The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 11-20-02 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY I'LANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia NOVEMBER 20, 2002 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) Committee Reports ................................................. (no tab) 2) Citizen Comments .................................................. (no tab) PUBLIC HEARING 3) Conditional Use Permit #14-02 of Barbara and Casey Ray for a Day Care Facility. The property is located at 1501 Jordan Springs Road and is identified with Property Identification Number 56-3-2-10 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. (Ms. Ragsdale)....................................................... (A) 4) Rezoning #08-02 of Bowman/Shoemaker (tabled at the 9/4/02 meeting), submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 10.09 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to B2 (Business General) District. This property is located south on Fairfax Pike (Rt. 277), approximately 800 feet east of the intersection of Rt. 277 and Double Church Road (Rt. 641), and is identified with Property Identification Number 86-A-81 in the 0 _gpon Magisterial District. (Mr. Camp) ................................... .... ................ (B) 5) Rezoning #10-02 of The Village at Harvest Ridge (tabled at the 9/18/02 meeting), submitted by G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. to rezone 16.92 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) District. This property is located south and adjacent to Route 622 (Cedar Creek Grade) bordering the City/County line, and is identified with Property Identification Numbers 63-A-2. An adjoining 9.82 -acre tract zoned RP and identified with Property Identification Number 63-A-3, is submitted for proffer amendments to the residential density. The combined tracts, totaling 26.74 acres, are in the Shawnee Magisterial District. ire (Ms. Kennedy) ....................................................... (C') 6) Request to Expand the Urban Development Area (UDA), submitted by Christopher Consultants, LTD, to incorporate approximately 26 acres of a132 -acre parcel known as the "Racey Tract." This tract is identified with Property Identification Number 85-A-140, zoned RA (Rural Areas) District, and is located southwest of the Woodside Estates subdivision in the Opequon Magisterial District. Approximately 106 acres of the tract are presently located within the UDA. (Mr. Lawrence) ....................................................... (D) PUBLIC MEETING 7) Request of Foxe Towne Plaza, submitted by G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc., for a waiver to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 144, Subdivision Ordinance, § 144-24(C), which would enable access to proposed commercial lots via private easement, in lieu of direct access from a public roadway. The site is located southeast of the intersection of North Frederick Pike (Route 522 North) and Route 37, and to the west of Fox Drive (Route 739). The property is identified with Property Identification Number 42-A-195 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. (Mr. Mohn)........................................................... (E) 8) Other CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #14-02 BARBARA AND CASEY RAY Staff Deport for Planning Commission Discussion Prepared: November 4, 2002 Staff Contact: Rebecca Ragsdale, Planner I This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this planning matter. Planning Commission: Board of Supervisors: Reviewed Action 11/20/02 Pending 12/11/02 Pending LOCATION: This property is located at 1501 Jordan Springs Road. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 56-3-2-10 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RP (Residential Performance) District; Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RP (Residential Performance) and -RA -- - (Rural Areas) Districts; Land Use: Residential PROPOSED USE: Day Care Facility (Licensed Family Day Home) REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The application for a conditional use permit for this property appears to have little measurable impact on Route 664, the VDOT facility which would provide access to the property. Existing entrance is adequate for proposed use. However, should use ever expand in the future, the entrance may have to be upgraded to VDOT minimum standards. Insinections Department: No comment or change of use required if licensed as Family Day Home by the state. Section 310.1 of The Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code. CUP #14-02, Barbara and Casey Ray Page 2 November 7, 2002 Fire Marshal: Recommend smoke detectors and portable fire extinguishers. Dry hydrant located within 1,000 feet. Security of hot tub may be an issue. Fire evacuation should not inhibit emergency vehicles from accessing driveway. Plan approval is recommended. Health Department: See attached letter dated 10/15/0.2 from Doug Dailey and Steve Lee. Planning and Zoning: Day care facilities are permitted in the RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District with an approved Conditional Use Permit. A day care facility is defined by the Zoning Ordinance as a facility in which more than five children, not including those children related to the people who maintain the facility, are received for care, protection, and guidance during only part of the 24-hour day. The proposed day care facility would be conducted within the principal structure on the two - acre property. The applicant does not propose to have employees and would care for no more than 12 children. There were no disapproving agency review comments. The applicant is in the process of obtaining a license with Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Social Services as a Family Day Home. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 11-20-02 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. Should the Planning Commission determine that this request is appropriate, staff would suggest the following conditions: The applicant shall satisfy the licensing requirements of the Virginia Department of Social Services and the County of Frederick. 2. The number of non-resident children allowed at this day care facility shall total no more than twelve (12). Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and should not exceed four (4) square feet in size. 4. All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. 5. Any expansion or change of use will require a new Conditional Use Permit (CUP). 0:\Agendas\COMMENTS\CUP's\2002\Barbara & Casey Ray.wpd 56 32 9 COMBS 55A 41 $ �pERSON 41 8 �pERSON `t 55A 5 14 55A 5 2 10 NEFF 55A 5 2 11 CARPER 55LAUCK (" 56 32 7 PULLEN RP 56 32 10 RAY RP 56 32 11 SHENANDOAH UNIVERSITY j RP 'Qa 56 32 6 FISHEL RP 56 32 5 VAUGHAN RP � f OPEQUON ESI 'I CUP# 14-02 Location Map: Barbara & Casey Ray IN: 56-3-2-10 N w e s 0 70 140 210 F. Oct. 25, 2002 "-Zll� %� t� R N 56 32 9 COMBS 55A 41 $ �pERSON 41 8 �pERSON `t 55A 5 14 55A 5 2 10 NEFF 55A 5 2 11 CARPER 55LAUCK (" 56 32 7 PULLEN RP 56 32 10 RAY RP 56 32 11 SHENANDOAH UNIVERSITY j RP 'Qa 56 32 6 FISHEL RP 56 32 5 VAUGHAN RP � f OPEQUON ESI 'I CUP# 14-02 Location Map: Barbara & Casey Ray IN: 56-3-2-10 N w e s 0 70 140 210 F. Oct. 25, 2002 "-Zll� %� 4�GK�_cOG Submittal Deadline P/C Meeting BOS Meeting APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA .101 5k-'� /X:/l-.� 1. Applicant (The applicant if the ,:/— owner other) NAME: c -r ADDRESS: I` I a,,aiCz ('1 r I V'lrf'aC-i"'d — - dk tI Y� y L` L L TELEPHONE 2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties in interest of the property: 3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and include the route number of your road or street) '► _ l cV k � � 'I ' A � � <<�a � � T, At - JA JIU ( ((,('(`'{ `(_,� W (previous owner) in deed} no . ,�'� �� 4� , as recorded in the records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, County of Frederick. Property Identificati Magisterial District Current Zoning .;t-�-i-'rh (,It 7. Adjoining Property: USE North East t u C-AOr 1«��. r��,`� C � � v :.� 1t� '�)`� I� . 1 C;Z� k:�� 'r� `_D LCGnL4 c 4. The property has a road frontage of T feet and a depth of feet and consists of `. I acres. _1 --(Please be exact) - ) 5. The property is owned by'"ty')(1'^�` �t �-( (i as r1 t:�7t evidenced by deed from �L i �1 c'►, i ; c�� i��;.-� �t_1 �, i +.° �i� r -girded W (previous owner) in deed} no . ,�'� �� 4� , as recorded in the records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, County of Frederick. Property Identificati Magisterial District Current Zoning .;t-�-i-'rh (,It 7. Adjoining Property: ZONING j# -T-1 USE North East South West ZONING j# -T-1 S. The type of use proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept. before completing) { 9. It is proposed,//that the following buildings will be constructed: kl 10. The following are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to both sides and rear and in front of (across sL'reet from) the property where the requested use will be conducted. (Continue on back if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this application: NAME L �`ll=, , ADDRESS - , PROPERTY ID# NAME ADDRESS PROPERTY ID# NAME AdDRESS PROPERTY ID# (s, ir'",t` NAME �.;;� �'., �.. _ C�. �1 ` r ADDRESS C 1 cIl 1 �� 'l.ft' ,I CL'lC�, - r- PROPERTY ID#_� NAME ' ADDRESSi��:�,�1��(0— IC � . t) PROPERTY ID# t. �. ,t1 ADDRESS ILVO r r � �., il' , , NAME �:�;�{�,.� L,�'�{""��'� � `� PROPERTY ID# L' _ NAME PROPERTY ID# NAME PROPERTY ID# ADDRESS ADDRESS 12. Additional comments, if any: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the governing body of Frederick County, Virginia to allow the use described in this application. I understand that the sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven (7) days prior to the first public hearing and maintained so as to be visible until after the Board of Supervisors' public hearing. Your application for a Conditional Use Permit authorizes any member of the Frederick County Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors or Planning and Development Department to inspect your property where the proposed use will be conducted. Signature of Applicant �_ �i'a e -/ :i -� •��:1 rr"" 7 Signature of Owner j�Y;1 I }'Y--�; E: t , .( i 1,4e,0 A . Owners' Mailing Address y- ^�, Owners' Telephone No. TO BE COMPLETED BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: USE CODE: RENEWAL DATE: fMaq� _mas -IS TO CnTI71 MAT Cil CL -.'20, 1595 I ?C%DE X1 A.CCMUM SUAVCT 07 TM F%MS= S2=1 HZ1=3 AND 2HAX Tl= ARZ 90 siS"''*�'..'4T5 VIS73LF CR T33 G mml Tam mlOSz SHOWN Exam. THIS LOT DOES NOT F..ALL IN A FLOOD HAZARD zc3. 6K 8 4 $ PG 0 3 0 1 RECO,L7 PLAT IS I Z=RDED IN DF.ID SOCK 473 AT PAGE 21. LOT 6 S 0803$'51"E 262,28' YM At Pilts°E" LOT 10 �'um 2.01 ACRES r4�,o sulzv�°� ON ern n ❑ m w r O n 0 o p C3 I STOR � J ®NCX o/ M !SOT In irh " 35' Nil. 630.!9' TO K f27759.87' ar�ss0 ACO9.98' N 09052'06'W 172.00' r JORDAN SPRINGS LOT 10 BLOCK A SECTION II ROAD OPEOUON ESTATES STONEVFLL DISTRICT �--z� FISF(�L / LE3A��TER FREDERICK COUNTY. VIRGINIA . --- -- -- -- _ -_ HSCALE: 60' OUSE LOCATION SURVEY VATI OCT. 2O° 1995 Dwo. Sys STEFURSTENAU SURVEYING PHENS CITY, VIRGINIA 22653 i. ru�uNu fpEDEPAX ppiyfTT. SCT. w� �M e��,� TSE M.p�d S.L541w/�/lbu-10-.i�.w�++.ok CIES Y Lord Fairla, x EnAro enta Health District 107 N. Kent St. ' P. O. lox 2056 Winchester, Virginia 22604 (540) 722-3480 FAX (540) 722-3479 Counties of.• Clarke, Frederick, Page, Shenandoah, Warren, and City of Winchester October 15, 2002 Barbara and Casey Ray 1501 Jordan Springs Road Stephenson, VA 22656 Re: Conditional Use Permit Comments; proposed family day home center Tax Map # 56-3-2-10; Lot 10, Opequon Estates Dear Mr. and Mrs. Ray: A request for comments for your proposal to license and operate a family day home center for less than twelve (12) children has been received at this office. The distribution box (for the sewage disposal system serving the property) has been uncovered and repaired. This office has no objection to the proposal as long as occupancy is limited to four full-time residents and the proposed children for day care. Also, please be advised that a permit to operate the day care may be required from the Department of Social Services in Verona, VA. Please contact this office with any questions at (540) 722-3480. Sincerely, Doug Dailey, Steve Lee, EHSS Environmental Health Supervisor • C� • REZONING APPLICATION #08-02 BOWMAN/SHOEMAKER PROPERTIES Staff Report for the Planning Commission Meeting Prepared: November 6, 2002 Staff Contact: Jeremy F. Camp, Planner II 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. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 09/04/02 Tabled 11/20/02 Pending Board of Supervisors: 12/11/02 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 10.09 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to B2 (Business General). LOCATION: This property is located south of Fairfax Pike (Rt. 277), approximately 800 feet east of the intersection of Rt. 277 and Double Church Road (Rt. 641). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 86-A-81 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) Present Use: Single Family Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: Zoned Ml (Industrial, Light) District Zoned RP (Residential Performance) District South: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District East: Zoned B2 (Business, General) District West: Zoned M2 (Industrial, General) District Zoned B2 (Business, General) District Use: Trucking Use: Single Family Residential R. Tnwnlhnii;gec Use: Single Family Residential & Commercial Use: Undeveloped Use: Office & Commercial Use: Office & Commercial R EZ #08-02, Bowman/Shoemaker Properties Page 2 November 8, 2002 PROPOSED USE: Office Uses REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: VDOT is satisfied that the revised transportation proffers in the Bowman/Shoemaker Rezoning application dated October 14, 2002, address transportation concerns associated with this request (see attached VDOT letter dated October 18, 2002). Fire Marshal: Fire and rescue apparatus access must be maintained at all times. "Fire Lane No Parking" signs required at fire hydrants, and normal and emergency access points. Fire hydrants are required to be with 300 feet of all points of any commercial building. Hydrants shall be placed within three feet of the curb line. Plan approval recommended. Stephens City Fire & Rescue: Based on the changes made to the Impact on Development, specifically to Stephens City Fire and Rescue, we do not have any problems with the rezoning of the aforementioned property. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. County Engineer: We offer no comments at this time. Sanitation Authority: No Comment. Frederick -Winchester Service Authority: No comments; no concerns. Historic Resources Advisory Board: Upon review of this rezoning, it appears the proposal does not significantly impact historic properties and it is not necessary to schedule a formal review ofthe proposal by the HR -AR-.-- As you -have -indicated- in your impact statement, accordingtothe-Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the property nor are there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It can also be noted that the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identify any core battlefields that this proposed rezoning would directly impact. Thank you for the chance to comment on this application. County AttorneX: Appear to be in proper form. Health Department: Health Department has no objection to the request if the following items are addressed: 1. In Phase 1, no more than six people (210 gpd water use) to occupy facility. 2. In Phase 2, all facilities must be serviced by municipal water and sewer. REZ #08-02, Bowman/Shoemaker Properties Page 3 November 8, 2002 Planning &_ Zoning_ 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephens City Quadrangle) depicts the zoning for the property which comprises the proposed rezoning as A-2 (Agricultural General). On February 14, 1990 the A-2 and A-1 (Agricultural Limited) Zoning Districts were consolidated to create the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. The current zoning of the property is RA. 2) Location The parcel which comprise the proposed rezoning is located on the south side of Fairfax Pike (Route 277). It is approximately 800 feet to the east of the road intersection of Fairfax Pike and Double Church Road. According to the Frederick County Eastern Road Plan, found in the Comprehensive Policy Plan, Fairfax Pike is classified as a minor arterial road. Double Church Road is classified as a major collector road. The property is surrounded by a mixture of land uses. Commercial and industrial properties are located to the east and west; residential and agricultural properties are located to the south; residential properties are located to the north; and industrial uses are located to the north and west. 3) Comprehensive Policy Plan The proposal to rezone the subject property to commercial is consistent with some of the objectives for commercial development found in the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan. For instance, the property is located along a minor arterial roadway; is adjacent to other -- properties zoned commercial; and is accessible to numerous citizens. -Nb small area land use plans exist in the area of the subject property. The property is not located within the Urban Development Area (UDA) or the Sewer & Water Service Area (SWSA). The portion of Fairfax Pike (Route 277) from I-81 to White Oak Road (Route 636) is a road improvement project identified in the Eastern Road Plan, found in the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan. This road improvement project is also on the Frederick County Primary Road Improvement Plan. 4) Site Suitability No flood plains, lakes or ponds, wetlands, sinkholes, natural stormwater retention areas, steep slopes, or woodlands have been identified on the parcel of this rezoning application. The property is within the Stephens Run Area Watershed, as identified in the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan. The Frederick County Soil Survey indicates that all of the soil on the subject parcel is 2-7% REZ 408-02, Bowman/Shoemaker Properties Page 4 November 8, 2002 Blairton silt loam (3B). This soil is identified as prime agricultural farmland in the Frederick County Soil Survey. Only minor construction concerns are generally associated with this type of soil. These concerns include a seasonal high water table, depth to bedrock, and potential frost action. The permeability of Blairton silt loam is generally moderately slow. The site exists within the Martinsburg shale geologic area of the County, which is similar to most area of urban development in the County. 5) Intended Use The applicant proposes the establishment of office uses. The submitted proffer statement offers to limit the total building structures to 100,000 square feet. The first Phase of development is proposed to have up to 5,000 square feet of building structures, and will only utilize the existing structure on the property. The second Phase of development would account for the remaining square footage; however, would only occur if the property is given the authority to have public sanitary services. 6.) Potential Impacts a) Transportation Impact Analysis Statement Information provided within the applicant's Impact Analysis Statement advises that traffic generation from the 10.09 acres would produce 1,101 VPD on the existing road system, as calculated utilizing The Institute of Transportation of Engineers Trip Generation Report, 6" Edition, based on office uses on a weekday at build -out. The Impact Analysis Statement breaks this projection down between the two proposed Phases of development. -Phase _I_would generate 55 VPD. Phase II would generate 1,046 VPD. The Impact Analysis Statement indicates that the current traffic volume along Fairfax Pike (Route 277) is 11,000 VPD. Planing Staff Comment The 2000 Virginia Department of Transportation Daily Traffic Volumes Jurisdiction Report 34 indicates that the Annual Average Daily Traffic for Fairfax Pike (Route 277) is 11,000 vehicle trips. The Impact Analysis Statement indicates that the proposed development would increase the existing traffic along Fairfax Pike (Route 277) by 1,101 vehicles per day. This translates into a 10% increase in traffic along Fairfax Pike. The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has reviewed and approved the applicant's rezoning application and proffer statement. VDOT's letter dated August 2, 2002 acknowledges that the proposed proffer statement addresses transportation concerns. This letter also recognizes the need for a future left turn lane and taper to access the site if build -out occurs before Fairfax Pike (Route 277). REZ #08-02, Bowman/Shoemaker Properties Page 5 November 8, 2002 The Traffic Impact Analysis dated June 24, 2002, provides an accurate depiction of the current traffic situation along Fairfax Pike (Route 277). It also provides information regarding the projected impacts to this existing roadway. The proffer statement proposed by the applicant details numerous transportation related conditions that would be binding if the property is rezoned. b) Historic Resources Impact Analysis Statement Information provided within the applicant's Impact Analysis Statement identifies several historic structures within the proximity of the subject property. It further advises that none of these structures were deemed to be historically significant by the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey Report. The Impact Analysis Statement also indicates that there are no possible historic districts located in or within the property, based on the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan. C) Water and Sewer Impact Analysis Statement The Impact Analysis Statement provided by the applicant for this rezoning provides the projected impact which the proposed rezoning would have on sanitary sewer services and water supply systems. A total of 20,000 Gallons Per Day (GPD) is projected. The Impact Analysis Statement utilized the Land Development Handbook, Dewberry & Davis, 1996, page 461 in arriving at this calculation. Planning- Staff Comment The property considered for rezoning is not located within the Sewer & Water Service Area (SWSA) or the Urban Development Area (UDA). The applicant has made an attempt to address this concern by proffering no development beyond the existing structure until the site is given the authority to use public sanitary services. The Health Department has indicated that a new health permit is necessary for the change of use of the existing structure into office uses. The Board recently heard a request to expand the SWSA to encompass the subject property. The Board decided that a comprehensive study of the entire area was warranted before making a decision on the request. Presently this study, is one of the tasks schedule for the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS). 7) Proffer Statement The applicant has submitted a proffer statement which has been signed by the property owner, notarized, and reviewed by the County Attorney's office. The following is a summary of the REZ 908-02, Bowman/Shoemaker Properties Page 6 November 8, 2002 conditions voluntarily proffered by the applicant: Proffer A - The property would only be used for offices with no more than 100,000 square feet of building structures. The first Phase of development will be to convert the existing structure into an office building with no more than 5,000 square feet. The remaining land will not be developed to office use until the property is authorized to have public sewer service. Proffer B - Right-of-way is offered to be granted to VDOT along Fairfax Pike (Route 277) to accommodate future road improvements and bicycle facilities; the number of entrances off of Fairfax Pike (Route 277) is restricted; and a signalization agreement will be enter into with VDOT for a traffic signal prior to approval of the first site plan for Phase II. The applicant also proffers to provide a 60 foot right-of-way and road through the subject property to be potentially uses as a state road in the future. Planning Staff Comment Staff suggests that the proposed development have no more than two entrances off of Fairfax Pike. The wording used by the applicant in the Impact Analysis Statement and Proffer B seems to be give conflicting information regarding the number of proposed entrances. Proffer C - A lighting plan would be provided for each site plan in Phase II. Planning Staff Comment - Staff would note that the proffer does not address a Phase ILighting Plan. Proffer D - All parking would be setback from Fairfax Pike (Route 277) by at least 20 feet. A three foot high berm would be provided in this setback area , which would be planted with evergreen shrubs. Proffer E - All future business signs would be limited to 100 square feet, be of monument sign style, and not exceed 15 feet in height. Proffer F - A monetary payment of $ 2,500 would be paid to the Frederick County Treasurer for Fire & Rescue services. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 09/04/02 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The 10.09 acres proposed to be rezoned to commercial property is not located within the county's Urban REZ 408-02, Bowman/Shoemaker Properties Page 7 November 8, 2002 Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Other than this concern regarding the UDA and SWSA, the rezoning application appears to be consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan's goals for commercial development. The subject property is located along a major roadway; is within convenient access to residential uses; and is near other commercial properties. The applicant has submitted a proffer statement in an attempt to mitigate the impacts associated with this commercial rezoning request. The proffer statement includes the voluntary restriction of all development for Phase II until the property is given the authority to access public sanitary services. The proffer statement also addresses many other concerns regarding the proposed rezoning petition. Staff believes that the applicant should be prepared to address the following issues to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission prior to a recommendation being forwarded to the Board of Supervisors: The property is not within the UDA or the SWSA. Existing septic system capacity for Phase I and the evaluation of the applicant's response to the property not being located within the UDA or SWSA should be evaluated. The number of proposed entrances off of Fairfax Pike should be clarified. To minimize the potential traffic impacts, staff supports that the property be limited to no more than two entrances. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY & ACTION OF 9/04/02 MEETING On September 9, 2002, the Frederick County Planning Commission tabled Rezoning Application 408-02 so the applicant might consider the traffic impacts that the proposed development would have on Fairfax -Pike-(Route-277). In particular, -the Planning Commission was -concerned about what would happen if Phase II were built prior to the anticipated improvements to Fairfax Pike. Some Planning Commissioners believed that Fairfax Pike could not support a 100,000 square foot office building until it is improved to a four lane road. There were no citizen comments. (Note: Commissioner Triplett was absent from the meeting.) UPDATE SINCE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON 9/04/02 A revised application, impact analysis statement and proffer statement were submitted on October 25, 2002 by the applicant. In addition, revised agency review comments were provided from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), the Health Department, the Fire Marshal, and the County Attorney. A summary of the changes to the application, impact analysis statement, and proffer statement REZ #08-02, Bowman/Shoemaker Properties Page 8 November 8, 2002 are noted below: Revised Application (Dated 10/25/02) Phase II is now proposed for office or commercial uses. The original application proposed only office uses. Revised Impact Analysis Statement (Dated 10/14/02) The impact analysis statement was revised to calculate the traffic impact if Phase Il were developed as a shopping center. In this worse case traffic scenario, traffic along Fairfax Pike (Route 277) would increase by 4,802 VPD. This calculates to a 40% overall increase in traffic to Fairfax Pike. Phase I accounts for only .05% of this increase. A 10% overall increase in traffic to Fairfax Pike was proposed in the original application when only office uses were proposed for Phase II. Revised Proffer Statement (Dated 10/14/02) The proffer statement has been revised to allow commercial and office uses in Phase II. As the previous proffer statement indicated, Phase I would only be used for office uses. • A new proffer is provided which restricts certain land uses. These restricted land uses include electric, gas and other utilityfacilities and offices, retail nurseries and lawn and garden supply stores, automotive dealers (excluding gasoline service stations SIC - 5541), hotels and motels, organizational hotels and lodging, car washes, miscellaneous repair services, golf driving ranges and miniature golf courses, membership - organizations, - self=service storage- facilities,- commercial --batting cages operated outdoors, adult care residences and assisted care facilities, and adult retail. All other uses permitted in the B2 Zoning District would still be allowed if the rezoning application is approved. As the applicant has stated in the impact analysis statement, this could include a shopping center. It could also enable a restaurant, office building, movie theater, or model home sales office. The transportation proffer (proffer B) has been revised to clarify that there will be no more than two commercial entrances to Fairfax Pike. One of these entrances will be the existing loop entrance on the property. The transportation proffer (proffer B) was also revised to indicate that a detailed traffic study will be conducted in accordance with VDOT for each site plan proposed for Phase II. Furthermore, any improvements necessary to maintain a Level of Service of C or better will be incorporated into each site plan submission. The applicant has proffered to implement the improvements deemed necessary by VDOT. REZ #08-02, Bowman/Shoemaker Properties Page 9 November 8, 2002 STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR NOVEMBER 20 2002 The applicant has made an attempt to address the concerns identified during the Planning Commission meeting on September 4, 2002. The applicant has proffered that any road improvements to Fairfax Pike, which are necessary to maintain or exceed a Level of Service C, will be paid for by the developer. The applicant has also clarified that there will only be two entrances onto Fairfax Pike. Staff does, however, identify a few concerns with the new application. These concerns are noted below: The applicant's change from strictly offices to offices and/or commercial uses in Phase II may potentially lead to a greater traffic impact. As with the original application, the fact that the property is not located within the Urban Development Area (UDA) or the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) should be evaluated. The Planning Commission expressed concern of this issue during the September 4th meeting. The applicant should be prepared to address any concerns raised in this report, as well as the concerns raised by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. O: IAgeladas I COMMEN%SI REZON/NGIStaff Reportl?0021Bowman_Shoemaker. wpd IN NEFF, E. R., INC. 86 A 77 RA BOWMAN 86 A 81 RA ORNDORFF 86 A 78 RA RP RP 4P,RP WHITACRE j r 86 A 89 Q 0, ��Q b PPE 6C 3 RP ea a� t REZ # 08 - 02 FRUITbMITEp t Location Map Feer. P' i PARTNERSHIP 86' A 80 t 3' ,O Bowman ! Shoemaker B2 S. Properties r PIN: b 86-A-81 i v t r 0 70 140 Feet Aug. 20, 2002 keVISE0 REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning Staff Fee Amount Paid Zoning Amendment Number l J Date Receive ` PC Hearing Date q-4- 7 ; I ^' tl. 02 BOS Hearing Date d The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, 1. 2. 3 4. Applicant: Name: Greenway Engineering Telephone: (540)-662-4185 Address: 151 Windv Hill, Winchester, VA 22602 - Property Owner (if different from above) Name: Beverley B. Shoemaker Telephone: 869-1800 Address: P.O. Box 480 Stephens City, VA 22655 Contact person if other than above - - Name.--Evan-Wyatt- -- Telephone: -(540)-662-4185 - Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map ® Agency Comments Plat ® Fees Deed to Property ® Impact Analysis Statement Verification of taxes paid ® Proffer Statement f4FCE1 to 0 6 2002 FREDERIG OUN� d — PlA� P 5. The Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned: Beverley B. Shoemaker 6. A) Current Use of the Property: B) Proposed Use of the Property: 7. Adjoining Property: Single -Family Residential Office & Commercial PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING 86-((A))-82 Commercial & Office M2 86-((A))-77 Single -Family Residential RA 86-((A))-78 Single -Family Residential RA 86-((A))-80 Undeveloped Commercial B2 86-((A))-86 & 87 Trucking M1 86-((A))-89 Single -Family Residential RP 86-5-A Single -Family Residential RP 86 -A -85E Single -Family Residential RP 86-((A))-90 Single -Family Residential RP 86C -2-83A Townhouse Residential RP 8. Location: The property is located at (give exact located based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route number): South on Route 277 (Fairfax Pike), approximately 800 feet east of the intersection of Route 277 and Route 641 (Double Church). Information to be Submitted for Capital Facilities Impact Model In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for the applicant to provide information concerning the specifics of the proposed use. Otherwise, the planning staff will use the maximum possible density or intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on Page 9 of the application package. 9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number 86-((A))-81 Districts Magisterial: Opequon High School: Sherando Fire Service: Stephens City Middle School: Aylor Rescue Service: Stephens City Elementary School: Bass Hoover 10. 11. Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. Acres Current Zoning Zoning Requested 10.09 RA B2 10.09 Total Acreage to be rezoned The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed Single Family homes: Townhome: Multi -Family Non -Residential Lots: Mobile Home: Hotel Rooms: Square Footage of Proposed Uses Office & 100,000 sq.ft. in two phases; Service Commercial: Phase I - 5,000 sq.ft office Station: Phase II - 95,000 sq.ft. office & co llmmerlilal. Retail: Manufacturing: Restaurant: Warehouse: Other 12. Signature: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors' public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right-of-way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the bet of my (our) knowledge. Applicant(s): n {� .A�oDate: Date: Owner (s): d!-- Date: Date: 10 - 1� 5- Q �-- 10-18-02; 9:46AM; Greenway Englneer;540 984 5607 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY Philip A. Shucet 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE COMMISSIONER EDINBURG, VA 22824 October 18, 2002 VDOT Comments to Bowman/Shoemaker Companies Rezvn:Ing.Annilication # 2/ 2 JERRYA. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL(540)984-5600 FAX(540)984-5607 The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Route 277, Fairfax Pike. This is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation revised proffers offered in the Bowman/Shoemaker Rezoning application dated October 14, 2002 addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation_ Manual, Sixth Edition for review.___ VDOT reserves the right _to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signalization, and off-site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment. Homer F. Coffman, Trdbg. Asst. Resident Engineer VirginiaDOlorg WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING OUTPUT MO.. _E APPLICANT: Bowman/Shoemaker Net Fiscal Impact LAND USE TYPECommercial REAL EST VAL $6,508,838 Costs of Impact Credit: Required I Credits to be Take Total Potential Adjustment For FIRE &RESCUE 11 (entered in Coital Faciltiie5 col sum only) Cur. Budget Cur. Budget Cap. 0 r.Cap Equip Expend-Debt_S. Future CIP/ Taxes Other Tax Credits Revenue- Net Capital Net Cost Per (Unadjusted) Cost -Balance Fa ilii s_I_m pct DwellingUnt Fire and Rescue Department $55,706 Elementary Schools $0 $0 $0 $55,706 ERR Middle Schools---- $0 $0 $0 ---- High Schools $0 $0 $0 ERR Parks and Recreation $ Public Library 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ERR Sheriffs Offices $0 $3,895 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,8 $0 $3,8 $0 ERR Administration Building $0 $0 ERR Other Miscellaneous Facilities $0 $9,339 $10,311 $0 $0 $0 $19,650 $0 $0 $0 ERR $19,650 $0 ERR SUBTOTAL $55,706 LESS: NET FISCAL IMPACT $4,577,622 $13,234 $10,311 $0 $23,545 $23,545 $32,161 ERR NET CAP. FACILITIES IMPACT $4,577,622 $4,577,622 4 7 22 ERR 0 1 ERR INDEX: "l .0" If Cap. Equip Included 1.0 INDEX: "1.0" if Rev -Cost Bal, "0.0" if Ratio to Co Av g: 0.0 Rev -Cost Bal = 1.000 --------------------------------------- PLANNING DEPT PREFERENCES ------------------------------------- 1.0 1.0 Ratio to Co Avg = 1.342 — ------------------------------- METHODOLOGY 1. Capital facilities requirements are input to the first column as calculated in the model. 2. Net Fiscal Impact NPV from operations calculations is input in row total of second column (zero if negative); included are the one-time taxes !fees for one year only at full value. 3. NPV of future oper cap equip taxes paid in third column as calculated in fiscal impacts. 4. NPV of future capital expenditure taxes paid in fourth col as calculated in fiscal impacts. 5. NPV of future taxes paid to bring current county up to standard for new facilities, as calculated for each new facility. i 6. Columns three through five are added as! potential credits against the calculated capital facilities requirements. These are adjusted for percent of costs covered by the revenues from the project (actual, or as ratio to avd. for all residential development). NOTE: Proffer calculations do not include interest because they are cash payments up front. Credits do include interest if the projects are debt financed. NOTE Description: - - (Prepared _ j icati n Date ob r 25, 2 - - - -- - 1 Assumes 5 00 Plication Dated October 25, 2002) NOTES: Model Run Date 11106102 J FC Pre ared for Revised A P 0 sq.ft. of office use and 95,000 square (feet of retail use on 10.09 acres zoned B2 District Property Identification Number (PI N) 86-A-81 Due to changing conditions associated with development in the County, the'results of this Output Module may not be valid beyond a period of 90 day s from the model run date. 2001MODEL a- -Z S ,AT'E' �iE ' �0WM LTi S H 0EMAKER CO v-11°ANIES R-E"NING Opequon District Frederick County, Virginia TM 86-((A))-81 10.09 Acres October 14, 2002 Current Owner: Beverley Shoemaker Contact Person: Evan_ A. Wyatt AICD Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22642 540-662-4.185 Greenway Engineering June 24, 2002 Shoemaker Hdqts Rezoning October 14, 2002 SHOEMAKER GLOBAL HEADQUARTERS REZONING INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared for the purpose of assessing the impact on Fredrick County by the proffered rezoning of a 10.09 -acre parcel owned by Beverley Shoemaker. The subject site is located on the south side of Route 277 (Fairfax Pike), and Approx. 800 ft. east of the intersection of Route 277 and Route 641 (Double Church Road). The current zoning is RA, Rural Areas District. The applicant proposes to rezone the property from RA to B2 (Business General). Basic information Location: Magisterial District: Property ID Numbers: Current Zoning: Current Use: Proposed Use: Proposed Zoning: Total rezoning area: Proposed build -out: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1. Policy South of Route 277 and east of the Intersection of Route 277 & Route 641 Opequon 86-((A))-81 RA Residential Business General B2 10.09 acre 100,000 square feet office and commercial The Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Policy Plan does not include a wide - area development plan for this geographic area of the County; however, the Fairfax Pike corridor has been a developing corridor over the past fifteen years. Land uses within the immediate area of the subject property include many residential subdivisions, several commercial sites including a shopping center, the Sherando High School and the Sherando Regional Park. The business area strategies within the Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Policy Plan call for the provision of locations for substantial expansion of retail, service and office use in the County with safe and efficient access. The business area strategies call for the development of major business developments on arterial corridors that provide for design, layout, function and appearance of the corridors. 2 Greenway Engineering June 24, 2002 Shoemaker Hdqts Rezoning October 14, 2002 2. Sewer and Water Service Area The 10.09 -acre property is located adjacent to the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Currently, the SWSA boundary includes all properties on the north side of Fairfax Pike from Interstate 81 Exit 307 to White Oak Road (Route 636) and all properties on the south side of Fairfax Pike from Interstate 81 Exit 307 to Double Church Road (Route 641). Recently, the Board of Supervisors adopted an expansion of the SWSA to include additional properties on the south side of Fairfax Pike just to the east of the subject property, including the Sherando High School property, the Sherando Regional Park property and several residential parcels along Hudson Hollow Road (Route 636). A request to include the subject property into the SWSA is currently under consideration by the Board of Supervisors 3. Frederick County Zoning Ordinance Article X, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, provides a statement of intent for each category of business and industrial zoning for Frederick County. The statement of intent for the B2, Business General District is to provide large areas for a variety of business, office and service land use located on arterial highways at major intersections and interchange areas. These areas are intended to provide direct access to major thoroughfares for the general public and delivery truck traffic. The direct access to major thoroughfares is intended to be controlled to promote safe and orderly development for properties with adequate frontage and depth. A. SUITABILITY OF THE SITE Access The subject site, tax parcel 86-((A))-81, has approximately 1,000 feet of frontage on Fairfax Pike (Route 277). The existing structure on the subject property has direct access to Fairfax Pike through a looped "horseshoe" driveway. This existing driveway is intended to serve the Phase I office development. The Phase II office and commercial development will be limited to access through one commercial entrance to the west of the existing loop driveway and through access off of a proposed 60 -foot road system which will intersect with Fairfax Pike and proceed in a southwestern direction through the limits of the subject property. Traffic signalization will be proposed at the intersection of Fairfax Pike and the 60 -foot road system to facilitate Phase II traffic movement Flood Plains The subject property is located on the FE MA National Flood Insurance Plar. Map #510063-0200-B. The entire site is located as "Zone C", area outside the 100 -year flood plain. 3 Greenway Engineering June 24, 2002 Shoemaker Hdqts Rezoning October 14, 2002 WPtlnnric The National Wetlands Inventory Map indicates that no wetlands exist on the subject property. Steep Slope The subject property does not contain areas of steep slope. Mature Woodlands The subject property does not contain woodland areas. Soil Types The following soil types contained in this tract have been obtained from the Soil Survey of Fredrick County, published by the USDA Soil Conservation Service. The subject site is located on map sheet number 47, and contains one soil type: 3B- Blairton silt loam — 2-7 percent slope, covers 100% of site. This soil type is identified in Table 5 — Prime Farmland on page 123 of this document. This soil type will not create construction difficulties or hazards. B. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES Adjoining property zoning and present use (see existing zoning map): North: Zoned -RPS Residential -Performance District Residential-- - Zoned Ml, Light Industrial District Industrial South: Zoned RA, Rural Areas District East: Zoned B2, Business General District West: Zoned M2, Industrial General District 11 Residential Undeveloped Commercial Heavy Commercial & Office Greenway Engineering June 24, 2002 Shoemaker Hdqts Rezoning October 14, 2002 C. TRAFFIC IMPACT 1. According to the VDOT Functional Classification located in the Transportation Chapter of the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan, Route 277 is classified as a minor arterial road. The proposed change in zoning will provide the opportunity for the existing structure to change its form of operation to an accepted B2 Zoning classification style of business for the Phase I development limit of 5,000 square feet, and will provide for the future use of the subject property during the Phase II development which proffers a maximum of 95,000 square feet of additional office and retail use for a total site build out of 100,000 square feet. Page 7 of the 2000 Virginia Department of Transportation Daily Traffic Volumes Manuel identifies an average daily traffic volume of 11,000 vehicle trips on Fairfax Pike between Interstate 81 Exit 307 and White Oak Road (Route 636). The Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual provides traffic generation information for shopping center use and office use as follows: Route 277 Trak = 11,000 VPD (2000 Volumes) Route 277 Traffic = 12,128 VPD (2002 Estimated Volumes with 5% annual increase) Average Vehicle Trips = 11.01 VPD' Average Vehicle Trips = 49.97 VPD2 Square Footage of Business = 5,000 sq.ft. (Phase I) 95,000 sq.ft. (Phase II) 100,000 sq.ft. total build out Projected Traffic = 55VPD (Phase I) = 4,747 VPD (Phase II) = 4,802 VPD total build out Percentage of Traffic Increase for Route 277 Daily Traffic Volume = 0.05% (Phase I) = 39% (Phase II) 40% build out -- 'This figure is in accordance to the I.T.E., Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition, and is projected for a general business office, as per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area, on a weekday (page 1052 in the manual). 2This figure is in accordance to the I.T.E., Trip Generation Manual, 6t'' Edition, and is projected for a shopping center, as per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area, on a Saturday (page 1340 in the manual). The Phase I development limit of 5,000 square feet creates a negligible increase in the average daily traffic volume on Fairfax Pike. The Phase II development has proffered conditions, which offer a 60' access road connection to Fairfax Pike at a signalized intersection and traffic studies for Phase II site plans to maintain a LOS C. These improvements reasonably mitigate the increased average daily traffic volume increase on Fairfax Pike that will occur over time 5 Greenway Engineering June 24, 2002 Shoemaker Hdqts Rezoning October 14, 2002 D. SEWAGE AND CONVEYANCE TREATMENT & WATER SUPPLY The subject site is located adjacent to the southern boundary of the Sewer and Water Service Area (S WSA) located on Fairfax Pike (Route 277). An 8" sewer main is currently in place on the north side of Fairfax Pike directly across from the subject property. An 8" sewer main also exists on the south side of Fairfax Pike to the west of the subject property that serves the Rite Aid parcel. A 12" water main is currently in place on the south side of Fairfax Pike which provides water service to the subject property. The impact of this proposed rezoning of the 10.09 -acre parcel from RA to B-2 on sewage conveyance and water supply is based on the square footage of the proffered office and commercial use being 100,000 sq. ft. Design figures show an estimated 200 GPD, for both the sewer and water systems, per 1,000 square feet of ultimate floor space (These numbers are in reference to the Land Development Handbook, Dewberry & Davis, 1996, page 461). The figures below represent the impact that the total build out of the proffered square footage of office and commercial use has on the sewage conveyance and water supply systems. Q = 200 GPD per 1,000 Sq. Ft. Q = 200 GPD x 100 (1,000 sq. ft.) Q = 20,000 GPD The numbers clearly represent that the total development of the subject property will have a minor impact on the sewage conveyance system and water supply systems. The Phase I development will utilize the existing public water supply and the existing sewage septic system for the proffered office square footage, while the proffered 95,000 square feet of office and commercial use in Phase II will be developed in conjunction with public sewer. The Frederick -Winchester Health Department comment dated August- 29j 2002 states that this is appropriate. E. DRAINAGE The subject property drains from south -to -north towards Fairfax Pike. The Phase I office development will not require the need for stormwater management facilities as the current acreage adequately handles the runoff from the existing structure. The Phase 11 office and commercial development will be designed in accordance with all applicable state and local stormwater management requirements for detention and erosion and sedimentation control. on Greenway Engineering F. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL June 24, 2002 Shoemaker Hdqts Rezoning October 14, 2002 The impact on solid waste disposal facilities can be projected from an average annual business consumption of landfill volume of 5.4 cubic yards per 1,000 sq ft. of business floor space (This number can be found in the Civil Engineering Reference Manual, 4th edition). DV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. per 1,000 sq. ft. DV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. x 100 (1,000 sq. ft.) DV = 540 Cu. Yd. The proposed business parcel will have a minimal impact landfill use. G. HISTORICAL SITES AND STRUCTURES The Rural Landmarks Survey Report for Frederick County, Virginia Phase I -III, 1988- 1992 identifies several structures within the proximity of the subject property that were inventoried. None of the inventoried structures were deemed to be historically significant; therefore, none of the structures were included on the list of Potentially Significant Properties found on page 248-249 or on the list of Sites Potentially Eligible for the State or National Register of Historic Places found on page 250 of this report. The subject property is not located in or within the proximity of Possible Historic Districts identified in Chapter 2 — History of the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan found on page 2-10. - H. IMPACT ON COMMUNITY FACILITIES The County's Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model has been prepared for the proposed rezoning of the 10.09 -acre site based on a proffered maximum square footage of office and commercial use. The revenues received for capital facilities costs are significant and offset all impacts to county services. The applicant has proffered a monetary contribution for fire and rescue services due to the net capital facilities impact demonstrated by the model. This monetary contribution exceeds the percentage of the net capital facilities impact to revenues which should adequately address any impact to fire and rescue services. 7 Greenway Engineering June 21, 2002 Bowman/Shoemaker Companies October 14, 2002 Rezoning BOWMAN/SHOEMAKER COMPANIES REZONING Tax Parcel 86-((A))-81 Opequon Magisterial District Preliminary Matters Pursuant to Section 15.2-2296 Et. Seq. of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and the provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance with respect to conditional zoning, the undersigned applicant hereby proffers that in the event the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall approve Rezoning Application #08-02 for the rezoning of 10.09 acres from the Rural Areas (RA) District to the Business General (132) 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 the said Code and Zoning Ordinance. In the event that such rezoning is not granted, then these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and have no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon this applicant and their legal successors, heirs, or assigns. The subject property, more particularly described as the land owned by James L. Bowman being all of Tax Map Parcel 86-((A))-81 and further described in Deed Book 332 Page 340 recorded in the Frederick County Clerk of Courts Office. A.) Use and Structural Development of Property I.) The applicant hereby proffers to develop the property for office and commercial use only and limit the total structural area to 100,000 square feet for the entire 10.09 -acre site. -2:7- The _applicant -hereby proffers to -develop the 10.09=acre site ih7t v phases. Pie I will be limited to 5,000 square feet of office space and Phase II will account for the balance of the proffered total structural square footage for the 10.09 -acre site. 3.) The applicant hereby proffers to utilize the existing 3,596 -square -foot structure on the 10.09 -acre parcel for office use in Phase 1. 4.) The applicant hereby proffers to prohibit any development of office or commercial use in Phase II until the 10.09 -acre parcel is authorized to have public sewer service. 5.) The applicant hereby proffers to prohibit the development of the following land uses on the 10.09 -acre site: Use SIC Electric, gas and other utility facilities and offices 49 Retail nurseries and lawn and garden supply stores 526 Automotive dealers (excluding gasoline service stations SIC - 5541) 55 File #3269/EAW Greenway Engineering June 21, 2002 October 14, 2002 Use Hotels and motels Organizational hotels and lodging Car washes Miscellaneous repair services Golf driving ranges and miniature golf courses Membership organizations Self-service storage facilities Commercial batting cages operated outdoors Adult care residences and assisted care facilities Adult retail B.) Transportation Bowman/Shoemaker Companies Rezoning SIC 701 704 7542 76 7999 86 l.) The applicant hereby proffers to dedicate right-of-way along Fairfax Pike (Route 277) for future road improvements by Virginia Department of Transportation in accordance with the preliminary engineering documents identified as F.I. Plans, Plan and Profile of Proposed State Highway, Frederick County From: 0.168 km east of CL I-81 To: 0.276 km East of Rt. 636; Project 0277-034-103, PE -101, RW 201, C-501. 2.) The applicant hereby proffers to develop a 60' right-of-way from an intersection with Fairfax Pike to the southern limits of the 10.09 -acre parcel as a Phase II improvement in accordance with the attached Exhibit A, attached to and made part of these proffers. This right-of-way will be designed and constructed as a part of the first site plan in Phase II which accesses the 60' right-of-way. 3.) The applicant hereby proffers to enter into a signalization agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation for the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Fairfax Pike and the 60' right-of-way. This signalization agreement -----Shall be executed -with the --Virginia Department -of Transportation - prior to approval -- approval of the first site plan in Phase II, which accesses the 60' right-of-way. 4.) The applicant hereby proffers to limit the intersection points with Fairfax Pike to utilize the existing loop driveway only for the Phase I office development. 5.) The applicant hereby proffers to limit the 10.09 -acre site to a total of two intersection points. The existing loop driveway for the Phase I office development shall account for one of the intersection points until the connection is severed from Route 277. 6.) The applicant hereby proffers to provide a ten -foot (10) non-exclusive easement along the Fairfax Pike (Route 277) property frontage for the purpose of allowing the development of a bicycle facility as identified by the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan's Bicycle Plan. This easement will be dedicated to the appropriate entity prior to the construction of the bicycle facility. 7.) The applicant hereby proffers to conduct a detailed traffic study in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation's guidelines and procedures for each site plan proposed for the Phase II. All site plan submissions thereafter shall File #3269/EAW 2 Greenway Engineering June 21, 2002 Bowman/Shoemaker Companies October 14, 2002 Rezoning include a traffic study update of the original study unless waived by VDOT. Any improvements deemed necessary by the Virginia Department of Transportation to maintain a level of service of C or better will be incorporated into said site plans submissions. These improvements will be paid for by each respective user in whole or part as deemed necessary by the Virginia Department of Transportation. These monies are to be used for said improvements and will be made available for matching funds for any County, State, or Federal programs that are entered into by Frederick County to implement the Route 277 improvement project. C.) Lighting The applicant hereby proffers that all building mounted lights and pole -mounted lights will be of a downcast nature and shielded and directed away from adjacent properties surrounding the proposed project. Pole -mounted lights will not exceed 25 feet in height. Lighting plans will be submitted for each site plan in Phase I1 for review and approval by the Frederick County Planning Department prior to installation. D.) Parking Lot Location and Design The applicant hereby proffers that all parking lots constructed in Phase II will be located a minimum of 20 feet from the dedicated Fairfax Pike right-of-way. An earth berm that is a minimum of three (3) feet in height will be installed within the 20 -foot parking lot setback distance and will be landscaped with evergreen shrubs that are a minimum of 24 inches in height at the time of planting to create a visual separation between Fairfax Pike and the parking lots for the office buildings. E.) Business Signs The applicant hereby proffers that all freestanding business signs will be monument type construction and that pole mounted -sign&-will be prohibited. Na -- monument sign will exceed 15 feet in height or 100 square feet in area for the message portion of the monument sign. F.) Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development The undersigned owner of the above-described property hereby voluntarily proffer that in the event rezoning application # 08-02 is approved, and the property is subsequently developed within a B2 zone, the undersigned will pay to the Treasurer of Frederick County, Virginia the following amount: $ 2,500 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue to be redistributed to Stephens City Volunteer Fire & Rescue Company for capital facilities costs File #3269/EAW 3 Greenway Engineering June 21, 2002 Bowman/Shoemaker Companies October 14, 2002 Rezoning This payment is intended to offset the additional cost to Frederick County due to an increased demand on public services and will be paid within ninety (90) days following approval of the rezoning by the Board of Supervisors. G.) Signatures The conditions proffered above shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors in the interest of the applicant and owner. In the event the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grants this rezoning and accepts the conditions, the proffered conditions shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to other requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code. Respectfully Submitted: By: 6: Beverley B. S oemaker Date Commonwealth of Virginia, City/County of To Wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this of 20Q�,by 4re- Notary Public My Commission Expires File #3269/EAW 4 x Z fCONCEPTUAIL 60' R.O.W. CoJC . t� COco, U3 co W cv <r Z I Or `> .02 a m m c. c. \ wm > > xx CNo.022837 H ZONING LEGEND--:;q;�.�Ir—••-`•II E- RA RURAL AREAS DISTRICT RP RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE DISTRICT I. -I R4 RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY c�;�'�. RS RESIDENTIAL RECREATIONAL COMMUNITY , ?_,`,t,.,- MH1 MOBILE HOME COMMUNITY DISTRICT B1 NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT 82 BUSINESS GENERAL DISTRICT B3 INDUSTRIAL TRANSITION DISTRICT - - M1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DSTRICT m M2 INDUSTRIAL GENERA'_ DISTRICT _ EM EXTRACTIVE MANUFACTURING DISTRICT HE HIGHER EDUCATION DISTRICT DATE: JULY 2, 2002 SCALE: -1"=300' DESIGNED BY:EAW JOB NO.3269 SHEET -1 OF 1 E- I x x w � a z E� O Aa U i_��wz H 0 H0 = r� W c� IIJJ p :� U Q ow 0 � aw a � z z 0 DATE: JULY 2, 2002 SCALE: -1"=300' DESIGNED BY:EAW JOB NO.3269 SHEET -1 OF 1 J w - *'0- REZONING APPLICATION #10-02 w ® THE VILLAGE AT HARVEST RIDGE Staff Report for the Planning Commission Meeting ,4wIN! 1738 Prepared: November 8, 2002 Staff Contact: Abbe S. Kennedy 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. PROPOSAL: To rezone 16.92 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) District, and to amend the proffers associated with an adjoining 9.82 acre tract presently zoned RP. The combined tracts total 26.74 acres. LOCATION: This property is located south and adjacent to Route 622 (Cedar Creek Grade) bordering the City/County line. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: _ 63-A-2,and 63-A73--- PROPERTY 3-A-3 — PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) District Land Use: Vacant Zoned: RP (Residential Performance) Land Use: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District South: Zoned RA (Rural Areas ) District East: Zoned LR (City of Winchester) Use: Agriculture Use: Residential; Church Use: Residential West: Zoned RA(Rural Areas) District Use: Residential; Veterinary Clinic Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 09/18/02 Tabled Planning Commission: 11/20/02 Pending Board of Supervisors: 12/11/02 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 16.92 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) District, and to amend the proffers associated with an adjoining 9.82 acre tract presently zoned RP. The combined tracts total 26.74 acres. LOCATION: This property is located south and adjacent to Route 622 (Cedar Creek Grade) bordering the City/County line. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: _ 63-A-2,and 63-A73--- PROPERTY 3-A-3 — PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) District Land Use: Vacant Zoned: RP (Residential Performance) Land Use: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District South: Zoned RA (Rural Areas ) District East: Zoned LR (City of Winchester) Use: Agriculture Use: Residential; Church Use: Residential West: Zoned RA(Rural Areas) District Use: Residential; Veterinary Clinic REZ 410-02, The Village at Harvest Ridge Page 2 November 8, 2002 PROPOSED USE: Single-family detached small lots; age -restricted community. REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The application to rezone this property appears to have little measurable impact on Routes 622 (Cedar Creek Grade) and 628 (Middle Road). Route 622 and 628 are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Village at Harvest Ridge rezoning application, dated July 2002, addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. In the event future access desired direct access to VDOT facilities, any such access should be provided to this office for VDOT review. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the ITE T Jjp Generation manual Sixth Edition, for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signalization and off-site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Fire Marshal: Access for fire and rescue must be maintained at all times. "Fire Lane No Parking" signs required at fire hydrants and normal and emergency access points. Fire hydrants shall be located within 400 feet of any residential structures. Plan approval is recommended. Sanitation Authority: This project is served by the City of Winchester. Frederick. -Winchester- Service Authority: No comments. - - County Engineer: Please see -letter from H. E. S'trawsnyder, Jr., -P: .,, Director of Public--W-orks,--- dated 7/03/02. Building Official: No comment required at this time. Shall comment at the time of site plan review. Historic Resources Adviscry Board: Please see letter from Rebecca Ragsdale, Planner I, dated 5125/02. Parks & Recreation: The proposed proffer of $543 per unit for Parks and Recreation appears to be consistent with the county proffer model as implemented by the county. Frederick Co. Public Schools: Since this is an age -restricted senior citizen community, there is no comment at this time. Count Attorney: Proffers appear to be in proper form once signed by owner(s). REZ #10-02, The Village at Harvest Ridge Page 3 November 8, 2002 City of Winchester: Please see attached memorandum from Tim Youmans, Planning Director, dated 8/16/02. Planning & Zoning_ 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning map (USGS Winchester Quadrangle) depicts the zoning for the two parcels as R2 (Residential Limited) District. Prior to 1980 the two parcels were changed from R-2 (Residential Limited) to A-2. During the comprehensive dowrnzoning of October 8, 1080, parcels 63-A-2 and 63-A-3 were changed from A-2 to RA (Rural Area) zoning district. On September 10, 1997, parcel 63-A-3 totaling 9.81 acres was rezoned from RA to RP as part of the Westridge Subdivision, Section III and was within the County UDA. The 16.92 acre RA tract was included in the County's Urban Development Area by action taken at the Board of Supervisors meeting of November 10, 1999. 2) Location The property is located south and adjacent to Route 622 (Cedar Creek Grade), bordering the city/county line. Cedar Creek Grade is classified as a major collector road. To the east is proposed residential lots in the city, to the northeast is "Homespun" an adjacent commercial enterprise, to the north across Cedar Creek Grade is farmland, to the west is a single family home site and a veterinary clinic, and to the south is single family residential and a church. 3) Site Suitability The site is characterized by a ridge running through the center of the site. There are no steep slopes or wetlands located on the site. The existing stands of trees are to be preserved where they can provide a buffer to existing roads. The site is an under -layer of limestone and limestone -- -residual clays. 4) Frederick County Comprehensive Plan The site is located in the Urban Development Area (UDA) ; the 9.82 acre tract included in 1997, the 16.92 acre tract in 1999. The proposed residential use is consistent with the UDA expansion. The Urban Development Area expansion for the 16 acre site was approved with the condition that access is provided from Cedar Creek Grade through this parcel to Westview Lane within Westridge, Section III. The submitted rezoning proposal calls for a private street system to be connected at two points to the City of Winchester street system. Therefore, the applicant contends that the low traffic generation of a single family small lot age restricted development precludes the need for an additional connection onto Cedar Creek Grade. 5) Intended Use The intended use of this property is for a total of 90 single-family small lot units on parcels 63 -A-2, and 63-A-3. Of significance is the proffer of use as an age restricted community, which REZ #10-02, The Village at Harvest Ridge Page 4 November 8, 2002 minimizes the permanent residence by school age children. Parcel 63-A-3 of 9.82 acres is currently zoned RP with an existing proffer for single family detached homes of 12,000 sf lot area not to exceed 25 lots. The submitted rezoning proposal contains provisions for a change of use for the 9.82 acre site, a previously approved RP rezoning from single family detached urban, to single family small lot. Should this rezoning be approved, all existing proffers on the 9.82 acre parcel would be eliminated, and all proposed proffers in this rezoning would apply to the entire 26.74 acre project of the Village at Harvest Ridge. 6) Potential Impacts a.) Transportation Impact Analysis Statement Traffic generation includes 3.7 trips per day per residential unit under the age restricted elderly housing category. The overall proj ect will have a maximum of 90 units for a total trip generation of 333 trips per day. The project will develop from north to south allowing the first connection to the City street system to be included in the first phase ofthe City subdivision "Harvest Ridge". The splits assumed provide for 2/3 of the generated trips to use Cedar Creek Grade access (222 TPD) and 1/3 Middle Road access (111 TPD). Review Agency Comment The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have little measurable impact -on Routes 622 (Cedar -Creek Grade) and 628 (Middle Road) -These are-the-- VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property reference. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Village at Harvest Ridge rezoning application addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. Planning Staff Comments Staff feels that the two interconnections to the conventional single family neighborhoods represent good planning, however, a county road providing a direct connection to Cedar Creek Grade would provide a more direct access for County emergency response vehicles. Staff is concerned that an age -restricted community may anticipate more frequent medical emergency calls which would be required to navigate the City streets in order to access the Village at Harvest Ridge community. This would also be the case for other service vehicles such as private refuse collection trucks serving the new age -restricted community. REZ #10-02, The Village at Harvest Ridge Page 5 November 8, 2002 The adjoining commercial enterprise northeast of the site ("Homespun) will be required to construct a commercial entrance off of Cedar Creek Grade. Staff believes this is an opportunity for the developer to work out a shared entrance, which would allow an additional access in and out of the age -restricted community, and not overburden the city streets in the adjoining single family neighborhood in the city. As the proposed rezoning request stands, this petition proffers that an emergency -only private road connection shall be made to Cedar Creek Grade in the County. Staff also notes that a connection to Cedar Creek Grade was a condition of inclusion into the UDA. b.) Water and Sewer Impact Analysis Statement At the time of improvements of Cedar Creek Grade by the City ten years ago, the property owner paid for the extension of sewer utilities along Cedar Creek Grade to serve this site. The owner also provided for the extension of a 10" water main into the site to allow for loop water flow connection with the existing Westridge subdivision. The City of Winchester has approved the extension of their water and sewer system into this project. The County Sanitation Authority has declined interest in servicing this project as part of the UDA expansion. The total demand for water use and sewage flow will be 13,500 gpd for the proposed 90 residential units of the Village project. Review Agency Comments This project will be served by the City of Winchester. c.) Site Suitability Impact Analysis Statement A generalized plan has been proposed as a part of the petition for rezoning and is shown as Figure 2B. The meandering street system allows opportunity for landscaping and visual buffering within the subdivision. The configuration of the site allows ample opportunity to provide the buffers and screens required by the county ordinances. A walkway system is proposed including sidewalks and walking trails. Recreation uses will be discussed during the Master Development Plan. A passive system of trails and open space uses are intended to provide active recreation facilities meeting small lot requirements of the zoning ordinance. A community building is not planned for this project. Individual lot sizes will exceed 5,000 s£ REZ #10-02, The Village at Harvest Ridge Page 6 November 8, 2002 Planning Staff Comments Staff notes that there is no proffer regarding lot sizes to exceed 5,000 s.f., and that the Frederick County Code allows a minimum lot size of 3,750 square feet. The applicant notes that no community building is planned for this project. If the lots fall under 5,000 sf, a recreational facility for each 30 dwelling units must be provided, and in addition, single family small lot housing shall provide a community center providing for the equivalent of three age-appropriate recreational units for each 30 dwelling units. The rear yard setback is 15 feet, and Frederick County code states that decks may extend five feet into the required setback in single family small lot housing. Staff feels that this project will adjoin single family homes on the west and south, and the single family homes of the city on the east. Staff notes the need for perimeter residential separation buffers on the east, south and west of the site. Although county code requirements would not require a residential separation buffer be placed between the single family detached homes of the city and the proposed single family small lots, staff would suggest the residential separation buffer be implemented. A road efficiency buffer will be required along the major collector road, Cedar Creek Grade. The attached proffered generalized development plan shows a walkway system and trails that terminate abruptly at the south ends with no connections back out to the street to form a continuous loop. Staff feels this generalized development plan including sidewalks and a walking trail system should be further clarified. d.) Site Drainage Impact Analysis Statement -- The generalized plan for drainage shown in Figure75 includes arrenclosed storm drainage system connecting to a stormwater management facility located as shown on the plan. This stormwater facility will discharge into the 54" storm sewer located in the Cedar Creek Grade right of way. Provision for expansion of the existing parcel owned by Mr. and Mrs. Turner (in use as "Homespun") will be made as a part of this project. Joint planning for the uses provides for sharing lands for the stormwater management facility. Review Agency Comment The proposed rezoning indicates that the stormwater will flow through a detention pond before discharging into an existing stormwater pipe (54 inches) located within the City of Winchester. Our approval of this subject rezoning will be contingent upon the approval of the City on issues related to stormwater management and traffic. REZ #10-02, The Village at Harvest Ridge Page 7 November 8, 2002 Planning Staff Comment The planning staff has not yet seen an agreement between the parties for sharing land regarding stormwater management, and the enclosed Site Drainage Plan, Figure 5, shows the pond extending into the area where the proposed emergency road connection to Cedar Creek Grade is proposed to be located as shown in the applicant's Transportation Plan, Figure 3. The stormwater management could be resolved during the MDP review. 7) Proffer Statement A statement of proffers, signed and dated by the owners on August 23, 2002,was submitted to the Planning Department. The applicant has offered the following proffered conditions: A monetary proffer for the sum of $1,539.00 per residential building lot. This provides for $543.00 for Frederick County Parks and Recreation; $481.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue; $87.00 for the Sheriff's Office and $241.00 for the Administration Building; and $187.00 for the Public Library. The Generalized Development Plan which includes the following conditions: a. All housing within the 26.74 -acre tract shall be single family small lot in accordance with the County's Zoning Ordinance. A maximum of 90 single family small lot units shall be constructed on the property. b. All streets shall be private with an approved connection to two City -maintained inter - parcel connector streets. C. The 26.74 -acre tract shall be designated by deed to be "age -restricted" under the U.S. Fair Housing Act. Stipulations shall require at least 80% of the occupied housing units have an occupant who is 55 or older and that no unit shall be occupied by a child under the age of 19 as a permanent resident. The intent is to provide a project for retirement housing that does not generate an impact on the Frederick County School System. d. An emergency -only private road connection shall be made to Cedar Creek Grade in the County in the location shown. * Please note that included in vour packet are the proffers of the previously -approved RP 9.82 - acre tract. These proffers would be abolished and replaced by the new proffers if the rezoning petition is accepted. Correspondence regarding the UDA expansion of the Allen property is included in your packet. REZ #10-02, The Village at Harvest Ridge Page 8 November 8, 2002 STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 09/18/02 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The 26.74 -acre site proposed for rezoning is within the County UDA and SWSA, making it conducive to residential development. The subject property is located along a major collector road and adjacent to the City of Winchester. Staff would note that the proffers attempt to address the issues of the age - restricted communities, yet concerns by staff prevail on the following issues: a. Direct connection for County emergency response vehicles and other service vehicles such as private refuse collection trucks and road maintenance vehicles. Also, the contingency of the approved UDA expansion upon creating a direct connection to Route 622, Cedar Creek Grade. b. Stormwater management clarification. c. A continuous loop to the hiker trail in open space, recreational amenities, and sidewalks along the private streets for an age -restricted community. d. Adequate perimeter buffering between Frederick County RA single family housing, and single family City of Winchester housing. e. Preservation of existing trees buffering Cedar Creek Grade, while a stormwater management pond and commercial entrance to "Homespun" will be required. Staff feels the applicant should be prepared to address the preceding issues to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission prior to a recommendation being forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. - -- PLANNING COMMISSION SUMT'kIA—RY OF -ACTION FOR 09/t8/U27-MEETING The rezoning request for 26.74 acres off Cedar Creek Grade for single family small lot age restricted housing brought forward discussion from the Planning Commission and the public. The issue regarding a county public access to Cedar Creek Grade was first addressed by the planning commission. The existing condition of the 1999 UDA expansion that included the subject property required a public access to Cedar Creek Grade when the subject parcel was developed. With a proposed City access to Cedar Creek Grade, the developers argued that two entrances to the same project within a few hundred feet of each other would be a detriment to Cedar Creek Grade. Two residents urged that the proposed county portion of the development not have direct access to Cedar Creek Grade, as it would create an enticing route for cut -through traffic to Middle Road. The applicant requested that action on the rezoning request be tabled to enable the applicant to address outstanding issues. The Planning Commission so moved. REZ # 10-02, The Village at Harvest Ridge Page 9 November 8, 2002 UPDATE SINCE THE 09/18/02 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The applicant submitted a revised rezoning request addressing a number of issues of concern. A final plat of the area to be rezoned has been revised in order to adjust tract lines for the boundary line change with the Homespun property. The revised proposed rezoning boundary lines shown on the plat necessitated a boundary line adjustment with the Homespun property. The signed plat, which has received the approval of the Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, must be recorded prior to the advertisement of this application for public hearing before the Board of Supervisors. The revised application requests that the Homespun property be brought into the urban development area as a logical addition to the UDA. The applicant has proposed to extend central sewer service to the Homespun property, which is zoned Rural Areas (RA) and possesses CUP approval for a country store. The requested UDA expansion is necessary to facilitate this extension. This request was considered by the CPPS at its October 14, 2002 meeting, where committee members agreed that the proximity of the Homespun property to the current boundaries of the UDA and its planned commercial use supported its inclusion in the UDA. The applicant also requests that the condition of the original UDA expansion requiring provision of a state road connection to Cedar Creek Grade be eliminated. The CPPS also considered this request at its October meeting and expressed no objections to the proposal. Revisions to the design of the project include the provision of a dense evergreen screen to be planted along the entire western and southern boundaries of the property. Existing vegetation along Cedar Creek Grade will also be preserved as shown on the revised rezoning plat. Moreover, the applicant has offered to provide a 10' open space buffer between the proposed small lot parcels and the existing and proposed conventional single-family detached lots located within the City— limits. The applicant has further proposed to install fencing or landscaping along the rear lot lines of these parcels. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 11/20/02 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING The revised application for the rezoning of the Village at Harvest Ridge appropriately meets county requirements. Additionally, the final plat for the requested rezoning includes the revisions necessary to address issues raised by the Planning Commission and citizens at the September 18, 2002, public hearing. A statement of proffers, signed and dated by the owners on August 23, 2002,was submitted to the Planning Department. The proffers have not changed since the September 18, 2002, Planning Commission meeting. Concerns of staff remain regarding the following issue: REZ #10-02, The Village at Harvest Ridge Page 10 November 8, 2002 Impact to Surrounding Residential Land Uses The applicant's comments state that the dense evergreen screen along the western and southern boundary, and the 10' minimum open space buffer between small lots and the proposed conventional housing in the city, are not proffered improvements. Staff recommends that a residential separation buffer or landscape screen be formally specified in terms of distance and plant materials as part of this rezoning request. Staff suggests that such buffers be implemented on the east, south, and west of the project, as the small lot housing will adjoin single family detached homes of the city and existing single family homes in the RA (Rural Areas). Staff requests that the Planning Commission forward recommendations to the Board of Supervisors regarding the following: 1) The provision of a state road connection to Cedar Creek Grade near the Homespun property be eliminated as a condition of the original UDA expansion. 2) Inclusion of the Homespun property (PIN # 63 -A -2H) in the UDA. 3) Forward a recommendation regarding revised Rezoning Application #10-02. O-\Agendas\COMMENTS\REZONING\Staff Report\2002\Village at Harvest Rdg PC2.wpd OUTPUT MODULE APPLICANT: PIN 63-A-2 Net Fiscal Impact LAND USE TYPEResidential Casts of Im REAL ES-� VAL 511,799,{100 --Ra l�r�it: AP-UT ht.-CI(IULIEPCiedits to e TakE FIRE 8 RESCUE Requrred {entered in Cur. Budget Cur. Budget Cap. Total Potentia! A diustmentFar Future Clef 9 �MLEiltiies col sum only' 00sr<Caa E ui — ��- ��—�1—�2t� TatS.e�,_Olher Pax Credits {Ur��stedCast ) Revenue Net Capital Abet Per Fire and Rescue Department W. 2 Cwt -Bunce EJt�s Impact piretf no Unit Elementary Schools $0 $0 s0 Middle Schools so i 50 $43,290 3481 High Schools So $0 so SO $0 — _ Parks and Recreation $131.153 31,153 fel 30 E4 Public Library $33,545 Sheriff; Offices $7,216 516,927 $33,545 $7,216 $33'545 597,608 $1,085 Administration 8vildng $5,944 50 $21,723 $3,1 f9 Other $9,063 57,216 99,063 316,801 $187 Miscellaneous Facilities $0 $27,B 18 $0 $7'864 SA7 $82,815 $16,665 $99,479 $0 599,479 $21,723 $241 SUBTOTAL $264,729 SS: NET FISCAL IMPACT • $15,665 $43,880 LE3666 $149,303 50 ,425 NET CAP. FACILITIES IMPACT $666,425 ,303 $115,426 31,283 $566 5866,425 $6¢th4 7. �5 INDEX- -i.0" If Cap_ Equip Included 0 1.0 INDEX: 'Lor if Rev-Cos' Bat, -0-WO Ratio to Co Av g: 0.0 PLANNING DEPT PREFERENCES 1.0 1.0 Rev-Cast Bal = 1.000 Ratio METHODOLOGY 1, Capital facilities i refro njs are in ut to the fus to Co Avg = 1.433 2. p t column as calculated in the model. io Fiscal Impact NPV fed calculations is input in raw total (zero of second column fe the a {�� it negalive); included ate the one-time taxes !tees ror one year only at tint value. 3. NPV of future oiler cap equip [axes paid in third cnhunn as calculated in fiscal impacts. 4. NPV of future c apital expenditure taxes paid in fourth c of as calculated in fiscal impacts. 5. NPV at future taxes paid to bring current county up [o standard far new facilities, as calculated for each new faCitity. 6. Columns three through five are, added as potential credits against the calculated capital facilities requirements. These are adjusted for percent dcosts covered by the revenues from Use project {actual, or as ratio to avg. for all residential devetepntenly NOTE: Proffer calculations do not include inctude interest because they are cash payments up franL Credlts do include Interest NOTE& e the Projects are debt financed. Model Run Date 06125/02 ERL P.1. N. 63-A-2 Rezoning: As sumes 15.92 acres zoned RP, wish a maximum o190 dw en ng units. ago-res Irt(- 'led developmeM. Due to changing conditions asscciafed wifth developrnem in the County, the results of this Output Mcdule may not be valid beyond at period of go day s from the model run date. NOTES: 1. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. 2. EASEMENTS OTHER THAN SHOWN MAY EXIST. 3. THE LOT SHOWN HEREON LIES WITHIN ZONE "C", AN AREA OF MINIMAL FLOODING, PER F.I.R.M. 510063 0115 8, ARC=224.90' RAD=1402.39' CHORD=N60'05'54'E_ 224.66' N55.30'09'E — 44,14' � –4z? CEDAR CREEK 6GRADE 22 VA SEC. ROUTE 22 IRS IRF DATED JULY 17, 1978. �N�Q`- / 'Ra "" 4,j CIN/COUNTY LINE TAKEN ; °a FROM PLAT BY DAVID F, d2� / Q SPRIGGS, DATED OCTOBER 24, y 40Q `" 2001, RECORDED IN low INSTRUMENT # 020001717 t"l��J� (CITY) AND #020007755 SCS 9��\ / V P ��o (COUNTY) AND WAS NOT 044 `F ?� (b FIELD VERIFIED. 'Q9 gryF o`3' �• v v� 0��2 0` J aQ ryo pQ pp 07 =\,�o / e 5 i Q4'Q-po. to , J /iF 0Y A1N ro 3 !106 s �F 63 0,0 L_ EGEND IRS IRON REBAR SET '�C C IRF IRON REBAR FOUND 'o b �FSr RRS RAILROAD SPIKE FOUND r, CU-- y.;4� LINE TABLE LINE BEARING I DISTANCE Ll S16.23'42'E I 200.32' L2 N75.45'13'E 1 145,37' REZONING PLAT OF THE LAND OF GREYSTONE PROPERTIES, LLC BACK CREEK MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA DATE: 10/23/02 I SCALE: 1"=300' I SHEET 1 OF 1 MARSH & LEGGE LAND SURVEYORS, P.L.C. 560 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 PHONE (540) 667-0468 N FAX (540) 667--0469 EMAIL office®marshandlegge.com TH OF" H. BRUCE EDENS No. 000162-13 DRAWN BY: JGB DWG NAME: id4579rz LL FARM 6 i MARSHALL I BRIDGEFORTH 63 A 2ARA 63 A 2D RA C&W PROPERTIES 63 A 2K RA I 62 WALLS 63 A 2.1--, RA GRACE BRETHERN CHURCH 63 A 2E� RA GATHER 63 A 3A\ RA MCLAURI 63 51 8 RA TRUSTEES OF WINCHESTER CHURCH 63 4D R Z RA � Cedar Creek Gr E f � .�—.�"�.•,,.•, TURNER ENTERPRISES, LLC i 63 A 2H RA a o Nroo...oM,d OPEgUON City Of V o' Winchester, (0"-" r irEinf �N� a V' jrGREYSTONE PROPERTIES LLC a, 6 A 23 'A w 63 A 2 63 3 RA wo The City Qa 13 Of W' h '& me es er, a Virxinia SeOCr�`9so ay+yteu 4 , s ' OVERLOOKHILI GLAIZE ` Location Map DEVELOPMENT, INC 63 A 3 RP REZ #10-02 The Village at Harvest Ridge KEST'BRIDGE 6z PIN: 63-A-2 63-A-3 N Wg _ •S _- - VAL VISTA HEIGHTS 0 300 800 Feet 6i SEPT. 3,2002 REVISED PROFFERS REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Number 63-A-2 Back Creek Magisterial District VIELLAGE AT HARVEST RIDGE Preliminary Matters Pursuant to Section 15.2-2296 et. Sea., of the code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and the provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance with respect to conditional rezoning, the undersigned applicant herby proffers that in the event the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall approve Rezoning Application #10- for the rezoning of 16.92 acres from the Rural Area (RA) to Residential Performance (RP) and the rezoning with revised proffer of 9.82 acres from RP (single family) to RP (small lot -age restricted). Development of the subject property shall be done in conformity with the terms and conditions set forth herein, except to the extent that such terms and conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the applicant and such be approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors in accordance with Virginia law. In the event that such rezoning is not granted, then these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and of no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon the applicant and their legal successor or assigns. The approval of theses proffers shall eliminate and void any pre-existing proffer statement controlling development of the lands involved. Monetary _Contribution The undersigned, who own the above described property, hereby voluntarily proffer that if the Board of Supervisors for the County of Frederick, Virginia approves the rezoning for the 26.74 acres, with ---- frontage along Cedar -Creek Grade in -the Back -Creek Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia to RP (small lot -age restricted), the undersigned will pay to Frederick County at the time the first building permit is applied for the sum of $1,539.00 per residential building lot. This monetary proffer provides for $543.00 for Frederick County Parks & Recreation; $481.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue; $87.00 for Sheriff's Office and $241.00 for Administration Building and $187.00 for the Public Library. General Development Plan Voluntarily proffered is the attached Generalized Development Plan which includes the following conditions: REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Number 63-A-2 Sack Creek Magisterial District Village at Harvest Ridge All housing within the 26.74 acre tract shall be single family small lot in accordance with the County zoning ordinance. A maximum of 90 single family small lot units shall be constructed on the property. 2. All streets shall be private with approved connection to two City maintained interparcel connector streets. The 26.74 acre tract shall be designated by deed to be "age restricted" under the U.S. Fair Housing Act. Stipulations shall require at least 80% of the occupied housing units have an occupant who is 55 or older and that no unit shall be occupied by a child under the age of 19 as a permanent resident. The intent is to provide a project for retirement housing that does not generate an impact on the Frederick County School system. 4. An emergency only private road connection shall be made to Cedar Creek Grade in the County in the location shown. 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 OWNERS By: - Date: X7 % U By: Date: By: z - Date: T REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Number 63-A-2 Back Creek Magisterial District 'pillage at Harvest Rddge STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To-wit.- The o-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this�� 2002, by < �, Q - U k� ,� _day of �� My commission expires Notary Public U_ Ik-zz-may iUf Attached Fetters: 1. County Engineer 2. HRAB 3. City of Winchester July 3, 2002 Mr. Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E. Vice President Gilbert W. Clifford and Associates, Inc. 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Rezoning for The Village at Harvest Ridge Frederick County, Virginia Dear Chuck: COUNTY of FREIDF:I Tf-W Department of Public Works 540/665-5643 FAX: 5401673-0632 The proposed rezoning application for The Village at Harvest Ridge indicates that the stormwater will flow through a detention pond before discharging into an existing stormwater pipe (54 inches) located within the City of Winchester. We recommend that the City of Winchester be given an opportunity to review and approve this concept before we grant our final approval. The impact analysis references a second parcel of land which was previously approved for RP development. Please clarify the analysis report to indicate that this parcel will also be developed as age restricted housing. - ---Our approval of the subject rezoning will be contingent upon the approval of the City of Winchester on the issues related to stormwater management and traffic control. Sincerely, Hary . Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E. Director of Public Works HES/rls CC' Frederick County Planning and Zoning file C:1Core1lWord Perfect\RhondalvilatlirstridgecOm.wpd 107 North Kent Street . Winchester- Virus nen'Y-7a am_conn CITY OF WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA MEORANDUM TO: Chuck Maddox, P.E. G.W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 FROM: Tim Youmans ` City of Winchester Planning Director DATE: August 16, 2002 SUBJECT: THE VILLAGE AT HARVEST RIDGE Rouss City Hall 15 North Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 540-667-1815 TDD 540-722-0782 I have reviewed the proposed rezoning request for the 60 single-family small lot units known as the "Village at Harvest Ridge." Mr. Vickers and Mr. Wilkins have done an admirable job of attempting to master plan a large residential area straddling the City -County line. I offer the following comments and observations: The change from a conventional single-family layout to the age -restricted senior community on the Glaize tract formerly known as Westridge, Section III represents a considerable departure from the previously approved conventional type of development similar to that in the adjacent Westridge, Section II development to the east. More attention needs to be paid to how the public street system in the City will transition to a private street system in the County. I have asked Mr. Vickers to consider extending a traditional urban street ---section to an area where larger_public service vehicles such a_sfire _trucks, _ school buses, refuse_ and _re_cycling _ trucks, etc. can safely turn around without using private driveways. Currently, there is a gravel turnaround allowing for safe maneuvering. Please provide more information on proposed yards and setbacks so that I can determine what, if any, impact the clustered homes would have on the existing conventional single-family lots at the end of West View Terrace. One version of the overall plan for Harvest Ridge depicts only a 10 -foot wide private open space strip between the rear of the elderly community lots and the existing conventional residence along the south side of WestView Terrace. How close could a new home be permitted to be built toward the rear yard line on the small lots? Would porches, decks and patios be allowed to encroach into rear yards under County Zoning? With conventional development, the adjacent City homeowner would expect a 25-35 foot rear yard for any new homes backing up to their side yard. If the clustered elderly homes are allowed to have much smaller rear yards (e.g. 5-10 feet) with more of them closer together on narrower lots, then this could cause an impact on the adjacent property owner. Is privacy fencing around the rear yards of the elderly homes proposed? "THE APPLE CAPITAL" Chuck Maddox, P.E August 16, 2002 Page 2 With regard to streets, the two interconnections to conventional single-family neigllborhoods in the City represent good planning. I do, however, question the merit of having no direct connection to Cedar Creek Grade or any County road directly from the elderly community. I appreciate Mr. Vickers' interest in preserving natural vegetation along the south side of Cedar Creek Grade, but feel that a private road connection could be incorporated into this area while still leaving much vegetation. Also, since the recently approved Homespun project is going to require a commercial entrance, there is an opportunity to work with that developer to construct a shared entrance. A direct connection to Cedar Creek Grade would provide a more direct route for County emergency response vehicles to this elderly residential community where medical emergency calls can be anticipated at a higher frequency then that which would occur with nonelderly development. With a direct connection, service vehicles such as private refuse collection trucks serving the elderly community would not need to navigate City residential streets either. The additional access would also distribute traffic entering and exiting the development at the Cedar Creek Grade end, thus not disproportionately burdening the future single-family residents in the City. The proposed private street system in lieu of public streets is not a concern for the City, but it would be helpful to know what the typical street section would look like. How wide are the streets? Are sidewalks proposed along both sides? Figure 2 of the rezoning booklet depicts a "Hiker Trail" through the proposed open space around the rear of the units but terminates abruptly at the south ends with no connection back out to the common areas. They should connect out to the private street to form a continuous loop. What would the future City lot owners backing up to the private open space and hiker trail find in terms of physical trail or path improvement? Would they have a right to access the trail? Thank you for providing this opportunity to comment on this important residential project COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of P1=, Ji - and Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 May 25, 2002 Mr. C. E. Maddox, Jr., P. E., Vice President Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) Comutents Allan Rezoning - Cedar Creek Grade Dear Chuck: The Frederick County Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) considered the referenced proposal during their meeting of May 21, 2002. The HRAB reviewed information associated with the 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley and information provided by representatives of the proposal. Historic Resources Advisory Board Comment The fifteen -acre parcel proposed for rezoning from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the RP (Residential Performance) District is located within the, study area for the First Battle of Kernstown and the core area for the Second Battle of Kernstown. Located directly adjacent to the subject -parcel is the historically significant structure known as "Homespun." The proposed use of the Allan property is an age -restricted housing development. The HRAB considered details of the development plans for the property, and its history. Discussion included the existing conditions adjoining the site, its proximity to housing developments in the City of Winchester and residential uses in the County. The applicant expressed their desire to be sensitive to the property's history and explained they would be providing additional landscaping and open space within the proposed development. The HRAB felt that the integrity of the battlefields had been compromised and that the proposed development was appropriate. The HRAB recommends that the applicant provide landscape screening along Cedar Creek Grade and "Homespun." There were no adverse comments by the HRAB and, after consideration, approval of this rezoning application was recommended. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding this comment from the Historic Resources Advisory Board. Sincerely, Vtu al p r'l Rebecca Ragsdale Planner I RAR/ch cc: Jim Vickers; Richie Wilkins U:\COMMi=Es\HRAB\COMMENTSWLL L7 -Ai rth K,e t Street * Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Existing Proffers to be abolished on RP zoned, 9.81 acre tract 63-A-3. AMENDMENT T Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: Recommended Approval on August 6, 1997 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Approved on September 10, 1997 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP #003-97 of WESTRIDGE SUBDIVISION, SECTION III WHEREAS, Rezoning Application #003-97 of Westridge Subdivision, Section III, requested the rezoning of 9.81 acres currently zoned RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance); and identified with P.I.N. 63-A-3. The property is located adjacent to the Westridge Subdivision with access from West View Lane via Middle Road (Rt. 628) in the City; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on August 6, 1997; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this ordinance adoption on September 10, 1997; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan; NOW, WHEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to revise the Zoning District Map to change 9.81 acres currently zoned RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) as described by the application and plat submitted, subject to the attached conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and the property owner. This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 10th day of September, 1997 by the following recorded vote: James L. Longerbeam, Chairman Yea W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Yea Charles W. Orndoff, Sr. Yea O:\AGENDAS\REZONE\ W ESIRIDG-RES PDRes #011-97 Richard C. Shickle Margaret B. Douglas Robert M. Sager A COPY ATTEST John Riley, Jr. / Frederick County Administrator Yea Yea Yea REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Number 63-((A))-3 WESTRIDGE GLAIZE DEVELOPMENTS, INC. Preliminaa Matters Pursuant to Section 15.1 - 491.1 ems„ 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 # CC3- q I for the rezoning of approximately 9.81 acres from RA Zoning District to the RP Zoning District, development of the subject property shall be done in conformity with the terms and conditions set forth herein, except to the extent that such terms and conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the applicant and such be approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors in accordance with Virginia law. In the event that such rezoning is not granted, then these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and of no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon the applicant and their legal successors or assigns. G neral Development Plan 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 9.81 acre tract, lying on the west side of Middle Road in the Back Creek Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia from RA to RP, the undersigned will submit a Master Development Plan that will provide for a street layout connecting with the State Route 628 (Middle Road) via West View Lane, and, as shown on the attached Addendum "A" - Proposed 50' R/W, Concept Plan for Westridge, Section III, dated February 19, 1996. The undersigned voluntarily proffers that the rezoned property shall not be subdivided into more -than -twenty-five (25) -single-family-home-lots-and--there shall - not be constructed thereon more than twenty-five (25) single family detached houses and further no apartments, duplexes or other multi -family buildings shall be constructed on the property. Consumer Notification 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 9.81 acre tract, lying on the west side of Middle Road in the Back Creek Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia from RA to RP, the undersigned will provide notice to each new lot purchaser that this property is located in Frederick County and that various governmental services may be different than the portion of the Westridge subdivision that is located outside of Frederick County. PAGE 2 REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Number 63-((A))-3 WESTRIDGE GLAIZE DEVELOPMEN'T'S, INC. Monetaa 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 9.81 acre tract, lying on the west side of Middle Road in the Back Creek Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia from RA to RP, the undersigned will pay to Frederick County, at the time a building permit is applied for, the sum of four thousand one hundred seventy-two dollars and twenty- eight cents ($9:,172.28) per approved lot ($3,581.20 for Schools and $591.08 for Parks & Recreation) plus, twelve dollars and sixty-one cents ($12.61) per approved lot to be paid to Frederick County for the Stephens City Fire and Rescue Company. In essence, the total sum of four thousand one hundred eighty-four dollars and eighty- nine cents ($4,184.89) will be paid at the time a building permit is applied for, for each lot approval. 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: l_—� 1� o . GLAIZE DEVELOPMENTS, INC. STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE CITY OF WINCHESTER, To -wit: The foregoing". strument was acknowledged before me this 323 day of July, 1997, by 1.�� m/l_j. 1& j(' of Glaize Developments, Inc.. My Commission expires /zc,% Notary Public Concept Pln N/F Koonce N/F Cother 2W M-th Cameron s� r�w1•a ;_zr3�,a WE STRID GE in o -4 Secti®n. III ,a L6 PROPOSED cn Frederick County, �.. O dwg. no: 'weeLdwg Job no: p 501 R/w C1 �! iso—C ad. ore.n.%.h on» drown by. e9 date: February 19, 1996 Q, ,rale kk.b". vfrgWa 22401 (340) M-2113 approved by. CEMscale: 1'-200' _ Frederick - - ----- City of NSF Allen -"-' - - --- - - ---__ _ Count -� Y � W-nche-te i Lot .- Virginia SHEET 4 OF 4 `z� r `pFS ^O 1 A\A Q �� ~ , ``� � 1 -A AN0 200 400 j 800 00 f''nrgd*dons of UDA Expansion November 10, 1999 May 8, 2002 Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E. G.W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 COUNTY o FREDERICK Department of Planning 2nd Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 5,40/6165-6395 RE: Westridge Expansion into Frederick County; Joseph A. Allen Property Property Identification number (PIN) 63-A-2 Dear Chuck: It was a pleasure to meet with you, Jim Vickers, and Richie Wilkins yesterday, May 6, 2002, to discuss potential development plans for the Allen property. This tentative development plan would establish 12,000 square foot single-family lots within the City portion of the property, and single-family small lots within that portion of the property located in the County. As you are aware, the Urban Development Area (UDA) was expanded on November 10, 1999 to include the subject site. Upon review of the Board of Supervisors' action on this date, it appears the Board approved the UDA expansion with the condition that access be provided from Cedar Creek Grade through the subject parcel to Westview Lane within Westridge, Section III, to ensure improved public service provisions, without traversing the City of Winchester's street system. Therefore, it appears that in order to utilize the UDA policy boundary, the subsequent development should provide access to Cedar Creek Grade within Frederick County, Please contact me with any questions. ERL/rsa Attachment AICP Director cc: Jim Vickers, Oakcrest Realty, 2055 Valley Ave., Winchester Richie Wilkins, Wilkins Development Co., 13 S. Loudoun St., Winchester U:1Eric\CommonlRezonings120021A11en\access issue.wpd 107 North Rent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 COUNT -l' o F D TIC Departmenl of Plan- ding and Deveiapu3eui 5401665-5651 FAX: 540/673-0682 November 18, 1999 Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 200 N. Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: REQUEST TO EXPAND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA Dear Steve: This letter is to confirm action taken by the Board of Supervisors at the November 10, 1999 meetil-ig. Your request for an expansion of the Urban Development Area (UDA) to incorporate parcel 63-A-2 of Joseph A. Allen, et als was approved with the condition that access is provided from Cedar Creek Grade through this parcel to Westview bane within Westridge, Section III. If you have any further questions on the approval of this request, please feel free to call this office. Sincerely, 3 Evan I Wyatt Deputy Director EAW/ch cc: Steve Melnikof� VDOT Jane Anderson, Real Estate O'\AgrndaslAPPR_DEN.LTR\W.AIV@R EXEbWVoscphAne UDA-exp-wpd 107 North Ke:at SJIr,?Ct o Winchester, Virginia 2245A1 -544A) C0U ITA r:t FR.Ei_DE ICI\- Depni—tment of Planr_ln,-, and Develupmant 54015�i�-St�� t FAX: 54,f 16734,632 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Board of Supervisors FROM: Evan A_ Wyatt, Deputy Planning Director c a RE: Urban Development Area Expansion Request of Joseph A. Allen, et als DATE: October 22, 1999 The Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) considered a request to allow for the expansion of the Urban Development Area (UDA) to incorporate parcel 63-A-2 of Joseph A Allen, et als during their August 9, 1999 meeting. Mr. Stephen Gyurisin, representative of Mr. Joseph A. Allen, et als, advised the CPPS that parcel 63-A-2 is a 16.9 -acre portion of a 41 -acre parcel which is severed by the city/county boundary line. The 24.1 -acre portion within the City of Winchester Corporate Limits is zoned LR (Low Density Residential) District which allows single family detached residential units on 12,000 -square -foot lots, while the 16.9 -acre portion within Frederick County is zoned RA, (Rural Areas) District. Mr. Gyurisin also advised the CPPS that the Frederick County Sanitation Authority Board approved a request to allow this acreage to be served with public water - and sewer by the City of Winchester Public Utilities should this acreage be incorporated into the UDA. The CPPS felt that this request was analogous to the Board of Supervisors' approval of expanding the UDA boundary to incorporate the nine -acre tract for the Westridge Subdivision which was also severed by the city/county boundary line. Furthermore, the CPPS felt that this particular request would allow for improved public services by creating a local street network between this parcel and the Westridge Subdivision which would connect Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622) and Middle Road (Route 628). The CPPS recommended unanimous approval of this request with a condition that the development of this property provide access from Cedar Creek Grade to a connection with the Westridge Subdivision to ensure improved public services through a complete road network. Mr. Gyr uri,sin advised the CPPS that the developers of the Alien tract would be amenable to constructing a road network from Cedar Creek Grade to Westridge Lane, including the off-site improvement within the Westridge Subdivision. 107 North Dent Strzet . lylinchester. Vir-rola 22601-000 Page -2- Joseph A. Allen, et als Memo October 22, 1999 At the Planning Commission's public hearing on October 6, 1999, members of the Commission believed the extension of Westview Lane in Section 1111 was the most important connection needed because it would allow direct access to the Frederick County portion of the development, via Cedar Creek Grade, and County public service personnel, such as the sheriff,. fire and rescue, and school buses, would not have to traverse streets in the City of Winchester. There were no citizen comments concerning this UDA expansion request. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the request with the condition that the development provide access to Cedar Creek Grade from Westview Lane in Section III to ensure improved public services. Please find included under this agenda item a letter from Mr. Stephen Gyurisin to Mr. Evan Wyatt, dated July 30, 1999, correspondence from the Frederick County Sanitation Authority to Mr. Evan Wyatt dated September 20, 1999, a location map depicting the Joseph A. Allen, et als property, a plat of the Joseph A. Allen, et als property within Frederick County and the City of Winchester, and a digital image of the parcel which goes from the southern boundary north to Cedar Creek Grade. EAW/rsa Attachments U.\Evan\Common\CompPlan\W atrSe,�vr\JoeAllenUDAExpansioiiRequestForPIN63-A-2-BOSMemo. wpd -2 - Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB)-10/1919911(Itg. Mr. Robert M. Morris, HRAB member, reported that the HRAB discussed possible projects the I-IRAB could embark upon this year Mr_ Morris said that in the past, the HRAB has only responded to zoning requests; however, the BRAB believes there is a great deal more the group could do, perhaps pursuing opportunities for historic overlay districts, or becoming a certified local government for historic preservation. Mr. Morris also reported that Maral Kalbian was present at the meeting with a number of copies of her new, book entitled, "Frederick County, Virginia - Hstory Through Architecture." Sanitation Authority (SA) -10118199 Mtg. Mrs. Marjorie Copenhaver, Planning Commission liaison to the SA, said that Wellington Jones, the SA's Engineer/Director, reported that 10%z" of rain fell in September, which raised and stabilized quarry levels. She reported that the SA concluded test pumping at the Back Creek well and during the test, 1,200 gallons per minute were pumped for 96 hours. She said the results were positive. Mrs. Copenhaver also reported that new connections for water and sewer have been running about 400 per year for the past few years, according to Mr. Jones. She said Mr. Jones bad commented that these figures point to the fact that growth within the County is "controlled growth," as compared to the end of the 1980's, when the SA was averaging about 1,000 new connections per year. PUBLIC HEARINGS Request to expand the. Urban Development Area (UDA) by incorporation of a 16.9 -acre portion of a 41 - acre parcel. This parcel is located on the south side of Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622), adjacent to the City of Winchester Corporate Boundary, in the Back Creek Magisterial District, and is identified with P.I.N. 63-A-2, zoned RA (Rural Areas). Action - Recommended Approval with Condition Mr_ Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Planning Director, said that the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) considered.a request to allow the expansion of the Urban Development Area (UDA) to incorporate a 16.9 -acre portion of 41 -acre parcel, which is severed by the City/County boundary line. He said the property is owned by Joseph A. Allen, et als. Mr. Wyatt advised the Commission that the Frederick County Sanitation Authority Board approved a request to allow this acreage to be served with public water and sewer by the City of Winchester Public Utilities, as there are no lines from the Frederick County Sanitation Authority in this area. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1999 Page 427 -3 - Mr. Wyatt continued, stating that the CPPS believed the Allen request was analogous to the Westridge Subdivision UDA expansion request, which was also a portion of a larger tract that was severed by the City/County line. He said the CPPS believed the Allen request would allow for improved public services by creating a local street network between the Allen parcel and the Westridge Subdivision, connecting Cedar Creek. Grade (Rt. 622) and Niiddle Road (Rt. 628). Mr. Wyatt stated that the CPPS recommended approval of the Allen request with the condition that the development of the property provide access from Cedar Creels Grade to a connection with the Westridge Subdivision to ensure improved public services through a complete road network. Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin with G W. Clifford & Associates, Inc., the engineering/design firm representing the applicant, was available to answer questim from the Commission. Mr. Gyurism pointed out two different connection points that could be made with Westridge Subdivision. Members ofthe Planning Commission believed the extension of Westview Lane in Section III was the most important connection needed because it would allow direct access to the Frederick County portion of the development, via Cedar Creek Grade. It was noted that the County's public service personnel, such as the sheriff fire and rescue, and school buses, would not have to traverse streets in the City of Winchester to get to the site. The Plnnning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the request with the condition that the development provide access to Cedar Creek Grade from Westview Lane in Section III to ensure improved public services. There were no mtiz-n comments. Upon motion made by Mr. Ours and seconded by Mr. Romme, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does herebyunanimously recommend approval of the request to expand the Urban Development Area (UDA) by the incorporation of a 16.9 -acre portion of a 41 -acre parcel, identified with PLN. 63-A-2 in the Back Creek District, and owned by Joseph A. Allen, et als with the condition that the development provide access to Cedar Creek Grade from Westview Lane in Section III to ensure improved public services. Request by Fellowship Bible Church to extend water and sewer service outside of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). This parcel is located on the south side of Afiddle Road (Rt. 628) and the north side of Apple Valley Road (Rt. 652) in the Back Creek Magisterial District and is identified with P.I.N. 63-A-14. ,Action - Recommended Approval Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Planning Director, stated that the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) considered a request to allow we extension ofpub;ic water and sewer service to the Fellowship Bible Church property during their September 13, 1999 meeting. Mr. Wyatt said the Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1999 Page 423 C� • • COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Planning Director RE: Public )Bearing - UDA Expansion to Incorporate the Racey Tract DATE: November 7, 2002 Staff has received a request from Christopher Consultants, LTD, to consider incorporating the entire Racey tract within the Urban Development Area (UDA). The property is located south of Fairfax Pike (Route 277), east of Town Run Lane (Route 1012), and west of Double Church Road (Route 641). The applicants have requested to expand the Urban Development Area (UDA) to incorporate approximately 26 acres of the 132 -acre tract ("Racey Tract") that is identified as Parcel 85-A-140, zoned RA (Rural Areas) District, and located southwest of the Woodside Estates subdivision. Approximately 106 acres of the tract are presently located within. the UDA. The map prepared by the applicant's agent (attached) delineates the subject parcel and the location of the UDA as it traverses the parcel. The map also indicates a potential vehicular access plan for the property, if the entire property is included into the UDA. Additional information pertaining to the -132-acre parcel and -adjoining area has been provided in letters from Louis-Canonico—R.E., Vice— President-Loudoun, icePresident-Loudoun, Christopher.Consultants, LTD., to Eric Lawrence, dated July 22, 2002; October 14, 2002; and most recently, November 7, 2002. The applicant has made some modifications to the request in response to the CPPS, the Planning Commission, and the Board of Supervisors' comments; the changes are included in the information attached. This request is being presented to the Commission for consideration during a public hearing; a recommendation to forward to the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. Please contact staff with any questions. Thank you. ERL/cih Attachments 107 North Kent Street A Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 UDA EXPANSION REQUEST RACEY TRACT Staff Report for the Planning Commission Public Hearing Prepared: November 7, 2002 Staff Contact: Eric Lawrence This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this comprehensive planning matter. PROPOSAL: To expand the Urban Development Area (UDA) by 26 acres PLANNED USE: Suburban Residential Uses LOCATION: The property is located south of Fairfax Pike (Route 277), east of Town Run Lane (Route 1012), and west of Double Church Road (Route 641). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon PROPERY'V ID NUMBERS: 85-A-140 PLANNING STAFF EVALUA'T'ION: Existing Conditions The subject site, as well as the properties adjoining to the east and south, are presently zoned RA (Rural Areas) and are 1n a-,ncultural uses. Suburban residential development [Woodside, The Meadows, Ridgefield, and Southern Hills; zoned RP (Residential Performance)] is located north and west of the subject property. The Town of Stephens City's abandoned sewage lagoon is located immediately adjacent to the subject property's western property line. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 10/02/02 discussion Comments Offered Board of Supervisors: 10/23/02 discussion Schedule Public Hearing Planning Commission: 11/20/02 Public Hearing Pending Board of Supervisors: 01/08/03 Public Hearing Pending PROPOSAL: To expand the Urban Development Area (UDA) by 26 acres PLANNED USE: Suburban Residential Uses LOCATION: The property is located south of Fairfax Pike (Route 277), east of Town Run Lane (Route 1012), and west of Double Church Road (Route 641). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon PROPERY'V ID NUMBERS: 85-A-140 PLANNING STAFF EVALUA'T'ION: Existing Conditions The subject site, as well as the properties adjoining to the east and south, are presently zoned RA (Rural Areas) and are 1n a-,ncultural uses. Suburban residential development [Woodside, The Meadows, Ridgefield, and Southern Hills; zoned RP (Residential Performance)] is located north and west of the subject property. The Town of Stephens City's abandoned sewage lagoon is located immediately adjacent to the subject property's western property line. UDA Expansion Public Hearing - Racey Tract Page 2 November 8, 2002 Comprehensive Policy Pian Land Use Plan The Racey Tract is not located within a particular small area land use plan. The tract is bounded on the north, east, and west by residential uses. The initial location of the County's Urban Development Area (UDA) bisected the subject property; 106 acres of the property's total 132 acres are presently located within the UDA. Therefore, approximately 20 percent of the parcel is located outside of the presently adopted UDA boundary. The Double Church Road Agricultural and Forestal District borders the tract's southern and eastern boundary. The property was also included in the Double Church Road Agricultural and Forestal District until its removal in 2001. Transportation Neither the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan nor the Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS) identify a proposed road system that would provide access to the subject property. The subject site presently does not have direct frontage on a publicly maintained arterial or collector roadway. Double Church Road, identified as a major collector road in the Comprehensive Policy Plan, is located east of the subject site. The subject site does not presently have access to this major collector road. ------Two localstreets-within the-Woodsidedev-cl-opment are available for -futures extension -into the subject site. If utilized, these local streets should only be available to provide secondary access to the site. COMPREHENSIVE PLANS ANIS PROGRAMS SUBCOMMITTEE (CPPS) SUMMARY & ACTION OF 09/09/02 MEETING: The CPPS felt that it was good comprehensive planning to look at the entire tract when planning for future development; therefore, it made sense to include the entire tract in the UDA. The CPPS was also concerned that if the request is approved, the UDA would be adjacent to the Double Church Road Agricultural and Forestal District, The Committee expressed concern with the enticement a Racey tract development might have on the adjoining property, as the preliminary designs for the Racey tract indicate the establishment of a road along the property line shared by the adjoining agricultural use. The CPPS recommended approval of the request to include the entire Racey Tract in the UDA. UDA Expansion Public Hearing - Racey Tract Page 3 November 8, 2002 PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION SUMMARY FROM 10/02/02 MEETING: The Commission concurred with the CPPS--it was good planning to look at the entire tract when considering future development. The Commission did have concerns regarding the tract's vehicular accessibility and proximity to the Agricultural District. While the Commission did support the request for expansion, it was emphasized that if the rezoning is pursued, the applicant would be expected to address and resolve the transportation and buffering concerns against the Agricultural District. The Commission also noted that the UDA line should be realigned with property lines on properties east and west of the site. Staff contacted the affected property owners, and was advised of their preference to not have the UDA line realigned as it pertains to their respective properties. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DISCUSSION SUMMARY FROM 10/23/02 MEETING: The Board directed staff to schedule a public hearing for further consideration of the request. U-\COMMI"rTEES\CPPS\Projects\2002 Projects\Racey UDA Request\PC Public Heating-memo.wpd christopher consultants / engineering - surveying - land planning November 7, 2002 Mr. Eric R. Lawrence, AICP Director Frederick County Department of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Racey Tract UDA Request Dear Eric: We are submitting herewith the pertinent information relating to SCP, Inc.'s request to have the UDA line adjusted on the Racey Tract such that the UDA line would be coincident with the Racey Tract boundary. We wish to emphasize that the basic nature of this request has not changed since it was originally brought before the Planning Commission's Comprehensive Plan Committee and the Planning Commission as a whole in work session. However, in the intervening months since Planning Commission members were first exposed to this request, the applicant has worked very diligently with the County staff, several adjoining property owners, and of course, the Board of Supervisors. Based on input received, as well as input from the original Planning Commission meetings, the applicant has made a number of changes to the original concept, as can be seen from the enclosed illustrative drawings. The applicant wishes to bring the following information to the Planning Commission's attention. While the adjustment to the UDA line would bring approximately 26 more acres within the UDA area, the applicant through a rezoning request is prepared to establish a permanent buffer along the Racey Tract's southern and eastern boundary, which is coincident to the existing Agricultural District boundary. The total acreage within this buffer area is approximately 14 acres, thus over half the amount of acreage being added to the UDA would not be developed with houses but would remain as buffer against active farming uses. The applicant respects, and will continue to respect the rights of the agricultural uses, and the need to buffer such uses. The applicant will insure future residents are fully aware of the adjoining active farm use. Pursuant to the document entitled "Fairview — Springhill Farms, Request for Consideration for Racey Development Master Plan", the applicant, through a rezoning application, is willing to proffer to a berming and landscaping plan for the permanent buffer along the Ag District boundary. As can be seen from the enclosed letter from Mr. John Stelzl to Mr. Rick Ours, he believes this concept meets the intent of his document. The plantings within this buffer that the applicant would be willing to proffer to would meet or exceed those as outlined in the above referenced document. ■ The applicant has heard through its meetings with the Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors, County staff and local VDOT officials that transportation will be a major issue in christopher consultants, ltd. voice 703.444.3707 45940 horseshoe drive, suite 100 fax 703.444.5230 sterling, virginia 20166 web site www.christopherconsultants.com Mr. Eric R. Lawrence, AICP Racey Tract LIDA Request November 7, 2002 Page 2 terms of any rezoning of the Racey Tract. The applicant is working diligently with a traffic consultant and has met with VDOT to specifically define and hopefully, through'the proffer., system, address those transportation issues which are most releventto,the Racey Tract rezoning such that approval of the rezoning will not only mitigate any traffic impacts generated by the Racey Tract, but indeed will improve the overall transportation network in, this portion of Frederick County, both in the near term and the long term. We look forward to presenting this proposal in greater detail at,the Planning Commission's public meeting. We welcome the opportunity to continue to work with the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission, the County staff and the citizens of Frederick County so as to ensure that the ultimate development of the Racey Tract will be in concert with all of Frederick"County's goals and objectives relating to development in this portion of the County. Very truly yours,,,----? Louis Ca onico, P.E. Vice President — Loudoun LC:dmo cc: Mr. Scott Plein V�- "\ ,_ J' r i 1 ► LEGEND c: EXISTING UDA LINE co , �PROPOSED UDA LINE _:�J► SITE BOUNDARY U `y *;x�_ PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS' Qy 40 1. ' �" 1 �' i_ ��! '�,ii } / ✓ tQi. % !< I p� 15% SLOPES & BUFFER AREAS* ; _ PROPOSED VEHICULAR - � .. 0) _ a t 4x OG CIRCULATION �(j f + << .fes; j,j �L i� - - - �� \�,'�� PROPOSED UDA AREA 7J �� l� �/� it \� TO BE ADJUSTED �►. 1 _ , . t * APPROXIMATE SIZE, SHAPE, & LOCATION lu ��, --` �� _ I/ti J ,�'� FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY. - , 1 1 �f� � / ` it � � i - 'fJ {9. "Et��`. �.I%��''� \ �7 (r j ` / \ A -,k Ti lilt➢�-.; -, �_,_ � c_ i ff l v S ,{VI .'� .� _ 't_ YL4'%, i ? S '''ff t->�•`r3+.` I - �''" i— _:_ - "� r 9 X- a/ N t f p /) — F R t , \ I / ;` no a oo zno o "-. . SCALE h7 ,TI�RLEl' gw i P "Ei AI i i ( Ir - �W G'v l- _ I L \ 4 'ST PSONI f PROP Ta(NF v ijtAcRY OPERTY HI A LINE}-ly .(105.7 A WITHIN UD A � i _ ". ,.h � � / � ` ^''� f . � E atNA &5 A tat I � ? • -� :" �� -- III e,- I n I 1 i f i E R 1 PREP �Y I, �i.\. I i ` -((f `\.. \'•4-'R %� -,-_:i r - / r .i ` - t.. ecaf i / f.- - r TOWN OF r- 7`J ' / / ciy ' ('t '✓ ` �- I l 1 STEPHEN - CITY �. ` .y \ , ,� % --"_ ' `., EXISTlirfia, � 4f UDA LINIE�? RACEYi'ROPlHft71l., ' E L N jar ��,\ \. .,\ -(yp, '..• ` /'y 1 2 �� q- t /" l eti .� {26.5 AsC +/ (/ISf6 OF UCA LINE) ..`� /�, z I \ O F� r F (y '�.. /j/,♦ F axTE LiocCD[/ -`~ J AP•PR0 4s P 1_ CC ATION :ROPO5LU ACCESS FST of APPROMA7IE Lo ON OF /!- _ '! � N G HPROPOSED ACCESS PONT M N z-- (3rLMITSOF FLOODPLAIN ✓rARM5 pCadzQy, UwW J SOPT R� \ FREDERICK PROPOSED SANITATION ` / 1 t r / / 11 f \ _ �. \UDA LINE LAGOON Y r ` y j 'i! // A �a /yam `-,,� J �-�-` _ / ft �7C V N / 1tt I t� PROJECT NO: OI�I-DI �• ! \ / �� 4 J SCALE: i t / ` r roo �� _N ,\�``�,� �� j f�t� � �f � ��.---, PROP�R� ( / �� DATE- `\ DESICN: M,D CHECKG ED: SHEET No. • Ll - GTJU 09/2 �i i '/2002 15:33 5408691 STELZL PAGE 01 FAIRVIEW SPRINGHILL FARMS September 27, 2002 Mr. Rick Ours 461 Westmoreland Drive Stephens City, Virginia 22655 Dear Mr. Ours, johri and Sarah S telzl 560 Grim Road "Stephens Cit ,, Virginia 22455 . Home: (540) 869-0643 Office/fax: (540) 869-1327 F_mail: st Azl@ vist�k. corn Scott Plein of SCP, Inc. will be presenting the master development pian for the Charles Racey farm at your October 2°d meeting. As I'm sure .you are aware this farm was a part of the core for the Double Churches A.,g District. In November of last year, I voiced my concern to Chris Tierney and Evan Wyatt about this property being rezoned for development. The planning staff forvwxied my concerus to the devel«per (Mr. Plein) and we have met and talked several times. Aside from the big issues over develorpment (water, w -w=, taxes, trffic etc.) I have more immediate concerns. Houses m,(Mag next to wo -king farmland provides many chances for rural/urban type conflicts to occur. In my ,meetings with ldir. Plein and tae planning staff, I offered several suggestions to minimize future conflicts. They are: • living buffer of evergreen trees • bous es as far removed from the farm boundary rss possible • deed notation to new home owners that they are moving next to working farmland, and normal farming practices will continue up to tEe farm/development boundary Mr. Plein' s master development plan (:ells for a minimum of 50 feet along the farm E ide boundaries of mixed evergreen and deciduous trams. The plan calls for a minimum of 6' heights and calipers of at least 2-21/2 inch calipers. I telieve that this is appropriate. 09/27/2002 15:33 540869 STELZL PAG:7- 02 The development blue prints show an access road.along the buffer zonaelfarmland, with houses on the development side of the road. This would certainly hc1p, to keep the new residences as far as possible from the, farmland. Mr. Plein was agreeable to the deed :notation idea. However, he did have some concern as to whether or not the deed would be the appropriate. document in which to mare the notation. My goal is for the neve homeowners (either first time or r*We) to be alerted to the fact that they've moved next to worldug farmland not open land or public use areas. If they purchase a home next to the fwvland they will respect it as such and agree that normal farming practices will continue on the him side up to the de4elopment boundary_ I believe that this notation is paramotust to retaining the integrity and purpose of thf. Ag. DistriFt. It is my ultimate wish that this land remain farmland so that there would be no development adjacent to my farm. B owever, I realize that this land is slated for development because it is in the UDA, I believe that "W Plein has awed a reasonable plan that respects the integrity of the Ag District. If tLe planning conunission moves to rezone this propenes F-mVestfullY request that the rezoning be on thr condition of to buffer, setbac rand deed notation ieq reme7nts that are outlined above. Sincerely, John Stelzl Fairview -Springhill Farm Cc_ Mr. Scott Plein Mr. Roger Thomas Mr. Charles DeHaven, Yr. x FAIRVIEW SPR.INGHILL FARMS REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION FOR RACEY DEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 5, 2001 Fairview -Springhill Farms New planting benefiting from Nutrient Management Plan and organic fertilizer ce I. Setback - Development shall place all houses 200 feet from property line. The 200 foot buffer between houses and adjacent Ag District shall be designated permanent open space. • Fairview -Springhill Farms (FSF) current Nutrient Management Plan (NMP) requires a 200 foot setback from occupied dwellings when spreading slurry. • FSF depends on nutrients from slurry to grow crops to feed cattle. • FSF depends on current cropland acreage (including some custom spread for the neighboring Scothom farm) to utilize by-products from the hog finishing operation. • If the Racey development places houses 10 feet from the fence line (property line), FSF will lose 3.5 acres of cropland. (NMP allows for spreading of commercial fertilizer within setback zones; however this is costly.) Above picture shows Racey's field. The Brome Sedge growing on the Racey farm shows an imbalance of nutrients, which yields a lower quality feed value to pasture or crops harvested. This shows what happens to land left unattended. Neighboring Scothorn Farm will lose approximately 4.5 acres if houses are built within 10 feet of fence line. FSF slurry is custom spread on Scothom land. This can be viewed as a "taking" of land without compensation. At the very least, it is an inconvenience which FSF has neither requested nor will benefit from. The Domino Effect • The Scothom farm was inherited by three brothers; only one of whom wishes to farm. The development of the Racey farm will no doubt impact this farm as well. • If the Scothom farm is developed, with houses 10 feet from the property line, FSF will lose a total of 9.2 acres of our crop land as well as the custom spreading of the Scothom land. • The picture below shows FSF pond in field adjacent to Scothom property. NMP requires a 50 foot setback from the pond. If future development went up to the H. Buffer - The developer shall plant and maintain evergreen trees (i.e. Leyland Cypress) on the development side of the property line. • While most people relish the sight of cattle grazing in green pastures, the smell of the cattle manure or slurry from the hogs and the sound of tractors churning up dust early in the morning are not so picture$que. • Likewise, the farmers are screened from the sight of a subdivision on once -green pastures. • Screening can reduce problems like attractive nuisances (ponds, woods, barns, etc.) as well as discourage trespassing. These are safety issues as well as property rights issues. • A good natural buffer is a good planning tool for both sides of the fence. M. Notation in Deed - Every deed must indicate that the potential homeowners are moving next to an Ag District, and that they will be living next to working farms, not picturesque open space. This should be in the deed, so that future property owners will be advised of this as well as first time buyers in the development. • The need for this is self-explanatory. It is important that the working nature of the farms be stressed so that people are not expecting to move next to parkland. • Subdivision Deeds shall expressly reserve the right of adjacent landowners to conduct normal farm practices up to the property line (i.e. spreading of slurry, harvesting crops, timber, etc.) regardless of final setback. IV. Traffic - All traffic should be routed through existing Woodside I and II entrances or to Route 277. Double Church Road is already too busy. Traffic increased exponentially with the addition of Woodside I and H. Individual home sites (5 acre lots outside of subdivisions) are dramatically on the rise, which also causes traffic concerns. An additional subdivision entrance would be a crippling blow to Double Church Road residents. Route 277 is better suited to handle the traffic with better signal control, planned widening of 277 and fewer residents whose own driveways open to 277 (west of Bank of Clarke County). �ace� 3.S A/ \3A christopher consultants engineering surveying - land planning October 14, 2002 Mr. Eric R. Lawrence, AICP Director County of Frederick Department of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Racey Tract UDA Adjustment Request Dear Mr. Lawrence: Pursuant to your request, I am providing herewith an updated package regarding SCP, Inc.'s request for an expansion of UDA limit line, specifically in regards to the UDA limit in the vicinity of the Racey Tract. It is my understanding that the Board of Supervisors will be addressing this issue as a discussion item at their upcoming October 23, 2002 meeting. As you know, on July 22, 2002, we transmitted to you a letter requesting a UDA line adjustment. That letter outlined our justification for the request and it included an exhibit showing the actual area of the Racey Tract, which would be effected by the UDA line adjustment. The reasons in that'letter remain valid in terms of justification for the UDA adjustment request. A copy of that letter is enclosed herewith for your convenience. Included herewith is a revised exhibit as it relates to the UDA line adjustment. This exhibit does not change the location of the requested UDA line adjustment, but does address a number of comments garnered in the time since the original request was made. The changes made were a result of input received from the Comprehensive Plan Committee of the Planning Commission, as well as that of the entire Planning Commission's comments, each made at their respective work sessions on.this request. Based on the valuable input received, the applicant has revised Urban Development Area exhibit drawing. The major change to that exhibit was an adjustment of the green space, such that an area of at least 150 feet in width parallels the ultimate UDA line. (As can be seen from the exhibit, some areas will have an even greater green space area). The applicant is maintaining the concept of providing a spine road or reservation area for dedication of such a roadway along the entire southern boundary of the Racey Tract, within the proposed green space area. The applicant's concept is that between the expanded UDA line and the spine road area, there will be a permanent vegetative buffer made up of evergreen trees and indigenous plant material. The spine road, permanent green space and vegetative buffer will thus be coincident with the Racey Tract southern and eastern boundaries. This proposed design is in keeping with Mr. John Stelzl's buffer plan and subsequent correspondence, copies of which are also attached hereto for the Board's reference. Finally, with respect to the transitional green space buffer area, we would like the Board to note that since our initial application, we have removed all proposed lots from the south and east of the spine road alignment and that none of the new homes that will be proposed in the rezoning application for the Racey Tract will front the proposed spine road. All proposed lots in the rezoning application will be accessed from the internal road network north of the UDA buffer area. christopher consultants, ltd. voice 703.444.3707 45940 horseshoe drive, suite 100 fax 703.444.5230 sterling, virginia 20166 web site www.chiistopherconsultants.com Mr. Eric R. Lawrence, AICP Racey Tract UDA Adjustment Request October 14, 2002 Page 2 The other change from the original concept is that we have shown the proposed`spine road intersecting directly with Town Run Lane. SCP, Inc. has a signed agreement4ith the Town of Stephen's City for a right-of-way to Town Run Lane. In exchange for this right-of,Way, SCP, Inc. will ` be closing the abandoned Stephen's City sewage lagoon, upon SCP, Inc.,s"opef6frezoning of the , Racey Tract. SCP, Inc. believes that the closing of this sewage lagoon will not,only benef[t the�Town of Stephen's City, but the other communities around this abandoned site as well: Scott Plein of SCP, Inc. and I look forward to presenting this proposal at.the Board of Supervisors' `I work session on October 23. We anticipate that we will receive *itional,productive input from the E Board and will, if appropriate, further update the proposed UDA line`adjustmentbased on this input! ,I. Very truly yours, ` Louis Canonico, P.E. , Vice President — Loudoun LC:dmo cc: Mr. Scott Plein ►/ christopher consultants / engineering surveying land planning s July 22, 2002 Mr. Eric Lawrence, AICP Planning Director Frederick County 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Racey Tract UDA Line Adjustment Dear Mr. Lawrence: The purpose of this letter is to request an adjustment to the Urban Development Area (UDA) limit line in the vicinity of the Racey Tract. The Racey Tract is more specifically identified as Parcel 140 on Frederick County Tax Map 85A. The parcel is currently zoned Rural Area and contains a total of 132 acres. Based on the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan, approximately 106 acres of the tract fall within the UDA as currently prescribed by the Comprehensive Plan. The specific nature of this request is to adjust the UDA limit line so as to be coincident with the existing boundary lines of the Racey Tract. This would add the balance of the Racey Tract, i.e. 26 acres to the UDA area (see attached exhibit drawing). SCP, Inc. is the contract purchaser of the Racey Tract. It is their intent to file a rezoning of the Racey Tract to the Residential Performance (RP) Zoning District. SCP, Inc. believes that this adjustment of the UDA is in keeping with the goals and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. By adjusting the UDA as requested, it will not only conform to existing property lines but will better reflect the limits of existing drainage sheds which are served by sanitary sewer service. All of the drainage sheds within the Racey Tract including that area which would be adjusted into the UDA can connect to existing sewer lines in close proximity to the boundaries of the property. Existing water service is also available at a number of locations adjacent to the property. SCP, Inc. has a pending agreement with the Town of Stephen's City, which owns the parcel immediately west of the Racey Tract. This agreement would allow the construction of the main access point to future development in this area through the extension of a roadway to the west. Based on the "Soils Surrey of Frederick County, Virginia," the type of soils found throughout the Racey Tract are primarily Berks, Clearbrook soils, with Weikert-Berks soils found along the drainage swales. The Soils Survey indicates that these soils are Class III and Class IV soils in terms of land compatibility classification, and thus have severe to very severe limitations in regards to agricultural uses. As such, this property is not considered prime agricultural land. Based on the above and the enclosed, we believe that the adjustment of the UDA as requested is in keeping with the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. The adjusted UDA better reflects the existing patterns of land use, the suitability of land for development and the existing and planned utility facilities. christopher consultants, ltd. voice 703.444.3707 45940 horseshoe drive, suite 100 fax 703.444.5230 sterling, virginia 20166 web site www.christopherconsufants.com Mr. Eric Lawrence, AICP July 22, 2002 Page 2 We would respectfully request that this adjustment to the UDA area be forwarded to your Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee at the earliest possible time. Thank you forr`your.-c�nsiderat on and action as it relates to this matter. We would be pleased to provide you with any additional information you may find necessary. In the meantime, if you have any ques�tions`or need additional information, please feel free to contact us. Very truly yo Aouis C onico, P.E. Vice President — Loudoun LC:dmo cc: Mr. Scott Plein, SCP, Inc. I t I , �r No DESCRIPTIONDATE 1 Ate% //�� /� ��` �. I i LEGEND vs,�EXISTING UDA LINE i t. tltl� tttt� 11. PROPOSED UDA LINE SITE BOUNDARY Q 5 - PROPOSED OPEN SPACE * o \\ PROPOSED VEHICULAR 10 o a / • CIRCULATION _ � � Y / / ° � � I Q ► � 1 I w N � OSED UDA AREA g PROPomm „ o TO BE ADJUSTED c o / V �a *APPROXIMATE LOCATION 19v° --- - `` bh h' '' \ �\ ;�A N 1`` —� �h � o��/ � RACEY PROPERTY I►. SITE AREA: 105.7 AC. / I (WITHIN UDA) SITE AREA: 26.5 AC. +!- (TO BE INCLUDED IN UDA) / \ I` \ TOTAL SITE AREA: 132.2 AC.Rt 111111111111111116— w, I 1 `g / J / 1 / \ ` I 1�' 12 ,��,•tA b 100 0 100 2W `APPROXIMAT= :ATIp/.�T \� i'. (u4 p)r L I r ` / / / OF PROPOSED a5 No SGV 4. 41I s y _ i !q ys.w.. r�I �/ \\ ` y1 I / (b rgllhsr� POJ 0 A IK \ ..•.. - . .:. _ . V� -u•T•T / RAPROPERTY �. ('105.7 AC. +I- +!-WITHIN UDA LINE) r\ APPRbI(OWTE LOCATI�� OF D ACCESS POINT t� W.oEY, OWW.E5 W. +PIN 85 A/4qC. 1 ,r II �- I ss.:+r::.• • / _ / t / / /S �� /� EXISTIINI ,�/ \ '\ I 265-402 [..1 EBYi :../ ¢' UDA LINEPOND - U TE/ /� \ \�\� I-:l:•.':':{:_:: .xf -.. `ED ICESS�NT /-� RAC EY PROPERTY ,-- 1 142 r / I I ( �\\�\ \--•R�''"�' U" r I �� / (26.5 AC. tl- OUTSIDE OF UDA r ` 1 l I \\ \\ \ TOWN OF TEV NS c1TT \\�\\PIN A MATE ACC ...... f/-.}-_-/ 3 +ROI(I ED E L E OR O/AD PROPOSED I J� UDA LINE. \' LIMITS OF "��.. . jj 1 \ JJ 5 r ,Its:FLOODPLAIN .. I / Pr&A= Ia arra I/ I I \ DAIS rops�a \ fF UP —2 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning ;and Development MEMORANDUM J. TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Christopher M. Mohn, AICP, Deputy Direct RE: Request for Exception to the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance SUBJECT: Foxe Towne Plaza DATE: November 5, 2002 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 Attached is one exhibit and a letter, dated October 22, 2002, from C. E. Maddox, Jr., P.E., of Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc., representing KRA Food Services, L.L.C., owner of approximately 5.649 acres, zoned B2 (Business General) in the Stonewall Magisterial District. On behalf of KRA Food Services, L.L.C., Mr. Maddox is proposing a subdivision of the property into four lots_ In order to facilitate the proposed subdivision, an exception to a requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance concerning public road access has been requested. Exhibit "A" illustrates a proposed private access easement that will serve the interior lots of the proposed subdivision. Section 144-24(C) of the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance requires that all lots abut and have direct access to a public street or right-of-way dedicated for maintenance by the Virginia Department of Transportation. As shown on Exhibit "A," the proposed private access easement would serve Lot #2 and Lot 43. The property owner is requesting an exception to the requirement of Section 144-24(C) that all lots obtain direct access from a public road to enable access to Lot #2 and Lot 93 via private easement. The approved master development plan (MDP) for this site addresses the development of multiple commercial uses on a single parcel. The parcel itself would obtain principal access from an improved Fox Ridge Lane and the internal development sites would be accessed by an internal circulation system comprised of private streets. The viability of this access arrangement was determined within the context of a development proposal located wholly within the boundaries of a single parcel. Indeed, the subsequent subdivision of the parcel was neither contemplated nor assumed by the approved MDP. The improvement of Fox Ridge Lane to VDOT standards was required by the Board of Supervisors to provide a principal means of access to the internal commercial uses that did not involve traversing the parking lot of an adjoining use. In so doing, the inter -parcel circulation system could function in a more efficient and safe manner consistent with sound planning practice. Moreover, the Deed of Dedication for the Fox Ridge Townhouse development clearly stipulated that Fox Ridge Lane was intended for public use and planned to serve future commercial development in addition to residential uses. The improvements shown on the MDP were considered an acceptable compromise that satisfied the Board's concerns, addressed the provisions of the deed, and achieved conformance with the access requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Page 2 Frederick County Planning Commission Re: Foxe Towne Plaza - Request for Exception November 5, 2002 The proposed subdivision of the site and its departure from the parcel configuration depicted on the MDP allow an opportunity to re-examine the scope of approved transportation improvements and the appropriateness ofthe internal access arrangement. The requested waiver would allow access to Lot #2 and Lot #3 exclusively by private easement thereby prompting the traffic of internal commercial uses to traverse independently owned and maintained access ways. These internal uses are projected to be a fast food restaurant and motel, the traffic of which would necessarily co -mingle on such private facilities with that of a proposed 20,000 square foot office building. As an alternative, a cul-de-sac constructed to VDOT standards may be extended into the proposed subdivision from Fox Ridge Lane. The location of this public right-of-way would be generally coincident with the path of the private inter -parcel access way shown on the MDP, thereby ensuring public road access to the internal lots as required by Section 144-24(C). A sketch of this alternative has been prepared by staff and attached as Exhibit `B" for your reference. A recommendation from the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors regarding this request is desired. CMM/rsa Attachments U:\Chris\Common\SUBDI V\Waivers\FoxeTowneYlaza. Access.wpd REQUE,57 OF WAIVER TO FREDERICK COUNTY SUBDIVS'ION ORDINANCE PARA. 144-24(C) LOT ACCESS, TO ALLOW ACCESS TO LOTS OVER AN EXISTING PRIVATE EASEMENT. RAT/OVAL.• 1. PREVENT DISTURBANCE OF EXIS77NG DENSE TREE BUFFER. 2. PREVENT DISRUP7701V OF EXISTING FOX WGE TRAF77C PATTER :! J. ALL PROPOSED LOTS WILL HAVE FRONTAGE ON EXISTING STATE ROADS. 9� (TWO ARE LIMITED ACCESS) 4. PREVENT LOSS OF p.�e COMMERCIAL S17F Z'4 OWNER/DEVELOPER.- KRA FOOD SERVICES 1625 APPLE BLOSSOM L WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 2.� 540-665-0405 i a Ass Zl- N/F Amw ZOAM BL -2 aaavar m smffm r.1, -II'' t S j � W N� 1 i a Ass Zl- N/F Amw ZOAM BL -2 aaavar m smffm r.1, -II'' t C/] Cr] W N� 1 y 1 I .� ;� 1 �4 4-1 N t 1� � v s `" o Q+ O `+ cio z I } 1 �+ It cis y Aj a,' I 1�, PIN d2 -A -19M mvp y '} Sxi# N I L5 + 1 Iry TWIN 42-A-195 i.80 ACRES ZONED. B2 RESTAURANT SLOT .> 1.456 AC. \ - RE COMMERCIAL \ 1EVELOPMENT � 1 I t \ RIGHT-OF-WAY ` \ FOR CONVENTIONAL Fr. ACm£ 9W1W AREA — \ STATE -ROADWAY- \ DISTURB 80 LF DENS < TREE BUFFER _ - Z' ,NACi W bl f V AREA ' j f+Ncl�ss� W F_ i. _ cazEss -ROAD AL FQX AWGE MAAVAJUSE 5U8Df may zaWa• RP a690VT USE RFSXIENM { E�ESS E LOT #1 - 0.965 AC. a s'e �sr EXISTING KFC RESTAURANT ow I�3 'APPRO _ BY BOARD -tom OF SUiPERVI MASTER PLAN. 9 6/02 3ROPOSED VDOT-/ �— _ - - - - - - NRN-A-ROUND PW 53 'A- 2A EASEMENT 4#rEAR y -- ZOAM RP CLO NT USE RE9MVAM V C/] Cr] W L� U d 4-1 N 0 v s `" o Q+ O cio voi Aj a,' o L5 w Iry rE V J _ U � m W J m CL U c Tv W -j o H ® U �� $ U to M N W N r c N o W i �GV�aIA 3",6 o sin r dCp > v A. U SHEET I of 1 C/] Cr] W L� U d w Q+ O o w Iry rE V J _ W J U W SCALE: 1 = 60' DATE: 10/17/02 SHEET I of 1 REQUEST OF WAIVER TO FREDERICK COUNT' SUBDIVSION ORDINANCE PARA. 144-24(C) LOT ACCESS, TO ALLOW ACCESS TO LOTS ?VER AN EXISTING PRIVATE EASEMENT. RATIONAL: 1. PREVENT DISTURBANCE OF EXISTING DENSE TREE BUFFER. Z PREVENT DISRUP77OV OF EXISTING FOX 9'DGE TRAF17C PA77ERN J. ALL PROPOSED L07S WILL HAVE FRONTAGE ON EXISTING STATE ROADS. 9� (TWO ARE LIMITED ACCESS) 4. PREVENT LOSS OF ode COMMERCIAL SITE Z4 �P OWNER/DEVELOPER.- KRA FOOD SERVICES 1625 APPLE BLOSSOM L WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 2.� 540-665-0405 RAS$ 1 V3 V3 w 1 {� L `99 4-J C3 C-4 0 4 L i � E V a r- U PkV 42 -A -19W o i N/r , o .%67H S Jvo Art/ 42-A-196 N/F ADM ZONaPr B-2 cromr USE szfrz 42-A-195 F �S 1.�■ ACRES { { NEN ZoED: B2 RES RANT le 1 LOT #4 N , 1.456 AC. RE COMMERCIAL )EVELOPMENT 6! RIGHT-OF-WAY ` FOR CONVEN110NAL FT ACnW£ BWf ? W_K SE- TATROADWAY- - i ' DISTURB 80 LF DENSE TREE BUFFER J -- ��--� uvEA I w.�nVl<I��IL MCA EN RANGE RG0'D FOR CONVENTIONAL � (Z5'INCRE9.91EGf2E33ESM7).... .' ROAD ALTERUTATE , FOX IP w 700MM, sLww_9 4V iPROPOSEO VDOTJ 2DVM RP ITURN-A-ROUND Ct*WMr U_ql ROAMML i EASeJENT LOT #1 - - 0.965 AC. me EXISTING KFC 1 ? RESTAURANT r J I 'a.e. VDOT RI T OF- AY APPROVED BY BOARD SIiPSORS MASTER PLAN. 9A/OY +A-V 5--A-49 2chm a- a#amvr usE )w >z U V3 V3 w U L `99 4-J C3 C-4 0 L N E V a r- U o o S 0 5 S E- .w w L � Q Q R t m a � � c w i7 �_ O c� o '� C-4 fx • U U L•�' d Lj N rx � � r N o _ = Q N L. W IOA O cu -0 rn `l SCALE: 1 * 60' DANE: 10/17/02 z S HIEET I of 1 V3 V3 w U C) `99 a r- E- Q Q aJ w t� c� C-4 fx SCALE: 1 * 60' DANE: 10/17/02 z S HIEET I of 1 Foxe Towne Plaza Subject: Foxe Towne Plaza Date: Tae, 5 Nov 2002 09:40:15 --0500 From: "Lineberry, Ben" <Ben.Lineberry@VirginiaDOT.org> To: 'Eric Lawrence' <elawrenc@co.frederick.va.us> CC: "Lineberry, Ben" <Ben.Lineberry@VirginiaDOT.org>, "Sweitzer, Barry" <Barry.Sweitzer aVirginiaDOT.org> VDOT has received a copy of the request for waiver of 144.24(c) of the Subdivision Ordinance which will allow each lot access over internal access easements in lieu of direct access to a state roadway. VDOT offers the following comments: * As detailed in the VDOT Comment to Request for Master Development Plan Comments, Foxe Towne Plaza dated July 29, 2002, VDOT will require a complete set of site plans, drainage calculations and traffic flow data from the T.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, Sixth Edition for review. VDCT reserves the right to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signals, and offsite roadway improvements and drainage. * VDOT would like to see how Fox Ridge Lane will be reconstructed to meet VDOT standards as stipulated in the July 30, 2002 approval of the Arby's Restaurant entrance. VDOT indicated "Please note this approval is contingent with the use of existing access to Route 739, Fox Drive, by ingress/egress over the Sheetz lot." VDOT will request a more detailed entrance plan via a portion of Fox Ridge Lane and the proposed interparcel connector as identified by VDOT comment on the final master development plan for Foxe Towne Plaza. Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to give me a call. Ben H. Lineberry Ass't. Resident Engineer VDOT - Edinburg Residency 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 (540) 984-5605 (540) 984-5607 (fax) 1 of 1 11/5/2002 10:13 AM INCORPORATED 1972 Engineers — Land Planners Water Quality 22 October 2002 Mr. Eric Lawrence Frederick County Planning 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Foxe Towne Plaza Dear Eric, Thank you for our discussions regarding the requested waiver to the subdivision ordinance. Board f)f Directors: President: Thomas J. O'Toole, P.E. Vice Presidents: Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.F. Earl R. Sutherland, RE Ronaldn Mislovvskv_ P.E. David J. Saunders, P.E. Directors: William 1- Wright Michael A. Hammer Thomas W. Price Attached please find exhibit sheet 1 of 1 which summarizes the issues. Original plans for this site involved leasehold interests for each use which does not require subdivision of the site, however, subsequent changes in approach require each use to have its own fee simple parcel. The waiver request is for paragraph 144.24(C) of the subdivision ordinance which will allow each lot access over internal access easements in lieu of direct access to a state roadway. The master development plan required to accomplish this has been approved by the Board of Supervisors on September 25, 2002. Each lot does have frontage on a state maintained road, however, access to two lots (7-t2 and #3) is denied due to limited access right of way. The traffic pattern and impacts on adjacent uses will not be affected by this waiver. Cross easement agreements created by the subdivision plats will allow access as planned in the approved master development plan. We request that you schedule the hearing required at the next available Planning Commission meeting. Sincerely yours, gilber . clifford ass ia'tcs, inc. .. E. Maddox, Jr., ,Vice President CEM/kf Enclosure cc: Mr. Homer Coffman, VDOT, Edinburg Residency Mr. Joseph Allen Mr. Ben Butler OCT 2 " 2002 DEPT, OF PLANNING/ DEVELOPMENT op 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200, Winchester, Virginia 22601 (540) 667-2139 Fax (540) 665-0493 e-mail gwcaramtcearthlink.net Memher American Consulting Engineers Council