PC 10-02-96 Meeting AgendaAGENDA"
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The Old Frederick County Courthouse
Winchester, Virginia
OCTOBER 2, 1996
7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB
1) Minutes of September 5, 1996 Meeting .................................... A
2) Bi -Monthly Report .................................................... B
3) Committee Reports ................................................... C
4) Citizen Comments .................................................... D
PUBLIC HEARINGS
5) Conditional Use Permit #012-96 of Peggy Ruble to operate a shale mining business.
The property is located at 532 N. Hayfield Road and identified with PIN 29-A-22 in the
Gainesboro Magisterial District.
(Mr. Miller) ............................. E
6) Route 11 North Land Use Plan to consider a Land Use Plan for the Route 11 North
area from Interstate 81, exit 317 to Clearbrook. Among other things, the plan
recommends the extension of the Sewer Water Service Area to encompass the study area
and identifies needed road connections and improvements
(Mr. Lawrence) ...................................................... F
7) Other
MEETING MINUTES
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Courthouse in Winchester,
Virginia on September 5, 1996.
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; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; 'Terry Stone,
Gainesboro District; Roberti A. Morris; Shawnee District; John H. Light, Stonewall . .
District; Jimmie K. Ellington, Gainesboro District; George L. Romine, Citizen at Large;
Robert M. Sager, Board Liaison; Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison; and Jay
Cook, Legal Counsel.
ABSENT: S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee. District
:STAFF PRESENT: Kris C. Tierney; Iiitenm Planning Director; Evan A. Wyatt; Planner -
II; W. Wayne Miller, Zoning AdrAn' . istrator; and Renee" S-. Arlotta, Minutes. Recorder.
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MINUTES - JULY 17, 1996
Upon motion made by Mrs. Copenhaver and seconded by Mr. Marker, the
minutes of July 17, 1996 were unanimously approved as presented.
2
BIMONTHLY REPORT
A question was raised concerning the status of the Flying J operation. Staff
reported that Flying J was still working out the details of their on-site septic disposal and
water system. A question was also raised about the intersection at Sherando. It was
noted that the trailer had been moved and the intersection is scheduled to be realigned
shortly. Commissioners also asked for clarification on the VDOT approved continuation
of renovation at Route 628 in Stephens City. It was noted that this was the 1 1/2mile
section of Middle Road that had never been built.
Chairman DeHaven accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's
information.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) 8/29/96 Mtg.
Mr. Thomas reported that the-DRRS discussed two items: 1) modifying the
zoning requirements to allow self -storage units in industrial park areas; and 2) developing -"
design standards for overlay zones for commercial entrances into the City of Winchester.
Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee (CPPC) - 08/28/96 Work Session
Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the CPPC had a joint work. session with the
Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission. She said that as a result of that
meeting, the staff is obtaining price estimates from the Sanitation Authority to
determine the feasibility of installing sewer service in the Stephenson area, if sewer
service is extended up Route 11.
3
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Conditional Use Permit #007-96 of Robert C. Fowler to operate a commercial
outdoor recreation facility/ shooting range. This property is located at 840 N.
Timber Ridge Road in Cross Junction and is identified with P.I.N. 3-A-18 in the
Gainesboro District. (This item was tabled from 6/5/96.)
Action - Recommended Approval
Mr. Miller stated that this application was heard by the Planning
Commission -on May 6, 1996 and was tabled in order to give the applicant time to take
care of the condition of the dirt road and entrance, the health facilities, and the
submission of a plan that would show a properly constructed shooting range.
Mr. Miller said that during his second visit to the site on August 19, he
observed that a new road had been partially- constructed from North ".Timber Ridge Road
into the site. Mr. Miller said that VDOT has approved the neva entrance location, -.:-
however, the commercial entrance required is still not complete. He stated that work. has "
gun on the area to be used for- the shooting competition, kowever, it is in a very rough
stage. Mr. Miller advised that the County Administrator -will approve a pump and haul
septic for this location, upon- receipt of the proper application through the Health
Department. Mr. Miller stated that although it appears feasible to conduct the desired
activity at this location, a considerable amount of work still needs to be accomplished
before this activity could be open to the public. He explained that the entrance, access
road, parking area, shooting range and public restroom facility must all be completed
prior to public use. Mr. Miller added that it was certainly understandable that Mr.
Fowler did not want to put a lot of money and effort into completing some of these
items, until he was assured that he would be permitted to operate.
Members of the Commission asked if the staff was aware of any
government agency that was responsible for licensing this activity for safety. Mr. Miller
said that he was not aware of one. He said that many organizations throughout the
community conduct shooting matches similar to this.
Commission members recalled discussion at the last meeting, when it was
noted that this activity would be for shotgun use only. Commissioners recommended
that this be incorporated under the conditions of the permit.
4
Mr. Robert C. Fowler, the applicant, was present to answer questions from
the Commission. Mr. Fowler said that matches would be held on Friday and Saturday
evenings, however, he didn't feel they would go beyond 11:00 p.m. He had no problems
with the conditions suggested by the staff.
Discussion ensued about whether the hours of operation should be made
a part of the conditions. It was noted that it was sometimes difficult to determine
exactly what time shooting matches might end because it depended upon how many
people were participating and how good the prizes were. It was decided that if the hours
of operation became a problem, the Commission could address it at that time.
There were no public comments.
Upon motion made by Mr. Light and seconded by Mr. Romine,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby
unanimously approve Conditional Use Permit #007-96 of Robert C. Fowler for an
Outdoor Recreation Facility/ Shooting Range with the following conditions:
1. The necessary facilities to properly accommodate this use must be constructed and
approved by the appropriate agency prior to any -public. use. This includes; but
is not limited to, the entrance, access road, parking area, public restroom facility,
and the shooting range.
2. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times.
3. Once in operation, the shooting activity must be supervised at all times by the
owner or an individual representing the owner who is qualified for such
supervision.
4. No alcoholic beverages will be allowed on the premises at any time.
5. No Sunday operation shall be allowed.
6. This activity shall be restricted to shot guns only.
5
Conditional Use Permit #011-96 of Jake T. Miller to operate a breeding kennel
for dogs. This property is located at 140 Duck Run Lane in Star Tannery and is
identified with PIN 70-1-1 in the Back Creek Magisterial District.
Action - Recommended Denial
Mr. (Wayne) Miller stated that as a result of receiving additional
information concerning this request,he visited the property a second time on August 30,
1996, in the company of Commissioner Marker and Mrs. Douglas, Supervisor for the
Back Creek District. Mr. (Wayne) Miller reported that it was determined that Mr. Jake
Miller had 18 dogs on his property -nine adult dogs and nine puppies. In addition, Mr.
Jake Miller had stated that he intended to have 30 dogs, excluding offspring.
Mr. (Wayne) Miller reported that there were two Boxer -type dogs chained
to trees in the front yard and these dogs barked continuously :during -his -visit to -the
property and the neighbor's property acrossthe- road. --Mr. (Wayne). Miller said that it.
had been reported that these- dogs have often broken their chains and have run free
throughout the neighborhood-'-.. Mr. '(Wayne) Miller felt this was a bad situation and
should be corrected. _ ...
In conclusion, Mr. (Wayne) Miller stated that the applicant was operating
an illegal kennel at this time, since he did not have the required conditional use permit.
Mr. (Wayne) Miller felt that if approval was granted, very strict control should be placed
on the kennel through appropriate conditions.
In response to questions raised by the Commission, Mr. (Wayne) Miller
stated that there are residences on Lots 14, 15, and 4, and a residence is under
construction on Lot 3. He said that he did not know of any other dog kennel operating
in a.5 -acre rural area subdivision in Frederick County. He said that Aberdeen Acres is
on a similar -sized piece of property, but is not within a rural area subdivision. Mr.
(Wayne) Miller said that a kennel would not be allowed in an RP District, however,
kennels are allowed in an RA District with a conditional use permit.
Mr. Jake T. Miller, the applicant, was present to answer questions from the
Commission. He said that he planned to construct a concrete building 40' behind his
house, with facilities, air conditioning and gas heat to handle 30 adult dogs, excluding
puppies under six months old. Mr. Jake Miller said that he anticipated installing a six
G
foot privacy fence along the front driveway and he also planned to construct five
detached 150'X 200' kennel runs.
Chairman DeHaven called for public comment and the following persons
came forward to speak
Mrs. Judy Miller, wife of the applicant, stated that this did not start out as
a profit-making business. She said that after her husband was in an accident, they
acquired one dog and then several, which turned out to be very therapeutic for him.
Mrs. Miller explained that in trying to find some type of work for Mr. Miller, the
Virginia Rehabilitation Services suggested a kennel operation, in light of Mr. Miller's
positive response to taking care of his dogs.
Mrs. Victor D. Cubow, adjoining property owner on Lot 15, came forward
to speak in opposition to the conditional use permit. Mrs. Cubow presented the
Commission with copies of a letter she and her husband wrote in opposition to the
kennel. Mrs. Cubow's reasons for opposition included the fact that Duck Run was a
residential subdivision with deed restrictions- prohibiting animals from creating a
nuisance; that a kennel next door could affect her property value and it could also affect
her ability to sell her home; that Mr. Jake Miller's dogs encroach on her property; and
finally, Mr. Jake Miller's barking dogs Have been creating a noise problem. Mrs. Cubow
stated that they have been experiencing a number of intimidating and unpleasant
remarks from Mr. Jake Miller in the last several months and they expect this behavior
to stop.
Mr. Aaron Mitchell, Sr., owner of Lot 3, came forward to speak in
opposition to the conditional use permit. Mr. Mitchell explained that he and his wife
reside at 103 Stonewall Drive, however, they are constructing a new home on Lot 3 in
Duck Run Estates, where they plan to reside permanantly. He said that they purchased
Lot 3 in 1995 in anticipation of a quiet, residential property. His lot is 400' from Mr.
Jake Miller's property and he felt that the sights, sounds, and smells associated with a
kennel would be disturbing and offensive; the kennel would affect the value of his
property; and the business would increase traffic on Duck Run Lane. He stated that a
road maintenance agreement was recently prepared in order for the residents to maintain
Duck Run Lane. He said that Mr. Jake Miller refused to participate in this. Mr.
Mitchell found it appalling that Mr. Jake Miller would be willing to add traffic to Duck
Run Lane with his business, yet he was not willing to help maintain the road.
Mr. (Wayne) Miller pointed out for the citizens present that local
government does not enforce deed covenants. He said that deed covenants are a civil
7
matter and may be enforced by those people affected.
Members of the Commission did not feel a kennel should be allowed to
operate in a rural, residential subdivision and they were concerned that allowing one
would set a precedent.
Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Romine,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby
recommend denial of Conditional Use Permit #011-96 of Jake T. Miller to operate a
breeding kennel for dogs. This recommendation was made by the following majority
vote:
YES (TO DENY): DeHaven, Romine, Morris, Ours, Ellington, Marker, Copenhaver,
Light, Stone
NO: Thomas
DISCUSSION:
PROCEDURES FOR DISCUSSION ITEMS
Mr. Wyatt stated that the staff has been asked to assist the Planning
Commission in the development of procedures for the consideration of development
applications, policy issues, and ordinance amendment requests. Mr. Wyatt said that it
is envisioned that these procedures would provide the Planning Commission with a
means of providing consistent direction to applicants and the staff to ensure that
requests are considered appropriately. He explained that the staff presented an outline
of procedural steps to the Commission in July and it was suggested that the procedures
be discussed at a subsequent meeting when attendance was greater.
Commissioners felt that applications of potential applicants should not be
informally discussed and the procedures outlined by the staff for applications were
satisfactory. Considerable discussion followed, however, on the next two categories:
Policy Issues and Ordinance Amendment Requests. Members of the Commission felt
that an informal discussion for these items among all the Planning Commission members
was sometimes very beneficial, however, the Commission needed to be careful not to
8
make an obligation. They felt that a decision to send these items to the Commission for
informal discussion could be made by either the staff or subcommittee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 8:45
p.m. by unanimous vote.
Respectfully submitted,
Kris C. Tierney, Interim Planning Director
Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman
BIMONTHLY REPORT OF PENDING APPLICATIONS
(printed September 19, 1996)
Application newly submitted.
REZONINGS:
Scully Ltd. (Rez #005-96)
-Opeguon
25,593 sf from B1 to B2
Location:
So. Side' of 277, E of I-81 /Ste hens City Interchan e
Submitted:
07/23/96
PC Review:
08/21/96 - Recommended Approval
BOS Review:
09/11/96 - Approved
Valley Mill Estates
(Rez #004-96)
Stonewall
1.0731 acres from RA to RP
Location:
No. of Valley Mill Rd. (Rt. 659) 3/4 mi. east of Rt. 656
Submitted:
06/24/96
PC Review:
8/21/96 - Recommended Approval
BOS Review:
09/11/96 - Approved
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS:
Chapel Hill (MDP #006-96)
Shawnee
35 SF Det. Urban Residential on
15.04 acres (RP)
Location:
East side of Rt. 522 So.; 700' south of Lon croft Rd.
Submitted:
06/10/96
PC Review:
07/03/96 - recommended approval
BOS Review:
08/14/96 - approved
Pending Admin. Approval:
Awaiting Completion of Review Agency Comments.
Mosby Station, Sect. I & H
(fvWP #005-96)
Opequon 102 SF Detached Residential on
36.12 acres (RP)
Location: a
Between,.old Rt; .642 & relocated Rt. 642
Submitted:
05/02/96
PC Review:
06/05/96 - recommended approval
BOS Review:
07/10/96 - approved
Admin. Approved: j
Awaiting com letion of review a ency, comments
Hill Valley (MDP)
Stonewall 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:
05/13/96 - Approved
Pending Admin. AppLovahApproval:
sf
SUBDIVISIONS:
Greenwood Rd. (SUB #007-
95)
Shawnee Subdivision of 2.837 ac. into five
lots (RP)
Location:
W. Side of Greenwood Rd (Rt. 656) approx. 1,400'
north of Sensen Rd. t. 657) intersection
Submitted:
07/22/96
PC Review:
08/21/96 - Recommended Approval
BOS Review:
09/11/96 - Approved
Admin. Approval:
Awaiting signed plats.
2
Fredericktowne Est. Sect.
14 & 15 (SUB #004-96)
Opequon 33 SF Trad. Lots on 9.9804
Acres (RP)
Location:
East of Stephens City; N.E. of Sections 11-13
Submitted:
05/02/96
MDP #007-88
Approved 12/05/88
Admin. Approval:
Section 15 Pending; Section 14 Approved 07/30/96
Valley Mill Estates
Back Creek 2 Ml Lots (0.552 acres & 20.285
acres)
21 SF Trad. Lots (RP)
Location:
No. Side of. Valle Mill, Rd., & East of Greenwood Rd.
JUBStonewall
Submitted:10/23/95
MDP #003-87
MDP #001-95Approved
04/26/95
Pendia Admin. A
Awaiting bonding, signed plats, & deed of dedication
Wine -Fred Co. IDC (SUB)
Back Creek 2 Ml Lots (0.552 acres & 20.285
acres)
Location:
Southeast side of Development Lane
Submitted:
09/08/95
MDP #003-87
Approved 07/08/87
Pendia Admin. Ap Koval
Awaitin si ned plats.
RT&T Partnership (SUB)
Back Creek
1 Lot - 29.6 Acres (B2)
Location:
Valley Pike (Rt. 11 So.)
Submitted:
05/17/95
MDP #003-91
Approved 07/10/91
Pending Admin. AppK2yahj
Awaiting submission of signed plat & deed of dedication
3
Briarwood Estates (SUB)
Stonewall
20 SF Det. Trad. Dots (RP)
Location:
Greenwood Rd.
Submitted:
01/03/94
NMP #005-93
Approved 12/8/93
Pending Admin. AppE21ah
Being held ata licants -request.
Abrams Point, Phase I
(SUB)
Shawnee 230 SF Cluster & Urban Lots
(RP)
Location:
South side of Rt. 659
Submitted:
05/02/90
PC Review:
06/06/90 Approved
BOS Review:
06/13/90 Approved
Pending Admin. Approval:
Awaiting deed of ded., 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 Approved
BOS Review:
1 10/26/94 Approved
Pending Admin. Approval:
Awaiting signed plat.
SITE PLANS:
Garrett Dentist Office (SP
#040-96)(Bl)
Opequon 7`3;120 sf office on 26,720 sf lot
Location:
Northeast intersection of A lor,Rd. & Hyde Ct.
Submitted:
08/27/96
11 Approved:
Pending
Premier Place Travel
Agency & Residence
Shawnee
(SP #041-96)
500 sf; Resid. 2,000 sf; on
F15,;67sf lot (B2)
Location:
133 Premier Place
Submitted:
08/27/96
Approved:
Pending
Preston Place T.H. Phase H
(SP #039-96)
Shawnee
44 T.H. Units on 2.7 ac. of a
14.59 ac. site (RP)
Location:
No. Side of Airport Rd. (Rt. 645), approx. 289' east of
Front Royal Pike (Rt.522)
Submitted:
08/23/96
Approved:
Pending
Stephenson Emmanual
U.M. Church (SP #038-96)
Stonewall
1,500 sf addition on 3.3515 ac.
tract (RA)
Location:
2720 Martinsburg Pike
Submitted:
08/21/96
Approved:
Pending
5
Frederick Veterinary
Hospital (SP #037-96)
Opequon Veterinary Hospital on .50 ac.
of a 2.05 ac, site (RP)
Location:
East side. of A for Rd (Rt. 642); so. of Westmoreland Dr
Submitted:
08121/96
Approved:
Pending
Winchester Regional
Airport (SP #036-96)
Shawnee
T -Hangers & Taxiways on 3 ac.
1 of a 472 ac. site (APl)
Location:
Winchester Regional
Airport; 491 Airport Road
Submitted:
08/20/96
Approved:
Pending
Kenneth D. Kovach &
Theresa Kovach
Shawnee 1,040 sf addit. on 0.26 ac. of a
0.8486 ac. tract (Ml)
Location:
230 Arbor Court
Submitted:
08/14/96
Approved:
Pending
Hardees Mobile Oil
Conven. Cntr (SP #050-95)
Back Creek Conven. Cntr/Rest. on a 1.0727
ac. site (RA) (CUP #011-95)
Location:
Southeast corner of Rt. 50 W and Ward Avenue
Submitted:
12/20/95
Approved:
Pending completion of agency requirements.
Kohls Distribution Facility
(SP #034-96)
Shawnee Warehouse Distrib; 38 disturbed
ac. of 53.27 ac. site (Ml)
Location:
A' rt Rd Rt. 645) in the Airport Business Center
Submitted:
08/02/96
Approved:
Pending
Furlongs Sheet Metal (SP
#032-96) (B2)
Stonewall 5,040 sf bldg on 0.569 ac. of
10.583 ac. site for refri , repair
I
Location:
Southeastern side of Baker Lane
Submitted:
07/17/96
Approved:
Pendin
Stimpson/Rt. 277 OR &
Lube Service (SP #030-96)
Opequon Oil & Lube Serv., Car Wash,
Drive-Thru on 2.97 ac. (B2)
Location:
152 Fairfax Pk. (behind Red Apple Country Store)
Submitted:
07/03/96
Approved:
Pendin
Stonewall Mini -Storage (SP
#028-96)
Gainesboro
Mini -storage on .25 ac. of a 2.56
ac. tract (Ml)
Location:
120 Lenoir Drive
Submitted:
06/20/96
Approved:
Pending
The Corners Restaurant
(SP #027-96)
Back Creek Addition to a restaurant on 0.10
1 acres of a 1.245 ac. site (RA)
Location:
1429 South Pifer Road
Submitted:
06/10/96
Approved:
Pending
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:
I Pending
Cedar Creek Center (SP
#025-96)
Back Creek Museum on 0.485 ac. of a 3.210
acre parcel (Bl)
Location:
8437 VaHey Pike (Rt. 11), Middletown
Submitted:
05/16/96
Approved:
Pending_
AMOCO/House of Gifts
(SP #022-96)
Gainesboro Gas Pump Canopy 880 sq. ft.
area of a 0.916 acre parcel (RA)
Location:
3548 North Frederick Pike
Submitted:
05/08/96
Approved:
Pending
Dr. Raymond Fish (SP
#023-96)
Stonewall Mini -Golf Facility on 5,000 sq.
ft. of a 16 acre parcel (B2)
Location:
S.E. Corner of 1-81/Hopewell Rd. Intersection
Submitted:
05/09/96
Approved:
Pendin
Parkview Apts. (formerly
Valley Mill Apts.)
Shawnee
(SP #020-96)
76 -unit apartment development
on 7.684 acres (RP)
Location:
Corner of Rt. 658 & Rt. 659
Submitted:
04/12/96
Approved:
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 lodge building on
3.4255 acre site (B2)
Location:
1730 Be ille Pike
Submitted:
.04/10/96
Approved
Pending
Dominion Knolls (SP #010-
96)
Stonewall
180 TH on 20.278 ac. (RP)
Location:
Intersection of Baker Lane and Gordon Street
Submitted:
02/21/96
Approved:
Pending
i
Pegasus Business Center,
Phase I (SP #007-96)
Shawnee Office, Misc. Retail, Business on I
1 1 2.5 ac of a 6.0623 ac site (B2)
Location:
434 Bufflick Road
Submitted:
02/14/96
Approved:
Pending
D.K. Erectors & Main-
tenance, Inc. (SP #051-95)
Gainesboro Indust Sery/Steel Fabrication on
a 10 acre site (M2)
Location:
4530 Northwestern Pike
Submitted:
12/28/95
Approved:
Pending
Wheatlands Wastewater
Facility (SP #047-89)
Opequon Treatment Facility on 5 Acres
1 (R5)
Location:
So. West of Double Tollgate; ad' . & west of Rt. 522
Submitted:
09/12/89
11 Note:Bein
held at applicant's request.
Flex Tech (SP #057-90)
Stonewall T
-Ml Use on 11 Ac. (Ml)
Location:
East side of Ft. Collier Rd.
Submitted:
10/25/90
Note:
Being held atapplicant's request.
10
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS:
Jennifer B. Harris
(CUP #010-96)
;i'� `
�iiietOrir`.```:' rr``•r-` rent"
Location:
4780 Northwestern Pike
Submitted:
09/16/96
PC Review:
11/06/96
BOS Review:
11/27/96
Jennifer B. Harris
(CUP #010-96)
Back Creek
1
Cottage Occupation/Tool
Sharpening (RA)
Location:
6671 Middle Road, Middletown
Submitted:
07/01/96
PC Review:
08/21/96 - Recommended Approval
BOS Review:
09/11/96 - Approved
Kenneth C. Poole, Jr.
(CUP #009-96)
Gainesboro Public Garage w/o body repair
1 1 (RA)
Location:
214 Stony
Hill Road (Rt. 688)
Submitted:
06/27/96
PC Review:
08/21/96
- Recommended Approval
BOS Review:
09/11/96 -
Approved
11
Robert C. Fowler (CUP
#007-96)
Gainesboro Comm. Outdoor Rec. Facility/
Shooting Range (RA)
Location:
840 North Timber Ridge Road
Submitted:
05/10/96
PC Review:
06/05/96 - tabled; 09/04/96 - recommended approval
BOS Review:
10/09/96
VARIANCES:
William & Mary Hunt
(VAR #014-96)
Opequon 8' rear yd. setbk for exist.
1 structure & attached deck
Location:
206 Halifax Court, Fredericktowne
Submitted:
08/23/96
BZA Review:
09/17/96 - Approved
Aaron L. Mitchell (VAR
#015-96)
Back Creek 10' front yd setbk for proposed
structure
Location:
Off of Rt. 600; Duck Run, Lot 3, Duck Run Lane
Submitted:
08/23/96
BZA Review:
09/17/96 - Approved
12
PC REVIEW: 10/2/96
BOS REVIEW: 10/23/96
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #412-96
PEGGY. RUBLE
Shale Mining Operation
LOCATION: This property is located at 532 N. Hayfield Road.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 29-A-22
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Area) District; Land Use:
Residential & Agriculture
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RA (Rural Area) District; Land Use:
Agriculture
PROPOSED USE: To establish a shale mining operation.
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-ways must be covered by a land
use permit. The permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety
bond coverage.
Health Department: No objections as proposed. Any future habitation or
congregation by the owner or employees will require an approved sewage disposal
system and water supply.
Inspections Department: No comment required due to no structures being built or
utilized.
Peggy Ruble CUP #012-96
Page 2
September 19, 1996
Fire Marshal: No comments.
Planning and Zoning: The requested use in this application is permitted with an
approved conditional use permit. The proposed mining area in this request is a ridge area
that is wooded. The proposed area of 8.190 acres also borders on a five -acre residential
lot (zoned RA). The house on this lot is approximately 200 feet from an area of the
proposed mining site where some shale has been removed for repair work on the very
long existing private road that accesses the property. The commercial mining, if this
request is approved, will need to beat least 100 feet from the boundary of the property
(DeHaven) where the residence is located. It appears the ordinance requirements can be
met to permit this use. There will need to be a new road constructed from the site to
Route 600, North Hayfield Road, and a commercial entrance installed as required by
VDOT. This road must be constructed prior to any commercial operation being
authorized.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR 10/2/96 MEETING: Staff recommends approval of this
request with the following conditions:
1. All review agency comments and Frederick County Zoning Ordinance requirements
shall be complied with at all times.
2. No commercial mining operation shall be allowed until the proposed road to service
this operation is constructed and useable.
3. A state mining permit shall be obtained and kept current as required by the Code of
Virginia.
File: KAWMMI NTOMMENTS'AUBLE.CUP
41 �
29
r � �)
926
2 ola �
28
112
26D 5
29 3
2
288 1 1p
28C
g0
23
2 91.
23
2PF
22F
c /
22B 22
2 91a y 22
29la
17A 3
17 d
20A 20
2 WR
18 206 20
6Q 2 pt.
19
291. h
42A 32
54
42 3
114
t
6 4h 7
PA
\
I
114
t
6 4h 7
PA
Submittal Deadline -9 -6 -?6
P/C Meeting
BOS Meeting p-
APPLICATION'FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FREDERICK COUNTY,' VIRGINIA
1.
ARylicant (The applicant if the X owner other)
NAME: Mrs`. Peggy Ruble
ADDRESS: 532 North Hayfield Rd.'" Winchester, Va. 22603
TELEPHONE (540) 888--3520
2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties in interest of
the property:
Mrs. Peggy Ruble
3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and
include the route number of your road or street)
522 North to Gainesboro, Turn left on Rt. 684, Cross RR tracks
at Fire Station, Turn left on Rt. 600 (North Hayfield Rd.),
Go 1.5 miles to Ruble Farms sign, Turn left on dirt road, Go .5 miles
to shale bank.
4. The property has a road frontage of 1600' (appx) feet and a
depth of 20001(appx) feet and consists of acres.
(Please be exact) Area to be mined.
5. The property is owned by__ Peggy Ruble as
evidenced by deed fromrecorded
(previous owner)
in deed book no. 301 on page 614 , as recorded in the
records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, County of
Frederick.
6. 14 -Digit Property Identification No. 29000-A-0000-0022
Magisterial District Gainesboro
Current Zoning
7. Adjoining Property:
USE
North Agricu ture
East Agriculture
South Agriculture
West _aAgriculture
NING
R77 -
RA
RA
RA
8. The type of use proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept.
before completing)
Mining of Shale
9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be
constructed: None
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
Rodella Lee Watach
Address 622 E. Old Town Rd.,Cumberland,MD 215
Property ID# 29000 -A -0000-113A
Sidney D. Rodgers
Address 420 N. Hayfield Rd.,Winchester, VA 22
Property ID# 29000-A-0000-0023
Robert J. O'Shea
Address 504 N. Hayfield Rd. Winchester, VA 22
Property ID# 29000 -A -0000-022E
Stephen T. Grant
Address 530
N. Hayfield Rd., Winchester, VA 2
Property ID#
29000 -A -0000-022D
Lawrence F. Ruble
Address 532
N. Hayfield Rd., Winchester,VA 22EI
Property ID#
29000 -A -0000-022C
Earnest R. Pugh
Address 627
N,Hayfield Rd., Winchester, VA 22f(
Property IDO
29000-A-0000-0021
03
)3
503
)3
)3
NAME
Address 637 N.Hayfield Rd., Winchester, VA 22 03
Kenneth Dwight DeHaven property ID#
29000 -A -0000-022A
J. Richard Saville Address 20.Cedar Dr..Sterling,Va. 20164
Property ID# 29000-A-0000-0020
Dan R. Cox Address346-C E.Market St. Leesburg,VA 22075
Praperty,ID# 29000-A-0000-1138
Susan L. French
Address 4395 N.Frederick Pike,Winchester,VA 2 60"
Property ID# 30000 -A -0000-122D
Susan L. French
Address Same as above
Property ID#
30000 -A -0000-122B
Mary Jane Wyatt
Address 289 West View Dr. Winchester,VA 22603
Property ID#
30000-6-0000-0003
Ronald Errico
Address4204 Van Buren St. Hyattsville,MD 2078
Property ID#
30000-6-0000-0006
Address Same
as above
Ronald Errico
Property ID#
30000-6-0000-0007
Address 561 Fox Dr. Winchester, VA 22601
Marcus M. Adams
Property ID# 40000-A-0000-0078
Address 634 N.Hayfield Rd. Winchester, VA 226 3
Kenneth S. DeHaven
Property ID# 29000 -A -0000-022B
Address
Property ID,#
Address
Property ID#
11. 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.
Cis*hw`-=-s .lqb AcRCs +o FaL)P E:AiY L,OrIs - Fs+IMA+ sd
cox- 394.3.0bERAVEN- I!a!oa
FRtYCR- I(ZIC.eo' Ad Ams-t'�,�aoo
WA+Act- 10041:b' WYA-tt
Raspy Eve-/l,So,aa.1 F- pp jCo
OthF_A-. 1700,70
7
DZHAVEV- I^G'O'D L.
�
gAv4f.lr' - 10-00 G �
Ga +
�0 r Q)
y
!
y5� ��
�v _
4�.
� sy • F�
lie ,
4,
4d
r
J
�0 r Q)
12. Additional comments, if any:
The attached plat prepared by Greenway Inc., dated 6/12/96,
shows an area of 8.190 acres which is area proposed to be
mined.
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.
TO BE COMPLETED BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
USE CODE:
RENEWAL DATE:
-
{
\ D.� 60o,P6 54fl
Zo NE O'. P -A
USE: AG Fc
W A TACH ZZ /
WH17E
D. D. 47 3, PG . 9 1 \ o^ W--
ZONED'
P -A �
/ \
FLU
C). U. 301. PG. I r--4
\
ZONED• P -A
W
! UsE' AGR .
!
556�44'4'S"E
�S isS'o7 4a', VF N^
59.70 CO k.
1
�
eol.oz �
s N
II
W
67. 19
N Z2� 14'oL• E
� 38.oy� 11
\ N SSS 13' 1%" E \� F'�Ap
\ 55B' 57'c,c"g
N IV, f5'4Z' E 51>" -
R U B L E
4'F 1 , PG . 705
ZONED' RA
44.w�
USE' AGR..
\
W
z4' �r- " E
o
eol.oz �
s N
II
'al
N Z2� 14'oL• E
AG1�ES
�\
N 1%2-!'4z"E J
S I
z
N 14' Z4' 36" E
zoo. c+o'
R
9
W
� J
/
1 0
N 13" Ih' 14" W
DE
N oSpo'17"W
HAVEN
0- E5 504., PCl. 351
I5G.Z7'
-
ZoNFv'. P -A
Lis E '. FZ-E S
"
N32��a 7,
20"W
PLAT SHotn/!NG
PP--Po5Er7 MINING AF2EA
I'M THE LANA op
PEG& Y A. W—vE�L E
6AIWF-5130Fro bISTF?--T- FFZEPEptiCK COU(-4TY, VIF?.r--IIJIA
SCALE 10= 7"1 DATE :,)Lima Iz, i -"4V
GREENWAY, INC.
970 Baker Lane, Winchester, Virginia 22603 9lo-662-4185
H. Bruce Edens, L.S. - President
SURVEYING — DESIGNING — PLANNING
RESIDENTIAL - AGRICULTURAL • COMMERCIAL , INDUSTRIAL - CONSTRUCTION
Q�VBRUCE ED" �
No. WO 162-8
t9� tiilR`IE�0+
SHEET I of j
_ W A T^ 6 H
B 47 3 , P(5. 9 I \
ZONED' P -A \
USC AGFr-
FLU B L C- Qj
D.B. 301, PG.
ZONED'. P -A N O
I USe: AGR N
I S9.7C, op �•
559^44'45"E 'v ,ham
I Itl.�v'I Z,
� 54l• 4%'03" E
1 lob. 37 r
S56'3a'42"E
S64.36'zz•E \
1 3B.o3r
1
� N I%• IS'4z' E
b b.aG•
lol.oZ'
� N ZZ• Ib'ob" E
N 1�•Zf'42"E
44.-t3'
I+- P --A D
8. Ivo
A�FzES
N 14' z4' 36" E
LOO, 00 '
Al
9
G Ox
b. g 600, FG S49
ZONE'. F -A
USE AG Iz
z2" /
536-Z("4>6"W
I
I
I
1
1
DE HAVEN ISG -Z7' / p
D. 13. 504•, P(S'. 351 -
ZoNEb'. ) -A
USE'.
2
Iy3z•�Hr7,
PLAT 5HOvV/NG
PRoPo5eC� MIN I N G A P? -EA
4:1N THE L-ANV op
PEGG Y A 12uE>L E
GAIIJESBopco bISTiLIGT- FREpEP/cK cO1.INT'{, VII--C'INIA
SCALE: 111= Z.�' DATE: .�unle Iz 1�7V
GREENWAY, INC.
970 Baker Lane, Winchester, Virginia 22603 510-662-4185
H. Bruce Edens, L.S. - President
SURVEYING - DESIGNING - PLANNING
LL RESIDENTIAL . AGRICULTURAL • COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION
o���p,1.1.Tii qP
�Bliuc
EE pEtr$
No. 000162$
�t-
'
SHEET I of I
RU 81.E
0.125. 4'f I , PG . 701,
Z -NE D' RA
W
\)I
i
� o
p N
I
w
G \
F,
E
c'6 .
fsoA f� N W
� e
DE HAVEN ISG -Z7' / p
D. 13. 504•, P(S'. 351 -
ZoNEb'. ) -A
USE'.
2
Iy3z•�Hr7,
PLAT 5HOvV/NG
PRoPo5eC� MIN I N G A P? -EA
4:1N THE L-ANV op
PEGG Y A 12uE>L E
GAIIJESBopco bISTiLIGT- FREpEP/cK cO1.INT'{, VII--C'INIA
SCALE: 111= Z.�' DATE: .�unle Iz 1�7V
GREENWAY, INC.
970 Baker Lane, Winchester, Virginia 22603 510-662-4185
H. Bruce Edens, L.S. - President
SURVEYING - DESIGNING - PLANNING
LL RESIDENTIAL . AGRICULTURAL • COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION
o���p,1.1.Tii qP
�Bliuc
EE pEtr$
No. 000162$
�t-
'
SHEET I of I
COUNTY of FREDEMCK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FIX: 540/678-0682
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
CC t/
FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, Planner I 6-
S U BJ ECT: Public Hearing: Proposed Route 11 North Land Use Plan
DATE: September 19, 1996
Industrial sites with rail access are necessary for economic growth in our community. In late 1993,
a shortage of such available sites was acknowledged by the County. As a result, the Board of
Supervisors directed staff to develop a land use plan for the Route 11 North area that would locate
potential sites for future industrial development.
In working with the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee, staff has developed and
submits the attached proposed land use plan. This plan proposes numerous potential locations for
these sought-after industrial sites, while addressing other land use issues that presently exist in the
Route 11 North area. Through the use of a proposed collector road system and the location of rail
lines, industrial uses can be accommodated with a minimal impact upon the existing residences.
Some of the key features of the proposed land use plan include the following:
• Industrial uses are proposed adjacent to both railroad corridors.
• Business uses are concentrated at designated road intersections.
• Future industrial and business uses should be appropriately screened and buffered from
existing residential uses.
• A collector road system is proposed to minimize future traffic impacts on Route 11 North.
The collector road would act as a bypass to Route 11 North, and the Stephenson community.
• Signalization is proposed for six key intersections.
• Water and sewer service would be made available for business, industrial, and existing
residential uses within the study area.
• Expansion of the UDA is not recommended, discouraging intensive residential development.
107 North Kent Street • Winchester. Virginia 22601-5000
Page 2
Frederick County Planning Commission
Public Hearing: Route 11 North Land Use Plan
September 19, 1996
As requested, cost estimates for sewer provisions to the Stephenson Rural Community Center have
also been generated. These preliminary cost estimates indicate that to run the sewer to the 180
residences identified would be approximately $1.3 million, or $7,200 per residence. This cost does
not include the tapping fee, nor the cost to run aline from the, sewer main to the residential structure.
Through input from a public meeting and two joint work sessions with the Commission and Board,
staff feels that this proposed plan achieves.the goal of the study: to locate industrial sites with rail
access. We are seeking an action from the commission that may be forwarded to the Board.
We are available to address your concerns.
Attachment
ROUTE 1 I NORTH
PROPOSED LAND USE PLAN
- 1996 STUDY AREA-
0#@,Al.r-r
Prepared for the:
Frederick County Board of Supervisors
and the
Frederick County Planning Commission
Endorsed by the:
Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee
August 12, 1996
Prepared by the:
Frederick County
Department of Planning and Development
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Table of Contents
Introduction 1
The Planning Process ............................................. 3
Understanding the Route 11 North Area ................................... 4
Existing Conditions .............................................. 4
Historical Features 7
Environmental Features 7
Objectives for the Land Use Plan ............. ......................... 10
LandUse ........................... ....... ....... ......... 10
Transportation ................................................. 10
Historical..................................................... 10
Environmental ................................................. 10
Public Utilities .................................................. 10
The Land Use Plan ................................................... 10
Land Use Components .......................................... 11
Infrastructure Components ....................................... 12
Transportation ............................................ 12
Sewer.................................................. 12
Water................................................... 13
Urban Development Area ........................................ 13
Summary.......................................................... 15
Maps
Route 11 North Land Use Plan Boundary Map ....... i ............... .... — 2
Existing Conditions Map (to be produced in color for Final plan) ................. 6
Historical Features Map ................................................ 8
Environmental Features Map ................ ........................... 9
LandUse Plan ...................................................... 14
Introduction
The Frederick County Comprehensive Plan contains land use plans for numerous
designated areas of the County. These areas, Rural Community Centers and business
corridors, are acknowledged as having specific characteristics that should be preserved
and promoted accordingly. By properly planning for each area, .the County hopes to guide
the community toward a prosperous future.
In late 1993, the County identified a shortage of available industrial sites with rail access,
a vital element in recruiting potential industries. A community's ability to promote economic
development may be considered the deciding factor between prosperity and despair. As
a result, the county initiated a search for potential locations for such uses.: Numerous key
areas were identified in Northeastern Frederick County that could be attractive sites for
industrial development with rail access.
The aim of this plan is to identify the most appropriate locations for industrial areas,
business concentrations, while protecting open space and historic areas and
neighborhoods within the Route 11 North area. The County does not feel that additional
large scale residential development is appropriate for this area of the County. On those
grounds, new residential development is not the aim of this study. The goal is to establish
more employment opportunities, and create a more profitable tax base that will assist the
County in continuing to maintain the high quality of life that our community's residents have
become accustomed to.
The challenge facing the County is to develop land use policies and regulations which will
allow portions of the Route 11 North area to maintain the residential characteristics of a
community, while accommodating sought after industrial uses. Portions of Stephenson
and Clearbrook, acknowledged as Rural Community Centers (RCC) by the County's
Comprehensive Plan, are located within the study area. While the RCCs are not the focus
of the study, efforts have been made to minimize adverse impacts that may result from
particular land uses. With this in mind, the Comprehensive Plans and Programs
Subcommittee has undertaken the task of developing a long-range land use plan for the
Route 11 North area.
Route 11 North 1 Draft Land Use Plan
1996 Study Area
1,890 Acres
Boundary Map
11
%fiiKq
661
Scale in Feet
0 1200 24OC 3000 4800
11
Stephe6sor,
f
v
The Planning Process
The process of formulating a plan began in spring of 1996. The Frederick County
Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS, a subcommittee of the
Frederick County Planning Commission). discussed the interests previously expressed by
County Officials for locating industriat.sites with., rail access in Northeastern Frederick
County. The subcommittee delineated a 14;700 -acre area that would become known as
"Northeastern Frederick County.., _ They also developed a list of.concerns and issues that
would need to be addressed during ,the study.
A joint work session with.the Board of.S.upervisors and the Planning _Commission was held
on May 22,,,1996, at which time the. 14;7001=acre-�study,. area.; "Northeastern Frederick
County" was presented. Numerous -members of tbe.Zoard_and .Ccmm ssionp-xpressed
concerns that the..area was too large to conduct a comprehensive land use study in a
timely fashion. It was,, recommended that the study area be reduced .to. emphasize the
southwestern portion of the area, including Route 11 North from Interstate 81 Exit 317
north to Clearbrook, and the CSX and Winchester & Western Railroads.
The CPPS met on June 11, 1996 and delineated a 1,890 -acre study area, the 1996 Study
Area", which encompassed Routes 11, 761, 664, and the two rail lines. A key
determination in selecting the boundaries for the °1996 Study area" was the ability to follow
the natural drainage basin of three watersheds. The 1996 Study Area would become the
first portion of Northeastern Frederick County to be studied and provided a land use plan.
At a meeting July 1, 1996, the CPPS endorsed a proposed land use plan for the study
area.
On July 16, 1996, a public meeting was sponsored by the CPPS and the Planning
Department to present the proposed land use plan to the public. Attendance at the
meeting was estimated to exceed 100 people. This turnout was attributed to the meeting
notices that were advertised in the Winchester Star and the NorffvmV rginia_-Daily. LMC
also broadcast the meeting notice on local radio and cable television. Flyers, which
announced the time, location, and intention of the meeting were sent to all property owners
within the established boundaries of the study area. Additionally, the. Winchester Star ran
an article the Saturday prior to the meeting, informing the public about the planning
process and visions for the area.
The public meeting was successful in that many of those in attendance were not opposed
to the proposed plan. Numerous participants voiced interests that sewer should be
extended to the area, as discussed some 20 years prior. The proposed plan attempts to
separate and buffer industrial uses from existing residential uses, a proposal that received
general acceptance.
Route 11 North 3 Draft Land Use Plan
The proposals made by the CPPS for the Route 11 North area take into consideration input
received from residents and land owners within the area, both as a result of the public
meeting and the comment sheets which were distributed and returned. In all, 19 comment
sheets have been received. A majority of the comments- received (15) were in favor of
providing sewer to the study area. Also, a majority (17) was in favor of industrial
development so long as the sense of community was not lost.
Understanding the Route 11 North Area
As with any study, it is very important to understand the numerous elements that exist
within and adjacent to the study area. Together, elements such -as environmental features
and existing neighborhoods establish a .community's character.
An overview of the existing conditions of the Route 11 North area indicate how the area
has developed over time. The concentration of uses such as residential, business,
industrial and public all indicate trends in development and location of uses. Observations
of the existing conditions exposed characteristics such as:
1. A number of major transportation systems currently exist within the area.
Interstate 81 establishes a natural boundary along the western edge of the area.
The Interstate not only acts as a natural boundary, it also contains two interchanges
(Exits 317 and 321) that enable vehicular traffic to expediently exit the area, the
County and .the state; a valuable asset when promoting an area for economic
development.
R u e 11 North bisects the area in a north -south linear fashion. Route 11
enables vehicular traffic to quickly travel from the center of the area to the northern
and southern fringes, where Interstate 81 awaits.
CSX and the Winchester and Western Railroads have rail lines paralleling Route
11 North. The availability of rail increases the opportunities for transporting freight
in and out of the area.
The proposed alignment of Route 37, a limited -access major arterial, transverses
the southern portion of the area. This proposed road has the potential to provide
direct access from the larger undeveloped land parcels to Interstate 81, bypassing
US Route 11 North.
Route 11 North 4 Draft Land Use Plan
2. Residential uses are generally concentrated along US Route 11 North. Three
mobile home park facilities are located along Route 11 within the Stephenson
community. Most of the single-family residential uses located along Route 11 North
are setback at least 100 feet from the road right-of-way.
3. Industrial uses are randomly located throughout the area. Most often these uses
have rail access.
4. Business uses are randomly located along Route 11 North.
5. The southern portion of the study area is located within the Sewer and Water
Service Area (SWSA). The southern portion is also within the Urban Development
Area (UDA).
6. About a third of the area (670 acres)- may be considered undeveloped; with no
physical restrictions on development such as natural features or occupying
structures. This figure does not include acreage that is underutilized. This
underutilized acreage includes areas where a portion of a parcel is devoted to
commercial or industrial use but the remaining acreage is vacant. A more detailed
analysis of land use may reveal additional acreage available for development.
Route 11 North 5 Draft Land Use Plan
NY
EJ
Historical Features
Many elements combine to illustrate an historical image of the area. In the early 1990's,
the County conducted a survey to locate and understand the County's architectural and
cultural history. This survey, called the Rural Landmark Survey, identified structures that
satisfied a list of criteria, just one of which was a structure's age. There are 38 sites in the
study area that were identified by this survey.
The study area also played a key role in the Civil War. The County's Battlefield Network
Plan illustrates the importance of the Civil War within Frederick County, and identifies three
sites for potential Civil War preservation. These preservation areas, Stephenson's Depot,
Third Winchester, and the Milburn Road corridor, are illustrated on the Historical Features
map and have been taken into consideration in planning for the Route 11 North area's
future.
Environmental Features
A look into the topography and other environmental concerns is important. The
Environmental Features map is used to identify floodplains and steep slopes within the
area. The County Zoning Ordinance presently places restrictions on the disturbance of
such elements. The southeastern portion of the study area contains a significant amount
of steep slopes (steep slopes are defined as slopes greater than 15 percent). Some flood
plain areas are also identified.
Route 11 North 7 Draft Land Use Plan
It
b"e dives for theland-Use Plan
Land Use
• Discourage industrial uses in close proximity to existing residential uses.
• Encourage industrial uses within planned industrial parks.
• Concentrate industrial uses near transportation systems, including .rail and road.
• Concentrate business uses around existing and proposed intersections.
• Discourage spot business and industrial uses along Route 11.
Promote land uses, that are compatible with adjacent existing land uses.
Transportation
• Provide for additional traffic control by proposing .signalized. intersections.
• Encourage central access points to industrial areas, minimizing new driveways and
intersections with Route 11, 761, 664.
• Encourage the expansion of Route 11 to a four -lane roadway.
• Require connector roads within industrial areas to minimize traffic impacts on Route
11.
Hi tgrq.�i _I
• Protect rural landmark sites as identified by the Rural Landmark Survey.
• Protect the historic areas and corridor as identified by the Battlefields Network Plan.
vi Qnme�n gI
• Protect identified environmentally sensitive areas such as floodplains and steep
slopes.
Public Lhili.p,
• Determine the potential and desirability for provisions of water and sewer service
to area.
The Land Use Plan
After compiling and understanding the community's issues, concerns and existing
conditions, the committee was able to develop a proposed land use plan, a plan that
achieves the study's objectives. The plan incorporates all written comments and those
expressed by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, Planning Commission,
Committees, and the residents of the County. Key components of the plan are the
proposed land uses and infrastructure.
Future land uses within the Route 11 North area should be sensitive to existing and
planned uses.
Route 11 North 10 Draft Land Use Plan
I .lil����r.- isui?i
The plan has been designed to provide the opportunity to develop industrial and business
uses in a well-planned, coordinated manner.
Industrial uses are proposed adjacent to- both railroad corridors and. the largely
undeveloped southeastern portion of the a -m- a Industrial uses -should be developed within
master planned industrial parks. These industrial parks could cater to numerous industrial
interests, in a planned environment...Such: uses should be adequately screened and
buffered from adjacent business and resideritiai use.- Industrial: use is discouraged from
fronting directly on along Route 11,; buffering and screening -should be exercised to mitigate
any impacts on Route 11. The industrial use locations are illustrated in the -Land Use Plan
map on page 14 by the blue shading. It is important to note that the. proposed industrial
use shown on the map encompasses more than 670 acres. The 670 acres referred to
earlier in this report were merely,the approximation of undeveloped land within the study
area. The area shaded on the map includes land currenty occupied, in addition to
undeveloped land.
The development of business uses are encouraged at designated road intersections. A
transportation benefit associated with concentrating business uses at key intersections is
the potential reduction in vehicle trips as.individuals will be able to park their vehicles at a
central location to conduct their shopping needs. Additionally, the promotion of shared
entrances and through connections for parking facilities reduce disruptions to the main
traffic flow. The business use locations are illustrated in the Land Use Plan map by the
orange shading.
Preserving and protecting the existing residential, historic, and significant open space
areas within the study area is encouraged. These areas have not been designated for
business and industrial use. The Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA), located along
Route 11 and Milburn Road, has two purposes. First, this designation discourages any
development along the Milburn Corridor; the corridor has been identified as a key
contributor during the Civil War. Secondly, the DSA would call for a higher standard of
development along Route 11, where residential uses dominate. As the DSA is a
community and historical preservation area, adjacent uses which are not compatible should
be adequately buffered and screened. Development regulations should be reviewed to
ensure that they protect and promote a cohesive community environment within the study
area with special attention to the DSA.
As with all development occurring within Frederick County, the protection of environmental
features continues to be of importance. The Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA)
delineate the location of environmental features where minimal disturbance is permitted.
The ESA is primarily located in the southern portion of the study area, and contains both
floodplains and steep slopes. Prior to any development, environmental protection
requirements will need to be addressed.
Route 11 North 11 Draft Land Use Plan
Infrastrur,ture QgmI2gnpntg;
As with all development proposals in Frederick County, construction of new collector roads
and the installation of sewer and water within the Route 11 North area would be the
responsibility of the property owners and developers.
Transportation The use of collector roads has been proposed to channel vehicular
traffic to and from key intersections along Routes 11, 761, and 664. These collector roads
would also act as bypasses to Route 11; traffic generated by the proposed industrial uses
would ,use. the collector roads to gain access to the north and south extremities of the area.
This would.minimize increased traffic on Routes 11; 761, and 664. The collector roads
would also :provide for safer vehicular movement as vehicles will be accessing the Routes
from designated locations.
These collector roads are seen as a preferred alternative to permitting an excessive
number of individual business and industrial entrances on Route 11. The location of
collector roads shown are not intended to be precise. Development proposals submitted
for specific areas would be expected to provide for roads which make the connections
indicated and serve the intended function, but would not necessarily follow the precise
alignments shown.
As the areas develop, signalization is likely to be required at six proposed key
intersections. Procedures already in place would require that development pay a pro rata
share toward the cost of such facilities.
Route 11 North should be improved to a four -lane facility as traffic increases, as has been
previously proposed by the Winchester Area Transportation Study (WATS). Presently a
three -lane facility, it is projected that the improvement would require that six feet be
obtained from either side of the existing road right-of-way.
A corridor has been reserved along the proposed alignment of Route 37. This corridor is
flanked on either side by proposed industrial uses, minimizing the impact Route 37 could
have on residential development, and maximizing the potential for an interchange from the
industrial uses directly onto Route 37.
Sewer: The Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) indicates that there would
be capacity available to serve the entire 1,890 -acre study area, and the natural drainage
basin makes it very feasible to provide this service. It is recommended that the entire study
area be included in the SWSA; providing sewer expands the opportunity for industrial
development. Additional residential development is not proposed, nor encouraged, for this
area of the County. Any sewer extension should be designed in a manner to serve existing
residential units within the study area.
The location of sewer mains would depend primarily upon the property owners that initiate
Route 11 North 12 Draft Land Use Plan
sewer connections (as development occurs, the costs associated with sewer extension are
the responsibility of the developer). It has been determined that the locating of sewer
mains along the railroad lines is possible, but the most effective long-term location -for
sewer mains is to follow Hiatt Run.
This plan does not address sewer provisions for the Stephenson Rural Community Center.
There are a number of land use: issues that will need to be addressed prior to allowing
sewer to extend into the eastern portion of the Stephenson community.
Water: The Sanitation Authority indicates that ..they :would have the capacity to
service the entire 1,890 -acre study area. Presently, water is available to a majority of the
land in the study area. With .the. expansion of the SWSA, water could more easily be
provided to those interested.
The present Urban Development Area (UDA) boundary incorporates a small portion of the
southwestern quadrant of the study area. Expansion of the UDA beyond its existing
boundary is not recommended by this plan.
Route 11 North 13 Draft Land Use Plan
Northeastern
Frederick County
Land Use Plan
1996
STUDY AREA
—Proposed-
-Land Use Plan—
lan—@'`''
@'k 1
Business
Industrial
■
developmentally
Sensitive Areas
Environmentally
Sensitive Areas
■■■■■■■■■■■
Proposed Collector Roads
Signalized Intersection
1996 Study Area
Railroad
County Planevq 6 Devetopeoent
vmcnester, vromo
4MISFrederick
July 1996
The primary goal of this land use plan has been to identify potential industrial sites with
rail access, while minimizing the disruption to existing uses. A great deal of thought has
gone into laying out a planned road network that separates industrial traffic from other trips
as much as possible. Those land features and community characteristics that are prized
or in need of protection have been identified and efforts have been made to minimize
adverse impacts.
The pace of development within the study area, including the future extension of sewer
service, will be based on numerous factors: the economy, desires of individual property
owners, and rezoning and Master Development Plan approval by the Frederick County
Board of Supervisors. As parcels within the study area are proposed for rezoning, it will
be incumbent upon the Planning staff, Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors to
ensure that the development proposed is in keeping with the concepts discussed in this
Plan.
Route 11 North 15 Draft Land Use Plan