Loading...
PC 08-06-97 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia AUGUST 6, 1997 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) Minutes of June 4, 1997 and July 2, 1997 ........................... . .... A 2) Bi -Monthly Report .................................................. B 3) Committee Reports ................................................. C 4) Citizen Comments ........ . ................... . ..................... D PUBLIC BEARING 5) Conditional Use Permit #011-97 of Robert R. Sheehan for a Cottage Occupation - Sign Shop. The property is located directly across from 558 Marple Road (Route 654), is zoned RA (Rural Areas) and is identified with Property Identification Number 41 -A - 118A in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. (Mr. Evans) ....................................................... E 6) Rezoning #003-97 for Westridge Subdivision, Section III, by Glaize Development, Inc. to rezone 9.81 acres currently zoned RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance). The property is located adjacent to the Westridge Subdivision with access from West View Lane via Middle Road (Rt. 628) in the City, and is identified with Property Identification Number 63-A-3 in the Back Creek Magisterial District. (Mr. Wyatt) ....................................................... F 7) Proposed Amendment to Chapter 165, Zoning, Article X, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Section 165-82B, B-2, Business General District, of the Frederick County Code. The proposed amendment will allow adult retail uses with a Conditional Use Permit. (Mr. Lawrence) .................................................... G N 8) Proposed Amendments to Chapter 165, Zoning, Article XVI, IA (Interstate Area) Overlay District, of the Frederick County Code. The proposed amendments are intended to improve the clarity of existing requirements through the comprehensive revision of this Article. (Mr. Wyatt) ....................................................... H 9) Other Gl+ YLn rl MEETING MINUTES � •t FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMIVIISSION Held in the Board Room of the the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on June 4, 1997. PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; John R Marker, Vice-Chairman/Back Creek District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Robert A. Morris, Sha=wnee District; George L. Romme, Citizen at Large; Terry Stone, Gamesboro District; W. Wayne Miller, Gamesboro District; Robert M. Sager, Board Liaison; and Jay Cook, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; and Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison STAFF PRESENT: Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Director; Andrew Evans, Zoning Administrator, Eric R Lawrence, Planner II; Michael T. Ruddy, Planner I; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Minutes Recorder. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES - APRIL 16, 1997 Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Thomas, the Commission unanimously approved the April 16, 1997 minutes as presented. BIMONTHLY REPORT Chairman DeHaven accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's information. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 4, 1997 Page 56 -2 - COMMITTEE REPORTS - - Development Review & Re<•13tions Subcommittee (DR-F.S) _ 05129/97 Mt..6• Mr. Thom -as _r -porter tht d10- DRJ; S discamissed two major topics--boculevard entrance design and buffers and screening. He said that discussions on these two items will continue and they will be brought before the Commission at a later date. Transportation Committee - 05/13/97 Mtg. Mr. Thomas reported that the Transportation Committee discussed a community request for a four-way stop sign at Fairfax Drive and Montgomery Circle in Fredericl town Estatce Mr. Thomas said that this request was endorsed and forwarded to VDOT. Also discussed was the acceptance of Boundary Avenue as a rural addition project, which will need to be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. Sanitation Authority (SA) - 05/20/97 Mtg. Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the SA elected officers and Ned Cleland remains the Chairman; a Director of Finance has been added to the Sanitation Authority staff, Ms. Judith Smootz; repairs are continuing in Fredericktowne. Joint Frederick Countv/Stephens City Planning Committee - 05/27/97Mtg. Mr. Thomas reported that the Joint Committee discussed boundary adjustments between Stephens City and Frederick County, and the economic development and growth of Stephens City. PUBLIC HEARING Conditional Use Permit 9007-97 of John and Patricia Bowers to operate an antique shop. The property is located at 4489 Martinsburg Pike and is identified with P.I.N. 33-A-93 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 4, 1997 Page 57 -3 - Mr. Evans said that the previous use of the building was a lodge. He stated that some modification to the existing building will be required for the change of use, however, changes to the building and site should not adversely affect the character and environment of the area. Mr. Evans said that the staff is requesting that a "minor site plan" be submitted. W. John E. Bowers, the applicant, asked what was involved for the submittal of a minor site Plan, which was one of the reconimcmied conditions for his permit. Mr. Wyatt explained that the minor site plan is a development plan for the use which illustrates certain agency issues, but does not go to the mx reme of requiring topography or grading plans. Mr. Wyatt said that for this particular use, they would be looking for a commercial entrance, which is a VDOT requirement, parking requirements, and various building code requirements. He added that the site plan would need to be prepared by a licensed architect, engineer, or surveyor, however, the amount of information required would be limited There were no citizen comments. ;r No issues of concern were raised by the Commission. Upon motion made by Mr. Light and seconded by Mr. Romine, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Conitional Use Permit 4007-97 of John and Patricia Bowers to operate an antique shop at 4489 Martinsburg Pike in Clearbrook with the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments shall be complied with. 2. A (minor) site plan shall be approved prior to occupancy of the site. A business sign for the use shall be limited to a maximum of 50 square feet. 4. Any outside displav area should be designated on the site plan. Conditional Use Permit #008-97 of Peter and Michelle Brogger for a Cottage Occupation/Catering Business. The property is located on Lusitano Lane in Marlboro and is identified with P.I.N. 83 -A -19C in the Back Creek Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval Mr. Ruddy stated that the catering business proposed by the applicants meets the requirements for a cottage occupation and would, therefore, be permitted with an approved conditional use permit (CUP). He said that the Broggers are proposing to construct a new residence and catering kitchen at the Lusitano Lane property and this property is currently under contract for purchase by them. Mr. Ruddy said that unlike the Broggers' existing location, no events will take place at this property. Mr. Ruddy said that the staff believes that establishing the cottage occupation will not have a rredenck County Planning Commission Minutes of June 4, 1997 Page 58 -4 - negative impact upon the surrounding neighborhood; and when considering the scale of the proposed kitchen, it will clearly be incidental to the proposed residence. Mr. Ruddy stated that VDOT has commented that the existing private entrance is inadequate for the proposed use and they cannot support a CUP for the property. Mr. Ruddy fiuther stated that it was the staWs opinion that if only the applicant's personal vehicles are used to transport goods to and from the property, it would alleviate many of VDOT's concerns; and in essence, the traffic generated at this location would be of a scale consistent with normal residential traffic. Some of the Commission members questioned a comment made by the Health Department in a letter dated May 8, 1997, Paragraph 2, Criteria #2, in which the Health Department states that the applicant could not cater any events that have more than 150 people per day. The Commissioners were concerned because they felt the Health Department may be out of their purview by making the statement, which could limit the Brogger's business, or the Health Department erroneously addressed the location for which the catering was being provided Chairman DeHaven requested that the staff seek clarification from the Health Department on the issue, before the Board's review of the application. Mr. and Mrs. Peter Brogger, the applicants, felt the Health Department's comments would not be restrictive; however, they were concerned about the comments from VDOT, which stated that minimum site distances were unobtainable to allow for the construction of a commercial entrance. Mrs. Brogger said that they were interested in having a minimal amount of deliveries made to the property. Mrs. Brogger said that they receive about 30-40 days of one delivery per day from a UPS -sized truck. She added that their business is seasonal and during the months of January, February, and March, they basicially have nothing going on. Mrs. Brogger said that VDOT would like them to pave the fust 20'-30' of the entrance and they would have no problem doing that, if they were allowed to have a minimal amount of deliveries. Mr. Miller recommended that the applicants attempt to negotiate an entrance with VDOT in order to arrive at a solution that would permit deliveries. Mr. Miller said that if the Broggers could not resolve the issue with VDOT, the deliveries would have to be eliminated. There were no citizen comments. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mrs. Copenhaver, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit 4008-97 of Peter and Michelle Brogger for a Cottage Occupation/ Catering Business with the following conditions: Review agency comments must be complied with at all times. No retail sales on the property and no delivery of goods to the property by vehicles other than those owned by the applicants. 3. Any expansion of the proposed facilities or use will require a new Conditional Use Permit. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 4, 1997 Page 59 -5- DISQjSSTON ITEMS Discussion Reeardiniz the Route 37 West Land Use Study - Preliminary Concept Mr Lawrence Pr=110d a Prelimnaiy concept for the Route 37 West Land Use Plan which was developed by the staff and the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcomtnittee (CPPS). W. Lawrence hoped to receive the Commission's thoughts and suggestions on the proposed plan. He explained that the study is a result of the recent DeGrange property rezoning, tate continual expansion of the Winchester Medical Center within the City, and the provisions for sewer and water service to be provided to the DeGrange property from the Sunnyside area. He stated that within the proposed 645 -acre area, there are two designated areas for business and office use --one along the Rt. 522 N. Corridor (approx. 83 ac.) for business use and one west of the Medical Center, north of the DeGrange property (approx. 118 ac.) for business/office use. Mr. Lawrence stated that a collector road system with signalized intersections is proposed; however, at the request of the CPPS, the collector road system does not transverse the areas of the study that have no proposed use changes. Mr. Lawrence said that the staff believed the roads should be indicated for long-range planning. r A Commission members raised the subject of the Medical Center's proposed interchange access and they felt the County needed to pursue working with the Medical Center and the Commonwealth Transportation Board so that the County could gain western access to the interchange. Commission members strongly felt that uses along Route 37 should be tied to some type of "medical" business uses. Most members were not in favor of industrial uses along Route 37, across from the medical center campus. Regarding the proposed collector road network, Commissioners believed it would not materialize until well into the future. A suggestion was made that the collector road network be legended outside of the plan and that it be stated that the roads are proposed, but the County doesn't foresee them being constructed anytime soon. The question of whether or not this plan was consistent with the Round Hill Plan was raised and whether or not there was a need for additional business and office use. Also discussed was the issue of proposing development for the area west of Rt. 37, which had always been designated for rural development. It was noted that there was already considerable available land east of Rt. 37 that was already rezoned, along with a skeletal infrastructure system to support it; whereas the land west of Rt. 37 had no infrastructure. Again, Commissioners voiced their feelings that if the area west of Rt. 37 was developed, it should only be for business supporting the medical center. Commissioners pointed out that 90% of Phase 11 of DeGrange property was already in the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). It was felt by members of the Commission that if a sewer line was going to be run through the undeveloped area, then some kind of plan needs to be adopted by the County to guide future use, whenever that might occur. Some members said that they would not support any expansion of the SWSA beyond its current location. The Commission recognized that impacts were going to occur in this area; specifically, the hospital interchange and the Sanitation Authority's 20 -yr and -yr water and sewer plans. They felt they needed to get ahead of the game by establishing "intent," by way of a plan stating the type of development desired by the County, Commissioners instructed the staff to arrange a worksession with the Board of Supervisors in early July. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 4, 1997 Page 60 -6 - CANCELLATION OF THE JUNE 18,1997 PC MEETING Upon motion made by Mr. Miller and seconded by Mr. Marker, the Commission unanimously voted to cancel the June 18, 1997 Planning Commission meeting because there were no pending applications or discussion items. ADJOURNMENT unanimous vote. No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. by Respectfully submitted, Kris C. Tierney, Secretary Charles S. DeHaven, Chairman Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 4, 1997 Page 61 • C • MEETING MINUTES FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMNIISSTON Held in the Board Room of the the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on July 2, 1997. PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; John R Marker, Vice-Chairman/Back Creek District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; Robert A. Morris, Sbwm= District; W. Wayne Miller, Gamesboro District, Robert M. Sager, Board Liaison; and Jay Cook, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Terry Stone, Gainesboro District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; George L. Romine, Citizen at Large; and Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison STAFF PRESENT: Kris C. Tierney, Director; Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Director; Andrew Evans, Zoning Administrator; Eric R Lawrence, Planner U; Michael T. Ruddy, Planner U; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES - MAY 7, 1997 Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Light, the Commission unanimously approved the May 7, 1997 minutes as presented. BIMONTHLY REPORT Chairman DeHaven accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's information. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of July 2, 1997 Page 62 -2 - COMMITTEE REPORTS Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) - 06/26/97 Mtg. Mr. Thomas reported that the DRRS discussed two major topics—an amendment to the Interstate Area Overlay District and the establishment of new development design standards for corridor appearance. Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) - 06/17/97 Mtg. Mr. Morris reported that the HRAB reviewed a preliminary master' development plan for Woodbrook Village which is located at the south side of Opequon Church Lane in Kernstown. Mr. Morris said that discussions centered on the Civil War nature of the area and the plan was forwarded without a recommendation. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. Charles W. Maddox, Jr., Vice-President/Engineer for G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc., invited the Commission to an on-site visit of the Stonecrest Village project on Tuesday, July 8, between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. He said that Stonecrest Village is similar in character to what is proposed for the Woodbrook Village master development plan, which he will be bringing before the Commission soon. Mr. Maddox gave the Commission directions to Stonecrest, which is located in the City on the south side of Tevis Street. PUBLIC HEARING Conditional Use Permit #009-97 of James K. Powell for office space, a workshop, and inventory for a plumbing business. The property is located at 6931 Valley Pike and is identified with P.I.N. 84-A-82 in the Opequon Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval Mr. Evans stated that the proposed use is allowed in the RA District with a conditional use permit. Mr. Evans explained that fencing is proposed for a portion of the site to provide screening for outside storage of supplies and service vehicles. He said the use of the existing building and site should not negatively affect surrounding properties or change the character of the area and staff is recommending approval with conditions. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of July 2, 1997 Page 63 -3 - Mr. James K -Powell, the applicant, was available to answer questions from the Commission. There were no citizen comments. Mr. Miller inquired if the proposed use should be classified as a cottage occupation and if so, was the sign size recommended by staff excessive. Mr. Tierney replied that because of the number of employees and the variety of previous uses of the property, the staff felt it more appropriate to classify the use as nonconforming, rather than as a cottage occupation. Mr. Tierney said that sign size could be limited, if that was a concern. Upon motion made by Mr. Thomas and seconded by Mr. Light, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit #009-97 of James K Powell for office space, a workshop, and inventory for a plumbing business with the following conditions: All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. 2. A (minor) site plan must be approved by the County and should include the proposed location of the fence/screening (material, height) on the plan. 3. All shop -related work must be done within the building only. 4. Total signage (wall or free-standing) should not exceed a maximum of 100 square feet. This conditional use permit was approved by the following majority vote: YES: Thomas, Wilson, DeHaven, Marker, Morris, Light NO: Miller (Romine, Copenhaver, Stone, Ours - absent) Amendment to Article X, Business and Industrial Districts, Chapter 165, Zoning, of the Frederick County Code to permit stone, clay, glass, and concrete products manufacturing in the M2 (Industrial General) District. Action - Recommended Approval Mr. Wyatt stated that the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) considered a request made by the Economic Development Commission (EDC) to amend Chapter 165 to allow for the manufacturing of products specified under Major Group 32 of the Standard Industrial Classification Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of July 2, 1997 Page 64 -4 - Manual (SIC). He said that this section would permit the manufacturing of stone, clay, glass, and concrete Pmt Mr. Wyatt said that the DRRS felt the uses as a whole were no more intensive than some of the other uses currently permitted in the M2; however, they did have some reservations about asbestos products manufacturing and, therefore, the recommendation is to amend Article X, Section 165-82E, the M2 (Industrial General) District to allow stone, clay, glass, and concrete products manufacturing as an SIC 32, excluding asbestos products. There were no citizen comments. Upon motion made by Mr. Light and seconded by Mr. Thomas, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the amendment to Article X, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Chapter 165, Zoning, of the Frederick County Code, as follows: 165-82E. M2, Industrial General District Allowed Uses SIC Stone, Clay, Glass, and Concrete Products, 32 excluding the following: Asbestos Products 3292 Rezoning Application #002-97 of Eastgate Commerce Center by Wrights Run Limited Partnership to rezone land currently zoned RA (Rural Areas), B2 (Business General), B3 (Industrial Transition), and MI (Light Industrial) within the Eastgate Commerce Center, to create 51.96 acres of B2 (Business General) zoned land; 21.10 acres of B3 (Industrial Transition) zoned land; and 51.83 acres of M1 (Light Industrial) zoned land. The property is located at the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Rt. 522 So.) and Tasker Road (Rt. 642) and is identified with P.I.N. 76-A-53 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval Mr. Wyatt presented the background information and project history to the Commission. Mr. Wyatt said that the proposed rezoning application is consistent with development policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan and the applicant has mitigated potential impacts through a proffer statement. He said that analysis of the applicant's traffic impact statement may result in the need for additional transportation improvements. Mr. Wyatt reviewed the transportation issues with the Commission. Mr. Charles W. Maddox, Jr. with G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc., the engineers for the Eastgate Commerce Center rezoning application, stated that during the design phase of their concept plan, they Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of July 2, 1997 Page 65 -5- had to make assumptions concerning pending road projects that were taking place at the time--the elevations of the new Route 522 and the location of Tasker Road. He said that the final road locations varied slightly from tom* initial design Mr. Maddox said that &tcy arc at te , ptirg tri clean up some zoning Innes with this application request; for example, some zoning lines are crossing roads and there are some M1 and B3-zoned lands on the -_[fnnete gide of Ticker frrrmi t, :;.• i,^.tom tis bc. vfr. Maddox said 'mai configuration of the property with respect to Tasker Road was also examined He pointed out that Tasker Road is now running through the center of the site, whereas before it bisected only a small portion to the north. Mr. Maddox stated that marketing has indicated that additional B2 and commercial lands may be appropriate to the north, in lieu of the residential use that was planned for initially. Mr. Maddox added that some access points directly onto Route 522 were needed, but he would not know how many until the traffic analysis was complete. He further added that VDOT will probably require a third lane along Route 522; however, there will be no cross -overs, and this will be a traffic light -controlled intersection. Commissioners were concerned that a substantial portion of the site remained RA. They felt that the applicant should have petitioned to rezone the whole site now, rather than coming back later to rezone the remaining portion. The transportation issues could then be examined for the entire site, instead of piecemeal. Commission members believed it would be better to let everyone know up front what to expect. In light of the continual development of RA land to the south, they said that the residents in that area would be unaware of the future intent for the property. Another issue of concern to the Commission was the suggestion that there would be additional entrances onto Route 522. Some members said they could not support additional entrances on Route 522, especially in light of the poor results achieved on Routes 11 North, 7 East, and 50 East, and because of the opportunity available internally for southbound movement on Sunrise Drive. Other Commissioners felt there may be some advantages in allowing the right turn access back out to Route 522 and that it was best not to limit options at this point in time. They decided to wait until the master planning stage and if a tenant was identified, more information would be available to assess the impacts of either having an entrance on Route 522 South or having all the traffic go back out to Tasker Road. Commission members stated that directing traffic out to Tasker Road was undesirable; however, by allowing traffic to go out on Route 522 with a right -turn lane, the intent of not having trucks on Tasker Road was being met. Other than the concerns raised with regard to entrances on Route 522 and the issue of the applicant not petitioning the entire tract for rezoning all at once, Commission members felt the application with proffers was consistent with policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan_ There were no public comments. Upon motion made by Mr. Morris and seconded by Mr. Thomas, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Rezoning 9002-97 of Eastgate Commerce Center, with the proffers submitted, to create 51.96 acres of B2 (Business General); 2 1. 10 acres of B3 (Industrial Transition); and 51.83 acres of M 1 (Light Industrial) by the following majority vote: YES (TO APPROVE): Miller, Thomas, Wilson, Marker, Light, Morris Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of July 2, 1997 Page 66 NO: DeHaven (Romine, Copenhaver, Stone, Ours - absent) PUBLIC MEETING: Master Development Plan #005-97 of Eastgate Commerce Center by Wrights Run Limited Partnership for 51.96 acres of B2 (Business General) zoned land; 21.10 acres of B3 (Industrial Transition) zoned land; and 51.83 acres of M1 (Light Industrial) zoned land for proposed commercial and industrial use. The property is located at the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Rt 522 South) and Tasker Road (Rt 642) and is identified with P.I.N. 76-A-53, 76-A 53A, 76 -A -53B, 764-53C, and 76 -A -53D in the Shawnee District A Action - Recommended Approval Mr. Ruddy presented the review agency comments and background information. He stated that no buffers have been shown on the Master Development Plan (MDP); he said that zoning district buffers are required along all zoning district boundaries internal to the development and also along the perimeter of the development where business/industrial zoned land abuts rural area land used for residential purposes. Mr. Ruddy said that the applicant's proffer statement mentions a 30' wide road efficiency buffer along both sides of Tasker Road, however, this also has not been shown on the master plan. Woodlands and steep slopes are also not indicated on the plan. Mr. Ruddy added that in the rural area portion of the property, there is a five -acre lot owned by the Cees. He explained that this lot has access to a road which fronts on Route 522 and comes back through the B2 and B3 portion of the property, directly to the five -acre site. Mr. Ruddy said that this is not shown on the MDP and staff is concerned as to how access to that property will be accommodated. Mr. Allan Hudson, President of Wrights Run Limited Partnership, the owner of the property, stated that his agreement with Mr. Cee is that they may move the road anywhere they desire, as long as access is provided to Mr. Cee. Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin with G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc., the design engineers for the applicant, stated that all of the items mentioned by staff will be accomplished on the MDP. Mr. Gyurisin said that there is adequate room on the site to accommodate all internal and perimeter buffers and those will be shown on the MDP. The main issue of concern for the Planning Commission was the potential for problems to result for exiting northbound traffic, especially truck traffic. Commission members believed that if vehicles traveled southbound for a short distance in order to U-turn at the next crossover to begin northbound flow, it could lead to serious safety hazards for the development's traffic and north and southbound motorists. Commission members suggested that the developer consider traffic signs internal to the development indicating that truck traffic going north should go back up to Wrights Run Road to Tasker to use the light. They felt that when the remainder of the RA area was developed, there would be a substantial increase in traffic on both Tasker and Sunrise to go south and north on Route 522. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of July 2, 1997 Page 67 -7 - Chairman DeHaven felt that Sunrise Drive was critical, especially in light of the fact that a crossover was not possible. Chairman DeHaven stated that he opposed additional entrances onto Route 522 from any of the B2 areas and believed those should all be internal. Upon motion made by Mr. Morris and seconded by Mr. Thomas, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Master Development Plan #005-97 of Eastgate Commerce Center by Wrights Run Limited Partnership for commercial and industrial use contingent upon the approval of the rezoning application by the Board of Supervisors and with the stipulation that all review agency comments are adequately addressed. The vote on this MDP was as follows: YES (TO APPROVE): Miller, Thomas, Wilson, Marker, Light, Morris A NO • DeHaven (Romine, Copenhaver, Stone, Ours - absent.) Request for an Exception by Dennis and Jean Settle/Daniel Lee Settle, under the provision of Section 1445 of the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance to subdivide a parcel of land and provide less than the 50 foot right-of-way as required by Section 144-31C.(3). This property is identified as PIN 76-A-105 and is located off of Armel Road (Rt. 642), approximately 2,000 feet east of the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Rt. 522), in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval Mr. Evans, Zoning Administrator, said that Dennis and Jean Settle, on behalf of Daniel Lee Settle, are requesting an exception under the provision of Section 144-5 of the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance to subdivide a 2+ acre lot from a 32 -acre tract of land with less than a 50 foot right-of-way as required by Section 144-31C.(3). Mr. Evans said that the 32 -acre tract of land is served by an existing 30 foot right-of- way from Armel Road (Rt. 642) and the Settles would like to subdivide the 2+ acres to construct a residence. He explained that the Settles have attempted to secure additional right-of-way, but were unsuccessful_ Mr. Evans added that the Settles have obtained a septic system permit from the Health Department. Members of the Commission were concerned about the potential precedence that may be set by approving a land division with less than the required 50 foot right-of-way. They felt that if this was approved, it should be designated on the plat that it is an exception for one lot only and the remainder of the tract is to remain intact. There were no citizen comments. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Morris, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of July 2, 1997 Page 68 -8 - approval of the request for exception to Section 144-31 C.(3) of the Subdivision Ordinance to subdivide a parcel of land with less than the required 50 foot right-of-way with the stipulation that the division is for one lot only and this restriction shall be designated on the plat. Request for an Exception by Kenneth C. And Mary P. Lebo under the provision of Section 1445 of the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance to subdivide a parcel of land and provide less than the 50 foot right-of-way as required by Section 144-31G(3). This property is identified as PIN 47-A-8 and is accessed off Pine Top Road (Rt. 617), approximately 1,000 feet east of the West Virginia/Virginia State Line, in the Back Creek Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval A Mr. Evans, the Zoning Administrator, said that Kenneth C. And Mary P. Lebo request an exception under the provision of Section 144-5 of the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance to subdivide a 13.567 acre tract of land from a 60.761 acre tract in order to construct a residence with less than the 50 foot right- of-way as required by Section 144-31C.(3). Mr. Evans stated that Mr. Lebo has been informed by his lender, The Marathon Bank, that his loan will be through Secondary Mortgage Market financing and the regulations state that acreage larger than 20 acres cannot be accepted under FNMAIFHIMC regulations. In order for Mr. Lebo to secure acceptable financing for his loan, an agreement was reached with The Marathon Bank to finance a smaller portion of the tract, 13.567 acres, which would be sufficient for the construction of the new home. Mr. Evans added that Mr. Lebo has no plans for development of the remaining 47.194 acres tract, so the existing 30 foot right-of-way would serve one residence and two tracts of land. Members of the Commission did not have any problems with the exception as long as the subdivision was for one lot only and that this requirement be stated on the plat. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Wilson, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the request of Kenneth C. And Mary P. Lebo for exception to the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance to subdivide a parcel of land with less than the required 50 foot right-of-way required by Section 144- 31 C.(3) with the stipulation that the division is for one lot only and this restriction shall be designated on the plat. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of July 2, 1997 Page 69 DISCUSSION ITEMS: Discussion of Provosed Amendments to Article XVi IA (Interstate Areal Overlay District Mr. Wyatt presented some amendments to the IA (Interstate Area) Overlay District for discussion, which were written to clarify the intent and some other issues raised by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Wyatt said that these revisions were reviewed and endorsed by the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) at their meeting of June 26. Mr. Wyatt discussed the changes with the Commission. He explained that the way the original ordinance was worded, it referred to primary uses on properties which placed staff in a position where determinations needed to be made on what was primary and what was accessory. He said that in order to clarify that, since SIC designations were being used, staff changed the wording to "qualifying criteria_" Mr. Wyatt said that another issue was the statement that limits the number of signs. He said that the intent was to provide the opportunity for one large sign that could be visible from the interstate and, if necessary, to share that sign, and the new wording reflects this intent. The section allowing the Planning Commission to waiver a portion of the setback was modified slightly. Also modified was the section dealing with maximum size, which did not increase the size, but rather, simplified the language and explained that only one pole is to be utilized. Other sections modified were those on Illumination, Maintenance and Permits, and Permitted Heights. The Planning Commission felt the amendments clarified and improved the wording of the ordinance and instructed the staff to advertise the amendments for public hearing for their fust meeting in August. Joint Worksession of the Planning Commission and the Board of Suyervisors Mr. Tierney said the Commission's request for a joint work session with the Board of Supervisors was granted and has been scheduled for 6:00 p.m. on July 9, which is prior to the Board's regularly scheduled meeting. Discussion of an Ordinance Dealing with Adult Retail Uses Mr. Lawrence presented draft language to address adult uses within the County in response to complaints received by the Planning Department, the County Administrator's Office, and the County Sheriff's Department. Mr. Lawrence said that he spoke with numerous departments throughout the State to determine how other jurisdictions deal with this same issue. Mr. Lawrence stated that the staff' has suggested that the use be provided as a conditional use within the B2 Zoning Districts, because of the intent and location of that district. He added that a conditional use was preferred over a "by -right" use because it allowed the opportunity for the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to determine if the proposal, and its location, was appropriate. It also allowed the opportunity to place conditions on the use. Planning Commission members were concerned that under Item #3, the phrase, "enclosed ftedenck County Planning Commission Minutes of July 2, 1997 Page 70 -10 - structures" may not be specific enough and that plate -glass windows might be considered as an enclosed structure. Members suggested the wording, "no merchandise shall be visible other than from the interior of the structure " Outside advertising was discussed and the Commission felt that building -mounted signs needed to be addressed. They also suggested that the distance from schools, churches, parks, day care centers, and residential uses be increased from 1,000 feet to 2,500 feet and that the measurement should be taken from the property line, not the structure. Commission members suggested that a setback distance be incorporated Mr. Lawrence said that he would incorporate the Commission's suggestions into the amendment and bring it back for further discussion- ;, P Status of "No Throueh Truck Traffic" for Tasker Road Mr. Wyatt stated that the "No Through Truck Traffic" restriction for Tasker Road has been advertised for public hearing at the Board of Supervisors' next meeting, July 9. Mr. Wyatt said that if the Board adopts the request, then VDOT will undertake studies to determine if it meets their criteria. He said that if the restriction.policy meets VDOT's criteria, it is then forwarded to the Commonwealth Transportation Board, who ultimately has the final decision on the posting of the route. ADJOURNMENT unanimous vote. No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. by Respectfully submitted, Kris C. Tierney, Secretary Charles S. DeHaven, Chairman Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of July 2, 1997 Page 71 BIMONTHLY REPORT OF PENDING APPLICATIONS (printed July 25, 1997) Application newly submitted. REZONINGS• Eastgate Commerce Center (REZ #002-97) Shawnee RA - 79.00 ac.; B2 - 51.96 ac. B3 - 21.10 ac.; M1 - 51.83 ac. Location: Intersecdon of Front Royal Pk (Rt. 522 So.) & Tasker Dr. (Rt. 642) Submitted: 06/09/97 PC Review: 07/02/97 - recommended approval BOS Review: 08/13/97 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS: Eastgate Commerce Center (MDP #005-97) Shawnee Commercial/Industrial uses on 135.99 ac. of 235.75 ac. tract (B2, B3, Ml) Location: East side of Rt. 522 So. at the intersecdon of relocated Rt. 642. Submitted: 06/06/97 PC Review: 07/02/97 - recommended approval BOS Review: 08/13/97 Woodbrook Village Back Creek 82 s.f. cluster & 81 multi-plex. units on (MDP #004-97) 42.50 acres (RP) Location: South side of O uon Church Lane at Kernstown Submitted: 05/09/97 PC Review: 07/16/97 - recommended approval BOS Review. 08/13/97 �� SUBDIVISIONS: Dominion Knolls (SUB #005-97) Stonewall 75 s.f. zero lot line lots on 20.278 ac. (R') Location: So. west comer of Baker Ln. (Rt. 1200) & Ft. Collier Rd. (Rt. 1322) Submitted: 05/16197 MDP X001-97 Approved by BOS 04/09/97 Admin. Approved: P Pendia 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 :NIDP X006-93: Approved 07/28/93 Admin. Approved: Pending Winc-Fred Co. IDC (SUB) Back Creek 2 M1 Lots (0.552 acres & 20.285 acres) Location: Southeast side of Development Lane Submitted: 09/08/95 MDP 1/003-87: Approved 07/08/87 Pending Admin. Approval Awaiting signed plats. RT&T Partnershi (SUB) Back Creek I 1 Lot - 29.6 Acres (B2) Location: Valley Pike (Rt. 11 So.) Submitted: 05/17/95 MDP /i003-91 Approved 07/10/91 Pending Admin. A roval: Awaiting submission of signed plat & deed of dedication Briarwood Estates (SUB) Stonewall 20 SF Det. Trad. Lots (RP) Location: Greenwood Rd. Submitted: 01/03/94 MDP #005-93 Approved 12/8/93 Pending Admin. Approval: Being held at applicant's request. Abrams Point, Phase I (SUB) Shawnee 7230 SF Cluster & Urban Lots (RP) Location: South side of Rt. 659 Submitted: 05/02/90 _ a PC Review: 06/06/90 - recommended approval BOS Review: 06/13/90 - a roved Pending Admin. Approval: 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 roved Pending Admin. Approval: Awaitine signed plat. SITE PLANS: Roundball #6 (SP #023-97) Gainesboro 1,750 s.f. office; 80,500 s.f. warehse Phase I; 80,500 s.f. warehse Phase 11; 10.0 ac. distrb. of 10.0159 ac. site (Ml) Location: Tyson Drive Submitted: Submitted: 06/30/97 07/16/97 Approved: Pending Marathon Bank (SP #022-97) Back Creek Addition to Bank - 1.494 ac. (B2) Location: 4095 Valley Pike Submitted: 06/ 18/97 Approved: 07/16/97 4 Clarke Motors, Inc. (SP #020-97) ][ Stonewall I Manufactured Office Buildin Location: i` 1659 Berryville Tike Submitted: 11 06/02/97 Eastern Supply (SP #017-97) Gainesboro 2,500 sq.ft. addition (ofnce & fabrica- tion shop); 4,500 sq -ft. disturbed of a 53185 ac. parcel (Ml) Location: 161 McGhee Road Submitted: Submitted: 05/15/97 ' Approved: 07/02/97 Corrugated Container (SP 6016-97) Back Creek Office, Production, & Warehouse (36,000 sq. ft.); 4.4 ac. disturbed of a 11369 ac. site (Ml) Location: 100 Development Lane; I.D.C. Subdivision Submitted: 05/05/97 Approved: I Pending C.E.D. Enterprises, Inc. SP #015- 97 (Revised SP #029-96) Back Creek 5,000 sq. ft. storage addition to so. end of existing bldg. (EM) Location: 221 Sand Mine Road Submitted: 04/22/97 Approved: 07/09/97 Veteran's Texaco Station & Conven. Store & Burger King Restaurant Addit. (SP #007-97) Opequon Service Station, Store, & Burger King Restaurant on 1.0591 acres (B2) Location: 121 Fairfax Pike Submitted: 03/13/97 Approved: Pendine Agape Christian Fellowship- Church Sanctus (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. 37/1-81 Interch . Submitted: 02/12/97 Approved: Pend Rose Memorial Foundation (SP #004-97) Stonewall Renovation of existing residence for an adult care facility; 3.292 ac. site (RP) Location: 549 Valley Mill Road Submitted: 02/11/97 = Approved: Pending Shenandoah Bldg. Supply (SP #056-96) Gainesboro Warehouse on 5 acres (Ml) Location: 195 Lenoir Drive (Stonewall Industrial Park) Submitted: 12/16/96 Approved: Pending Stimpson/Rt. 277 Oil & Lube Service (SP #030-96) Opequon Oil & Lube Serv., Car Wash, Drive - l Thru on 2.97 ac. (B2) Location: 152 Fairfax Pk. (behind Red Apple Country Store) Submitted: 07/03/96 Approved:- Pendini! Flying J Travel Plaza (SP #026- 96) Stonewall Travel Plaza on 15 acres (B3) Location: S.W. corner of the intersection of I-81 & Rt. 669 Submitted: 05/23/96 Approved: Pending Cedar Creek Center (SP #025-96) Back Creek Location: Museum on 0.485 ac. of a 3.210 acre parcel (BI) Location: 8437 Vafley Pike (Rt. 11), Middletown Submitted: 05/16/96 Approved: Pendia AMOCO/House of Gifts (SP #022-96) Gainesboro Gas Pump Canopy 880 sq. ft. area of a 0.916 acre ar (RA) Location: 3548 North Frederick Pike Submitted: 05/08/96 Approved: Pendia Legion Post #021 (SP Stonewall Addition to lodge building on 3.4255 acre site B2) FA 1730 Berryville PikeIi : 04/ 10/96 • Pendia D.K. Erectors & Maintenance, Inc. (SP X051-95) Gainesboro Indust Sery/Steel Fabrication on a 10- acre site (M2) Location: 4530 Northwestern Pike Submitted: 12/28/95 Approved: Pendine Wheatlands Wastewater Facility (SP /1047-89) - Opequon - Treatment Facility on 5 Acres (R5) Location: So. West of Double Tollgate: adj. & west of Rt. 522 Submitted: 09/12/89 Note: Being held at -applicant's request. Flex Tech (SP #057-90) Stonewall I Ml Use on 11 Ac. (MI) Location: East side of Ft. Collier Rd. Submitted: 10/25/90 Note: Being held atapplicant's request. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS T. P. & Susan Goodman (CUP #010-97) Stonewall Social Center, Outdoor Recreation Center, Catered Functions, Tours, Meetings, Etc. (RA) Location: 534 Redbud Road Submitted: 06/09/97 PC Review: 09/03/97 BOS Review: 10/08/97 - tentatively scheduled James K. Powell (CUP #009-97) Opequon Office Space & Work Shop for Plumbing Business (RA) Location: 6931 Valley Pike Submitted: 05/19/97 PC Review: 07/02/97 - recommended approval BOS Review: 08/13/97 &Michelle Brogger Back Creek Cot08-97) tage Occupation for Catering Business (RA) n: E Off of Cha 1 Road (Rt. 627). On Lustino Lane ed: 05/09/97 06/04/97 - recommended approval PC Review: 06/04/97 - recommended approval BOS Review: 07/09/97 - a roved John & Patricia Bowers (CUP #007-97) StonewallAntique Shop in Existing Bldg. (RA) Location: 4489 Martinsburg Pike (Rt. 11N.)• Clearbrook - Submitted: 04/21/97 PC Review: 06/04/97 - recommended approval BOS Review: 07/09/97 - approved BZA APPEALS: BZA VARIANCES: CFJ Properties (VAR #006-97) (Flying J) Stonewall Appeal of the determination made by the Director of Planning & Development in the administration of the Zoning Ordinance. Location: 1530 Rest Church Road Submitted: 04/25/97 BZA Review: 05/20/97 Tabled for 90 days per applicant's request to 08/19/97 BZA VARIANCES: 10 C Flying J Travel Plaza Stonewall Height variance of 20' from 710' to (VAR #007-97) 730' above sea level and a sign size variance of 198.95 sq.it. over the 300 .Bt. allowed. Location: 1530 Rest Church Rd./ So. West quadrant of I-81 & VA Rt. 669 (Exit 323) Submitted: 04/29/97 BZA Review: d 05/20/97 Tabled for 90 da s licant's t to 08/19/97. 10 PC REVIEW: 8/6/97 BOS REVIEW: 9/10/97 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #011-97 Robert R. Sheehan Cottage Occupation - Sign Shop LOCATION: This property is located on Marple Road (Rt. 654), directly across from 558 Maiple Road. r� A I TERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY M NUMBER: 41-A 118A PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District; Land Use: Vacant ADJOININGADJOEVING PROPERTY ZONING & E: Zoned RA (Rural Areas).District; Land Use: Residential and agricultural PROPOSED USE: Cottage Occupation - Sign Shop REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation,: No objection to a conditional use permit for this property. However, prior to operation- of the business, a commercial entrance must be constructed to our minimum standards to allow for safe egress and ingress of the property. Any work performed on the State's right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. The permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Inspections Department: Building shall comply with Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and Section 304, Use Group B (Business) of the BOCA National Code/1996. 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 of building permit application. Robert R. Sheehan - CUP #011-97 Page 2 July 25, 1997 Fire Marshal: The Fire and Rescue Department does not wish for any specific conditions as a matter of approval. Health Department: The Health Department has no objection to the proposed Conditional use Permit provided that the business is limited to the owner plus one additional employee. Planning and Zoning: History: Mr. Sheehan received approval for a Conditional Use Permit #014-89 by the Board of Supervisors on October 25, 1989 to operate a sign shop on property located at 5358 Northwestern Pike (Route 50 West), next to the Hayfield Family Restaurant. The applicant desires to construct a residence and a detached garage on a property located on Maiple Road (Route 654), directly across from 558 Maiple Road. A 30'x 40' garage will provide the structure to accommodate the office and sign shop. Both the residence and the garage will be located more than 450' from Marple Road, providing a distance buffer from the public road. A mixture of residential uses and undeveloped land make up the surrounding area. Staff concurs with the need for a commercial entrance for public safety. Only one (1) employee will be working with the applicant in the business. As per the Health Department comments, this will meet with their recommendation. It is staff s conclusion that the granting of the conditional use permit with conditions should not affect the natural character and established pattern of development in the area of the proposed use. The use should be in harmony with and should not adversely affect the use and enjoyment of the surrounding properties. Staff Recommendation for 8/6/97: Staff recommends approval with these conditions: All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. 2. Activity associated with this use, including storage, shall be conducted wholly within the enclosed garage building. OAAGENDASSCOMM ENMSH EEHAN,CUP CUP #011--97 PIN: 41—A -118A Robert R. Sheehan Submittal Deadline P/C Meeting BOS Meeting APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FREDERICK COUNT-,., V-JR%-3IX-1A 7i!(1 ?A/ 4/', 1. Applicant (The applicant if the x owner other) NAME= Robert R. Sheehan ADDRESS: 5358 Northwestern Pik Gore, VA 22637 TELEPHONE 540/877-1511 2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties =in interest of the property: Robert R and Karen T She 12an 3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and include the route number of your road or street) Marple Road (Route 654). Go to Nain, Route 522North, turn LEFT on Marple Road, go 9/10 of a mile. Property is on left, a wooded lot with new driveway. Directly across 558 Marple Road. 4. The property has a road frontage of 300 feet and a depth of 892 feet and consists of 6.1422 acres. (Please be exact) 5. The property is owned by Robert R and Karen T. Sheehan evidenced by deed from Ron and Linda Carper as recorded (previous owner) in deed book no. 861 on page 1548 , as recorded in the records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, County of Frederick. 6. 14 -Digit Property Identification No. 41 -A -118A (Tax Ticket ;27816) Magisterial District Gainsboro Current Zoning RA Residential 7. Adjoining Property: jii 3�' USE ZONING�� North Residential W East (same property as above) 117-1 �^-, ! South Agricultural RA `�� W West Residential ---------------- RA _; S. The type of use proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept. before completing) Cottage occupations -- sign shop 9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be constructed: One house, one detached AaraQe 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 BRAITHWAITE, Harry ADDRESS 461 Marple Road Winchester, VA 22603 PROPERTY ID# 41000 OA 000 0118-0 NAME MERRITT, Donald ADDRESS _ 558 Marple Road PROPERTY ID# 41000 OA 000-0119-0 Winchester, VA 22603 NAME MERRITT, Donald ^„ „ ADDRESS 558 Mar le Road PROPERTY ID# 41000 OA 000 0120-0 Winchester, VA 22603 NAME MERRITT, Donald ADDRESS 558 Marple Road PROPERTY ID# 41000 OA 000 0120-A Winchester, VA 22603 NAME Fruit Hill Orchard ADDRESS POB 2368 PROPERTY ID# 42000 OA 000 0000 Winchester, VA 22604 NAME _ ADDRESS PROPERTY ID# NAME PROPERTY ID# ADDRESS NAME ADDRESS PROPERTY ID# Il. Please use this page for your sketch of the property. Show proposed and/or existing structures on the property, including measurements to all property lines. TI `'✓S'e-- O v s t S 7:2 i �-/-A -1 Ira �- F Q�;-1.4 J 12. Additional comments, if any: Valley Signs, Inc currently holds a Conditional Use Permit_ #014-89 at 5358 Northwestern Pike, Gore, VA. I desire the same type of Conditional Use Permit as listed above 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. 5358 Northwester Pike, Gore, VA 22637 540/877-1511 TO BE COMPLETED BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: USE CODE: RENEWAL DATE: STM 41 ((A)) PCL 118A ` Zoned. RA Use: Residential 6.1422 Acres v0ws 1. No title report famished. Eosemenfs may exist that are not shoirn. LEGEND IPF Iron P/pe Found IRS Iron . Rod Set t16 Distribution Box LR.L: Building Restriction Cine a too 200 wo Grcphie Scale in Feet 1--200' Final Plot for MINOR RURAL SUBDNISION Of The Land Of HARRY L. 19RAITHTVAI7T, III Gainesboro Magisterial District � Plot: BSep . dw9 Frederick County, Virginia C3CERTiF(CATE U 1197 a DATE: 20 SSeptember 1995 SCALE: f"-200' tg . Sheol 2 0l Z tib DVI(ARS11 8, LEDGE D SI�EI�� _Land Surveyors P L C .n 139 NorthCameron Street W trrohesler. 'illnle 22601 (!�O) 6A7-a16e re. (s•o) 667_044.9 9Jj sA9~F `lQ`J?e —CPMW'`�. oo, gc,AOi 61 26 J8'l7" w • FSG? y/C( 00 .j00. 00 O• �` A -,9 c`,�q tigRv o Y IRSy TM 41 ((A)) PCL 118 \ Ia'.y��� Zoned. • RA Use. Residential •36.4707 Acres (Original Area) 30.3285 Acres (Remainder) STM 41 ((A)) PCL 118A ` Zoned. RA Use: Residential 6.1422 Acres v0ws 1. No title report famished. Eosemenfs may exist that are not shoirn. LEGEND IPF Iron P/pe Found IRS Iron . Rod Set t16 Distribution Box LR.L: Building Restriction Cine a too 200 wo Grcphie Scale in Feet 1--200' Final Plot for MINOR RURAL SUBDNISION Of The Land Of HARRY L. 19RAITHTVAI7T, III Gainesboro Magisterial District � Plot: BSep . dw9 Frederick County, Virginia C3CERTiF(CATE U 1197 a DATE: 20 SSeptember 1995 SCALE: f"-200' Sheol 2 0l Z e qV DVI(ARS11 8, LEDGE D SI�EI�� _Land Surveyors P L C 139 NorthCameron Street W trrohesler. 'illnle 22601 (!�O) 6A7-a16e re. (s•o) 667_044.9 PC REVIEW DATE: 8/6/97 BOS REVIEW DATE: 9/10/97 REZONING APPLICATION #003-97 Westridge Subdivision, Section III To Rezone 9.81 Acres Tract from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) LOCATION: This property is located adjacent to the Westridge Subdivision with access from West View Lane via Middle Road (Rt. 628) in the City. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Back Creek PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 63-A-3 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: Rural Areas District Land Use: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: Zoned: RA, Rural Areas Use: South: Zoned: RA, Rural Areas Use: East: Zoned: LR, Low Density Residential Use: West: Zoned: RA, Rural Areas Use: PROPOSED USE: Single family dwellings REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Church, Vacant Vacant Residential Residential Virginia Dept, of Transportation: No objections to the rezoning of this property. Prior to development, this office will require a complete set of construction site plans which detail roadway geometrics, drainage features and traffic flow data from the ITE Manual, Fifth Edition for review. The County should be aware the rezoning and subsequent development of this property will require Westridge Subdivision, Sec: M - REZ #003-97 Page 2 July 24, 1997 access, i.e. school buses, fire and rescue, VDOT maintenance equipment thru streets maintained by the City of Winchester. Frederick Co. 5anitation A thori : This area served by City of Winchester. Rublic Works: The proposed rezoning is approved by the Public Works Department. It is anticipated that the development will be a small lot subdivision (residential) with curb and gutter. Stormwater management will be required if the off-site stormwater is discharged into Frederick County. Fire and Rescue: I [Doug Kiracofe] am working on the Rezoning and MDP for Westridge project. In the rezoning request proffer statement, property ID 53-(A)-3, there is a correction needed. In the paragraph below "Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development," the Fire and Rescue contributions are shown going to the Round Hill Fire and Rescue Company. This should be the Stephens City Fire and Rescue Co., Inc., P.O. Box 253, Stephens City, Virginia 22655. Stephens City Fire and Rescue Company: See no problem with rezoning for the 25 houses. Parks and Recreation: Residents from this development will use the regional parks as league and program participants. They will participate in classes and tournaments held at the parks. Families will picnic at the shelters, swim at the pools, play on the playgrounds and in the open space provided, paddle boat and fish in the lakes, and participate in an array of different non -structured activities. I would suggest that the impact model be used to determine the potential impact this development may have on the County's park system. County Attornev: The spelled part of the monetary contribution doesn't match the numerical part so proffer should not be accepted until corrected. Gly of Winchester: After reviewing the preliminary plans, I have no problem with what is proposed in this rezoning. Since the property is located in the county, I question the concern about the maintenance of the roads and the utilities in any easements being quitclaimed by the state in order for the roadway to be approved. The developer should be reminded of the availability fees are double those that are charged in the City. In addition, water rates are $2.00 per 1,000 after the first 3,000, rather than $1.33 per 1,000. Winchester Dept. Of Public Works: Stormwater management will be a prime concern, as we are still in the process of resolving this issue with the VADCR from the last phase (II) of this subdivision. I would imagine that there will also be requests for the City to plow snow and pick up refuse, which we will not do. Westridge Subdivision, Sec. III - REZ #003-97 Page 3 July 24, 1997 Erederick Co. Public Schogis: We feel this proposal will have an impact on current and future school facilities. We recommend these concerns be addressed during the approval process. Planning ,&„Zoning: 1) Site Hi story The Board of Supervisors incorporated the 9.81 -acre tract into the Urban Development Area (UDA) on July 10, 1996 by majority vote. Prior to this action, the inclusion of this property was considered by the Planning Commission and the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee. The Planning Commission and the CPPC expressed concern that this action may set a precedent that would result in the expansion of existing subdivisions in the City of Winchester into the county. However. each group felt that this action could be defended based on the unusual circumstances pertaining to this property, as the property was within single ownership that was split by the City/County line and access to the property was limited through the developed portion of Westridge in the city. 2) Location The 9.81 -acre tract is located within the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Comprehensive Policy Plan requires property to be located within the UDA and the SWSA as a first step in determining its appropriateness for suburban residential development. The 9.81 acres is adjoined by large tracts of land to the north, south, and west that are developed and vacant. Developed properties include a church to the north and a residential lot within the Clayhill Farms subdivision. The 9.81 acres is adjoined by Section II of Westridge to the east. Several Iots along West View Lane and Wind Wood Drive have been developed or are currently under construction. The location of this 9.81 -acre tract creates a situation in which the only means of access is via West View Lane through the City of Winchester. The Planning Commission requested that information regarding various residential services be presented during the rezoning application. The following describes these services: A) Fire & Rescue Service - Response for Phase III of Westridge under current policy will be by the closest fire and rescue company. The closest company is Shawnee within the City of Winchester and Stephens City in the county. Should this policy change in the future and require county service only, Stephens City would be the first response and Round Hill would be the backup. Westridge Subdivision, Sec. III - REZ #003-97 Page 4 July 24, 1997 B) Police Service - Response for Phase III of Westridge under current policy will be by the closest department. The City of Winchester has the authority by law to respond to properties in the county that are within one mile of the city line. C) Snow Removal Service - The Virginia Department of Transportation is pursuing an agreement with the City of Winchester Public Works Department to allow for the removal of snow by the city. Similar agreements have been achieved in other areas of the county in which access is limited from the city. This agreement would be for snow removal only and does not pertain to any maintenance work. D) School Bus Service - The Frederick County Public Schools Transportation Department will provide school bus service to Phase III of Westridge. School buses will go into Phase III only if an adequate turnaround is provided. If an adequate turnaround is not provided, bus service would be provided at the intersection of Middle Road and West View Lane. 3) Site Suitability The 9.81 -acre tract does not contain environmental features as defined by the Zoning Ordinance; however, there may be some minor areas of woodlands in the northwestern corner of the site which will need to be identified during the master plan process. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey does not recognize the 9.81 -acre tract as qualifying as a historic site, and does not identify buildings or other man-made objects that qualify as historic structures. 4) Potential Impacts The applicant has indicated that 25 single family detached residential lots will be established if the 9.81 acres is rezoned. This number of residential lots would produce an average daily traffic generation of 239 trips. All trips will access Middle Road within the City of Winchester. It is reasonable to expect the majority of the trips leaving Westridge III to make a left turn movement onto Middle Road and travel towards Valley Avenue. The Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model was applied to this rezoning application, assuming the development of 25 single family dwelling units. The results of this model run demonstrate a negative fiscal impact of $89,530 to the Frederick County Public Schools, $14,777 to Frederick County Parks and Recreation, and $315.29 to Frederick County Fire and Rescue. Westridge Subdivision, Sec. III - REZ 9003-97 Page 5 July 24, 1997 5) Impact Statement/Proffer Statement The applicant has submitted a proffer statement which includes a generalized development plan. The applicant has proffered to provide Frederick County with a monetary contribution that is consistent with the results of the Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model. The applicant has proffered a 50 -foot wide future street connection to the Allen property to the north. This will provide a future connection to Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622) within the City of Winchester. Finally, the applicant has proffered to provide a consumer notification disclosure for each future property owner which will describe the various services provided by each jurisdiction. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR 8/6/97 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The rezoning application is consistent with the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The monetary proffer provided by the applicant compensates for the negative fiscal impact identified by the Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model. The provision of the future street will eventually provide access to Cedar Creek Grade following the development of the Allen property. The consumer notification disclosure will alert future property owners to the provision of services offered by the city and the county. Staff recommends approval of this rezoning application. REZONING #003-07 PIN: 63—A-3 Westridge Subdivision, Sec.III REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning Staff. kezaNjr4G- z.,,,;mg • ,...,,.,dme Number -q BOS Hearing Date 0" 211 Date Received .r7-/[ PC Hearing Date ' 6 The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 23 Court Square, Winchester. 1. Applicant: _Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. Name: Ste hen M. Gyurisin Address: 200 N. Cameron Street Winchester Vir 'ma 22601 Telephone: 540-667-2139 2. Representative: Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates Inc. Name: Stephen M. Gvurisin Telephone: 540-667-2139 3. Owner. Name: Glaize Developments, Inc. Address: P.O. Box 2598 Winchester Virgina 22604 Telephone: 540-662-2092 The Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned: Fred L. Glaize, III 4. Zoning Change: It is requested that the zoning of the property be changed O from RA to RP 5. Current Use of the Property: Vacant 6. Adjoining Property: PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING 63-A-2 Vacant RA 63 -A -3A Vacant RA 63 -A -2E Religious RA 63-A-8 Residential RA 63 -A -4B Residential RA 289-4-C Lots 64, 65, Vacant Lots RA 70,71,72&73 7. Location: The property is located at (five exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route number): Remaining portion of Westridge Subdivision with access from West View Lane via Middle Road (Rt 628) at City/County boundarv. 8. Parcel Identification 14 Digit Tax Marcel Number: 63-((A))-3 9. Magisterial District: Back Creek 10. Property Dimensions: The dimensions of the property to be rezoned. Total Area: 9.81 Acres The area of each portion to be rezoned to a different zoning district category should be noted: 9.81 Acres Rezoned from RA to RP Acres Rezoned from to _ Acres Rezoned from to Acres Rezoned from to 11. Deed Reference: The ownership of the property is referenced by the following deed: Conveyed from: Ray Robinson Deed Book Number 196 Pages 681 12 Proposed Use: It is proposed that the property will be put to the following uses: w Single Family Dwellings 13. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map X Plat X Deed to property X Statement verifying taxes paid X Agency Comments X Fees X Impact Analysis Statement X Proffer Statement X 14. Signature: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued to me (us) when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right-of-way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. Applicant: Owner: CLk-JAC,1) S- ( �L-- L,4, (_), P, -Z, . Date: 7 (_ i v / 5 gilbert w. cli f ford & associates, inc. 200 North Cameron Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-2139 9 Fax. 703-665-0493 Westridge Subdivision Section III Adjoining Pnrol2erties Tax Number Onwer Name and Address 63-A-2 Bank of Clarke County T/F Evelyn Allen R T 1625 Apple Blossom Drive Winchester, Virginia 22601 63 -A -3A George Cather 3296 Apple Pie Ridge Road Winchester, Virginia 22601 63 -A -2E Blue Ridge Grace Church Route 1, Box 37A Clearbrook, Virginia 22624 63-A 4B 41> Elmer M rple, Jr. 2884 Mid e Road Winche er, Virginia 22602 63-A-8 Cour ey . & Clara A. Lowe �. 2952 Mi e Road Winche ex, Virginia 22602 289-4-C-64 Glaize Developments, Inc. 289-4-C-65 P.O. Box 2598 289-4-C-71 Winchester, Virginia 22604 289-4-C-72 289-4-C-70 Richard C. & Patrice G. Vossler 2711 Windwood Drive Winchester, Virginia 22601 289-4-C-73 Zane L. Metz, Jr. P.O. Box 2999 Winchester, Virginia 22604 A 11 7 \ Cit ul u.fti L REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Number 63-((A))-3 WESTRIDGE GLAIZE DEVELOPMENTS, INC Preliminary Matters Pursuant to Section 15.1 - 491.1 eta of the code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and the provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance with respect to conditional zoning, the undersigned applicant hereby proffers that in the event the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall approve Rezoning Application # for the rezoning of approximately 9.81 acres from RA Zoning District to the RP Zoning District, development of the subject property shall be done in conformity with the terms and conditions set forth herein, except to the extent that such terms and conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the applicant and such be approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors in accordance with Virginia law. In the event that such rezoning is not granted, then these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and of no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon the applicant and their legal successors or assigns. General Development Plan The undersigned, who owns the above described property hereby voluntarily proffers that if the Board of Supervisors for the County of Frederick, Virginia approves the rezoning for the 9.81 acre tract, lying on the west side of Middle Road in the Back Creek Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia from RA to RP, the undersigned will submit a Master Development Plan that will provide for a street layout connecting with the State Route 628 (Middle Road) via West View Lane, and, as shown on the attached Addendum "A" - Proposed 50' R/W, Concept Plan for Westridge, Section III, dated February 19, 1996. The undersigned voluntarily proffers that the rezoned property shall not be subdivided into more than twenty-five (25) single family home lots and there shall not be constructed thereon more than twenty-five (25) single family detached houses and further no apartments, duplexes or other multi -family buildings shall be constructed on the property. mrNotification The undersigned, who owns the above described property hereby voluntarily proffers that if the Board of Supervisors for the County of Frederick, Virginia approves the rezoning for the 9.81 acre tract, lying on the west side of Middle Road in the Back Creek Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia from RA to RP, the undersigned will provide notice to each new lot purchaser that this property is located in Frederick County and that various governmental services may be different than the portion of the Westridge subdivision that is located outside of Frederick County. PAGE 2 REZONING REQUEST PROFFER Property Identification Number 63-((A))-3 WESTRIDGE GLAIZE DEVELOPMENTS, INC. Monet= Canbibudan to Offset Impact of Develogmen The undersigned, who owns the above described property hereby voluntarily proffers that if the Board of Supervisors for the County of Frederick, Virginia approves the rezoning for the 9.81 acre tract, lying on the west side of Middle Road in the Back Creek Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia from RA to RP, the undersigned will pay to Frederick County, at the time a building permit is applied for, the sum of four thousand one hundred seventy-two dollars and twenty- eight cents ($4,172.28) per approved lot ($3,581.20 for Schools and $591.08 for Parks & Recreation) plus, twelve dollars and sixty-one cents ($12.61) per approved lot to be paid to Frederick County for the Stephens City Fire and Rescue Company. In essence, the total sum of four thousand one hundred eighty-four dollars and eighty- nine cents ($4,184.89) will be paid at the time a building permit is applied for, for each lot approval. The conditions proffered above shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors in interest of the Applicant and Owner. In the event the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grant said rezoning and accepts these conditions, the proffered conditions shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to other requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code. Respectfully submitted, PROPERTY OWNER By: �\ �--- GLAIZE DEVELOPMENTS, INC. STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE CITY OF WINCHESTER, To -wit: The foregoing nstrument was acknowledged before me this c42,5— day of July, 1997, by vAnlld Aa of Glaize Developments, Inc.. My Commission expires _&/ 97 _(Sd:nz Q& w Notary Public Concept. Plan /J./f Kcjc)nC& WF Cother WESTRIDGE Section III PROPOSED 509 R/W Frederick County, Virginia d.9 na; 'Welt.dwgjob no: ] drawn by. 63 Idolc February 19, 1996 SH SEET 40F4 approved by,. CEM scale: 0-200' —Frederick I County I-- Cit V of NIF A//en ounty —Win-- - ' chester e4. SFS OW" N 200 400 800 W-64:«. V1,21-16 (5 401 667- 2119 o En r+ - V M th "o '1 150-C ado Q,N .kh oj� PL f,.awkkbt,,g. w2we 234a, 15401 R9n-2tls WESTRIDGE Section III PROPOSED 509 R/W Frederick County, Virginia d.9 na; 'Welt.dwgjob no: ] drawn by. 63 Idolc February 19, 1996 SH SEET 40F4 approved by,. CEM scale: 0-200' —Frederick I County I-- Cit V of NIF A//en ounty —Win-- - ' chester e4. SFS OW" N 200 400 800 GLAQE UEVELOPMENT. INC. PROPERTY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA JULY 1996 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT Glaize Development, Inc. Property Westridge Subdivision L Summary The firm of Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. has been commissioned to evaluate the above referenced project in light of several major planning issues, as outlined and required by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors. This document is prepared to rezone a 9.81 acre property from present Rural Areas (RA) to Residential Performance (RP) for twenty five single family detached homes on public sewer and water. The property is suited for Residential Performance (RP) zoning and is adjacent to the existing developed portion of Westridge Subdivision that has 10,000+ square foot single family lots. The City/County boundary traverses the entire property. The area to be rezoned is within the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan designated area the Urban Development Area (UDA). The UDA was designated in July 1996 by the Board of Supervisors upon recommendation of the Planning Commission. The property, located in Frederick County, is the balance of the original tract that is divided by the City/County boundary. The remainder of the property, located in the City of Winchester, is developed as Westridge Subdivision with single family detached homes. There is a fiscal development impact as identified by the Frederick County impact model. Proffers are proposed to mitigate the identified fiscal impacts. Current zoning, development, and subdivision requirements allow for adequate measures to protect and mitigate any minor, negative, identified development impacts to the surrounding properties. Adequate measures are provided for in existing development codes to provide for protection of environmental features. II. Introduction The 9.81 acre property of the Glaize Developments, Inc. is located at the end of West View Lane on the west side of Middle Road (Route 628). Access is through the existing Section II of Westridge Subdivision. This property adjoins the existing single family development of Westridge and continuation of the same pattern of lots, subdivision features and homes is planned. The parcel is identified as tax parcel 63-((A))-3 in the Back Creek Magisterial District and is currently zoned Rural Areas (RA). 70U om Com1 • 1 , 1 ' 1 i , si rfo((� Wln<A••t.r• WglnW 22801 (50) ee7_2139 WE STRID GE (D w " `` Section III - Y/n0 1 LOCATION MAP CD ' t.. Frederick County, Virginia ! ! �' r+• t h dwg. no: ;C:.L,t:::;" }ob no: r "•• ' �! 150-C Old• Gr••ndch D" drown b gLFM ldmburg. Vkgbl• 22401 r• dole: ��br��.} ►g. 1996 SHEET OF 4. / o ao ega-25 [approved by CE 1.1 scale: 1•=_6.")Q' 1*41 y19 1 ,J U 797 � � • s • !; � 1.r ' I• /J/) (' I .'s� ('.."1( a .. y• ate• ,� 8 • • Q @ri Cen r i.% �•qJJ 4R `s ` " �` �,CREr£H : ,p • t , ttib`' i ', ' �.?Jf/ s� , ! i• ":�rl • j %'lf' ( I .� .-- eve j n 1i j�1� �� 1 /�� � {:' r �' r— .:•�;;• - � �%, i; �° j� ! `y l' o i Wiij ► eJ. .,�'vPl "M. r�pe merilal llaa _ �•• y''+( 1Q t{ , 756 ! I�`(1 e ; (1 { a5�' 1 .1 ��)/ (+�1 / 1 Z esgi -� `� ,� Ca !� Noh$ eor jj `�l Bch. u T2s y�°J 1 �o J ~ 6" ,, /'I' til �� � ��� li,/ fi )! � ' �' , ' r�j /'1 )'.1%.,•y. `t� .�� s, f;� `; - , ,gr ► ,,,�` tf`«';' (J 0;11` ��� ,''�.S • 1� ' . : t 1 �� - 1 .P= f '�1 7 1 � t , 1 /,C. •eJli t/ jtl f• �61i �••' .. _s J �/�/ / .\l '� ` 1 888"" '1 t - `�(� "';. l y. C ..• rL 'y r 183( va 4 �! (✓ I/// / C/� r' tl a�+ 1 pt! C E3 r 1 c. {/! I �' • !•�: �� • ••t�•. `-'\ " I 1 {�(;. ��/ �. of � �p ..j i4 .�.,`�:. •j �{ t ' •, n tr < p• � 1' 'I,)I� 8r)! ,, L� 'i,l��• ., ._..,�- '•• Kernstown E� •,��• .:�;•i•. ♦ '%© � Old Opeqljon. r. ) � r/ .(d' moi/ / {15iry,i r� ��, CCtn :� t.. _� �.� ��'/%� �'y (�/• ). . T Ro Qq wncn..1«. WBnb 44801 (540) 887-4139 t7 0 r+ r+ sCD 0 N/F Koonce ''1 150-0 ad. a..n." oa» N/F Cother la' ;;;0 i -k- ;¢ *qhb 44401 WESTRIDGE Section III EXISTING SURVEY Frederick County, dwq. no: ^We!;1A.,; Job no. drawn by. se date: rabruary 19. 1996 approved by. CEld scale: V" 200' is SHEET 2 OF 4 E – – Frederick Cit of N/f Allen 1083.32' County _ __— Winchester TEMPORARY I N , CUL–DE–SAC n lF EASEMENT ' •-...\ � � 1F- 0-1011 IJ\90 to 1 o so. 01,6 0 200 400 800 dao` O �CIL, GLARE DtVELOPMENT, INC. PROPERTY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA JULY 1996 Residential Performance (RP) zoning is planned for the property. The 9.81 acres to be rezoned is in Frederick County and in the UDA. A preliminary site development evaluation indicates that this site can easily support residential uses of the RP zone. Development of the portion of the property located in the City has occurred since the mid -1980's. The attached proffer statement provides for only single family homes with design features the similar (using Frederick County zoning and subdivision design standards) as the first two sections of the Westridge Subdivision. �s III. Planning Analysis Site Suitability - The property has no site specific development limiting factors. The property appears well suited for Residential Performance (RP) zoning use development based on site evaluation of soils, slopes, wetlands, ponds and lakes, flood plains and other site suitability and environmental factors. Soils - The soils are suitable for site development purposes. The USDA Soil Conservation Soil Survey for Frederick County identifies the soils of the property on map sheet 35 as Frederick-Poplimento loams. Prime Agricultural Soils.- The property does contain prime agricultural soils as identified by the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. Slopes - There are no steep slopes on this property. The topography is ideally suited for residential type development. Slopes generally range from 2_010 to 15% with a portion of the property above 7%. Wetlands - There are no wetlands on this property. The property is generally well drained and has no low lying wet areas that wetland vegetation that indicates the presence of a wetland area. Ponds and Lakes - There are no ponds or lakes on the property. Flood Plain - The property is not located within the 100 year HUD designated flood plain as identified in the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan and panel map number 510063- ooi i5B of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Flood Boundary map. IW 110lVI WT.�PI ani w� 040) 667-2Wgin 139 to 22601 WE STRID GE 3 Section III Or." w rJ SOILS cin �T. Frederick County, _ Virginia ►� 1 dwg. no: _...j,.. Job no: ol 130-0 old. GtNn.l h drown by. dote: Fobtuo:y i8. �39b SHEET 3 OF 4 ;� aaFrW�nck�burq, WgInlu 22401 `' N/F Koonce N/F Cather 340 696-2113 approved by. CF11 scale: 1" -:?GD' Frederick -City of N/F Allen t County Winchester a, +O t Frederick- Poplimento Loams 2-7% Slopes N v 1141C 00 Frederick-Poplimento Loams 7-15% Slopes ,Fo o� 200 � 00 800 �`'0 c i � �• e � GLARE DEVELOPMENT, INC. PROPERTY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT FREDERICK COUNTY. VIRGINIA JULY 1996 Adjoining Properties - Rezoning and development impacts are slight on adjacent properties. The primary impact concern on adjoining properties is the change of use from open, rural land to a residential subdivision setting. Primary adjoining uses are urban, single-family homes and large -lot single family homes. The adjoining property to the north is developed as a single family large -lot five acre residential subdivision. To the east is the existing section of Westridge recently constructed and under development. To the south is a single family residence on a large -lot, five acre residential lot; and, the land to the west is developed as a single family large -lot five acre residential subdivision. Zoning Review. - A majority of the original tract is within the City of Winchester limits. A portion of the tract, 9.81 acres of the property is located in Frederick County. The property in Frederick County is inside of the UDA and is requested to be rezoned to RP. The property is currently zoned Rural Areas (RA) allowing by right a variety of uses including large lot housing units as well as agricultural uses. Under the Residential Performance (RP) zoning regulations a variety of housing types are permitted with limiting performance zoning criteria. The surrounding neighborhoods consist of single family homes. Continuation of the same housing pattern is encouraged with comprehensive planning policies and zoning standards. The proposed housing type is consistent with the surrounding urban neighborhood that is part of the entire tract and regulating planning policies. IV. Traffic Traffic impacts are negligible for this property. Impacts of vehicular access and turning movements will be minimal. Traffic will enter this portion of the development through the existing West Vie1v Lane from Route 628, Middle Road. The 9.81 acres to be rezoned will produce approximately 200 trip ends per weekday based upon ITE Trip Generation figures. GLARE DEVELOPMENT, INC. PROPERTY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA JULY 1996 V. Sewage There are no sewage conveyance or treatment problems associated with this project. The property will be served by the City of Winchester via existing sanitary sewer lines serving the remaining portion of Westridge Subdivision. VI. Water There are no water supply or transmission problems with this property. Currently this property can be served by the existing public water lines serving the remaining portion of Westridge Subdivision. Fire protections measures such as the installation of fire hydrants will be addressed at the site development stage. The installation of fire protection hydrants poses no problems. The installation of ire hydrants on the property will improve the fire protection means of the surrounding properties as well as the enhancing the protection of the property. The fire fighting capabilities of the fire company covering this area will be enhanced with additional fire hydrants. Under current RA zoning this property could be developed without any fire hydrant protection measures. VII. Drainage Proper storm water management planning will result in minimal or no site drainage impacts. In lieu of the above, additional storm water detention calculations will be presented with final design which would show no adverse impacts created by the imposition of this increase storm water on the existing downstream water course. Drainage flows generally toward the Middle Road area to the south and east of the property. Predevelopment runoff rates will be maintained using recognized storm water management standards. Currently, storm water management ponds are in place for the existing portion of Westview Subdivision. These ponds are effective as a means to regulate storm water and are planned to serve the remaining portion of the property. VIII. Solid Waste Solid waste impacts are measured in terms of waste generated based upon five pounds per capita per day. Solid waster collection is not provided on a door to door basis, rather solid waste transfer stations are utilized for individual home disposal. 7 GL AVE DEVELOPMENT, INC. PROPERTY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA JULY 1996 IX Historic This project area through past development of adjoining property has no known significance. The area has been significantly developed to the east and north. There are no structures currently located on the area to be rezoned that are of historic significance. A review of the National Register, the Virginia Landmarks Register and The Frederick County Comprehensive Plan indicates that there are no known historic structures on this property. X. Community Facilities Education - This project will generate approximately 16 school age children when the project is completely built out and developed. Total build out time is projected to be within two to five years. Fiscal impact costs are noted on the attached impact model r' -port for elementary, middle and high schools. Parks and Recreation - This project would result in minimal impact on Parks and Recreational facilities. Minimal additional recreational facilities will be required for the proposed development. Impact costs are noted on the attached impact model report for parks and recreation. Emergencv Services Cost - There are minimal additional fire, rescue or sheriff facilities anticipated with the development of the property using RP type uses. Fire protection is available from the Stephens City Volunteer Fire and Rescue Company. The planned RP rezoning will have all required site development standards required by the fire code, building code and zoning codes. There are no fire protection problems associated with this property. All hydrants and fire protection measures will be installed when the property is developed. Rescue services are provided by the Stephens City Fire and Rescue Squad. Sheriff Department services protection will be required. Regular and routine patrol should be sufficient for protection. Impact costs are noted on the attached impact model report for fire and rescue. XI. Environmental There are no known major environmental impacts associated with the rezoning of this property from RA to R.P. There will be certain minor negative impacts due to the construction activity including run off sediment, noise and traffic GLA¢E UEVELOPMENT. INC. PROPERTY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA JULY 1996 movements. These are to be minimized by proper compliance with local and state laws for environmental protection. The effects on the down. -stream impoundment and stream are minimal and in accordance ouwith local and s".te regulations. There is no known loss of irretrievable resources involved with this project. There are no known endangered species of fauna, flora or wildlife which will be effected by this project. Ground water and air quality should be unaffected. XII. Fiscal Impacts Fiscal impacts for the property are determined based upon the fiscal impact model prepared by the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development staff using the size of the parcel and the number of projected homes. The fiscal impact model results are attached in the appendix of this report. There is a net fiscal impact projected for the property due to the zoning from RA to RP. Proffers in the same amount are listed in the attached addendum to mitigate fiscal impacts. A net fiscal impact per unit of $4,157.80 is projected by Frederick County impact model for each single family home. A fire and rescue impact per unit is projected at 512.61. The fiscal impacts of the Westridge rezoning are measured for capital costs that relate to the improvements necessary for the County to increase the capacity of public facilities. The amount of the impact for any rezoning and subsequent land development such as Westridge depends upon location and land uses. The location is in the Back Creek Magisterial District in the school and fire and rescue zones as assigned. The proposed use is 25 single family homes. The fiscal impacts were determined based upon the specific criteria of the Westridge property to be zoned to RP. Using the rezoning impact model provided by Frederick County, the total capital cost of required new facilities generated by the Westridge rezoning is considered for each local governmental department for it's respective service area. In this case these departmental areas include: • Schools (elementary, middle and senior high) • Parks and Recreation _ • Fire and Rescue 8 GIAIZE DEVELOPMENT, INC. PROPERTY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA JULY 1996 As evidenced by the model forecast, there is a net impact. The net impact for is $103,945.00 plus $315.29 for fire and rescue. Capital costs include $89,530..00 for for Schools and Parks and Recreation. New capital costs calculated for Fire and Rescue for costs not covered by county contributions boosts the amount for Fire and Rescue to $315.29. The Westridge development when rezoned to RP warrants an impact based upon Ws overall net fiscal impact Future credits that go toward funding existing debt service are determined by the model and applies to school, fire and rescue and parks and recreation departments only. Total credit for taxes that will be paid in the future is $12,674.00. By department area credits are as follows: $11,494.00 for Schools; $496.00 for Fire and Rescue; and, $683.00 for Parks and Recreation. The rezoning impact model for Frederick County does not calculate positive fiscal impacts associated with non-residential land uses such. Instead, only impacts associated with residential uses are actually shown. In the case of non-residential uses a zero ($0) value impact amount or value is shown due to the large amount of fiscal impact associated with such commercial or office (non-residential) land uses. The Westridge rezoning is for single family homes. The net fiscal impact, $103,945.00 in this case, result from the new project against capital costs that are generated by the project. The credit over a ten year period is the amount of development fees, as well as permit fees, plus, project revenues. Revenues are the sum of the following taxes and fees associated with RP type zoning : • Real property tax • Personal property tax (estimated at $93.00 per employee) • Business license tax • Utility tax • Retail sales tax (estimated at $2.83 per square foot) • Transient tax (Motel tax) (estimated at 5172.00 per room) • Meals tax ( estimated at $5.91 per square foot) Costs are associated capital costs for capital improvement projects in the respective areas of each governmental department, there include fire, schools and parks and recreation. XIV. Concept Plan Continuation of similar development patterns as the existing portions of Westridge is envisioned for the portion to be zoned RP. A Concept Plan showing the proposed right of way and project layout follows. FREDERICK COUNTY IMPACT MODEL REPORT —' Net Credit for • •'CULE Fiscal Taxes to Capital Impact Capital Net SSL+ Q=L5 lrrng $48 Fire 00partn1eflt RSSLUe Cepartment $33,804 Eiamentsry Schools 82 $10 82 $10.4 $11.494 S89 53-0 Middie Schools $56,$15.45039 - High Schools 7 Parks and Recreation TOTAL $116,819 Sa $12,874 S1 G3.945 FIRE AND RESCUE ADOENCUM 5315.29 New Capital Costs Nat Covered by County Model RLn Cato 1 101J8 EA�V PJ.rJ. 63-A-3 -15 :5 SFO Lots cn 3 10 aeras rezoned from RA eo RP. 200 North comeran Stmt � n i �• , � ,1. , % � g,~ � M7ncn..lr. Wgtn1. 22601 WE STRID GE 5 F • (540) 667-2179 CT' , ' I • Pp" � UI,5CD o C+- Section III LOCATION MAP f (� Frederick County, Virginia _ _ Job no: 150-c aa. G.•n.1cn w- drown b SH Y (�. frrdrlck•G�, q, Wpinia 22+ot Y -- --- dote: , I:Nfi S� ar i, �EE7 C OF q 540 e9e-2M approved by. (V! t scale: !' -:• t<(K)' u OW ;Dani i` �= EEK YBOB `—..:r''_ t �!'�./' U 4j (/ '•• i• '_, ` '. r •� y... 1 `� I / J r _ �� )� .�+�lit� J ��/�• � !'o�•~'' � l ��I;r- Imo• ` .1 �/�� h , / / . , 85. :o v. •� • •' M, r s tmenja: Flas ,/ �� /�� •• _.�� X56 ti` i J 8 t . , I1i l+r Z B! ��"CT 1I',: `� Nobt 6016 1 set q )i'S ccc — ,P • J = ,! L ,.� . r • ', ` ik AkEA' �t iv ' , > , ` �8 , a 1 .. •�: p:� •. 611 , / .. � • ,, ! (•',(,' I )'t /!�) (J ` �_ /�11 x9(i 1 J d(7 �� O t (� ',t ( r4 !' • •q:F .• • • ••'• , , • :���� 1 . �/1. �\,.„�/ � 1/ �, 1 �l•.�7� , JSP ) I, `� \\ \\\jj, r ( (\���I� .. i�ii�i':'.h;� � lr�,• al( ili�•�?C•..J ,, Kernatown z• :�:%; '.�• t •m '' ,!(' '��' ,,:� •rte � •! ,. �Q =�� - i J ilpegtwn. � •� a J• ) 1x:1,1 �' •`..�\.it ' i ' \ �`••�j (�• ). � 1 .�' , , ♦♦ l 1 C ( � , � � �, ✓mss' ` V .• 1 /�. Zoo Nrtn wmrm auwa m �Q� Wncrr. Nrglnlo ssea, yvE STRID GE tsrol ee7-zus Section III n o , r- � OL� EXISTING SURVEY 3 En Vey Frederick County. Virginia dwg. nEby. c ., job no: o SHEET 2 OF 4 n ►y ,so -c as arnen.lrh Ddw drawn dale: i' br�arg i9. ii9B E1, fr�drkkaG rq, NrgMla yz+oi approved by. cf r! scale: Pl/F Koonce N/F Cather 5� 898-y��s Frederick Ulty of N/F Allen j /* S 78'5859"_E 1083.32° County Winchester 1 'y' Sg JFK , �S. TEMPORARY N \` CUL—DE—SAC ' EASEMENT � i r r 800 200 400 ,, ;.e COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, Planner II SUBJECT: Public Hearing - Proposed Amendment Regarding Adult Retail Use DATE: duly 25, 1997 As you are aware, staff has been directed to review and determine if Adult Retail uses should be specifically addressed within the Zoning Ordinance. Presently, such uses would be categorized with General Merchandise Stores, Miscellaneous Retail, and other similar uses. Based on research staff conducted and on direction provided by the Commonwealth Attorney's office, staff has determined that the best method to address such uses is by allowing it in the B2 (Business General) District with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The proposed amendment contains performance standards for, and a definition of, Adult Retail Uses. Performance standards would be applied to provide for the safety and welfare of minors, and to reduce traffic hazards that may be associated with larger signage adult retail displays. The definition would be included in the definition portion of the Zoning Ordinance for future reference and clarification. The proposed language was presented to the Commission at their July 16, 1997 meeting. Comments and suggestions were noted during the meeting and incorporated into the proposed text. The revised amendment is presented to you this evening as a public hearing item. Staff asks for a recommendation that may be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. Please contact staff with any questions concerning this proposed amendment. Enclosure U TR1C1COMMONTRRYADULT.PC 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Vir;ini.i 22001-_5001) DRAFT -- Article X -- DRAFT -- Business and Industrial Zoning Districts §165-82 District use regulations. B. B2 (Business General) District. The intent of this district is to provide large areas for a variety of business, office and service uses. General business areas are located on arterial highways at major intersections and at interchange areas. Businesses allowed involve frequent and direct access by the general public but not heavy truck traffic on a constant basis other than that required for delivery of retail goods. General business areas should have good direct access to major thoroughfares and should be properly separated from residential areas. Adequate frontage and depth should be provided, and access should be properly controlled to promote safety and orderly development. Nuisance factors are to be avoided. Allowed Uses Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Conditional Uses Uses permitted with a conditio al use permit shall be asfollows: Adult Retail uses meeti g the requirements of this chapter ------ and with the followin conditions: (1) Such uses shall be located at least 2,500 feet from the property line of an existing ad lq,tlail use school, churchfparks, day carevand residential uses and districts. (2) Such uses shall not be ermined in shopping centers and/or multi buildings. .� (3) All merchandise display areas shall be limited to enclosed structures, and vot�be visible from the outside. s h., (4) Business signs shall not exceed a maximum of 25 square feet. No wall mounted pr window displays shall be permitted. s��J 6� (5) Hours of operation shall be limited to �n7h 1^4veen 9: 00 AM and 11: 00 PILI. ' ait a Definition: ADULT TAIL - A retail establishment for whic 25 p�ims, r more of its stock i trad videos, magazines, books, publications, tapesor other periodicals and paraphernalia which are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on depicting or describing specified sexual conduct or specified anatomical areas. �.� COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Director RE: Article XVI, Interstate Area Overlay District Amendments DATE: July 17, 1997 Included with this memorandum are proposed amendments to the referenced Article of the Zoning Ordinance. The Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) has considered a comprehensive revision to this Article which is intended to clarify current requirements. In particular, amendments have been proposed for Section 165-116, Intent; Section 165-118, Establishment of Districts; Section 165-119, Qualifying Criteria; and Section 165-120, District Regulations. Noteworthy revisions include the review of qualifying uses as described by the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (SIC) in lieu of primary or accessory uses, clarification of the total number of tall signs permitted by the overlay district, clarification regarding the permitted square footage for tall signs, requirements for greater sign setbacks if adjoining properties are residential, notification of the potential for additional setback and spacing requirements, additional requirements for sign illumination, and a description of the various Interstate 81 exits. Other revisions are editorial in nature. All proposed amendments have been highlighted for review purposes. Staff asks that the Planning Commission consider this amendment request and forward a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors for final resolution during their regular meeting on August 13, 1997. 107 North Kent Street - tiVinchester. Virginia „h�11-5001) ARTICLE XVI IA (Interstate Area) Overlay District §165-116, Intens. The IA (Interstate Area) Overlay District is intended to provide commercial businesses within an identified area the ability to utilize business signs that are in excess of the limits specified in § 165- 30 of this chapter. This flexibility is provided to inform the traveling public of business service opportunities at specific interstate interchange areas. The standards within this Article are designed to allow for additional visibility for commercial businesses while minimizing negative impacts too i tra�reltng;go"W residential properties that are adjacent to or within the proximity of the overlay district. Established boundaries are based on reasonable sight distances and policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan and are intended to designate each interstate interchange area and provide guidance for considering the acl HR"', subsequent properties. §165-117. District Boundaries. Propenies that are included within the Interstate Area Overlay District shall be delineated on the Official Zoning Map for Frederick County. This map shall be maintained and updated by the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development. §165-118. Establishment of districts. A. The Frederick County Board of Supervisors may apply the Interstate Area Overlay District to properties within the proximity of interstate interchange areas upon concluding that: (1) The property is in conformance with the idealized interchange development pattern recommendation of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. (2) The placement of a sign 'meeting the Fequirements<of this section will not have an adverse impact on adjoining properties whose primary use is residential. (3) The property has met the requirements of Article II of this chapter, as well as the requirements of § 15.1-4910) of the Code of Virginia 1950, as amended. B. The Interstate Area Overlay District shall be in addition to and shall overlay all other zoning districts where it is applied so that any parcel of land within the Interstate Area Overlay District shall also be within one (1) or more zoning districts as specified within this chapter. The effect shall be the creation of regulations and requirements of both the underlying zoning district(s) and the Interstate Area Overlay District. §165-119. Qualifying criteria. A. E y+~rla D stet,., l following uses shall be authorized to erect a commercial business that complies with the requirements of 165-120 of this Article.uh=raf Standard Industrial Classification ivaTiifyig Uses (SIC) General merchandise and apparel stores 53 and 56 Automotive dealers and gasoline service stations 55 Eating and drinking establishments 58 Hotel and lodging establishments 70 .......................... B.y'g uses specified under §165-119A that are authorized on property through the issuance of a conditional use permit in the RA (Rural Areas) District may be entitled to erect an Interstate Eve gy sign that is of a greater height and size than is permitted in the underlying zoning district, provided that the property has met the requirements of Article III of this chapter, the business sign complies with the requirements of § 165-120 of this Article and the .............. . ..................... gaGfyinuse is located on property that is delineated on the Official Zoning Map as being part of the Interstate Area Overlay District. §165-120. District regulations. A. Permitted signs. (1) Interstate overlay signs. (2) Signs permitted in the underlying zoning district(s). B. Prohibited signs. (1) Off -premises business signs. (2) Signs prohibited in the underlying zoning district(s). C. Number of freestanding commercial business signs. (1) On Akpce# " the Interstate Area Overlay District, one (1) int i~rrstate;4verja sign that complies with the requirements set forth in this Article may be er". D. Setback requirements. (1) � al' Fet uea sign shall be set back a minimum of ten (10) feet from lot line or roe boundary lute and l rrte all offer apggb setback �Equ2e.�nents� . (2) When any t3testat et sign exceeds the height requirement of the underlying zoning districts) iY is located on property that adjoins or is across a right-of-way from property that is in the RP (Residential Performance) District, the HE (Higher Education) District, car any gzspert whrcls a residence asrts primary rise; the setback shall be the normal setback plus one (1) foot for every foot over the maximum height of the underlying zoning district(s). 3) The Planning Commission may waive any portion of the setback described in § 165- 120D(2) if it" cart'15e demonstrated the setback requirement canrYgt.be Hier due to the irregular size or shape of the parcel. E. Spacing requirements. The spacing requirements between . an interstate; overlay sign an signs ;in the underlying zoning district(s) shall comply with the requirements in § 165-30F of this Chapter, and shall'meet all other applicablespaeing requirements: F. Maximum size. (1) No interstate overlay sign shall exceed a total of three hundred (300) square feet in area. G. Illumination. (1) Neither the direct nor reflected from anv illuminated create a traffic hazard fad operators of motor vehicles. H. Maintenance and permits. (1) All signs that are erected in the Interstate Area Overlay District shall meet the maintenance and permit requirements as specified in § 165-30I and § 165-30J of this Chapter. (2) If required, appropriate easements shall be secured by any property owner that desires to erect an prior to the issuance of a sign permitixt overlay sign ......... -. -r to ................. ensure that required maintenance c' ... can bc.,performed. I. Permitted heights. C' Maximum Business Sign Height Exit Number (feet above mean sea level) 302(Middletown .&-.�Rt, l . South) 760 307 ($tqpheh4.City&,!�Ri277) 800 310 (Kern I stownR-C37) 805 313 (Rt. 50/17&Rt-.-�:5:22) 805 315 (Rt:v'::T &: B6r.ryvdle' 750 317 (Rt'11 North & Rt 37} 815 321 (Clearbrook & Rt. 1. Y North) 700 323 (Whitehall '& 4R,t;�:JJNorth) 710