Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 01-06-99 Meeting Agenda4 AGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia JANUARY 6, 1999 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) Election of Officers................................................(no tab) 2) Application Action Summary .......................................... A 3) Committee Reports ...................... ......................... (no tab) 4) Citizen Comments.................................................(no tab) PUBLIC HEARING 5) Rezoning #019-98 of Danford Ridge Properties, L.C., submitted by G.W. Clifford and Associates, Inc., to rezone 103.74 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance). This property is located approximately 1,400 feet south of the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Rt. 522) and W. Parkins Mill Road (Rt. 644), on the west side of Front Royal Pike (Rt. 522 South), and is identified with Property Identification Numbers 76-A-22 and 76-A-23 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. (Tabled at the 12-2-98 meeting) (Mr. Wyatt) ....................................................... B 6) Rezoning #018-98 of Carriebrooke, submitted by G.W. Clifford and Associates, Inc., to rezone 72.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance). This property is located along the eastern side of Tasker Road (Rt. 642), south of the intersection with Routes 37/1-81/847 and 642, and is identified with Property Identification Numbers 75-A- 89 and 75 -A -89A in the Shawnee Magisterial District. (Tabled at the 12-2-98 meeting) (Mr. Wyatt) ....................................................... C 7) Proposed Amendments to Chapter 165, Zoning, Article IV, Supplemental Use Regulations, establishing Section 165-48.8; Article V, RA (Rural Areas) District, Section 165-51 "Conditional Uses"; Article XXI, Definitions, establishing "Humanitarian Aid Organizational Office" of the Frederick County Code. The proposed amendments would allow for humanitarian aid organizations to establish offices and operate from the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. Performance standards would be applied to the use. The amendment also requires that a Conditional Use Permit be obtained from the Board of Supervisors prior to operating the Humanitarian Aid Organizational Office use. (Mr. Lawrence) .................................................... D e G DISCUSSION ITEMS 8) Request for Exemption from the Subdivision Ordinance Requirement, submitted by Mr. Lee Ebert on behalf of Kenneth and Ruth Lineberg. The property is located at 505 Rhinehart Lane, and is identified with Property Identification Number 27-A-78 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. (Mr. Lawrence) .................................................... E 9) Sewer and Water Service Area Expansion Request, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to include six tracts totaling 162.32 acres. These properties are located on the south side of Tasker Road (Rt. 642), just east of White Oak Road (Rt. 636) in the Shawnee Magisterial District. (Mr. Wyatt) ....................................................... F 10) Proposed 1999-2000 Capital Improvements Plan WT. Wyatt) ....................................................... G 11) TEA -21 Enhancement Project (Kernstown Battlefield site) (Mr. Ruddy) ................................. I..................... H 12) Other , r0 A)0v"'_J APPLICATION ACTION SUMMARY (printed December 18, 1998) WHOMEM Application newly submitted. n 1 su mi tted. REZONING: Danford Ridge Properties, L.C. Z 019-98 Shawnee 103.74 ac. from RA to RP for 250 S.F. homes Location: Approx. 1,400'x- south of the Rt. 522/ Rt. 644 intersection; on the west side of Rt. 522 South Submitted: 11/06/98 PC Review: 12/02/98 - tabled; 01/06/99 BOS Review: 01/27/99 Carriebrooke (REZ #018-98) Shawnee 72.7 ac. from RA to RP for 250 S.F. & M.F, homes Location: astern side of Tasker Rd. (Rt. 642); south of intersection of Routes 7/ I-81/ 847/ 642 110/23/98 Submitted: PC Review: 12/02/98 -tabled; 01/06/99 BOS Review: 01/27/99 Gore School Z #017-98 Back Creek 3.29 ac. from RA to B2 Location: 251 Gore Road (Rt. 75 1) old Rt. 50); Gore Submitted: 10/09/98 PC Review: 11/04/98 - recommended approval w/ proffers BOS Review: 12/09/98 - approved with proffers J. Carson Cline Estate (REZ #016-98 Opequon 4.70 ac. from RP to B2 Location: Along north boundary line of Fairfax Pk, (Rt. 277); approx. 0.11 miles west of Warrior Drive. Submitted: 10/13/98 PC Review: 11/04/98 - recommended approval w/ proffers BOS Review: 12/09/98 - approved with proffers Jack K Wampler, Sr., et. als. Z #015-98 Stonewall 9.30 ac. from RA to B3 and 10.70 ac. from RA to B2 Location: West side of Martinsburg Pk. (Rt. 11), about 0.5 mi. south of the intersection with Rt. 672. Submitted: 10/09/98 PC Review: 11/04/98 - tabled for 30 days; 12/02/98 - approved w/ proffers BOS Review: 12/09/98 - approved with proffers MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS: Willow Branch (MDP #006-98) Back Creek 51 single family homes on 26.895 ac. Location: W. side of Merriman's Ln. (Rt. 621) at W&W Railroad, along Rt. 37 Submitted: 10/21/98 PC Review: 12/02/98 - approved with conditions BOS Review: 01/13/99 Admin. Approved: pending Dawson Industrial Park P #005-98 Back Creek Office & Industrial Park on 26.4493 ac. 1 Location: NW quadrant of the Shady Elm Rd. (Rt. 65 1) & Rt. 37 intersection Submitted: 09/25/98 PC Review: 12/02/98 - approved with conditions BOS Review: 01/13/99 Admin. Approved: pending Applications Action Summary Printed December 18, 1998 SUBDIVISIONS: Autumn Glen, Sect. I SUB 015-98 Opequon 21 lots - duplex & multiplex (52 dwellings) on 14.8 ac. Location: South side of Tasker Rd. t. 642), 0.25 mi. East of Rt. 647 Submitted: 06/30/98 MDP#004-98(Tasker Rd Lnd Bays) MDP approved by BOS 07/08/98; MDP Pending Admin. Approval Subd. Admin. Aroved: [Phase I approved on 11/04/98 for 21 dwellings Briarwood Estates (SUB #014-98) Stonewall 184 single-family lots on 55.7887 ac Location: East side of Greenwood Rd. (Rt. 656) midway between Senseny Rd. (Rt. 657) & Valley Mill Rd. (Rt. 659) Submitted: 06/29/98 MDP #003-98 MDP approved by BOS 05/27/98; MDP Admin. Approved 06/29/98 Subd. Admin. Approved: Pending Applications Action Summary Printed December 18,1998 Mark & Rachelle Repine SUB #004-98 NO MDP Shawnee Subdivision of 1.3719 ac. into 3 s.f, lots Location: Heritage Hills Subd.; along the eastern portion of Idlewood Drive Submitted: 01/26/98 PC Review: 02/18/98 -recommended approval BOS Review: 03/11/98 - approved Admin. Approved: _-1—pending Lenoir City Co. Lot 2; Stonewall Indust. Pk. SUB #007-9 Gainesboro Subdivision of a 2.6584 ac. lot (M1) Location: McGhee Rd. (Rt. 861); approx. 1,000' from Tyson Dr. intersection Submitted: 07/28/97 MDP #006-93 Approved by BOS 07/14/93; Admin. Approved 07/28/93 Subd. Admin. Approved: Pending Dominion Knolls (SUB #005-97) Stonewall 75 s.f. zero lot line lots on 20.278 ac. Location: So.west corner of Baker Ln. (Rt. 1200) & Ft. Collier Rd. (Rt. 1322) Submitted: 05/16/97 MDP #001-97 Approved by BOS 04/09/97; Admin. Approved 06/30/97 Subd. Admin. Approved: Section 1 (25 lots) approved 06/02/98; Sections 2 & 3 Pending Winc-Fred Co. IDC SUB IFBack Creek 2 M1 Lots 0.552 acres & 20.285 acres Location: Southeast side of Development Lane Submitted: 09/08/95 MDP #003-87: Approved by BOS 07/08/87; Admin. Approved 06/08/88 Pending Admin. Approval Awaiting signed plats. Applications Action Summary Printed December 18, 1998 RT&T Partnership SUB Back Creek 1 1 Lot - 29.6 Acres 2 Location: Valley Pike (Rt. 11 So.) Submitted: 05/17/95 MDP #003-91 Approved by BOS 07/10/91; Admin. Approved 09/03/91 Pending Admin. Approval: Awaiting submission of signed plat & deed of dedication Abrams Point, Phase I (SUB) Shawnee 230 SF Cluster & Urban LotsBn--] Location: South side of Rt. 659 Submitted: 05/02/90 PC Review: 06/06/90 - recommended approval BOS Review: 06/13/90 - approved Pending Admin. Approval: Awaiting deed of dedication, letter of credit, and signed plat --] Har Stimpson SUB __j O e uon Two B2 Lots Location: Town Run Lane Submitted: 09/23/94 PC Review: 10/19/94 - recommended approval BOS Review: 10/26/94 - approved Pending Admin. Approval: Awaiting signed plat. SITE PLANS: Applications Action Summary Printed December 18, 1998 Rite Aid SP #068-98 Gainesboro Ez ansion of Truck Parkin Area 1 Location: Welltown Pike (Rt. 66 1) Submitted: 11/04/98 Approved: 11/20/98 Applications Action Summary Printed December 18, 1998 Opequon Water Reclamation Facility SP #067-98 Stonewall Upgrade of Wastewater Treatment Facility; 5 ac. disturbed Location: 3100 Berryville Pike Submitted: 11/05/98 Approved: 12/03/98 II Crider & Shockey, Inc. of W.V. SP #065-98 Stonewall Industrial/Mfg. Use; 9.2467 ac. develo ed of a 9.2467 ac. site 1 Location: West Brooke Road; Ft. Collier Industrial Park Submitted: 10/15/98 Approved: Pending IIJones & Frank (SP #064-98) Stonewall Warehouse & office use; 5.0 ac. developed on a 5.0 ac. site 1 Location: 150 Fort Collier Road, Fort Collier Industrial Park Submitted: 10/19/98 Approved: Pending Raymart, Inc. (SP #063-98) Shawnee 24' X 16' addition for ADA upgrades & exterior improvements Location: 1039 Millwood Pike Submitted: 10/14/98 Approved: Pending God's Glory Land (SP #061-98) Back Creek Church Retreat; 26.45 ac. to be developed of a 85.7 ac. site Location: Back Creek Road Submitted: 10/01/98 Approved: Pendin Applications Action Summary Printed December 18, 1998 World Wide Automotive (SP #062-98) Stonewall Industrial/Manufacturing; 12.2 ac. to 1 be developed on a 12.203 ac. site 1 Location: Fort Colli fr Industrial Park; West Brooke. Roads Submitted: 10/01/98 Approved: Pendin Dawson Industrial Park SP #060-98 Back Creek Office/Industrial Uses; 2.828 ac. parcel to be developed on 26.45 ac. tract 1 Location: Northeast corner of Route 37 & Shady Elm Road (Rt. 65 1) Submitted: 09/29/98 Approved: 12/08/98 Kim Henry Property - MiniStonewall Warehouse SP #057-98 7,504 s.f. warehouse; 4 ac. developed of a 7.74 ac. site 3 Location: Intersection of Baker Lane & Fort Collier Road Submitted: 08/26/98 Approved: Pending Bo's at Kernstown/ Emmart Oil Co. SP #052-98 Back Creek convenience store/gasoline sales; 0.846 ac. parcel to be developed 2 Location: Valley Avenue (Rt. 11), South of Winchester Submitted: 07/24/98 Approved: 11/20/98 Moffett Property (SP #050-98) Stonewall Metal warebse addition (4,800 g.s.f.); 1.392 ac. site; 0.465 disturbed 3 Location: 1154 Martinsburg Pike Submitted: 07/21/98 Approved: Pending Applications Action Summary Printed December 18, 1998 Hayfield Assembly of God SP #049-98 Gainesboro 3,789 s.f. addition to existing church; 3.053 ac. site Location: 5118 Northwestern Pike, Gore Submitted: 07/20/98 Approved: I 12/02/98 I T.P. & Susan Goodman SP #044-98 Stonewall Hackwood/ Minor Site Plan (RA) Location: 534 Redbud Road Submitted: 06/10/98 Approved: Pending Cives Steel Company SP #042-98 Stonewall Addition of paper storage bldg.; 1,200 s.f. of 18.07 -ac. site 1 Location: 210 Cives Lane(behind Shade Equipment Co.) Submitted: 06/17/98 F 12/04/98 Approved: P Pending Blue - idge Grace Brethren Church SP #026-98 Back Creek Sanctuary Addition; 1.2 ac. developed on a 10 ac. site Location: 1025 Cedar Creek Grade Submitted: 04/01/98 Approved: F 12/04/98 Southeast Container (SP #001-98) Stonewall District Parking Lot; 0.2 ac. Disturbed on a 89:6 ac. Site 1 Location: Ft. Collier Industrial Park Submitted: 01/06/98 Approved: Pending Applications Action Summary Printed December 18, 1998 Agape Christian Fellowship Church Sanctuary SP #005-9 Shawnee Church Expansion; 2.5 ac. to be developed of a 29.5115 ac. site Location: East side of Rt. 642; approx. 2,500' so. of the Rt. 37/1-81 Interch . Submitted: 02/12/97 Approved: Approved: Pending Shenandoah Bldg. Supply SP #056-96 Gainesboro Warehouse on 5 acres (Ml) Location: 195 Lenoir Drive (Stonewall Industrial Park) Submitted: 12/16/96 Approved: Pending Stimpson/Rt. 277 Oil & Lube Service SP #030-96 Opequon Oil & Lube Serv., Car Wash, Drive - Thru on 2.97 ac. 2 Location: 152 Fairfax Pk. (behind Red Apple Country Store) Submitted: 07/03/96 Approved: Pending AMOCO/House of Gifts SP #022-96 Gainesboro Gas Pump Canopy 880 sq. ft. area of a 0.916 acre parcel QW Location: 3548 North Frederick Pike Submitted: 05/08/96 Approved: Pending American Legion Post #021 SP #018-9 Stonewall Addition to lodge building on 3.4255 acre site 2 Location: 1730 Berryville Pike Submitted: 04/10/96 Approved: Pending Applications Action Summary Printed December 18, 1998 10 Wheatlands Wastewater Facility SP #047-89 Opequon Treatment Facility on 5 Acres (115) Location: So. West of Double Tollgate; ad'. & west of Rt. 522 Submitted: I 09/12/89 Note: Being held atapplicant's request. Flex TechSP #057-90 Stonewall Ml Use on 11 Ac. 1 Location: East side of Ft. Collier Rd. Submitted: 10/25/90 Note: Being held at applicant's r uest. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS: Norris & Kathleen Westover CUP #009-98 Back Creek Cottage Occupation for a private (one erson CPA Office Location: 1721 Wardensville Grade (Rt. 608); approx. 3 mi. So. of Rt. 50 W Submitted: 11/05/98 PC Review: 12/02/98 - approved with conditions BOS Review: 01/13/99 Meade's Family Day Home J[Gainesboro CUP #008-98 Day Care Facility Location: 150 Twine Lane, Gore Submitted: 09/11/98 PC Review: 0/07/98 tabled for 30 days; 11/04/98 tabled for 30 days; 2/02/98 - approved with conditions L01/13/99 BOS Review: Applications Action Summary Printed December 18, 1998 11 VARIANCES: Thomas M. Eichenberger AR #027-98 Shawnee 3111" rear setback var. for existing deck Location: 223 Canyon Road Submitted: 10/22/98 BZA Review: 11/17/98 - denied Ralph Gregory (VAR #020-98) Opequon front setbk var.(s) & variances from re uirmts. of zon. dist. buffers 2/RP Location: W. Side of A for Rd. (647) at intersctn w/ Double Church Rd. (641) Submitted: 07/24/98 BZA Review: 08/18/98 - approved front setback variances; tabled zoning district buffer variances until 09/15/98; 09/15/98 - tabled zoning district buffer variances until on or before 12/15/98.APPROVED 12/15/98 Applications Action Summary Printed December 18, 1998 12 T T PC REVIEW DATE: 12/02/98; 01/06/99 BOS REVIEW DATE: 01/27/99 REZONING APPLICATION #019-98 DANFORD RIDGE PROPERTIES, L.C. To rezone 103.74 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) LOCATION: This property is located approximately 1,400 feet south of the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and Papermill Road (Route 644) on the west side of Route 522 South. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 76-A-22 and 76-A-23 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) District Land Use: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District South: Zoned RP (Residential Performance) District East: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District West: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District PROPOSED USE: 250 single family residential units REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Use: Residential; Agricultural Use: Undeveloped Sections of Wakeland Manor and Tasker Land Bay Master Plan Use: Residential Use: Vacant Virginia Dept. of Transportation: No objection to rezoning ofthis property. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs, drainage Danford Ridge Properties, L.C.; REZ #019-98 Page 2 December 17, 1998 features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, Sixth Edition for review. 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. See attached letter from VDOT to G.W. Clifford dated 10/8/98. ' Fire Marshal: Plan approval recommended. Sanitation Authority: No comment. County Engineer: See attached letter from Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr. dated 10/2/98. Parks & Recreation: Plan appears to address standards for parks and recreation development. Frederick Co. Public Schools: We believe the impact of the proposed rezoning on current and future school needs should be considered during the rezoning process. County Attorngy: Proffer needs signature of owner; otherwise, appears in proper form. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Zoning Map for Frederick County (U.S.G.S. Stephens City Quadrangle) demonstrates that this site was zoned A2 (Agricultural General) District. This zoning designation was reclassified to RA (Rural Areas) District on February 14, 1990, when the comprehensive revision to the Zoning Ordinance was adopted by the Board of Supervisors. To date, no divisions of land have occurred on these two parcels. 2) Location The two parcels proposed for rezoning are located in the County's -Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Parcel 76-A-23, comprised of 66.93 acres, does not have direct access to a state -maintained road and is only accessible at this time through parcel 76- A-22, comprised of 36.80 acres, which has frontage along Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South). 3) Site Suitability The site contains significant areas of steep slope and woodlands, as well as areas of flood plain and wetlands that are associated with Lick Run, a perennial stream which traverses the two properties and drains into the Opequon Creek. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey identifies the Frederick Hall House (#34-143), located just north of this site, as a potentially significant historic 4" Danford Ridge Properties, L.C.; REZ #019-98 Page 3 December 17, 1998 resource. The site has a public sewer line and easement along Lick Run and has the potential to be served by public water service. Access is limited at this time to Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South). Future connections will include the extension of Warrior Drive, a major collector road which will traverse this site from south to north, and Parkins Mill Drive, a major collector road which will traverse this site from east to west. 4) Potential .Impacts and Issues a) Transportation System: The applicant has provided information which indicates that the development of this site would generate 2,500 vehicle trips per day. The most current VDOT traffic counts (1994 data) indicate that there is an average of 7,800 daily vehicle trips through this segment of Front Royal Pike. Therefore, the development of this site would increase traffic on this segment of Front Royal Pike by 32%. The Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS) and the County's Comprehensive Policy Plan call for the development of Warrior Drive within this area. Warrior Drive is being planned between Fairfax Pike and Tasker Road at this time, and is depicted on the approved Wakeland Manor Master Development Plan as continuing from Macedonia Church Road to the northern limits of that development. The terminus of Warrior Drive through Wakeland Manor adjoins parcel 76-A-23, approximately 700 feet from the southwestern boundary line. The General Development Plan for the proposed rezoning does not demonstrate the continuation of Warrior Drive through this site. The sole means of access to this site is via Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South) at this time. Correspondence from VDOT, dated October 8, 1998, and an E-mail from VDOT, dated November 10, 1998, state that there is no objection to the rezoning provided that a minimum spacing standard of 800 feet is provided between existing crossovers along Front Royal Pike and the new crossover that would need to be constructed for this development. The VDOT correspondence, dated October 8, 1998, indicates that -there is a deficiency of approximately 250 feet of distance to meet this requirement. b) Historic Resources: The Frederick Hall House, identified by the Rural Landmarks Survey as a potentially significant historic resource (#34-143), is located on the north side of the Opequon Creek, approximately 500 feet from the northeastern limits ofthis proposed residential development. Negative impacts to the viewshed from the Frederick Hall property could be realized if woodland disturbance occurs in this general area. Danford Ridge Properties, L.C.; REZ #019-98 Page 4 December 17, 1998 C) Community Facilities and Services: The County's Capital Facilities Impact Model was applied to this rezoning application on November 4, 1998. The results of this model run demonstrate a negative fiscal impact to Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, and Fire and Rescue services for capital facilities needs. 5) Proffer Statement The applicant has submitted a proffer statement which has been signed, notarized, and reviewed by the County Attorney. The applicant has proffered to develop a maximum of 250 single-family dwelling units, to provide necessary right-of-way and undertake improvements for Front Royal Pike and for internal road systems as required by VDOT, to provide an environmental easement that will maintain existing steep slope and woodland areas for the purpose of protecting the Frederick Hall viewshed, and to provide a monetary contribution to offset the negative fiscal impacts for Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, and Fire and Rescue services. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 12/02/98 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The 103.74 acres proposed for rezoning is located in the County's Urban Development Area (UDA). The Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Policy Plan (CPP) states that suburban residential development will be the predominant land use within the area although business and industrial uses will also be present. The CPP also states that new development within the UDA should only be approved when roads and other infrastructure with sufficient capacity have been provided. The applicant has provided a proffer statement as a part of this rezoning application to attempt to mitigate the negative impacts to the transportation system, to historic resources, and to community facilities and services. The proffer statement appears to satisfy the comments made by VDOT, provided that adequate distance can be provided between crossovers on Front Royal Pike, and satisfies the negative impacts to the Frederick Hall viewshed and community facilities and services. The General Development Plan provided by the applicant does not include a proposal to continue Warrior Drive from the Wakeland Manor property to the south. This plan depicts the location of Warrior Drive west of Danford Ridge through the Artrip property. This location appears to be superior from a technical engineering design review, as it keeps Warrior Drive out of the stream beds and steep slope areas. Unfortunately, the location proposed by the applicant will not allow for a connection with the segment of Warrior Drive through Wakeland Manor unless the approved Master Development Plan is revised for that development. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address the issues associated with the Southern Frederick Land Use Study and the location of Warrior Drive, as well as concerns raised by the Danford Ridge Properties, L.C.; REZ #019-98 Page 5 December 17, 1998 Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors during the decision-making process for this rezoning proposal. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 1/06/99 PLANNING COMNHSSION MEETING: The primary concern expressed by the Planning Commission during the 12/2/98 meeting pertained to the applicant's proffered General Development Plan (GDP). The GDP provided for the construction of a segment of Parkins Mill Road extended; however, it did not account for the continuation of Warrior Drive from the Wakeland Manor Subdivision. The applicant advised the commission that the location of Warrior Drive on the approved Wakeland Manor Master Development Plan should be revised to conform with the proffered GDP, as the GDP made more sense from an engineering design standpoint. In an attempt to address this issue, the applicant distributed a revised proffer statement to address the Warrior Drive issue. The Planning Commission tabled this application to allow for adequate public review of the revised proffer statement, and to correct the legal advertisement for this application which was in error. The applicant's revised proffer statement appears to satisfy the comments made by VDOT, provided that adequate distance can be provided between crossovers on Front Royal Pike, to community facilities and services for capital facilities costs, and to the negative impacts to the Frederick Hall viewshed. The applicant has revised the GDP to provide for a continuation of Warrior Drive from the Wakeland Manor Subdivision. The applicant has incorporated an addendum to the original proffer statement which allows for administrative approval of a new GDP should the adjoining land owners agree to a relocation of Warrior Drive that is satisfactory to Frederick County. The addendum also requires resolution of the Warrior Drive location to the satisfaction of Frederick County prior to the submission of a Master Development Plan for this project. The revised GDP and revised proffer statement appear to adequately mitigate the impacts associated with this rezoning application. 0:1AgendaslREZONE\CONLMENTSU)wdordRidgeProperties.REZ 11/13/1998 15:21 5485558493 G W CLIFFORD & ASSOC r k.AiMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA OF-PARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DAM R. GE'HR E®INRURG AE8IDENCY COMMIgSHIMR 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE P.O. BOX 278 EDINBURG, VA 22824.0278 October 8, 1998 Mr. Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E., V.P. C/O G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Chuck: PAGE 82 COPP RFSII7EE W N4NM 1E.E(aao)m"M FATS(5Q) Ref. Danford Ridge Generalized Development Plan Route 522 (Front Royal Pike) Fredeiick County We have reviewed the preliminary plan dated August 10, 1998 for the ;referenced project. Although we have provided a favorable comment to Frederick County for the rezoning application, it is our desire to register early concerns on two major potential problems incorporated on the proposed plan. 1. The proposed access to VDOT facility Route 522 is located such that minimum distance between crossovers could not be achieved. A posted speed of 55 mph has a desirable spacing between crossovers of 1000' with a minimum of 800'. The distance from this proposed access to the nearest existing crossover appears to be approximately 550'. Please refer to VDOT Road Design Manual, Appendix C-1 (copy attached). 2. The proposed drainage structure just upstream of an exisitng double box culvert under existing Route 522 will carry the flow from an Opequon Creek Tributary, Lick Run, its impact on the VDOT structure should be considered. Also, the assurance of onsite stormwater management practices so no adverse affect will be placed on the VDOT downstream structures should be considered. _These concerns are being forwarded to our District Office- for further review. These comments are to be considered incomplete until such time as we receive a response from District staff members. In the meantime, if there are any questions, please feel free to tail. Sincerely, Z7 inceely,Z7 +wEngineerBa3J. Sweitzer Trans. R For: Steven A. Melnikoff, Transportation Engineer BJS/rf Enclosures ice: Mr. Dave Heironimus Mr. Jim Diamond, Attention: Mr. Kelly Downs Mr. Terry Jackson, Attention: IWM}FRPPW MoviNG 11/10/1998 16:27 5406650493 Q W CLIFFORD & ASSOC PAGE 03 C-1 SECTION/ C -1 -DESIGN FEATURES CROSSOVER SPACING Criteria Table C-1-1 shows crossover spacing and sight distance requirements to be applied on all divided highways without full control of mess. The minimum sight distance requirement indicated in Table C-1-1 "Must be met at all crossover locations. Crossover spacing less than shown as minimum will be considered when required by intersecting public highways or streets with a current ADT of 100 or greater. Other crossovers will only be allowed after an individual traffic safety and operational study. The following are some factors, but not all inclusive, that should be considered in the study, if applicable: Operating speed, volume of traffic for crossover and through routes, signal operation/progression, accidents with and without additional crossover, number of U-turns, weaving maneuvers, alternative solution, capacity analysis, type of vehicles such as school bases, trucks, etc. Final approval will be required by the State Traffic Engineer and the State.Location and Design Engineer. Sight distance determinations apply both horizontally and vertically and are to be based on a height of driver's eye of 3.5' and a height of object 4.25' measured each way. All pians at the .freld inspection stage are to show only those crossovers at public highways and streets which irmeet these criteria or at other locations that preliminary planning and traffic studies have warranted. The determination of additional crossovers will be the result of field inspection recommendations of the District Administrator, State Traffic Engineer, (or other appropriate Engineer) and the State L & D Engineer. The approval of the crossovers is the responsibility of the State Traffic Engineer and the State L & D Engineer, with the final responsibility for the location of cr 7ssover layout on plans resting with the State L & D Engineer. From: Sweitzer. Barry <BSWFIT7FR@vdot.state.va.us> To: G. W. Clifford & Associates (E-mail) <gwcliff@mnsinc.com> Cc: Frederick County Planning Department (E-mail) <fcplan@shentel.net>; Diamond, _Iim <niamnnd JRnvrint etata yn us>• nrn ,r,c Kon. <Downs_KB(?fvdot,state- va.us>; Heironimus, David (Dave) <Heironimus D@vdot_state_va,us> Date: Tuesday, November 10, 1998 12:09 PM Subject: Danford Ridge MDP - Alternate Plan Concept (Route 522, Frederick County) ATTENTION: MR. CHUCK MADDOX A VDOT review has been completed for the alternate plan received on 10/21/98 for the subject project's master development plan. We concur with the alternate plan provided adequate sight distance can be achieved at the intersection. Consideration should be given to both directions on the respective lanes at crossover. Left turn lanes and taper should be provided on each lane at crossover. The master development plan should include proffers from the developer to provide the required crossover and tum lanes with tapers, signalization agreement if warrants are evident by VDOT analysis with all costs for installation and construction to be borne by the developer. This intersection with the necessary documentation will have to be submitted to VDOTs Central Office for approval prior to issuance of an approved permit. This documentation should include as a minimum the above mentioned sight distances as well as Route 522 (NBL;SBL) and the connecting street profile sheets. If there are any questions or if you need additional information, please call. Barry J. Sweitzer, Roadway Engineer For: Steven A. Melnikoff, Transportation Engineer 11/10/98 October 2, 1998 Mr. Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E. G. W. Clifford and Associates, Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Rezoning for Danford Ridge Frederick County, Virginia Dear Chuck: COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Public Works 540/665-5643 FAX: 540/675-0652 We have completed our review of your request to rezone approximately 104 acres from RA to RP. Based on your description of the proposed project, we anticipate that the site will be developed as a residential subdivision for approximately 250 single family dwellings. We can only assume at this point that the development will include curb and gutter. Based on our review of the impact analysis, we offer the following comments: 1. The bridge structure proposed across Lick Run should be designed to the same parameters adopted by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) for the new structures under Route 522. The impact of the Route 522 structures on the proposed crossing should be evaluated considering the close proximity. 2. We support your proposal to design and construct multi-stormwater structures. The site topography supports this approach to stormwater management. Each stormwater detention structure shall be designed to include sedimentation control which shall be maintained during the build -out phase of the _ development. 3. The analysis of the generation of solid waste is very realistic. To carry this one step further, the construction of this development will result in a cost impact of approximately $45,000.00 to Frederick County's solid waste budget. To reduce this impact, we suggest that the developer include the requirement for solid waste collection in the covenants of the subdivision. For your information, the impact model has been revised to include solid waste impacts. 4. Based on our site review, we concur with your evaluation of the environmental issues. We will reserve any further comments related to this issue until we have 107 North Kent Street a Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 S C Danford Ridge Page 2 October 2, 1998 had an opportunity to review the Master Development Plan. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding the above comments. HES/kch cc: Department of Planning and Zoning file Sincerely, C� H ey E trawsnyder, Jr., P. Director of Public Works Danford Ridge Properties, LC REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Number 74-((A))-22 & 75-((A))-23 Opequon & Shawnee 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 #019-98 for the rezoning of 103.74 acres from Rural Area (RA) zoning district Residential Performance (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 successor or assigns. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development The undersigned, who owns the above described property hereby voluntarily proffers that if the Board of Supervisors for the County of Frederick, Virginia approves the rezoning for the 103.74 acres, with frontage along Front Royal Pike in the Opequon and Shawnee Magisterial Districts of Frederick County, Virginia from RA to RP, the undersigned will pay to Frederick County at the time a building permit is applied for and issued the sum of $4,087.97 per lot. The monetary proffer provides for $3,484.29 for Frederick County Schools; $591.06 for Frederick County Parks and Recreation, and $12.62 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue. General Development Plan The development of the subject property shall provide for a street layout connecting with U. S. Route 522 South, Front Royal Pike and continuing in a northwest fashion toward the west boundary of the property to connect with Parkins Mill Drive, as shown on the attached Generalized Development Plan dated August 16, 1998 and labeled `Danford Ridge" as prepared by Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. T T Danford Ridge Properties, LC Page 2 Voluntarily proffered is the attached Generalized Development Plan including the following improvements: 1. On the 103.74 acres to be zoned RP no more than 250 units shall be constructed. These units shall consist of single family home lots. No multi -family units shall be constructed on this property. 2. Additional right-of-way for the construction of turn lanes and/or travel lanes along U.S. Route 522, Front Royal Pike as required by VDOT will be provided. 3. A traffic impact study will be conducted using VDOT procedures for the development proposed within Danford Ridge Properties, LC at the time of the site development plan review and/or subdivision. Improvements to U.S. Route 522, Front Royal Pike and the design improvements of interior roads will be constructed by the undersigned as required by VDOT regulations for the predicted traffic impacts based upon the specific number of lots. 4. Steep slope and environmental areas, as defined by the Frederick County Zoning Code, that are located along the Danford Ridge property line bordering Opequon Creek shall be maintained so as to preserve the viewshed of the adjoining historic building know as Frederick Hall. The general location of these features are shown on the attached Generalized Development Plan dated August 16, 1998 and labeled "Danford Ridge" as prepared by Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. These areas will be further shown and described on the required Master Development Plan for Danford Ridge. 5, Warrior Drive shall be shown on the attached Generalized Development plan dated August 16, 1998 and labeled "Danford Ridge" as prepared by Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. to conform with the approved Wakeland Manor Master Development Plan. The owner agrees to consult with adjoining property -owners involved with the Warrior Drive location as shown in the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan and attempt to reach an agreement necessary to implement the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. Prior to submission of a Master Plan for the Danford Ridge Properties, LC the location of Warrior Drive will be resolved to the satisfaction of Frederick County to ensure that Warrior Drive is continued from Tasker Road to proposed Rte. 37. 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. Danford Ridge Properties Dage Respectfully submitted, PROPERTY OWNER By: Date: % �d,�,�/g <;� ✓ STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this I day of 1998, by�� .,r'- ' of Danford Ridge Properties, LC. fy, ; v My Commissio4 expires Notary Public `� r ' :L T T PC REVIEW DATE: 12/02/98; 01/06/99 BOS REVIEW DATE: 01/27/99 REZONING APPLICATION #018-98 CARRIEBROOKE To rezone 72.7418 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) LOCATION: This property is located along the eastern side of Tasker Road (Rt. 642), south of the intersection of Routes 37/1-81/847 and 642. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 75-A-89 & 75 -A -89A PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) District Land Use: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District Use: Residential South: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District Use: Residential RP (Residential Performance) District Lakeside Estates East: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District Use: Vacant West: Zoned B2 (Business General) District Use: Office; FCSA Headquarters PROPOSED USE: Single-family and Multi -family Residential REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: No objection to rezoning of this property. VDOT has stated previously concerns about traffic impacts to Route 642 and the adjacent Route 37/1-81 interchange area. We strongly recommend bearing in mind the latest approved Winchester Area Transportation Study and how this rezoning would affect traffic movements through this area. Before development, Carriebrooke, REZ #018-98 Page 2 December 17, 1998 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. 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. Historic Resources Advisory Board: See attached letterfrom Jeffrey Everett dated February 25, 1998 Fire Marshal: Plan approval recommended. Any additional comments are addressable on the site plan. Sanitation Authority: Water and sewer are available. County Engineer: The same comments made on November 18, 1997 (see attached copy) will apply to the revised rezoning request. Traffic and solid waste will be the major impact items, especially if the proposed development is completed before the 37 extension. Parks & Recreation: I would recommend that the impact of this development be based on the use of the land for which rezoning is being requested. Frederick Co. Public Schools: We have a concern that the Capital Impact Model does not adequately demonstrate the impact of the proposed rezoning on current and future school needs. It is our belief the applicant has not addressed this impact through his proffer statement and the negative impact of the proposed rezoning on the school division should be considered during the approval process. County Attorney: Owner signature appears correct. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The 72.7418 acres proposed for rezoning represents a portion of a 92.7418 -acre tract owned by Shiho, Inc. To date, 20 acres of this site is zoned B2 (Business General) District. The rezoning to B2 (Business General) occurred through two Board of Supervisors' actions. Rezoning #003 -88 was approved by the Board of Supervisors on March 9, 1988 for 14 acres of B2 (Business General) District land. Rezoning #017-88 was approved by the Board of Supervisors on October 5, 1988 for an additional six acres ofB2 (Business General) District land. It should be noted that Rezoning #003- 88 also proposed 77 acres of RP (Residential Performance) District land. This request was tabled by the Board of Supervisors on March 9, 1988 and later withdrawn by the applicant. Carriebrooke, REZ #018-98 Page 3 December 17, 1998 Master Development Plan #008-96 was approved for Carriebrooke Business Park on January 6, 1997. To date, one office building has been constructed for the Department of Agriculture which houses three organizations. 2) Location The 72.7418 acres proposed for rezoning is located in the County's Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). This acreage is accessible from Tasker Road (Route 642) via Carriebrooke Drive which is constructed within the B2 (Business General) District portion of the 92.7418 -acre site. 3) Site Suitability The site contains areas of steep slope, flood plain, woodlands, prime agricultural soils, intermittent streams, and a portion of Opequon Creek. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey identifies the Carysbrook House (#34-319) and the Carysbrook Redoubt (#34-320) as potentially significant historic resources. The site has public water and sewer service and is traversed by a gas line owned by the Shenandoah Gas Company. The site fronts on Tasker Road (Route 642) which is a two-lane major collector road. Proposed uses would be accessible via Carriebrooke Drive which would be constructed to a major collector road standard. 4) Potentiallmpacts a) Transportation System: The applicant has prepared a traffic impact analysis statement which provides average daily traffic data and peak hour traffic data. The results of this analysis suggest that Tasker Road would receive an additional 2, 000 vehicle trips per day which would increase traffic on Tasker Road by 25%. The majority of this traffic will travel north to the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 3 7 which will decrease the level of service at this signalized intersection. The Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS) calls for the current connection of Tasker Road and Route 37 to be severed; therefore, Carriebrooke Drive will become the primary route for traffic to access Route 37 at a new interchange with Warrior Drive in the future. Tasker Road will be impacted by the additional traffic generated from this site until the improvements identified in the WATS are realized. b) Adjoining Properties: The predominant land use of properties south of this site is single-family residential. The proposal to develop multi -family residential dwellings adjacent to these residences may create T Ir Carriebrooke, REZ #018-98 Page 4 December 17, 1998 a negative impact due to structural height, outdoor lighting and increased traffic. c) Historic Resources. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey identifies the Carysbrook House (#34-319) and the Carysbrook Redoubt (#34-320) as potentially significant historic resources. The Historic Resources Advisory Board has recommended that measures be taken to protect the historic redoubt from development activity. d) Community Facilities and Services: The Capital Facilities Impact Model was applied to this rezoning proposal based on two scenarios. The first scenario accounted for the residential development of 72.7418 acres, while the second scenario accounted for the residential development of 72.7418 acres and the development of the 20 acres that is zoned for commercial use. Both scenarios demonstrated a negative fiscal impact for capital facilities cost to Fire and Rescue services and Parks and Recreation; however, only the first scenario demonstrated a negative fiscal impact to the Public School system. Review agency comments from Parks and Recreation and the Frederick County Public Schools state that the proposal for 72.7418 acres will have a negative impact on public park and public school facilities which should be adequately addressed prior to the approval of this proposal. The results of each Capital Facilities Impact Model run with a per lot impact breakdown are provided and are labeled Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 to coincide with the information described in this paragraph. 5) Proffer Statement The applicant has submitted a proffer statement which has been signed, notarized, and reviewed by the County Attorney. The applicant has proffered to develop a total of 250 residential dwelling units that will be single-family and multi -family use, to preserve the Carysbrook Redoubt historic resource, and to undertake improvements to Tasker Road and Carriebrooke Drive as required by VDOT. The applicant has proffered a monetary contribution to mitigate the negative fiscal impacts to Fire and Rescue services and Parks and Recreation that is consistent with the results of the Capital Facilities Impact Model run based on the second scenario described under Potential Impacts to Community Facilities and Services. The applicant submitted a revised proffer statement to staff which provides an additional monetary contribution to the Stephens City Fire and Rescue Company and restricts uses on the 20 -acre portion of this site that is zoned for commercial use. It is the opinion of the County Attorney that the use restrictions for the 20 -acre portion of this site are not Carriebrooke, REZ ##018-98 Page 5 December 17, 1998 enforceable since the rezoning application is only for RP (Residential Performance) District use. Staff believes that these items could be incorporated into a restrictive covenant for the commercial portion of this site that would be enforceable by the applicant or a future property owners association. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 12/02/98 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The 72.7418 -acre site is located in the County's Urban Development Area (UDA). The Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Policy Plan (CPP) states that suburban residential development will be the predominant land use within the area although business and industrial uses will also be present. The CPP also states that new development within the UDA should only be approved when roads and other infrastructure with sufficient capacity have been provided. The applicant has provided a proffer statement as a part of this rezoning application to attempt to mitigate the negative fiscal impacts to capital facilities costs based on the development of 250 residential units. The applicant has proposed to utilize the 20 -acre commercial portion of the overall site as a credit to offset the negative fiscal impact created by the residential rezoning request. The comments received from Public Schools and Parks and Recreation indicate a desire to base this impact on the residential impact that will be realized in the future, as the commercial rezoning occurred more than 10 years ago. Review of the County's Proffer Statement Reference Manual indicates that no previous rezoning application has submitted a similar proffer, therefore, no precedent has been established regarding this issue. The applicant has proffered to preserve the historic Carysbrook; however, no detail is provided as to how this will occur, what improvements will be provided to protect the feature, or who will assume this responsibility once the applicant has developed the site. The IHLkB comments recommend that this feature be placed in common open space to allow for public access; that split -rail fencing be installed around the site; that a plaque with a map be incorporated to identify the feature; and that a maintenance schedule be established for the perpetual care of this historic resource. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address these -issues, as well as concerns raised by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors during the decision-making process for this rezoning proposal. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 1/06/99 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Several concerns were expressed by the Planning Commission during the December 2, 1998 meeting which included the impacts of new residential development to the county's public school system and regional park system, as well as the inability of Tasker Road (Route 642) to manage the additional traffic that would be generated by 250 new residential units. The commission felt that the applicant T T Carriebrooke, REZ #018-98 Page 6 December 17, 1998 did not adequately address the negative fiscal impacts for community facilities and services capital facilities costs, and that the applicant needed to be more specific in how the historic Carysbrooke Redoubt would be protected and available for public use. The commission felt that several of the road improvement projects identified in the Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS) were necessary to accommodate increased traffic impacts in this area (particularly Route 37 - Phase I and Warrior Drive); however, it was recognized that these projects were outside of the control of this applicant. In an attempt to address the negative fiscal impacts for community facilities and services capital facilities costs, the applicant distributed a revised proffer statement. The Planning Commission tabled this application to allow for adequate public review of the revised proffer statement. The applicant's revised proffer statement provides a phasing plan which would allow for the development of 120 apartment units and would condition the platting of lots for the development of 130 single-family dwelling units upon the beginning of construction of Route 37 - Phase I. The applicant has also proffered to place the historic Carysbrooke Redoubt within the required common open space for this development which will include an access easement for public use, and has proffered to enhance this feature through the installation of a split -rail fence and an identification plaque. Finally, the applicant has revised the proffer statement to increase the monetary contribution to mitigate the fiscal impacts to community facilities and services capital facilities costs. The revised monetary contribution is consistent with the results of the Capital Facilities Impact Model run for 72.74 acres of RP (Residential Performance) District development without credit for the commercial acreage which was rezoned in 1988. The applicant's revised proffer statement provides a cost -per- unit breakdown for the proffered 120 apartment units and 130 single-family dwelling units. The applicant's revised proffer statement appears to satisfy the comments made by the Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB), Frederick County Public Schools, and the Parks and Recreation Department. The applicant has attempted to reduce the traffic impacts to Tasker Road (Route 642) through the proffered phasing plan. This phasing plan would reduce the average daily traffic impact of the proffered dwelling units from 2,080 trips per day to 780 trips per day until the beginning of construction for Route 37 - Phase I. The revised proffer statement appears to mitigate the majority of the impacts associated with this rezoning application, as well as the majority of the concerns raised during the December 2, 1998 meeting. It appears that the primary concern regards the ability of Tasker Road to accommodate additional traffic and function at an acceptable level of service. The Planning Commission will need to determine if the project phasing plan adequately mitigates this concern. O: W Mdas\REZONMCO MMENTSkamebrooke.REZ COUNTY of FRED RRICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/573-0632 MEMORANDUM TO: Stephen M. Gyurisin FROM: Jeffrey C. Everett, Planner I RE: HRAB Comments for the Carriebrooke Rezoning DATE: February 25, 1998 The HRAB recommends that the Carysbrook Redoubts be preserved. They recommend including the redoubts in the required open space portion of the site. If this cannot be done, they recommend including the redoubts as part of the landscaping plan that could complement the development (It was recommended that additional berms not be built for landscaping since this would detract from the redoubts). Additional recommendations include providing split -rail fencing around the site, a map showing the layout of the redoubts, and a plaque identifying their significance. Furthermore, the HRAB recommends that a maintenance schedule be established, with a volunteer group being responsible for maintaining the redoubts. 107 North Rent Street o Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 COUNTY of FREDE CK DcPartment of I aMe Works November 18, 1997 Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin Gilbert W. Clifford and Associates, Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Carriebrooke Rezoning Request Frederick County, Virginia Dear Steve: 540/665-5643 FAX: 540/673-0632 We have completed our review of your request to rezone approximately 95 acres of RA land to 22.23 acres of RP, 10.55 acres of M-1 and 62.65 acres of B-2. Based on our review, we offer the following comments: 1) Sheet 1 of 1 should be revised to reflect the acreages indicated above. Also, the designation EX. RP. should be changed to PROP. RP 2) The 120 condo units shown on sheet i of 1 are located within an area that includes rural landmarks. This plan should be revised to reflect the treatment of the rural landmarks in conjunction with the condo development. 3) The discussion of development impacts should also include solid waste costs and traffic congestion on Route 642. 4) The design of the master development plan should include the following: tentative location of stormwater management facilities, delineation of the 100 year flood plain, location of existing wetlands and delineztion of steep slopes that cannot be developed. Please make the appropriate revisions and return a revised submittal for our final review and approval. Sincerely, �f} L7ll.i Haney E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E. Director of Public Works 107 North Kent Street • 'vVinchcster Virginia 22-5111--;00 D 44 "Carriebrooke" REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Number 75 -((A)) -89&89A Shawnee Magisterial District 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 zoning, the undersigned applicant hereby proffers that in the event the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia , shall approve Rezoning Application # 018-98 for the rezoning of 72.7418 acres from Rural Area (RA) zoning district Residential Performance (RP) zoning district. The current 72.7418 acres zoned RA will change to RP. 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. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development The undersigned, who owns the above described property hereby voluntarily proffers that if the Board of Supervisors for the County of Frederick, Virginia approves the rezoning for the 72.7418 acres, lying along Carriebrooke Drive in Shawnee 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 and issued the sum of $618.75 per multifamily unit and $4,615.38 per lot for single family lot. The monetary proffer provides for $1,020.00 for Frederick County -Parks and Recreation, $18.46 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue emergency services, and $3,576.92 for Frederick County Schools per lot for single family lots, and; $136.74 for Frederick County Parks and Recreation $2.48 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue emergency services, and $479.53 for Frederick County Schools per unit for multifamily. Phasin The owner voluntarily proffers that the low density single family (LD) area as shown on the Carriebrooke Land Use Development plan, dated October 1998 by Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. will not be platted for recordation until notice to proceed with the construction of proposed Route 37 is underway for the portion of Route 37 from I-81 to U.S. Rte. 522. Ir s. Carriebrooke Page 2 General Development Plan The development of the subject property shall provide for a street layout connecting with VA. Sec. Route 642, Tasker Road and continuing in an northeast fashion to the west boundary of the subject property as shown on the attached Master Development Plan dated July 1996 and labeled "Carriebrooke" approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on November 13, 1996. Voluntarily proffered is the attached Master Development Plan including the following improvements: 1. Preservation of the Civil War era redoubt know as Carysbrook Redoubt and identified as Rural Landmark Survey site number 320. The redoubt shall be enclosed with a split rail fence and made accessible for public access by easement. Maintenance of the redoubt shall be provided by the Home Owners Association. 2. On the 72.7418 acres to be zoned RP no more than 250 units shall be constructed. These units shall consist of no more than 130 single family home lots and 120 multifamily units. 3. Additional right-of-way for the construction of turn lanes and/or travel lanes along Tasker Road will be provided by the undersigned to VDOT at the subdivision stage if required by VDOT. 4. A traffic impact study will be conducted using VDOT procedures for the development proposed within Carriebrooke at the time of site development plan review and/or subdivision. Improvements to Tasker road and the design improvements of Carriebrooke Drive will be constructed by the undersigned as required by VDOT regulations for the predicted traffic impacts based upon the specific proposed use. 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. T C Carriebrooke Page 3 Respectfully submitted, PROPERTY OWNER 'h/ I Ile By- Date:1�i . STATE OF VIRGEN A., AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this I (D � day of by-bav B. Hom& of Shiho, Inc. ire cem ber resrdc a My Commission expires" -M 3 I)o Notary Public T CAFI'�.IFPP.,00r\F FPTPFFICK COUNTY�, VIRGINIA m CIVIL m A C -)v c�r)OOQ pt 400. 1998 MMPPY. cidl,rt W. JAW cbik. , k '_)(X) U c/lATWOM W. P Nrl I-1 ToPmr PLAN 92.1415 ACW5 r0rX. 20.00 KkY5 - D-2 121418 - W L�6N[9 CONWIRCK `it 14 k' i hl.;a fucilwvr( cowomit"illmo pt 400. 1998 MMPPY. cidl,rt W. JAW cbik. , k '_)(X) U c/lATWOM W. Wffle5ft. VA 2261C COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/67$-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, Zoning Administrator') SUBJECT: Public Hearing - Humanitarian Aid Organizational Offices in the RA (Rural Areas) District DATE: December 17, 1998 In response to a request from Mr. Otis Goodwin of Outreach To Asian Nationals (OTAN), staff has reviewed and evaluated the possibility of amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow uses such as OTAN to operate in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. The Planning Commission reviewed the request during a discussion on October 7, 1998. The Planning Commission's discussion resulted in a motion to deny the proposed ordinance amendment. The Board of Supervisors reviewed the request on November 11, 1998, at which time staff was directed to redraft an ordinance amendment for the Board to consider. Background on Zoning Ordinance Amendment Request Staff received a request to amend the Zoning Ordinance to consider allowing non-profit foreign aid organizational offices in the RA Zoning District. This request had been made by Outreach To Asia Nationals (OTAN). OTAN established itself in Frederick County in 1991 as a cottage occupation. The Board of Supervisors approved Conditional Use Permit #009-91 in 1991 allowing OTAN to establish an office in an existing garage on OTAN property offRoute 522N. Since that time, interest in OTAN has increased; OTAN feels that an expansion of its facilities is necessary to continue providing their services. OTAN provides equipment, training, and financial support to national church workers in Asia in their 107 North Kent Street 9 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 k Proposed Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Humanitarian Aad Organizational Offices in RA Page 2 December 17, 1998 pursuit of furthering their belief in Christianity. Funding for this service is derived from churches throughout the United States. OTAN envisions the Frederick County location as the organization's main office, providing administrative services and training. Limited overnight accommodations are also envisioned for up to 10 persons. With any expansion of this facility, OTAN will no longer be considered a cottage occupation; a cottage occupation states that no more than one person, other than the members of the family residing on the property, may be involved with the business. The type of use that OTAN has requested is not permitted in the RA Zoning District. Therefore, OTAN has requested that the ordinance be amended to allow this use in the RA Zoning District. Staff Comments The County's Comprehensive Policy Plan and the Zoning Ordinance restrict office uses in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. In the RA Zoning District, the typical office use will generate a significant impact in terms ofvehicular traffic and environmental pollution (air, groundwater, noise). As no public utilities are available, wells and drainfields will be necessary. Emergency services should also be considered; without public water available, pumper trucks would be necessary to respond to fire emergencies. In the RA Zoning District, the Comprehensive Policy Plan and the Zoning Ordinance encourage and allow, respectively, uses that are associated with the rural community. Uses such as agricultural pursuits and single family residences are permitted by -right. Uses that provide services to the rural community, such as country stores, farm markets, feed stores, and auto repair, are considered and permitted on a site specific basis. In either case, the uses are small in nature and provide services to the rural community with minimal impact on the surroundings. When considering an office use in terms of long-range planning, the differentiation between a for- profit or non-profit use is not relevant. Both for-profit and nonprofit uses will create a similar impact on the property and its surroundings. It is the professional opinion of staff that an office use, whether for-profit or non-profit, does not provide a direct service to the rural community. Therefore, office uses should not be permitted in the rural community (RA Zoning District), but should locate, as is presently permitted, in the business district of the county were the necessary infrastructure and services are available. The allowance of office uses in the rural community conflicts with the County's goal of preserving the rural character of the RA Zoning District. T It Proposed Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Humanitarian Aid Organizational Offices in RA Page 3 December 17, 1998 Further Considerations Staff is concerned with the potential impact this type of use may have in the RA Zoning District, and especially on the adjoining properties. Presently, ifthis use was located in the B2 (Business General) District, adjacent to RA -zoned property used for residential uses, a category `B" buffer would be required. A category "C" buffer would be required if the property was zoned Ml (Light Industrial). Therefore, ifthe use is considered appropriate in the RA district, it would be staffs recommendation that a buffer component be utilized. Research Considered by the MRS and Staff in Acting on this Reguest Staff communicated with a number of representatives from jurisdictions from around the Commonwealth to ascertain how other jurisdictions address, or would address, the issue before us. Summary of findings: 1. Does the establishment of an office, for whatever purpose, in the rural part of the county concur with the County's Comprehensive Plan? In Frederick County, the Comprehensive Plan indicates that office uses should be located within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The SWSA is generally located near Winchester and Stephens City. 2. `Urban Uses' - including offices, conference and training facilities - are typically located near the urban core of an area. By locating the proposed use in a rural setting, you contradict the community's long-range planning efforts. 3. The allowance of non-profit groups to locate in the rural areas of the County would establish a precedent for future organizations of similar composition. 4. The more a community departs from traditional planning practices, i.e., keeping office type uses near urban areas, the more difficult it is to maintain solid planning practices and principles. 5. As uses spread from the urban area, the cost of providing services - (fire/rescue/utilities) increases significantly. 6. Non-profit classification is not a privilege that exempts the user from zoning requirements. The CBN (Christian Broadcast Network) in Norfolk is a non-profit organization that is quite large, yet adheres to the zoning requirements for that city. Within Frederick County, a number of uses were identified that might have similar origins as that requested. These projects include: Timber Ridge School, Rock Enon Boy Scout Camp, God's Glory Land, and Project Hope 1. Timber Ridge School. The Timber Ridge facility (Leary Educational Foundation, Inc.) IT Proposed Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Humanitarian Aid Organizational Offices in RA Page 4 December 17, 1998 was established at its location in Reynold's Store prior to 1969. Based on its academic pursuits, the facility may be classified as a school. 2. Rock Enon Boy Scout Camp. The Rock Enon Boy Scout Camp is a campground and recreational area While this facility has existed for a number of years, similar facilities could be established with a Conditional Use Permit. 3. God's Glory Land. Issued a Conditional Use Permit as a Church retreat in 1994, the master plan for God's Glory Land would also be considered a recreation area/resort The facility contains athletic fields, a swimming pool, bath houses, and a number of one -room cottages. 4. Project Hope. Project Hope has two local locations. The first is in the Airport Business Center, Zoned Ml; used for warehousing. A second Project Hope facility is located in Clarke County. This facility is considered legally non -conforming as it was established prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance. Based on discussions with a Clarke County representative, facilities such as Project Hope would not be permitted under today's zoning ordinances. Nor would the County feel an amendment to the zoning ordinance would be appropriate. Conclusion While staff is concerned with this requested amendment, attached is our attempt to draft an amendment that would provide for the proposed use. The DRRS reviewed this request at their meeting on December 10, 1998. The subcommittee is concerned that the requested use would be inappropriate in the RA district, and unanimously recommended against the requested amendment. An action on the Commission's behalf would be appropriate. Staff is available to address your concerns. Thank you. ERL/cc Attachment 4 T Proposed Amendment to Permit Humanitarian Aid Organizational Offices in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District Editorial key: Text presently in the Zoning Ordinance Proposed Text Additions Article V RA Rural Areas District § 165-51. Conditional uses. The following uses of structures and land shall be allowed only if a conditional use permit has been granted for the use: AB. Humanitarian aid organizational office Article XXI J �� Definitions § 165-145. Definitions and word usage. [Amended 11-13-911 Unless a contrary intention clearly appears, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning given in this section. All words and terms not defined herein shall be used with a meaning of standard usage. HUMANITARIAN AID ORGANIZATIONAL OFFICE - A charitable organization established to provide relief assistance to an identified distressed, underprivileged group. Relief would be provided in such forms as clothing, medical supplies, or educational contributions The organization must provide a public benef%kl kWMmf to the community. Proposed Amendment to Permit Humanitarian Aid Organizational Offices in the RA Zoning District Article IV Supplementary Use Regulations § 165-48.8. Humanitarian aid organizational office. Non-profit aid organizational offices located in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District shall be subject to the following requirements: A. A Category `B" zoning district separation buffer and screen, as described by this chapter, shall be provided in relation to surrounding properties containing residential uses. B. Maximum building square footage shall not exceed 15,000 square feet, or a floor area -to -lot area ratio (FAR) of 0.3, whichever is less C All signs shall conform with the Cottage Occupation sign requirements D. No marketing of merchandise shall occur from this property. U:\Eric\Common\DRRS\OTAN\010699.pc.hearing.wpd COUNTY of FREDERICK r Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 MEMORANDUM FAX: 540/678-0682 TO: FROM SUBJECT Frederick County Planning Commission Eric R. Lawrence, Zoning Administrator L,"u,ZZ Request for Exemption from the Subdivision Ordinance Requirement, Kenneth and Ruth Lineberg Property DATE: December 17, 1998 Staff has received a request from Mr. Lee A. Ebert, on behalf of Kenneth and Ruth Lineberg, to gain an exemption to the 50 -foot right-of-way width requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance [§ 144-31. C(3)]. The Board of Supervisors may allow for exemptions to the Subdivision Ordinance in cases of unusual situations or when strict adherence to the general regulations would result in substantial injustice or hardship [§144-5]. The Linebergs own a 62.08 -acre parcel northwest of Gore. Some time ago, Thomas Lineberg, Kenneth and Ruth's son, constructed and currently lives in a house on this 62.08 -acre parcel. The Linebergs' desire to utilize the Family Division Lot provision and convey a lot (with his house) to their son. Access to the Lineberg's property is via Rhinehart Lane, a private road without a designated right-of-way width. The Subdivision Ordinance requires that lots be created with a minimum 50 -foot right-of-way width [§ 144-31. C(3) ]. As access to the parcel in question is via an existing right-of-way across property owned by others, the request asks that the Board of Supervisors exempt this land division from the 50 -foot requirement, so that the existing right-of-way may be utilized. Based on the location of this land division, the nature of the surrounding properties, and the fact that a Family Division Lot provision will be utilized, staff feels that a waiver to allow for use of the existing right-of-way is reasonable. A recommendation from the Commission would be appropriate. Staff is available to address your concerns. ERL/cc Attachments FILE: U:\Eric\Common\SUBDMS\Linebeig.WPD 107 forth Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 226101-5000 LAND SURVEYING + LAMD PL„N HHNG o DEVELOP11JENT Mr. Eric R. Lawrence, County of Frederick Department of Planning 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia Dear Mr. Lawrence: Planner- II & Development 22601-5000 December 11, 1995 By deed dated 24 May 1957 in Deed Book 246 Page 560, Kenneth L. and Ruth Lineberg purchased a tract of land lying Northwest of Gore. The deed stated the tract contained 65 acres. Since that time two tracts (1.31 Acres and 1.61 Acres) have been conveyed. The tax records show the present tract - 27-A-78 contains 62.08 acres. Some years ago their son, Thomas L. Lineberg built a house on the land. The desire is to now convey him a tract with the house. That tract would contain at least the required two acre and maybe as much as five acres. The improvements are designated as 505 Rhinehart Lane. The deed to our tract, and the many tracts between it and Route 50, just referred to Rhinehart Road without any designated right-of-way. The proposed tract is nearly one mile from U. S. Route 50 and it may be impossible to get a right-of-way of any width. This letter is a request to make our survey without a designated right-of-way and use the existing roadway designated as Rhinehart Lane. LAE/jhs Sincerely, EBER ASSOCIATES M ee� Ebert Certified Land Surveyor 35 WEST BOSCAbVEN STREET , 'MMCNESTER, VIRGINIA 22601-4740 540-667-3233 • FAX 540-687-9138 a TOLL FREE 1-800-755-7320 Right--of—Way Width Waiver Request Kenneth L. & Ruth Lineberg PIN: 27—A-78 Produced by Frederick County Planning and Development, 12-14-98 46 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Director Zi4li RE: Sewer and Water Service Area Expansion Request DATE: December 14, 1998 Please find included under this agenda item a letter from Mr, Ralph Beeman, Greenway Engineering, to Mr. Evan Wyatt, Deputy Planning Director, dated November 25, 1998, and attachments depicting a location map of the county's Sewer and Water Service Area boundary (SWSA); the properties that are proposed for inclusion into the SWSA; and signatures of the six property owners authorizing this request. Greenway Engineering has requested that the six tracts identified by the property owner signatures be incorporated into the SWSA. These tracts total 162.32 acres and range in size from 1.41 acres to 120.73 acres. The Comprehensive Policy Plan states that suburban residential development has to occur in the Urban Development Area (UDA); therefore, properties that are incorporated into the SWSA are limited to commercial and industrial development. In January 1991, the Comprehensive Plans Committee considered a similar request to include these properties, as well as additional properties to the east into the SWSA. On April 10, 1991, the Board of Supervisors approved an expansion of the SWSA to incorporate the tracts east of these properties which comprise the Eastgate Commerce Center and the Jouan Global Center. It is staff's understanding that the property owners represented under this application requested to have their properties removed from consideration of inclusion into the SWSA in 1991. The Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) considered this request during their December 7, 1998 meeting. The CPPS felt that the inclusion of these properties into the SWSA was appropriate and logical based on the existing land use patterns in this area, as well as the ability of these properties to be adequately served by the existing infrastructure. This recommendation has been forwarded to the Planning Commission for the purpose of discussion only. Staff will proceed with advertising this request for public hearing at a subsequent meeting following this discussion. EAW/cc Attachments U:\Evan\Common\CompPlan\WatrSewMWSAExpansionRequ st@TmkerRoad.wpd 107 North Kent Street ® Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 I �l Ninth• I fill Lane Winrhe5ter. Virginia 22602 Founded rn 1777 November 25, 1998 To: Evan Wyatt Deputy Director of Planning Frederick County PIanning Department From: Ralph Beeman Greenway Engineering Re: Orndorff Request Inclusion in the Sewer and Water Service Area Evan, on behalf of our client, I hereby request that the Frederick County Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee consider changing the sewer and water service area. I also request that we be put on the agenda for the December 7th meeting. We are proposing two different revisions to the SWSA boundary. Please see the attached drawings. I have also enclosed a list of signatures from the affected property owners for proposal no. 1. Mr. Daniel Heflin was unavailable to sign, but we expect to gain his signature before the committee date. If you have any questions, please call me. Thank you. Signed, , Ralph Beeman Greenway Engineering Enclosures I.n;;inccrti tiun'r�'nr� fcli'I hone i W 66 11 "i-, FAX -'-4o-,-2-1 ')i_;i 1, / 1 3' Note: These changes were accepted by the Frederick County Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee on 12/7/98. Plan Showing Changes to the Sewer & Water Service Area In Frederick County SCALE: 1"=200-' DATE: December, 1998 RE N AY ENGINEER11 Engineers 151 WINDY HILL LANE Surveyors WINCHESTER, VA. 22602 TELEPHONE: (540) 662-4185 Founded in 1971 FAX: (540) 722-9528 Affected Parcels 76- A 76- A -43 76- A 1-42 -44 76- A -45 76- A -46 A�yTH gF U MARK D. SMITH 9 1 No.022837 o��'S 'ICNAL Cs REQUEST FOR INCLUSION Frederick County Sewer & Water Service Area The following owners do hereby request that their property be included in the sewer and water service area: Owner Tax Map No. Signature John H. Sargent, et ux 76-((A))42 Viola Omdorff 76-((A))-43 William E. Heflin 76-((A))-44 -/— Daniel Heflin 76-((A))-45 Shirley Heflin 76-((A))-46 William J. Heflin, et ux 76-((A))-47 / COUNTY of FREDERICK y . Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Director � RE: 1999-2000 Capital Improvements Plan Discussion DATE: December 11, 1998 The Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) has forwarded a recommended draft of the 1999-2000 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to the Planning Commission for discussion. The CPPS evaluated new project requests provided by the Frederick County School Board, the Regional Airport Authority, and the Frederick County Public Works Department. Following this evaluation, the CPPS modified the 1998 project rankings and financial data accordingly. The CPPS directed staff to prepare the final CIP document for consideration by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors following this discussion. Included with this memorandum is a summary ofthe project requests, a summary ofproposed project costs, the evaluation form prepared by the CPPS, and project tables comparing projects from the 1998-1999 CIP and this plan. Staff asks that the Planning Commission review this information for discussion purposes. Staff will advertise the proposed 1998-1999 CIP for the February 3, 1999 Planning Commission meeting; therefore, staffasks that commission members contact this department to discuss concerns or other issues prior to the January meeting. This will provide star with an opportunity to research issues and present additional information to the commission if necessary. U:\Evan\Common\CIP\1999CIPDiscussionPC.wpd 107 North Kent Street a Winchester, Virginia 22601.-5000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN SUMMARY The proposed draft 1999-2000 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) consists of 26 projects compared to 24 projects recommended last year. All projects are proposed to be developed over a period of five years. Three new projects are proposed as a part of the 1999-2000 CIP. New capital facility projects have been submitted by the Frederick County School Board, the Winchester Regional Airport, and the Frederick County Public Works Department as follows: The total cost of the projects proposed for the 1999-2000 CIP is $102,347,587. This is an increase of $236,341 in the total project cost from the 1998-1999 CIP The total cost does not account for the costs associated with the proposed Public Safety Center, the Transportation Maintenance Facility, the Annex Facilities, the Field House & Indoor Pool Complex, the renovations to James Wood Middle School, or the NREP addition. The total county cost of the projects proposed for the 1999-2000 CIP is $100,830,997. This reflects a project cost of $65,984,665 and a debt service of $34,846,332. This is an increase of $1,893,923 in the total project cost from the 1998-1999 CIP •__ The Department of Parks and Recreation is working with Valley Health Systems to conduct a feasibility study to determine the county and city needs that could be accommodated by the field house and indoor pool project. The results of this feasibility study are anticipated to be available in Spring 1999. The Handley Regional Library has modified the new library facility in the Lakeside area to coincide with the funding cap established by the Board of Supervisors. A new section will be incorporated into the 1999-2000 CIP which provides a list of capital facility projects that have received funding but are incomplete. This will remove these projects from the funding needs spreadsheet, thus averting confusion for funding needs. 2 FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN 1999-2000 County Department Project Descriptions County terest From Any TOTAL COUNTY Total Project Priority Priority FY 99-00 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 Ctuttrirutrotia Notes Debt Service COSTS Costs i i iilT j . k�Ics: ahrary 2;Q,Q28 2Gi:?2Ps 2t .:...... 4,1,258 t► 2 1 (CA) Public Safety Center N/A* 4F3iCt�S $4 3tii,253 t 3 1ITR ItiewBatkl reek)rIesne �Sl 1tiF1 S 3A O110 ,. ,0,...;, :.. 0 S;8(t0;[]00 N/A** 5 f8 I32 0 y 0 4 2 (PS) Transportafion/MamtenancelWarehouse N/A* 0 . tk: .,.,*,'k8.r'fj',1• C N/A** � 6 2 (CA) New Ammar Shelter 85,000 670,000 t, 755,00{] rued d �' � � � :, � a 7 # fP�1 James WitxtdMid ;3choolRenovattnn itA" 0 755,000 $755,000 8 4 (PR) Park Land Acquisition p. 1200 233 t,'100;?33 2+TlA" 0 €�ts " 9 3 €tk) Annex ac>#tftes:;8s1xt ofteY �a� 1t1* 1,200233 $1,200233 10 1 (AP) .. Airport Apron Expansion 120,000 1`20,000 A 0 " 11 eft : :44Tie t Svt>$ttiYpfl4t# iQ.fx> 30,,7[70 120,000 $600,000 12 5 (PS) Thud County High School 2,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 32,000,000 20,545,151 52,545,151 35i43z151` 14 5 (PR) Soccer Complex SP 1,023,516 102#,516 0 1,023,516 $1,023,516 15.: 6 {(ikR Ttttunst8ask�illjll Complex f B $:42 657 ..:. . 3:4;657 0 . $142;557 16 7 (PR) Open Play Area CB 433,410 433,4113 0 433,410 17 ::: 18 3.(P}, .ottk(m 8 Mena Saltnni LaadeRuia!1ic!t✓1 tow0 _ 7Si%OOiI ')5, 1,?fsG1,I2€i6: 19 (PR) $ Tennis/Picnic Area - SP 41.0d'ttt4n 553,325 533,326 '' 0 553,325.... $553,325 20 6 (PS) Indian Hollow Elem. School Addition 2,100 00(1 1ti0,1100 . 1,352,860 452 860 860 2 7(PS) ewGaffieabvrgE#neta4ySchaol 1,30©;000 _.. . 9,fl00,#1ih1 1fs,71i,90q 17;225,9€14 $ 17.'iS904 22 3 (PR) Baseball Field Renovations - SP 688,847 4>$847 .. p - - •• , • a; 23 9 (Pl�j': $ile�er; Stage:�sattrtg CB _ 331tS19. 339131D Q 688 847 $688,847 24 11 (PR) Maintenance Compound -SP 173,1IS 0 33931Q :. VIP 5}?175,175 25 IQ} d 4 }87d 8341.74 #I 175,175 I7�&74.. $1.75,175 26 9 S Administration Offices N/A* f1 $� T7 >174 4 • TOTALS $7,625,261 $30,289,028 $24,463,410 $1,451,073 $2,155,893Cs59xGb3 $34,846,332 0 0 $100,830,9971 _ $102,347,587 A — Partial funding from Federal Airport Improvement Program (FA1P) and State Commonwealth Airport Fund (SCAF) giant. B = Partial funding from State gnmis and local gigs C = Debt Service is unavailable at time of printing D= Partialfundutg from private donation. N/A* - Project Scope Not Determined At Time Of Printing Department Priority Abbreviations: N/A** - Funding Source Not Determined; Therefore, Debt Service Uncertain At Time Of Printing N/A*** - Feasibility Study To Be Complete Prior To Project Scope Determination AP - Winchester Regional Airport CA - County Administration HL - Handley Regional Library PR - Parks and Recreation PS - Public Schools 1/6/99 CIP99-OO.WK4 CAPITAL, IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS Frit&�c.k County Public choZs 99 Rank 98 Rank Project 99 Cost 98 Cost Difference Description 1 1 Back Creek $9,800,000 $8,700,000 +$17100,000 Elementary 2 2 Transportation Not Not & Maintenance Determined Determined Facility 3 4 Elementary $750,000 $500,000 +$250,000 School Land Acquisition 4 N/A James Wood Not N/A Middle School Determined Renovation 5 3 Third High $32,000,000 $30,000,000 +$2,000,000 School 6 5 Indian Hollow $2,100,000 $2,000,000 +$100,000 Addition 7 6 Gainesboro $10,500,000 $10,000,000 +$500,000 Elementary School 8 N/A NREP Not N/A Addition Determined Note: The priority for land acquisition for a new elementary school in southeastern Frederick County has ascended, while the priority for a third high school has descended. The table reflects the difference in capital costs for the various projects only and does not include information on projected debt service that will be realized through loan issues. -3- IV Frederic. County i'arks and Recreation 99 Rank I 98 Rank 1 Project I Desc:-�pt.vn F 99 Cost 98 CostDifference 1 5 Field House Not Determined Not Determined 2 3 Softball Complex $438,956 $432,042 +$6,914 3 4 Baseball Field Renovations $688,847 $677,998 +$10,849 4 2 Land Acquisition New Parkland $1,200,233 $1,181,332 +$18,901 5 8 Soccer Complex $1,023,516 $1,007,398 +$16,118 6 7 Tennis Courts & Basketball Courts $342,557 $337,163 +$5,394 7 6 Open Play Area $433,410 $426,581 +$6,829 8 9 Tennis Courts & Picnic Area $553,325 $544,611 +$8,714 9 10 Shelter & Stage $339,519 $334,172 +$5,347 10 11 Skateboard Park & In -Line Hockey $417,874 $204,600 +$213,274 11 12 Maintenance Compound $175,175 $200,000 -$24,825 Note: The priorities for a new field house and indoor pool complex and a new soccer complex have ascended, while the priorities for land acquisition for a new regional park in the western portion of the county and an open play area at Clearbrook Park have descended. The #11 priority has been modified in scope to include an In -Line Hockey Rink as a part of the Skateboard Park, while the #12 priority for a maintenance compound and office at Sherando Park has been decreased in scope. EJ Handley Regional. Library 99 Rank 98 Rank Project 99 Cost 98 Cost Difference Description 1 1 New Library $4,316,253 $5,257,940 -$941,687 Note: The new library facility is proposed to be developed at 35,000 square feet which maintains the same square footage from last year; however, it is estimated that approximately 1/3 of the interior of the structure will not be finished as a part of this capital project. Frederick County Public Warks 99 Rank 98 Rank Project Description 99 Cost 98 Cost Difference 1 1 CDD Landfill $700,000 $800,000 -$100,000 2 N/A Ballast Pond $200,000 N/A Rt. 645 Relocation 3 3 Cell Closure $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $0 4 2 Gas Management Cell $500,000 $500,000 $0 5 4 New Landfill Development $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 6 N/A New Animal Shelter $755,000 N/A Note: The top five projects are funded through the Landfill Enterprise Fund and do not require appropriations from the county's General Fund. Winchester Regional Airport 99 Rank 98 Rank Project Description 99 Cost 98 Cost Difference 1 N/A Apron Expansion $600,000 N/A 2 2 Rt. 645 Relocation $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $0 5- FREDERICK COUNTY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMMING PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA UAEvan\Common\CIP\E V ALUATN [#1 i oP C DE CRI P'.I"ION WEIGHT I Conformance to Does the project conform to, or contribute to Comprehensive Plan the attainment of goals/objectives of the 3 Comprehensive Plan? Is the project consistent with establishedpolicies? 2 Public Health, Safety or Does the project improve conditions affecting Welfare health safety or welfare? Does it eliminate a 4 clear health or safety risk? 3 Legal Requirement Is the project required in order to meet a State or Federal mandate or some other legal 4 requirement? 4 Equitable Distribution of Does the project meet a special need of some Services segment of the population that has been identified as needing assistance? Would the 2 project provide equivalent services to a population group that is currently under- served relative to other areas of the county? 5 Economic Impact Is the project essential to, or would it encourage some form of economic development? Would the project improve the 2 tax base, reduce operating expenses, produce revenue, or otherwise have a positive effect on the local economy? 6 Coordination with other Is the project necessary for the successful Projects completion of other projects? Is the project 3 art of a largerproject? 7 Public Support Are county residents fully informed and 3 supportive of the proposed project? 8 Department Priority Ratings are provided for the top four projects 2 submitted by each agency or department. UAEvan\Common\CIP\E V ALUATN [#1 CRITERION and WEIGHT LIBRARY New Library SCHOOL SYSTEM New Back Creek Elementary School Transportation Maintenance Facility Southern Elem. School Site Acquisition James Wood Middle School Renovation Third County High School Indian Hollow Elementary Addition New Gainesboro Elementary School NREP Addition Administration Building Renovations PARKS AND RECREATION Field House/Indoor Pool Softball Complex - SP Baseball Field Renovations - SP Park Land Acquisition Soccer Complex - SP Tennis/Basketball Complex - CB Open Play Area - CB Tennis/Picnic Area - SP Shelter, Stage Seating - CB Skateboard Park Maintenance Compound - SP AIRPORT Apron Expansion Route 645 Relocation - Construction COUNTY ADMINISTRATION Public Safety Center New Animal Shelter Annex Facilities NOTE: 1999 — 2000 FREDERICK COUNTY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS EVALUATION FORM LISTED BY DEPARTMENT IN ORDER OF DEPARTMENT PRIORITY Conform to Health, Legally Distribute Economic Related Public Department Comp. Plan safety, Required Services Impact to Other Support Priority TOTAL Welfers Welfare Projects 3 4 4 2 2 3 3 2 rr '1 4s` 2!6 1/4 1/4 0/0 1/2 2/6 1/3 316 31 1A Z., 1.(3vn 401.;> 2/6 2/8 0/0 112 112 2/6 113 3/6 33 a .,2;s 1) Capital Improvement Projects in bold, italic print represent new project requests by department. 2) The New Department Priority category provides a rating for the top four projects submitted by each agency. 216 2!8 0/0 3.t9 Idd o10 1/2 kl4 3/6 2/6 If 1}"$.1:101111 113 11:111111111:111111 $ 37 2/6 3/12 0/0 112 V-4 2/4 113 ?J9 r 2/6 2/8 0/0 1/2 2/4 1!3 i,3;,. 113 OXt 26 2/6 2/8 0/0 3/6 2/4 0/0 1/3 iilp 27 2f4 X19. 3f5 3/9 1/4 0/0 J44.., rQfU 1/2 ]12:' 1/2 1/3 }<1... i1.: 2/6 45 2J4 ; 30 3/9 1/4 0/0 .. l fq;4d}4 418 1/2 1/3 j} 2/6 0/0 32 3/9 1/4 0/0 3/6 1/2 2/6 1/3 010 30 3/9 1/4 0/0 `QlQ 1/2 3fd;1. 0/0 2/6 t14': 2/60/0 2::15 #ilQ 27 2$ 1/3 I/4 0/0 t4. § V-4aRp;r;` 1/2 1/2 1/3 2/6 zr 0/0 €Irk 20 rr '1 4s` 2!6 1/4 1/4 0/0 1/2 2/6 1/3 316 31 1A Z., 1.(3vn 401.;> 2/6 2/8 0/0 112 112 2/6 113 3/6 33 a .,2;s 1) Capital Improvement Projects in bold, italic print represent new project requests by department. 2) The New Department Priority category provides a rating for the top four projects submitted by each agency. COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/678-0682 MEMORANDUM To: Frederick County Planning Commission From: Michael T. Ruddy, Planner II Jou^� Subject: TEA -21 Enhancement Project Application - Kernstown Battlefield Date: December 18, 1998 Frederick County and the City of Winchester plan to submit an application for a joint TEA -21 Enhancement Project to assist further with the acquisition of the remainder of the historic Kernstown Battlefield site. This TEA -21 Enhancement Project is a continuance of the two previous ISTEA grant applications that were successful in securing funds to acquire a portion of the Kernstown Battlefield. Complete acquisition of the Kernstown Battlefield site would be the first major step toward the creation of a Civil War Battlefield Network in Frederick County and the City of Winchester. The Kernstown Battlefields will play a significant role in the interpretation of Civil War history for the area. As the Commission is aware, Frederick County and the City of Winchester no longer hold an option to purchase the 342 -acre Grim Farm, site of the First and Second Battles of Kernstown. It remains the goal of Frederick County, The City of Winchester, and the Kernstown Battlefield Association to purchase the Grim Farm and preserve the Kernstown Battlefield. The Virginia Department of 'transportation has previously awarded a total $1,090,000 in ISTEA Enhancement funds for this project. At this time, it is uncertain as to the final purchase price of the property. Therefore, additional funding sources, such as the TEA -21 Enhancement Project, should continue to be pursued to maintain the potential for acquisition by Frederick County and the City of Winchester. This year's application emphasizes the efforts made toward achieving the goal of establishing a Battlefield Tour Network in Frederick County and the City of Winchester. In particular, the application highlights endeavors to acquire the Grim Farm and the completion of a Resource Management Plan for the Kernstown Battlefields. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 S TEA -21 Enhancement Project Page 2 December 18, 1998 Management Plan for the Kernstown Battlefields. Staff will present the completed application for your review at the January 6, 1999, Planning Commission meeting. This 1999 TEA -21 Enhancement proposal for Frederick County and the City of Winchester will be scheduled for public hearing during the January 13, 1999 Board of Supervisors meeting. Staff asks that the Planning Commission consider this proposal and forward a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. MTR/cc