles E. Maddox, Jr. P -E, VP G.W. Ciif ord & Associates, Inc. 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester. VA 22601 COUNTY of FRFT)FRT('K- Department of Planning and Development RE: Winchester Medical.Center, Inc. and WWW, L.C. Rezoning Proposals Dear Chuck: 5401665-5651 FAX: 5401665-6395 In follow-up to our discussion of December 3, this correspondence is intended to reiterate issues of concern regarding the Winchester Medical Center, Inc. and WWW, L.C. rezoning proposals. It is anticipated .that these--issues:wiH be fully, addressed through'revisions to these applications prior to their consideration by the. Planning Commission and B odrd of Supervisors. 7 The Winchester Medical Center; Inc., application-Proposes:the rezoning ;of the remaining 52' acres of the foi7iierTH: Clay DeGrange Estate:from-RA ural.Areas to MS pp ) (Medical Su' ort : The WWW -L.C. app lication proposes the rezoning of approximately 71 acres from RA to B2 (Business General). Both sites are located on the north side of Route 50 (Northwestern Pike), immediately west of the Route 37 interchange in the Gainesboro Magisterial District: The following comments are offered for your records_ A. Transportation, As you are aware, a level of service "C" is expected to be maintained on roads adjacent to and within new development in -Frederick County (2000 Comprehensive Policy. Plan for Frederick County, TTirginia, p. 7-5). The Impact Analysis Statement submitted with the preliminary Winchester Medical Center, Inc. application states that proposed transportation proffers will ensure that conditions on adjoining roads do not fall below a level of service "D." The statement further suggests that transportation improvements would be generally limited to those progered with the 1997 DeGrange rezoning, which rezoned the front 50 acres of the Medical Center tract from RA (Rural Areas) to B2 (BusinessGeneral). Given the 'close. proximity, of the subject rezoning sites to each other and thein shared reliance on Route 50 for principal,access, it was requested that the requisite traffic analysis and any proposed transportation improvementsaddress the cumulative impacts of the respective proposals. During a' meeting with VDOT representatives at the Edinburg Residency on Novembez 4, it was agreed that Page 2 Mr. Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E., V.P. ; Re- Winchester Medical Center, Inc. and VVIW, L. C. Rezoning Proposals , ... December d-0, 2002 such a comprehensive analysis was indeed necessary to effectively and equitably mitigate traffic impacts related to the proposals. It was further noted that adequate mitigation would likely involve additional improvements beyond those proffered with the DeGrange rezoning. During our December 3 meeting, you indicated that a revised traffic study and transportation improvement plan have been submitted to VDOT for review. The subject applications will not be accepted by the Department of Planning until VDOT has concluded its review and granted approval of all proposed transportation improvements. It is noted that Route 50 is identified for short-term development of bicycle facilities in the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Such non -motorized systems are considered integral to the creation of a complete networked transportation system for Frederick County and the City of Winchester. The County has adopted the Bicycle Plan for the City of Winchester and Frederick County as a guide for the development ofnon-motorized facilities (2000 Comprehensive PolicyPlan forFrederick County, Virginia, p. 7-3, 7-14, 7-17). The transportation plan for each application should therefore include provisions for bicycle facilities along the Route 50 corridor. The design of all proposed bicycle facilities 'should conform with the provisions of the adopted bicycle plan and VDOT requirements, as applicable. It is important to reiterate that the Ievel of service standard established by the Comprehensive Policy Plan will be the measure against which the proposed transportation plan will be evaluated. It is therefore recommended that improvements be considered that ensure conformance with the adopted transportation policy (2000 Comprehensive Policy_Plan forFrederick County, Virginia, p. 7-5, 7-12, 7-13). B. Round Hill Community Plan Conformance Both of the subject rezonin_a proposals uIvoly ._land:thzt. located ;wholly v6tEn the P>?ase One boundaries of the Round Hill -Community Land Use Plan (2000 Comprehensive Policy Plan for Frederick County, Virginia, p. 6-47 thru p. 6-51). This phase is planned to develop with Business/Office land uses subject to the availability of central sewer and water facilities: The land uses permitted in both the B2 and MS Districts would be consistent with the planned land use for Phase One. A key recommendation of the Round Hill Community Plan is the employment of design techniques to ensure the contextual compatibility ofnew commercial development in the Round Hill Community. Such techniques should preclude the visual disruption ofthe Route 50 corridor while also promoting development whose configuration and appearance reflects the established character of the Round Hill Community. Page 3 Mr. Charles E. Maddox, Jr,, P.E., V.P. Re: Winchester Medical Center, Inc. and WWW, L.C. Rezoning Proposals December 10, 2002 Strip commercial development is explicitly discouraged within the Round Hill Community. The Iandscape design features proffered with the DeGrange rezoning approval are consistent with this objective. The application of equivalent features along the frontage of the WWW, L.C. site is encouraged to facilitate coordinated design and continuity of appearance along the Route 50 corridor. Please specify the location and composition of all proposed landscape design features on the generalized development plan submitted with each application. To further the: corridor design goals of the'Round Hill Community Plan, enhanced controls regarding _ signage would be appropriate with both rezoning applications. Specifically, the applicants should consider a comprehensive sign plan that coordinates the design and general location of signage erected within the proposed developments. It is recommended that freestanding signs be limited to monument -type structures sharing common design characteristics and that the total number of such signs be limited within each development. Moreover, a system of directional signage should be considered that is coordinated to ensure consistency of appearance and efficiency of movement between the respective developments. Also critical to avoiding strip development and promoting contextual compatibility is building design. Through the deliberate coordination of materials, colors, style, building massing, and other architectural features, buildings within a project can establish a consistent theme that is immediately identifiable to the public. When coupled withthe use ofunified landscaping, comprehensive signage, and the creative design of such customary site features as lighting fixtures, common building design elements will facilitate development that both reflects and enhances the unique character of the - surrounding community. The proffers approved with the D eGrange rezoning reference the use of private covenants to ensure that individual uses employ design techniques that complement other uses internal to the commercial development to achieve a "total integrated complex;" While this arrangement supports coordinated design within the development, it does not necessarily facilitate design that is either compatible with the surrounding community or complementary to the Route 50 corridor. It is therefore recommended that a set of zniminium standards for building design be outlined by the applicant(s) in addition to the deeded covenants. In particular, standards should be considered that: 1) limit the scale of buildings on development sites nearest the Route 50 right-of-way, 2) result in the finishing of all exterior sides of a buiding or structure with similar materials and/or architectural treatments, 3) identify exterior materials and/or architectural treatments that will visually unify all buildings and structures, and 4) preclude the use of certain exterior building materials (i.e. corrugated metal, cinder block). The location of parking areas relative to the Route 50 right-of-way should -also be addressed by the applicants. Specifically, it is recommended that parking areas be restricted within the immediate viewshed of Route 50. This objective may be attained most directly by prohibiting the location of Page 4 Mr. Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E.; V.P. . Re: Winchester Medical Center, Inc. and WWW, L.C. Rezoning Proposals December 10, 2002 parking and loading areas between buildings and any arterial roadway. To provide sufficient flexibility in the design of peripheral development sites, it may be appropriate to include the alternative of allowing parking adjacent to the right-of-way with the caveat that such parking be wholly screened from view from the arterial roadway. It is requested that any such proposal clearly delineate the method or combination of methods proposed to achieve full screening of parking lots, such as, but not limited to: depression of parking areas, supplemental berms, and supplemental plantings. C. Review Agency Comments. Please ensure that review comments from the following agencies are obtained: Frederick County Attorney, VDOT, Historic Resources Advisory Board, Public Works, Fire Marshal, Fire and Rescue, First Responders, Frederick County Sanitation Authority. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions or concerns regarding this correspondence_ Sincerely, Christopher M. Mohn, AICP Deputy Director OWrsa cc: Eric R Lawrence,,AICP, Planning Director Abbe S. Kennedy, Senior Planner Ben Lineberry, Virginia Department of Transportation U.\Chris\Common\Rezoning\2002 Prelim Comments\W MCand W W kV,wpd gilbert W. clifford & associates, inc INCORPORATED 1972 Engineers — Land Pl ers — Water Quality 18 December 2002 Mr. Christopher Mohn .Deputy Director Frederick County Planning 107 X Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: VMC and VVWW Rezonings Dear Chris, Board of Directors: President Thomas I O'Toole, Pte_ Vice Presidents: Cees l;_ Madder Jr-, PE. Earl R. Sutherland, Pa Ronald A Ifislowsky, RK David 7_ Saanders, Pte. Directors: William L. Wright lvliehael A i�3- a=er Thomas W_ Price It was a good meeting today with other attendees Mr. Sam Clem, Mr. Jerry Copp, Mr. Ben Lineberry, Mr. John Callow and. Mr_ Ritchie Wilkins_ I believe eve_ made considerable headway towards a responsible transportation proffer that is appropriate, fair, equitable and reasonable to all interested parties_ A properly structured approach to the combined land bay development of WMC and WVi W, -which incorporates the 170 acres identified by the Round Hill Plan for commercial/busmess development is good planning for the County_ Looking at long tern development of all of the impacted property, as we are doing here, has always been the Tanning Commission's favored approach and we are pleased to be a part of this comprehensive study effort. Much of our presentation today on behalf of the applicants can be summarized by seven points as follows.- (1) ollows: (1) The LOS of Route 50 and Rout 37 dare to growth of traffic in background without development is an important issue. {2) The substantial investments proposed by the applicants offsite and onsite; in the face of unknown market conditions. (3) The timing of improvements. (4) The approved and "by right" new traffic by the existing deGrange proffers. (5) The net reducti-on of traffic density on deGainge due to implementation of the MS district and associated uses. (b) The Predenck County need for additional potential retail and business sites in the corridor due to this change of use on deGrange. (7) The value of bringing a coordinated proposal for the 170 acres including the public-private goals and responsibilities that are needed to implement.this type of approach. VDOT provided important input which was -noted as folio vs: ;i) A clear phasing of the improvements proposed needs to be established udthin the proffers. (2) Establish a way to monitor the -growth of development traffic within the phases so that uncontrolled impacts can be avoided. 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200, EVmchester, Virginia 22601 (540) 667-2139 Fax (540) 665-0493 e-maif gvvcaram@,carthhk.net - Member American Consulting Engineers Council gilberl w. cord and associates, inc Page 2 (3) The lark of a "limited access break" whish requires the Commonwealth Transportation Board to allow western access to the WMC interchange is a problem for VDOT in considering the Phase 2 traffic scenario projected in the traffic study_ (4) The proffered improvements will handle the traffic increase to a point between Phase 1 and Phase 2. Due to construction and functional issues most of the improvements need to be in place early in the design life_ (5) VDOT needs to find a mechanism for providing the new right of way for relocated Route 803 to the south of U.S. Route 50 since policy issues for purchased VDOT land at the headquarters site must be in compliance_ also, the appropriate funding mechanism was thought to be "revenue sharing," for this unproffered U' uprovement which would need to be requested by Frederick County, The County staff transportation coucems are farther summarized: (I) The applicants heed to continue to work closely with VDOT prior to pub -He presentations to define the issues so that VDOT is as comfortable as possible with the approach. (2) A clear understanding between V�iC and. VVWW needs to be outlined on the timing issues of the proffered improvements_ .Also, the staff issues outlined in your letter of 12 December regarding architectural compatibility, landscaping and "sense of place" inherent in the directives of the Round Hill Plan need fr rther definition in the proffers. ,.The owners fiztly intend to implement planning with internal consistency in order to meet the goals of the ound Hill plan Both proposals have included proffers which refer to the architectural landscaping and other functional and aesthetic issues to which you refer To the extent that the crystal ball aldows, further de5ning of these proffers are in order as we go forward in order to meet the common goals of this partnership. We wlil be providing specific answers too the above concerns through agreement with owners and amendment of the respective preliminary proffer statements. I would appreciate input by staff and VDOT regarding the scope of this amendment effort. Thank you again for your review and comment on these important projects for Frederick County. Sincerely yours, Silbert w. difford & associates, inc.. E. Maddox, Jr., P.E_, Vice President cc: Mr. Ben Lineberry, VDOT Mr_ Doug Rosen, Winchester Medical Center Mr. Richie Wilkins, WSW, L -C. Mr. Jahn Cahow PFR&A 0 APPENDIX Winchester Medical Center Property Route 50 West Prepared hv- - Gilbert W_ Clifford & Associates, Inc. 117 E. Piccadilly Streets Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 540-667-2139 I I ;t "�-iii •r �.��.����..�����.T------------,i•�l��7' ti^+ tST \ . pp/�p� 'j r"Rvr OSED � XM- �\ �ry��� tii \ NVLyGytYf[WO l ! t 1 i \ `x- `�./'� ✓ C,:a;� i h� 5{: ;, f r� :`\ ti a \tib,\-� \-+ _ v''.� �'� i� L�--�Z-\._- � -��r:.'}?'>k:�-��r'; i:ij=\...�'�;,,F:?s. ;'�•� ; � �`T ; WMI �` �j,\� �t`-\ \•. /r�� �z-s'�� r.,1---�- � )`�x. : �=>___%' _ /tKr:.T�- ti t \'+ � \ c ��� a� A i\\`'?�'i , j ' 1 `t tt\lT�� l f- '�t��yy s. �`-.Y j fes. ..µ: \ •l L � j� 'Fl ' 't� {.;`C � ��' \fit t –j r l.�•k1k1�=,� 1 �- �'i �r �=%� } +' '± r l7 '` J _– ; i J :t: • jr. \ �- J � 'ii7�it;r+r� - ,�. _ � , o - 3 7: ap J!-ACT 11 / ,�+. 'j. .Y1 it`\. ;i { s& r t�:r�t='•l:.it --"� r`Y7=sc � -' --. =•u., �___ _--� _��..-„--� �—s:'.-c._.. �–Y.:,.-sa.: Y ^"�.. Wit--. �-�, � _ y'� :p 'F�s• .'� �-----�.c-i'_"%'���-�-+`-. � ���. - --tee.-.acs,_.., � �� �---F.- _-_�,'. � E1R&lfalF !II 47, -'1�-"""4%-� ..��Q �/ �_ �. �.—v'���"��S.L� _'+Y •a4._ -S --a_."°' ^.^-� �`- x6s6mk1 t3�••.A�—�• Htl �e"F _ _ gs'•`'v,. E+�'.��t _�jr+'�-$'.' :: :.4:t' � .e�hx`/ IF AM 0 �DcAus �-,� �= Summary of Basis of Proffers for WWW,LC Proffer No i_ Work Description 1 Rte 50 EBL -LTL WMC Entrance 2 Rte 50 WBL-3rd Thru Lane-WMC Frontage 3 WMC-5 Lane Entrance incl collector rd thru property 4 Rte 37-NBL&SBL off ramps -RTL 5 Rte 50-WMC Entr-Stoplight 6 Rte 50 EBL -2nd LTUlength trans -to NB Rte 37 7 Rte 50 WBL-3rd Thru Lane -WWW Frontage 8 Rte 50 EBL -LTL WWW Entrance 9 Rte 50 WBL-LTL Rte 803 Entrance 10 WWW -5 Lane Entrance incl collector rd to WMC 11 Rte 50 -WWW Entr-Stoplight 12 Rte 803 Relocation -Inti Rte 50 13 Rte 37-NBL on ramp -transition 14 Rte 50 -EBL -LTL -West Entrance(VDOT HQ) 15 Rte 50 EBL&WBL-WWW east entr-crossover impr(unsignalized) ne Line Totals Previous Estimate-WMC Responsible Party WMC WMC WMC WMC WMC WMC WWW WWW WWW WWW WWW FRED CTYNDOT-rev sharing WWW www WWW Estimated Cost WMC Proffer WWW Proffer VDOT (2003 Dollars) $47,064,00 $47,064.00 $160,480.00 $160,480.00 ns $125,504.00 $125,504.00 $115,000.00 $115;000.00 $68,152.00 $68,152.00 $439,264.00 $439,264.00 $47,064.00 $47,064.00 $47,064.00 $47,0.64.00 ne $115,000..00 $115, 000..00 $235,320.00 $235, 320.00 $78,440.00 $78,440.00 $47,064.00 $47,.064.00 $944,128.00 $94,128.00 $1,619,544.00 $516,200.00 $868,024.00 $235,320.00 $397,500.00 REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Number 53 -((A)) -68- H. CLAY deGRANGE ESTATE "Frederick Center" Preliminary Matters Pursuant to Section 15.1 - 491.1 eta of the code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and the provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance with respect to conditional zoning, the undersigned applicant hereby proffers that in the event the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall approve Rezoning Application #006-96 for the rezoning of 50.0540 acres from Rural Area (RA) Zoning District to the Business General (B-2) Zoning District, development of the subject property shall be done in conformity with the terms and conditions �,- set forth herein, except to the extent that such terms and conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the applicant and such be approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors in accordance with Virginia law. In the event that such rezoning is not granted, then these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and of no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon the applicant and their legal successor or assigns. General Development Plan The development of the subject property, and the submission of any Master Development Plan shall be in conformance with all pertinent County regulations and shall be in substantial conformity with the Concept Plan, dated December 1996 and the Street Improvement Plan, dated December 1996 both which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. REZONING REQUEST PROFFER H. CLAY deGRANGE ESTATE January 22, 1997 • Page 2 Street Improvements The Applicant shall design and construct all roads on the subject property consistent with the County's adopted Round Hill Land Use Plan for the area, and according to uniform standards established by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), and as may be provided in these proffers as illustrated on the Street Improvement Plan dated December 1996 which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. • On U.S. Route 50 at the intersection of Route 1317, a 200 feet left turn lane for eastbound traffic will be provided. (#1) • On U.S. Route 50, an acceleration/ deceleration lane will be added across the entire U.S. Route 50 frontage of the site, and the only exit on U.S. Route 50 will be located at the Route 1317 intersection. Curb and gutter will be provided along the entire frontage. (#2) At the VA Route 1317 intersection, traffic leaving the site will be provided two left turn Ianes, one thru and one right turn lane. (#3) • Lanes will be added to the VA Route 37 exit ramps to allow dedicated right and left turn lanes (#4) as follows: - At U.S. Route 50/VA Route 37 western signal, Southbound right turn - 200 feet. - At U.S. Route 50/VA Route 37 eastern signal, Northbound left turn - 200 feet. • A traffic signal will be provided at U.S. Route 50 and VA Route 1317 intersection. (#5) • A 200 feet left turn lane will be provided on U.S. Route 50 for the eastbound traffic at the US Route 50/VA Route 37 eastern signal. (#6) REZONING REQUEST PROFFER H. CLAY deGRANGE ESTATE January 22, 1997 • Page 3 Landscape Design Features The development of the subject property, and the submission of any Master Development Plan shall include the following landscape design feature provided in these proffers and as illustrated on the Concept Plan dated December 1996 which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. A thirty foot (30') landscaped green strip along the US Route 50 frontage portion of the site. (#1) • A landscaped green area along the north side of the main entrance. (#2) • A landscaped, open, green visual focal link without structures with the US Route 50 and 37 interchange area. (#3) • A central open space area, currently shown as deGrange Park, planned as part of the area rising in the west portion of the property. (#4) • A ten foot (10) landscaped buffer area along the western property line landscaped with white pine evergreen trees or an equal plant species, with white pines to be a minimum of four feet (4') in height when planted and planted at ten foot (10) intervals. Covenants and Restrictions The Applicant shall record and include in each deed as well as provide Frederick County with a complete set of Covenants and Restrictions in substantial conformance with the Protective Covenants and Restrictions provided in the "Impact Component Details and Proffer" report of December 1996 at the time of subdivision governing design and maintenance as required for review and approval by Frederick County. All property owners of the Frederick Center property shall be provided with a copy of the Covenants and Restrictions as recorded. Property owners shall ' be notified of adjoining active agricultural operations. REZONRITG REQUEST PROFFER H. CLAY deGRANGE ESTATE January 22, 1997 • Page 4 Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development The undersigned, who owns the above described property hereby voluntarily proffers that if the Board of Supervisors for the County of Frederick, Virginia approves the rezoning for the 50.0540 acre tract, lying on the north side of U.S. Route 50 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia from RA to B-2, the undersigned will pay to Frederick County for the Round Hill Fire and Rescue Company the sum of $12,161.11 at the time the first building permit is issued. The conditions proffered above shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors in interest of the Applicant and Owner. In the event the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grant said rezoning and accepts these conditions, the proffered conditions shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to other requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code. Respectfully submitted, PROPERTY ��OWNER: �/f By: - 1 Date&_/fZ STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this. day of r—i ✓, , 1997, b of the H. Clay deGrange Estate. My Commissi . n expires Notary Public o 40o _--I3nWPiC SCG/&17 =200- ee kre It \ 7,4 C J N. 4� STREET IMPROVEMENTS;' 1. On U.S. Route 50, a left turn lane for eastbound traffic will be provided; 2. On U.S. Route 50, an acceleration/deceleration lane will be added across the entire Route 50 frontage of tge he site, and the only exit placed at the Route 1317 intersection. Curb and gutter will be provided along the entire frontage 3. At the VA Route 1317 intersection, two left turn `. = 5>1 - lanes, one thru lane and one right turn la -�'s be pro g lane will 4 Lanes will be -jam -- ;��'/ �_%i. '�; y- '-`��,=;-:; (i✓,�%� = j �' added to the VA Route 37 exit ramps / to allow dedicated right and left turn la sly described int he traffic study;nes as 5. A traffic signal will Route 1317• be provided at U.S. 50 and VA 6. Eastbound U.S. Route 50 stacking lane for left turn signal light at eastern . (Curren tly VDOT improvements are underway for wideningand p im rovin the north bound exit ramp is lanes of VA Route 37. Impact Analysis for Rezoning the DeGrange Property Street Improvements The DeGrange property located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of US Route 50 West & Route 37, consists of 102.0216 acres zoned Rural Area (RA). 51 acres are requested for Business General (B2) zoning. The DeGrange property is located in the Gainesboro Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia. December, 1996 gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. Engineers • Land Planners • Surveyors 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22501 540-667-2139 Fax 540-667-0493 0 250 500 1000 Graphic Scale in Feet 1 "=500' 07, AREA TO BE REZONED FROM RA TO B-2 51.0540 ACRES f LANDSCAPE DESIGN FEATURES 1. A thirty foot (30') landscaped green strip along the Route 50 frontage protion of the site. 2. A landscaped green area along the north side of the main entrance. 3. A landscaped, open, green visual focal link with the 50 and 37 interchange area. 4. A central open space area, currently shown as Degrange Park, planned as part of the area rising in the west portion of the property. 1 5. A landscaped buffer area, ten feet (10') in width, planted with \ a double row of white pines or equivalent evergreen. Impact Analysis for Rezoning- the DeGrange Property Concept 61 r— Plan a r The DeGrange ;property, located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of � _TT ; _ , ', US Route 50 West & Route 37, consists of 102.0216 acres ' y�"a. zoned Rural Area (RA). , l l ,� A ' 51 acres r/ ; are requested for Business General (B2) zoning. The DeGrange property is located in the \�X�\ Gainesboro Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia. December, 1996 gilbert w. Clifford & associates, inc. Engineers • Land Planners • Surveyors 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 540-667-2139 Fax 540-667-0493 PROTECTIVE COVENANTS. AND RESTRICTION FOR FREDERICK CENTER RECITALS Whereas, the owner desires to create on the property and any additions thereto a business center with open spaces and a planned mix of office and commercial uses, and desire to provide for the preservation and enhancement of the property values, amenities and opportunities within the property and for the maintenance of the real estate and improvements thereon, and to this end desires to subject the property to the covenants, restrictions, easements, charges and liens hereinafter set forth. ARTICLE I PURPOSE It is the purpose of this Declaration to assure the orderly and attractive development of the property in an efficient and harmonious manner, to preserve and enhance property values, amenities and opportunities within the property, to promote the health and safety of the occupants and to maintain a harmonious relationship among the structures and the natural vegetation and topography thereon. This declaration is designed to complement the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and other local and state government regulations and ordinances, and where conflicts occur, the more rigid requirement shall prevail. ARTICLE II PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED USES PROHIBITED USES No communication towers, satellite earth stations, dish antennae, or exterior radio/TV antennae shall be permitted without the prior written consent of the Architectural Review Board (the 'Board"), as provided in Article V, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Protective Covenants And Restriction For Frederick Center Approval from any public agency notwithstanding, no operation will be permitted which creates objectionable noise, smoke, odors or which in any other way, in the opinion of the Board, will constitute a nuisance or degrade the value of the real estate within the property. No rubbish or debris of any kind shall be placed or permitted to accumulate upon or adjacent to any site, except in approved waste containers in screened areas in locations at the rear or sides of building approved by the Board. ARTICLE III DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PLAN APPROVAL REQUIRED No Improvement shall to constructed, erected, placed, altered, added to, maintained or permitted to remain on the property until the plans shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Architectural Review Board as J provided in Article IV. BUILDING LINES All setbacks shall be subject to approval of the Board. SITE DESIGN Location of Parking Lots The curb or edge of any parking lot, loading zone or service area, shall not be closer than 10 feet from the front street curb or from any property line. Property Design Design of the property as a total integrated complex is required. Building design in terms of massing, scale, color and circulation shall relate to adjacent buildings and to the total development. Orientation of uses shall be based upon site considerations, uses of adjoining buildings, visual impact and overall circulation patterns. When multiple structures are planned as part of a project under single ownership, they shall be designed in a unified architectural and spatial manner. 2 Protective Covenants And Restriction For Frederick Center BUILDING MATERIALS AND DESIGN Exterior Walls Exterior wall materials shall be subject to review and approval by the Architectural Board. AUTOMOBILE PARKING On -Site Parking Required The owner of each lot or site shall provide adequate automobile parking on such owner's lot or site capable of accommodating the reasonable parking needs of its employees, visitors and company vehicles. No use or activity shall be permitted on any lot or site of the property, unless adequate parking is provided on the lot or site for such use or activity in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth herein; and in the event that the parking requirements on any lot or site increase as a result of a change in use of the lot or site or as a result of an increase in the number of employees working at the site, it shall be the owner's responsibility to provide additional parking areas, as approved by the Board, either on the site or elsewhere, in order to accommodate such increased parking requirements. Such additional parking areas shall be provided prior to, or concurrently with, the institution' of such changed use or the employment of such additional employees. Off -Site Parkin Each owner, of occupant of any lot or site shall use its best efforts to prevent its employees, lessees, agents, contractors, customers and visitors from parking on any public street within the property. Further, the Association shall have the right to cause vehicles parked on any common area or public street with in the property to be removed by towing or otherwise to a licensed garage for storage until called for by the owner of the vehicle or his agent, provided that notice of such action shall first or simultaneously therewith be given to at least one of the local law enforcement officers. In the event of such removal or storage, the owner of the vehicle 3 Protective Covenants And Restriction For Frederick Center involved shall be chargeable with and the said vehicle may be held for a reasonable charge for its removal and storage. Parking Area Standards Parking areas shall be paved with asphalt or concrete and shall have concrete curbs around their perimeters. Other special paving materials may be used to accent special entrance areas or walkways, if approved by the Board. In the front and on the side of buildings, paved parking areas larger than twenty- four (24) parking spaces shall have landscaped islands and areas intermittently spaced, as approved by the Board. Screening Where possible parking shall be screened from the view of Route 50 by depressing grades, by use of landscaping, and/or by earth berms. A 30' vegetative buffer is to be provided along the US Route 50 frontage. Fences No fences shall be allowed in the development without the prior written approval of the Board of Architectural Review. Any permitted fences shall be screened as hereinabove provided. TRUCK LOADING AND PARKING All loading docks shall be located in the rear of the buildings or screened from view so that trucks using such docks will not be readily visible from public streets. OUTSIDE STORAGE No outside storage of any type will be permitted without written approval of the Board. When such approval is given, the outside storage area shall be totally enclosed with a screen approved by the Board so that storage is not visible from the neighboring buildings or property or the street. 4 Protective Covenants And Restriction For Frederick Center LANDSCAPING Landscaping Plan All open areas on each lot not occupied by buildings and paved areas shall be suitably graded and drained and shall be landscaped with lawns, trees and shrubs. The landscape plan submitted to the Board for approval as part of the plans shall show such things as the preservation of natural areas, the planting of trees, shrubs and grass and installation of earth berms and screens and optional underground sprinkling systems. Plant material shall be in conformance with American Association of Nurserymen Standards for Nursery Stock, latest edition (ANN). Landscaping, as approved by the Board, shall be installed within one planting season of occupancy or within six months of substantial completion of any building, which ever occurs first, provided that an extension may be granted by the Board in the event of inclement weather. The date of substantial completion shall mean that date on which the exterior walls and roof have been installed. The installation and maintenance of all landscaping on each site shall be done in a good and workmanlike manner. Maintenance All landscaping on each lot, including landscaping located within any easements reserved by Declarant for such purpose, shall be properly maintained by the owner of the lot, which maintenance shall include all necessary cutting, watering, fertilizing, aerating, spraying, pruning and required replacements. However, the Association may assume responsibility for the maintenance of landscaping within the easement area reserved to declarant for landscaping and related purposes. Dead or damaged planting material shall be promptly replaced. Tree Removal No healthy tree with a diameter exceeding eight (8) inches may be removed without the approval of the Board, which aDDroval shall not be 1 unreasonably withheld where removal of such trees is required in connection with the location of a building or paved area. Reasonable care shall be exercised to preserve trees and assure that they remain healthy. 61 Protective Covenants And Restriction For Frederick Center EASEMENT FOR LANDSCAPING AND RELATED PURPOSES- COVENANT TO DEDICATE FOR STREET WIDENING Easement Abutting Public Streets There shall be and is hereby reserved to declarant a perpetual and non- exclusive easement over any common area, for the purpose of erecting and maintaining street intersection signs, directional signs, temporary promotional signs, lawns, shrubbery, lighting, entrance features and/or "theme areas", lights, stone, wood or masonry wall features and/or related landscaping. EXTERIOR LIGHTING All exterior lighting shall be designed, erected, altered and maintained in accordance with the final drawings and specifications as approved by the Board, Lighting shall be compatible and harmonious throughout the entire property and shall be in keeping with the specific use of the building. f I If automobile and truck parking areas are illuminated, the light sources shall be screened to reduce visible glare from the street. All outside wirings for exterior lighting shall be installed underground. On-site lighting shall be directed away from any residential uses. SIGNS AND GRAPHICS Approval All signs of every nature shall be uniform and consistent with the overall development of the property and subject to the prior written approval of the Board as to size, shape, color, material, design, wording and location. Where possible multiple use "marquee" signs are desirable. Temporary Signs Temporary signs may be erected on a lot or site (i) by persons offering for sale or lease premises on such lot or site, or (ii) by builders, lenders, and architects involved in the construction and design of buildings on such lot or site. These signs shall be designed in accordance with the Development Guidelines, and the 0 Protective Covenants And Restriction For Frederick Center design, size, location and number of signs shall be subject to the prior approval of the Board. Signs offering property for sale or lease shall be removed within thirty (30) days after completion of sale or lease of the property. Construction signs shall be removed within thirty (30) days of completion of the shell of the building UTILITIES Utilities All new utility lines, including electrical and telecommunication lines, shall be installed and maintained underground. Reservation of Utility Easements Declarant shall have the right to create at any time by recordation of an appropriate instrument among the land records of Frederick County, Virginia, temporary or perpetual easements for the purpose of locating, installing and maintaining utility and drainage lines, walkways and trails, and the right of access to said easement areas for construction, utility maintenance and emergency vehicles, over, under, or across any and all lands within the property except (i) building locations previously approved by the Board and any applicable government authority or (ii) areas of a lot or site which now or hereafter are reasonably set aside by the owner as proposed planned building locations and which, if submitted for governmental approval as a building location, owner reasonably believes would satisfy all state, local and federal regulations, statutes and ordinances, and which are consistent with sound engineering and architectural principles and practices. The declarant shall have the right to assign the benefit of any such easement to any utility company or local government. CONSTRUCTION Once commenced, construction shall be diligently pursued to completion. No construction or building materials, vehicles or mobile buildings shall be located or stored within street rights-of-way or landscape easements. 7 Protective Covenants And Restriction For Frederick Center MAINTENANCE DURING CONSTRUCTION During construction the owner shall be responsible for keeping the premises in reasonably neat condition, preventing the accumulation of trash, and shall prevent runoff of soil from the site onto adjacent property or the streets. MAINTENANCE No building or other improvement on the property shall be permitted by its owner or occupant to fall into disrepair, and each such building and other improvement shall at all times be kept in good condition and repair, property maintained and adequately painted or otherwise finished, clan and safe. All asphalt or concrete pave surfaces shall be resurfaced or sealed as needed and all potholes shall be promptly repaired. Unimproved sites shall be maintained in a reasonably neat condition, free of debris. STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS Owners may participate in any storm water management program established or to be established for the property by declarant and/or the association designed to serve their properties by separate agreement with the declarant and/or the association. Participating owners shall contribute to the cost of installing and/or maintaining. the common retention areas and other shared storm water management facilities ("Storm Water Management Facilities") on a contractual basis, as set forth in the written agreements between the participating owners and the declarant and/or the association (the "Storm Water Management Facilities Agreement"). ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Owners and occupants shall comply with all federal, state and local governmental statutes, ordinances and regulations relating to environmental protection, in relation to the property. on Protective Covenants And Restriction For Frederick Center ARTICLE IV ADMINISTRATION AUTHORITY This declaration shall be administered by the association, except for those functions specifically reserved herein for declarant. ESTABLISHMENT OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BROAD PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS OF ASSOCIATION 0 Protective Covenants And Restriction For Frederick Center COVENANT FOR ASSESSMENTS LIABILITY FOR ASSESSMENTS REMEDIES OF THE ASSOCIATION IN EVENT OF DEFAULT SUBORDINATION OF LIEN TO MORTGAGES ARTICLE V ENFORCEMENT PREVENTIVE REMEDIES The Board, the Association or any Owner, lessee or licensee may proceed at law or in equity to prevent the violation of this Declaration. 10 Protective Covenants And Restriction For Frederick Center \% RIGHT OF ENTRY ENFORCEMENT RIGHTS CUMULATIVE REMEDIES FAILURE TO ENFORCE NOT A WAIVER OF RIGHTS ASSIGNMENT OF RIGHTS AND DUTIES CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE AND ACCEPTANCE 17 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Planning Director RE: Discussion - Thomas Property Request for Extension of Sewer and Water Services DATE: January 22, 2003 Staff has received a request from Tim and Denise Thomas seeking the extension of water and sewer to approximately one acre of land. This is a request for extension of water and sewer outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The property is located on the east side of Double Church Road, immediately east of the Hartwood and Woodside subdivisions. The land is more specifically identified as parcel 86 -A -71A. Comprehensive Policy Plan: The subject property is located outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), and has not been considered within a particular small area land use plan. The tract is bounded on the north, west, and south by residential uses. An agricultural district is located northeast of the property. Staff would note that in Spring 2002, a number of S WSA expansion scenarios were presented to the Board of Supervisors; the project was termed the 277 SWSA Expansion and included the area east of Double Church Road, subject site included. The Board approved a SWSA expansion scenario which did not include the subject property. The CPPS reviewed this request on January 13, 2003, and has forwarded a recommendation of denial. The request is now before the Planning Commission for discussion. Staff is available to respond to your inquires. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF WATER AND SEWER OUTSIDE OF THE SWSA AND UDA THOMAS PROPERTY Staff Report for the Planning Commission Discussion Prepared: January 22, 2003 Staff Contact: Eric Lawrence This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this comprehensive planning matter. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 02/05/03 discussion Pending Board of Supervisors: 02/26/03 discussion Pending PROPOSAL: To extend public sewer and water outside the Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) to service a one -acre parcel PLANNED USE: Single Family Home LOCA'T'ION: The property is located on the east side of Double Church Road, across from the Hartwood and Woodside subdivisions. MAGIS'T'ERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 86 -A -71A PLANNING STAFF EVALUATION: Existing Conditions The subject site is bounded on the north, east, and south by properties currently zoned RA (Rural Areas). The properties located west of the subject site, across Double Church Road are zoned RP (Residential Performance). The subject property currently contains a two-bedroom home, and a functioning private health system (sand filter). Comprehensive Policy Plan Land Use Plan The Thomas Property is not located within a particular small area land use plan. Sewer and Water Extension - Discussion - Thomas Property Page 2 January 22, 2003 Double Church Road establishes the boundary of both the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) and the Urban Development Area (UDA). A small portion of the Double Church Road Agricultural and Forestal District is located northeast of the subject property. The majority of the District lies south of the subject site. Transportation Neither the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan nor the Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS) identify a proposed road system that would provide access to the subject property. The subject site presently has direct access onto Double Church Road. COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PROGRAMS SUBCOMMITTEE (CPPB) SUMMARY & ACTION OF 01/13/03 MEETING: The CPPS felt that it was inappropriate to extend public sewer and water to the subject property. The CPPS noted that the property is currently in use as a residence with a functioning health system. Therefore, there was not a health issue that required the extension of sewer and water service to the property. IJ \COMMITTEES\CPPS\Projects\2003 Projects\Thom.s.PC.Discussion. wpd October 3, 2002 Mr. Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Director Frederick Co. Dept. of Planning and Development 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Re: 781 Double Church Road, Stephens City, VA (Frederick Co.); Tax Map Parcel #86 A 71A Dear Mr. Lawrence: We are the owners of, and reside on, a one acre parcel located at 781 Double Church Road, Stephens City, Virginia, Tax Map Parcel #86 A 71 A. Our property is adjacent to the soon to be built Hardwood Subdivision. We are currently on a sand filtration system configured for a two-bedroom, single family dwelling. We have many concerns regarding the sand filtration system and consider the system to be a constraint and feel it would be beneficial to discontinue this system from an environmental standpoint. We have been advised by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority that our property is outside of their service area. The builder of Hartwood Subdivision, Oakcrest Builders, has expressed their willingness to assist us concurrent with their installation of the sewer system for the subdivision. Therefore, please consider this as our formal request for consideration of the extension of our sewer service outside of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority's service area. Our request would be for a 4" service line sized only for our existing dwelling which is 1200 square feet. Should you have any questions or need any further information, we can be reached as follows: (540) 539-9277 (cell) - Tim Thomas (540) 869-2296 (home) (540) 869-5639 (fax) tthomas@sheetz.com Thank you for your cooperation and assistance Sincerely, Tim B. Thomas Denise L. Thomas cc: Robert M. Sager FairfOx Pike,,, (Router-?-; 0 C Cr r I 0 Al CL Ur4an Development s,Double Chuch Road Agricultvr..a6'and Forestal District 1 I Subject Property 64-A-71 A (UDA) Request for ewer and Water Service Outside of the Urban Development .Area (UDA) Thomas Property - i COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development MEM01-OANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Planning Director f f RE: Discussion - Trenary Property Request for Extension of Sewer and Water Services DATE: January 22, 2003 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 Staff has received a request from Robert Trenary seeking the extension of water and sewer to approximately 80 acres of land he owns. This is a request for extension of water and sewer outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA). The property is located on Forest Lakes Drive, south of Fairfax Pike and Hudson Hollow Road. The land is more specifically identified as Parcels 86-A-211 and 86-A-212. The parcels are located southeast of the Sherando Park, and is in close proximity to the Forest Lakes mobile home community. Comprehensive Policy Plan: The subject property is located outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), and has not been considered within a particular small area land use plan. The tract is bounded by rural residential and agricultural uses. Staff would note that in Spring 2002, a number of SWSA expansion scenarios were presented to the Board of Supervisors; the project was termed the 277 SWSA Expansion. and included the Hudson Hollow Road area. The Board approved a SWSA expansion scenario which did not include the subject property. The CPPS reviewed this request on January 13, 2003, and has forwarded a recommendation of denial. The request is now before the Planning Commission for discussion. Staff is available to respond to your inquires. U,\CO\4MITTEESICPPSTrojects\.2003 Projects\Trenary.PC.Discussion.wpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF WATER AND SEWER OUTSIDE OF THE SWSA AND UDA TRENARY PROPERTIES \w/ Staff Report for the Planning Commission Discussion 1]J8 Prepare1: January 22, 2003 Staff Contact: Eric Lawrence This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this comprehensive planning matter. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 02/05/03 discussion Pending Board of Supervisors: 02/26/03 discussion Pending PROPOSAL: To extend public sewer and water outside the Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) to service approximately 80 acres PLANNED USE: Suburban Residential Uses LOCATION: The property is located south of Fairfax Pike (Route 277), on Forest Lakes Drive. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 86-A-211 and 86-A-212 PLANNING STAFF EVALUATION: Existing Conditions The subject site, as well as the properties adjoining to the west and south, are presently zoned RA (Rural Areas) and are in agricultural uses. The Forest Lakes Mobile Home Park is located east of the subject properties. The Pioneer Trailer Park is located north of the subject properties. Comprehensive Policy Plan Land Use Plan The Trenary Properties are not located within a particular small area land use plan. The tract is bounded on the west and south by agricultural uses. Legally non -conforming mobile home parks are located in the general vicinity to the north and east. Sewer and Water Extension - Discussion - Trenary Properties Page 2 January 22, 2003 The boundary of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) is approximately 800 feet to the northeast of the property. The boundary of the Urban Development Area (UDA) is approximately 1,800 feet to the northwest of the property. The Double Church Road Agricultural and Forestal District is located southwest of the subject properties. Transportation Neither the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan nor the Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS) identify a proposed road system that would provide access to the subject property. The subject site presently has access onto Forest Lakes Drive. COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PROGRAMS SUBCOMMITTEE (CPPS) SUMMARY & ACTION OF 01/13/03 MEETING. The CPPS felt that it was inappropriate to extend public sewer and water to the subject properties as they are clearly outside of the existing SWSA and UDA. The CPPS noted that the properties do not have failing health systems that require attention at this time. U:\COMMITTEES\CPPS\Projects\2003 Projects\Trenary. PC. Discussion. wpd COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, A1CP, Planning Director RE: Discussion - Northeast Land Use Plan Revisions DATE: January 24, 2003 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 On June 12, 2002, the Board of Supervisors directed staff to reexamine the recommended land uses and policies included in the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP). This plan was most recently included in the 2000 Comprehensive Policy Plan update. The Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) has been reviewing and discussing the NELUP over the past six months, and at their December 9, 2002 meeting, forwarded a recommendation (revised NELUP - Alternative 1) that they felt addressed the concerns identified by the Board of Supervisors. This revised plan is now presented to the Planning Commission as a discussion item for consideration and direction as appropriate. Board of Supervisors' Directive The Board of Supervisors requested that the following issues be addressed: a. Location and amount of land designated by the current Plan as future industrial; b. Recognition and identification of the Milburn Rural Historic District, the core battlefield areas of 2"d and 3`d Winchester, Jordan Springs Historic Area Overlay, and Stephenson's Depot; C. An examination of the policies related to the provision of sewer and water service to undeveloped RA -zoned land located within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), and the communities of Stephenson, Clearbrook, and Brucetown for existing homes with failing septic systems; d. Incorporate changes made by the County since the adoption of the Plan on September 27, 2000; and, e. This is to include Public meetings, the CPPS with citizen liaisons' input, prior to submission to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Shenandoah Valley Battlefield Foundation The Shenandoah Valley Battlefield Foundation (SVBF) has undertaken an effort of analyzing Winchester's historical areas which included the historic areas within the Northeast Land Use Plan study area. The SVBF exercise looked at various documents regarding civil war battles and other historical features, including the National Parks Services' 1992 Study of Civil War Battlefields. It is the SVBF's intent to identify land parcels which have retained their historical integrity, as well as those properties which are viable for preservation. During the CPPS' December meeting, representatives from the SVBF presented the preliminary results from their initiative as it pertained to the study area. This preliminary information indicated an area surrounding Stephenson's Depot as viable for preservation. This historical area has been identified on the CPPS' revised land use plan recommendations. Land Owners' Request During the CPPS' review of the NELUP, staff received three land use alternatives from property owners who own land located south of Old Charlestown Road (Route 76 1) and east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), land within the NELUP. In a letter from Mr. Shockey and Ms. Slaughter dated October 31, 2002, they request that the County consider a future residential planned community land use on their properties which would require changes to the land use plan from an industrial to planned residential land use classification, as well as expansion of the Urban Development Area (UDA). Two additional requests were submitted by property owner groups residing south of the Shockey and Slaughter properties. These property owner groups (Red Bud Road area residents, and the Woods Mill Estates POA) requested land uses consistent to the Shockey/Slaughter requests. The CPPS felt that planned residential land uses, as requested, were inappropriate. Therefore, such uses have not been included in the CPPS' revised land use plan recommendations. CPPS Membership The Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) currently consists of 13 individuals, which includes Planning Commission members, a Town of Stephens City liaison, and various County citizens. Four citizens from the Stephenson community were appointed to the CPPS to assist in the NELUP review. CPPS Discussion Summary The committee achieved consensus that the land uses identified in the adopted NELUP were generally acceptable west of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), and north of Walters Mill Road (Route 836). As a result, the CPPS Chairman requested that each committee member provide staff with a potential land use scheme for the land located south of Walters Mill Lane (Route 836), and east of Martinsburg Pike (a.k.a. "concentrated study area"). A number of land use schemes were drafted by the CPPS membership and discussed during their Page 2 of 3 monthly meetings this past fall. Land use proposals discussed involved: expansion of sewer and water services to incorporate the Brucetown, Clearbrook, and Stephenson communities; reduction of future industrial land uses; reduction of business land uses throughout the study area, with concentrations of business -emphasized interstate interchanges; and an increase in the size of Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA). Revisions to the SWSA boundary were also discussed. CPPS' Recommendation During the CPPS' December meeting, the committee discussed the various future land use planned aspects of the NELUP, and the land owner requests for planned residential designation and inclusion in the Urban Development Area. It was during this meeting that the CPPS voted to recommend that the Northeast Land Use Plan be revised to include and reflect the findings of the Shenandoah Valley Battlefield Foundations' viable land preservation study. This land use plan is attached and titled "CPPS Recommended Alternative." Two of the other land use plan alternatives that were discussed by the CPPS have also been attached as information. These two reviewed, but not CPPS-endorsed land use proposals, have been titled "Alternative I" and "Alternative 2." The significant revision of the NELUP identified in Alternative 1 is the removal of the Planned Industrial Land Use designation and associated SWSA boundary as it pertains to property located south of Old Charlestown Road (Route 76 1) and east of the CSX rail road. Alternative 2 suggested more significant changes to the NELUP including: reductions in Planned Industrial and Business Land Uses; increases in Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA); and expansion of the SWSA to incorporate the rural community centers of Stephenson, Clearbrook, and Brucetown. Attached is the text associated with the current 2000 Comprehensive Policy Plan as it pertains to the Northeast Land Use Plan. Staff will be available to address questions the Commission may have during this discussion. ERL/cih Attachments CPPS Recommended Alternative; Alternative 1; Alternative 2; and text from the 2000 Comprehensive Policy Plan U \C0MMMEES\CPPS\Projects\2002 Projects\NE Land Use Plan\PC Discussion. wpd Page 3 of 3 000 0 1 Miles f )S LEGEND Map Features SWdyArea Belmday Prepmed SVVSA lord Caemmey Ced— Iiii1111 Wder Fedwea /VFxemld Shama A tWW.Fedrraa Proposed sand use RmNMMW alueresr lndu*kd Rurd Ama 6NDGvMVm&ntWV SMbV 6 Aran Roads Interstate 81 ^/ Primary "I ffi—ys Smondery R..& Raeioads � ae�aea Route 37 Edenslon New Cderla Reads ® New Sigrd¢dion As 4 Zoning L..>I 02 (Busifesr. GwwW DIsMd) 8311 d slnel 7ren aW UlsMcn EM (ExbeOivo MenufaYunno DlStrkt) M7 (I durst 4. LIgN LAMM M21 Onus al. Generw DSWCO MH7 (Motile Home Coel—fty) RA (Ruml Arae) RP (Resdardisl Per7onnence Distract) wE Northeast Land Use Plan s Alternative 1 DRAFT / - r _T1 -1 1 0 1 Miles 3444 Northeast Land Use Plan Alternative 2 LEGEND Map Features =Study Wea Bowrdary W,Proposed SWSA Rural Community Centers ® Weter F-t— NPerenn!M Streams A Histona Fean Pmip—d Land 1152 Residential `, 81 (Busiaessl \\ Rurel Area O.VC.0—d.11y Sensitive Areas (BSA) Roads Z;�lraeme4111 PtYnrYFB4hwaYs /V Secondary Roeda Z"Reer oedS —d RaWe 37 EDftnsfon .� New Cdkdw RNdS New Slgalfarlon WA N W+ E S CPPS 0 1 Miles 1 01119 r - � LEGEND Map Fe I..s Study Nea Boundary Pmposed SWSA Rural Community Centers MI Water Fed— NPemnnid Streams A H+done Features Proposed Land Use Rosiaeneal eusmess 1w- nel Rural A ea Developmentally Son --Areas Roads �� Irterslate 81 N Primary Highways IV Secondary Roatls fo Railroads ProDosetl Route 3] Extension f N Cdl dar Roeds N S gnalization Zoning n 82 (B sines Go -4 Dislnd) ellW(1 t MAT h nDistrict) EM (Extractive M iacturmg Distad) ell Mt (lndu nd, Lght Dldnnt) (, ) M211rqudnd, 6e � Distad) �; MHt IMoblk Home CommunRy) RA (Rural Area) RP (ResideMd Pertormarme Didnd) Recommended Alternative DRAFT Land Use A collector road is also shown running north from Route 659 across Route 7 onto the Winchester Mall property and then continuing north through the Regency Lakes property, and also connecting to Route 661. There have been discussions concerning the possible alteration of the Eastern Road Plan in this area. One proposal being considered would create a collector road that runs from Greenwood road roughly across from the Greenwood Volunteer Fire Company in a northwesterly direction, through the Abrams Point development and connecting up with Route 658 (Brookland Lane). The road would then connect with the proposed connection running from Valley Mill Road across Route 7 to the Winchester Mall site. At the time of this writing, no decision has been made to incorporate this proposal into the Eastern Road Plan. Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan Route 11 North Corridor Plan In 1995, the Board of Supervisors and the Economic Development Commission identified a shortage of available industrial sites with rail access, a vital element in recruiting potential industries. As a result, the county initiated a search for potential locations for such uses. Numerous areas were identified within the northeastern portion of the County along the Route 11 North corridor that could be attractive sites for industrial development with rail access. As a result, the Board of Supervisors directed the County's Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) to develop a land use plan for the Route 11 North corridor from Interstate 81 Exit 317 to Exit 321. In 1996, a land use plan for the Route 11 North corridor from Interstate 81 Exit 317 to Exit 321 was adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Approximately 3,200 acres of land was included within the adopted study area boundary of the Route 11 North corridor which extended from Interstate 81 to the west and the Hot Run, Hiatt Run, and Redbud Run drainage basins to the east. Portions of the Stephenson Rural Community Center and the Clearbrook Rural Community Center were included within the study area boundary. The Route 11 North Land Use Plan recommended industrial and commercial development as the predominant land use within the study area boundary. New large- scale residential development was not proposed as a component of the land use plan. Finally, a Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA) designation was established to preserve and protect existing residential land uses, historic features, and significant open space areas. The DSA was recommended along the Route 11 North corridor, the Milburn Road corridor, and along the western segment of the Old Charles Town Road corridor. Frederick County 6-33 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Recent Issues Development activity and land use speculation has occurred along the Route 11 corridor between Interstate 81, Exit 321 and Exit 323 since the adoption of the north of the Route 11 North Land Use Plan. Concerns expressed by county officials and citizens regarding various land use activities and plans in this area led the Board of Supervisors to direct the CPPS to revisit the previously adopted land use plan. The Board of Supervisors directed the CPPS to develop a land use plan which expanded upon the Route 11 North plan to incorporate all land east of Interstate 81 between Interstate 81 mile marker 316 and Interstate 81 Exit 323 to the Opequon Creek, as well as land on the west side of Interstate 81 at Exit 321 and Exit 323. Land Use Plan Ob'ecl tives The CPPS conducted two visioning meetings in January 2000 at the Stonewall Elementary School. These meetings provided an opportunity for the CPPS to determine issues of importance to the community and to familiarize participants with the process necessary to undertake a large -area land use study and develop a land use plan for the designated area. Participants were encouraged to vote on identified issues and to submit comments associated with a prepared questionnaire. The CPPS utilized this information to establish objectives for the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan. Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan Objectives Policies ► Develop policies which provide for a balance of growth and preservation. ► Develop policies which prohibit higher density growth within defined portions of the study area. ► Ensure that public water and sewer service with adequate capacity accompanies future development proposals. ► Ensure that adequate Levels of Service for all road systems are maintained or are achieved as a result of future development proposals. ► Apply appropriate quality design standards for future development within the study area. Frederick County 6-34 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Land Use ► Concentrate industrial uses near major road and railroad transportation systems. ► Encourage industrial uses to locate within master planned areas. ► Provide for interstate business development opportunities on the eastern and western sides of Interstate 81 interchanges. ► Concentrate business uses at strategic locations along the Route 11 North corridor. > Discourage random business and industrial land uses along Route 11 that are incompatible with adjacent existing land uses. Transportation ► Identify appropriate locations for signalized intersections to maintain or improve Levels of Service. ► Encourage central access points to industrial areas, minimizing new driveways and intersections with Route 11 North, Route 761, Route 664, Route 669, and Route 671. ► Encourage the expansion of Route 11 to a four -lane roadway. ► Determine appropriate locations for new connector roads within industrial and commercial areas to minimize traffic impacts on Route 11 North and existing secondary roads. ► Discourage new access points along the historic Milburn Road corridor (Route 662). Infrastructure ► Identify appropriate locations within the study area for inclusion in the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). ► Determine impacts of proposed future land uses on the Opequon Waste Water Treatment Plant. ► Determine appropriate types of water and sewer systems to serve existing and proposed land uses. Historical ► Ensure that recommendations of Third Winchester Battlefield Preservation Plan are implemented to the extent possible. ► Determine appropriate methods to protect significant historic areas and corridors that are identified by the Battlefield Network Plan. Frederick County 6-35 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Identify appropriate locations to implement Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA) land use designations to protect potentially significant historic resources as identified t'Ln- t r__ t t rt r t r ��__I_.. O__Y.•.;_. T`... LI aLt LT -_t., ni ._ 'T"%. 7 e.. 0__-.. Ue.. by the rreuerlcK l.vUrilytCLlral LallllltlatnN ,3w vcy. i;usurc I.rra� �hc rit�wlit; t�c6uur�c� AdvisoryBoard (HRAB) reviews all development proposals which impact identified DSA. Environmental Identify environmentally sensitive areas such as flood plains and steep slopes to ensure that future land use impacts to these areas are minimized or avoided. Identify areas for agricultural and open space preservation. Encourage land preservation programs such as conservation easements, agricultural and forestal districts, and public purchase of permanent easements. Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan The Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan is intended to expand upon, and supersede the Route 11 North Land Use Plan which was adopted in 1996. The study area boundaries have been significantly expanded to incorporate approximately 14,500 acres of land between Interstate S 1, the West Virginia state fine, the Opequon Creek, and the northern study area boundary limits of the Route 7 East Corridor Plan. The revised study area boundary accounts for the entire acreage which comprised the Route 11 North Land Use Plan. The Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan has been designed to provide for a balance of land uses which includes industrial and commercial growth along the major road and railroad corridors, and the preservation of rural areas and significant historic features within the study area boundaries. Future land uses within the study area boundary should be sensitive to existing and planned land uses. The land use plan has been designed to provide the opportunity to develop industrial and business uses in a well-planned, coordinated manner. Industrial land uses are proposed adjacent to the Winchester and Western Railroad in the southern and northern portions of the study area, and adjacent to the CSX Railroad in the southem portion of the study area and within the Stephenson Rural Community Center between Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and the Global Chemstone Quarry. Proposed industrial land uses should be developed within master planned areas which discourage individual lot access on the Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North) corridor. Industrial land uses should be adequately screened from adjoining land uses to mitigate visual and noise impacts. Furthermore, industrial land uses should be planned to provide greater setbacks and buffers and screening along Martinsburg Pike to enhance the appearance of the corridor. Frederick County 6-36 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Business and commercial land uses are proposed along the Martinsburg Pike corridor, on the east and west side of Interstate 81 Exits 317, 321, and 323, and within the southeastern portion of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) near Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and Milburn Road (Route 662). It is envisioned that commercial land uses which cater to the interstate traveler will be developed along the three Interstate 81 interchange areas, while retail, service, and office land uses will occur along the Martinsburg Pike corridor and the southeastern portion of the SWSA. The development of business and commercial land uses is encouraged at designated signalized road intersections. All business and commercial uses are encouraged to provide inter -parcel connectors to enhance accessibility between uses and reduce disruptions to primary and secondary road systems. Additionally, business and commercial land uses which adjoin existing residential uses and significant historic resources should be adequately screened to mitigate impacts. The preservation and protection of significant historic resources, environmentally sensitive areas, and open space areas is encouraged by this land use plan. The majority of the acreage within the study area which comprises these features has been protected from industrial and commercial development through its exclusion from the SWSA expansion. This acreage includes the core area of the Opequon Battlefield (3`d Battle of Winchester); significant historic properties including Sulfer Spring Spa (34-110), Cleridge (34-111), and Hackwood (34-134); the majority ofthe steep slope and mature woodland areas; and all of the flood plain and wetland areas associated with Opequon Creek. Significant historic resources including the core area of Stephensons Depot (2nd battle of Winchester), Kenilworth (34-113), the Branson House (34-137), Milburn (34-729), the Byers House (34-1124), and the Milburn Road corridor (Route 662), and minor areas of steep slope and mature woodlands fall within the expanded SWSA boundary. The land use plan incorporates a Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA) designation to ensure that these features, as well as existing residential clusters and public land uses are protected from future industrial and commercial development proposals. The DSA is a community and historical preservation area; therefore, adjacent uses which are incompatible should provide adequate buffers and screening. The DSA is intended to discourage any development along the Milburn Road corridor and to promote a higher standard of development along the Martinsburg Pike corridor where residential clusters and public land uses dominate. Development regulations should be reviewed to ensure that they protect and promote a cohesive community environment within the study area with special attention to the DSA, while providing flexibility to encourage high quality development. The expansion of the Urban Development Area (UDA) is not proposed within the land use study boundary; therefore, higher density residential land use is not proposed. The land use plan recommends the allowance of residential land uses within the three Rural Community Centers (RCC). Residential land use should only occur in conjunction with public water and sewer service, and should be compatible with existing residential densities and lot sizes within each community center. Frederick County 6-36.1 Comprehensive Plan Lana Use Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan Infrastructure Components The proposed industrial and commercial land uses identified in this land use plan are recommended to be developed with public water and sewer service unless they are of a scale that can be served by a conventional well and drain field system. Therefore, it is the recommendation of this land use plan to prohibit package treatment plants unless they are of a scale and design that is feasible for them to be dedicated to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority for operation and maintenance. Furthermore, proposed industrial and commercial land use development should only occur if impacted road systems function at a Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. The installation of public water and sewer infrastructure, the development of new road systems and new signalization, and improvements to existing road systems will be the responsibility of private property owners and developers, unless the Board of Supervisors determine that public private partnerships are appropriate. Transportation: Proposed industrial and commercial development within the land use plan boundary will necessitate improvements to existing road systems and the construction of new road systems. The land use plan provides for the general location of new collector roads and signalized intersections to channel vehicular traffic between key intersections throughout the study area. These collector roads are intended to promote efficient traffic movement between land uses, enhance safety by limiting individual commercial entrances and turning movements at random points, and preserve capacities on existing road systems to ensure adequate levels of service. The general location of new collector roads and new signalized intersections is depicted on the land use plan map. The development of these transportation improvements will be required as proposed industrial and commercial projects are realized. Improvements to existing primary and secondary road systems will be required throughout the study area. To ensure that these road improvements occur, proposed developments should be expected to provide dedicated right- of-ways and construct all improvements deemed necessary by the Virginia Department of Transportation and the Board of Supervisors. Improvements to the existing primary and secondary road systems include improving Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North) to a four -lane facility, and improving the width and geometrics of Rest Church Road (Route 669); Woodbine Road (Route 669); Branson Spring Road (Route 668); Woodside Road (Route 671); Brucetown Road (Route 672); Stephenson Road (Route 664); and Old Charles Town Road (Route 761). Frederick County 6-36.2 Comprehensive Plan Land Use A corridor has been reserved along the proposed alignment of Route 37 - Alternative C; Phase N. This corridor is flanked on either side by proposed industrial and commercial land uses. The proposed industrial and commercial land uses may provide an opportunity for the development of a future interchange along the phase of the Route 37 corridor. Water and Sewer: Proposed industrial and commercial development within the land use plan boundary will be developed in conjunction with public water and sewer infrastructure. Public water infrastructure exists within the study area along Martinsburg Pike from the southern study area boundary to the intersection with Interstate 81 Exit 321. This infrastructure extends to the east, following portions of Stephensons Road (Route 664); Old Charles Town Road (Route 664); and Gun Club Road (Route 666). Currently, no public sewer infrastructure exists within the study area boundary. Currently, the Opequon Waste Water Treatment Plant (OWWTP) is the closest treatment facility to the study area boundary. Utilization of the OWWTP would require the development of pump stations and lift stations throughout the study area. The proposed industrial and commercial land use acreages have been compiled to determine the potential impacts to the OWWTP capacities. The estimated development of these acreages demonstrates that capacities at the OWWTP will be exceeded prior to the buildout of these areas. The Board of Supervisors will need to work with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) to determine appropriate methods for establishing public water and sewer infrastructure with adequate capacities. Appropriate methods may include partnerships and agreements with adjoining localities to utilize existing infrastructure, the development of new treatment facilities for water extraction and sewer treatment, or public/private partnerships to develop necessary infrastructure. Frederick County 6-36.3 Comprehensive Plan