Loading...
PC 02-18-98 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia FEBRUARY 18, 1998 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) December 3, 1997 and December 17, 1997 Minutes ......................... A 2) Bi -Monthly Report .................................................. B 3) Committee Reports ................................................. C 4) Citizen Comments .................................................. D PUBLIC HEARING 5) Conditional Use Permit #019-97 of Denise McClearen for a cottage occupation to operate a dog grooming business. This property is located at 4784 Front Royal Pike and is identified with Property Identification Numbers 94A-1-11-4 thru 9 in the Opequon Magisterial District. (Mr.Ruddy)....................................................... E 6) 1998-99 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for Frederick County. The CIP is a prioritized list of projects requested by numerous County agencies, to be undertaken in the ensuing five-year period. The plan is created as an informational document to assist in the development of the County's annual budget. The CIP is an advisory document; projects are not necessarily funded because of their inclusion in the CIP. (Mr. Wyatt) ....................................................... F PUBLIC MEETING 7) Repine Subdivision #004-98 submitted by Mark and Rachelle Repine for the subdivision of a 1.3719 -acre tract into three lots. This property is located at the eastern portion of Idylwood Drive in the existing Heritage Hills subdivision (Route 1238) and is identified with Property Identification Number 54-3-1A in the Shawnee Magisterial District. (Mr. Lawrence) .................................................... G 2 S) Wythe Avenue Extension Subdivision #015-97 submitted by Greenway Engineering, Inc. for the subdivision of a 1.4065 -acre tract into four lots. This property is located at the end of the existing Wythe Avenue in Stephens City and is identified with Property Identification Number 75-A-65. (Mr. Lawrence) .................................................... H 9) Proposed 1998 Primary Road Improvement Plan - The purpose of this plan is to advise the Commonwealth Transportation Board of the funding priorities for the Primary Road System in Frederick County. (Mr. Ruddy) ....................................................... I 10) Other 0- AGENDAS\98COVERSTC2 18.AGN MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on December 3, 1997. PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; Robert A. Moms, Shawnee District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; Terry Stone, Gainesboro District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; W. Wayne Miller, Gainesboro District; George L. Romine, Citizen at Large; Robert M. Sager, Board Liaison; Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison; and Jay Cook, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: John R Marker, Vice-Chairman/Back Creek District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; and Richard C. Ours, Opequon District. STAFF PRESENT: Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Planning Director; Andrew D. Evans, Zoning Administrator; Eric R. Lawrence, Planner II; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEETING MINUTES - November 5,1997 Upon motion made by Mrs. Copenhaver and seconded by Mr. Wilson, the minutes of November 5, 1997 were unanimously approved as presented. BIMONTHLY REPORT Chairman DeHaven accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's information. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 3, 1997 Page 126 -2 - COMMITTEE REPORTS Transportation Committee Mr. Wyatt reported that the Commonwealth Transportation Board approved the "No 1 hrough Truck Traffic" Policy for Tasker Road. Economic Development Commission Mr. Romine reported that at their next meeting, they will be ready to unveil the Industrial Services Directory and they will also be discussing the new Construction Services Directory. Winchester City Planning Commission Mr. DiBenedetto reported that the Winchester City Planning Commission's most recent project has been to address some of the rezoning concerns of the Winchester Medical Center; and apparently, there will be some concerns raised over taxes and the implementation of an interchange on Route 37. He also reported that the Commission's worksessions have included discussions on implementing the EIP District, which was created earlier in the year, and the update of the Comprehensive Plan. PUBLIC HEARING Conditional Use Permit #018-97 of Thomas A. and Kim L. Hazard for the manufacture and assembly of magic props and furniture. The property is located at 949 Canterburg Road in Stephens City and is identified with P.I.N. 92 -A -72B in the Opequon Magisterial District Action - Recommended Approval with Conditions Andrew Evans, Zoning Administrator, read the background information and review agency comments. Mr. Evans said that the request is for a cottage occupation to assemble magic props and furniture in an existing barn building, which will have a 20' X 27' frame addition attached. Mr. Evans said that the applicant indicates there will be no employees. He stated that the site has high visibility from a number of adjacent properties and staff is recommending that all activity and storage associated with the use be within the building. He said that it did not appear that granting the permit would have a negative impact on the neighborhood. Mr. Evans read the four conditions recommended by the staff. Mr. Thomas A. Hazard, property owner and applicant, stated that he is proposing a small Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 3, 1997 Page 127 -3 - assembly business that he and his wife will be operating. Mr. Hazard felt it was a little extravagant for VDOT to require a curb and gutter entrance for the type of operation he was proposing. Commission members discussed VDOT's recommendation for a commercial entrance in light of the operation proposed by the Hazards and the staffs recommended Condition # 1, which stated that all review agency comments must be complied with. Commission members stated that the applicant has the right to work with VDOT to eliminate or reduce the requirement for a commercial entrance. It was noted that a commercial entrance does not necessarily mean a "curb and gutter paved entrance" into a property, but may simply involve a slight modification to the entrance onto the property. Commission members felt this issue needed to be negotiated between the applicant and VDOT and that Condition # 1 should remain as stated. There were no public comments. Upon motion made by Mr. Light and seconded by Mr. Morris, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit #018-97 of Thomas and Kim Hazard for a Cottage Occupation for the manufacture and assembly of magic props and furniture with the following conditions: All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. 2. All work shall be accomplished inside of the enclosed building. No outside storage of materials, props, or furniture/fixtures. 4. Hours of operation should be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Rezoning Application #005-97 of C. L. Robinson Corporation to rezone 26.895 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance). This property is located at the west side of Merrimans Lane (Rt. 621) at Winchester & Western Railroad crossing and east of Route 37, approximately 1,100' South of Breckenridge Lane, and identified with P.I.N. 53-A-88 in the Back Creek Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval Mr. Evan Wyatt, Deputy Planning Director, gave the background information and review agency comments for the rezoning application. He pointed out a revised comment from VDOT, dated November 5, 1997, which stated that the extension of Jubal Early Drive, as conceptually proposed, and resulting widening of Route 37, will have an impact on the subject property. Mr. Wyatt said that the Frederick County Sanitation Authority has agreed to allow the City of Winchester to serve this area and staff has received a letter from the City's Public Utilities Director stating the City has a water and sewer distribution and collection system in close proximity that could serve the property upon the extension of lines to the parcel. Mr. Wyatt said that both the Fire & Rescue Department and the Parks & Recreation Department have raised a concern regarding the County's fiscal impact model and the net fiscal impact demonstrated by the model run. In addition, he said that the Public Schools have a concern about the impact this rezoning would have on future and existing school facilities and Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 3, 1997 Page 128 -4 - the Winchester City Planning Department has raised a concern regarding the potential for accidents at the Merrimans Lane/ Breckinridge Drive intersection. Mr. Wyatt stated that the applicant has proffered a monetary contribution consistent with the results of the Capital Facilities Impact Model, has proffered a maximum of 54 single-family detached residential lots, and has proffered a general development plan which demonstrates a phase plan. He said that this phase plan, as well as a consumer notification statement, to be placed on all subdivision plats, has been proffered to alert future lot purchasers of the Jubal Early Drive extension project. In summary, Mr. Wyatt stated that the proposed rezoning conforms to the requirements of the Comprehensive Policy Plan and the proffered density conforms to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. He said that the applicant's submitted proffer mitigates the negative impacts associated with capital costs and the possible extension of Jubal Early Drive; however, the staff is recommending that the applicant enhance the language within the "phasing section" by stating that the approval of subdivision plats or building permits be tied into a percentage of build -out or a future date. Mr. Wyatt presented a letter from Richard W. Pifer to the Commission in which Mr. Pifer expresses his concern with traffic associated with the proposed project. Commission members inquired if the County was legally tied to the existing impact model. Mr. Wyatt said that the Capital Facilities Impact Model is a fiscal impact management tool adopted by the Board of Supervisors which has been consistently used with rezonings and should be abided by until the Board of Supervisors advises the staff of a new model to be used. Mr. Jay Cook, legal counsel to the Planning Commission, agreed with Mr. Wyatt's statement. Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin with G. W. Clifford & Associates, the design engineering firm for this project, presented the proposal to the Planning Commission. Mr. Gyurisin reviewed the proffers submitted indicating the monetary proffer amount of $3,910.03 per approved lot to be paid to Frederick County at the time of building permit application. Members of the Commission inquired if the water source to serve this property was the same water service access for the Route 50 corridor businesses that will ultimately serve Roundhill. Mr. Gyurisin replied that it was the same. Chairman DeHaven called for public comment and the following persons came forward to speak: Pastor Malcolm Vandereit, property owner to the north, inquired about what price range of homes the developer anticipated. Pastor Vandereit said that he was not opposed to residential rezoning, however, he was opposed to the density proposed. Mr. Robert Whitacre, Assistant Fire Chief at Roundhill Community Volunteer Fire Company, had concerns with the monetary amount proffered to fire and rescue services that was submitted with this application. Mr. Whitacre stated that the percentage amounts used to determine the proffers were based on 1990 fiscal impact figures and were far too low. He said that his company can not buy fuel and equipment in 1997 for what they paid in 1990. He felt that the percentage amounts designated to fire companies were too low when the impact model was originally developed in 1990. Mr. Whitacre requested that the Commission table the rezoning until the Board of Supervisors had an opportunity to revise the Capital Facilities Impact Model. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 3, 1997 Page 129 -5 - Dr. James Dumont, resident across the road from Route 37 on Merriman Lane, inquired if Merriman Lane would be able to handle the increased traffic created by the additional homes. He said he was not opposed to residential rezoning, however, he was concerned that if the residential lots did not sell because of traffic problems, that the applicant may return to rezone the property for commercial use. Mr. Dan Redman, Rescue Captain with the Stephens City Volunteer Fire Department, came forward to voice his concerns about the 1990 Capital Facilities Impact Model. He stated that the 1990 figures used in the model were outdated and he was concerned that those figures were still being used to calculate emergency services impacts in 1997. Mr. Redman said that the amount proffered to Fire and Rescue for this development did not come close to covering its share of the operating and equipment costs associated with providing fire and rescue services. Mr. Redman requested that the Planning Commission table the rezoning until the impact model could be revised. Frederick County Fire Marshal, Mr. Douglas Kiracofe, came forward to also express concerns about what he believed were outdated figures used in the 1990 Capital Facilities Impact Model. Mr. Kiracofe stated that the Fire and Rescue Department's argument is not with the proposed rezoning, but with the process used to determine capital costs associated with the proposed development. He further stated that the Capital Facilities Impact Model should have been updated yearly. Mr. Kiracofe said that each time a rezoning is approved and impact is added to volunteer fire and rescue companies in Frederick County, the demand for services increases; however, the funding level remains stagnant. He said that the volunteers have to make up the monetary deficit and that's what hurts the volunteer system --the hours we expect volunteers to spend at fundraisers to help pay for equipment. Mr. Kiracofe said that a Class A Pumper on the street today costs $110,000 more than it did on the day the Impact Model was adopted in 1990. Mr. Gyurisin came back to the podium to address some of the questions that were raised. Mr. Gyurisin said that the price range of the homes is anticipated to be comparable to the homes in the Woodside Estates subdivision. Regarding the monetary contribution to Fire and Rescue, Mr. Gyurisin stated that they have proffered an amount that is consistent with other rezonings that have been recently presented to the Commission. Mr. Gyurisin asked the Commission not to stop this rezoning process while the Commission and Board works out the differences in the impact model and the Fire and Rescue Department's concerns. As far as density and lot sizes were concerned, Mr. Gyurisin stated that the lot sizes in this development were consistent with those in the area. He added that the development will have curb and gutter and street lights. Members of the Planning Commission stated that it was difficult to ignore the proffer/ impact model issue when reviewing this rezoning. Everyone agreed that new developments should be mitigating the impacts they create; they also agreed that the impact model needed examination and brought current, however, they did not want to hold up the project under consideration while the County did the necessary work to update the impact model. Members of the Commission also stated that they would prefer a subdivision with streets, sidewalks, curbs, and lighting, such as this proposal, rather than simply a five -acre lot subdivision. Upon motion made by Mrs. Copenhaver and seconded by Mr. Romine, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission recognizes the funding problems the fire companies are experiencing with the proffer system and use of the current Capital Facilities Impact Model; however, the Commission does hereby recommend approval of Rezoning Application 4005-97 of C. L. Robinson Corporation to rezone 26.895 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) by the following majority vote: Frederick Countv Planning Commission Minutes of December 3, 1997 Page 130 YES (TO APPROVE): Miller, Stone, Romine, DeHaven, Copenhaver, Light, Morris NO: Wilson (The following Commissioners were absent: Mr. Thomas, Mr. Ours, and Mr. Marker) Upon motion made by Mr. Wilson and seconded by Mrs. Copenhaver, the letter from Mr. Richard Pifer was made a part of the official record by unanimous vote. 1998 FREDERICK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN Action - Recommended Approval Deputy Planning Director, Evan A. Wyatt, stated that the staff presented information to the Commission at their previous meeting that was prepared by the Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) dealing with the update of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Mr. Wyatt said that the changes included table and text amendments, the conversion of maps, and the inclusion of the Rt. 37 West Land Use Plan. Members of the Commission had capacity questions on the public schools section which School Superintendent, Thomas R. Malcolm, answered for the Commission. There were no public comments. Upon motion made by Mrs. Copenhaver and seconded by Mr. Wilson, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the 1998 Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan. PRESENTATION OF SITE PLANS FOR ARMEL AND MIDDLETOWN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS No Action Required Superintendent of Frederick County Schools, Thomas R. Malcolm, presented two sets of plans for additions to two elementary schools, Armel Elementary School and Middletown Elementary School. Mr. Malcolm stated that this expansion is designed to add capacity to both schools, increasing each from a 550 -pupil school to an approximately 745 -pupil school. He explained that the idea here is to add capacity strategically throughout the County in areas where population is growing the quickest and avoid building a new, additional school. Addressing the Armel Elementary School plan first, Mr. Malcolm said that the proposal is to add approximately 11,000 square feet, consisting of nine classrooms, related support areas, and a teachers' dining Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 3, 1997 Page 131 -7 - area. Mr. Malcolm proceeded to review the Middletown plan, which was essentially the same. He said that both sites are large enough to accommodate the additions with appropriate entrances and parking spaces. The Planning Commission had no outstanding issues with the plans and gave the staff authority to administratively approve the plans when ready. DISCUSSION REGARDING FLEX -TECH AMENDMENTS Mr. Eric R Lawrence, Planner II, presented the Flex -Tech amendments as recommended by the Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS). Mr. Lawrence stated that the flex -tech use would be implemented through a master development plan and would be provided within the B2, B3, and M 1 Zoning Districts with performance standards. Mr. Lawrence stated that a concern raised just recently by one of the area development firms was that the flex -tech use should be driven strictly by the market and they wanted the flexibility to build a shell building for use by either all retail or all manufacturing clients, whichever the market dictated. Commission members who were on the DRRS recalled that this issue of concern was primarily from the 132/ B3 general business people who wanted this flexibility; the industrial representatives did not want a group to come into an industrial park and become, for example, totally B2. Mr. Lawrence reviewed the performance standards, beginning with building requirements and proceeding to site layout requirements and buffer and screening requirements. He said that the text is consistent with what the DRRS reviewed on November 13, except for the possible waiver for loading bays. He explained that this issue was raised by a development firm concerned with the difficulty in hiding a loading bay, if the property was surrounded on all sides by streets. Mr. Lawrence said that the staff provided language for a waiver of the requirement, if the Commission felt it was warranted after reviewing the situation. The Planning Commission was comfortable with the amendments as proposed and instructed the staff to proceed with advertising for public hearing. OTHER VIRGINIA CERTIFIED PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S PROGRAM Chairman DeHaven reminded the Commission of the upcoming session of the Virginia Certified Planning Commissioner's Program beginning on March 2 - 3, 1998 with the closing session being held on May 14 - 15, 1998. Chairman DeHaven encouraged members of the Commission to take advantage of this worthwhile program, if they hadn't already done so. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 3, 1997 Page 132 ADJOURNMENT unanimous vote. -8 - No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adiourned at 8:45 p.m. by Respectfully submitted, Kris C. Tierney, Secretary Charles S. DeHaven, Chairman Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 3, 1997 Page 133 MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on December 17, 1997. PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; John R. Marker, Vice-Chairman/Back Creek District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; W. Wayne Miller, Gainesboro District; George L. Romine, Citizen at Large; and Jay Cook, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: Terry Stone, Gainesboro District; Robert M. Sager, Board Liaison; and Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison. STAFF PRESENT: Kris C. Tierney, Director; Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Planning Director; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. BIMONTHLY REPORT Chairman DeHaven accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's information. COMMITTEE REPORTS Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) - 12/08/97 Mtg. Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the CPPS finalized the Capital Improvements Plan. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 17, 1997 Page 134 -2 - Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) -12/16/97 Mtg. Mr. Morris reported that there were approximately 30 attendees, made up of staff, committee members, news media, and others, at the HRAB meeting to review two rezoning requests: the first, consisting of 63 acres located on Shady Elm Road and Apple Valley Road, behind G.E., of which a portion is adjacent to the Kernstown Battlefield; the HRAB felt the viewshed should be maintained to the extent possible (Pritchard's Hill) out over the northern end of that property; and, the second rezoning, Carriebrooke, located at Rt. 37 and Rt. 642, behind the Frederick County water tower, contains some redoubts and a historic house; the HRAB felt the house was far beyond saving, but the redoubts should be maintained. Economic Development Commission (EDC) Mr. Romine reported that the Commission is updating budgets and miscellaneous year-end business. Joint Frederick County -Stephens City Planning Committee Mr. Tierney reported that a representative from the Commission on Local Government was present at the last meeting to discuss the various alternative means of annexation and it was a fairly informative meeting. Sanitation Authority - 12/16/98 Mtg. Mrs. Copenhaver reported that repair work on manholes and lines in the Fredericktowne area is almost complete. She said the Westmoreland Drive work will begin in January. PUBLIC HEARING Proposed amendments to Chapter 165, Zoning, Article IV, Supplemental Use Regulations, Section 165-23, Setback Requirements; Section 165-27, Off -Street Parking; Parking Lots, Section 165-29, Motor Vehicle Access; Section 165-30, Signs; Section 165-35, Nuisances; Section 165-47, Landfills, Junkyards, Trash Disposal and Inoperable Vehicles; and Section 165-48.7, Utilities; and Article XXI, Definitions, of the Frederick County Code. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 17, 1997 Page 135 -3 - Action - Recommended Approval Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Planning Director, stated that the amendments proposed establish development design standards that are intended to enhance the quality of development projects. Mr. Wyatt stated that the Commission has been involved with this discussion since April of 1997 and the Commission has also had the opportunity to discuss several revisions as a result of staff's continuing work with the Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) and the development and design community. Mr. Wyatt singled out two items that were the result of the Commission's last discussion: 1) the boulevard entrance design standards; Mr. Wyatt said that a meeting was held with several local engineers representing several of the design firms in the community and the conclusion drawn was that several things needed to occur, potentially some at the Comprehensive Planning level, before all those involved would feel comfortable proposing an ordinance for the Commission and the Board's action. Mr. Wyatt advised that as a result, this section has been removed from the presented text with the understanding that work will continue. Proceeding to the other key item, 2) the setback for parking lots for lots that have frontage on arterial roadways and major collector roadways; Mr. Wyatt said that the proposed text shows the 30' setback; it provides for a 20' setback (a 10' reduction) provided certain design elements are in place; and, it adds a waiver potential for the Planning Commission to accommodate unique situations, such as parcel redevelopment or an undeveloped parcel that is legally platted which cannot meet the setback requirements. Chairman DeHaven called for public comment and the following person came forward to speak: Mr. Jim Emmart, speaking on behalf of the Northern Virginia Petroleum Drivers Association, whose membership includes Bauserman Oil Company, Emmart Oil Company, H. N. Funkhouser, J. D. Glover & Sons, Kremer Oil Corporation, L. J. Wright, Mercer Oil Company, Quarles Petroleum, Skyline Oil, and Southern States, apologized for coming into the amendment discussions so late; however, he said that due to the massive changes which they feel are occurring in this proposal and their lack of understanding of them, the Northern Virginia Petroleum Drivers Association feels they need to be in objection to several of the proposed amendments, specifically: parking, entrance setbacks, petroleum pump setbacks, mounded perimeters, and sign reductions. No other public comments were made. Upon motion made by Mr. Thomas and seconded by Mr. Ours, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the proposed amendments to Chapter 165, Zoning, Article IV, Supplemental Use Regulations, Section 165-23, Setback Requirements; Section 165-27, Off -Street Parking; Parking Lots, Section 165-29, Motor Vehicle Access; Section 165-30, Signs; Section 165-35, Nuisances; Section 165-47, Landfills, Junkyards, Trash Disposal and Inoperable Vehicles; and Section 165-48.7, Utilities; and Article XXI, Definitions, of the Frederick County Code. These proposed amendments establish development design standards that are intended to enhance the quality of development projects. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 17, 1997 Page 136 -4 - Proposed Amendment to the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan to expand the Frederick County Urban Development Area (UDA) to include a 42.5 acre tract of land located south of Fairfax Pike (Rt. 277) and east of Double Church Road (Rt. 641). Action - Recommended Deni?! Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Planning Director, stated that the Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) received a request from Mr. Douglas W. Harold, Jr. to expand the Urban Development Area (UDA) to include a 42.5 -acre tract owned by Preston E. Conner, Sr., Estate. He said that the property is located on the east side of Double Church Road (Rt. 64 1) and adjoins the Sherando High School tract along its eastern property line. Mr. Wyatt said that the site is in close proximity to South Warrior Drive; however, access at this time is via Brandy Lane, which is a private drive. Mr. Wyatt said that several areas of concern were raised by the CPPS: 1) expansion of the UDA south of Rt. 277, as well as east of Double Church Road (Rt. 641); 2) if the line was expanded and the property was developed at a higher density than what was allowed in the RA Zoning District, it would exacerbate an already existing traffic congestion problem; and, 3) uncertainty of adequate capacity for both sewer and water to serve this area. Mr. Wyatt said that the CPPS's final recommendation was that the UDA should not be expanded at this time, primarily because of the traffic impacts. Mr. Wyatt reviewed a letter from the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) in which the FCSA stated that they would be able to provide sewer and water to the designated area with no adverse impacts to their system; and secondly, the sewer service could be pumped to the north, to the west, or in both directions without increasing line sizes, however, if pumped to the north, the pump station would need to be upgraded. Commission members asked the staff for the closest point of the Agricultural and Forestal District (A&FD). Using a map, Mr. Wyatt pointed out the location of the A&FD on the Racey Tract and along Double Church Road, and on the Wymer tract. Mr. Wyatt said that the A&FD does not abut the 42 -acre tract, but is certainly in close proximity. Mr. Douglas W. Harold, Jr., the trustee of the 42.5 -acre plot of land, stated that this particular tract of land was much larger; he said it used to contain the land where Sherando High School is located. Mr. Harold said that a guaranteed access exists down Warrior Road pursuant to the deeds of the Sherando High School property, for whatever development may take place in the future. He said that the property is currently limited to agricultural use, however, north of this land is both residential and commercial development. Mr. Harold stated that if the land remains in agriculture zoning, it will be of limited value to the trust he represents. He fiuther stated that there is access to the water and sewer service provided to Sherando High School, which is consistent with the contracts executed at the time the Sherando High School property was sold. Members of the Commission asked if improvements to Warrior Road were part of the access agreement. Mr. Harold stated that no provisions for improvements were included in the contracts; however, if improvements were necessary, he would be prepared to proffer them. Commission members inquired if Warrior Road would be the primary means of access and egress for a proposed development and Mr. Harold replied that it would. Mr. Harold added that Brandy Lane is a gravel drive running along the southern portion of the land; however, it may be possible to gradually improve Brandy Lane as part of a proposal. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 17, 1997 Page 137 -5 - Chairman DeHaven called for public comment and the following people came forward to speak: Mr. John Stelzel, Vice President of the Frederick County Farm Bureau and President of the North Valley Agricultural Issues Association, came forward to speak in opposition to the request on behalf of these two organizations and himself. Mr. Stelzel stated that the Farm Bureau recently passed a resolution, which will be presented to the County early in 1998, requesting buffer placement between rural and residential areas as new developments are created. In defense of having this land remain in agricultural use, Mr. Stelzel said that rural land pays its own way in the County, by providing the County with tax dollars and requiring very low service costs, as compared to residential areas. Mr. Stelzel stated that this area is lacking in the necessary infrastructure to handle more residential development. Mr. Ed Hamilton, resident on Double Church Road, stated that during high school sporting events at Sherando, there is a terrible traffic problem that extends all the way back into Stephens City and all the way down onto the other side of Rt. 277. Mr. Hamilton expressed his concerns about increased traffic problems that would come with future development and the availability of water and sewer. Mr. Herbert Painter, resident on Route 641 below Woodside Estates, stated that he was opposed to the expansion of the UDA, primarily because of the traffic situation. Ms. Loretta Wymer, resident on Double Church Road (Rt. 641), asked if any of the Wymer property would be placed in the UDA. Ms. Wymer stated that if sewer is extended through there, she would be charged for it, even though she did not need it. She added that Mr. Conner told her before he died that he had seen to it that his land would not be developed for ten years. Mr. Harold returned to the podium and stated that he has the responsibility, as trustee of this property, to ensure that the land, placed in trust many years before he met Mr. Conner, had the opportunity to acquire its greatest and highest potential financial value. Mrs_ Sarah Stelzel, resident on Grim Road (Rt. 640), asked the Commission to stand by their long-range plans and not extend the UDA. Ms. Stelzel said that there is a significant amount of existing land in the UDA that can still be developed. She said that as a resident along that road and someone who will be impacted by the proposed development, she was opposed to the request. Members of the Commission believed that the only reason to extend the UDA would be because there was not enough land in the existing UDA to meet development needs, and this wasn't the case in this particular situation. They also had strong concerns about the traffic situation and how it would be further impacted if this area was developed. Members of the Commission believed that additional land should not be developed until the infrastructure was available to support it. They expressed concern about the impacts to schools, fire and rescue services, police services, and the lack of existing infrastructure; and they were opposed to expanding the UDA at this time. Upon motion made by Mr_ Light and seconded by Mr. Wilson, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend denial of the request by Douglas W. Harold, Jr. to amend the Comprehensive Policy Plan to expand the Urban Development Area to include a 42.5 -acre tract owned by the Preston E. Conner, Sr., Estate. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 17, 1997 Page 138 -6 - (Mr. Stone was absent from this meeting.) PUBLIC MEETING Consideration of a request by Mr. Jim Petry, Vice President of Development for JASBO, Inc. to extend sewer service beyond the Sewer and Water Service Area to the Whitfield Subdivision. This property is located on the east side of Double Church Road, approximately one mile south of Fairfax Pike. Action - Recommended Denial Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Planning Director, stated that the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) considered a request from Mr. Jim Petry, Vice President of Development for JASBO, Inc. to allow for the extension of sewer service from the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) to the Whitfield Subdivision. Mr. Wyatt said that Mr. Petry advised the CPPS that the subdivision is experiencing failing drainfield systems and that perk sites for undeveloped lots cannot be achieved; therefore, extending service would be the only option for developing the platted, undeveloped lots. Mr. Wyatt said that the CPPS acknowledged the fact that limited capacity sewer has been extended outside of the SWSA on occasions; however, this was done to accommodate existing industrial, business, or institutional uses. He said that the Committee believed there was not a compelling reason to extend sewer service at this time and stated that they did not want to set a precedent to extend sewer service outside of the SWSA for uses other than those just mentioned. Mr. Mark Smith, the project design engineer with Greenway Engineering, stated that the lots were recorded in 1968. Mr. Smith said that the Health Department has determined that the soils in this area are not able to perk. He said that because of the close proximity of sewer in the Woodside development, it is now technically feasible and reasonable in cost to develop these lots. Mr. Smith said that the force main will be extended all the way back through the subdivision, so that any homeowner that needs to hook on can do so. Mr. James Petry, representing JASBO, Inc. and Mr. Bowman in this request, said that JASBO owns seven lots in Whitfield Subdivision. Mr. Petry said that they are not asking for anything new; they just want to finish a project that began 30 years ago. He said that perk sites could not be found a long time ago and he had the Health Department check again as recently as five or six years ago. He said that the Health Department has determined that perk sites are just not available in that subdivision. Mr. Petry said that they were told that there are systems in the subdivision that are not functioning properly. He said that if this is so, the situation can only get worse. Mr. Petry said that he was proposing a new service for their seven -lot purposes; but, in doing so, they were making available a solution to a potential problem down the road. Chairman DeHaven called for public comment and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Herbert Painter, resident on Double Church Road, was opposed to the request. Mr. Painter said that his biggest concern was the precedent this would set for future extension requests and even more development. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 17, 1997 Page 139 -7 - Mr. Edward Hamilton, resident in Whitfield Subdivision, was concerned that the developer would put multi -family units on the remaining seven lots, if public sewer was available. Mr. Hamilton also inquired who would be would be responsible for paying for running the sewer line underneath the road. Mr. John Stelzl, Vice President of the Frederick County Farm Bureau and President of the North Valley Agricultural Issues Association, came forward to speak in opposition to the request on behalf of these two organizations and himself. Mr. Stelzl believed that granting this extension would set a precedent for future development. He said that he was sympathetic to the homeowners who were having problems with their systems, but he was not in favor of granting the request for the seven remaining, undeveloped lots. Mrs. Sarah Stelzl, area resident and property owner, asked if the request was on behalf of the homeowners who were experiencing septic problems or if the request was simply so the remaining undeveloped lots could be developed. Mrs. Stelzl said that if there are people with failing septics and there is an unhealthy situation, that was one issue to be dealt with; however, if the applicant was speaking of extending sewer to double the number of homes, then she felt that was an entirely different matter. Mr. Petry and Mr. Smith returned to the podium. Mr. Petry stated that his desire was to finish this project and make use of seven platted, vacant lots which have incurred taxes for the past 30 years. Mr. Petry said that they would gladly make the sewer line available to others in the subdivision. Mr. Smith said that the force main and crossings would be paid for by Mr. Petry and his organization and the individual grinder pumps would be paid for by the homeowners. He said that a typical grinder pump will cost about $3,000.00, the installer fee would be about $3,000.00, and the Service Authority's tap -on fee is about $2,065.00. Most of the members of the Commission were not in favor of extending the SWSA simply to develop the remaining seven lots in the Whitfield Subdivision, especially because of the precedent it would set in that area for more development to occur. On the other hand, a few Commission members believed that the opportunity should be seized to fix the failing septic problems of area homeowners. These Commissioners felt that the system could be designed for a two-inch force main and certainly contain restrictions that no connection past the existing development could ever occur. A motion for denial was made by Mr. Light and seconded by Mr. Marker, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend denial of the request by Mr. Jim Petry, Vice President of Development for JASBO, Inc. to extend sewer service from the Sewer and Water Service Area to the Whitfield Subdivision by the following majority vote: YES (TO DENY THE REQUEST): Ours, Wilson, DeHaven, Marker, Copenhaver, Light, Morris NO: Thomas, Romine (Note: Mr. Stone was absent from the meeting.) Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 17, 1997 Page 140 -8 - Master Development Plan #008-97 for Autumn Wind Apartments for the development of a 9.24 -acre tract for 92 garden apartments with recreational amenities. This property is located at Route 522, North Frederick Pike, 1/4 mile north of the Winchester City limits behind the Adelphia Cable Office and is identified with P.I.N. 53-A-60 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Action - Tabled for 30 Days Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Planning Director, stated that the proposal exceeds the ordinance's density requirement by one unit; access is proposed through a median crossing to the northeast; and the proposed layout far exceeds the ordinance's maximum disturbance allowance of woodlands and steep slope areas. Mr. Wyatt said that staff met with the design engineer and walked the site to inventory the woodlands. The design engineers and the developer have met with staff to study possible options. Mr. Wyatt said that the Commission may want to table this application to allow more time for the staff to work with the applicant to determine what options are available. Mr. Mark Smith, design engineer with Greenway Engineering, stated that the density issue is not a problem, they will make this a 91 -unit project, instead of a 92 -unit project; and the access is workable with VDOT, by either using the Adelphia Cable entrance or the Star Fort Estates crossover. Mr. Smith next discussed the tree save issue in relation to this site. He explained that this is a ten -acre site with mature and secondary tree growth and according to ordinance requirements, they are only permitted to develop 2'/z acres. Mr. Smith said that works out to be a 75% tree -save ordinance. Mr. Smith proceeded to show slides indicating the make-up of the site and how they would have to develop the site under the ordinance. He felt the ordinance needed to be looked at in regards to a "tree quality" issue. Mr. Kenneth Merrier with National Housing Corporation, the developer, said that his company is an apartment development company and they develop, construct, and manage all of their own apartment projects throughout the country. Mr. Merrier described some of the amenities and landscaping that are planned for the site. Mr. Merner expressed his company's concern for a timely approval due to financing. Commission members recognized there may be a shortfall in the ordinance regulations and that this section will need to be re-examined. In the meantime, members of the Commission agreed to table the master plan so that the staff and applicant could see what options were available to pursue. Members of the Commission recognized that an upscale apartment complex, such as the one proposed, is a desirable commodity for a particular segment of the community. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Wilson, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend that MDP #008-97 of Autumn Wind Apartments be tabled for 30 days in order for the staff to work with the applicant to determine what alternatives are available to develop the property under zoning ordinance regulations. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 17, 1997 Page 141 9M ADJOURNMENT Ido further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. by unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, Kris C. Tierney, Secretary Charles S. DeHaven, Chairman Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of December 17, 1997 Page 142 BIMONTHLY REPORT OF PENDING APPLICATIONS (printed February 5, 1998) Application cation newlY submitted. . P REZONING: C. L. Robinson Ice & Cold Storage Corp. (REZ #005-97) Back Creek 26.895 ac. from RA to RP for 54 S.F. Tresidential dwellings Location: W side of Merrimans Lane (Rt. 621) at Winc./Western R.R. crossing & E of Rt. 37. Approx. 1,100' south of Breckenridge Lane. Submitted: 11/12/97 PC Review: 12/03/97 - recommended approval BOS Review: 01/14/98 - no action; reconsider on 02/11/98 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS: Autumn Wind Apartments (MDP #008-97) Gainesboro 104 Garden Apts. on 19.04 ac. (RP/132) Location: No. Frederick Pk. (Rt. 522N); 1/4 mi. north of Winchester City Limits, behind Adelphia Cable Office Submitted: 11/24/97 PC Review: 12/17/97 - tabled for 30 days to 01/21/98 BOS Review: 02/11/98 - tentatively scheduled Admin. Approved: Pending Westridge III (MDP #006-97) Back Creek 19 S.F. Detached Urban Residential Lots on 9.81 ac. (RP) Location: Adjacent to the Westridge Subd. (Sec. I & 11) w/ access from West View Lane via Middle Road (Rt. 628) in the City. Submitted: 09/22/97 PC Review: 10/15/97 - recommended approval BOS Review: 11/12/97 - approved Admin. Approved: Pending completion of review agency comments. SUBDIVISIONS: Westview Business Center - Valley Cycle Cntr. (SUB #019-97) Shawnee Subd. of one 2.0579 ac. lot for B2 use 1 (Lot A) Location: East of I-81, just off Rt. 50/17 on Independence Drive Submitted: 12/29/98 MDP #012-87 (Rev. 1997) Approved by BOS 11/23/97; Admin. Approved 04/30/97 Subd. Admin. Approved: 01/28/98 Woodbrook Village (SUB#016-97) Back Creek 1 81 multi- lex lots on 19.56 ac. (RP) Location: So. side of Opeguon Church Lane (Rt. 706) Submitted: 12/02/97 MDP #004-97: MDP approved by BOS 09/24/97; Admin. approved 12/10/97 Subd. Admin. Approved: Pending Wythe Ave. Ext. (SUB #015-97) No MDP Opequon 4 S.F. lots on 1.4065 ac. (RP) Location: End of existing Wythe Ave. in Stephens City Submitted: 11/20/97 PC Review: 02/18/98 BOS Review: 03/11/98 - tentatively scheduled Approved: Pending Chapel Hill Subdivision (SUB #014-97) Shawnee 34 S.F. Det. Urban Lots on 14.4214 acres (RP) Location: East side of Rt. 522, 0.15 mi. south of Lon croft Rd. (Rt. 785) Submitted: 10/30/97 MDP #006-96: Approved by BOS 08/14/96; Admin. Approved on 09/17/96 Subd. Admin. Approved: Pending Dr. Raymond L. Fish (SUB #012-97) Stonewall Subdivision of one lot (1.4962 ac.) (B2) off a 16.00 ac. parent tract (132 & 133) East side of Greenwood Rd.(Rt. 656) Location: Hopewell Rd. & new proposed street, Clearbrook Ln; 160' NW of existing Winchester & Western 60' right-of-way Submitted: 10/09/97 MDP #005-95: Approved by BOS on 01/24/96; Admin. Approved on 07/15/96 Subd. Admin. Approved: Pending Briarwood Estates (SUB #011-97) Stonewall Subdivision of 9.79 acres for 20 S.F. Det. Traditional Lots (RP) Location: East side of Greenwood Rd.(Rt. 656) Submitted: 09/26/97 (Replaces Subdiv. #001-94) MDP #005-93 A proved by BOS on 12/8/93 Subd. Admin. Approved: Pending Star Fort, Sect. II (SUB #010-97) Stonewall Subdivision of 11.6182 ac. for 26 s.f. detached traditional lots Location: U.S. Rt. 522 and VA Rt. 832 Submitted: 09/16/97 MDP #004-94 Approved by BOS 09/14/94; Admin. Approved 04/10/95 Subd. Admin. Approved: Pending Lenoir City Co. Lot 2; Stonewall Indust. Pk. (SUB #007-97) 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: Lending Dominion Knolls (SUB #005-97) Stonewall 75 s.f. zero lot line lots on 20.278 ac. (RP) 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: -jjPending Pending Lenoir City Co. of Virginia (SUB #003-97) Gainesboro 1 M1 Lot (2.000 acres) Location: Stonewall Industrial Pk.; McGhee Rd. (Rt. 861), approx. 700' west of the McGhee Rd. and Tyson Dr. intersection. Submitted: 05/15/97 MDP #006-93: Approved by BOS 07/14/93; Admin. Approved 07/28/93 Admin. Approved: Pending Wine -Fred Co. IDC (SUB) Back Creek 1 2 MI 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; Achnin. Approved 06/08/88 Fp—ending Admin. Approval Awaiting signed plats. RT&T Partnership (SUB) Back Creek 1 Lot - 29.6 Acres (B2) Location: Valley Pike (Rt. 11 So.) Submitted: 05/17/95 MDP #003-91 Approved b BOS 07/10/91; Admin. Approved 09/03/91 Pending Admin. A roval: Awaiting submission of si ed plat &deed of dedication Abrams Point, Phase I (SUB) Shawnee 230 SF Cluster & Urban Lots (RP) Location: South side of Rt. 659 Submitted: 05/02/90 PC Review: 06/06/90 - recommended approval BOS Review: 06/13/90 - a roved Pending Admin. Approvat_____Jl Awaiting deed of dedication, letter of credit, and signed plat Harry Stimpson (SUB) Opeguon Two B2 Lots Location: Town Run Lane Submitted: 09/23/94 PC Review: 10/19/94 - recommended approval BOS Review: 10/26/94 - a proved Pending Admin. Approval: Awaiting signed plat. SITE PLANS: DMK Properties (SP #005-98) Shawnee District 15,135 s.f. office bldg. on 4.0 acres for general office use (M1) Location: Independence Drive; Lot 6, Westview Business Center Submitted: 01/13/98 Approved: Pending Pack It Inn Mini Storage Warehouse (SP #004-98) Stonewall Self -Storage facility; 3 ac. disturbed on a 3.1083 ac. site (MI) Location: Baker Lane Industrial Park, Lot 13 Submitted: 01/09/98 Approved: Pending Insulated Bldg. Systems (SP #003-98) Stonewall 50' X 100' lean-to addition to existing facility (M1) Location: 326 McGhee Road Submitted: 01/09/98 Approved: Pending Valley Biomedical Prod. & Serv. (SP #002-98) Back Creek Office & Processing Facility; 2.0 ac. disturbed on 3.204 ac. site (MI) Location: 110-A Industrial Drive Submitted: 01/05/98 Approved: Pending Southeast Container (SP #001-98) Stonewall District Parking Lot; 0.2 ac. Disturbed on a 89.6 ac. Site (Nil) Location: Ft. Collier Industrial Park Submitted: 01/06/98 Approved: Pending Carlyle & Anderson Tractor Sales & Service (SP #048-97) Stonewall Truck office & repair; & tractor sales & service; 201X20' addit.; 1.0659 ac. disturbed on 3.2647 ac. site (M2) Location: 1603 Berryville Pike Submitted: Submitted: 12/02/97 Pending Approved: Pending Middletown Elementary School Addition (SP #047-97) Opequon 2+ disturbed ac. on a 15.0 ac. site (RA) Location: 190 Mustang Lane Submitted: 11/18/97 Approved: Pending Armel Elementary School Addition (SP #046-97) Opequon 6+ disturbed ac. on a 14.978 ac. site (RA) Location: 2239 Front Royal Pike Submitted: 11/18/97 Approved: 02/02/98 Pegasus Bus. Cntr., Phase H (SP #045-97) Shawnee 17,920 s.f. office bldg.; 2.0 ac. disturbed on a 4.18 ac. site (B2) Location: Location: 401 Pegasus Court, Pegasus Business Center Submitted: 11/10/97 Approved: 01/22/98 Negley Mini -Storage, Phase II (SP #041-97) Stonewall Office/ Mini -Storage on 3.57 ac. (B3) Location: 127 Mercedes Court Submitted: 11/03/97 Approved: 01/28/98 Trex Outdoor Storage (SP #035-97) Back Creek Outdoor Storage; 173,416 S.F. (M2) Location: 11 158 Ca 4oi Lane Submitted: 10-01-97 Approved: Pending Valley Cycle Center (SP #033-97) Shawnee 16,000 s.f. bldg. for retail sales; 2 ac. disturbed on a 2.0579 ac. site (B2) Location: Westview Business Center; Lot A; Approx. 2 miles east of I-81 on Rt. 50 at Independence Drive Submitted: 09/23/97 Approved: Pending Dr. Fairman Veterinary Office (SP #029-97) Stonewall 4,272 sq ft Veterinary Office on 1.4962 ac. parcel (B2) Location: 1092 Hopewell Road Submitted: 07/25/97 Approved: Pending Mobil-Wendys Rt. 50W Conven. Center (SP #026-97) Back Creek Gas-Conven. Cntr.; 3,783 sq ft floor area; 1.072 ac. site disturbed (RA) Location: Rt. 50 West Submitted: 07/23/97 Approved: Pendv�g Seo Property (SP #025-97) Shawnee Video Store in existing bldg.; 2.04 ac. (Bl) Location: Front Royal Pike Submitted: 07/23/97 Approved: Pending (SP #024-97) Stonewall 3 additional self -storage bldgs; 9.211 ac. arcel disturbed; (Ml) FEIlisSelf-Storage ion: Intersection of Routes 761 & 664 itted: I 07/03/97 LApproved: Pending Agape Christian Fellowship Church Sanctuary (SP #005-97) Shawnee Church Expansion; 2.5 ac. to be developed of a 29.5115 ac. site (RA) Location: East side of Rt. 642; approx. 2,500' so. of the Rt. 37/I-81 Interch . Submitted: 02/12/97 Approved: Pending doah Bldg. Supply 6-96) Gainesboro Warehouse on 5 acres (M1) Location: n: [Aroved: 195 Lenoir Drive (Stonewall Industrial Park) ted: 12/16/96 Pending Pending Stimpson/Rt. 277 Oil & Lube Service (SP #030-96) Opequon Oil & Lube Serv., Car Wash, Drive - Thru on 2.97 ac. (B2) Location: 152 Fairfax Pk. (behind Red Apple Cowitry 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 (RA) Location: 3548 North Frederick Pike Submitted: 05/08/96 Approved: Pending American Legion Post #021 (SP #018-96) Stonewall Addition to lodge building on 3.4255 acre site (132) Location: 1730 Berryville Pike Submitted: 04/10/96 Approved: Pending D.K. Erectors & Maintenance, Inc. (SP #051-95) Gainesboro Indust Sery/Steel Fabrication on a 10 - acre site (M2) Location: 4530 Northwestern Pike Submitted: 12/28/95 Approved: Pending 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: 09/12/89 Note: Being held at applicant's request. Flex Tech (SP #057-90) Stonewall I MI Use on 11 Ac. (MI) Location: East side of Ft. Collier Rd. Submitted: 10/25/90 Note: Being held at applicant's request. 10 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS Shenandoah Mobile Co./ Parkins Mills (CUP #024-97) Shawnee commercial telecommunications facilities (RA) Location: Knight Drive (private ravel road), off Rt. 642 Submitted: 12/12/97 PC Review: 01/07/98 - recommended approval of monopole tower w/ conditions and waiver of setbacks BOS Review: 01/28/98; Tabled until 04/08/98 Shenandoah Mobile Co./ Sherando (CUP #023-97) Opequon commercial telecommunications facilities (RA) Location: 0.25 mi. off Rt. 636, 0.4 mi, from Rt. 636/277 intersection Submitted: 12/12/97 PC Review: 01/07/98 - recommended approval of monopole tower w/ conditions 11 BOS Review: 01/28/98; Tabled until 04/08/98 Shenandoah Mobile Co./ Hunting Ridge (CUP #022-97) Back Creek cial telecommunications �fac�ilities(RA) Location: 0.5 mi. on Turtle Meadow Drive from Rt. 616 Submitted: 12/12/97 PC Review: 01/07/98 -recommended approval of lattice tower w/ conditions BOS Review: 01/28/98; Tabled until 04/08/98 Shenandoah Mobile Co./ Little Timber Ridge (CUP #021-97) Back Creek ommercial telecommunications [facilities(RA) Location: 0.38 miles off of Rt. 610 Submitted: 12/12/97 PC Review: 01/07/98 - recommended approval of monopole tower (Option #1) w/ conditions BOS Review: 01/28/98; Tabled until 04/08/98 11 Shenandoah Mobile Co./ Bowling Green Ridge (CUP #020-97) Gainesboro commercial telecommunications facilities (RA) Location: 0.13 miles off Rt. 688 Submitted: 12/12/97 PC Review: 01/07/98 -recommended approval of monopole tower w/ conditions BOS Review: 01/28/98; Tabled until 04/08/98 Fenise McClearen (CUP #019-97) O uon Cottage Occup. - Pet Grooming (RA) Location: 4784 Front Royal Pike Submitted: 12/11/97 PC Review: 02/18/98 BOS Review: 03/03/98 - tentatively scheduled T. P. & Susan Goodman Stonewall Social Center, Outdoor Recreation (CUP #010-97) Center, Catered Functions, Tours, Meetings, Etc. (RA) Location: 534 Redbud Road Submitted: 06/09/97 PC Review: 09/03/97 - recommended approval with conditions BOS Review: 10/07/97 tabled until 11/12/97; 11/12/97 - temporary approval until 12/31/97; subject to renewal and/or disposition on 01/14/98 - tabled for 60 days VARIANCES: Location: 11 3/4 mile from Rt. 50 West on Fairview Road (Rt. Submitted: II 01/23/98 BZA Review: II 02/17/98 12 PC REVIEW: 01/07/98 BOS REVIEW: 02/04/98 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #019-97 DENISE McCLEAREN Cottage Occupation Dog Grooming Business LOCATION: This property is located at 4784 Front Royal Pike. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 94A-1-11-4 thru 9 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District; Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District; Land Use: Residential, Vacant, and Agricultural PROPOSED USE: Cottage Occupation - Dog Grooming Business REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: No objection to conditional use permit for this property. Existing entrance is adequate for proposed use. However, should use ever expand in the future, the entrance may have to be upgraded to VDOT minimum commercial standards. Inspections Department: Building shall comply with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and section 304, Use Group B (Business) of the BOCA National Building Code. Other codes that apply are CABO Al 17.1-92, Accessible and Useable Buildings and Facilities. Please submit a floor plan of the area to be utilized at the time building permit and change of use applications are obtained. Fire Marshal: No comment. Denise McClearen CUP #019-97 Page 2 January 22, 1998 Health Department: The Health Department conducted a walk -over of the existing sewage disposal drain field on 11/24/97. No evidence of any malfunction was evident. The Health Department has no objection to the proposed use of the property. We request that a hair filter go onto the drain line to keep out dog hair. Frederick County Sanitation Authority: No comment. Planning and Zoning: Within the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District, cottage occupations are permitted with the issuance of a conditional use permit. The dog grooming business proposed by the applicant meets the requirements of a cottage occupation and, therefore, would be a permitted use with an approved conditional use permit. Mrs. McClearen has stated that she wishes to conduct the business in her home and that only members of the family residing on the premises would be involved. This clearly fits the definition of a cottage occupation in the Zoning Ordinance. In fact, the Zoning Ordinance allows those with a cottage occupation to conduct the business within the principal residential building or an accessory building or structure. Staff believes that establishing this cottage occupation would not have a negative impact upon the surrounding neighborhood. The adjoining property, the Wishing Well Gift Shop, has been an established business for many years. When considering the scale of the proposed dog grooming business, the proposal will clearly be incidental to the existing residence. The present configuration of the driveway and turnaround area may be adequate for the proposed business. Staff will work with the applicant to confirm the adequacy of available parking based on the anticipated number of customers. Staff has identified a Zoning Ordinance violation that should be resolved prior to the business's operation. The primary structure (the residence, location of proposed business) is located on several lots. This violates the setback requirements for primary structures; structures are not permitted to cross property lines. In order to resolve this violation, a lot consolidation will be necessary. As for a sign indicating the existence of the cottage occupation business, the Zoning Ordinance permits cottage occupation signs that do not exceed four square feet in area. This sign would also be required to be placed on the same lot as the business. Therefore, the cottage occupation sign could not be placed along Front Royal Pike (%ute 522 South). Denise McClearen CUP #019-97 Page 3 January 22, 1998 taff Recommendation for Fehrna 4 199R• Staff recommends that this application be approved with the following conditions: 1 • All review agency comments be complied with at all times. 2. A lot consolidation shall be conducted to bring the property into compliance wit Zoning Ordinance setback requirements. p h 3. Sufficient parking shall be provided to accommodate customer's vehicles. 4. No dogs will be permitted to stay at the property overnight. 0:1AGENDASICOMMENIS\MCC,EARN.CUP Zoning Legend CUP #019-97 RA Denise McClearen R -s PIN: 94A-1-11-4 thru 9 Frederick County Planning & Development 12-23-97 Submittal Deadline - - 7 P/C Meeting BOS Meeting I - APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 1. Applicant (The applicant if the —X owner other) NAME:,l�gp ADDRESS: 4- Ao r TELEPHONE -'546 (D 9-%D 14 — 5 V _ gy, 9 - aslI L"J . 2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties in interest of the property: 3'�er11Se /l)�eI,-plg2�N c 3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and include the route number of your road or street) 4. The property depth of has a road feet (Please be exact) frontage of SD feet and a and consists of * 2,as' acres. 5. The property is owned by 'O -I C ''11PA as evidenced by deed from recorded (previous owner) in deed boon no. on page _LL_i I as recorded in the records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, County of Frederick. f� 6. 14 -Digit Property Identification No. Magisterial District Current Zoning _g(3 7. Adjoining Property: USE ZONING g 01% J2 � North to, J _ i� �. � Ly -V East South DFS �� �' �Ic ., a�. West 8. The type of use proposed`L _is (consult with the Planning Dept. before completing) �rsl7'F'SE 1��_vG,¢1�1U/yAL- Q�� (yam r(1%i\k 9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be constructed: NDNg 10. The following are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to both sides and rear and in front of (across street from) the property where the requested use will be conducted. (Continue' on back if necessary.) . These people will be notified by mail of this application: NAME �1��1SL1 _ ADDRESS N16 2 0 mnl i r 4116 - PROPERTY (lEPROPERTY ID# r // f L6 NAME ADDRESS PROPERTY ID# NAME 1'C1191q/7)/ PROPERTY ID# q?;, 000 163 6041/0 NAME PROPERTY ID# em /D/ ez �a D NAME Prem t. E ,Te ssi e PROPERTY ID#' C, NAME C c V, C-ck � ADDRESS ADDRESS „rU ADDRESS ADDRESS *L5Q .jg- &1=2 0AbL ?a -dr, V11 Z z663 PROPERTY ID,# q � A1 - 10 - NAME J o..vv�.. `1 �7 J PROPERTY ID# 11+A - I - NAME A PROPERTY ID# 9�A-I-11-3 rw_C,�,c,,w �Edciie ADDRESS ADDRESS 2 - ADDRESS iA V14 2 63_ iqz � CB�-� CUf� �' I c c 12. Additional comments, if any: -7 L(,a4NA USE 1r I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the governing body of Frederick County, Virginia to allow the use described in this application. I understand that the sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven (7) days prior to the first public hearing and maintained so as to be visible until after the Board of Supervisors' public hearing. Your application for a Conditional Use Permit authorizes any member of the Frederick County Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors or Planning and Development Department to inspect your property where the proposed use will be conducted. Signature of Applicant Signature of Owner Owners' Mailing Address Owners' Telephone No. P, � /iii g/,//.9 gay- a� TO BE COMPLETED BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: USE CODE: RENEWAL DATE: u 1 I / /,/•/- •� CC.L'v/S � i I _J L— —— t I PA LED ACCESS ROAD 1 - 1 U.P, t I.P.F. S J5V8 B W LDH MCN 150.19 I.P.F. QY UNE 1.0, ON LINE 1.4' STA TE HWY. RT. 522 N. HOUSE LOCA TJOIV SURLY THIS /s TO C£R77FY 7HAr ON OCMBER 77. 1997 cw /,WADE AN ACCURA7F SURLEY LIF THE PREVISES LOTS 4 - 9 — BLOCK %% A/ C- T,n LOTS 6 — 8 — BLOCK 9 MENTS OR ENCRO 0WENTS N £ LW THE OS GROL/ND OTHER THAN THC -'W S?IONN HEREON LOTS 6 - 8 - BLOCK 2 RID GEWA Y HEIGHTS 1. T 1. TAX ASSESSMENT MAP N0. 94A-1-11-4 JHROUGH S A°Eoucm D/S7RTCT 2. CURRENT INS 7RUMENT /N CHAIN CF 77 TL£ IS FREDERTCX COUNTY V7RGYN/A 4 LP.F. RS 'r� 1 .STLWY q 8R/pC fRAME 27J yss' 7-1-9 c. 111"1,1 . i i 1 RMOENCE o a �O 4• 77.4' COL£RED w e Gl SASMENT ENTRY U + el + + v ' 1 r ( CH 1 / FRAME TR T 1 o GARAGE )5,381 SO. FT I 1 _ I # NfLL b to a " '�7 ti 0.2 I I ASPHALT I I 1 ORIYEWAY t w C RSRs -- (UNIMPRO �*J&01 -- QE-5j7-S7W )00.00 SUMM/T A VE7VUE WRs JO" RI)Y LPF N J43000" E 150.00' - U.P. UP I.P.F. \ U 4' \ \ I i x \ \ \ I _ I \I 1 ♦ ' 1 � 1 rnx / I j 1 i y I 1 I (,1 ASFHAL T 1 Cn ' N DRI L£WAY�� 1 I 11x TRA 20 IT It 1' 1 40,9-T8 . FT %x(11 u 1 I / /,/•/- •� CC.L'v/S � i I _J L— —— t I PA LED ACCESS ROAD 1 - 1 U.P, t I.P.F. S J5V8 B W LDH MCN 150.19 I.P.F. QY UNE 1.0, ON LINE 1.4' STA TE HWY. RT. 522 N. HOUSE LOCA TJOIV SURLY THIS /s TO C£R77FY 7HAr ON OCMBER 77. 1997 cw /,WADE AN ACCURA7F SURLEY LIF THE PREVISES LOTS 4 - 9 — BLOCK %% -WO ON HEREcw. Atw THA r THERE ARE NO SE- A LOTS 6 — 8 — BLOCK 9 MENTS OR ENCRO 0WENTS N £ LW THE OS GROL/ND OTHER THAN THC -'W S?IONN HEREON LOTS 6 - 8 - BLOCK 2 RID GEWA Y HEIGHTS 1. T 1. TAX ASSESSMENT MAP N0. 94A-1-11-4 JHROUGH S A°Eoucm D/S7RTCT 2. CURRENT INS 7RUMENT /N CHAIN CF 77 TL£ IS FREDERTCX COUNTY V7RGYN/A DEED BOOK 78 PACE 95 MIS PLAT HAS BEEN PREPARED mrHoUr 1HE BE14ErT Of A 'TILE ^EPrPT 440 DOES NOT NECESSARILY INDICA IE ALL ENCUMBRANCES ON THE PROPERTY. DAT vCil.uuT 2� 1997 OIWD?..• HUMHINCS PURCHASER. MCCLEAREN W.O. / 97454 FLCGD N07F - ZO.AI C COMMUNITY NO: 51006) PANEL• 0200 8 DA 7F• 7-17-78 ARCHrrECTS ENCIWEERS DavT PLANNERS & ASSOQA►TES SURVEYORS 3078 SHAWNEE DR(VE P.O. BOX 2033 WINCHESTER. VIRGINIA 22601 (540)667-1103 SCALE- I' = 50" OF EJDOVE5�q COUNTS' of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAY: 540/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Director `00 RE: 1998-1999 Capital Improvements Plan Public Hearing DATE: January 22, 1998 During the January 21, 1998 Planning Commission meeting, staff presented information pertaining to the referenced plan for discussion. The information in this plan was forwarded with a favorable recommendation from the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) following several months of study. The CPPS evaluated project requests provided by the Handley Regional Library, the Frederick County School Board, the Frederick County Department of Parks and Recreation, the Regional Airport Authority, Frederick County Administration, and the Frederick County Public Works Department. Following this evaluation, the CPPS rated new project requests and modified the 1997 project rankings and financial data accordingly. Staff advised the Planning Commission that the purpose of the Capital Improvements Plan was to provide the Board of Supervisors with information regarding the capital facility needs of various departments and agencies, to create an advisory document that can be utilized as a budgetary tool by the Board, the County Administrator, and the Finance Director to determine what can be funded through the general fund and loan sources, and to provide an opportunity to realize development proffers for capital projects. The Planning Commission noted that the projects proposed for the CIP must conform with the Comprehensive Policy Plan and asked staff if the projects proposed by the Regional Airport Authority met this criteria. Staff advised the commission that the Comprehensive Policy Plan delineates an Airport Support Area and discusses issues regarding land acquisition and navigation easements to ensure public safety and the ability to maintain a runway protection zone. Therefore, it was the opinion of staff that the capital projects proposed by the Regional Airport Authority met this criteria. The Planning Commission had no other comments and advised staff to advertise this document for a public hearing during the February 4, 1998 meeting. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester. Nirginin 22601-5000 1998-1999 CIP Memo Page -2- January 22, 1998 Included with this memorandum is a summary of the project requests, a summary of proposed project costs, the evaluation form prepared by the CPPS, and project tables comparing projects from the 1997-1998 CIP and this plan. Staff asks that the Planning Commission consider this information and forward a recommendation for final disposition by the Board of Supervisors. Staff will provide the Planning Commission with a draft 1998-1999 CIP document which provides the project requests, the project costs, the project ratings, and a revised narrative utilizing the format from the 1997-1998 CIP. Staff will prepare final copies of the 1998-1999 CIP for distribution following the Planning Commission review of this draft document. WE V AN \COM MON\CBIPUBLNEAR.PC CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN SUMMARY • The proposed draft 1998-1999 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) consists25 projects compared to 21 projects recommended last year. All projects are propos developed over a period of five years. • Five new projects are proposed as a part of the 1998-1999 CIP. Three new projects have been submitted by the Frederick County School Board and two new projects by the Frederick County Administration Office as follows: NREP Addition Indian Hollow Elementary Addition Site Acquisition for New Elementary -� School in SE Frederick County Public Safety Center Annex Facilities • The Department of Parks and Recreation has proposed to combine the field house and indoor pool project, thus increasing the scope. Funding for a feasibility study is proposed in the upcoming budget for the Department of Parks and Recreation. A rating and prioritization for this project is recommended to occur following the completion of the feasibility study. • The total cost of the projects proposed for the 1998-1999 CIP is $102,111,246. This does not account for the costs associated with the proposed Public Safety Center, the Transportation Maintenance Facility, the Annex Facilities, or the Field House & Indoor Pool Complex. • The total county cost of the projects proposed for the 1998-1999 CIP is $98,937,074. This reflects a project cost of $64,998,052 and a debt service of $33,939,022. PROJECTS COSTS & PROJECT EVALUATIONS FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN 1998-1999 1999-2000 I 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 110,000 2 837700 2,000,000 14,000,000 14,000,000 426,581 337,163 1,007;398 i4 2: Annex Facilities. 15 6 Indian Hollow Elementary School Addit )n 2,000000 ib Z° New Gatnesboro Element ary School 1150(1;000 17 3 County epartment Softball Complex SP Route 645 Relocation Design Total Project Costs 10,000 19 Priority Priority $1,400,000 Pro'ects H 1998-99 Elements School $ile Acquisition SE y. 1 2 3 4 3 2 Airport Land A quisition - Bufflick Road Bit: rc ` itit . NREP Addition New Library 51,2' 2,500,000 2,420240 2 $4,110,548 5 7 8 9 1 2 .: 3 1 4 Public Safety Center . Pi i)t I an ;- Western Frederick Co. Trans nation Maintenance Warehous New Back it k ElementarySchool Third County High School N/A- 1,1s11332 N/A` 9,200,OOp 35,257,940' 0 23 Qpen P1ayArea » CB Baseball Field Renovations - SP $0 11 7 Tennis/Basketball Complex - CB Skateboard Park SI,181,332 0 C Soccer G.0 X - SP 0 $0 13 9 Tennis/Picnic Area - SP 15,126,81b 1999-2000 I 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 110,000 2 837700 2,000,000 14,000,000 14,000,000 426,581 337,163 1,007;398 i4 2: Annex Facilities. 15 6 Indian Hollow Elementary School Addit )n 2,000000 ib Z° New Gatnesboro Element ary School 1150(1;000 17 3 TOTALS 30,000 677,998 8,50(1;1)00 544,611 334,172 200,,00.} N/A** $15,852,787 $8,060,740 $15,956,581 $23,844,561 $1,283,383 A = Partial funding from Federal Airport Improvement Program (FAIP) and State Commonwealth Airport Fund (SCAF) grants C = Debt Service is unavailable at time of printing N/A' = Project Scope Not Determined At Time Of Printing N/A" = Feasibility Study To Be Complete Prior To Project Scope Determination Wunty Contributions. 18 1 Softball Complex SP Route 645 Relocation Design Total Project Costs 10,000 19 2 Route 645 Relocation - Construction $1,400,000 51,213 H Nj!t1 Elements School $ile Acquisition SE y. 504;000 2;5110;000 21 10 Shelter, Stage Seating - CB $4,110,548 3;257;940 22 12 Maintenance Compound- SP 35,257,940' 0 23 4 Baseball Field Renovations - SP $0 1,1$1,332 24 11 Skateboard Park SI,181,332 TOTALS 30,000 677,998 8,50(1;1)00 544,611 334,172 200,,00.} N/A** $15,852,787 $8,060,740 $15,956,581 $23,844,561 $1,283,383 A = Partial funding from Federal Airport Improvement Program (FAIP) and State Commonwealth Airport Fund (SCAF) grants C = Debt Service is unavailable at time of printing N/A' = Project Scope Not Determined At Time Of Printing N/A" = Feasibility Study To Be Complete Prior To Project Scope Determination Wunty Contributions. I JNotes Interest From Any Debt Service TOTAL COUNTY COSTS Total Project Costs 10,000 A N/A 110,000 $1,400,000 51,213 H Nj!t1 51,215 $318;387 2;5110;000 1,610 548 4,110 548 $4,110,548 3;257;940 I3 N' A 5,257,440 35,257,940' 0 N/A 0 $0 1,1$1,332 NIA 1.181;332 SI,181,332 0 C N/A 0 $0 9;2001000 5,926,816 15,126,81b 15,126,816 30;000,000 18,338,918 48,338,918 $48,338,918 426181NA 426;x$1 $426,581'. 337;163 N/A 337,163 $337,163 1;007;398 NfA 1,007;398 51,007,398 5401:1 N/A 544,611 $544,611 0 $0 Zowlo* 11,288 38 0,000,000 6,442,19.2. 1642,192 $16,44219?; 432;042 NIA 432,9Q $432,042 3.000 A NIA 3,QOq $1501000 30,000 A N/A 30,000 $1500,000 500;000 332,110 832;110 $832,110 334!172 N/A 334,172 $334,172 200,000 IIIA VOW., :200,000 677;998 N/A 677,998 $677,998 204,600 NfA 2tf4;600 5204,600 0 0 $64;999,432 $33,939,022 $98,937,074 $102,111,246 B = Partial funding from State grants and local gifts D = Partial funding from private donations 12/29/97 1998CIP.WK4 r 1998 FREDERICK COUNTY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS EVALUATION FORM LISTED BY DEPARTMENT; IN ORDER OF DEPARTMENT PRIORITY CRITERION and WEIGHT LIBRARY New Library SCHOOL SYSTEM New Back Creek Elementary School NW Reg. Ed. Prov. (NREP) Addition Transportation Maintenance Facility Third County High School Southem Elem. School Site Acquisition Indian Hollow Elementary Addition New Gainesboro Elementary School Administration Building Renovations PARKS AND RECREATION Bikeway System Park Land Softball Complex - SP Baseball Field Renovations - SP Field House/Indoor Pool Open Play Area - CB Tennis/Basketball Complex - CB Soccer Complex - SP Tennis/Picnic Area - SP Shelter, Stage Seating - CB Skateboard Park Maintenance Compound - SP AIRPORT Route 645 Relocation - Design Route 645 Relocation - Construction Land Aquisition, ButBick Road COUNTY ADMINISTRATION Public Safety Center Annex Facilities Conform to Health. Lctplly Distribute Ecaomuc Rolated Public cam. plan safety. Required sorvi« Input to othor s-pport TOTAL Welfare welfare: Pro9- 3 4 4 2 2 3 3 2/6 2/8 0/0 4/8 2/4 0/0 3/9 35 216 2.19 0/'0 316 2!4 1/3 113 30 2/6 2/8 2/8 3/6 2/4 0/0 113 35 1f6 2./°$ 06 1} 3/'6 2./6 1}3 31 2/6 2/8 0/0 2/4 3/6 1/3 113 30 3N 11-4 0/'0 2/4 112 11:3 1113 25 2/6 2/8 0/0 1/2 2/4 1/3 1/3 26 216 2./8 0/0 1/2 2/4 1/'3 113 26 36 3/9 1/4 0/0 4/8 1/2 1/3 2/6 32 2/6 1/4 0/0 1/2 1/2 1/3 2/6 23 2.10 114 00 2.14 312 2/6 3/4 31 3/9 1/4 0/0 3/6 1/2 1/3 2/6 30 3 J`9 i/4 b 31:0 l/:2 1: 4- - 3/9 1/4 0/0 3/6 1/2 1/3 2/6 30 3/9 I/4 0/0 ij2 0;/0 2:j'4 2l`b 27 3/9 1/4 0/0 3/6 2/4 2/6 2/6 25 1/3 114 0/0 142 1/2 1/3 216 20 1/3 1/4 0/0 0/0 3/6 3/9 1/3 25 2}6 1 /4 1 /'4 4/'0 1 /Z 2/6 1 /3 25 2/6 1/4 1/4 0/0 1/2 2/6 1/3 25 2,/6 2/8 3/1'2 !(2 2/4 2/6 2/`6 44 3,/9 31,12 0/0 1 (2 1/2 2%4 113 34 3/9 2/8 Oro 1/2 1/2 1 /3 1/3 27 FREDERICK COUNTY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMMING PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA U:1ER]0C0MM0NIC1MV LUATN. TOPIC DESCRIPTION WEIGHT 1 Conformance to Does the Project conform to, or contribute to Comprehensive Plan the attainment of goaWobjectives of the Comprehensive Plan? Is the Project 3 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 supportive of the proposed Project? 3 U:1ER]0C0MM0NIC1MV LUATN. 1997 & 1998 PROJECT COMPARISONS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS * indicates new capital improvements project description Parks & Recreation 98 Rank 97 Rank Project Description 98 Cost 97 Cost Difference 1 1 Bicycle Facility $318,387 $318,387 $0 2 2 Parkland - Western $1,1811332 $1,159,772 +$21,560 Frederick County 3 4 Softball Complex $432,042 $422,328 +$9,714 Sherando 4 5 Baseball Field $677,998 $662,755 +$15,243 Renovation - Sher. 5* 6 & 8 Field House and $10,030,000 $3,495,200 +$6,534,800 Indoor Pool 6 3 Open Play Area - $426,581 $416,992 +$9,589 Clearbrook 7* 7 Tennis & $337,163 $533,586 -$196,423 Basketball Complex - Clearbrook 8* 9 Soccer Complex - $1,007,398 $1,127,692 -$120,294 Sherando 9* 11 Tennis/Picnic - $544,611 $612,495 1 -$67,884 Sherando 10 12 Shelter/Stage - $334,172 $326,659 +$7,513 Clearbrook 11 13 Skateboard Park $204,600 $200,000 +$4,600 12 10 Maintenance $172,415 $168,539 +$3,876 Facility- Sher. * indicates new capital improvements project description Parks & Recreation addendums have been made to the plan that was presented to the CPPS last year. The following describes the changes that have been identified in the table: Project 5: Combines the field house and indoor pool projects into a 118,000 square feet facility. Last year, the field house was estimated to be 29,900 square feet. The project also calls for a 200 meter indoor track and additional courts. Project 7: Has been scaled back from 8 tennis courts to 4 tennis courts and has eliminated the racquetball courts. Project 8: Has been scaled back from 3 soccer fields to 2 soccer fields and has eliminated 1 of the 2 picnic shelters. Project 9: Has been scaled back to eliminate 4 racquetball courts. Re ional Library 98 Rank 97 Rank Project 98 Cost 97 Cost Difference Description 1 1 Frederick $8,457,940 $8,041,485 +$416,455 County Library The square footage for this facility has been increased from 34,000 square feet to 35,000 square feet. Build out of this facility is proposed to be 50,000 square feet. Public Works 98 Rank 97 Rank Project 98 Cost 97 Cost Difference Description 1 1 Construction $800,000 $800,000 $0 Debris Landfill 2 4 Active Gas $500,000 $500,000 $0 Management 3 2 Cell Closure $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $0 4 3 Landfill $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 Development Priorities have been modified to satisfy DEQ monitoring requirements prior to the cell closures. Re ional Airport 98 Rank 97 Rank Project 98 Cost 97 Cost Difference Description 1 2 Airport Road $150,000 $125,000 +$25,000 Relocation Design 2 3 Airport Road $1,500,000 $1,400,000 +$100,000 Construction 3 4 Bufflick $1,400,000 $775,000 +$625,000 Road Land Ac uisition The Regional Airport has various funding formulas for their capital improvement projects. The following represents this list: Project 1: Requires a $3,000 local match. Project 2: Requires a $30,000 local match. Project 3: Requires a $110,000 local match. Frederick County Public Schools 98 Rank 97 Rank Project 98 Cost 97 Cost Difference Description 1 1 Back Creek $9,200,000 N/A +$9,200,000 Elementary School 7 2 Gainesboro $10,000,000 $8,700,000 +$1,300,000 Elementary School 3 4 Transportation N/A N/A $0 and Maintenance 11 Facility 4 5 Third County $30,000,000 $32,000,000 _$2,000,000 High School PC REVIEW: 02/18/98 BOS REVIEW: 03/11/98 Subdivision Application #004-98 REPINE SUBDIVISION (Mark & Racheile Repine) LOCATION: The property is located at the eastern portion of Idylwood Drive in the existing Heritage Hills subdivision (Route 1238). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 54-3-1A PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: RP (Residential Performance) District; Land Use: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: RP (Residential Performance) District; Land Use: Vacant and single family SUBDIVISION SPECIFICS: Subdivision of a 1.3719 -acre tract into three lots REVIEW AGENCY COMMENTS: Department of Transportation: See attached letter from Barry Sweitzer dated 10/2/97. Engineering: See attached letterfrom Joe Wilder dated 9-13-97. City of Winchester Public Utilities : After reviewing your preliminary plan for extension of water and sewer, I find it acceptable in concept and layout. Also, see attached letter from Jesse Moffet dated 8-27-97 Planning and Zoning: Public Meeting Requirement The Subdivision Ordinance requires that land divisions in the RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District, without an approved master development plan, be presented to the Board of Repine Subdivision Page 2 February 6, 1998 Supervisors for final approval. This project is zoned RP, and does not contain an approved MDP; therefore, Board review and action is necessary. Staff Review This parcel is presently surrounded by residential subdivisions: the Heritage Hills subdivision to the south, west, and north, and Jasbo, Inc. and Frederick Development Company, Inc. (Abrams Pointe) to the east. The Abrams Pointe subdivision has not yet been developed. In the planning of Heritage Hills, Idylwood Drive appears to have been designed to connect with the land under consideration for subdivision, as Idylwood Drive abuts this property. Three single-family detached traditional lots are proposed for this site, each complying with the minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet. The proposed three residential lots will range in size from 15,002 to 21,096 square feet. Review agency comments from the Fire Marshal and the Inspections Department are required for this subdivision, but have not been submitted with this application. Staff will work with the applicant and the review agencies to confirm that all comments are satisfied. Staff Recommendation for 2/18/98: Staff recommends approval of this subdivision application contingent upon the applicant's satisfying all review agency continents. OAAGEN DAS\COMM ENTS\REPIN E. SUB COMMONWEALTH of V1RQINJh DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY DAVID R. GEHR 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE COMMISSIONER P.O. BOX 278 EDINBURG, VA 22824-0278 October 2,1997 Mr. Ronald A. Mislowsky, P.E., V.P. G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Ron: JERRY A. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TELE (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 Ref: Repine Subdivision Route 1238 (Idylwood Drive) Frederick County This is to acknowledge receipt of your revised plans dated September 10, 1997 for the referenced project. The plans appear satisfactory and are approved. Please advise the developer accordingly. I offer the following comments: • A preconstruction conference be held by the engineer and/or developer with the attendance of the contractor, various County agencies and VDOT shall be conducted prior to initiation of work. • Materials used and method of construction shall apply to current observed VDOT Road & Bridge Specifications applicable during construction of this development. • Our review and comments are general in nature. Should conditions in the field exist such that additional measures are warranted, such measures shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Department prior to inclusion into the Secondary Road System. • Attached is a copy of the minimum requirements and information needed prior to acceptance of subdivision streets into the Secondary System. This is the responsibility of the developer. • All drainage is to be carried within the right-of-way in ditch lines or gutters along the street to a pipe or drainage easement. • The contractor shall notify VDOT when work is to begin or cease for anv undetermined length of time. VDOT will also require 48 hours notice for inspections. WE KEEP VIRGINIA N10VING Mr. Ronald A. Mislowsky Ref: Repine Subdivision October 2,1997 Page 2 • The appropriate land use permits shall be obtained before any work is performed on the State's right-of-way. The permits will require a minimum processing fee, surety bond coverage and the salary & expenses of a State assigned Inspector. • If mailboxes are to be placed along the roadway fronting lots, a minimum of 4' shall be between the edge of pavement and the front of mailbox. • Private entrances will be installed in accordance with PE -1, 2.9 driveway profile. This is the developer's responsibility. • I suggest any utilities and/or storm sewer placed within the proposed right-of-way be backfilled completely with C.R. Type 21-A Stone. This will greatly reduce the possibility of any pavement settlement. • Dedications for all drainage easements need to be provided prior to issuance of land use permits from this office. Should you need additional information, do not hesitate to call. Sincere IJ G / I Barry J. Sweitzer Trans. Roadway Engineer For: Robert B. Childress Transportation Engineer BJS/ rf Attachments xc: Mr. R. B. Childress Mr. S. A. Melnikoff Mr. R. D. Hawkins Mr. Kris Tierney Ms. Kim Holliday Figure 7 iriaximurn Grades With Shoulders Desirable Maximum Grade Grade 0 TO ±39b + 0I'Gulr1�;- bVith Curb C� Guiter DCsirablo Maximum Grade Grad;, OTO 3b / Pavemo-nt Sidewalk Spac; 2.9 DI'1-•('dim, i�Y0i11C Revised 08/01/94 INFORMATION NEEDED PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE OF SUBDIVISION STREETS INTO STATE SECONDARY SYSTEM Subdivision streets may be considered eligible for acceptance into the State Secondary System when: • Built according to plans approved by the Department of Transportation, properly maintained since completion and • Rendering a public service [serving three (3) occupied dwellings or three (3) businesses per street]. THE FOLLOWING WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE FURNISHED TO THE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AT LEAST THIRTY (30) DAYS PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REQUESTING THE ADDITION: 1. Three (3) copies of as -built construction plans showing: • Roadway Geometrics • Drainage & Drainage Easements 2. Three (3) copies of the final plat with date & place of recordation, deed book number and page number. 3. Signed permits covering all utilities, publicly or privately owned, to occupy or cross the right-of-way and quitclaiming any prior rights. 4. Bond to guarantee workmanship and performance of material for one year from date of acceptance. (See reverse side for schedule.) 5. Maintenance Fee - check payable to the "Virginia Department of Transportation". This fee is based on the length of the streets involved from the date of acceptance to the end of the fiscal year (June 30`''). No maintenance fee is required if the addition is effective July 151. (See reverse side for schedule.) ADDITIONS «'ILL BE MADE EFFECTI`'E ONLY ON THE FIRST OF THE MONTH. ALL DATA IS TO BE IN THE EDINBURG RESIDENCY OFFICE OF TIIE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BYTHE IST OF THE PRECEDING .MONTH. (30 DAYS) 2 -LANE STREET: :Minimum (up to 0.25 mile) From 0.25 to 0.50 mile Over 0.50 mile 4-LA\'E STREET: Nfinimum (up to 0.25 mile) From 0.25 to 0.50 mile Over 0.50 mile EXAMPLES FEE & SURETY SCHEDULE for S UBDI VISION STREET ADDITIONS SURETY $ 3,750 $ 7,500 S 1,500/tenth of mile & fraction thereof $ 7,500 $15,000 S 3,000/tenth of mile & fraction thereof MAL ITENANCE FEE $375/year $750/year $150/tenth of mile & fraction thereof $750/year $11500/year S300/tenth of mile fraction thereon' A two lane street, 0.35 mile long, is processed for addition effective September Pt. Therefore. surety is required for four -tenths mile and maintenance fee is required for ten months. Surety required: $7,500 Maintenance fee required: S750 x 10/12 = S625 A four lane stree1t, 0.78 mile long. is processed for addition effective February ". Therefore, surety is required for eight -tenths mile and maintenance fee is required for five months. Surety required: 8 x 53,000 = 524,000 Maintenance fee required: S x S300 x 5/12 = 51,000 COUNTY of FREDERICK September 13, 1997 Mr. Ronald A. Mislowsky, P.E. Gilbert W. Clifford and Associates, Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Repine Subdivision Comments Frederick County, Virginia Dear Ron: Department of Public Works 540/665-5643 FAX: 540/678-0682 Upon review of the subject subdivision plan, we offer the following comments: 1. Install either a silt fence or a diversion berm as indicated on the plan to control off-site silt drainage. Since this comment is minor in nature, we recommend approval of the subject subdivision plan. However, we request that a final revised plan be submitted to this office for our files. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Joe C. Wilder Engineering Technician Department of Public Works JCW:rls cc: Andrew Evans, Planning and Zoning file 107 North Kent Street - Winchester. Virginia 22601-5000 CITY OF WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA V � August 27, 1997 Mr. Steve Gyurisin G.W. Clifford and Associates, Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Repine Subdivision - Idylwood Drive Dear Steve: Rouss City Hall 15 North Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 540-667-1815 FAX. 540-722-3618 TDD: 540-722-0782 This letter is to acknowledge acceptance of the water and sewer extensions provided for the Repine Subdivision project. It should also be noted to the developer that availability fees will be assessed and must be paid prior to any service being provided. Cost per lot based upon the plans provided will be $4,079.50 per lot ($2,000 availability fee for water, $2,000 availability fee for sewer, $79.50 for each 5/8 X 3/4 inch meter). Please feel free to contact this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, �-s Jesse W. Moffett Director - Public Utilities "THE APPLE CAPITAL" e a o° �^ .•' k 115 Rt. 65 w e 16 114 • s v116 � -9 9._ 11 12 fi '3 117 119 / I Date: —1— Applicant/Agent: Address: ,P -I (0 V�JIIJ G Phone: APPLICATION AND CHECKLIST SUBDIVISION FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA Application # LLZ--,?q D $ Ae--sr� Owners name: MAe J k -D � �� Address: Z �G{-� V 11E�-j Phone: � � &2& Fee Paid rte" Please list names of all owners, TGr- --3ez-y �r,ry}rh zu �as ��3d Contact Person: Phone: J�-{:L�(p(O% - 2 Name of Subdivision: Number of Lots 3 Property Location: (Give State Rt.#, n Magisterial District 1 Total Acreage 5 V_ 1230 distance an direction from ntersection) Property Identification Number (PIN)) — IIJL-I Ix Property zoning and present use: T! P Zp�!cJ c' Adjoining property zoning and use:20�(t-j Has a Master Development Plan been submitted for this project? Yes No Vi 1 If yes, has the final MDP been approved by the Board of Supervisors? Yes No What was the MDP title? Does the plat contain any changes from the approved MDP? Yes No If yes, specify what changes: Minimum Lot Size (smallest lot) S r 6('-5-ocz jr- Number and types of housing units in this development: Number Types { gol r57 J � 9 L 01:."=6; 1998 11:31 54060_50499 G W CLIFFORD . r,`SSC F' -"'-GE 02 Repine Subdivision Ad joing Properties Tax Map # Owners Marne & Address 54H-1-76 James A. Wratchford 106 Huntcrest Circle Winchester, Virginia 22602 54H-1-77 Stacey L. Furgison 104 Huntcrest Circle Winchester, Virginia 22602 54H-1-82 Albert C. Wienmann, Jr 105 Idylwood Drive Winchester, Virginia 22602 54H-1-89 Charlie W., Jr. & Glenda D. Jenkins 102 Crest Circle Winchester, Virginia 22602 54H-1-90 Ray W. & Linda L. Aston 144 Lambden Avenue Winchester Virginia 22601 54H-1-91 Geraldine C. Boone 106 Crest Circle Winchester, Virginia 22602 54H-1-96 Charles K. & Eleanor E. Frame 104 Idylwood Drive Winchester, Virginia 22602 54-3-1 Jasbo, Inc. & Frederick Development Co., Inc. P.O. Box 888 Winchester, Virginia 22604 3 Cj FINAL PLAT Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia r.. tndlev ,moi % 0 y • ( lr� �� F ,� i):uw•i 11r¢an �, �o. Qh Bch .� .,` r J }Q n ( t1idd�- S" 1 wagC� � -Sr ) .Sacred F�s.'i � r.� � . r` ,�� • . '� : -���•, \,. �q,%" 1�_ .,' 1,.., j_ `���m - ShinrT'ttea� . 2 %'� �P �"�.,ti,-n`'`. �:; � /// • r ��. trrEk '�•' .S#7fZ7t9 -a �. -� s;\��•�,.�i •r�..� (,. ,•.:r. =� Cera/ (7� ^� `` " .y J �� .� -�" . �� �w )�/ 3 a•. . .'- 4L, . /Sch•.'ederick J2•? �.`, .p; '/•� �'• O �- _winchestel!:/- '16]s.; .�- .:i,=y'• Heigh Ls •,r p . _`... � 1� ,� •:. �� �=.-�; � Country Chb -' v, � ,�- .. - � :. - J ..:' t •i.n.'r .fl726 r Vicinity M / ':?>�• �l�en3eny Scale: 1'-2000' Rio`.t d,. . . r J '' 11 ✓ r City of Winchester F-edericlrz?ov -tr Sonrfofron Avffrcrir Planning Commission Subdivision Administrator Vo. Dept. of Transportation ROVED BY i� Date Date Dote -� Dote OWNER'S CERTIFICATE The above and foregoing subdivision of land, as appears in the accompaning plats, is with the free consent and in accordance with the desires of the undersigned owners, proprietors, and trustees, if any. Date NOTARY PUBLIC a Notary Public in and for the State of Virginia, at large, do certify that --- ---- ___........ whose names are signed to the foregoing Owner's Certificate. have acknowledged the same before me in my state. Given under my hand this —_--_—__ day of ---_—__--_--__, 1997 My commission expires --_ SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE l hereby certify that the land contained in this Subdivision is the some land that was conveyed to Mark J. & Racheiie R. Repine by deed doted October 26. 1989, said deed recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, irryinia in Deed SooA 130 at Page 6D5. � Gr P. DUANE BROWN NO. 1285 (::)CI4 10:\/9'9'7 �+ 1, L tl SUE' 1.0 AO. P. Duane Brown, L.S. The property represented herein is shown on Frederick County Tax Map 54 ((3)) as Parcel IA. DATE_ October 2, 1997 COVER SHEET FILE,#: "7083PLAT.DWC" gilbert w. Clifford & associates, inc. ENGINEERS — LAND PLANNERS — SURVEYORS SHEET 1 sa-c ade fro.,,.ic, ertve Freclerkksi-r4. virglnla 22401 200 North Cameron Street OF (70J) 8=8-2115 Mkuherter, Wiginia 22801 (703) 887-2139 - 0 Q Q. 0 W C, W cv 0 Ow Curve Table Area Summary Area in Lots 1.1817 Acres Area in R/W 0.1902 Acres TOTAL AREA SUMMED 1.3719 Acres Number of Lots 3 Average Lot Size 17,158 Sq. Ft. i EXIS77NG ZONING: RP EXISTING USE.' VACANT All lots are single—family detached traditional All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENTS along all rights—of—way and a 10' Utility & Drainage FRONT = 35' Easement along all property lines. SIDE = 10' REAR = 25' T H OF N;�6 mmirk I. Zz R(McLene R. Rep' �' 49 me ,f P. DUANE .2 o �.� BROWN ; DATE: October 2, 1997 CURVE TABLE FILE#: "7083PLAT.DWG" NO. 1235 gilbert w. Clifford do associates, Inc. cif /o /997 ENGMEERS — LAND PLANNERS — SURVEYORS SHEET yti0 SURIJC' 150—c Olds Q..,ridn Driv. 2W North Cameron Street Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401 Winchester, Virginia 225M OF (70 848-2115 (70 657-22-139 LOT 77 �S L. FURGISON LOT 76 98 8 OB 863 P 1017 JAMES A. dr MIME I. ZONED. • RP ARA TCHFORD USE RESIDENRAL DB 454 P 457 ZONED. RP LOT 82 s61� USE RERDENRAL ALBERT C. W JNMANN, JR SsZ. fir ANNA A. AONMANN ^ 6? DB 456 P 175 ZONED. RP USE- RESIDENRAL / 538.86' W / 20,41 LOT C o o. 21,096 SF 6O� ys�o . 3 INAGE �EAAsEYENr /J � \ 0 LOT 96 �� y0.00 / � y0• CHARLES K. do / 00 PRIVATE SAN. 3 0� Ilk ELEANOR E FRAME 0 SEWER EASEMENT s9 �7�- �h J400, INC. AND FREDERICK D8 453 P 790 �1 b67s DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. ZONED. RP�°� �8� j X02 08 654 P 715 USE- RESIOENRAL � 1 ZONED. RP 40 t- s, USE VACANT ir•3p DRAINAGE LOT A / 15,002 SF o o EASEMENT LOT B 15,377 SF 9 � / ,,gyp• � GSF �O'LiQ 6' o� GSF < 9lAoyl \ \ F ! ���ol, ti�91 y cy 60 .30 0 60 120 9 _ /�G<1 F l GlOy�:r6O9 p ply ( IN FEET T H OF r� `�� 0 2 Sys 1 inch = 60 ft. P. DUANESo R. lRepnime aBROWN �p� N�> DATE: October 2, 1997 SCALE 1" = 60 FILE##: "7085PLAT.DWO" z N0. 1295 gilbert w. clifford do associates, inc. Oc;4 /O /99GI 7 SHEET ENGINEERS — LAND PLANNERS — SURVEYORS Neu SURVI- Fredw6dmbur% VtyNlo 22401 Wkncherter VlrgNorth � 225M treet OF o (540) 898-2115 (W) 667-2139 I 3 v _ PC REVIEW: 02/18/98 BOS REVIEW: 03/11/98 Subdivision Application #015-97 WYTHE AVENUE EXTENSION LOCATION: The property is located at the end of the existing Wythe Avenue in Stephens City. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 75-A-65 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: RP (Residential Performance) District; Land Use: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: RP (Residential Performance) District; Land Use: Residential SUBDIVISION SPECIFICS: Subdivision of a 1.4065 -acre tract into four lots REVIEW AGENCY COMMENTS: Department of Transportation: No objection to the subdivision of this property. This section of street is currently not in the State's Secondary Road System. However, all entrance design and drainage features must meet State requirements if the street is to be eligible for acceptance. A complete set of construction plans will be required for review. Also, see attached leiter dated Jan. 13, 1998from Barry J. Sweitzer, Trans. Road Engineer Sanitation Authority: Second review: Approved as noted; three items/make changes; return one full set, blue lines; sheet 2, blue lines; sheet 2, plastic sepia. Inspections: Upon review of the subject subdivision plan, we offer the following comments: 1) Ensure all run-off from the cul-de-sac drains within the drainage ditch along the road; 2) The proposed use for the site will be residential homes, not retail services. Since these comments are minor in nature, we recommend approval of the subject subdivision plan. Wythe Avenue Extension Subdivision Page 2 February 6, 1998 Fire Marshal: No comments. Engineering: Based on our knowledge of the site topography, it appears that additional drainage easements will be required across the 10 -acre subdivision, as well as the remaining school property. PIanning and Zoning: Public Meeting Requirement The Subdivision Ordinance requires that land divisions in the RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District, without an approved master development plan, be presented to the Board of Supervisors for final approval. This project is zoned RP, and does not contain an approved MDP. Therefore, Board review and action is necessary. Staff' Review This land parcel is adjacent to Fredericktowne - Section 3, Albin Village - Section 1, Caroline Avenue, and Albin Drive. Lot 3 is proposed to have access onto both Caroline and Wythe Avenues. Lot 4 will be served by Caroline Avenue. Four single-family detached traditional lots are proposed for this site, each complying with the minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet. The proposed four residential lots will range in size from 15,021 to 16,012 square feet. The subdivision as submitted appears to satisfy the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. Staff Recommendation for 2/18/98: Staff recommends approval of this subdivision application contingent upon the applicant's satisfying all review agency comments. 0\AGENDAS\COMMENTS\W7HEAVE.SUB Azk' �, COMMONWEALTH of V1RQ1N1A1r'' ° tv o DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DAVID R. GEHR EDINBURG RESIDENCY 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE JERRYA. COPP COMMISSIONER P.O. BOX 278 RESIDENT ENGINEER EDINBURG, VA 22824-0278 TELE(540)984-5600 FAX(540)984-5607 January 13, 1998 Mr. Gary Oates, Site Planner Ref: Wythe Avenue Extension C/O Greenway Engineering TIBOW, LLC - Westmoreland Drive off Rte. 277 151 Windy Hill Lane Frederick County Winchester, VA 22602 Dear Gary: This is to acknowledge receipt of your revised plans dated January 9, 1998 for the referenced project. The plans appear satisfactory and are approved. Please advise the developer accordingly. I offer the following comments: • A preconstruction conference be held by the engineer and/or developer with the attendance of the contractor, various County agencies and VDOT shall be conducted prior to initiation of work. • Materials used and method of construction shall apply to current observed VDOT Road & Bridge Specifications applicable during construction of this development. • Our review and comments are general in nature. Should conditions in the field exist such that additional measures are warranted, such measures shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Department prior to inclusion into the Secondary Road System. • Attached is a copy of the minimum requirements and information needed prior to acceptance of subdivision streets into the Secondary System. This is the responsibility of the developer. • All drainage is to be carried within the right-of-way in ditch lines or gutters along the street to a pipe or drainage easement. • The contractor shall notify VDOT when work is to begin or cease for any undetermined length of time. VDOT will also require 48 hours notice for inspections. 1A/F :,GSD %I[Mr- :INIIA �1('."I KL^- Mr. Gary Oates Ref: Wythe Avenue Extension January 13,1998 Page g2 The appropriate land use permits shall be obtained before any work is performed on the State's right-of-way. The permits are issued by this office and will require a minimum processing fee, surety bond coverage and the salary and expenses of a State assigned Inspector. • If mailboxes are to be placed along the roadway fronting lots, a minimum of 4' shall be between the edge of pavement and the front of mailbox as shown on VDOT standards. • Private entrances will be installed in accordance with Standard PE -1. This is the developer's responsibility. • Any entrances constructed from the referenced street(s) shall meet VDOT minimum standards. This is the developer's responsibility. • 1 suggest any utilities and/or storm sewer placed within the proposed right-of-way be backfilled completely with C.R. Type 21-A Stone. This will greatly reduce the possibility of any pavement settlement. • Please note all easements and right-of-way dedications required on the project will need to be secured prior to VDOT issuance of any land use permits. Should you need additional information, do not hesitate to call. Sincerely Barry J. Sweitzer Trans. Roadway Engineer For: Norman K. Sparks Trans. Asst. Resident Engineer BJS/rf Attachments xc: Transportation Engineer Mr. S. A. Melnikoff Mr. Kris Tierney Subdivision #015-97 PIN: 75—A-65 Wythe Avenue Extension s APPLICATION AND CHECKLIST SUBDIVISION FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA Date: Application # Applicant/Agent: Address: /5 1 01,5-q7 1V z Phone: `;40 Owners name: 71 S (CW L . G Address:.�✓�-�;.. 7 r Phone: % 5 & & % - 1-2- G G Please list names of all stockholders: �'I-1 /� e S �OGv/'►1 tires Contact Person: Phone: Fee Paid t - owners, principals and /or majority (O % - 12 % �o Name of Subdivision: v Number of Lots Total Acreage i.&SS Property Location: En��L Pyr s��, �v� ✓,, (Give State Rt.#, name, distance and direction from intersection) Magisterial District Property Identification Number ('PIN)) WE - -- OW Property zoning and present use: PF ya-c a-otlt Adjoining property zoning and use: Has a Master Development Plan been submitted for this project? Yes No ✓ If yes, has the final MDP been approved by the Board of Supervisors? Yes No What was the MDP title? Does the plat contain any changes from the approved MDP? Yes No If yes, specify what changes: Minimum Lot Size (smallest lot) (5, C7-1 y7 Number and types of housing units in this development: Number 4- Types S ,� 9 I%`_ g N0��9 O EG�,00 ga F ame and Pro erty Identification Number Address me Pro m# %S F- 2— Name Name PETTI TT,-- 1, (v rtv# -%S it - �- �- ''� Pro(c>� �el?bkits Gc�� l: .a. -? Name EVA k C-R c C J Pro env 7 ^, i `1_ c' , �-C r !\-z n S Name U r u- Pro em# 7� - I- ~ - >/�- `-=�Cp2- Name r-, r t✓ ,'= ,� ` '`-1 I r ►I��I, Pro em # -7 7 E f - ? - ' = Name !- utiT Pro em # 7, Name C i v' r.l r'�'iC rc C n c j �� rt S , z�4- H,-zI , f� �. Gt . Pro em# �S� - I- - Z3`j �tcp2Z6S�- Name v-, d j- x Gf. Pro em # t C - I - Name MAGA �rG�1li .� . ZC`� 1/�ly� %1/� v�•u� Pro em# -7 C- I- 3- --'9!o Stent ns Cay ��rn. ZZlcS`S Name �1�ILt;S ,Shirir.j i�. 4 l=t.�Y10 D. Zr� �tyrf� %ve��,t✓ m# 7S �- (- 3- Z Properry `t% Sfc 1�� Name G I L- I, , �,�, t,' i A - 21-7 VV 4 r—/� Pro em# 7 5 - -24 Name Property�3- 7-Q E A �.��C�FSfi[r', �',, z Ccc NameZ Vv' Pro em Z S C; S S Name f,IANC—=c N(14- WAvevukc- Pro erty # 71; S+-ep Ken S 6 f G u . ? Z Co S S z " F 3 Name and Property Identification Number Address Name (A (,— P- L L - I Y Z i td VI/l/ 4- e AV e^�- S4-c�lteVl SC� 1�/, Vr� . Z Z SS Pm0 erry # i 5 i - - 5 7 Name I W,/ -,e %vrt-JA .c t -2 Protv7S Name c r-f-�� 7 Pro ertyA i Name Icl L fl. Is c-F,G:r f S �-c p I,x r, 5 C : % , ^n , Iz- Pro erre # % S - f - � i til 4' w;_..•> �- c Name ;, �� �� ww �s ,� 5 �< c. i ri c_ . Properry Name C;A \rL, ��S = � . .�� . C�Tc r y ! � Z .v; E'ti' Pro em #- Name lAl �Grl;��11-'. Pr,2peny 15 F- 1- 3 Name ,AL -5t -a ViL�AGc �-icn.r�cv��.Nacs f�,sSG�c ,r.1c ISS TUn�s Crt. IG Z. ILara kI Gi n S G y . �� , . -2 z [o SS" Proenv # - F= - I - 3A5i-e Name CrFI Ei✓D, N �.��G� F . lo(o Tvrl•'s Gt . 5 (� (� h s y �� Z -2 S�— Pro em v # 71-7 ¢ " Name _DC,vtci Tvn pI�nS Pro rrv# %S F - I- S�c Name �.�SuGi.iVP.i� ��;4�P. �'c.$�x Oslo Pro errs# %S' F- I- Name T-1 F- , Cit^, a Iri T , F -(C' 1 �¢ G , i cc- I un. s (ft . S I -r' 171) ��c 5 +y , �'; . ? ? 4 Sc,— Pro erre # T7 - ! - ? Name ?cue I`oI� lr'L Ta��.,eC��• �� fc G ns C t {, lI<, 226 17 Pro erre# (^ F- ( I<-� Namerc TGrPfau S }-c{2 G,.�, n S C,-� v Lia " Pro erty # -7 C F- I- I Name and Pro erty Identification Number Address Name ��KA I TH ,1� 41 " r ,- 7, — -f :;-) �`I larjec- t-'{��� Pro env# Name M c� � (LL , �{ ue c�er W, . � r . 1 I S a f'cl e C P (rL c -C Pro m # 7 S F Name 17",, c-kSc N G I�C�r L't�1 FZ 4l0 �c- x A Fc, A a. Pro em # -' S- F Name N 'i -F' 4 � r^y i c !mac'• � �eG1�r � c��� LYS Via , r•c Property # 1 S F - f - Name PC ZZLcProperty# rY� i Ul . -2 - p Name G.- MMr N,xJerAL 1 H e - F VA Pro em # 7q. - A - (� Name ProgErtv # Name Pro errs # Name Pro erty # Name Pro erry # Name Pro em it Name Pro erry # Name Pro ern' # Name Pro erty # FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT OF THE LAND OF TIBOW., L.I--,.C-_ OPEQUON DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA OCTOBER 23, 1997 T 7'Q STEPHENS vtA GAR -1NE SITS VICINITY MAP 1" = 2000' OWNER'S CERTIFICATE `l THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING SUBDIVISION OF THE LAND OF TIBOW, L.L.C., AS APPEARS ON THE ACCOMPANYING PLATS, IS WITH THE FREE CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DESIRES OF THE UNDERSIGNED OWNERS, PROPRIETORS, AND TIRUSTEES, IF ANY. /] COMMONWEALTH OF VI GIN)f A j CITY / T'( OF W fM4-,e-S4Se TO WIT: THE FOREGOING OWNER'S CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS Lj— DAY OF r 1992 BY OdMeS J.. Ol. M,tj OTARY PUBLIC T MY COMMISSION EXPIRES I a_Cxr SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE LAND CONTAINED IN THIS SUBDIVISION IS ALL OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO TIBOW, L.L.C. BY DEEDS DATED AUGUST 22, 1997 AND SEPTEMBER 10, 1997 OF RECORD IN THE FREDERICK COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE IN DEED BOOK 885 AT PAGE 1856 AND DEED BOOK 891 A PA 3 SPECTIVELY. MARK D. SMITH, L.S. NOTE: PARENT TAX PARCEL IDENTIFICATION TIBOW, L.L.C. 75-((A))-65 1.5023 ACRES ZONE RP REF DB 885 PG 1856 TIBOW, L.L.C. 75 -((A)) -63A 0.1317 ACRES ZONE RP REF DB 891 PG 835 APPROVALS: �U FREDERICK OUNTY SANITATION AUTHORITY DATE ��� VIRGINIA ARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DATE ,�� FREDERICK COUNTY SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATOR DATE I' MARK D. SMITH GREENWAY ENGINEERING No.002009 l U z j�G�� 151 WINDY HILL LANE Engineers WINCHESTER, VA. 22602 lq 04 � S?JR � Surveyors TELEPHONE: (540) 662-4185 Founded in 1971 FAX: (540) 722-9528 SHEET 1 OF 3 CURVE DATA NUMBER DELTA RADIUS ARG TANCaENT GHORD CI 46'34'03" 250' 2032' Sil'02'02"E 19.16' G2 108'56'28" 550' 10458' 112' S45"50'49"E 8952' 66.03' C3 l3'db'44" 550' 1082' 4128' -30-4-1 '5 Sb.l9' 55.40' N52'23'24"W 186' C5 46'34'03" 250' 203?' 10.16' N30'2l'59"W 19.16' C6 14'11'55" 3300' 81.18' 41.10' N20'30'40"E 8151' c1 09'14'2l" 330.00' 5322' ?bbl' N08'4l'29"E 53.11' ApJACENT PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION `SYMBOL LOT DESIGNATION OWNER REFERENCE ® OPEN SPACE F ALBIN VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS A55O(--,, INC. DB 848 PG 505 OPEN SPACE B AL51N VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS 48° INc. DB 848 PG 505 © LOT Il JOHN G. SMITH DB 632 FIG 802 LOT 18 THEODORE W. DB 114 MERRILL, JR FYs 349 LOT 258 PETER S. GROSZ, JR 4 DB CONSTANCE M. GROSZ 603 PG 203 OUTLOT A PETER S. GROSZ, JR 4 DB 144 cONSTANCE M. GROSZ FL's 1652 LOT 248 VIVIAN A. GILL DB 612 FL's 3b8 OUTLOT B JOEL O. STOUJE 4 DB LUCITA M. 5TOWE 638 PG 688 LOT SUMMARY ALL LOTS ARE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED TRADITIONAL. MINIMUM LOT AREA • 15000 SQ. FT, AREA IN LOTS 61,265 50. FT. AREA DEDICATED FOR R��U 9,911 SQ FT AREA IN OPEN SPACE 0 SQ. FT. TOTAL AREA 11,116 SQ. FT. NUMBER OF LOTS 4 AVERAGE LOT AREA • 15,316 SQ. FT. MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR PRIMARY STRUCTURES: MINIMUM FRONT YARD • 35 FEET MINIMUM SIDE YARD • 10 FEET MINIMUM REAR YARD • 25 FEET FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT OF THE LAND OF TIBOW, L.L.C. OPEQUON DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA v MARK D. SMITH a SCALE: N/A DATE: OCTOBER 23, 1997 No.002009 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 WINDY HILL LANE 10,23-11 O Engineers WINCHESTER, VA. 22602 Surveyors SUR` TELEPHONE: (540) 662-4185 un ed in 1971 FAX: (540) 722-9528 SHEET 2-0 F 3 66.03' C4 90'24'53" 550' Sb.l9' 55.40' N52'23'24"W 186' C5 46'34'03" 250' 203?' 10.16' N30'2l'59"W 19.16' C6 14'11'55" 3300' 81.18' 41.10' N20'30'40"E 8151' c1 09'14'2l" 330.00' 5322' ?bbl' N08'4l'29"E 53.11' Pte? :3 EX. 60' TEMPORARY TURN AROUND EASEMENT DB 443 FIG 296 HEREBY ABANDONED _ FREDERICKTOUN - SECTION 3 535'49'14"W - 266.10' IRF 150.00' J� roo 0 C� 56.10' IRF / LI Ln 1 ia6 cn LOT I cq 55' RAD. 115,136 SQ_ FT.I Lnz 9,9I1 5Q F.T 12 0 U HEREBY DEDICATED '- I FOR STREET � m PURPOSES W 04 N l/ n1 w J n 0 LOT 2 a- I B cn j N 15,09-1 SQ. F- \ rn vim' c Z 10' PRIVATE ESM' I Z m L TOB I 0 F— - N40'42' E LOT 3 U 612 SQ. FT.cl w 21 \ SQ. FT. 0 a 30' SHARED .�� ACCESS E5M'T B 885 PCs 1856 I� ^Q� DB 89i—PCs 835 o A�NUE ® GF NOTES 1, o DENOTES �'J" IRON REBAR SET UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. IRF . '%" IRON REBAR FOUND_ 3. SEE SHEET 2 OF 3 FOR CURVE DATA AND ADJACENT PROPERTY 50 0 50 IDENTIFICATION. ■ LINE DATA 4 SETBACK REQUIREMENTS` 35' FRONT CsRAF'HIG SCALE CIN FEET) LI . 553'45'00"E - 0.45' 10' SIDE 25' REAR FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT OF THE LAND OF CT TIBOW, L.L.C.OPEQUON DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE: 1" = 50' DATE: OCTOBER 23, 1997GREENWAY ENGINEERING$� Engineers 151 WINDY HILL LANE Surveyors WINCHESTER, VA. 22602 TELEPHONE: (540) 662-4185 Founded in 19 71 FAX: (540) 722-9528 SHEET 3 OF 3 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/678-0682 1VILMQ 1 V"UM To: Planning Commission From: Michael T. Ruddy, Planner II Subject: 1998 Primary Road Improvement Plan Date: February 5, 1998 Enclosed is the Draft 1998 Frederick County Primary Road Improvement Plan for review by the Planning Commission. The purpose of this plan is to advise the Commonwealth Transportation Board of the funding priorities for the Primary Road System in Frederick County. Frederick County representatives will be attending the 1998 Pre -allocation Hearing on Friday, April 3, 1998 at the Augusta County Government Center to present this plan to the Commonwealth Transportation Board. The plan presented to you maintains the same priorities that were presented in the 1997 plan; however, the Route 11 South project has been revised to reflect the recommendations of the Winchester Area Transportation Study, and upon recommendation of the Transportation Committee, the Route 277 project has been broken into two segments. Staff asks that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation that will be considered by the Board of Supervisors. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virbinia 22601-5000 DRAFT 1998 PRIMARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN for FREDERICK COUNTY Adopted on , 1998 by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors Presented to the Commonwealth Transportation Board on 1 1998 PREFACE The 1998 Primary Road Improvement Plan for Frederick County, Virginia focuses on the development of a new limited access arterial corridor and improvements to existing major and minor arterial systems within the county's Urban Development Area. The improvements recommended in this plan will complete the primary road system necessary to manage the traffic demands in Frederick County and the City of Winchester into the foreseeable future. These projects are listed in order of priority and will continue to appear on subsequent plans until funding has been secured for their completion. Projects earmarked for allocations are specified in the Commonwealth Transportation Board Final Allocation of Funds - Fiscal Year 1997-1998 through 2002-2003. These projects include the recently completed four -lane improvement to U.S. Route 522, south of Winchester (Front Royal Pike), interchange modifications at Route 37/U.S. Route 11, north of Winchester (Martinsburg Pike); the reconstruction of a portion of the northbound lane on U.S. Route 522, north of Winchester (North Frederick Pike) to remove existing "S" curves near Cross Junction; the replacement of a bridge over Isaacs Creek on U.S. Route 522, north of Winchester; the reconstruction of the intersection at U.S. Route 522 and Route 654, north of Winchester; the preliminary engineering for the widening of Interstate -81 within Frederick County; and the preliminary engineering for Route 37 from Interstate - 81 south to U.S. Route 522. 1998 PRIMARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN 1) Route 37 Eastern Bypass (Alternative C) A) Continued reimbursement of funding provided by Frederick County to undertake the study and prepare the Environmental Impact Statement for the preferred alternative recommended by the Commonwealth Transportation Board. B) Initiate engineering and design, acquire right-of-way, and establish a construction phase schedule for the preferred alternative between the southern terminus of Route 37 to the new intersection with Route 7 east of the City of Winchester as follows: * From the southern terminus of Route 37 to Route 522 * From Route 522 to Route 50/17 * From Route 50/17 to Route 7 C) Program funds to initiate engineering and design, right-of-way acquisition and construction from Route 7 to the Route 37 northern terminus once a final study corridor is agreed upon by the Commonwealth Transportation Board and the County of Frederick. 2) Route 277 (East of Stephens City) From: I-81/277/647 Intersection (East of Stephens City) To: Route 340/522 South Intersection (East of Double Toll Gate) A) Initiate engineering and design, acquire right-of-way, and establish a construction schedule for the above segment in the following phases: * From the I-81/277 Interchange to Route 636 * From Route 636 to Route 340/522 B) Work with county staff to acquire dedicated right-of-way and achieve grading, drainage, and construction improvements in conjunction with development projects which occur along the corridor until such time that funding is available for construction. C) Program funding for the phased construction of the segment described above. 3) Route 11 (North and South of Winchester) A. From: Southern limits of the City of Winchester To: Route 652, Apple Valley Road Intersection Widen and improve to five lanes. B. From: Northern limits of the City of Winchester To: Interstate 81 Exit 317 Interchange Widen and improve as necessary. 4) I-81 (East of Winchester) From: West Virginia line To: Warren County line Provide additional through lanes, collector -distributor lanes, modifications to existing access points, and additional access points to the main line as recommended by the Interstate 81 Study and the Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS). 5) Commuter Park and Ride Lots Conduct studies and utilize existing information from the Lord Fairfax Planning District Commission to determine the location of needed facilities.