Loading...
PC 03-19-03 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia MARCH 19, 2003 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) January 15, 2003 Minutes ............................................... (A) 2) Committee Reports ................................................. (no tab) 3) Citizen Comments .................................................. (no tab) PUBLIC HEARING 4) Rezoning 402-03 of the Winchester Medical Center (tabled at the 2/5/03 mtg.), submitted by G. W. 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 ITEM 5) Discussion on Expansion of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) to include the entire area of the 70.9065 -acre WWW, L.C. site, which is located north and adjacent to Route 50 West, approximately 1,700 feet west of the Route 50/Route 37 interchange. The request would result in the addition of approximately 50 acres to the SWSA. The request has been submitted by Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E. of G.W. Clifford and Associates, Inc. on behalf of WWW, L.C. (Ms. Kennedy)....................................................... (C) 6) 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 January 15, 2003. PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; Pat Gochenour, Red Bud District; Marie F. Straub, Red Bud District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Gene E. Fisher, Citizen at Large; and Jay Cook, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Opequon District; William C. Rosenberry, Shawnee District; Robert Sager, Board of Supervisors' Liaison; and Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison. STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Abbe S. Kennedy, Senior Planner; Jeremy F. Camp, Planner II; Mark R. Cheran, Planner I; Rebecca A. Ragsdale, Planner 1; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR 2403 Election of Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman The Chairman declared nominations open for Chairman. The nonunation of Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., for Chainnan was made by Commissioner Light and seconded by Commissioner Morris. Motion was made by Commissioner Ours, seconded by Commissioner Kriz, and unanimously passed to close nominations for Chairman. BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously elect Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., as Chainnan of the Planning Commission for the Year of 2003. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 976 -2 - Election of Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman Chairman DeHaven declared nominations open for Vice Chairman. The nomination of Roger L. Thomas was made by Commissioner Ours and seconded by Commissioner Kriz. Motion was made by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Kriz, and unanimously passed to close the nominations for Vice Chairman. BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously elect Roger L. Thomas as Vice Chairman of the Planning Commission for the Year of 2003. Election of Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary Chairman DeHaven declared nominations open for Secretary. The nomination of Eric R. Lawrence was made by Commissioner Light and seconded by Commissioner Kriz. Motion was made by Commissioner Light, seconded by Commissioner Fisher, and unanimously passed to close the nominations for Secretary. BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Plamling Commission does hereby unanimously elect Eric R. Lawrence as Secretary of the Planning Commission for the Year of 2003. MEETING SCHEDULE FOR 2003 Upon motion made by Conunissioner Ours and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission voted unanunously to have their regular monthly meetings on the first and third Wednesdays of each month at 7:00 p.m. to be held in the Board of Supervisors meeting room; the Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee on the second Monday of each month at 7:30 p.m.; and the Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee on the fourth Thursday of each month at 7:30 p.m. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 977 -3 - COMMITTEE, APPOINTMENTS FOR 2003 Chairman DeHaven made the following reappointments: Commissioner Thomas to the Economic Development Commission for 2003; Commissioner Fisher to the Sanitation Authority for 2003; and Commissioner Ours as liaison to the Winchester Planning Commission. Chairman DeHaven deferred the other committee appointments until the Cominission has an opportunity for discussion on those. MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 20 2002 AND DECEMBER 4 2002 Upon motion made by Commissioner Morris and seconded by Commissioner Light, the minutes of November 20, 2002 were unanimously approved as presented. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Fisher, the minutes of December 4, 2002 were unanimously approved as presented. COMMITTEE REPORTS Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) - 01/13/03 Commissioner Light reported that the CPPS reviewed two extensions of water and sewer out of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) for private use. He said that both requests were recommended for denial by the CPPS. Commissioner Light said the requests will be coming to the Commission in the near future. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. Sam Lehman from Back Creek District came forward to inform the Commission about a talk entitled, "Loudoun County: A Case In Unbridled Growth," to be given by Independent Loudoun County Supervisor, James Burton, at the Save Stephenson meeting at 7:00 p.m., Thursday, January 16, 2003, in the Emanuel Methodist Church, Rt. 11 North. Mr. Lehman said that Mr. Burton will be speaking about the events leading up to the Loudoun County down -zoning. He said that Mr. Burton has had speaking engagements in Warren and Jefferson Counties, and other localities. Mr. Lehman presented the Commission with a written copy of Mr. Burton's talk, which was published in the Warren Sentir_el. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 978 -4 - PUBLIC HEARING Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 916-02 of Shared Towers, Inc./White Tail Lane Tower, submitted by Greenway Engineering, for a time extension to a previously -approved condition associated with CUP 922-01 for a 195 -foot -high lattice -type telecommunications facility. This property is located on White Tail Lane off of North Frederick Pike (Route 522N) and is identified with Property Identification Number 19- A-27 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval with Conditions Planning Director Eric R. Lawrence reported that approximately one year ago, a number of conditional use permits (CUP) for towers were submitted to the County; he stated that four were approved with a condition stating that, if the tower is not erected within 12 months, the CUP would be deemed invalid. Director Lawrence noted that the Commission reviewed two ofthe four applications within the last few months, this one being the third, of which the applicant was not able to erect the tower within the 12 -month period. Therefore, the applicant was requesting a renewal of the CUP. Commissioner Morris noted that with the previous renewals, the Commission discussed making sure that conditions of the renewal include any ordinance changes that were made since the original approval of the CUP. Commissioner Morris cited as an example, the inclusion of an engineer's certification regarding structural integrity. He inquired if this was included in this particular CUP. Director Lawrence stated that the engineer's certification is required under Condition #6 of the CUP. Commissioner Ours inquired if the CUP for White Tail Lane was ready to expire. Director Lawrence replied that the current CUP expires on January 23, 2003, and the renewal will give the applicant another 12 months. Commissioner Straub inquired if there was a projected completion date. Director Lawrence believed the applicant had commitments, but was waiting for finalized agreements. Mr. Evan A. Wyatt with Greenway Engineering, representing the applicant, recalled that he came before the Commission a few months ago with a request for time extensions for the Cross Junction and Reynolds Store towers. Mr. Wyatt said that all the conditions could remain the same, all three of the sites already have approved site plans, nothing has changed as far as location, height, access, or screening. He said that because of the economic downturn, the industry has experienced a downfall and as soon as the service providers are willing to sign up, the towers will be constructed. Mr. Wyatt stated that a building permit has been obtained for one tower, the Hunting Ridge Tower; however, the other three are being postponed. He noted that the additional condition, to provide for structural integrity verification by an engineer, is acceptable. Chairman DeHaven called for public comments, however, no one came forward to speak. The Planning Commission believed that the application for this telecommunications facility had adequately addressed the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance in that a need for this facility, based on a lack of coverage and capacity in this part of the County, had been demonstrated. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 979 561E Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Cominission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) # 16-02 of Shared Towers, Inc./White Tail Lane Tower, submitted by Greenway Engineering, for a time extension to a previously -approved condition associated with CUP #22-01 for a 195 -foot -high lattice -type telecommunications facility on White Tail Lane, which essentially granted the applicant an extension of 12 months to construct the tower, with the following conditions: All Zoning Ordinance requirements and review agency comments shall be addressed and complied with at all times. 2. The tower shall be available for co -locating personal wireless services providers. 3. A minor site plan shall be approved by the County. 4. The tower shall be removed by the applicant or property owner within twelve (12) months of abandonment of operation. 5. In the event a telecommunications tower is not erected within twelve (12) months of the approval of this Conditional Use Permit, then the CUP will be deemed invalid. 6. A certified Virginia engineer shall provide verification that the tower is designed, and will be constructed, in a manner that should the tower collapse for any reason, the collapsed tower will be contained in an area around the tower, with a radius equal to or lesser than the setback, measured from the center line of the base of the tower. Conditional Use Permit 901-03 of Jackie F. Lichliter for a Cottage Occupation - Gunsmith/Gunshop. This property is located at 251 Christmas Tree Lane and is identified with Property Identification plumber 45-A-25 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval with Conditions Planner Rebecca Ragsdale reported that the applicant is proposing a gunsmith/ gunshop from his home located on 17 acres at 251 Christmas Tree Lane and would primarily provide repair services. She said the applicant intends to utilize an existing barn on the property for the gunshop and there would be no employees associated with the business; no retail activities are proposed. She next read a list of recommended conditions, should the Commission determine the use to be appropriate. Conunissioner Morris raised a question concerning the Fire Marshal's comments concerning the inaxirnuni storage of explosive materials and liquids. He inquired if those amounts were based on State Code requirements or if the amounts were arbitrarily established by the Fire Marshal. Commissioner Morris Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 980 -6 - also inquired if Mr. Lichliter was responsible for any other ATF requirements. The applicant and property owner, Mr. Jackie F. Lichliter, believed the restrictions on storage of explosive materials were the Fire Marshal's Code requirements. Mr. Lichliter also explained that he is required to maintain detailed records on firearms that come into his shop that stay overnight and yearly records on what firearms he works on and for whom. Commissioner Ours inquired if Mr. Lichliter typically test fires firearms that he repairs. Mr. Lichliter replied that he would occasionally test fire firearms and intends to construct an outdoor backstop. Chairman DeHaven asked Mr. Lichliter ifhe was comfortable with the conditions ofhis permit as recommended by the staff and Mr. Lichliter replied that he was comfortable with them. Chairr ian DeHaven next called for public comments, however, no one came forward to speak. Based on the limited scale ofthe proposed use, the Planning Commission believed the proposed use would no have significant impacts on adjoining properties. Upon motion made by Commissioner Light and seconded by Commissioner "z, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Plarming Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit #01-03 of Jackie F. Lichliter for a Cottage Occupation/ Gunsmith/ Gunshop at 251 Christmas Tree Lane with the following conditions: All review agency requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. Any expansion or change of use shall require a new conditional use permit. No retail sales of merchandise shall be permitted. 4. No employees shall be permitted. No business signs shall be permitted. Conditional Use Permit #02-03 of Timothy E. Felty for a Dog Kennel (breeding only). This property is located at 536 Fletcher Road and is identified with Property Identification Number 26 -A -39G in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval with Conditions Planner Rebecca Ragsdale reported that the applicant is proposing a kennel from his home and intends to breed dogs for sale, but does not intend to offer boarding services. She said that no new structures are proposed and no additional employees are proposed besides the applicant. Planner Ragsdale added that there were no disapproving agency review continents and she read a list of conditions reconimended by the Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 981 -7 - staff, should the Commission find the use to be appropriate. Mr. Timothy E. Felty, the applicant, introduced himself and his wife. Mrs. Felty provided hand-outs regarding the average number of puppies that have been born per litter and registered with the American Kennel Club over the past several years. She also provided two letters of support from citizens who could not attend the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Felty said he was not aware that a CUP was required; he said that he is disabled and breeding the beagles is a hobby that he enjoys. Commissioner Light asked Mr. Felty for his estimate on the numbers of dogs he would have on the property. Mr. Felty said the largest litter his dogs produced at any one time was six; in addition, he has six adult dogs of his own. Commissioner Watt inquired if Mr. Felty could control the barking of the dogs. Mr. Felty said that he has never had any complaints from his neighbors about barking. Mr. Felty said there was a complaint regarding the construction of a building on his property, however, because the building was going to be used for storage of firewood, hay, straw, and feed, it was classified as agriculture and a permit was not required. He said that during discussions with the Planning staff regarding the complaint, it was determined that he needed to acquire a CUP for operating a kennel. Chairman DeHaven asked Mr. Felty if he planned on moving his kennel into the structure or alongside the structure from the existing location. Mr. Felty replied that half of the building will be used as an inside dog kennel during the wintertime. Commissioner Gochenour commented that she and Commissioner Straub visited the site and they were pleased with what they saw. Chairman DeHaven called for public comment and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Milt McCormack, a resident across the street from the Feltys, said that he and his wife have been kept awake all night long by barking dogs and he was not in favor of this CUP being granted. Mr. McCormack said that beagles are known to bark all the time, and Mr. Felty's dogs do bark. He said that he has complained to Mr. Felty from time to time. Mr. McCormack added that the peace and tranquility of the area is ruined by the barking dogs. As a professional real estate appraiser, he was further disturbed by the possible adverse affect the noise may have on the values of properties. In response to Commissioner Watt's question regarding how far he was from the Feltys, Mr. McCormack stated that he was about 200 feet diagonally across from Mr. Felty. Mr. Ray West, a neighbor to the south, approximately a few hundred feet, said that he has known Mr. Felty for 22 years and Mr. Felty has always had dogs. Mr. West said that he doesn't hear the dogs barking and the kennel operation has never bothered him. Ms. Pamela Bell, 1802 Hollow Road, said that she is not on the same road as Mr. Felty, but she is up high on a ridge, above Mr. Felty. Ms. Bell said that she had an objection to allowing 30 dogs, the number mentioned in the list of conditions recommended by the staff. She said that on occasion, she has heard beagles barking, Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 982 -8 - Mr. Brian King, an adjoining property owner at 573 Fletcher Road, said that he moved to this area to get away from the noise and crowded conditions of the city, and now, this situation has become an aggravation for him. He said that he works long hours and the last thing he wants to hear is dogs barking. Mr. King said the barking is an annoyance. He was opposed to allowing 30 dogs. He said that when they sit on their deck or do yard work, the dogs bark constantly. Ms. Charlotte West, wife of Mr. Ray West who spoke earlier, was not opposed to Mr. Felty's kennel operation or the dogs barking. Mrs. Marsha J. Felty, wife of the applicant, Mr. Timothy Felty, said that this is the first she has heard complaints about their dogs being a nuisance. Mrs. Felty said the reason the application was submitted was for the breeding and selling of their dogs. She explained that she does not believe they would ever have 30 dogs at any one time. Chairman DeHaven asked Mrs. Felty if there was a maximum number of dogs that she and her husband would want to be permitted. Mr. Felty returned to the podium and explained that they own six dogs, of which only two females are able to have puppies. He said that if both females have a litter at the same time, and it was possible they could have up to ten puppies per litter, that would put him at 26 dogs. The Commissioners had further discussion with Mr. Felty about the operation of his business and the structures proposed to house the dogs. The Commissioners were of the opinion that the operation of this kennel business would not become a nuisance to the neighbors. Upon motion made by Ms. Gochenour and seconded by Commissioner Unger, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission, by a majority vote, does hereby recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit 402-03 of Timothy E. Felty for a Dog Kennel (breeding only) at 536 Fletcher Road with the following conditions: All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. This permit is for a breeding keimel only; animals not associated with the breeding operation shall not be boarded at any time. 3. All dogs kept at the kennel must be controlled so as not to be a nuisance to any adjoining property by barking or roaming free. All dogs must be kept within a fenced -in area. 4. All requirements of the Frederick County Code and the Code of Virginia pertaining to dog kennels shall be complied with at all times. 5. Any expansion or change of use shall require a new conditional use permit No more than (30) thirty dogs shall be allowed on the property at any given time. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 983 -9- 7. Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and should not exceed four (4) square feet in size. The majority vote on this recommendation was as follows: YES (TO APPROVE): Straub, Gochenour, Fisher, Ours, Light, Morris, Unger, Watt, DeHaven NO: Triplett, Kriz Chairman DeHaven said that he would consider a motion to accept two letters from adjoining property owners and some general information that the Felty's submitted concerning their application, CUP #02-03. Upon motion made by Commissioner Ours and seconded by Commissioner Fisher, the Planning Commission unanimously accepted the information submitted by the Felty's regarding their conditional use pen -nit application and included the information in the official record. Conditional Use Permit #03-03 of Daniel E. Whitacre for a Cottage Occupation/ Machine Shop. This property is located at 519 Turtle Meadow Drive and is identified with Property Identification Number 51-A-9 in the Back Creek Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval with Conditions Planner Mark R. Cheran reported that the proposed business will be conducted in a two-story accessory structure, approximately 800 square feet in size, located at the rear of the property; the adjoining properties are located greater than 100 feet from this structure and the property; and the property is surrounded by natural wooded screening and buffers. Planner Cheran stated that the applicant will be fabricating Civil War Era musket barrels and small parts for local industry and individuals. He said there were no adverse comments from any of the reviewing agencies. Commissioner Ours inquired if the one employee permitted was in addition to the owner/ operator. Planner Cheran replied this was correct; he said that in the future, the applicant desires to have one other employee, besides himself Mr. Daniel E. Whitacre, the owner/applicant, was available to answer questions from the Commission. Commissioner Straub asked Mr. Whitacre if he planned to test fire the Civil War Era rifle barrels that he would fabricate. Mr. Whitacre replied that on occasion, he would test them out of doors; he said that he has a natural backstop. There were no citizen comments. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 984 -10 - Based on the limited scale of the proposed use and evaluation of the property, Commission members believed that the proposed use would not have significant impacts on the adjoining properties. Upon motion made by Commissioner Unger and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit #03-03 of Daniel E. Whitacre for a Cottage Occupation/ Machine Shop at 519 Turtle Meadow Drive with the following conditions: All reviewing agencies' comments must be complied with at all times. 2. No more than one (1) employee associated with this Conditional Use Permit is allowed. Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and will not exceed four (4) square feet in size. 4. Any expansion or modification of this use shall require approval of a new Conditional Use Permit. Rezoning #01-03 of Frederick Block Company, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 2.63 acres from RP (Residential Performance), B2 (Business General), and MI (Light Industrial) to B2 (Business General); and 2.01 acres from RP (Residential Performance), B2 (Business General), and MI (Light Industrial) to B3 (Industrial Transition). This property is located on the eastern side along Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North, approximately 3,400 feet north of the intersection of Rt. 11 and Lee Avenue, and is identified with Property Identification Numbers 54A -1-15B, 54A -1-15C, 54A -1-15D; and 54A-1-16 and 54A-1-17 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval with Proffers Chairman Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. said that he would abstain from all discussion and voting on this rezoning application, due to a possible conflict of interest. Chairman DeHaven said that he would designate the chairmanship of the meeting to Mr. John Light, since Vice Chairman Thomas was absent from the meeting. Planner Abbe S. Kennedy reported that the proposed rezoning in this location is consistent with the Frederick County Land Use Policy and the Comprehensive Policy Plan; the site is also within the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SW SA) and the properties along this section of Route 11, both in the City and in the County, contain significant commercial and light industrial land uses. Planner Kennedy reported no significant review agency comments. She noted, however, that the Comprehensive Policy Plan states that business corridors should implement landscaping for screening of incompatible uses; that woodland buffers should remain where possible for screening; and that signage may affect the character of the area. Planner Kennedy continued, stating that where site development proffers exist, staff would suggest that a generalized development plan be submitted along with the rezoning proposal to show the Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 985 -11 - locations of the proposed 50' minimum vegetative preservation, and the locations of the proposed decorative walls. She said the staff would further suggest that the tree planting along Martinsburg Pike frontage should be consistent with expectations for development along County corridors. In addition, she explained that controls on signs place an important part in establishing the character of business corridors and monument -style signage should be encouraged as the only type of freestanding business signs for new business development along this segment of the pike; therefore, the staff believed the existing pole sign, located at the southwest corner of the property, which is currently in violation of the County's Zoning Code, does not conform with the Comprehensive Policy Plan's goals for signage along this business corridor. Mr. Evan A. Wyatt with Greenway Engineering, who was representing the property owners, began by describing the site in general. Mr. Wyatt said the applicant has proffered to submit a site plan providing two entrance points along Martinsburg Pike, which will align with the two entrances into the Shockey property; and it will provide a continuous turn lane along the property frontage. Secondly, Mr. Wyatt said they have proffered to refurbish the existing stone wall along Rt. 11; they will provide rounded, decorative walls at the entrance locations, as well as landscaping and street trees along Martinsburg Pike. He stated their desire to make use of the existing pole sign, but to limit all future signs to monument -type signs. He noted that the proffer states that the sign will not be more than 20' in height; he noted that under the existing zonings currently on the property, the M1 would allow for a sign as tall as 60' and the B2 would allow a 35' sign. Mr. Wyatt explained that once rezoned, their proffer would, indeed, enhance an existing sign that needs work and guarantees it will be in keeping with the street scape of the corridor. Regarding the third issue of buffering on the northern property line, Mr. Wyatt stated that the 50' existing strip will be maintained and then supplemented with a single row of evergreens. Commissioner Gochenour inquired about details for the drainage plan. Mr. Wyatt explained that the site accepts water from across Rt. 11 from the Shockey parcel. He said that an existing storm sewer in the ground goes through the limits of this property and out to the railroad track, and discharges into Ft. Collier. He added that the facilities are in place and functioning well. Acting Chairman Light inquired about the timing of the existing sign structure; Mr. Wyatt replied that the sign, in its current condition, has been on the property for many years and to his knowledge, the property owners have never been cited with a zoning violation for the sign. Mr. Wyatt said the applicant has proffered that the building official will be provided with a sign plan before any work is done. Acting Chairman Light next called for public continents and the following person came forward to speak: Mr. Lillard, a neighboring property owner, said that his home is within an adjoining subdivision. Mr. Lillard wanted to know if the applicant was breaking into an old subdivision with the proposed rezoning. Mr. Donald Shockey of the Shockey Companies, a neighboring property owner across the street, was in favor of the requested rezoning. He stated that Frederick Block has been a good neighbor. Mr. Shockey said that he has considerable respect for Stephen Slaughter and his family and he knew they would follow through with what they say. Mr. Shockey believed the development will clean up_ this area of Martinsburg Pike, it will be good for the economy, and will help Frederick County. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 986 -12 - In response to Mr. Lillard's concern, Mr. Wyatt replied that there will be no access from this commercial property into the subdivision whatsoever. He explained that pending the approval of the proposed rezoning, a lot consolidation will be done to combine the five lots into one, and, at that time, the 20' access will be vacated. He assured Mr. Lillard and the Commission there would be no possibility of getting access in a northern direction. appearance. Conunissioner Ours believed this was a well -thought-out plan, especially with the corridor Upon motion made by Commissioner Unger and seconded by Commissioner Ours, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Rezoning #01-03 of Frederick Block Company, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 2.63 acres from RP (Residential Performance), B2 (Business General), and M 1 (Light Industrial) to B2 (Business General); and 2.01 acres from RP (Residential Performance), B2 (Business General), and M 1 (Light Industrial) to B3 (Industrial Transition) with proffers as submitted by the applicant. (Note: Chairman DeHaven abstained from voting; Commissioners Rosenberry and Thomas were absent.) Master Development Plan #01-03 of Canter Estates, Section V, submitted by Greenway Engineering, for 200 single-family detached urban lots. This property is located on the west side of Front Royal Pike (Rt. 522 South) approximately 1,200 feet south of Parkins Mill Road (Rt. 644), and is identified with Property Identification Numbers 76-A-22 and 76-A-23 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval Planner Jeremy F. Camp stated that the overall concept of the master plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan and the requirements of Article XVII, Master Development Plan, of the Zoning Ordinance. Planner Camp pointed out five minor issues identified by the Planning Staff which dealt with the amount of open space in areas of environmental features, the location of environmental features on individual lots, the design of the proposed road efficiency buffers, the intent of the viewshed protection area, and the timing of the developer's responsibility for the proposed roads. Mr. Evan A. Wyatt of Greenway Engineering was representing the owner, Shoemaker Construction and Jasbo, Inc. Mr. Wyatt began by giving a brief overview of the project. He addressed each of the issues raised by staff and he informed the Commission that the plan will be modified to address the first four of staff's concerns prior to administrative approval. Regarding the fifth issue, regarding the timing of the developer's responsibility for the proposed roads, Mr. Wyatt did not believe it was the developer's responsibility to pay for the future extension of Warrior Drive and Parkins Mill Road. He believed it was inappropriate to expect the developer to build those segments of road, which are not currently on the County's road plan; however, he did believe it was appropriate for the developer to guarantee that right -oma way is available for the road when it is ready to be constructed. Mr. Wyatt said they have provided for the right-of- way area, within the generalized development plan and the proffer statement, in order to dedicate that right -of - Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 987 -13 - way to the County when it is needed. Commissioner Straub said that she could not locate the historic structures, Frederick Hall House or the Parkins Mill Battery, during a site visit of the property. Mr. Wyatt pointed out the Frederick Hall House on a display map; he explained that maintaining the 20 -foot strip of the existing woodlands on the ridge will be important for viewshed protection. Mr. Wyatt was not familiar with the Parkins Mill Battery. Chairman DeHaven called for public comments and the following person came forward to speak: Mr. Jim Giraytys, resident of Back Creek District, was concerned about the long-term implications of development on the County's infrastructure, air quality, and the ozone issue. He believed the County will have to face metropolitan organizational issues in the future. The Coni nission believed the issues had been adequately addressed by the applicant. No other areas of concern were raised. Upon motion made by Conunissioner Morris and seconded by Commissioner Unger, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Master Development Plan 401-03 of Canter Estates, Section V, submitted by Greenway Engineering, for 200 single-family detached urban lots. Substantial -in -Accord Review of the Proposed Fourth Middle School, as submitted by Frederick County Public Schools, for conformance to the County's Comprehensive Policy Plan. The proposed site is located along the Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South) corridor, close to the intersection of Papermill Road, in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, stated that he would present the next three items on the Planning Commission's agenda together, since they were all related. Director Lawrence said the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2232, requires that all publicly -funded projects be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; therefore, the proposed middle school is being presented to the Planning Commission and, subsequently to the Board of Supervisors, for review and determination of its conformance with the County's 2000 Comprehensive Policy Plan. He pointed out that the proposed 30 -acre school site is a couple hundred feet outside of the UDA; it is intended to serve the Senseny Road corridor and the Stephens City/Tasker Road corridor population centers. Director Lawrence explained the second issue, which was contingent on the Commission determining that the school was consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The second issue was a request by the School Board to utilize the public water and sewer system for the property. He said that rather than expanding the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), the School Board is seeking an extension of the existing services, which are in close proximity. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 988 -14 - Director Lawrence stated that the third issue deals with access to the subject property and the property owners' request in acquiring that access. He explained that the property owner will need to displace some mobile homes in order to construct a road to the property and he is seeking an Urban Development Area (UDA) expansion to accommodate the displaced homes. In summary, Director Lawrence stated that if the proposed school is in substantial accord, the School Board would then ask if the sewer line could be extended outside of the SWSA to the site, and finally, the UDA expansion request is to accommodate the displaced mobile home units. Director Lawrence concluded by introducing the Administrative Assistant to the Superin- tendent of the Frederick County Public Schools, Mr. Al Omdorff, and Mr. Mark Smith of Greenway Engineering, the design engineers for the project. Using a display map, Mr. Al Orndorff, Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent of Frederick County Public Schools, pointed out a concentration of students in the Eastern and the Southern portions of Frederick County within the UDA and a small arm of UDA that swings out, just missing the proposed school site. Mr. Orndorff stated that a dot placed at the proposed middle school would fall directly in between these two concentrations of students. He said there is a little over 11,000 students currently enrolled in the public school system and in the UDA area, where the proposed school is designated; there are 5,600 plus students, or about 52% of the total student population that lies within this area. Because of these statistics, Mr. Orndorff believed it was an excellent location for a future school site. In addition, he mentioned that the potential of a collector road would assist with student transportation. Commissioner Ours asked how much ofa role attendance zones play in determining aproposed school location. Mr. Orndorff replied that direction from the School Board, the Capital Improvements Plan, the location of student populations, and the transportation system all play a role in determining school locations. He added that the proposed school would take pressure off of all three existing middle schools. Commissioner Gochenour expressed concerns that the proposed school site was not located within the UDA; it was her opinion that the School Board was creating problems by locating schools outside of the UDA. Commissioner Gochenour also believed that all of the issues, such as the drought, adequate water sources, and compliance with air pollution, had not been addressed. Commissioner Straub was also ofthe opinion that locating schools outside ofthe UDA created problems, particularly sprawl. She said the site chosen for this school was an empty field with the potential for creating development all around it. She wanted to see schools located where people and neighborhoods already exist. She did not believe it was appropriate to send school students who live along Senseny Road to a school 12 miles away; she reasoned that if 70% of the students are in the Senseny Road area, then that is where the school should be located. In response, Mr. Orndorff explained that the School Board does not necessarily focus on a geographical line, but rather uses factors such as the location of the student population and where they need to be transported from. Mr. Orndorff stated that the important factor in the selection of this proposed school site was that it was located between two major student population pockets and it lent itself well to transporting students. He said these two factors figured greater than the fact that the UDA line was 200 yards further north. He added that between eight and 13 sites were considered and sites were removed from the list for various reasons, certainly cost and location. Mr. Orndorff said the School Board believed this was the best site, as far Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 989 -15 - as location, considering the density of the student population, busing costs, etc. Commissioner Gochenour commented that the Planning Commission should have had input on the list of sites the School Board was considering and a joint decision should have been made on the site chosen. Mr. Mark Smith came forward representing several parties, including the Shenandoah Mobile Park, which he and his wife owns, the residents of the Shenandoah Mobile Park, and as the co-owner of the property requested for the school site. Mr. Smith said the request by the owners and residents of the Shenandoah Mobile Park is for the expansion of the SWSA and the UDA to take care of the residents that will be displaced by the creation of the access road to the school. He explained that if approval of the expansion is given, he will come back with a rezoning request for the area to accommodate the mobile homes that will be displaced by the road connection. He assured the Commission that he would not request an increase in density; he said this will be a one-for-one exchange. Mr. Smith noted that the relocation area was chosen by him and his partners, the Russell brothers, Chris Russell and Darrell Russell, and was based on topography. Mr. Smith said that both his and his partners' wish is for designated areas to remain undeveloped and to remain in family ownership for themselves and their children. Mr. Smith pointed out the location of the Russell's home and where he is building his own home. He also pointed out an area where they would like to have some moderate growth, but nothing high intensity because of the close proximity to their homes. Chairman DeHaven pointed out that the goal ofthe Board of Supervisors would be to stipulate that the extension of sewer and water outside of the SWSA would be for this specific use only. Chairman DeHaven asked Mr. Smith for additional details on the access road and the direction the line would run, if the UDA and the SWSA were expanded for the relocations. Mr. Smith explained how the road and line would be run and his plans to use gravity feed and eliminate the existing pump station. Commissioner Ours asked Mr. Smith for his interpretation of moderate growth. Mr. Smith said that his and his partners' wish is that it will not be a subdivision or an intense industrial use. He said that if the school wanted to buy additional land, they would welcome that. He suggested something fairly moderate, maybe a recreational swim complex, light business, or light commercial uses. Commissioner Morris said that he was in support of the re-establishment of the mobile home pads in light of the need and the lack of affordable housing in Frederick County. Mr. Smith said that it was very important to both him and his wife to make sure the residents in the mobile homes have a place to live; he said the trailers will be relocated at his own cost. Mr. Smith said that he has an opportunity; he said that he was able to purchase into the Russell Farm; he was able to acquire the mobile home park; there's a fulfillment of a Comprehensive Plan road that helps traffic circulation; a sewer line is available a few hundred feet away to service the school site; natural gas is available; and water is available. Chairman DeHaven called for public comments and the following person came forward to speak: Mr. Samuel Lelunan, Back Creek District, stated that he hoped Mr. Al Orndorffand Dr. Dean do a better job of locating schools than in the past. He was concerned about the excessive amount of land that is being bought to accommodate a single school and the amount paid per acre; he spoke of the dollar amounts Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 990 spent grading roads and creating accesses; he was concerned that excess amounts of money were being spent on transporting students all over the County. Conunissioner Fisher believed the transportation issues had not been adequately addressed. He considered the number of students proposed to be transported on a road that VDOT has publicly said will be saturated in approximately four years. He pointed out that if areas already approved for development are considered, both residential and commercial, including Eastgate and the existing elementary school, the impacts on this road will be great. Commissioner Fisher was interested in knowing where the other sites were on the School Board's list that were considered. Other Commissioners believed certain factors drive the upgrade of roads and that building structures, such as schools, drive VDOT to make needed road improvements. Chairman DeHaven commented that consideration of the request before the Commission should not be focused on whether or not this was a good school site; he believed that decision was the School Board's decision to make and not the place of the Planning Commission. Considering all the concerns raised, the majority of Commissioners believed the proposed fourth middle school was substantially in -accord with Frederick County's Comprehensive Policy Plan. Upon motion made by Commissioner Ours and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, that by a majority vote, the recommendation of the Frederick County Planning Commission is that the proposed fourth middle school, as submitted by Frederick County Public Schools, is substantially in -accord with confonnance to Frederick County's Comprehensive Policy Plan. The proposed site is located along the Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South) corridor, close to the intersection of Papermill Road, in the Shawnee Magisterial District. The majority vote was as follows: YES (TO APPROVE): DeHaven, Kriz, Morris, Watt, Triplett, Unger, Ours, Light NO: Fisher, Oouchenour, Straub (Please Note: Commissioners Rosenberry and Thomas were absent from the meeting.) Request for Sewer and Water Services to extend beyond the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) to serve the proposed fourth middle school site. The proposed site is located along the Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South) corridor, close to its intersection with Papermill Road, in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Action - Reconunended Approval The discussion on this request was included under the previous item. Upon motion made by Commissioner Light and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 991 SIR BE IT RESOLVED, That by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the request to extend sewer and water services outside of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) with the condition that it is only to serve the proposed fourth middle school, as proposed by the Frederick County School Board. The proposed site is located along the Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South) corridor, close to its intersection with Papermill Road, in the Shawnee Magisterial District. The majority vote was as follows: VES (TO APPROVE): DeHaven, Kriz, Morris, Watt, Triplett, Unger, Ours, Light, Fisher, NO: Gouchenour, Straub (Please Note: Commissioners Rosenberry and Thomas were absent from the meeting.) Request to Expand the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area. (SWSA), submitted by Greenway Engineering, to incorporate approximately seven acres of property referred to as the Russell Farm. The property is identified by Property Identification Numbers 76-A-5 and 64-A-37, zoned RA (Rural Areas) District, in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval The discussion on this request was included under a previous item, the "Substantial In -Accord Review of the Proposed Fourth Middle School." Upon motion made by Commissioner Morris and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, That by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval ofthe request, by Greenway Engineering, to expand the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) to incorporate approximately seven acres of property, referred to as the Russell Far n, for the purposes of relocating existing residential units in the Shenandoah Mobile Home Park. The majority vote was as follows.- YES ollows: YES (TO APPROVE): DeHaven, Kriz, Morris, Watt, Triplett, Unger, Ours, Light NO: Gouchenour, Straub, Fisher (Please Note: Commissioners Rosenberry and Thomas were absent from the meeting.) Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 992 ADJOURNMENT unanimous vote. -18 - No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. by a Respectfully submitted, Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 15, 2003 Page 993 0 0 REZONING APPLICATION #02-03 WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER -VILEST CAMPUS Staff Report for the Planning Commission Meeting Prepared: January 22, 2003; Revised: March 5, 2003 Staff Contact: Christopher M. Mohn, AICP, Deputy Director This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report. As this application proceeds through the legislative review process, the method(s) of resolution or response offered by the applicant(s) concerning each issue will be stated in the text of this report. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 02/05/03 Tabled for 30 Days. 03/19/03 Pending Board of Supervisors: 04/09/03 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: Gamesboro 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 March 10, 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 Vlofthe 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 Authori : 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 1, dated 11125102, 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 10101102, located in Section V1 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 March 10, 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 Poligy Plan The 50.0540 acres ("Tract I") 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 ofthe 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 402-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 4 March 10, 2003 land 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. A. ISSUE: 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 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 individua. 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). RESOLUTION: The applicant has proposed the formation of an architectural review REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 5 March 10, 2003 committee (ARC) to evaluate and approve building design throughout the 102 -acre development pursuant to the generalized standards of the proffers and specific guidelines applicable through restrictive covenants. As stated in the revised proffer statement, Valley Health System will exercise control of the ARC and, therefore, maintain perpetual influence over the coordination and compatibility ofbuilding and site design, regardless of changes in property ownership. Staff considers these design proposals to be an effective means of achieving the corridor appearance objectives of the Round Hill Community Land Use Plan. In particular, the proffered establishment of an ARC controlled by Valley Health System provides a self- regulating system for the implementation of mutually beneficial standards for site and building design. The perpetual involvement of Valley Health System in this review process will promote long-term consistency and compatibility of design regardless of changes in a given parcel's use or ownership status. B. 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 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. RESOLUTION: 1'he applicant has proposed to limit freestanding signs along the Route 50 corridor to one (1) monument style sign located in the proximity of the main project entrance. No other signs would be permitted in the fifty (50) foot buffer proffered adjacent to the Route 50 right-of-way. The revised proffer statement further indicates that this sign shall be no greater than twenty (20) feet in height, which is less REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 6 March 10, 2003 than the thirty-five (35) feet allowed by ordinance. All wall -mounted and freestanding signage installed within the development will be subject to the sign requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and ARC approval. Although not comprehensive in applicability, the signage controls proposed by the applicant are consistent with the corridor appearance objectives of the Round Hill Community Land Use Plan. The proffered monument style entrance sign will be similar in design to that which is already in place at the entrance to the medical center's east campus, thereby, establishing continuity of design that will visually link the two campuses. C. 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 (406-96) 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). RESOLUTION: The applicant has proposed to increase the buffer along the Route 50 right-of-way from thirty-five (35) feet to fifty (50) feet in depth. The revised proffer statement prohibits parking, travelways, and commercial structures from encroaching within the buffer area. Moreover, the buffer area will accommodate a bicycle/pedestrian trail that will comprise part of the project's overall pedestrian circulation system and further serve as a segment of the planned bicycle facility network for Frederick County. The applicant has also prepared plans detailing the location and composition of proffered landscape design features. Such detail plans are proposed as components of the proffered Generalized Development Plan and will therefore be reflected in all subsequent development plans for the project. It is noted that the applicant has proposed the relocation of the open/landscaped focal link feature (#10) originally proffered with the DeGrange rezoning to the MS portion of the site. The new location of this feature is intended to maximize the value of this focal link by making it visible from not only the Route 50/Route 37 interchange, but also from the existing medical center campus. The additional detail provided by the applicant concerning the proffered landscape design features exceeds that which was originally proffered with the DeGrange rezoning. Moreover, the applicant has increased the size of the proffered landscapes' buffer adjacent to Route 50 from thirty-five (35) feet to fifty (50) feet. The provision of a landscaped buffer is recommended by the Round Hill Community Land Use Plan REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 7 March 10, 2003 as a principal means of enhancing corridor appearance. The enlargement of this feature will positively impact the visual and functional quality of the corridor by distancing parking and buildings from the right -of way while simultaneously establishing linear green space designed to support passive recreation activities. 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 would be used for cominercial uses that 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. Planning Staff Comment and Issues: A. 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. APPLICANT RESPONSE: The applicant is not willing to proffer the exclusion of any uses from the B2 portion of the site. Any use permitted in the B2 District would therefore be allowed on the site pursuant to applicable Zoning Ordinance requirements. 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" REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 8 March 10, 2003 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% ar, 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. 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: A. 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 Servic "C"(Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 7-5). As noted above, the Impact Statement REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 9 March 10, 2003 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. APPLICANT RESPONSE: It is noted that the traffic impact analysis (TIA) for this application includes traffic generated by the WWW, LC commercial project as background data. The WWW, LC project is a forthcoming rezoning application applicable to approximately seventy (70) acres located just west of the subject property. The inclusion of this background traffic in the TIA was encouraged by staff and VDOT to facilitate a comprehensive evaluation of the transportation impacts of the respective projects and to coordinate improvements to mitigate said impacts. The applicant is correct in their statement that the development proposed for the entire 102 -acre project will generate traffic equivalent to that originally projected for the 50 acres of the site subject to the DeGrange rezoning. However, the individual impact of this proposal on level of service conditions has not been quantified; the LOS "D" projected at the conclusion of Phase 1 development reflects the cumulative impact of this proj ect and the WWW, LC proposal on the surrounding transportation network. It is acknowledged that the level of service issue may effectively be continued for further evaluation during consideration of the WWW, L.C. rezoning application. Given that build -out conditions are projected to return to LOS "C," the anticipated status of the transportation system during Phase 1 constitutes an interim degradation of traffic conditions below the level of service desired by policy. Nevertheless, the joint TIA process has not revealed the scope of improvements necessary to ensure LOS "C" conditions at the conclusion of Phase 1 development. Staff maintains that such information would be valuable for future transportation planning along the Route 50 corridor, regardless of the applicant's relative willingness to provide the full array of required improvements. B. 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 REZ 402-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 10 March 10, 2003 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. RESOLUTION: To address the uncertainty of the referenced assumptions, the applicant has proposed a proffer that restricts the scope of project development should outlets such as western access to the VHS/Route 37 interchange remain unavailable. Specifically, the revised proffer proposes that the applicant provide annual traffic counts to VDOT and the Planning Department that will be reviewed and added to counts associated with development proposals that are pending site plan approval. At such time that this cumulative total is determined to reach 70% of the total average weekday volume projected for the project as a whole (equivalent to 14,000 TPD), new development will be indefinitely paused through the withholding of site plan approvals until an updated traffic impact analysis (TIA) is completed. The updated TIA will be conducted to assess the level of service on adjoining roads and the capacity of the transportation network to accommodate continued build -out of the project at acceptable levels of service. The applicant has proffered that development will not be resumed unless or until it is determined that existing infrastructure is adequate to support additional trips. The applicant has proposed a development threshold at which the status of & transportation network serving the project will be assessed to ensure its adequacy to support build -out of the project. Indeed, it has been acknowledged by staff, VDOT and the applicant that the Route 50 corridor could support approximately 70% of the total average daily volume projected for the development in the absence of western access to the VHS/Route 37 interchange. The proposed proffer provides a degree of assurance that development will not proceed beyond this critical traffic generation threshold should adequate transportation infrastructure fail to exist. C. 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 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. APPLICANT RESPONSE: The applicant recognizes that a direct connection between the campuses is necessary and has further indicated that such a link is ultimately planned. However, the applicant is not prepared to establish a definitive time frame or development threshold to trigger construction of the connection. D. ISSUE: At the request of staff, the applicant agreed to analyze the cu nulativs. 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 REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 11 March 10, 2003 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. RESOLUTiION: Staff acknowledges that the forthcoming WWW, LC application cross- references the transportation improvements proffered by the applicant. Such language is sufficient to ensure coordination of improvements. For the purposes of this application, inclusion of WWW, LC traffic in the TIA is arguably adequate to facilitate a comprehensive and integrated approach to impact mitigation on the Route 50 corridor. E. 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. RESOLUTION: The applicant has proposed a bicycle/pedestrian trail for inclusion within the landscaped buffer proffered adjacent to the Route 50 right-of-way. In addition to contributing to the project's internal circulation system, the provision of the trail segment along the parcel's frontage will establish an initial component of the bicycle facilities planned on Route 50. 7) Historic Resources Impact Analvsis 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. REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 12 March 10, 2003 8) 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 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). 9) Revised Proffer Statement, Dated March 4, 2003 A. 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 fc 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 of the first certificate of occupancy within the development, with the exception of the major collector road section. Moreover, the applicant will provide traffic counts for the project on an annual basis and conduct an updated traffic impact analysis (TIA) when the average weekday volume reaches 14,000 TPD. The applicant further agrees to indefinitely suspend development activity should the updated TIA reveal that existing transportation infrastructure is not adequate to support additional project build -out at acceptable levels of service. Planning Staff Comment: The revised transportation proffers quantify the traffic threshold at which evaluation of the transportation system will occur to assess the adequacy of existing infrastructure to support continued build -out. Should alternative traffic outlets such as western access to the VHS/Route 37 interchange remain unavailable, the revised proffer provides for the indefinite suspension of development activity until improvements necessary to ensure acceptable levels of service are provided. B. Landscape Design Features: The applicant has proffered landscape design features that include a fifty -foot (50') buffer along the Route 50 frontage of the site to include bicycle/pedestrian trail, a landscaped green area along the north side of the mat 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 REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 13 March 10, 2003 buffer along the western property line. The applicant has included details of these landscape design features with the proffered Generalized Development Plan. Planning Staff Comment: The revised proffers governing landscape design features expand upon those approved with the DeGrange rezoning, which are currently applicable to the B2 portion of the site. Moreover, the applicant's provision of design details with the proffered GDP clarifies the intended appearance of these features and demonstrates their collective capacity to further corridor design objectives. C. 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 (CMU), 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. The covenants and restrictions will be enforced through an architectural review committee (ARC) that will evaluate and approve building design throughout the 102 -acre development. Valley Health System will exercise control of the ARB and therefore maintain perpetual influence over the coordination and compatibility ofbuilding and site design, regardless of changes in property ownership. Planning Staff Comment: The ARC proffered by the applicant provides a mechanism capable of ensuring coordinated and compatible building and site design throughout the project. The long-term control of the ARC by Valley Health System is considered critical to the effectiveness of this design approach due to its established reputation for high quality building and campus design. The revised site development conditions proffered by the applicant provide ample assurance that ultimate building and site designs will be appropriate in the context of the Round Hill community and Route 50 corridor. D. 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 $5,000 to the Sheriff's 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: It is noted that the Fire Marshal does not perceive the sum proffered to the Round Hill Fire and Rescue Company to be adequate to relieve the net capital facilities impact to Fire and Rescue services, regardless of the positive net fiscal impact of the proposed development. REZ #02-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 14 March 10, 2003 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/Rout 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. SUMMARY OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AT 02/05/03 MEETING At the request of the applicant, the Planning Commission unanimously agreed to table consideration of this rezoning request for thirty (30) days. The tabling ofthe application was deemed appropriate to allow the applicant and staff an opportunity to resolve issues concerning transportation and corridor design identified in the staff report. SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES SINCE THE 02/05/03 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Pursuant to the direction of the Planning Commission, the applicant and staff met to discuss the outstanding issues identified in the staff report for this rezoning request. Following initial discussions, the applicant proceeded through a consultative process during which revisions to the proffer statemen, and Generalized Development Plan were developed. These revisions were ultimately submitted to stagy on March 3, 2003, with the intention of returning the application for Planning Commission review at its meeting on March 19, 2003. The revised proffer statement, dated March 4, 2003, and the proffered REZ 402-03, Winchester Medical Center Page 15 March 10, 2003 Generalized Development Plan are attached for your review. The revisions and/or responses provided by the applicant have been incorporated into the staff report via narratives entitled either Resolution or Applicant Response that follow each identified issue. These narratives also provide staff perspective regarding applicant proposals. These revised documents replace those included in the applicant's original package; all other information presented in the package remains unchanged. The applicant should be prepared to further clarify their responses to issues identified in this staff report and provide any additional information deemed necessary for evaluation of this request by the Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors. O-\Agendas\COMMENT'S\REZONING\Staff Report\2003\WMC West Campus.wpd ]REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Number 53-((A))-68 WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER "Fest Campus" Preliminary Matters Pursuant to Section 15.1 - 49 1. 1 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 # 02-03 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 5 of 5 and 6 of 6, 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) 2. 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) 3 _ 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) 4- Lanes . ;11 be added tc the VA Route 37 est ramps to allow dedicated right and left turn lanes (#4) as follows_ At U.S. Route 50NA Route 37 western signal, Southbound right turn - 200 feet with transition to provide full 2 lanes at intersection. (Revised 3/4/03) Page 1 of 6 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. 5. A traffic signal will be provided at U.S. Route 50 and VA Route 1317 intersection. (#5) 6. 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) 7. 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. The applicant shall limit entrance connections onto U_ S. Route 50 to two points as shown on GDP. The applicant shall prepare a traffic generation estimate for uses established by the Site Development Plan to be submitted for initial construction approval to the County. The combined trip generation (ADT) shall not exceed 14,000 TPD (average weekday volume) without further approval by the County_ The actual trip generation from the project shall be determined by the Winchester Medical Center Management annually, from data collected in May and with results due on July 1 of each year, and be available for review as individual site plans and subdivisions for future uses are submitted for review by VDOT and the County. The combined traffic impact form the 104 acre site is not to exceed 14,000 TPD (average weekday volume) when current actual counts and proposed counts are added for cumulative total. If the cumulative total for any site plan at WMC causes the total to exceed 14,000 TPD then it is agreed that the County may withhold site plan approval until satisfied that adequate and manageable levels of service will exist on state or internal site roadways. The SIC code system and the ITE shall be utilized for the subject projections. The applicant shall perform an updated TIA of the project intersection on U.S_ Route 50 and of the Route 50/Route 37 interchange when traffic generation from the 104 acre site reaches 14,000 TPD (average weekday volume). The County may review this 14,000 TPD cap upward, without modification of this proffer agreement, should results of the TIA show that additional loading is appropriate. 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. (Revised 3/4/03) Page 2 of 6 Rezoning Request Proffer Property Identification Number 53-A-68 Gainesboro Magisterial District 1 _ A fifty foot (50') landscaped buffer along the US Route 50 frontage portion of the site. (#8). Internal parking, travel ways and commercial structures shall not extend closer than 50' to front right of way line on U -S. Route 50. An illustrative detail is attached to this proffer for the purpose of establishing a standard of quality to be implemented upon final design. (See ID "N'). 2. A landscaped green area along the north side of the main entrance. (See ID "A") (#9) 3. A landscaped, open, green visual focal link and park located at around about (#10). An illustrative example (ID "B") is attached to this proffer for the purpose of establishing a standard of quality to be implemented upon final design. On Site Development The Winchester Medical Center shall establish an Architectural Review Committee (ARC) to review all planning within the 104 acre site to insure conformance with the standard of quality described in the Master Development Plan and Covenants. In general, project covenants shall establish a standard of quality for structures and site design as follows: 1. Materials utilized for the facades of the buildings shall include but not be limited to concrete masonry units (CMU) brick, architectural block, dryvit, or other simulated stucco (EFIS), real or simulated wood and/or glass. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. A single monument type sign shall be utilized near the project entrance to describe internal features. Sign height shall be limited to 20' within 50' landscape area along U.S_ Route 50. Individual signs to be allowed per ordinance requirements to announce individual uses. On building signage to be the preferred sign type for individual uses. No other signs shall be located within 50' buffer area. 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. (Revised 3/4/03) Page 3 of 6 Rezoning Request Proffer Property Identification Number 53-A-68 Gainesboro Magisterial District 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:f� Date: r STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The fore oing instrumt was acknowledged before me this 2003, by Q /{ G` , My commission expires Notary Public day of lr , (Re-Osed 3/4/03) Page 4 of 6 F== i.=�--- - �1 _ /I \\ Ca ` , \ .b�v� 1 .gyp 1 i ,j """` \ \ __r _ _ �.r_ lei C! ��Kr,\ ? \ AN- PROP-OSED fMA,1QR $)-- :NOLLE,,CTOR f IS _�� r r 4 f= cp WINCHESTER MEDICAI CENTEly PROPERTY B-2 Property gilbert w. Clifford &associates, inc. GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN SheetEaVkw--mlid Pbrnmv waiter ato ty J WEST CAMPUS" 5 O of 111E Pico % Wmchesta, Yuginio 22601 FREDERICK COUNTY, WRGINIA 6 / ,`ti_,'i ` 'FUTURE /f. •' ,\ EXTENSIONf=` 'ROUTE %50-' AT ROUTE -80'3 � _ vvi� `t� `�y+ r /�� N• ,�� � � � � ��/ �/� -_.. G'`x" _J ._, -- lel .' / - fir.. f� t r` ^X, F== i.=�--- - �1 _ /I \\ Ca ` , \ .b�v� 1 .gyp 1 i ,j """` \ \ __r _ _ �.r_ lei C! ��Kr,\ ? \ AN- PROP-OSED fMA,1QR $)-- :NOLLE,,CTOR f IS _�� r r 4 f= Revised 3/4/03 cp WINCHESTER MEDICAI CENTEly PROPERTY B-2 Property gilbert w. Clifford &associates, inc. GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN SheetEaVkw--mlid Pbrnmv waiter ato ty J WEST CAMPUS" 5 O of 111E Pico % Wmchesta, Yuginio 22601 FREDERICK COUNTY, WRGINIA 6 VOCE: (540) 667-2139 FA%: (540) 665-0493 EMAIL godrOmw-kc.00m Revised 3/4/03 Revised 3/4/03 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development LM E RM •1 -�< 7— TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Abbe S. Kennedy, Senior Planner RE: Discussion on WWW, L.C. SWSA Expansion Request DATE: March 7, 2003 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 Staff has received a request from G.W. Clifford and Associates, Inc. on behalf of WWW, L.C.. owners of approximately 71 acres of land, for an expansion to the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The property is located north and adjacent to Route 50 West, approximately 1,700 feet west of the Route 50/Route 37 interchange. The applicants have requested to expand the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) to include approximately 50 acres of the entire 71 -acre (WWW Tract) currently zoned RA (Rural Areas) District. Approximately 21 acres of the site are presently located within the SWSA. Attached to this memo is information that has been prepared by Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E. of G. W. Clifford and Associates, Inc. on behalf of WWW, L.C., property owners. An application has been filed by WWW, L.C. to rezone the site from RA (Rural Areas) to B2 (Business General) to develop a mix of office and retail land uses. At the request of staff, the applicant has agreed to defer consideration of the rezoning petition pending resolution of the SWSA issue. Comprehensive Policy Plan: The easternmost 21 acres of the site are located within the SWSA and the Phase 1 boundaries of the Round Hill Community Land Use Plan. The remaining 50 acres that are subject to this request are located outside of the SWSA and within the Phase 2 boundaries of the Round Hill Plan. Each of these phases is planned for Business/Office land uses. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-51) As adopted, the Round Hili Community Land Use Plan expressly limits the boundaries of the SWSA and the extension of commercial land use to Phase 1 of the study area and a small portion of Phase 2. The Round Hill Community Land Use Plan further stipulates that commercial development beyond these existing boundaries should be delayed pursuant to a determination that expansion of the SWSA is appropriate. The Plan states the following: 107 North Kent Street . Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 WWW, L.C. SWSA Expansion Request Page 2 March 7, 2003 "It should be noted that only Phase 1 and a small portion of Phase II is inside the current Sewer and Water Service Area_ It will ultimately be up to the Board of Supervisors to determine when it is appropriate to include other areas of the community within the Sewer and Water Service Area, a necessary first step to extending utilities. Development of any area would be dependent on the availability of appropriate infrastructure; therefore, the plan does not recommend rezoning land within the community for commercial development prior to the provision of central water and sewer." (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-47) Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) Meeting Summary: The CPPS reviewed this request during their February 10, 2003 meeting. The CPPS was generally in favor ofthe request, however additional information was deemed necessary prior to consideration by the Planning Commission. Specifically, assurances were desired that this SWSA expansion would facilitate adequate infrastructure capacity to enable future corridor growth and the ultimate extension of water and sewer to the Round Hill Community. Update since the February 10, 2003 CPPS Meeting: The applicant has prepared clarification documentation in response to the CPPS comments for the discussion. Mr. Maddox has advised staff that a representative from the Frederick County Sanitation Authority will be available to address design issues. Staff is seeking your thoughts on this SWSA expansion request, and will forward your thoughts to the Board for consideration. No action is required. If deemed appropriate by the Board of Supervisors, public hearings will be scheduled for the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. ASK/cih Attachments U \COMMITTEES\CPPS\WWWPC Discussion. memo gilhe t W. difford & associates, inc INCORP®RATED 1972 Engineers — Land Planners — Water Quality 30 January 2003 Mr. Chris Mohn Frederick County Planning 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: WWW, LC SWSA Expansion Route 5OW/Round Hili Dear Chris, Board of Directors: President: Thomas J. O'Toole, P.E. Vice Presidents: Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E. Earl R Sutherland, P.E. Ronald A. Mislowsky, P.E. David J. Saunders, P.E. Directors: William L. Wright Michael A. Hammer Thomas W. Price Please consider this letter a request for the Frederick County Planning Commission to adjust the SWSA boundary in the Round Hill Comprehensive Plan to include the site boundary of the WWW, LC site. I have attached an exhibit which summarizes this request. As you know, the WMC and WWW, LC are coordinating their rezoning requests in order to provide continuity in the extension of water and sewer services to this corridor. A presentation on the technical issues involved is -)ntained within the rezoning petitions and the FCSA comments. I am attaching this information for your use. Please also consider this letter as a formal request for you to hold advertising for the rezoning petition until we get a clear indication that expansion of the sewer and water service area will be granted. I understand this issue will be reviewed by the FCCPPS on February 10' and we will attend for this discussion. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely yours, gllbert w. cllfford & associates, Inc. C. E. Maddox, Jr., P.E', Vice President CEM/kf Enclosure JA N 3 1 L 00,i cc: Mr_ Ritchie Wilkins Mr. Doug Rosen 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200, Winchester, Virginia 22601 (540) 667-2139 Fax(540)665-0493 e-mail gvvcaram0)earihlink.nct Meniher,4naerican Consulting Engineers Council PROP, ADJUSTMENT TO SWSA E%NE Nkv !ANK . "PROP, SEWER LINE PROP, WATER LINE ;r m� PROP. SEWER & PUMP STATION WWW PROPERTY gilbert w. cliffordVL & associates, inc_ N.3 \-- SWSA ADJUSTMENT AREA Land Pbmcm water cry, � 117 E Ficad7y 5L lin, **a 22601 GA/N£SBORO A�AClSTERL4L D/57R/CT FREDERICK CpUNTY V/RG/N1A I I 1 olm. (540) 667-2139 FAK (540) 665-0493 NAL gwcaram@earthrmLne! ,f, —� _ -_ } af. ' ;x + of ]7 •��1' �� � ��„� � r a , _ ---.i., s. _ � ... i ;? s '0.x, •} •+ei"� } -'-�.fb - i- r^ ! �.15C ♦, �"4 t f�L • _'""^' - �' i � � tr*n ah ` R +,=, -` --'� r�� i i � iwyi,'1 r4 Kii t � i .� '4� �1A :�. ", gaYra7 aAdr r u ,,stru /_ *� F i� in t a 1, fi� ro , 44 :.,k '. �[ S- � c § $ �A•��C�.V'FR 1..: 1�„'�� �"�,' � ��d lttfir`� !}��` �� ��k �t4t' iltll �+�: '- "�..� a ice:, r'` i i ex Jtivx. �' .�+lrti� •.," e�. ` & x ` ih , t g i .l � , � ', : -�}' '{ � a t. _a',� � 1 3 .�•,. .'A. ,,, :��*" e '°oi'tie �.'¢4,�,. 4 t -.9 � �`: d�. � '�':6i_"' '� - '�'"r. � �.ary r ti �• � v 3 A� �.F� �' y�,,''�7+`"iP�' 'A ..._ � -1+` of , u F , � 1:. > �. &.+� ,.�.•'7IY Y i-�"`t�-,--s. �4 v a,ci`d Ti.r}� SkO'c+74d 1 i.t 1V;t�}} I _ �l "'�' F ,� .s z .r ssk s � � 'rc' � .�4. - 5;t � 1i�n a a�l'.. ,r.x•� .r,�, :,, �+ �' y %. 0.. �*x� � !E• '�d�+e h'y�. �T�tls rki x x n �S7- se •� 't` -^as. `�-i=,•nh. J';:� a• '�.'•".,�` "g - Vit. F , Q hRa �°I 2. �I_,.r+� t•`P-`•mii'�ra$i�trity�5 " - -'Tri w+ it fie. �' � .�x t ���K �Wy�'�• 'i:�� �,a y >;� ff�i'inVx,' ���. �h :ta a i� ,,thy s�p x s,T l n L.t� t .-,� x•'V.•o sgrv�! z'rr �^ .m' ti��yA i s.Y, xt"Y es.�'' `', +, ,�. .'c r`{ .Fil ". X11 >,-g•� -., . � ��� � h$t se r '�r tom- .��ii""�. aG � '' x` 3 ::�ffiar+.S. _ Yac ji.r.� \l,'� tel. �.. yy?4 ... � - li� � Y e L - ,- p •; ��p{�p t `'yx. a ea- v - -.r+ -� �j �, _r., rO11be �stailbi j, d'"'.�'. •�...t..w_.a :� �` - •'-� -e4'd. '� '+'i" � � ,p� •��,'v *' ,< e ¢'�Z' k 'x"'�� �r ��y. � � `' �1 7 `it' -•bks -_ .ayG�4J .•"� -'� ��.w e,F.�+ '.i i k"�£,'s F , - - -07,2JC'w y, .r- 7 fvx- l�..:� .P±.'�..,�.,�u�-�.....��. �������'Saaa .�- ..a `_it�'.•..I m':,'�.: a•ss '�'..3.Ca�,s .�.:�.j�.; tC'"'F.�3� � `,`� :.�:vi y r `F AL- A. ti LOCATION MAP O 57DNEWALL MAG1S7ER1AL V=ICT- FRE17ER11 ds -r vqqq�Ljj.. px,*;r� • S kr • .� � 2 i�� t, r� k y .�.� li 3i�+ '} �� _�. ih � r T �' "`w ��""�•i�d �T�ki _ ..-' msr�` - r .u4k'.� r �-t � I � i .: t ti..�tf4' A z i r'r ION ly ����.� - �!"-'`-•'-�,� .'iii. ,.+ :' :�'=1�.:..-�� - —� F �x ailhert W. Clifford& associates, inc. Engineers Land Planners Water Quality 117 E Poly SL 'yid tPx- **ia 22601 VOICE (54 COUNTY �/RG/Nd4 0) 667-2139 FAI (540) 665--M3 Figure 1 I B ; r r Rt. .sj ti WWY4i PROP Lf -RD �. gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. CONCEPJ PLAN �;, seers Land Mamary Water OuaW p 117 E. Ficadll St. Vwhesler, Virginio 22601 GAINESBORO A/AC/S7£R/AL OlS7R/Cr FREDER/CK COUMY U/RG/N/A VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX (540) 665-0493 Figure 3 -14 www PROPERTY gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. rn tocction in County t \O and 117 E Pcm* SL W -hinter, WOO 22601 GAINESBORO U461STERW DISTRICT EREEDERICK COUNTY, 14RGIAIIA VDU_. (540) 667-2139 FAX: (54o) %5-0493 ELS g2mr k Figure 4 Reaonina Comments Frederick County Sanitation Authority Mail to: Frederick Co. Sanitation Authority Attn: Engineer P.O. Box 1877 Winchester, VA 22604 (540) 868-1061 WWW L. Hand deliver to: Frederick Co. Sanitation Authority Attn- Engineer 315 Tasker Road Stephens City, VA A as.asses the `Sa tats 3r:Authar ty nth =their review Attae _ rap r appi e�tr� fora,; 1Oc13t36 fi , '_proft s s 'eanen z st Sys ss a;i �a -----other ertrtneht ..: ., 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: 1700' west of Route 37, just north and adjacent to U.S. Route 50 Current Zoning: RA Zoning Requested: B-2 Acreage: 67.0960 RA B-2 3.4640 RA B-2 0.3465 Sanitation Authority Comments See Page 2 (attached). Sanitation Authority Signature &Date. Notice to Sanitation Autho Tease Return This Form to the applicant 14 Page 2 RezoninZ Comments WWW L..C. The western part of this site is outside the SWSA. The hydraulic grade line of the Authority's water system is not sufficient to provide adequate pressure to this part of the site. The consultant has proposed a water booster station to overcome this problem. However, no water storage is proposed. Provisions of reliable and continuous water service cannot be accomplished economically without storage. If the SWSA is to be expanded for this site, consideration should be given as to any other land in this vicinity that will be included in the SWSA. This will enable proper sizing of a water storage tank. Wastewater from this area will be pumped to the existing gravity sewer lines along U. S. Route 522 near Fox Drive. These lines have limited capacity available for this area and the expansion of the SWSA needs to include an evaluation of the impact on this capacity. Frederick County, Virginia IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT AND REZON-MG APPLICATION MATERULS FOR REZONING REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF TEE WvvW L.e. PROPERTY Gainesboro -Magisterial Dia d` tn October, 2002 Prepared by Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 117 E_ Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phorne- 540-667-2131 Fax -540-665-09493 E-mail: gwcaram@eardAj]a _net L. C. E. Sewage Conveyance and Water Supply ImpactAnalysis Statement In order to provide service to this site a regional pump station and force main system need to be implemented under FCSA policies and procedures. Also a water main extension from north to south is required. The concept of this system was approved during the deGrange rezoning off site easement allowing this extension we've acquired by the FCSA during the western transmission line project extended south along VA Route 37 from the Stonewall Industrial Park- The ark The water main extension will be a from a 20" main intended to be a link in the west transmission loop shown in the master water plan of FCSA This main coupled with the 4 million gallon northwest tank facility will provide adequate water quantity for commercial development of the WWW site. Site elevations .will create low pressure zones which are unsatisfactory for commercial water service. In order to provide pressure for daily usage and fire delivery, a booster pump. system will be required as shown in. Figure 12. A gravity sewer main extension will be required through the Winchester Medical Center site as shown. The anticipated water demand and sewer flow allocation for the WWW and WMC sites are shown on the attached table. The system proposed is acceptable and manageable in providing sanitary sewer and water service to the proposed commercially rezoned site. WWW L. C. VVVVVV L.C. Rezoning Nater UsefWastewater Flow Summary Frederick County, Virginia Impact Analysis. Statement Land Use Amount Quantity Unit Unit Value (GPI) Total Dfice park 35 Acres 1000 g/aLue 35,000 Discot= Superstore 135,000 SF 0.1 g/SF I3,500 Shopping Center 150,000 _ SF 0.2 g/SF 30,000 is 10,000 SF 0.2 gISF 2,000 Tota'.- 90,500 --Pd NW STANK 9eh� CGNNECTIDN � PROP. WATER SYSTEM' ��%'+; / WITH FCSA /� SYSTEM AT SUNNYSIDE v ! '' BOOSTER PUMP STATION S PR❑, GRAVITY SEWER - PROP, SEWER SYSTEM OP, WATE SERVICE REGIONAL SEWAGE PUMP STATION 1ww PROPERTY 1� \ gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. V J 0 SEWER & WATER PLANT avkmem LandPbnnm W G4/NESBORD WGISTFRAL DISTRICT fRQLR/C/( COUNTYI//RG/N14 bINC -(50)97-21-M FAX: (590) 665--09.3 Mf U q..ml.&,rn,`.�t Figure 12