PC 05-01-96 Meeting AgendaAGENDA 1112e.
n
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The Old Frederick County Courthouse
Winchester, Virginia
MAY 1, 1996
7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB
1) Minutes of March 20, 1996 Meeting ..................................... A
2) Bi -Monthly Report .................................................... B
3) Committee Reports ................................................... C
4) Citizen Comments ........................... . ........................ D
PUBLIC HEARINGS
5) Conditional Use Permit #003-96 of David A. Keller to operate a commercial outdoor
recreation facility (archery range). This property is located in Shockeysville, off of State
Route 691 (Holiday Road), and identified with PIN 8-A-16 in the Gainesboro Magisterial
District.
(Mr. Miller)......................................................... E
6) Rezoning #002-96 of Raymond L. Fish to rezone four acres from B2 (Business
General) District to B3 (Industrial Transition) District and 7.3 acres from RA (Rural
Areas) District to B3 (Industrial Transition) District for an animal hospital and a
beverage warehouse. This property is located at the southeast corner of the intersection
of Interstate 81 and Route 672 in Clearbrook and is identified with PINs 33-A-164, 33-
A-I64C and 33-A-165, in the Stonewall Magisterial District.
(Mr. Tierney) .................................. . F
N
7) Rezoning #003-96 of Richard L. Heisey to rezone 1.43 acres from RA (Rural Areas)
District to B2 (Business General) District for self -storage warehouse units. This property
is located two miles west of Winchester By -Pass (Rt. 37), on the south side of
Northwestern Pike (Rt. 50), and approximately 200 feet to the west of Poorhouse Road
(Rt. 654) and is identified with PINs 52-A-148 and 52-A-149 in the Back Creek
Magisterial District.
(Mr. Wyatt)......................................................... G
8) An Amendment to Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, of the Frederick County
Code, Article III, General Provisions, Section 144-4, Subdivision Administrator.
The proposed amendment establishes new standards for the administrative approval of
industrial, commercial, and residential subdivisions of land that are a part of an approved
Master Development Plan.
(Mr. Wyatt)......................................................... H
DISCUSSION ITEMS
9) Request of C.E.D. Enterprises, Inc. to have the Planning Commission reduce a required
side yard setback in the EM (Extractive Manufacturing) District per Section 165-88B(l)
of the Zoning Ordinance.
(Mr. Wyatt).........................................................1
10) Other
MEETING MQNUTES
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMNIISSION
Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Court House in Winchester, Virginia on
March 20, 1996.
PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr.,
Chairman/Stonewall District; John R. Marker, Vice Chairman/Back Creek
District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; John H. Light, Stonewall District;
Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District;
Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; Terry Stone, Gainesboro District; S. Blaine
Wilson, Shawnee District; George L. Romine, Citizen at Large: Robert M. Sager,
Board Liaison; Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison; and Jay Cook,
Legal Counsel.
ABSENT: Jimmie K. Ellington, Gainesboro District
Staff present: Robert W. Watkins, Director and Secretary; W. Wayne Miller, Zoning
Administrator; Evan A. Wyatt, Planner II; and Renee S. Arlotta, Minutes Recorder.
Call To Order
Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Meeting Minutes of February 7, 1996 and February 21, 1996
Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Romine, the minutes of
the February 7, 1996 meeting were unanimously approved as presented.
Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Wilson, the minutes of
February 21, 1996 were unanimously approved as presented.
2
Bimonthly Report
Chairman DeHaven accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's
information.
Committee Reports
Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee (CPPC)- - 3/11/96 Mtg.
Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the CPPC discussed revisions to the Round Hill
Land Use Plan and reviewed a request to extend the Urban Development Area.
Battlefield Task Force (BTF) - 4/11/96 Mtg.
Mr. Watkins reported that the BTF will meet on April 1, 1996. He said that they
will primarily be discussing fund raising efforts for Kernstown.
Economic Development Commission (EDC) - 9/20/95 Mtg.
Mr. Romine presented a summary of the EDCs activity for the year. Mr. Romine
said that industrial sites with access to water, highways, and rail sites are needed.
Winchester City Planning Commission - 3/19/96 Mtg.
Mr. Ours reported that the City Planning Commission has spent much of their time
on the rezoning of the Meadowbranch South development which will include the extension of
Jubal Early Drive from Valley Avenue north into the Meadowbranch subdivision. Mr. Ours said
the housing types, lower density housing, and office space were discussed. He said that at some
point, as plans develop, there is a potential for impact to the county because they are planning to
extend into Amherst or onto Rt. 37.
3
Consideration of the establishment of a Vested Rights Policy Statement for Frederick
County. This policy statement will define development and design criteria that will maintain
a vested interest when delineated on approved master development plans, subdivision design
plans, subdivision plats, and site development plans.
Action - Recommended Approval
Mr. Wyatt presented the Vested Rights Policy Statement for Frederick County for
the Commissions consideration. Mr. Wyatt said that the staff felt the proposed policy was an
excellent planning tool for approvals for the various development applications required by the
Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances. He said that the staff does not view the policy statement as
enforceable; however, it would provide ground rules that the county could use, such as vesting
overall land use plans, residential densities, floor area ratios for commercial and industrial
developments, widths for required buffers, etc.
Mr. Thomas asked when the design standards become vested. Mr. Wyatt said that
the "design standards" terminology was not used. He said the intent of the policy was not to vest
specific design standards because those are what change over time.
There were no public comments.
Members of the Commission were in favor of the policy statement and felt it would
be a great benefit to the staff, the Commission and Board, and the development community.
Upon motion made by Mr. Romine and seconded by Mr. Marker,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County PIanning Commission does hereby
unanimously approve the resolution supporting the adoption of a Vested Rights Policy
Statement for Frederick County as follows:
VESTED RIGHTS POLICY STATEMENT
RESOLUTION
At a regular meeting of the Frederick County Planning Commission, held on the 20th day of
March, 1996, in the Board Room of the Frederick County Court House on Loudoun Street in
Winchester, Virginia, it was duly moved and seconded that the following resolution be adopted:
Whereas, residential, commercial, and industrial development within Frederick County, Virginia
is continuing at a significant rate; and,
Whereas, the Frederick County Planning Commission continues to develop policies to address
4
the management of growth in the community; and,
Whereas, the Frederick County Planning Commission believes that the establishment of a Vested
Rights Policy Statement will provide a valuable planning tool for County Officials and property
developers within Frederick County; and,
Whereas, the Frederick County Planning Commission believes that the establishment of a Vested
Rights Policy Statement will initiate a technique for consistent decision making regarding
development and design issues.
NOW, Therefore, Be It Resolved, that the Frederick County Planning Commission supports the
adoption of a Vested Rights Policy Statement for Frederick County, Virginia.
Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman
Frederick County Planning Commission
Robert W. Watkins, Secretary
Frederick County Planning Commission
VESTED RIGHTS POLICY STATEMENT
FOR FREDERICK COUNTY, VA
The information set forth in this document is intended to define the requirements of the Code of
Frederick County that maintain a vested right when provided on a legally approved development
plan, or a legally approved and recorded plat. It is envisioned that these requirements be vested
perpetually unless future legislative actions at the State or Federal levels mandate otherwise.
1) Master Development Plans:
a) Overall land use plans shall be vested when depicted on an approved master development
plan.
b) Proposed residential densities, the type of residential dwelling, the number of residential
dwellings within various development phases, and commercial or industrial floor to area
ratios (FAR) shall be vested if the appropriate terminology and numeric information is
clearly depicted on an approved master development plan.
c) Proposed widths for required buffers shall be vested if the appropriate terminology and
numeric information is clearly depicted on an approved master development plan.
However, requirements for screening shall be required as mandated by the current
ordinance.
5
d) Percentages or acreage of required common open space and recreational areas shall be
vested if the appropriate terminology and numeric information is clearly depicted on an
approved master development plan.
e) The number of recreational areas designated on an approved master development plan shall
be vested. However, required recreational amenities and installation specifications shall
be mandated by current ordinance requirements.
2) Subdivision Design Plans:
a) The use of each parcel and the number of lots in each use shall be vested when depicted
on an approved subdivision plan.
b) The location and acreage of each parcel of land dedicated for common open space or for
public use shall be vested if the appropriate terminology and numeric information is clearly
depicted on the approved subdivision design plan.
C) The location and width of all road right-of-ways provided on an approved subdivision plan
shall be vested provided that the road classification and numeric information is clearly
depicted.
3) Subdivision Plats:
a) The location of setback lines shall be vested if the appropriate terminology and numeric
information is clearly depicted on a subdivision plat that is legally approved and recorded.
b) The location and design of proposed buffers and screening shall be vested if the
appropriate terminology and numeric information is clearly depicted on a subdivision plat
that is legally approved and recorded.
C) The location and acreage of each parcel of land dedicated for common open space or for
public use shall be vested if it is consistent with the approved subdivision plan, and if the
appropriate terminology and numeric information is clearly depicted on a subdivision plat
that is legally approved and recorded.
d) The location and width of all road right-of-ways shall be vested if the information is
consistent with the approved subdivision plan, and if the appropriate road classification and
numeric information is clearly depicted on a subdivision plat that is legally approved and
recorded.
i
e) The allowable density which results from future subdivisions of a parent tract shall be
vested if the appropriate terminology and numeric information is clearly depicted on a
subdivision plat that is legally approved and recorded.
4) Site Development Plans:
a) All requirements provided on an approved site development plan shall be valid for five
years from the official approval date of the plan. The requirements provided on an
approved site development plan shall only be vested if building permits have been issued
prior to the date of site plan expiration.
b) Site plans shall be allowed to be approved for phased development. In the event that
outstanding phases are not developed when the expiration date of a site development plan
is realized, all requirements associated with the individual phases shall only be vested if
building permits have been issued for the individual phases by Frederick County.
C) Site development plans that have been submitted for review but have not received official
approval from Frederick County shall not be vested from new design requirements or from
new performance standards.
Subdivision Application #001-96 of Fredericktowne Estates, Sections 12 and 13, for a request
to subdivide an 11.3496 -acre tract into 30 lots. This property is located east of Stephens
City, northeast of Fredericktowne Estates, Sections 5 through S, and southeast of Section
11. This property is identified with P.I.N. 75-A-72 in the Opequon Magisterial District.
Action - Approved
Mr. Miller gave the background information and review agency comments. Mr.
Miller said that the Inspections Department and the Engineering Department are requiring that site
plans be submitted for a number of lots showing grading, lowest floor elevations, and drainage
easements.
Mr. Sager said that within the last 30 days he has received over 100 phone calls
concerning the heavy truck traffic on Westmoreland Drive. Mr. Sager said that Westmoreland
Drive was never intended to be an expressway for trucks delivering supplies to build houses. Mr.
Sager said that summer is coming and there are many children in this residential neighborhood.
He said that both he and the residents in the area are concerned that someone may be injured
because of the heavy trucks traveling through this residential area at high speed. Mr. Sager
wanted to know if an alternate route could be worked out, even temporarily, to relieve the
%/
problem.
Mr. Ours said that he also received many phone calls and the problem is exactly
true as stated by Mr. Sager. Mr. Ours said that the noise is a big problem. He said that this was
an infrastructure issue and this development was not properly planned. Mr. Ours questioned
whether the Commission should continue approving more houses and adding more traffic back
into an area that does not have sufficient infrastructure to support it.
Another Commissioner asked who would pay for repair of the roads after they have
been damaged by all the truck traffic.
Mr. Miller replied that these were state maintained roads and VDOT would be
responsible for their maintenance. Mr. Miller said that Fairfax was opened up onto Wythe to
alleviate some of the traffic problem, however, until Fredericktowne was built out, truck traffic
would continue to be a problem.
Upon reviewing the overall road situation, Mr. Thomas inquired about the status
of discussion for connection of Warrior Road through to Route 277. He also asked for
clarification about what was shown on the approved master development plan.
Mr. Watkins explained that a plan was developed and approved to move the section
of the road from within Fredericktowne east onto the western portion of Sherando Park. Mr.
Watkins said that the commitments have already been made for the land and land will not be an
issue. Mr. Watkins said that the important question that has not been resolved is who will build
the road across the park land. He said that it will obviously be built when the RP properties to
the north of the park are developed.
Mr. Charles W. Maddox, Jr., with G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc., the
engineering firm representing this subdivision, said that they had originally planned a connection
from Rt. 277 into Sussex and Westmoreland, however, a large, vocal segment of the
neighborhood did not want that done and the decision was made not to complete that connection.
Mr. Maddox said that had that connection been made, there would have been three ways in and
out of Fredericktowne and significantly less trucks would be going through the residential
development to get back and forth to the project. Mr. Maddox said that the road through
Sherando Park needs to be constructed. He said that the developer of the Village at Sherando
agreed to bond an amount equivalent to what would have been spent to complete the connection
to Fredericktowne as it had been originally designed and this money can be used to design and/or
construct as much of the new alignment as can be accomplished for that amount through the park.
Mr. Maddox didnt think the master development plan was ever formally revised. He added that
the road connection to the stop light on Route 277 will be lined up and made this summer.
Chairman DeHaven called for public comments, but no one came forward to speak.
F
Mr. Ours said he thought this situation was comparable to the same issues discussed
with Woodside. He said that the Commission voted that down because of traffic concerns. Mr.
Ours said that when the infrastructure is not present to support what is to be built, the Commission
has no obligation to allow building to continue. Other members of the Commission felt that
because a subdivision is at the administrative stage of development, it would be difficult to legally
justify denying this request.
Mr. Thomas moved to deny the subdivision until a connection was made between
Westmoreland Drive south to Route 277. This motion was seconded by Mr. Ours, however, it
was defeated by the following vote:
YES (TO DENY THE REQUEST): Thomas, Ours
NO: Stone, Light, Copenhaver, Marker, DeHaven, Wilson, Romine, Morris
Mr. Marker moved and Mr. Stone seconded to approve the subdivision with a
statement of concern, however, that the connection from Warrior Road to Route 277 needed to
be addressed. It was noted that within the next two months, Mr. Maddox will be bringing in two
more sections with 30-40 additional houses and the traffic is already overwhelming on
Westmoreland.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby approve
Subdivision Application #001-96 of Fredericktowne Estates, Sections 12 and 13, to subdivide
an 11.3496 acre tract into 30 residential lots by majority vote. A statement of concern was
included that the connection from Warrior Road to Route 277 was urgently needed to handle
increasing residential and construction traffic.
The subdivision was approved by the following majority vote:
YES (TO APPROVE): Stone, Light, Copenhaver, Marker, DeHaven, Wilson, Romine, Morris
NO: Thomas, Ours
Mr. Marker requested that at each Planning Commission meeting, starting in the
next two weeks and from then on, that the Commission receive a report regarding the status of
this. Mr. Marker requested that a report be made, not just at the next meeting, but at all future
meetings until this situation is worked out. Mr. Thomas said that he would also like to be assured
that this subdivision is consistent with the approved master development plan.
9
Subdivision Application #002-96 of Premier Place for a request to subdivide a five -acre tract
into four lots. This property is located on the west side of U.S. Route 522 South, north and
west of the intersection of US. Route 522 and VA Route 645, and is identified as PIN 64 -A -
10A in the Shawnee Magisterial District.
Action - Recommended Approval
Mr. Miller gave the background information and review agency comments. He
said that the County Engineer indicates that the location of storm water management facilities and
storm water easements need to be designated. Mr. Miller stated that there was not an approved
master plan for this tract and waiver of master plan requirements was recommended. He
explained that the street to serve the property has already been constructed and leaves little
flexibility in how the property can be divided.
Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin, with G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc., the engineering
firm representing the owner/applicant, Glaize & Brothers, came forward to present the
subdivision. Mr. Gyurisin said that the existing street, built to state standards in 1988, was never
placed into the states system because of the requirement for three businesses on a dedicated street.
Mr. Gyurisin said that due to a lack of maintenance over the years, some work will need to be
done to the road to bring it up to standards for inclusion in the states system. He noted that this
is a commercial piece of property with two businesses in model homes and a third business will
be locating on the third lot.
The Commissioners had no outstanding concerns with the subdivision, but did
comment about the odd shape of the property.
Upon motion made by Mr. Morris and seconded by Mr. Romine,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously
recommend approval of Subdivision Application #002-96 of Premier Place for the subdivision of
a five -acre tract into four lots with the stipulation that all review agency comments be complied
with prior to final administrative approval. The Commission also waived the requirements for a
master development plan as permitted under Section 165-123C of the Frederick County Code.
Draft of the Work Program for the Department of Planning & Development
Mr. Watkins presented a draft of the Work Program for the Department of Planning
and Development for 1996-1997. Mr. Watkins said that any comments or suggestions for
inclusion in the work program would be welcomed.
10
Adjournment
There being no further business to discuss, Chairman DeHaven adjourned the
meeting at 8:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert W. Watkins, Secretary
Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman
BIMONTHLY REPORT OF PENDING APPLICATIONS
(printed April 19, 1996)
REZONINGS:
Richard L. & Nancy S.
Heise (REZ #003-96)
Back Creek 1.43 ac. from RA to B2 for self -
storage warehouse units
Location:
2 mi. W. of 37; on So. Side of Rt. 50; approx. 220' W.
of Rt. 654 (Poorhouse Rd)
Submitted:
04/04/96
PC Review:
05/01/96
BOS Review:
06/12/96 - tentatively scheduled
Dr. Raymond L. Fish (REZ
#002-96)
Stonewall 4 ac. B2 to B3/ 7.3 ac. RA to B3
animal hosp. & bevera a warehs
Location:
So. East corner of I-81 & Rt. 672 intersection; Clrbrook
Submitted:
04/02/96
PC Review:
5/01/96
BOS Review:
06/12/96 - tentatively scheduled
Woodside Est. (REZ)
Opequon 36.4589 Acres from RA to RP for
s.f. residential lots
Location:
West side of Double Churches Rd (Rt. 641), south of
the intersection w/ Fairfax Pk (Rt. 277)
Submitted:
11/15/95
PC Review:
12/06/95 - Recommended Denial
BOS Review:
02/13/96 Tabled for unspecified period at applicants
r
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS:
Dr. Raymond Fish (MDP)
Stonewall
Garden Apartment Units
(rental) on 14.59 acres (RP)
Animal Hospital & Mobile
Office Sales on 20.93 acres (B2
& B3)
Location:
East side of I-81 and south side of Rt. 672
Submitted:
11/02/95
02/21/96 - Recommended Approval
PC Review:
01/03/96 -
Recommended Approval
BOS Review:
01/24/96 -
Approved
Pending Admin. Approval: j
Awaiting completion of easement plat for water line ext.
Preston Place Apts. Phase
H (MDP)
Shawnee
Garden Apartment Units
(rental) on 14.59 acres (RP)
Location:
No. Side of Airport Rd. (Rt. 645)
Submitted:
01/29/96
PC Review:
02/21/96 - Recommended Approval
BOS Review: ---]03/13/96
- Tabled by BOS for unspecified time.
Whitehall Business Pk
(Flying J) (MDP)
Stonewall
Business Pk on 52.04 Ac. (Ml &
B3)
Location:
So. West quadrant of I-81 & Rt. 669 intersection
Submitted:
01/31/96
PC Review:
02/21/96 - Recommended Approval
BOS Review:
02/28/96 -Approved
Pending Admin. Approval:
Awaiting completion of review agency requirements.
2
Hili Valley (MDP)
Shawnee
54 SF Det. Cluster; 26.123 Ac.
(RP)
Location:
N.W. Corner of Valley Mill & Greenwood Rds.
Submitted:
11/15/95
PC Review:
03/06/96 - Recommended Approval
BOS Review:
Not yet scheduled.
SUBDIVISIONS:
Valley Mill Estates (SUB)
Stonewall
1 21 SF Trad. Lots (RP)
Location:
No. Side of Valley Mill Rd. & East of Greenwood Rd.
Submitted:
10/23/95
PC Review:
11/15/95 - Approved
BOS Review:
Review not required --Has an approved MDP
Pending Admin. Approval:
Awaiting bonding, signed plats, & deed of dedication
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
PC Review:
10/04/95 Approved
BOS Review:
Review not required --Has an approved MDP
Pending Admin. Ap roval
Awaiting signed plats.
RT&T Partnership (SUB)
Back Creek
1 Lot - 29.6 Acres (B2)
Location:
Valley Pike Kt. i i So.'
Submitted:
05/17/95
PC Review:
06/07/95 Approved
BOS Review:
Review not required—has an approved MDP
Pending Admin. Approval:
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
PC Review:
Review date pending atapplicant's request.
BOS Review:
Review not required—has an approved MDP
Abrams Point, Phase I
(SUB)
Shawnee
230 SF Cluster & Urban Lots
I (RP)
Location:
South side of Rt. 659
Submitted:
05/02/90
PC Review:
06/06/90 Approved
BOS Review:
06/13/90 Approved
Pending Admin. Approval:
Awaiting deed of dedication, letter of credit, and signed
plat
Harry Stim son (SUB)
O e uon
Two B2 Lots
Location:
Town Run Lane
Submitted:
09/23/94
PC Review:
10/19/94 A proved
BOS Review:
10/26/94 Approved
Pending Admin. Approval:
Awaiting signed plat.
SITE PLANS:
Valley Mill Apts. (SP #020-
96)
Shawnee 76 -unit apartment development
on 7.684 acres (RP)
Location:
Corner of Rt. 658 & Rt. 659
Submitted:
04/12/96
Approved: =11Pendin
Pending
Stonewall Elem. School (SP
#019-96)
Stonewall School Bldg; developing 8.22 ac.
of a 10.0122 ac. parcel (RA)
Location:
3165 Martinsburg Pike, Clearbrook
Submitted:
04/11/96
Approved:
Pending
American Legion Post #021
(SP #018-96)
Stonewall Addition to post home on a
3.4255 acre site (B2)
1730 Berryville Pike
Location:
Submitted:
04/10/96
Approved:
Pendin
Ft. Collier Indust. Pk.
Lease Bldg #3 (SP #017-96)
Stonewall Warehouse/Indust. on 4.24 ac.
1 of a 10.95 ac. site (Ml)
Location:
660 Brooke Road
Submitted:
04/08/96
Approved:-----
L Pending
C.E.D. Enterprises, Inc.
(SP)
Back Creek
Bldg. Addit. for mineral
process-ing on 0.27 ac. of a
10.00 ac. site
Location:
221 Sand Mine Road
Submitted:
03/27/96
Approved:
Pending
Glaize Truss Components
Shawnee 1,188 sq.ft. Addition; 19.4 acres
(Ml)
Location:
2749 Victory Lane
Submitted:
03/22/96
11 Approved:
Pending
AeroCenter Business Pk
(B.I. Chemical) (SP)
Shawnee Warehouse/Office on 3.12 acres
(Ml)
Location:
Lot 2; So.West corner of Victory Ln. & Arbor Ct.
Submitted:
03/20/96
11 Approved:
Pending
Toan & Assoc./Noland
Pro'. (Const. Mgt.) (SP)
Stonewall
Distribution Warehouse on 0.2
ac. of a 4.17 ac. site (MI)
Location:
Stonewall Industrial Pk., Lot 14, Tyson Drive
Submitted:
03/ 14/96
Approved:
04/11/96
Senseny Rd. Elem. School
Addition (SP)
nee
School Addition on 3.0 ac. of a
9.7 ac. site (RP)
Location:
ensen Road
r03/
Submitted:
96
Approved:
Dominion Knolls (SP)
Stonewall
Townhouses on 20.278 ac. (RP)
Location:
Intersection of Baker Lane and Gordon Street
Submitted:
02/21 /96
Approved:
Pending
Pegasus Business Center,
Phase I (SP)
Shawnee
Office, Misc. Retail, Business on
2.5 ac of a 6.0623 ac site (B2)
Location:
434 Bufflick Road
Submitted:
02/14/96
Approved:
Pending
AT&T P.O.P. Bldg. (SP)
Stonewall
Bldg. Addition on 0.10 ac. Of a
0.19 acre site (RP)
Location:
2032 Martinsburg
Pike (US 11)
Submitted:
02/13/96
Approved -
Pending
Hardees Mobile Oil Con-
venience Center (SP)
Back Creek Conven. Cntr/Rest. on a 1.0727
ac. site (RA) (CUP #011-95)
ration:
Southeast comer of Rt. 50 West and Ward Avenue
Submitted:
12/20/95
Approved:
Pending
D.K. Erectors &
Maintenance, Inc. (SP)
Gainesboro
Indust Sery/Steel Fabrication on
a 10 acre site (M2)
Location:
4530 Northwestern Pike
Submitted:
12/28/95
Approved:
Pending
Regency Lakes, Sect. E
(SP)
Stonewall
95 units on 28.0 acres (M][11)
Location:
North of Regency Lakes Drive
Submitted:
10/27/95
Approved:
Pending
Wheatlands Wastewater
Facility (SP)
Opequon Treatment Facility on 5 Acres
I (R5)
Location:
So.West of Double Tollgate; ad'. & west of Rt. 522
Submitted:
09/12/89
Note:
Being held atapplicant's request.
Flex Tech (SP)
Stonewall
MI 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:
l 96)
°I David A. Keller (CUP 003-105/22/96
G ainesboro Comm. Outdoor Ree. Facility -
Archery Range (RA)
Location:
Off Rt. 671 in Shocke sville
Submitted:
04/05/96
PC Review:
05/01/96
BOS Review:
Robt. E. Rose Memorial
Foundation, Inc. (CUP)
Stonewall Home for Adult Care (RP)
Location:
549 Valley Mill Road
Submitted:
03/06/96
PC Review:
04/03/96- Recommended Approval
BOS Review:
04/24/96
Howard A. Pohn (CUP)
Cottage Occupation -
Blacksmith Shop (RA)
Location:
oad
Submitted:
LCattail
Review:
commended Approval
BOS Review:
roved
VARIANCES
Robert & Kathy Emmons
Stonewall
5' front setback variance for a
single family residence (RP)
Location:
Corner of Sensen Rt. (Rt. 657) & Anderson Street
Submitted:
03/22/96
BZA Review:
04/16/96 - Approved
Andrew J. Maguschak
Back Creek 10.73' front yd. variance for an
addition to residence
Location:
Intersection of Manor Dr. & Greenway Ct; Highview
Manor, Lot 16
Submitted:
03/21/96
BZA Review:
04/16/96 - Approved
10
PC REVIEW: 5/1/96
BOS REVIEW: 5/22/96
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #003-96
DAVID A. KELLER
Outdoor Recreation Facility
Archery Range
LOCATION: This property is located at 195 Holiday Road (Route 69 1) in Shockeysville.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 8-A-16
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District; Land Use:
Residential and Vacant
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RA (Rural Area) District; Land Uses:
Residential and Vacant
PROPOSED USE: To establish an archery range business.
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Dept. of Transportation: No objection to a conditional use permit being
issued for this property provided all access to the business is from the end of Route 691,
Health Department: As Mr. Keller will not be using his residence for sewage disposal
and will use a "Porta -Potty" for the archery shoots, the health department has no
objection to the proposed conditional use permit.
Inspections Department: No comment or building permit required. No construction
involved.
Fire Marshal: No comments.
David A. Keller CUP #003-96
Page 2
April 19, 1996
Planning and Zoning: The proposed outdoor recreation use is permitted with an
approved conditional use permit. A visit was made to this proposed site on April 18,
1996. It does not appear that permitting this use would have any negative impact on the
neighborhood. There is a cemetery and church adjacent to the property to the west.
Because of the location of the entrance road into the property, it does not appear that an
archery target could be located so as to cause a problem on the adjacent property. It
should be suggested that any targets be arranged to preclude any stray arrows from
impacting on adjoining property. Parking will need to be provided for customers if this
permit is approved.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR 5/1/96 MEETING: This request appears to meet all of
the ordinance requirements necessary to permit approval. If approved, the following conditions
are suggested:
1. Maximum allowable hours of operation shall be from sunrise to sunset Monday
through Saturday and from 12:00 noon to sunset on Sunday.
2. A designated parking area must be provided for customers.
3. All targets shall be located so as to insure that stray arrows do not impact on adjoining
properties.
4. Range activities shall be supervised by the owner or a qualified employee at all times
while in use.
File: K.\WP\CNINICOMMENTS\KELLER.CUP
Location Map for PIN: 8—A-16
CUP #003-96, David Keller
�! "C
1. ApDJ
NAME:
ADDRESS:
Submittal DeadlineL - , Z
P/C Meeting S _ t _qC
BOS Meeting _
Ci _ ; !
APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONS USE PERMIT
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
/1P X403-1?4-
ant (The applicant if the (� _ owner other)
TELEPHONE S y 1 V �V
2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties in interest of
the property:
71
3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and
include the route number of your road or street)
mti1�� �c,rt t q�i�31neS�4r a �A s
IS
SA0CkeYsvill e,
.4. The propert has a road frontage of 3 O feet and a
depth of . '� Ll feet and consists of �('0 acres.
(Please be exact)
5. The property is owned by Q Ll 10 as
evidenced by deed from recorded
(previous owner)
in deed book no. S on page�j I - as recorded in the
records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, County of
Frederick.
6. 14 -Digit Property Identification No.
Magisterial District Dere-C�l�f'1 -
Current Zoning RA
7. Adjoining Property:
USE ZONING
North
East
South
West
8. The type of use proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept.
before completing)
A r grIf,
9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be
constructed:
10. The following are all of the individuals, firms, or
corporations owning property adjacent to both sides, rear and
in front of, (also across street from) the property where
requested use will be conducted. (Continue on back if
necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this
application: (PLEASE LIST COMPLETE 14 -DIGIT NUMBER.
NAME
1R
5
Address
N A Sy
!41
Property
ID#
Address
Property
ID# �Y',
Address
E�
Property
ID#
irwi A
Address
'�� ?� S�1 • C �
t
Property
ID#
Address
Property
ID#
Address
Property
ID#
1R
5
12. Additional comments, if any:
I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application
and petition the governing body of Frederick County, Virginia to
allow the use described in this application. I understand that the
sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed
at the front property line at least seven (7) days prior to the
first public hearing and maintained so as to be visible until after
the Board of Supervisors' public hearing. Your application for a
Conditional Use Permit authorizes any member of the Frederick
County Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors or Planning and
Development Department to inspect your property where the proposed
use will be conducted.
Signature of Applicant <D Ct A,
of Owner
Owners' Mailing Address
Owners' Telephone No.
TO BE COMPLETED BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
USE CODE:
RENEWAL DATE:
V �u 3
3 b+ 'o ,o
to •o
\.? �• r is ���. L o
"' ;z `� Uel 1M P��Ui:-::ID ►' t.�,•,,'/
a i0-11
-
`- � LST `8
•rix
0
o� r,_�. ��!3% Ft-)z P76
++ y D N R y i v
�► �•.. a 5yLv/A
14 q
'•i' is-4s'..
Rte' S ACRE5 { ° F�•�
V is14
y `
CL , a w �y+ �'* I• {� �j�f` 1 ` , ac's /.1 �� —*m X PR A 00 '00060
OLY�Ol6c '
X
ACk
1l �� .ET /! 99888
SITS►-
ar V i l.
to D G
oN to
a
aN
-four
WLL
Q' l� !e C tr t n�Gac8 • RITTER ::TAIN PRDPzTJESr; Q
CD;
L
cr
� C�� hlf� ay. Y!• p. J9� �J M ..�i - V
godgot
fns o� a
3a
SNocK�Ys v1t! c .St`a18 wr�nrP
PC REVIEW DATE: 5/l/96
REZONING APPLICATION #002-96
Dr. Raymond L. Fish
(Kingdom Farm)
To Rezone 4.7 Acres from B2 (Business General) to B3 (Industrial Transition)
and 7.3 Acres from RA (Rural Area) to B3 (Industrial Transition)
LOCATION: This property is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Interstate 81 and
Route 672 in Clearbrook.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: PINS 33-A-164, 33 -A -164C and 33-A-165
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned B2 (Business General) and RA (Rural Areas);
Land Use: Vacant
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas); Land Use:
Residential
PROPOSED USE: Animal Hospital and Beverage Warehouse
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
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
entrance and street designs, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Manual,
5th Edition for review. Any work performed on the state's right-of-way must be covered
under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee
and surety bond coverage.
Fire Marshal: Applicant is requested to adhere to Capital Facilities Impact model for Fire
and Rescue proffers.
Dr. Raymond L. Fish REZ #002-96
Page 2
April 17, 1996
Fire Chief: Request retaining pond or above -ground water storage for fire department use
be constructed, size to be determined by Fire Marshal's office.
Health Department: The Health Department has no objection to the proposed rezoning.
Applicant will be required to have sewage disposal permits for each lot prior to subdivision
or issuance of building permits.
EngineeringTublic Works: We have completed our review of the proposed rezoning of the
property designated as Parcels 33 -A -164C and 33-A-165 from B2 and RA respectively, to
B3. We do not have any specific objection or comments related to this rezoning. However,
some of the same comments made during our review of the preliminary master development
plan will be applied to the rezoned property at the time of the submission of individual site
plans. A copy of these comments are attached for your review. See attached letters from
Ed Strawsnyder dated April 10, 1996 and November 27, 1995.
Coun jy Attorney: Proffers appear to be in proper form.
�h
Planning & Zoning:
Location: The property referenced by the application is outside of both the Urban
Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). There is a water
line along Route 11 to the east of the subject property. The property is in very close
proximity to the Interstate 81 /Route 672 interchange and has frontage along the Winchester
and Western Railroad. Interstate 81 and the rail line tend to isolate the parcel from uses to
the east and west.
Site Suitability: There is a portion of the property that would be considered flood plain
and/or wetlands along Clearbrook Run. This area will need to be delineated prior to any
development of the tracts. There appear to be no other environmentally sensitive areas as
defined by the Zoning Ordinance present on the site.
Dr. Raymond L. Fish REZ #002-96
Page 3
April 17, 1996
The Comprehensive Plan makes a number of statements related to future business and
industrial areas. Two that appear relevant are:
► "Though some business and industrial uses are located outside of the Urban
Development Area and Sewer and Water Service Area, in the future
proposals for such uses outside of these service areas should be given careful
consideration."
► "New industrial uses should be located near interchanges and in the vicinity
of the existing industrial areas and parks where appropriate access and
facilities are available. These areas should be in the form of carefully
planned industrial parks. In general, industrial development will follow the
Interstate 81 and rail corridors."
Potential Impacts: Though the area is outside of the UDA and SWSA, four of the 12.02
acres are already zoned Business General (132), as is a separate parcel lying adjacent and to
the north. Impacts anticipated as a result of Industrial Transition Zoning as opposed to
Business General would be limited. Many of the uses permitted within the B2 zone would
be expected to generate more traffic than a number of the B3 uses. The parcel also has
excellent access to the interstate which should help to reduce traffic impacts to surrounding
properties. Given the nature of the surrounding uses, the relative isolation of the parcel, and
the existing B2 zoning, the impacts of the rezoning on surrounding properties should be
minimal.
The applicant has proffered $1,413.00 (to be paid prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for any use on the property) for impacts to the Clearbrook Fire and Rescue
Company. This amount was based on 10.3 acres which was the original information
provided by the applicant. The revised acreage figure is 12.02 acres which results in the
projection of a greater impact to emergency services. The resulting projection from the
impact model is $1650.30.
The applicant has not addressed the Fire Company's request for some method of above-
ground storage of water for fire suppression purposes.
Dr. Raymond L. Fish REZ #002-96
Page 4
April 17, 1996
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR 05\01\96 PC MEETING: Approval contingent upon
applicant satisfactorily addressing impacts to Fire and Rescue, and providing required application
materials.
APR -J
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Public Works Department
Harvey F Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E.
Director
April 10, 1996 540/665-5643
Fax 540/678-0682
Dr. Raymond L. Fish
174 Warm Springs Road
Winchester, Virginia 22603
RE: Rezoning Request - Kingdom Farm
Frederick County, Virginia
Dear Dr. Fish:
We have completed our review of the proposed rezoning of the property designated as
parcels 33 -A -164C and 33-A-165 from B-2 and RA respectively, to B-3. We do not have any
specific objection or comments related to this rezoning.
However, some of the same comments made during our review of the preliminary master
development plan will be applied to the rezoned property at the time of the submission of
individual site plans. A copy of these comments are attached for your review.
HES:rls
Attachment: as stated
cc: Planning and Zoning
file
Sincerely,
41
Harvey trawsnyder, Jr., E.
Director Public Works
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Public Works Department
Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E.
Director
November 27, 1995 703/665-5643
Fax: 703/678-0682
Mr. Keith H. Burr
Greenway, Inc.
970 Baker Lane
Winchester, Virginia 22603
RE: Dr. Raymond Fish
Preliminary Master Development Plan
Frederick County, Virginia
Dear Keith:
We have reviewed the proposed Master Development Plan for Dr. Raymond Fish and
offer the following comments:
1) The proposed stormwater management area may have to be split to accommodate
development on the north and south sides of Clearbrook Run.
2) It appears that wetlands exist adjacent to Clearbrook Run. This area
should be delineated to verify that any impact would be less than one acre.
3) The 100 year flood plain associated with Clearbrook Run should be delineated on.
the Master Development Pian. The backwater effect created by the culvert under
the Winchester Western Railroad should be considered when delineating the flood
plain.
Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions regarding the above comments.
HES:mIh
cc: file
Sincerely,
-- — �� �t—
Harvey E. wsnyder, Jr., P.E.
Director of Public Works
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Location Map for:
Rezoning ,002--96,
PIN: 33-A-164, 164C, 165
Dr. Fish
REZONING APPLICATION FORM
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
To be completed by Planning Staff?
Zoning Amendment Number Date Received ' �- 2-6
BOS Hearing Date—u5 ' ,2 -�6 PC Hearing Date
The following information shall be provided by the applicant:
-;t`0 0.2 – v
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: ,I,, C.L(D m J -Ca -f
Nam .
Address: '7 y VkL(- nn
W e VA 2 C.o 0 3
Telephone: S U CJ > L¢ '-1 -! y 5 y
2. Representative:
vk C rt e P t^ I' n
Telephone:
3. Owner:
Name:_ U r- C k-Vl M ('S
Address: 1 1-7 11 k a
0 ACX �—('S
r e'\1 11 S --?
a-sp-r-t, I -J
.,
\u
Telephoner 4U ,J(_p C,0 r — Lj
12
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:
1
4. Zoning Change: It is requested that the zoning of the property be changed
from B" � _ to
13 3
5. Current Use of the Property:
Y Ct. C (,L A �-
6. Adjoining Property:
PARCEL ID NUMBER
_ P. a amu. c /-, .e Y
(3-3
USE
ZONING
7. Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from
nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers):
13
S. Parcel Identification:
14 Digit Tax Parcel Number: 3J 3- 3 3 - - (_p C, )33-14-1(
9. Magisterial District:
10. Property Dimensions: The dimensions of the property to be rezoned.
Total Area: 11 3 Acres
The area of each portion to be rezoned to a different zoning district category should be noted:
Acres Rezoned from r..3 --Z to f3 - 3
7• 3 Acres Rezoned from to—f3 - 3
Acres Rezoned from to
Acres Rezoned from to
11. Deed Reference: The ownership of the property is referenced by the following deed:
Conveyed from: 3 . S rru—s
Deed Book Number 3 CI U Paacs 5.3
�yyC'cQ Lir%, �.� ' hi*o I a-y\a sR q �uu.r- ICr, ►�/ X15 K -fur "t
�e �3aoK Nt�,�►oq r3 e 3
12. Proposed Use: It is proposed that t c property will be put to the following uses.
— f 5 (U ar,n
- Fe (\k� d
I,tcj
(k Ce,ha k) -2-
13. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application.
Location map
Plat
Deed to property _
Suitement verifying taxes paid
Agency Comments
Fees
Impact Analysis Statement
Proffer Statement
LZI
14. Sibnature:
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 t is application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to
the best of my (oury owlc ge. 17 ,1
Applicant:
Owner.
Date:
15
I
ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS
Owners of properly adjoining the land proposed to be rezoned will be notified of (lie public hearing. For
the purposes of this application, adjoining property is any property abutting the requested property or any
property directly across z roped fruit: the requested pruperty. The applicant is required io obtain the
following inlormation on each adjoining property including the 14 -digit property identification number
which may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Department.
Name
Address :end Property Identification
1. WAVSrZL-I FHIm
Address. o?SG tu,9vF-,eGy .e.D
(f r %1,4 a�625t
Property ill:
6Ta/v£W14LL ELFM Xd/100
Address: /, ®, 1jex 3SDB Al
as 6
w/eVC,q 9 :5 770e 0,14 0
Property 117:
3. ,� le,"vN
Address: 41/4L J,e
S7-�,o sf SNS (1171$ 4/.4 ww-?1764-V—
Property 11): 33 /4 11-d7l 49
. �?GeN� �5Gv/�•C'i�� L/�
Address:
�L ,( 3,e4-o,e bs, aa6 a
Property 11): g5 ,q // SZ Ig
Address: 1613Q .::: Z4 v voU A-1 VT
w/AJCH S716,1e, 444 ad 60 /
Properly 117:
�Gta. ri`ik"/11
Address:o?Q /6p�1�/iLGb
4Z
Property 11): 39 e4 /6V,-9
. eoRy �5L4FN PIC/( 1JM
Address:
�- 7;74 1/ ALLAN 7?9,eWFa
- a7w6-V jl
Property 11): 33 ,q / 9
3. --/1-9dlr 4 W�1%tM, Set;
Address: 02 041tf /%%W,Eir/Vs
s71F P� n/svrr -✓�- aa�s�
Property I D: 334 /4� .D
9. /•(,/J 19f/ILy AUC
Address: 144 l'o Twa1- D Ci"
sr��, >✓n/5 e/7"y, 09L 07a6 ss
�- _S,>AW F 19AIIYL /ail
,eL446L,,f TJSa/1/
Property ll):_
17
J
I-)
18
Nance
Address and Property Identification
10. 5'702 NEltii9GL
Address: wok
Property ID: /Vy /9
IL Z!%' vl�F.eGY ,c'f1.C.'/� 1
Address: x.5"6 Au6ye ez RD
/?.I G - _v 10,i i Izz, -n -1 i
i rT of ce (O O( 176
Property ID: go
12.
Address:
Property ID:
13.
Address:
Property ID:
14.
Address:
Property ID:
15.
Address:
Property ID:
16.
Address:
Property ID:
17.
Address:
Property ID:
18.
Address:
Property ID:
19.
Address:
Property ID:
0.
Address:
Property ID:
18
0. Z8 Ac.
t
i eJ
e-
�,yd •�
X17 'V 47��� ,
m ^ T�e rn
� v
J �
941 /
HVA 'OPE. TEL �A o /
�,* -5'77-o
6 iZ i
v�g- n s
0 ? ►` 1
AW.0 . X.4n n• .,
v n 2.37'
N N Oi +
V ^ P P.
m
43
o
41 /v
+( y 6o tNAV
N X14
�U FzVEIt'of�'S N OTE
THI�i Pi -AT Ne>T
IAF i -e,5 E N T o F- G E 127 i F Y
A DoUN1>ArZY
DENOTES Atz-eA-i To 13E
• � f2� Zo N E t7 !3 - 3 .
,^ r
FLAT SHovviNG
P 12c� Po5 E t� fZE Z O N I N G
ON 7 L= LAN d of
t7R . $ZA%(NAC> H d F 1<7 H
SToNEV,�Al--1- DISTIziGT- FIZffPC-F -IGK G, C?UM7Y, \/112G/N1A
SCALE : I "= 3t5l,'I DATE
GREENWAY, INC.
970 Baker Lane. Winchester, Virginla 22603 (5qz 662-4185
H. Bruce Edens, L.S. - President
SURVEYING - DESIGNING - PLANNING
RE3MNTIAL . AGRICULTURAL - COMMERCIAL , INDUSTRIAL • CONSTRUCTION
Q y
H' UUGE EDI car
;o. 0001616
e� S�
SHEET I of
DRAFT
03/20/96
Frederick County Board of Supervisors
Frederick County Planning Commission
9 Court Square
Winchester, VA 22601
Reference: Kingdom Farm
1092 Hopewell Rd.
Clear Brook, VA 22624
Frederick County, VA
We the undersigned, sole owners of the lands to be rezoned under
rezoning request number , (hereinafter the "Property")
referred to as the Kingdom Farm rezoning, and the applicants
for said rezoning, hereby voluntarily proffer the following
conditions. The conditions proffered shall be binding on the
heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors in
interest of both the applicant and owners. In the event the
Frederick County Board of Supervisors grants said rezoning and
accepts these conditions, the following proffered conditions
shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to the other
requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code:
1. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy related
to any improvements placed on the Property by the applicant,
it will pay to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. the
sum of $1413.00 to be used for the purposes of the fire
company.
OWNERS:
K
IN7FARM
Dr. Ra.vmond L. Fish
Iris Joy Fish
IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT
Dr. Raymond L. Fish
March 13, 1996
INTRODUCTION
This parcel of land is located in Stonewall Magisterial
District, at the southeast corner of the junction of
Interstate 81 and State Route 672. It is bounded on the west
by I - 81, on the north by State Route 672, on the east by the
Winchester and Western Railroad, and on the south by vacant
land owned by the Stonewall District Ruritan Club.
The parcel consists of 3 tracts. Parcel "A" is repre-
sented as tax map No. 33 - A - 164C. Parcel "B" is 4.93 acres,
represented as tax map No. 33 - A - 164. Parcel "C", 7. acres,
represented as tax map no. 33 - A - 165.
The proposed zoning for a 4 acre tract of Parcel "A"
would convert from B-2 to B-3. Parcel "C" zoned R -A, would
become B-3 as well. Parcel "B" would remain zoned B-2. All of
the subject land is presently unused.
J
OrNOa�:<< i
IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT
Dr. Raymond L. Fish
March 13, 1996
A. SUITABILITY OF SITE:
1. 100 Year Floodplain - None of the property is located
within the 100 year floodplain according to the Freddrick
County Comprehensive Plan.
2. Wetlands - There are no wetlands on the property
except between the creek banks. Some surface water accumu-
lation does occur on both sides of entrance due to partial
occlusion of R R culvert. This is to be addressed by building
of new access road.
3. Steep Slopes - There are no steep slopes on the
property.
4. Mature Woodlands - There are no mature woodlands
except for a few scattered large trees along the creek bank
and fence row.
5. Prime Agricultural Soils - The soil on this tract was
probably once considered prime agricultural but has some years
ago been designated for commercial use due to proximity to
Interstate 81.
6. Soil or Bedrock Conditions - There are some ledges of
limestone running across the northern end of the property.
These have not proven to be a problem with previous
construction on the site. Soils are Massanetta to Oaklet silty
clay loam.
l
B. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES - The property is bounded on the
west by Route 81, on the north by S.R. 672, on the east by the
Winchester & Western R.R. and on the south by vacant land
belonging to the Stonewall Ruritan Club. The nearest residence
is some 200 feet from the eastern property line.
C. TRAFFIC - Ingress & Eggress from the property is from S.R.
672. According to Va. Dept. of Transportation tabulation, the
daily trip count on this section of Rt. 672 is 1,652 per day.
It is unlikely that B3 zoning would generate any higher count
than B2 development and could even result in fewer trips than
B2.
D. SEWAGE TREATMENT - There are presently two septic tank/
drainfield systems on the site. It is anticipated that one of
these would accomodate one more B3 type buildings. Previous
soil surveys indicate that one or two more drainfield sites
are present. This is all subject to the approval of the Va.
Health Dept. Any use of the property would be limited to
location of suitable drainfields.
E. WATER SUPPLY - Plans are in progress to tap into the County
water supply on Rt. 11. Present facilities are served by a
well. (See Plat)
F. DRAINAGE - Drainage from the tract is into Clearbrook Run
which traverses the property in generally east and west
direction crossing under the W W Railroad, under Rt. 11, thru
the Clearbrook Park and subsequently the Opequon Creek. Storm
water retention would be provided as needed.
G. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES - Solid waste from the
present business is presently maintained by private
contractor. It is anticipated that this practice would
continue.
H. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES - The nearest structure of
historic significance is the Hopewell Meeting House about 3/4
mile to the west. The rezoning should have no affect on this
structure.
I. ENVIRONMENT - There are no significant environmental
features on the property. Construction of the proposed
development using accepted engineering and construction
practices will pose no threat to ground water, surface water
or air quality.
J. EMERGENCY SERVICES - Clearbrook Fire & Rescue (Co. 13) is
located about 1/2 mile from the site. The additional cost to
emergency services is calculated based on an addition square
footage of space of 7,200 sq. feet, plus the 7 acres of
additional commercial land, to be $1,413.00 according to
Frederick County Zoning Department computer model calculation.
A proffer of that amount is made herewith.
OUTPUT MODULE
Capital
• osts
vire Department
$136
Rescue Department
$507
Elementary Schools
$0
Middle Schools
$0
High Schools
$0
Parks and Recreation
IQ
TOTAL
$643
FIRE AND RESCUE ADDENDUM
New Capital Costs Not
Covered by County
Contributions
Net
Credit for
Fiscal
Taxes to
Impact
Capital
Credit
Costs
$1,042
$5,688,388
$380,098
$22,594
$403,734
$1,550.30
NOTES: Model Run Date 4/1196 EAW
FISH REZONING: Assumes 212,982 square feet of retail on 11.3 acres rezoned from B2 & RA to B3.
Net
IM120
$0
,/37/75
Ag
2• �S'2� X - 16 5a 3 0
PC REVIEW DATE: 5/1/96
REZONING APPLICATION #003-96
Richard L. Heisey and Nancy S. Heisey
To Rezone 1.43 Acres from RA (Rural Area) to B2 (Business General)
LOCATION: This property is located two miles west of Rt. 37, on the south side of Rt. 50 and
approximately 220 feet to the west of Rt. 654 (Poorhouse Road).
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Back Creek District
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 52-A-148 and 52-A-149
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas); Land Use: Unimproved
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas); Land
Use: Residential and Unimproved Shale Pit
PROPOSED USE: Self -storage warehouse units
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Dept. of Transportation: No objections to the rezoning of this property. An
entrance meeting VDOT's minimum commercial design standards must be constructed to
allow for safe egress/ingress prior to operation of any business. All work on the state's
right-of-way must be covered under land use permit. Prior to making any further
comments, this department will require a complete set of construction site plans detailing
entrance design, drainage calculations, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Manual, 5th
Edition for review.
Fire Marshal: Only concern would be the storing of explosives, flammable materials and
hazardous materials. Future use of property under B2 zoning.
Fire Chief See letter from Douglas A. Kiracofe, Fire Marshal, dated 3/7/96.
Richard L. Heisey, REZ #003-96
Page 2
April 12, 1996
Health Department: Health department has no objection as long as there is no
water use or need for sewage disposal as per items 4 & 5 in the enclosed impact
statement.
Engineerin,z/Public Works: We do not have any comments at this time. We reserve
the right to perform a detailed review at the time of the site plan submission.
County Attornev: Once signed by owners, appears to be in proper form.
Planning & Zoning:
1) Project History
The applicant discussed this proposal informally with the Planning Commission on
November 1, 1995. The essence of that discussion focused on the proposed use and its
potential impacts on the Northwestern Pike corridor and the adjoining residential
properties.
2) Location
The property is located on the south side of Northwestern Pike, just west of the
intersection of Poor House Road. The property is located approximately 1.5 miles west of
the Frederick County Urban Development Area and the Water and Sewer Service Area.
The property is located within the area that has been designated as the Round Hill
Community Center. The Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee (CPPC) recently
completed a plan to develop land use policies for this Community Center. The plan
recommends that some commercial and office use be developed along the Northwestern
Pike corridor. The plan also recommends that commercial rezonings should not take place
prior to the provision of public water and sewer service. However, it should be noted that
self-service storage facilities may operate independently of public water and sewer service.
The property is in close proximity to other commercial uses, including two automotive
dealerships, three convenience stores, a model home sales operation, and a small retail
facility containing four businesses and a seasonal ice cream stand. These commercial uses
are located along Northwestern Pike and exist alongside residential uses. Secondary roads
within the proximity of this property are primarily residential in nature.
Richard L. Heisey, REZ #003-96
Page 3
April 12, 1996
3) Site Suitability:
a) Access - The property has a significant amount of road frontage along the
eastbound lane of Northwestern Pike. This will allow for a commercial
entrance to be provided which will meet the requirements of VDOT and
Frederick County. A crossover exists on Northwestern Pike just west of
the property. This crossover will allow for access by westbound traffic
without much difficulty.
b) Topography - The property is gently rolling to the south with the high
point along Northwestern Pike. The impact statement calls for little or no
excavation to develop the site; however, it may require some amount of fill.
The elevation of this property is approximately 8 to 10 feet below the
elevation of Northwestern Pike.
C) Environmental Features - The property maintains some vegetation;
however, there are no woodlands by definition. A drainage way exists
along the eastern portion of this property which drains to the south. The
impact statement suggests that a storm water detention facility will need to
be provided to ensure that post -development stormwater runoff does not
exceed pre -development conditions.
4) Potential Impacts:
Existing residential uses exist to the north, south, and east of this property. Access to this
property will be from Northwestern Pike; therefore, it does not appear that traffic will
impact the residential properties as their access is either on the other side of Northwestern
Pike or along secondary roads. Visual impacts may be realized by the residential
properties to the east of this property. The residential properties sit at a higher elevation
than this property; therefore, buffers and screening and the requirement for a perimeter
fence may not mitigate visual impacts. Visual impacts will be minimized if fill is needed to
bring the property to a closer elevation with Northwestern Pike.
5) Impact Statement:
The applicant has proffered out specific business uses such as automotive dealerships,
gasoline service stations, restaurants, car washes, and child day care facilities, however,
the remainder of the permitted uses in the B-2, General Business District would be
Richard L. Heisey, REZ #003-96
Page 4
April 12, 1996
permitted on this property. The applicant has also proffered to offset the impact to
emergency services by offering a cash proffer to be paid at the time of occupancy of this
site. The cash proffer is consistent with the information provided by the County's Impact
Model. It should be noted that the applicant's impact statement reads that the owner
would participate in a prorate share of the cost of extending sewer service to this area.
However, this is not reflected in the proposed proffer statement.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR 5/1/96 PC MEETING: Approval, based on the provisions
of the applicant's proffer statement, the compatability with the existing uses along Northwestern
Pike, and the minimal impacts to the adjoining residential properties.
Heisey Rezoning Application
# 0307963113
Addendum Comments
The applicant for this rezoning request has addressed the impact on Fire and Rescue
capitol cost impacts in the form of a proffer, in the amount of $400.00, to be paid at the
time of occupancy permit.
It should be noted that there are no hydrants available for fire suppression efforts at this
time, due to the lack of municipal water to this site. In the event of a fire, water would
have to be shuttled, via tanker, from a remote site. This procedure, while often
necessary, is an undesireable fire ground operation. Having to haul limited quantaties of
water, for firefighting purposes severely hampers fire suppression efforts. This factor
often contributes to greater losses, in the event of a fire, than would be the case at a
similiar facility situated near hydrants with adequate water supplies. At such time when
public water is available, I would strongly recommend the installation of hydrants on this
site.
The application implies that 30,546 square feet of building can be built on the site. I
wish to point out that the maximum single area that can be built, without the addition of
fire rated separation walls, for a storage use, is 12,000 square feet. If any single area
between fire walls is to exceed 12,000 square feet, an automatic sprinkler system would
be necessary. Design of the site plan should take into consideration all aspects of the
Uniform Statewide Building Code, pertaining to building separation distances, area
limitations, and rating requirements of exterior walls. These and all other Fire and
Rescue related issues will be addressed at the time of Site Plan submittal.
If there are any questions on this matter, the applicant can contact the Fire Marshal's
Office at 540-665-6350.
7
Douglas A. Kiracofe ✓
Fire Marshal
3/7/96
Location
Map for
PIN.
52—A-148, 149
Rezoning
#003-96,
Richard
Heisey
REZONING APPLICATION FORM
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA # o D :5 _ 9
To be completed by Planning Staff.-
Zoning
taf
Zoning Amendment Number#003- Date Received
BOS Hearing Date S- �Z - q6_ PC Hearing Date
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:
Name: Richard L. Heisey and Nancy S. Heisey
Address: 141 Poorhouse Road
.Winchester, VA 22602
Telephone: (540)665-2056 (RICK at Work - 665-0182)
2. Representative:
Name: Richard L. Heisey (Rick)
Telephone: (540)665-2056 - Home
(540)665-0182 - Work
3. Owner:
Name: Richard L. Heisey and Nancy S. Heisey
0�• Co
ca
Address: 141 Poorhouse Road `a Q`C4��` `LOti
Winchester, VA 22602
Telephone: (540) 665-2056
12
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:
Richard L Heise s and Nancy S. Heisev
4. Zoning Change: It is requested that the zoning of the property be changed
from n- u_
5. Current Use of the Property:
Unimproved
6. Adjoining Property:
PARCEL ID NUMBER USE_ Z NTN
52
0000
A
0000 92
C
Home Remodeling Co.
B2
52
0000
A
0000 92
0
Residence/farmette
RA
52
0000
A
000 151
0
Residence
RA
52
0000
A
000 150
0
Residence
RA
52
0000
A
000 150
A
Used Car Lot
B2
52
0000
8
00000 1
0
Used Car Lot
B2
52
0000
8
00000 2
0
Residence
RA see bottom of page
7. Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from
nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers):
Two miles West of VA Route 37, on the South side of U.S. Route 50, and
approximately 220 feet to the West of VA Route 654 (Poorhouse Road)
G.
(Continued)
52
0000 8 00000
3 0
Residence_
RA
52
0000 8 00000
4 0
Residence
RA
52
0000 8 00000
5 0
Residence
RA
52
0000 8 0000
92 A
Unimproved
Shale Pit RA
13
S. Parcel Identification:
14 Digit Tax Parcel Number. 52 0000 A 000 148 0 / 52 0000 A 000 149 0
9. Magisterial District:
Back Creek District
10. Property Dimensions: The dimensions of the property to be rezoned.
Total Area: 1.43 Acres
The area of each portion to be rezoned to a different zoning district category should be noted:
1.43 Acres Rezoned from_ tor, B2
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: Winchester Outdoor Advertizina CorD.
Deed Hook Number 852 Paces 832-834
12. Proposed Use: It is proposed that the property will be put to the following uses.
Self Storage warehouse units
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
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. _ If
,Applicant:
Owner:
Date:
15
INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED FOR CAPITAL FACILITIES IMPACT MODEL
In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for the applicant to
provide information concerning the specifics of the proposed use. Otherwise, the planning staff will use
the maximum possible density or intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on Page
8 of the application package.
The following information should be provided regardless of the type of rezoning:
Fire Service District: Round Hill Fire Department
Rescue Service District: Rniind Hill Fire nepartmPnt
Total Proposed Non -Residential Lots/Buildings: Four Storage Buildings
The following information should be provided with any residential rezoning:
Elementary School District:
Middle School District:
High School District:
Number of Single Family Dwellings Proposed:
Number of Townhouse Dwellings Proposed:
Number of Multi -Family Dwellings Proposed:
Number of Mobile Home Units Proposed:
NA
NA
The following information should be provided with any commercial/industrial rezoning or with a
residential/commercial (P.U.D.) rezoning:
Gross Office Square Footage:
Retail Square Footage:
Restaurant Square Footage:
Service Station Square Footage:
Manufacturing Square Footage:
Warehouse Square Footage:
Hotel Rooms:
16
30,546Maximum
ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS
Owners of property adjoining the land proposed to be rezoned will be notified of the public hearing. For
the purposes of this application, adjoining property is any property abutting the requested property or any
property directly across a road from the requested property. The applicant is required to obtain the
following information on each adjoining property including the 14 -digit property identification number
which may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Department.
Name
Address and Property Identification
I- Daniel B. Hager III
Address:
122 Blackfeet Trail
Winchester, VA 22602
Property ID: 520000 A 0000 92C
'Timothy A. & Helen H. Hodges
Address:
844 Round Hill Road
Winchester, VA 22602
Property
ID: 520000 A 0000 920
3.
Address:
Richard L. & Nancy S. Heisey
141 Poorhouse Road
Property ID:Winchester, VA 22602
• Mitzi Lee Horton
Address:
157 Snake Drive
Winchester, VA 22603
Property
ID: 520000 A 000 1500
Address:
'Terry K. & Lynne Oates
2835 Northwestern Pike
Winchester, VA 22603
Property
ID: 520000 A QQQ 150A
6-D. Brian & Judy L. Kenny
Address:
2838 Northwestern Pike
Winchester, VA 22603
Property
ID: 520000 8 00000"3 0
-Paul L. & Nancy S. Barbour
Address:
2864 Northwestern Pike
Winchester, VA 22603
Property
ID: 520000 8 00000 2 0
S.
Address:
Deborah Kaye Barbour
c/o 2864 Northwestern Pike
Winchester. VA 22603
Property
f D:
a---
9 -Burl A. & Deloris L. Emmart
Address:
2874 Northwestern Pike
Winchester, VA 22603
Property ID: 520000 8 00000 4 0
17
Name
Address and Property Identification
10.Kimberly Jean Reid Campbell
Address: 259 Hogue Creek Lane
Winchester, VA 22603
Property ID: 520000 8 00000 5 0
11.
Address:.
Nicholson Rental Properties, Ind
1115 Dicks Hollow Road
VAO 603
Property IDWinchester,
2
520000 A 00012.
Address:
Property ID:
13.
Address:
Property ID:
14.
Address:
Property ID:
15.
Address:
Property ID:
16.
Address:
Property ID:
17.
Address:
Property ID:
18.
Address:
Property ID:
19.
Address:
Property ID:
0.
Address:
Property ID:
IN
WINCHESTER - FREDERICK COUNT -Y, VIRGINIA
620
Q'
J�SNERWOOD
Radio 3
FOREST,
�o
G5q
roWEa `
SEE
TNS ET
Bmf
E►uw.�vuct
9jChr►st►aL,Chv►
Rourt o HILLRot,rnu
�tcu
JCO o
't
Rovcto
4S c r�i► rea
c1rn.
_
:..
t�►► �.
c.ow�wv►v ►SY
cEtiT6R
F{os s. �A4.E
6 tiPT-ts r
7 t
ca
u
�
I_uthaMl
c.ho c.k
O
D v
P'ERRYs
QoaR&Y
WINC-dETrLq
s�
50
,u
S �� �ic.Do►taidS
�7
n �=
62 Ij
ak
N tC.�o�sovt CawQb.t( �„w8rt Bat -I., &,6., KeKtt3
U.S. Rour�
I i -t.73 3 YS.,Sy
V4. RouT'E a'n:i R ���s.�� .
10
Loc-6-FION Mprp
Oj
&at19e
�� R f�icl,e(son
6-0
(3 a
307.a4l
a&.31
n
tq�n4� cS�fe
B�
.'q3Ac.. e h
c. �
Rc�kd, [kit
V
�}ssoc•,,d{-s o
ga3ay
d� 9c.
►.5'6 Ac..,
�s
o-
v
o
�.c�,.f'cr
,���
6e7.IJ'ct
a�4
17J r
iiorfe�
b
Rom 2
.Dutilap
I i -t.73 3 YS.,Sy
V4. RouT'E a'n:i R ���s.�� .
10
Loc-6-FION Mprp
Oj
&at19e
�� R f�icl,e(son
PROFFER
REZONING APPLICATION NO. �90
APPLICANT/OWNER: Richard and Nancy Heisey
PROPERTY LOCATION: 1.43 Acres on the South side of U.S. Route 50, about two
miles west of VA Route 37, and about 220 feet West of VA. Route 654.
The undersigned, sole owner of land, and the applicant for rezoning of
under rezoning Request No. -96, hereby voluntarily proffer the following
conditions. The conditions proffered shall be binding upon the assigns and
successors in interest of the applicant. In the event Frederick County Board
Supervisors grants said rezoning and accepts this condition, the following
proffered conditions shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to other
requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code:
land,
of
1. The following shall not be permitted uses under the proposed Business
General (B2) zoning, to wit: automotive dealers and gasoline service stations (SIC
55), restaurants (SIC 58), car washes (SIC 7542), and child day-care facilities
(SIC 8351).
2. There will be no more than one facility for ingress and egress to
property onto U.S. Route 50, and shall be provided in compliance with Virginia
Department of Transportation regulations.
3. All areas not paved or graveled as driveway or parking shall be
landscaped either in trees, shrubs, grass, or flowers. These areas shall be kept
mowed, trimmed, and maintained so as not to have overgrown grass, dead wood,
bramble or overgrowth affecting site visibility for traffic flow.
4.; All electrical, telephone, and cable lines on the property will be
installed underground for aesthetics. The only exceptions will be where such
action is outside the power of the owner to provide, where there are prexisting
conditions, or where prohibited by law.
5. Applicant shall contribute $400.00 toward County Fire and Rescue capital
expenses to offset costs incurred by development of this property. This amount is
to be paid to the County of Frederick at the time of the issuance of the Occupancy
Permit. This amount is based on calculations from the County Fiscal Impact Model
dated 11/27/95.
These proffers shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns
and successors in interest of the owner of this property.
This document shall set forth the total obligation of the applicant to the County
of Frederick in connection with the rezoning of the site. Consequently, the
applicants obligation shall not be subject to future modification or enlargement
without the express written concurrence or consent of the current property
owner(s), applicant or their successorg and assigns.
Property Owners: _ _ _ __� _Date_. 6
Date_._,
)
Subscribed and sworn to before me on this 4 day of 1996
Notary Public
My commission expires:-nC( /�.....-_...
* * * * * * * * *
IMPACT_ STATEMENT FOR..,. ROUND_ HILL .MINISTORAGE.UNITS
INTRODUCTION:
A property owned by Richard and Nancy Heisey. of Round Hill, is the subject
property of this rezoning application. The property lies approximately two miles
West of VA Route 37 on the South side of U.S. Route 50. The proposed usage, a
self -storage facility, will require the rezoning of the 1.43 acre plot from Rural
Areas (RA) to Business General (B2). A location map is enclosed.
The Frederick County Planning Commission requires the submission of an impact
analysis statement addressing a number of important issues which may affect the
neighborhood and the counties' long term plan. The subject property is well suited
for this zoning change. The following analysis will show only nominal impacts on
the surrounding neighborhood and demonstrate an appropriate fit with the county's
long-term plan.
1). SUITABILITY OF THE SITE:
The property under consideration is well suited for the proposed usage.
According to the Community Panel Map #510063-0100-B, (July 17, 1978), the property
falls within Zone C, which is identified as having minimal flooding potential, and
is not in the 100 year flood zone. There are no steep slopes (2 to 7%) and little
or no excavation will be required. According to the Soil Survey of Frederick
County, (USDA Soil Conservation Service) the soil on this property is classified as
being in the Oaklet series. This is a well drained soil with hard bedrock occurring
more than 60" from the surface.
The soil. Oaklet silt loam, is qualified as prime farmland by the Soil Survey,
This particular site has not been used for agricultural purposes in recent history
and the location would not accommodate such use.
This soil type will typically support habitat for wildlife such as grain and
seed crops. Grasses and legumes, wild herbaceous plants, and hardwood and coniferous
trees. However it is rated poor to very poor for wetland plants and shallow water
areas. For openland, and woodland wildlife the conditions of this soil type are
good, but again the rating is very poor for wetland wildlife.
There are no ponds or lakes on the property, however, there is a drainage ditch
from a culvert under U.S. Route 50 which will need to be accommodated in any site
plan. �,
The natural elevation of the land is approximately2 feet above sea level,
(USGS, Winchester Quadrangle, 1929). Because the general elevation of the land is
2' to 6' lower than the adjoining U.S. Route 50 highway, fill will be required to
make access to most development convenient.
2). SURROUNDING PROPERTIES:
The surrounding properties are currently of mixed usage. On either side of the
property are operating business establishments which are zoned B2 and have been used
as such for a number of years. On the opposite side of US. Route 50 is another B2
property and the Nickolson (Buckley -Leges) shale pit (RA zoning). Behind the
property there are three properties zoned RA (Rural Areas), two of which are
residential lots and one 7.8 acre "farmette". Across Route 50 are four properties
zoned RA, three of which are residential homes and one vacant lot. The impact on
these neighborina properties will vary, but in general will be minimal. The
adjoining B2 properties will likely feel the greatest impact by the proposed zoning
chanae, some of which impact may be very positive.
3). TRAFFIC•
The proposed ingress and egress from US Route 50 will be about 495 feet from VA
Route 654. The peak traffic time on US Route 50 is Eastbound between 6:00 and 8:00
on weekday mornings. There is another peak time Westbound between 3:30 and 6:00
weekday evenings. The daily traffic count as provided by the Virginia Department
of Transportation is approximately 16.000 cars per day on U.S. Route 50.
The maximum square footage available for development is 30,546 sq. ft. retail
space (based on 1.43 acres @21,361 sq. ft. per acre). This use would generate
approximately 1242 trip ends per day, according to the 5th edition of the Institute
of Transportation Engineers TRIP GENERATION Report.
The pattern of the proposed usage is typically scattered throughout the day
with a slightly lower usage on weekends. Based on the ITE Report, at the maximum
square foot usage, the proposed mini -storage development will generate approximately
80 trip ends per weekday. Maximun weekend usage would be approximately 72 trip ends
per day.
4). SEWAGE CONVEYANCE -ANA,.. TREATMENT:
There is not a requirement for sewaae disposal in the proposed storaae
facility. However, should sewage service become available as a result of the Round
Hill Community plannina, the owner would participate in a prorate share of the cost
of the sewer extension. Obviously, usage of this property will be limited to those
uses which do not require sewage until such time service becomes available.
5).. WATER SUPPLY:
Because sewaae service is not available, most uses which would otherwise be
suitable in a B2 zone would be prohibited. For that reason, a water supply is
important only for uses not requiring water treatment. Any water would be used only
for building and landscape maintenance and could be supplied by a well on the
property.
6). DRAINAGE•
The development of this property will increase run off because of buildings and
paved areas. There is currently a drainaae culvert under US Route 50 which will
impact on drainage requirements for this property. The water flow from the run off
and from the drainage culvert, will require a storm water retention structure to
limit post -development flows to pre -development levels in accordance with state and
county regulations.
7)., SOLID_ WASTE._DISPOSAL,FACILITIES.;
The proposed usage will not venerate more than nominal solid waste, with the
exception of the building phase. Any waste will be easily handled by the Frederick
County Landfill. There are two county collection points within several miles of the
site, one is the Albin compactor site, and the other is the the compactor at County
Route 817 off Route 50 West.
8,)._. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES:
There is no evidence of historically significant resources at this site. Based
on a site walkover and knowledge of the area, there is no evidence of previous
dwellings or other historical structures on the property. A review of the Frederick
County Rural Landmarks Survey indicates no historically significant structures or
usage on the subject property. There is a non -potable well on the property which
has been used by an adjacent property, and the remains of an unused advertising
billboard from the 1960'x.
9). IMPACT ON COMMUNITY FACILITIES:
The impact on the various services available in the Round Hill community are
nominal. There will be no impact on Educational or Parks and Recreational
facilities since no residential usage is involved. Police surveillance that is
normally carried on along the Route 50 corridor will be adequate for the proposed
usage.
Fire and rescue services are readily available from Round Hill Fire Department,
which is less than one half mile away, however, the proposed usage carries a low
risk of fire hazard. Proper precautions will be taken to mitigate the need for fire
emergency services.
IO). FISCAL IMPACTS:
The operation of the business proposed on this property should generate
tax revenue for the county in several ways. An annual business licences based on
revenue will yield some income for the county. Real Estate taxes will yield
approximately S1100.00 annually based on 5.93/100 compared to the current tax of
approximately $83.
11). OTHER IMPACTS:
The proposed use of this property will provide the Round Hill and Western
Frederick County residents with a service facility which will be easily accessible;
attractive and convenient. The use of this property will greatly improve the visual
appearance and remove what has become an unsightly and illkept piece of land on an
attractive approach to the City of Winchester from the West. This is obviously one
of the very positive impacts on the community at large.
OUTPUT MODULE.
rare Department
Rescue Department
Elementary Schools
Middle Schools
High Schools
Parks and Recreation
TOTAL
FIRE AND RESCUE ADDENDUM
New Capital Costs Not
Covered by County
Contributions
$347.81
NOTES: Model Run Date 11/21/95 - EAW
Heisey Rezoning: Assumes 30,546 square feet of retail use on 1.43 acres zoned B2 from RA.
Net
Credit fog
Fiscal
Taxes to
Capital
I/m►►��p�,a,,..ctt
C/a+,piit�al
Net
Casts
Credit
C'nsL1
1J.LiJ aCt
$38
$149
$0
$74
$0
$0
$54,514
$0
$0
$Q
$3240
$112
$818,111
$57,904
$0
$347.81
NOTES: Model Run Date 11/21/95 - EAW
Heisey Rezoning: Assumes 30,546 square feet of retail use on 1.43 acres zoned B2 from RA.
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, Planner H
RE: Subdivision Ordinance Amendment
DATE: April 16, 1996
During the Planning Commission Retreat in February, it was suggested that certain types of
subdivisions be allowed to be approved administratively. The purpose for this suggestion was to
reduce the time it takes to approve a subdivision of land in areas that are currently planned for
development. The participants at the retreat felt that this would expedite the development plan
review process and eliminate an unnecessary review by the Planning Commission.
Staff presented this proposal to the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS)
in March. This proposal calls for the amendment to Article III, General Provisions, Section 144-
4, Subdivision Administrator, of the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance to establish new
standards for the administrative approval of residential, commercial and industrial subdivisions
that are a part of an approved Master Development Plan. The DRRS felt that the proposed
amendment was a good idea; however, there was concern expressed regarding the ability of the
Planning Commission to review residential subdivision applications. Staff advised the DRRS that
all residential subdivision applications, with the exception of Rural Area subdivisions, appear on
the Planning Commission's Bimonthly Report. Staff felt that this process would provide the
Planning Commission with an opportunity to request a formal review of any pending subdivision
application. Staff also advised the DRRS that a statement was included in the proposed
amendment which allowed the Subdivision Administrator to forward any subdivision plan or plat
to the Planning Commission for formal approval.
Included with this agenda item is the proposed amendment to Section 144-4 of the Frederick
County Subdivision Ordinance. Staff asks that the Planning Commission consider the proposed
amendment and forward a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors for final resolution.
107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 144, SUBDIVISION OF LAND
ARTICLE III, GENERAL PROVISIONS
144-4 Subdivision Administrator
A Subdivision Administrator shall be appointed by the Board of Supervisors and entrusted to
enact, administer and enforce the requirements of this chapter. The Subdivision Administrator
shall have the powers and duties specified in this chapter as authorized by the Board of
Supervisors. The Subdivision Administrator is authorized to administratively approve or
disapprove all divisions of land in the RA, Rural Areas District and all divisions of land in
all other zoning districts that are within an approved master development plan. The
Subdivision Administrator shall have the authority to forward any division of land,
subdivision design plan or final plat to the Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors
for final approval.
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/678-0682
MEMORANDUM1�Q-�
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Planner H
RE: C.E.D. Enterprises, Inc. Reduced Side Yard Setback Request
DATE: April 16, 1996
C.E.D. Enterprises, Inc. has filed a Site Development Pan with Frederick County for the proposed
expansion of their facility. This proposal calls for three phases of development over the next year.
Phase III calls for an expansion of the kiln which will be located 50 feet from the adjoining property
fine. The EM, Extractive Manufacturing District requires structures to be setback a minimum of 100
feet from any property that is zoned RA, RP, R4, R5 or MH1. However, Section 165-88B(1) of the
Zoning Ordinance allows the Planning Commission to reduce the required setback to 50 feet if this
encroachment does not adversely impact the adjoining property.
Staff visited this site to determine the potential impacts to the adjoining properties. The properties
owned by Robert W. Butler and Richard Whetzel are part of a subdivided parent tract referred to as
Earl Haines Lots. The Earl Haines Lots are heavily wooded and were created along a ridge line.
Access to these lots is via Dandelion Lane which is located on the opposite side of the ridge line from
the C.E.D.Enterprises, Inc. facility. The facility is not visible from the existing residences.
Included with this memorandum is a copy of Section 165-88B(1) of the Zoning Ordinance and a copy
of the proposed Site Development Plan. Woodlands have been identified in green on this plan. Staff
asks that the Planning Commission consider this request for final disposition of this matter.
107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
§ 165-88 FREDERICK COUNTY CODE § 165-90
B. Side and rear setbacks. All principle and accessory structures shall be
set back at least twenty-five (25) feet from any side or rear property
boundary.
(1) No structure shall be closer than one hundred (100) feet from any
property line zoned RA, RP, R4. R5 or MH 1. The Planning
Commission may reduce this required setback to fifty (50) feet if
it determines that, through the use of measures, such as
landscaping or screening, the effective protection afforded to
adjacent properties has not been reduced.
(2) Excavations shall be no closer than one hundred (100) feet from
any property zoned RA, RP, R4. R5 or MH 1. No excavation shall
be located closer than two hundred (200) feet from any dwelling
or platted residential subdivision. The Planning Commission may
reduce these required setbacks to fifty (50) feet if it determines
that, through the use of measures. such as landscaping or
screening, the effective protection afforded to adjacent properties
has not been reduced.
(3) All crushing or screening machinery shall be set back at least
three hundred (300) feet from any property boundary. If such
equipment is fully enclosed within a building which maintains the
effective protection afforded adjacent properties, the Planning
Commission may reduce this yard requirement to a minimum of
two hundred (200) feet.
§ 165-89. Height limitations.
No structure shall exceed forty-five (45) feet in height.
§ 165-90. Additional requirements.
All uses in the EM District must conform with all state. federal and local
regulations. All mining operators shall submit to the Zoning Administrator a copy
of the operations plan required by state agencies with the required site plan.
16626