The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 04-05-95 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Old Frederick County Courthouse Winchester, Virginia APRIL 5, 1995 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) Meeting Minutes of March 1, 1995 & March 15, 1995 .............. A 2) Bimonthly Report ...................................... B 3) Committee Reports ..................................... C 4) Citizen Comments ..................................... D PUBLIC HEARINGS 5) Conditional Use Permit #003-95 of Raymond Bailey for a Automobile garage without body repair. This property is located at 302 Poorhouse Road and identified with PIN 52-A-71 in the Gainesboro District. (Mr. Miller) ......................................... E 6) Rezoning application #008-94 of James Carroll to rezone 2.81 acres from RP (Residential Performance) to B2 (Business General). The directions to this property are as follows: From Interstate 81 approximately .75 miles east of the City of Winchester, turn left onto Custer Avenue, property is located at the intersection of Custer Avenue and Pembridge Road. This property is identified with PINS 64A -4-20A; 64A -4-10A; 64A -10-B and is located in the Shawnee District. (Mr. Tierney) ........................................ F 2 7) An Amendment to Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, of the Frederick County Code, Article V, RA Rural Areas District, Section 165-51, Conditional Uses. The proposed amendment will eliminate specific agricultural uses as required by the 1995 Right To Farm Legislation. (Mr. Wyatt) .........................................G 8) An Amendment to Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, of the Frederick County Code, Article X, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Section 165-82, District Use Regulations. The proposed amendment will allow art dealers, art supplies, and art framing as a permitted use in the B1 Neighborhood Business District. (Mr. Wyatt) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . H OTHER 9) Master Development Plan Application #001-95 of Valley Mill Estates. The applicant proposes to develop 22 single family homes. This property is located North of Valley Mill Road (Route 659), approximately 3/4 mile East of Greenwood Road (Route 656), and is identified as PINS 55-A-176 and 55-A- 176B in the Stonewall District. (Mr. Tierney) ........................................I 10) Informal Discussion Regarding Proposed RP, Residential Performance Amendments. (Mr. Wyatt) .........................................J 11) Informal Discussion with Raymond L. Fish, D.V.M., Regarding The County Ordinance As It Relates To Family Lot Subdivisions. (Mr. Watkins) ........................................ K 12) Recommendation of the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee Concerning the Request of Linwood Ritter for a Sewer Extension. (Mr. Tierney) ........................................L 13) Discussion Regarding Proposed Guidelines For Commercial Construction in Historic Overlay Zones. (Mr. Tierney) ....................................... M 14) Other.............................................N MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Court House in Winchester, Virginia on March 1, 1995. PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; John R. Marker, Vice Chairman/Back Creek District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Richard C. Shickle, Gainesboro District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; George L. Romine, Citizen at Large; and Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison. ABSENT: Terry Stone, Gainesboro District and Robert M. Sager, Board Liaison Planning Staff present: Robert W. Watkins, Director and Secretary; W. Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator; Evan A. Wyatt, Planner II; and Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Director. CALL TO ORDER - Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Thomas, the minutes of January 4, 1995 were unanimously approved as presented. Upon motion made by Mr. Thomas and seconded by Mr. Romine, the minutes of January 18, 1995 were unanimously approved as presented. 2 INTRODUCTION OF MR. RICHARD C. OURS, OPEOUON DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE Chairman DeHaven welcomed the newly appointed Opequon District representative to the Planning Commission, Mr. Richard C. Ours. BIMONTHLY REPORT Option to Purchase Caleb Heights Property Mr. Watkins stated that the Association for the Preservation of Civil War Sites (APCWS), which is a national group headquartered in Fredericksburg, Virginia, has undertaken an option agreement with Mr. David Holiday for 222 acres of the Caleb Heights site, with a final purchase price of $2.5 million. Mr. Watkins said this group has purchased battlefield sites throughout the country and this is good news for Frederick County. Chairman DeHaven accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's information. COMMITTEE REPORTS Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee - 2/23/95 Mtg. Mr. Thomas reported that the DRRS discussed the issue of vested rights and sign regulations at interstate intersections. With regard to vested rights, Mr. Thomas said that the DRRS discussed the -possibility of putting a termination clause in the ordinance for master plan approvals that would require resubmittals after a number of years and also discussing how long that time frame should be. Regarding sign regulations, Mr. Thomas reported that the DRRS discussed developing overlay districts for various intersections along the interstate for sign regulations. Mr. Thomas said that the committee was trying to become more aware of business needs for advertisement in those areas, while at the same time, protecting the surrounding areas, particularly residential areas, from over -signage. Mr. Thomas said that the DRRS plans to meet with the BZA to discuss the proposals as a joint committee and is also considering having a liaison member of the BZA on the DRRS while the ordinance is being developed. 3 Transportation Committee - 2/14/95 Mtg. Mr. Wyatt said that the Transportation Committee discussed the Primary Road Improvement Plan, which is before the Planning Commission this evening. Battlefield Task Force - Will meet on 3113195 Mr. Watkins reported that the BTF is in the process of finalizing an overall plan for a battlefield network. He said that the BTF is planning to present the plan at a joint worksession with the City and the County in early April. Historic Resources Advisory Board - 2/21/95 Mtg. Mr. Morris reported that the HRAB will begin the historic plaque program by presenting plaques to the ten national historic sites in the county. He said that it is hopeful that the first presentations of those plaques will be made by the Board of Supervisors in April. Mr. Morris said that design guidelines for new construction in historic overlay areas was also discussed. Sanitation Authority - 2/15/95 MU. Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the minutes of the February 15, 1995 meeting indicate that a contract has been obtained for sewer on Route 522 South between Airport Road and the Shenandoah Mobile Home Park. Winchester Planning Commission - 2/14/95 and 2/21/95 Mtgs. Mr. Shickle reported that the City is continuing their discussions on the outdoor display and sale of retail merchandise. He also reported that certain City staff members have expressed interest in working with the County Planning Commission on the interstate signage issue. Mr. DiBenedetto said that the City unanimously voted to rezone a portion of the Park property for a theater -arts building. 4 SUBDIVISIONS Subdivision Application #001-95 of Saratoga Meadows for 42 single-family detached traditional housing units on minimum building lots of 15,000 square feet. This property is located on the south side of Senseny Road (Rt. 657), approximately 150' west of the intersection of Senseny Road and Greenwood Road (Rt. 656), and is identified with PINS 55-A-195 and 54 -A -125A in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Action - Approved Mr. Miller gave some project history of the site, stating that the approved rezoning of this property included proffers which offered $4,148 per building lot to offset capital costs associated with public schools, regional parks, and emergency services. He said that the master development plan addressed entrance concerns through the alignment with Country Park Drive (Rt. 1243) and stormwater management concerns were addressed through the creation of two on-site stormwater management facilities designed per the County Engineer's specifications. Mr. Miller said that because of water problems in one corner of the development, the Inspections Department is requesting that the lowest floor elevations be shown on site plans for Lots 27, 28, 37, and 38. Mr. Miller said that several of the platted lots (Lots 10, 11, 24, 27) will have long and narrow or very restrictive building footprints available and may result in variance requests. Mr. Miller -said- that a drainage easement plat across the Riggleman property will be required prior to final administrative approval of this development. Mr. Bruce Edens, the project surveyor with Greenway, Inc., was present to answer questions. The Planning Commission -expressed concerns on the stormwater management, in light of the drainage problems in this area and the Greenfield Heights area. Staff noted that the County engineer has expressed confidence that what is presented on the plan would be adequate to handle the situation. Upon motion made by Mr. Romine and seconded by Mr. Wilson, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve Subdivision Application #001-95 of Saratoga Meadows for 42 single family detached traditional housing units provided that all review agency requirements are adequately addressed prior to final administrative approval. 5 PUBLIC HEARINGS: Conditional Use Permit #001-95 of Michael Sheffield for a cottage occupation to produce rodents as a pet industry supplier at 4648 Wardensville Grade. This property is identified with PIN 58-A-29 in the Back Creek District. Action - Approved Mr. Miller gave the background information for this application and said that there were no particular problems by any of the reviewing agencies. Mr. Miller said that the site is isolated and is located approximately 1/2 mile from the state -maintained road and any other residence. Mr. Michael Sheffield, the applicant and property owner, came forward to answer questions from the Commission. Mr. Morris asked if Mr. Sheffield was dealing with any sort of hybrid animal or if he planned on doing any type of genetic research. Mr. Sheffield replied that the animals were the average laboratory -type white mice and rats reproduced under normal reproductive processes. He said there would be no genetic research carried out. There were no citizen comments. No other outstanding__ issues were raised by the Commission. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Romine, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve Conditional Use Permit #001-95 of Michael Sheffield for a Cottage Occupation to produce rodents as a pet industry supplier with the following conditions: 1. Any expansion of facilities required to accommodate the use will require a new or revised conditional use permit. Conditional Use Permit #002-95 of Barry D. Myers for a motel/resort (bed and breakfast) at 473 Vaucluse Road near Stephens City. This property is identified with PIN 84-A-53 in the Back Creek District. Action - Approved Mr. Miller said that VDOT has stated that minimum site distance requirements are not met at the existing entrance into this property to allow for safe ingress/egress and VDOT has requested that the entrance be relocated slightly westward. Mr. Miller said that VDOT's other request was for a commercial entrance, which would consist of a 30' culvert and flared entrance, however, it did not have to be paved or curb and guttered. He said that the applicant has agreed to meet these requirements prior to operation. The Commissioners had questions on the existing and/or proposed septic systems for structures on site and whether or not sprinkler systems were required. Mr. Barry D. Myers, the applicant and owner, described the existing structures on the site. He said that there is one main house, an art gallery with two bedrooms on the second floor, a mill house which is used as a studio, a guest house which he and his wife intend to live in, and the Vaucluse property, which is a historic 3,500 square foot brick structure built in the late 1700s, and that he and his wife intend to restore. Mr. Myers said that there are also remnants of a 12' X 14' house belonging to Gabriel Jones, the valley lawyer, and some slave quarters, both of which they would like to rebuild some time in the future. Mr. Myers said that this would not be a motel/hotel service. He said that they would have no more than 15 rooms on the entire property, spread throughout all of the structures. Mr. Myers next explained which structures each of the drainfields would serve. Mr. Myers said that he has reviewed this plan with the Health Department and it seems to work and to satisfy their needs, as long as he can get the required septic capacity. He added that sprinkler systems were not required by the code for this use group. There were no citizen comments. No other outstanding issues were raised by the Commission. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Light, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve Conditional Use Permit #002-95 of Barry D. Myers for a motel/resort (bed and breakfast) with the following conditions: 1. Any expansion of the use or facilities to accommodate the use will require a new conditional use permit and a revised site plan. 2. A relocated commercial entrance as required by VDOT will be constructed and approved prior to any public use. 3. Approved health systems must be installed prior to any public use. 7 4. All review agency comments and requirements must be complied with prior to any public use. 5. A site plan must be submitted, approved, and all requirements completed prior to any public use of the facilities. An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article N, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165-37, Buffer and Screening Requirements, which would permit the Planning Commission to allow a modified Zoning District Buffer under certain specified conditions on land located within an approved master development plan. Action - Approved Mr. Tierney brought the Commission's attention to their discussion on January 18, 1995 with Mr. Ralph Gregory concerning a parcel within his business park, located south of the Route 37 interchange, north of Stephens City, on the west side of Route 11. Mr. Tierney said that Mr. Gregory had a potential purchaser for the site with a use that required B3 Zoning. He said that the required buffers under B3 Zoning were unacceptable to the proposed purchaser because the purchaser wanted visibility from Route 11. Mr. Tierney said that Mr. Gregory proceeded with a request. to amend the buffer requirements in the ordinance. Mr. Tierney said that the Commission felt that some flexibility on buffers and screening could be permitted within approved master planned parcels; and because of time constraints involved with Mr. Gregory's client, they instructed the staff to draft an amendment to allow a buffer and screening reduction waiver which would be site plan controlled. Mr. Tierney read the proposed amendment as drafted by the staff. The Commissioners felt that the wording under D(6)(b) should be changed to read, "...will require review..." instead of "...may require review..." In order to prevent all kinds of minor modifications in screening requirements coming to the Commission for review, the staff suggested the wording, "...will require review by the Planning staff and may require review by the Planning Commission..." The Commission felt this wording would be appropriate. The Commission consulted with the Assistant Commonwealth Attorney, Mr. Jay Cook, to determine if readvertising was necessary due to the wording change. Mr. Cook replied that readvertising would not be required. Upon -motion made by Mr. Light and seconded by Mr. Marker, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve the ordinance which would permit the Planning Commission to allow a modified Zoning �3 District Buffer under certain specified conditions on land located within an approved master development plan, as follows: D. Zoning District Buffers. Buffers shall be placed on land to be developed when it adjoins land in certain different zoning districts. (6) Where B-3 (Industrial Transition) zoning adjoins B-2 (Business General) zoning on land contained within an approved Master Development Plan, the Planning Commission may allow for specific modifications in screening requirements. (a) Such modifications shall be allowed at the Commission's discretion, provided all the following conditions are met. (1) The property line for which the modification is requested is internal to the land contained within the Master Development Plan. (2) A specified use is proposed on the parcel for which the modification is requested. (3) The modification shall not involve a reduction to required buffer distances. (4) The proposed components of the buffer are clearly indicated on a site plan for the parcel. (5)-- The site plan is reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. (b) The approval of modified screening shall apply only for the specified use approved. Any change in use of the parcel including additions or site alterations will require review by the staff and may require review by the Planning Commission and may result in the Commission revoking the modified screening approval. OTHER THE 1995 UPDATE TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY PRIMARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN Action - Approved M Mr. Wyatt said that the County has received VDOT's preliminary funding plan for the next six years, which provides money for preliminary engineering, right-of-way acquisition, and construction for the ongoing Route 522 South improvements, as well as improvements for the Route 37/ Rt. 11/ I-81 interchange area, which was discussed last year. Mr. Wyatt said that with that in mind, the staff felt it was prudent to remove those items from the 1995 Plan and revise the 1995 Plan to emphasize the importance of new projects. Mr. Wyatt said that the Commonwealth Transportation Board's Preallocation Hearing will be held in Augusta County on March 21 and the staff anticipates addressing the 1995 Plan showing the proposed Route 37 Eastern Bypass as the County's top priority for new road improvements. Mr. Wyatt said that the second priority is the improvements to the Route 277 Corridor, based on the commercial, residential, and public use activities that have occurred over the last several years. He said that Priorities 3 (Rt. 11 North and South of Winchester) and 4 (Interstate 81 East of Winchester) on the proposed plan are one in the same, although they will be advertised separately; and the staff will be coordinating these efforts with the City Planning Department because a portion of this area lies within City limits. Mr. Wyatt noted that the Plan indicates access improvements from Route 11 North and South to the Route 37 interchange areas and finally, the Plan calls for improvements to the I-81 Corridor. Mr. Wyatt added that the 1995 Plan also indicates the need to address commuter park and ride lots. and in particular, the designation of properties that are in the proximity of future 37 East with the Route 7 East and Route 50 East intersections. Commissioners questioned whether or not there was any way to determine if Frederick County was receiving its fair share of allocations distributed by VDOT, as compared with other jurisdictions across the state. Mr. Wyatt said that the staff does not pass up the opportunity, especially at the Preallocation Hearings, to express the need to receive funding for all the items on the plan. The Commission had no amendments to the proposed 1995 Plan as presented. Upon motion made by Mr. Light and seconded by Mr. Marker, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously endorse the 1995 Frederick County Primary Road Improvement Plan as presented. REQUEST FOR BUFFER REQUIREMENT WAIVER ASSOCIATED WITH THE FIRST VIRGINIA SQUARE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN Action - Approved 10 Mr. Wyatt said that representatives of Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. have asked for an opportunity to address the Planning Commission regarding the potential to reduce some of the buffer requirements associated with the First Virginia Square Site Development Plan. He said that the proposed design for this project does not allow for a ten foot landscaped area, therefore, the applicant is proposing to maintain six feet and requests a waiver of the remaining four feet. Mr. Charles W. Maddox, Jr., project engineer with G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc., described the mixture of evergreen and deciduous plantings that they were proposing inside the six foot easement. Mr. Maddox said that the size of the proposed Burger King, the drive- through space, the one -lane of parking, and the full 24 foot through -lane on the eastern side of this site creates a "choke point" that has caused this request for a reduction in buffer. Commissioners felt that the remaining four feet was needed more in property space than in the landscaped area because of the tight -fit of the numerous uses planned for this site. The Commissioners felt that they could grant the reduction if the landscaping proposed was attractively done and well-maintained to break up the busy activity of the site. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Romine, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve the reduction of the ten foot landscaped screen to six feet with the stipulation that the landscaping provided is attractive and well-maintained. BIMONTHLY REPORT AND SITE PLAN SUBMISSIONS Mr. Miller said that the staff is in the process of streamlining the site plan review process and is requesting that the procedure for the site plan process be changed to allow the staff to administratively approve site plans without the need for them to appear on the Bimonthly Report. Mr. Miller said that the staff and applicants have found this procedure to be somewhat cumbersome at times because a site plan may be held up for two weeks or more awaiting appearance on the Bimonthly Report. Mr. Miller said that the staff would continue to automatically present plans which involved public facilities or the spending of public monies and staff would also continue to formally present plans that had previously been requested by the Commission, such as in the case of an approved CUP that required a site plan and the Commission had requested formal review. He said that the staff would also bring site plans for formal review if there was controversy that could not be resolved by the staff or the staff determined that it would be appropriate to submit the site plan for review by the Commission. 11 The Planning Commission did not have problems with changing the site plan procedure as outlined by Mr. Miller. Upon motion made by Mr. Romine and seconded by Mr. Light, the Commission voted unanimously to formally approve the request of the staff to change the site plan process to allow the staff to administratively approve site plans without them appearing on the Bimonthly Report. ADJOURNMENT p. in. No other business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 8:25 Respectfully submitted, Robert W. Watkins, Secretary Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Court House in Winchester, Virginia on March 15, 1995. PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; John R. Marker, Vice Chairman/Back Creek District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; Terry Stone, Gainesboro District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Richard C. Shickle, 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 Planning Staff present: Robert W. Watkins, Director and Secretary; Jean M. Moore, Planner I; and Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Director. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES The staff recommended a revision to the fifth paragraph on page four of the minutes of February 1. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Light, the minutes of February 1, 1995 were unanimously approved as corrected. 2 BIMONTHLY REPORT Chairman DeHaven accepted -the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's information. COMMITTEE REPORTS Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee - 3/13/95 Mtg. Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the CPPC discussed Mr. Linwood Ritter's request for authorization to extend sewer to his MH1 (mobile home) property located on Route 636. Mrs. Copenhaver said that the CPPC felt it would not be appropriate to extend either the Sewer and Water Service Area or the Urban Development Area at this time. Battlefield Task Force - 3/13/95 Mtg. Mr. Watkins reported that the BTF discussed the acquisition activity in relation to Third Winchester that the APCWS is undertaking. He said that the BTF essentially completed their discussions of the draft plan and it will next be submitted at a worksession to both the City and County's Commissions and Boards. Economic Development Commission Mr. Romine said that the EDC has appointed two new members, Mr. James W. Golladay, Jr. and Mr. Douglas Rinker. Sanitation Authority - 3/15/95 Mtg. Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the SA has purchased a T.V. camera to monitor sewer lines for surface water infiltration. She said that they also plan to purchase a flushing truck to clean and vacuum problem lines. Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the SA also discussed their prioritized projects --connecting the south and north quarries and the new administration and maintenance headquarters. 3 Winchester Planning Commission - 3/14/95 Mr. Shickle reported that the City Planning Commission held a worksession on March 14, 1995. Mr. Shickle read a list of the upcoming rezoning applications that will be heard by the City Planning Commission. Informal Discussion with Bruce E. Welch, DVM, Regarding an Amendment to the RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District to Allow Veterinary Hospitals with a Conditional Use Permit. The property is located at 689 Aylor Road, near Stephens City, and is designated with PIN# 75-A-38. Mr. Tierney said that Mr. Bruce E. Welch, DVM, who spoke with the Commission on January 18, 1995 about establishing a veterinary clinic on the east side of Route 647, is now contemplating the possibility of requesting veterinary clinics as an allowed use in RP (Residential Performance) Districts. Mr. Tierney said that Mr. Welch's previous discussions with the Commission involved rezoning the property to B2, which is the required zoning for veterinary clinics. Mr. Tierney said that the property is currently zoned RP and is surrounded by RP uses. Mr. Bruce E. Welch, DVM, came forward to get the Commission's feelings on pursuing an ordinance amendment to allow veterinary clinics in an RP District with a conditional use permit. Mr. Welch said that fraternal lodges and civic clubs, day care facilities, and convalescent nursing homes are all uses which are allowed in RP with a conditional use permit, yet all of these uses generate much more traffic than a veterinary clinic. Mr. Welch said that other benefits of a conditional use permit would be that the Commission could evaluate sites and apply restrictions on an individual basis. Mr. Welch felt that if the property was rezoned to B2, the B2 buffer restrictions would infringe on the site and the use of the property, and he also felt that B2 zoning, which allows Taco Bells and Burger Kings, would not fit well within the neighborhood. Mr. Welch presented a handout showing two different layouts for the location of structures, the driveway, and parking lot. Commissioners discussed the precedent setting situation that may be created by allowing veterinary clinics in RP with a conditional use permit. They felt the precedent was not just veterinary clinics, but all the small business offices that fall under B2 Zoning. There was discussion about amending the ordinance to allow veterinary clinics as an allowed use in B1 (Neighborhood Business) Zoning Districts; however, if this business failed, a problem could arise in deciding what other use to put at this location. They did not feel that a 132 (Business 4 General) Zoning was appropriate. Chairman DeHaven polled the Commission and the majority of members felt it would be best to pursue allowing this use in RP with a conditional use permit because of the ability to evaluate individual sites and to apply restrictions on an individual basis. No other action was needed by the Commission at this time. Informal Discussion with Mr. John Stevens Regarding a Rezoning from Bl (Neighborhood Business) to B2 (Business General) for an art gallery/framing shop. This property is designated with PIN# 90-A-55. Mr. Tierney said that Mr. John Stevens owns a 3.21 acre parcel on the east side of Route 11 south of Middletown, zoned B1, and he is interested in selling the property to someone who would like to have an art gallery/framing shop. Mr. Tierney said that an art gallery/framing shop requires B2 zoning. He added that surrounding zoning is RA and the Belle Grove property is located across Route 11. Mr. John Stevens was available to answer questions from the Commission. Mr. Stevens -said that he would like to see the property used for something favorable to the area and to Belle Grove. The Commission felt that an art gallery/framing shop would be an improvement over the uses that have operated from this location in the past. There was some discussion about inconsistencies that exist in the ordinance with regard to the uses allowed in B1 and B2. It was noted that some of the uses allowed in B1 were more intense than a framing shop, which is only allowed in B2. It was suggested that a "miscellaneous retail" classification be placed in the B1 District to allow this use and other small, neighborhood retail uses. The Commissioners felt that the art gallery/framing shop use should be allowed in a B1 District and instructed the staff to proceed with advertising. Informal Discussion with Linden Unger Regarding a Rezoning from B2 (Business General) to RP (Residential Performance). This property is designated with PIN# 53-A-55 and PIN# 53-A-62. Mr. Tierney said that in January, the Commission had discussions with Mr. Linden Unger concerning the possibility of rezoning two small parcels of land (totaling roughly one and a third acres) located on the south side of Route 522 North from B2 (Business General) to RP (Residential Performance). Mr. Tierney said that at that time, there was confusion over the location of the two parcels (53-A-55 and 62) and surrounding zoning. He said that the staff 5 has since resolved both issues and both parcels are deeded separately and are listed separately in the real estate records. Mr. Tierney said that the parcels are adjoined on the east and west by parcels zoned B2 and Parcel 55 adjoins RP (Residential Performance) zoning to the south. Mr. Linden Unger said that he has no plans for the property. He said that under B2 Zoning, the taxes have already exceeded the value of the property, and he wanted to change that. Commissioners felt that if Mr. Unger would like to have the property changed back to RP because he has no use for B2 Zoning, he did not ask for B2 zoning, and the taxes were presenting a burden, then they were in favor of rezoning the property back to RP. Commissioners noted that the zoning was probably changed to B2 back in the 1970s as a comprehensive rezoning for that whole area. DISCUSSION ON THE STREAMLINING OF THE SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS Ms. Moore came forward to discuss the efforts the Planning Department has made regarding streamlining the site plan review process. Ms. Moore said that the goal of streamlining the site plan review process has been three -fold and includes ways to improve service to customers, to gain a competitive edge in economic development, and to encourage the submission of quality plans. Ms. Moore discussed the analysis of the review process with the Commission. She said that representatives from county and state reviewing agencies were involved in the streamlining effort and letters were also sent to the development community asking for their opinions on improving the process. Ms. Moore said that modifications were recommended in three areas: the site plan application package, the review process itself, and the Frederick County Ordinance that governs the process. Ms. Moore discussed nine recommended modifications to the review process. The Planning Commission was in favor of the efforts made so far in the streamlining process and endorsed the recommended modifications to the site plan application package, the review process, and minor changes to the county ordinance governing the process. A ADJOURNMENT No other business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 8:20 Respectfully submitted, Robert W. Watkins, Secretary Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman M E M O R a N D rr M — v ai TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Robert W. Watkins, Secretary SUBJECT: Bimonthly Report DATE: March 24, 1995 (1) Rezonings Pending: (dates are submittal dates) James Carroll Valley Mill Estates 10/07/94 11/10/94 Shaw Shaw RP to B2 RA to RP (2) Conditional Use Permits Pending: (dates are submittal dates) Michael & Rebecca 09/12/89 Opeq Pet Industry Supplier Sheffield 02/01/95 BcCk (Produce Rodents) Barry & Shelia Myers 02/01/95 BcCk Bed & Breakfast Raymond Bailey 03/10/95 Gain Automotive Repair w/o Lakeview Garden Apartments 01/05/95 Shaw body repair (3) Conditional Use Permits Approved: (dates are approval dates) Virginia Square 02/08/95 NONE Burger King/Amoco Amoco Foam 03/10/95 (4) Site Plans Pending: (dates are submittal dates) Wheatlands Wastewater Fac. 09/12/89 Opeq Trmt.facil Grace Brethren Church 06/08/90 Shaw Church Flex Tech 10/25/90 Ston Lgt. Industrial Lake Centre 05/15/91 Shaw Townhouses Lakeview Garden Apartments 01/05/95 Shaw Apartments Holiday Inn Express 02/16/95 Opeq Motel Virginia Square 02/08/95 Gain Burger King/Amoco Amoco Foam 03/10/95 Ston Storage area Exxon Service Station 03/20/95 Ston Service Station (5) Site Plans Approved: (dates are approval dates) Westminster Canterbury 03/21/95 Gaines Duplex Housing Fort Collier Lease Bldg.#1 03/24/95 Ston Warehouse Addition (6) Subdivisions Pending: (dates are submittal dates) Briarwood Est. 01/04/94 Ston 2 (7) Subdivisions Pending Final Admin. Approval: (P/C or BOS approval dates Abrams Point, Phase I 06/13/90 Shaw Lake Centre 06/19/91 Shaw Fredericktowne Est., Sec 9 10/06/93 Opeq Harry Stimpson 10/26/94 Opeq Saratoga Meadows 03/01/95 Shaw Hampton Chase Section I 11/02/94 Ston (8) PMDP Pending: (dates are submittal dates) Fieldstone Heights 04/25/94 Ston Valley Mill Estates 03/16/95 Ston (9) FMDP Pending Administrative Approval: (dates are BOS approval dates Battlefield Partnership 04/08/92 BaCk James R. Wilkins III 04/14/93 Shaw Star Fort 09/14/94 Gain 10) Variances Pending: (dates are submittal dates) Timothy & Kevin Giroux 02/24/95 BaCk Ronald & Patricia Powers 03/17/95 Shaw Bobby & Audrey Brown 03/24/95 Opeq 11) Variances Approved: (dates are approval dates) Darroll & Patricia Neely 03/21/95 Gain 1E. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT -„ ACTIVITY „REPORT #77 (Mar. 1-15) 1. Transportation Bob Watkins attended the meeting of the Chamber of Commerce Transportation Committee. The Winchester Area Transportation Study was discussed. Both Bob Watkins and Kris Tierney met with G. W. Clifford & Associates' Chuck Maddox and Steve Gyurison to discuss various issues associated with the County's Eastern Road Plan. Evan Wyatt prepared the 1995 Primary Road Improvement Plan for Frederick County. Harrington Smith, Wendell Dick, and Evan Wyatt will be participating in the 1995 Staunton District Preallocation Hearing to be held at the Augusta County Government Center on March 21, 1995. Evan Wyatt met with concerned citizens regarding the proposed improvements to Greenwood Road and Valley Mill Road which are scheduled for advertisement in 1996. Evan Wyatt is coordinating a meeting between VDOT representatives and citizens along Ebenezer Church Road (Route 705) to discuss proposed incidental construction improvements. 2. Historic Issues Bob Watkins attended a LFPDC meeting with Alex Wise, the Director of the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. Mr. Watkins gave a presentation of local battlefield efforts and strategies were discussed. 3. Plan Reviews, Approvals,, and Site Inspections: Evan Wyatt reviewed the following siteplans: K&J Investments for the development of office and warehouse space along Welltown Road (Route 661); a proposed addition to Van Guilders Nursing Home located on Pennsylvania Avenue; and an auditorium and classroom addition to Mt. View Church of Christ located along Valley Pike (Route 11). Evan also participated in a Technical Review Committee meeting to discuss the development of Regency Lakes Mobile Home Park, section D. Jean Moore reviewed the following site plans: Holiday Inn Express; a proposed addition to Red Apple Deli located on Stickley Drive (the addition is proposed to be a Subway sandwich shop); the expansion of Boyer Landscaping (the site plan was required by their conditional use permit obtained in April, 1994). 5. Meetings Bob Watkins assisted Mr. Strawsnyder on the response to the Office RFP meeting. Evan Wyatt had the following meetings: 1) Met with Steve Gyurisin to discuss the requirements for a revised master development plan and a new site plan for development at Regency Lakes Mobile Home Park. The revised master development plan is a result of the desire to realign the Regency Lakes Drive loop road around the lake, the elimination of a proposed 60' right-of-way, and the creation of an 80' right-of-way that will provide access to Caleb Heights. 2) Met with Greenway, Inc. to discuss site plan requirements associated with improvements to Fort Collier Lease Building #1 and a new Hoss' Steak House to be located beside Big Lots on Millwood Pike (Route 50). 3) Met with Richard Ruckman to discuss requirements for outdoor storage facilities and storm water management improvements at the Amoco Foam site located on Martinsburg Pike. 4) Met with contractors that are interested in expanding the existing Gore Post Office on Northwestern Pike (Route 50). 5) Met with Gary DeOms and Brenda Diehl to begin work associated with the update of the Southern Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District. This district will be presented to the Board of Supervisors in May, 1995. 6 ) Both Evan Wyatt and Eric Lawrence met with Tim Youmans to discuss the requirements for the proposed expansion of the Winchester Public Utilities maintenance yard on Woodstock Lane. Jean Moore had the following meetings: 1) Met with Steve Gyurisin to discuss revisions made to the Holiday Inn Express site plan. 2) Met with Dave Furstenau to discuss buffer and parking requirements for the proposed addition to Red Apple Deli. 3) Met with Glenn Williamson to obtain a search warrant to investigate apartments being leased by Mark Anderson above Aberdeen Acres Kennels. Kris Tierney had the following meetings: 1) Met with John Stevens to discuss the pnssibility of rezoning a small parcel on the east side of Route 11, south of Middletown, from B-1 (Neighborhood Business) to B-2 (Business General). 2) Met with EDC's June Wilmot to discuss strategies for developing additional industrial sites with rail access in the county. 3) Met with Bruce Welch, a veterinarian interested in establishing a clinic within a residential area. This led to an informal discussion with the Planning Commission who felt it may be appropriate to permit veterinary clinics in the RP (Residential Performance) zone as a conditional use. 4) Met with the applicants and designers of a single family MDP and RP rezoning on Valley Mill Road to discuss issues associated with the pending applications. 6. GIS/Mapping Jean Moore produced a land use map of Round Hill Community Center. 7. Other Evan Wyatt attended an arbitration hearing in Minneapolis, Minnesota on March 6 and March 7. The arbitration hearing regards settlement issues associated with the Miller Milling facility located in the Fort Collier Industrial Park. Evan was subpoenaed to testify regarding site plan design issues and review procedures. Jean Moore attended the Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District's Strategic Planning Workshop. The workshop involved representatives from various agencies and localities to form a strategic plan that will address the current and future needs of the District. Jean ,Moore met with Deputy P. Grim and Deputy Gary Williams and proceeded to investigate the property of Mark Anderson. It was determined that two apartments are being leased without proper building or zoning permits. 8. Professional Development Eric Lawrence and Jean Moore attended a seminar sponsored by the Small Business Development Center explaining the applications and basics of Internet. P/C Review Date: 04/05/95 BOS Review Date: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #003-95 RAYMOND BAILEY AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR W/O BODY REPAIR LOCATION: This property is located at 302 Poorhouse Road (Rt. 654), Winchester, Virginia. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 52-A-71 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) Land use - Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) Land Use - residential PROPOSED USE: Automotive repair w/o -body repair REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation• No objection to a conditional use permit for this property. However, prior to operation of the business a commercial entrance must be constructed to our minimum standards to allow for safe egress and ingress of the property. Any work performed on the State's right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. The permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Fire Marshall: Access to structure must be maintained at all times for fire department vehicles. 1) Any use of flammable or combustible liquids must comply with Chapter 32 of the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code. 2) Building must comply with applicable sections of 1993 B.O.C.A. Building Code pertaining to service station garage operations. Inspections Department: Building shall comply with Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and Section 3111 Use Group S (Storage) of the BOCA National Building Code 1993. Other codes that apply are Title 24 Code of Federal Regulation, Part 36 Page 2 Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities. Existing foundation will require evaluation at the time of building permit application. All drainage from the building shall have an approved grease/oil separator as per the BOCA Plumbing Code. Health Department;_ No permit or record of approval for sewage disposal is available for this parcel. Planning Department: Automobile repair without body repair is permitted in the Rural Area (RA) zoning district with an approved CUP. Applicant proposes to construct a building on an existing concrete pad where there previously was a structure. This structure will have high visibility in what is basically a residential area. During a visit to the site on March 21, 1995 it was observed that there were 3 inoperative vehicles located on the property that are in violation of the zoning ordinance. I also observed that there is an old underground tank at the rear left corner of the concrete pad. Applicant advises that he will remove the underground tank. Because of the high site visibility and the configuration of the neighborhood, vehicles awaiting repair should be very limited or screened from public view. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APRIL 5, 1995: Approval with the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments will be complied -with prior to any service to the public. 2. The existing underground tank must be removed, disabled or properly permitted. 3. All repair work must take place inside of an enclosed building. 4. No outside storage of parts or other materials shall be allowed. 5. No inoperative vehicles shall be allowed to_ be stored on the property. 6. No more than 5 vehicles awaiting repair will be allowed to be openly displayed on the property at any one time. 7. Hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM, Monday through Saturday. Location Map for PIN. 52-A-71 CUP #003-95 1. NAME: Submittal Deadline P/C Meeting BOS Meeting APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA ('rne appiicant if the owner other) ADDRESS: � �.� 1 i��e�� i.�wc��. .4��9 TELEPHONE (`70`Z ) / /,!�- 2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties in interest of the property: G - ow tee. 3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and include the route number of your road or street) An 2i 9-� 3 0 9- Ae-eP c..= s -elt, 4. The property has a road frontage of % - 13 feet and a depth of mv-o feet and consists of �.�7 _ acres. (Please be exact) 5. The property is owned by as evidenced by deed from — '! recorded `-�� (previous owner) in deed book no. - on page _!340—, as recorded in the records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, County of Frederick. 6. 14 -Digit Property Identification No. 562 Magisterial District Current Zoning - 7. Adjoining Property: USE ZO North East South _. Cit 0+ West e - S. The type of use proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept. before completing) ,qu,t,�,�r 12f�.Q»,i2 LV,"Ib 0,.,ef foog& Shy 9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be constructed: - $t el S ��c�.-ate c,v 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 Address v.pL 01 �c?de, s.zk1 1"f,1; Property ID# 5'�1O00-/q-cov©-DO �5 ..na�e�r �.�i�.u,� y„v-es Address Property Address ID# s� VCC,_0000-00 70 3 30 lPocA,t iji: m.Gi'llfil A1'O G,2CC' ,.✓ Property ID# S "�- 000-p-0000-0'0 -rm„,y A- Address 3/5 Property ID# Address L �/�.s1 hw= s fin v ; K� , Z� t ` , N✓ , , �. /VC, /Property�ofQP% >eic�► � C��tu�c V41lr X Address A [Property ID# 5�,2 000 � /ri O� �b�V iUe Level �i eK 7 3 8 P 2 47 to ncrate / /Finnd(pl co ner°�^ r�tt 011 meted / ve way • Denote 6 Rn Cound 1 N / Rtici s. / // `\�? .` • ' ' Denotes Ca.n.. / I t • HOU56 DGTAIL i ah t verheja6 tom / �4 Wood Race nG5 2.5497 f�onrele G�• Nd1'U.Yr I 1V/ /r Wire Fence oo Ell; AAAl:11-'CtC. t'•e%p, s:rr N t4 9( 2 57. 26 r' VIRGINIA FREDERICK COUNTY. SCT. 161 This siinstrument of writing was produced to mo on the I – _day of�,�, 19Y • at_��'7 011 and with c :: 1 t he of acknowledgmerd the; c.j .-nne;: J c was aadm"tte :o record. Tax impoead by So. F:_'34.1 ;I I IS S L'_i and 50-54 have been paid , If HOUOPj LOCArIOM CLERK BRENDA F F05Te2 P 0.13. G82 PCi. 640 GAINE6130120 MAG10T('_,RIAL DI9T121Ci ism F-Rl5De,0CX CO. NTy,1 V192GINIA U ro re A B145 ^.• o�., n.. w•- m•oow .nrow w^.rn or . r.n• ,.oar •ro a... ror m•.•ra• ..^..m...�.. rn. o•oo.n. r.a. �.,b^..,. r,,•.,m.,. FLOOD ZONE: PANEL: 0100 8 •^a eo rotn.n,r n ro o.^..,nb rn.• .. •. •• m ,-- .• .•w y, ,N ao^.v„um m_r COMMUNITY NO: `3 DATE: 7 IT"78 S 1 00 DATE: Mr—GME361z 1'S, 1Dfy9 SCALE: 1'► 100 JOB NO: 895G 28 is PURCHASER: 13A1t_tY SELLER: rOOTOr;� c Rb1D) 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 _� % / Signature of Owner tc Owners' Mailing Address 0 r"�'D �:(��% Alf C,C, ), ,-k, -L C/w a�f�,j Owners' Telephone No. '7ZI ) Gfo S'. all TO BE COMPLETED BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: USE CODE: RENEWAL DATE: P/C review date: 04/05/95 BOS review date: REZONING APPLICATION #008-94 JAMES CARROLL To Rezone 2.81 Acres From RP (Residential Performance) To B2 (Business General) LOCATION: From Interstate 81 approximately .75 miles east of the City of Winchester, turn left onto Custer Avenue, property is located at the intersection of Custer Avenue and Pembridge Road. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 64A -4-20A, 64A -10-A, 64A -10-B PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RP (Residential Performance); present use: vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: RP (Residential Performance), present use: residential and vacant PROPOSED USE: Business and Commercial REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Vircrinia Dept. of Transportation• See attached comments dated 09/28/94. Fire Marshal: Hydrants must all be on designated fire lane. (1) Will address specific fire department issues on site plana (2) Applicant should address fire and rescue impacts based on County's computer model available from Planning Department staff. County Engineer: We have no comments at this time. However, we reserve the right to perform a detailed review at the time of a site plan submittal. CountV Attorney: No comment. PLANNING: Location: The property is located within the Urban Development Area, in close proximity to an interstate interchange. The future land use map within the recently completed report on Frederick County business corridors shows this area of Route 50 as being a business/office use. B-2 zoning would not be out of line with this categorization. Site Suitability: The parcel is relatively level with no steep slopes or other environmentally sensitive features as defined by the County's Zoning Ordinance. Sewer and water are available to the parcel. Potential Impacts: Impacts from the proposed rezoning would not differ greatly from those that would be expected from development under the current RP zoning of the property. The traffic generated under B-2 zoning would be expected to be greater than under RP, however, the difference as a percentage of existing traffic would not be significant. The applicant has proffered that there would be no entrance on Etnam Drive and there would be a total of no more than five entrances to the site. The applicant has not eliminated any of the uses allowed under B-2 zoning. The County's impact model forecasts a net fiscal gain to the County with the exception of a cost for the unfunded portion of fire and rescue services which is forecasted at $1947.25. This amount is contrary to the applicant's impact statement which forecasts the cost at $757.00. This difference appears to be in part a result of the applicant generating a per acre cost rather than a total for the entire 2.8 acres. The cost for fire and rescue services under the current RP (Residential Performance) zoning as forecasted by the model is $648.80, with the cost difference being $1298.45. The applicant has not proffered a contribution to cover this cost. Conclusion: The proposed zoning conforms to the proposed future land use map developed by the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee and proposed for adoption as a part of the County's Comprehensive Plan. The County's impact model, however, projects a cost to fire and rescue services which has not been offset by the application. STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF 11\02194 PC MEETING: Denial, based on the cost impacts to Fire & Rescue of the proposed zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION SUMMARY OF 11/02/94: The applicant revised their proffer statement to include an increased emergency services payment to Fire & Rescue that matched the County's impact model. The applicant also presented a survey of the four lots proposed to clear up any discrepancy on which lots were involved in the rezoning. 15 residents of the Pembridge Heights Subdivision came forward to speak in opposition. The residents spoke about the heavy traffic in this area and felt the addition of a business at the entrance to their subdivision would only add to their traffic problems. They also felt that the existing access road to Route 50, Custer Avenue (Rt. 781), was inadequate. A petition was submitted containing 199 signatures of residents of the Pembridge Heights Subdivision who were in opposition to the rezoning. Mr. James H. Carroll, the property owner, said he had an informal discussion with the Planing Commission at the time Pembridge Heights was being developed, to ask if the Commission would grant him commercial zoning if he gave the developers a right-of-way through his property to Route 50. Mr. Carroll felt that the Commission's feeling were favorable towards rezoning at that time. The Commission felt that traffic was going to be a major consideration at this location and that the intersection at Route 50 and Custer Avenue (Rt. 681) was dangerous. It was noted that the applicant had offered no plans to modify the existing street network. Commissioners pointed out that residential traffic would have to pass through the proposed commercial area in order to get to the residential area. -Some Commissioners felt they could support a B1 zoning or a B2 zoning, if intense uses were proffered out; other commissioners felt it was too late to put commercial zoning here, since most of the homes in Pembridge Heights had already been built and sold. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION OF 11102/94• Tabled for 30 days or until December 7, 1994 by unanimous vote. (Mr. Wilson was absent) PLANNING COMMISSION MTG. OF 12107/94: Applicant requested tabling the application until the March 1, 1995 meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION MTG. OF 03/01/95: Applicant requested tabling the application until the April 5, 1995 meeting. COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. 0. BOX 278 RAY D. PETHTEL EDINBURG, 22824 WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN COMMISSIONER RESIDENT ENGINEER TELE(703)984-5600 FAX(703)984-5607 VDOT COMMENTS TO REQUEST FOR REZONING - JAMES CARROLL PROPERTY 09/28/94 No objections to the rezoning of this property from RP to B-2. Commercial development of this property along with further development of the Prince Frederick Business Park on the south side of Route 50 could have a significant impact on the adjacent Route 50/781 intersection. Intersection improvements -and possible signalization may be required to accommodate additional traffic. The upgrading of Route 781 from Route 50 may also be necessary. Prior to development a complete set of site plans which detail entrance designs, drainage improvements and trip generation from the I.T.E. Manual, 4(h Edition will be required for review. A storm water system will need to be provided to accommodate the existing drainage outfall ditch and easement which crosses the property. Any work performed on VDOT right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. VDOT Signature and Date xc- Mr. S. A. Melnikoff Mr. J. B. Diamond (FYI) TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY 09/28/94 Q7� V GotQ 110 facs��a �rrw a iqj / a GrecJ, 1 P / f� ` {.• � ~ M � O i 107 j Q n p x y r is dg 1 I 1 1 3 Q c • h , q�. � :? b 1 fi .OP �� r 'O � 1 b • � yv b ty �` a .' ws � � • � JJ rw. M� A '7 • s ' t'p C Iw � t / %o '• v '�'J.- V w � of � ger � 5B >G-f�tBt�4 oy 70jgr ,J 'a v d 3 Q ip /� 4C 9j �� ` • �s 8 " Y' IU j qh � 9`L p See 100 of Le .�.. ,/ % o-' 4 126-423 110 j „SUS ter O 230-582 � , -.. -qI-0 / 89A O b x 4E 4J lO ♦ A Cos�e/% 89 Oe ae�`G� �� q '- • _. m / 44 A �� Ce , Y Win Cr \> 1 - ast briv i I � i Al 00 i n i o i A 88 / OC/ a '2 ' \ UV 84 V 0 8) �R I n ' A n 4 o p � V M O I n •s + a ad a �� 1 L ra I 45E °'may^yam �� J! h I Scale in Feet = 45C 0x,`500 600 5900 kation Map for PIN; 64A -4-20A 3mes Carroll Rezoning #008-94 REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning Staf. Zoning Amendment Number 1 :S -S4 Date Received � C ,-1 BOS Hearing Date i PC Hearing Date `-5 The following information shall be provided by the applicant.- All pplicant. 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: Jances H. Carroll cZo Stephen i,'I. Cvurisin Address: Silbert W. Clifford & Associates inc. 200 11. Cameron Street, Winchester, VA 22601 Telephone: 0 -c6 -21 Fax:665-0423 2. Representative: Name: 5a:;ie As Above Telephone: 3. Owner: Name: James H. Carroll c o Stephen M. :;yurisin Address: ;ilbert W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. 200 N. Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 Telephone:i The _Code of Virizinia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list helow all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned - James li. Carroll 4. Zoning Change: It is requested that the zoning of the property be changed from i P to B-2 5. Current Use of the Property: Vacant 6. Adjoining Property: PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING 64-Aw-0000-01130 locant u4 -a00-0000-00130 Vacant c4-104-0000-00200 Residential b4A-0010-0001-20A t Residential RP RF RP 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): Approxi .ately .75 iles east -,f the City o w inches Ler at i-81. 14-r. th of R u to 50 east c,n Rc,ute 781 at Peribri -:ge Road. 13 8. Parcel Identification: 14 Digit Tax Parcel Number: 64A o0 o4 0000 20 A 9. Magisterial District: Shawnee 10. Property Dimensions: The dimensions of the property to be rezoned. Total Area: 2.8132 Acres The area of each portion to be rezoned to a different zoning district category should be noted: 2.8132 Acres Rezoned from to B-2 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: tsuckley-Lal-es, Inc ./Lrcwnell , In:.. Deed Book Number 308/361 Pages 622/706 12. Proposed Use: It is proposed that the property will be put to the following uses. 13. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map Plat X Deed to property X Statement verifying taxes paid X Agency Comments X Fees Impact Analysis Statement X Proffcr Statement X 14 14. Signature: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Freden,- County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued to me (us) when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right-of-way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. Applicant: Owner. Date: ! �' W 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: _ :rPanwnn 3 Rescue Service District: greenwood Total Proposed Non -Residential Lots/Buildings: ."iA 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: Armel Freuerica C:_-unty Ja-ies Wood N/.4 — NIA _ 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: There are no specific uses or square footage (r;axi;nu-q or _inimum) planned at this time. A site 'evelop��ent plan, in accord with all Zon n�-, r-egul at l nnc i i l l he pra arpd at time of . eveloLv.ient 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 1. Address: 3792 t--;elo,3y Lane Hagerstown, ED N awar X. i�iiller, Et Al Property ID: -4000-A00-0000-11`1130 2. Address: Rt. 6, Box 203 Arnoli. J. & Lottie Bartley Winchester, VA 22&A Property ID: 64A00-004-0�-00-00200 3. Address: 355 South p, -,to: -.ac Street lti inches ter Lu td,aor hagerstown, f�iU 416)10 Advvrt.i Property ID:64000-A00-0000-001 go . Address: 130 Etnai;i 'rive Lilwar F.,Jr. & -r.-.ay L. Hunt Winchester, VA 2602 Property ID: 64A -0010-()001-20A 5. Address: 127 Etnam Drive James L., II -1 & Elizabeth D. ..inchester, VA 22602 Harman Property ID: 64A-0'. 10-0001-183 6. Address: 131 E'tnam brive r:ichael & S•hanncn 'Watson Winchester, VA 22602 Property 1D: 64A-0010-0001-184 Address: 133 Etnam i1iive Jung i;hul & -ia.aie Hong Shin aincheFter, `V: 22602 Property ID: b4A-0010-0x01-1 54 8. Address: 104 : enbri: ge 'Frive Scott 1t. & Faige D. Clerk Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID: 64A-0010-0001-001 9. Address: 106 : e. bridge Drive Stephen 14. Rhinehardt Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID:64A-0010-0001-002 17 ACTION.- PLANNING COMMISSION BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AMENDMENT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP #008-94 of JAMES T. CARROLL WTIERF.AS, Rezoning Application #008-94 of dames T. Carroll to rezone 2.81 acres from RP (Residential Performance) to B2 (Business General), and which is located at the intersection of CurterAvenue and Pembridge Road, designated with PINS 64A -4-20A, 64A -10-A, and 64A -10-B, in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and, WTIERF.AS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on April S, 1995; and, WIMREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this ordinance adoption on and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, convenience, and in good zoning practice; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning Ordinance, is amended to revise the Zoning District Map to change 2.81 acres, designated by PINS 64A -4-20A, 64A -10-A, and 64A -10-B, from RP (Residential Performance) to B2 (Business General) as described by the application and plat submitted, subject to the following conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and property owner.- PROFFER (Revised)? artir.Naztr as -u3a CARROLL REZONING REQU T © 66 11 sa V66 CASE NO. 008-94 + c1`1�; I, the undersigned, JAMES H. CARROLL sole owner of the land to be rezoned under zoning request number 008-94, referred to as the Carroll Rezoning and the applicant for said rezoning, hereby voluntarily proffer the following conditions. The conditions proffered shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest of the undersigned. In the event the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grants said rezoning to B-2 (Business General) and accepts these conditions, the following proffered conditions shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to other requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code: 1. There shall be no entrance to the property on Etnam Street. 2. There will be a total of no more than five (5) entrances for the property. I The Owner proffers a payment shall be made to the County for emergency services in the amount of $1,950.00, said payment to be made at time of building permit issuance by the County. James H. Carroll Date This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage. Passed this Richard G Dick Chairman day of , 1995. W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Charles W. Orndq f ; Sr. Jimmie K Ellington James L. Longerbeam Robert M. Sager A Copy Attest John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT FOR REZONING REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE JAMES H. CARROLL PROPERTY Shawnee Magisterial District AUGUST 1,.1994_ gilbert w. cli f ford & associates, inc. 200 North Cameron Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-2139 • Fax: 703-665-0493 ;. ACTANALYSISSTATEMENT REZONING APPROVAL REQUEST JAMES H. CARROLL PROPERTY AUGUST 1994 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS L SUMMARY 3 IL INTRODUCTION 3 IIL PLANNING ANALYSIS 4 • Site Suitability • Adjoining Properties • Zoning Review IV. TRAFFIC 5 V. SEWAGE 6 VI. WATER 6 VII. DRAINAGE 7 VIII. SOLID WASTE 7 IX. HISTORIC SITES 8 X. COMMUNITY FACILITIES 8 • Education • Emergency Services • Parks and Recreation • Other XI, ENVIRONMENT 9 XII. FISCAL 9 XIII. OTHER 9 APPENDIX 10 - IMPACT AI TAI.YSI S STATEMENT for James H. Carroll Property I. Summary 'ACTANALYSIS STATEMENT REZONING APPROVAL REQUEST JAMES H. CARROLL PROPERTY AUGUST 1994 The firm of Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. has been commissioned to evaluate the above referenced project in light of several major planning issues, as outlined and required by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors. This document is prepared in support of and in preparation to rezone the referenced property from present Residential Performance (RP) to General Business (B-2). The property is suited for General Business (B-2) zoning. There is a positive fiscal impact. Current zoning requirements allow for adequate measures to provide for buffers and screens that would mitigate any negative impacts to the surrounding neighborhood. Neighborhood traffic impacts have been minimized with proffers limiting entrances. II Introduction The 2.8132 acre property of James H. Carroll is located at the intersection of Route 781 and Pembridge Drive, just north of Route 50 and east, approximately .75 miles, of the City of Winchester corporate boundary at I-81. The property is currently vacant and is divided by Pembridge Drive creating two parcels. Both parcels are identified as tax parcel 64A -0004-0000-20A and are currently zoned Residential Performance (RP). General Business (B-2) zoning is planned for the property. The property is located in the Urban Development Area is part of an interchange business area and is part of a corridor area planned for future business. Preliminary site development planning indicates that this site can support most General Business (B-2) uses while providing adequate protection space for zoning buffer areas. 3 JACTAM4LYSIS STATEMENT REZONING APPROVAL REQUEST JAMES H. CARROLL PROPERTY AUGUST 1994 III. Planning Analysis Site Suitability - The property has no site specific development limiting factors. The property appears well suited for General Business (B-2) zoning use development based on site evaluation of soils, slopes, wetlands, ponds and lakes, flood plains and other site suitability and environmental factors. Soils - The soils are suitable for site development purposes. The USDA Soil Conservation Soil Survey for Frederick County identifies the soils of the property on map sheet 36 as Weikert- Berks channery silt loams. Prime Agricultural Soils.- The property does not contain any prime agricultural soils as identified by the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. Slopes - There are no steep slopes on this property. The topography is ideally suited for General Business type development. Slopes generally range from 2% to 7% and elevations range from 659 to 678 feet above sea level. Wetlands - There are no wetlands on this property. The property is generally well drained and has no low lying wet areas that wetland vegetation that indicates the presence of a wetland area. Ponds and Lakes - There are no ponds or lakes on the property. Flood Plain - The property is not located within the 100 year HUD designated flood plain as identified in the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan and panel map number 510063- 00115B of the United States department of Housing and Urban Development Flood Boundary map. AdJoining Properties - Development impact concerns are primarily north of the property where single family residential houses are located across Etnam and Pembridge Drives. The impacts of the General -Business (B-2) uses on the surrounding residential uses is greatly reduced through existing zoning distance, setback, buffer, landscaping and screening regulations. A 35' building setback is required, and; in addition, a 50' distance buffer is required with a full screen. A proffer is suggested that restricts entrances/ driveways on Etnam Drive and limits the total number of access points to five. 4 n. ,4CT ANALYSIS STATEMENT REZONING APPROVAL REQUEST JAMES H. CARROLL PROPERTY AUGUST 1994 The adjoining property to the north is single family residential detached urban houses part of Pembridge Heights subdivision, zoned Residential Performance (RP). To the east is vacant open land zoned Residential Performance (RP) and currently undeveloped. To the south is State Route 781, and to the west is a mix of older single family, detached residential houses and vacant lots. Zoning Review - The property is currently zoned Residential Performance (RP) allowing by right a variety of housing types. Approximately four to eighteen homes are permitted depending on the type of housing planned. Front yard setbacks, buffers, screens and parking would be required under the RP zoning codes. Driveways for each house would be permitted throughout the property. Under the General Business (B-2) zoning regulations a variety of office and service uses are permitted. Approximately 12 to 15 % or about 18,000 square feet of the site may be used for business structures, the remainder of the property would be used for parking and required open areas such as buffers and storm management. The B-2 floor area to lot ratio is 1.0. The minimum landscaped area is 15% or about 18,000 square feet. The maximum height of any building is 35 feet. Required setbacks are 35 feet. The impacts of the General -Business (B-2) uses on the surrounding residential uses is greatly reduced through existing zoning distance, setback, buffer, landscaping and screening regulations. IV. Traffic Impacts Traffic impacts are negligible for this property. Impacts of vehicular access and turning movements on the residential area north of the property have been removed with the proffer that eliminates all vehicular entrances on Etnam Drive. The estimated 16,500 square feet of retail floor space created by this property will result in approximately 210 trips per weekday of traffic. based on ITE Trip Generation figures. The subject project will not originate trips since trip generation is a function of residential use. By removing the approximate 3 acres of land from residential performance and considering 2.5 dwelling units per acre density for single family, which is the adjacent use, the increase is only 125 trips per day. R ACT ANAL YSIS STATEMENT REZONING APPROVAL REQUEST JAMES H. CARROLL PROPERTY AUGUST 1994 Most traffic would enter the site via Route 781 and Route 50. The site is ideally suited for access at the junction between Pembridge Drive, State Route 781 and U.S. Route 50. Most of the traffic using the site will use U.S. Route 50 and VA Route 781. The increase on both these roads of 10 trips per hour is negligible. V. Sewage Conveyance and Treatment Impacts There are no sewage conveyance or treatment problems with this property. The sewage from this property will connect with the regional interceptor system at Route 50 and be pumped to the Opequon Regional Facility. Flows generated from this complex are estimated by the State Health Department at 3300 (200gpd/1000SF) gallons per day with an instantaneous flow at peak of 6 gallons per minute. All sewage conveyance systems involved have full capability to handle this additional flow, as does the plant have the capability of treating and discharging this flow in satisfactory manor. It should be pointed out that by right, that 7 units of development available on this property under current zoning would produce 3,000 gallons per day of wastewater. VI. Water Supply Impacts There are no water supply or transmission problems for this property. This property would connect to the existing 8" water supply system located in Pembridge Heights. There are no known limitations in the water system which would preclude the use of the property as shown. The property will utilize the same amount of water as projected in sewage flow or 3300 gallons per day. Fire protections measures such as the installation of fire hydrants will be addressed at the site development planning stage. The installation of fire protection hydrants poses no problems. The installation of fire hydrants on the property will improve the fire protection means of the surrounding properties as well. ry .PACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT REZONING APPROVAL REQUEST JAMES H. CARROLL PROPERTY AUGUST 1994 VIL Drainage Facility Impacts Proper storm water management planning will result in minimal or no site drainage impacts. The development of commercial in lieu of residential will increase run off in small amounts over that which would be created in residential use. It is recommended that either suitable green space be allowed to reduce run off amounts or that the increased run off would be reduced prior to discharge from the site. In lieu of the above, additional storm water detention calculations should be presented with final design which would show no adverse impacts created by the imposition of this increase storm water on the existing downstream water course. Drainage flows generally toward State Route 781 and Route 50, crossing under Route 50 to the south -side of the road. Predevelopment runoff rates will be maintained using recognized storm water management standards. VIII. Solid Waste Cost There are no solid waste collection and disposal impacts. Solid waste will be exported by contract hauler at no cost to the County. No additional solid waste facilities will be required to handle the waste from this property. Impacts to the County will be reduced with the planned B-2 rezoning. Under the current RP zoning and assuming 7 housing units on the property, the estimated cost of $1400.00 for solid waste disposal impacts is needed. The planned B-2 zoning change would result in a reduction of impacts since there would be no collection fees and since tipping fees are designed by the County to cover the expenses of solid waste disposal. 7 .. ACTANALYSISSTATEMENT REZONING APPROVAL REQUEST JAMES H. CARROLL PROPERTY AUGUST 1994 IX. Historic Impacts This project Vvill not involve the loss of any historic buildings, sites or artifacts that are known. The area has been significantly developed on all sides and no such findings of historic importance has been identified. There are no structures currently located on this property. A review of the National Register, the Virginia Landmarks Register and The Frederick County Comprehensive Plan indicates that there are no known historic structures or sites on this property. X. Community Facilities The property when zoned B-2 will generate tax revenues with a net worth of approximately $60.00 per square foot and a tax base of $990,000 which totals at a tax rate of $.60 approximately $594.00 per year of tax revenue. Education - This project will generate no school children and therefore have no effect on educational cost in Frederick County. Capitol cost impacts for school age children will be reduced since no school children will result with B-2 zoning. The current zoning of RP, with 7 units would produce about 7 school age children. Parks and Recreation - This project would result in no impact on Parks and Recreational facilities. Emergency Services Cost - There are no additional fire, rescue or sheriff facilities anticipated with the development of the property using B-2 type uses. Fire protection is available from the Greenwood Volunteer Fire Company. The planned B-2 rezoning will have all required site development standards required by the fire code, building code and zoning codes. There are no fire protection problems associated with this property. All hydrants and fire protection measures will be installed when the property is developed. Rescue services are provided by the Winchester Rescue Squad with future service from the Greenwood Volunteer Fire Company. ACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT REZONING APPROVAL REQUEST JAMES H. CARROLL PROPERTY AUGUST 1994 Sheriff Department services protection will be required by this facility. Routine patrols of the Pembridge area should suffice for the majority of time and materials necessary to cover this facility. M. Environmental Impacts There will be certain minor negative impacts due to the construction activity including run off sediment, noise and traffic movements. These are to be minimized by proper compliance with local and state laws for environmental protection. A minor increase in run off quantity and a decrease in quality is probable from this development. The effects on the down -stream impoundment and stream are minimal and in accordance with local and state regulations. There is no known loss of irretrievable resources involved with this project. There are no known endangered species of fauna, flora or wildlife which will be effected by this project. Ground water and air quality should be unaffected. A minor impact of a negative nature is associated with lighting for security and business use. These should be closely controlled during planning stage to minimize the adverse impacts on adjacent residential structures and impacts on the traveling public. XII. Fiscal Impacts Fiscal impacts for the property are determined based upon the fiscal impact model prepared by the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development staff. The model assumes 16,500 square feet of retail floor space. The square footage assumption figure may change, but should have no significant influence on the model output. XIII. Other This planned zoning change would create a positive fiscal impact as compared to the existing zoning. There are no known other impacts. Q SinI"i• V.,6�5k jr ts �Co'nL' C'ub ensenil L Q) Siena •6 9-6 V B 1-Z A' c� lank N T E R U11 C J ns � r7 4 tef 3 Am, N- L o froject��iren I's /q. DdS Valle; j Colt Club k 814 T Na' J 7 10, 1A W-nChes!e, Mun.c.pal am 712 G MCTZ)f.al pa -6 Gilbert W Clifford and Associates 200 N. Cameron Street 1- PROPERTY LOCATION MAP Winchester, Virginia, 22601 703-667-2139 N/F Bartley PEMBRIDGE HEIGHTS — PHASE 1 Lot 153 Parcel B" Parcel "A" 1 W JAMES H. CARR011 TM Ins 64A (e PCL 20A 10' Temporary Construction Easement 10' Permanent Water Easement 2. BOUNDARY SURVEY N/F Edward K. dlrller VA. SEC. R TE 781 NOTES: I. No Title Report furnished. PLAT SHOWING 2. Boundary information was taken from public records and not field verified. 10' PERMANENT WATER EASEMENT and 10' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT through the land of JAMES H. CARROLL D8 622 — Pg 308 PLT H �F to be acquired by FREDERICK COON TY SAKI TA TION A U THORI TY Shawnee Magisterial District S. W. MARSH 'zFrederick County, Virginia (DCERTIFICATEN❑. DATE: August 1992 SCALE: 1"=100' Plot No. 9354—IX-1 1843 gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. 150—C Olde Greenwich ENGINEERS — LAND PLANNERS SURVEYORS SURA Drive Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401 200 North Cameron Street (703) 898-2115 Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 667-2139 3. RE( �RDED SUBDIVISION PLAT f/CJ ,3T4 1 I 1 �l I 41 b:_ E�.Y` •�U tD v DT ' e slmly ,EE casrR/cr , F�cEoec/cn couNTY ��J�G�N�-� CCI COCA ;', /763 PACIULLI, SIMMONS & ASSOCIATES, LTD. 305 S. Harrlson Street, Suite 200, Lccs!)urC, Vir-inl: 22075 10� 7 7:75, •173-C915 PROFFER (Revised) In N17, CARROLL REZONING REQUEST CASE NO. 008-94 I, the undersigned, JAMES H. CARROLL sole owner of the land to be rezoned under zoning request number 008-94, referred to as the Carroll Rezoning and the applicant for said rezoning, hereby voluntarily proffer the following conditions. The conditions proffered shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest of the undersigned. In the event the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grants said rezoning to B-2 (Business General) and accepts these conditions, the following proffered conditions shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to other requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code: 1. There shall be no entrance to the property on Etnam Street. 2. There will be a total of no more than five (5) entrances for the property. 3. The Owner proffers a payment shall be made to the County for emergency services in the amount of $1,950.00, said payment to be made at time of building permit issuance by the County. James H. Carroll Date 55�• � $.0 PEMBRIDGE x(50 R� EET a [IN HEIGHTS PHASE I i }I I h N m �I I ft. R��R� 5 -1 3p954pc. Wj • 1 O Y Z 1 1 N 75L_ 179' w--- 395-5' - COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 FAX 703/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Planner H 11Z RE: Amendments To The RA Rural Areas District DATE: March 22, 1995 As you know, Governor Allen recently signed SB 513/HB 1225, Right to Farm Bill, into legislation. This legislation prohibits localities from requiring special use permits for agricultural and silvicultural production activities on property that is zoned for agricultural use. However, localities are permitted to create performance standards for specific production activities in this zoning district (i.e. setback or minimum area requirements for a parcel used for the production of poultry). This legislation further states that agricultural and silvicultural production activities can not be considered a nuisance if the production operation is conducted in accordance with best management practices and complies with existing laws and regulations of the Commonwealth. Frederick County is in the process of working with the Extension Service, members of the agribusiness community, and Jesse Richardson (a local attorney whose expertise is in the field of agriculture) to develop reasonable performance standards that are permitted under this legislation. The intent of these standards is to protect agricultural activities from potential litigation from aggrieved property owners. This language will be presented to the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee, the Planning Commission, and the Board of Supervisors at a later date. The Right to Farm Act will become effective on April 1, 1995. Therefore, the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance needs to be amended to eliminate all agricultural production operations that currently require a conditional use permit. These uses include poultry production operations, fish production operations, and swine production operations. The following amendment accomplishes this phase of the process. 107 North Kent Street P.O. Box 601. Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 AMENDMENT Approvals: PLANNING COMMISSION April 5. 1995 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS April 12. 1995 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 165, ZONING WHEREAS, An ordinance to amend Chapter 165, Zoning, of the Frederick County Code, Article X, Business and Industrial District, to allow art dealers, art supplies, and art framing operations in the B-1 Neighborhood Business District was referred to the Planning Commission on April 5, 1995; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this ordinance adoption on April 5, 1995; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this ordinance adoption on April 12, 1995; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the adoption of this ordinance to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in good zoning practice; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, Article X, Business and Industrial District, Section 165-82A, Neighborhood Business District is amended as described on the following attachment: Elimination of the following subsections of Section 165-51. Conditional uses. 165-51 A Poultry farms and hatcheries and egg production. 165-51B Fish hatcheries and fish production. 165-51C Hog farming. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage. Passed this 12th day of April, 1995 by the following recorded vote: Richard G. Dick W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Jimmie K. Ellington James J. Longerbeam Charles W. Omdoff, Sr. Robert M. Sager A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 FAX 703/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Planner R `ttj RE: Amendments To The B-1 Neighborhood Business District DATE: March 22, 1995 During the March 15, 1995 regular meeting of the Planning Commission, Mr. John Stevens requested an opportunity to informally discuss the potential for rezoning his property from B-1 to B-2 to allow an art gallery and framing shop. Staff had previously determined that this use paralleled those listed under Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 5999 - Miscellaneous Retail Stores, Not Elsewhere Classified. This SIC classification is only permitted in the B-2 District. During the informal discussion, the Planning Commission suggested that it may be more appropriate to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow this use than to have Mr. Stevens rezone his property. The Planning Commission did not have concerns with this use in the B -I District, and directed staff to advertise this amendment for public hearing. Since that meeting, staff has reviewed the uses under SIC 5999 and has concerns with some of the specific uses. Therefore, staff believes that it is prudent to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow art dealers, art supplies, and art framing as permitted uses without a SIC classification. Staff feels that it is important to have the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) review the uses under SIC 5999 and forward a recommendation to the Planning Commission as to what uses may be appropriate to be excluded in the B-1 District. Included for your information is the uses permitted under SIC 5999. The proposed amendment to the B-1 District is included with this memorandum. 107 North Kent Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 AMENDMENT Approvals: PLANNING COMMISSION April 5, 1995 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS April 12.1995 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 165, ZONING WHEREAS, Governor Allen signed SB 513/HB 1228, Right to Farm Bill, into legislation; and `WHEREAS, this legislation prohibits counties within the state of Virginia to adopt any ordinance that requires a special exception or a special use permit to be obtained prior to the commencement of any agricultural or silvicultural activity on property that is zoned as an agricultural district or classification; and WHEREAS, this legislation becomes effective on April 1, 1995; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, Article V, RA Rural Areas District, Section 165-51, Conditional uses is amended as described or, the following attachment: 165-82A B-1 Neighborhood Business District. Allowed Uses Art Dealers, Art Supplies, and Art Framing This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage. (SIC) None Passed this 12th day of April, 1995 by the following recorded vote: Richard G. Dick W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Jimmie K. Ellington James J. Longerbeam Charles W. Orndoff, Sr. Robert M. Sager A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator 334 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION Industry Group Industry 599 No.RETAIL STORES, NOT ELSEWHERE CLASSIFIED—Con. 5995 Optical Goods Stores—Con. in the retail sale of binoculars, telescopes, and opera glasses are classified in Industry 5999. Optical goods—retail opticians—retail 5999 Miscellaneous Retail Stores, Not Elsewhere Classified Establishments primarily engaged in the retail sale of specialized lines of merchandise, not elsewhere classified, such as artists' supplies; orthopedic and artificial limbs; rubber stamps; pets; religious goods; and monuments and tombstones. This industry also includes establishments primarily engaged in selling a general line of their own or consigned merchandise at retail on an auction basis. Establishments primarily engaged in auctioning tangible per- sonal property of others on a contract or fee basis are classified in Services, Industry 7389. Architectural supplies—retail Art dealers—retail Artificial flowers—retail Artists' supply and material stores— retail Auction rooms (general merchandise} -- retail Autograph and philatelist supply stores—retail Awning shops—retail Baby carriages—retail Banner shops—retail Binoculars—retail Cake decorating supplies retail Candle shops—retail Coin shops—retail, except mail-order Cosmetics stores—retail Electric razor shops—retail Fireworks—retail Flag shops—retail Gem stones, rough—retail Gravestones, finished—retail Hearing aids—retail Hot tubs—retail Ice dealers --retail Monuments, finished to custom order— retail Orthopedic and artificial limb stores— retail Pet food stores—retail Pet shops—retail Picture frames, ready-made—retail Police supply stores—retail Religious goods stores (other than books)—retail Rock and atone apecimens—retail Rubber stamp stores—retail Sales barns—retail Stamps, philatelist—retail: except mail- order Stones, crystalline: rough—retail Swimming pools, home: not installed— retail Telephone stores—retail Telescopea—retail Tent shops—retail Tombstones—retail Trophy shops—retail Typewriter stores—retail Whirlpool baths—retail Pe REVIEW: 04/05/95 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #001-95 VALLEY MILL ESTATES LOCATION: The property is located North of Valley Mill Road(Route 659), approximately 3/4 mile East of Greenwood Road (Route 656). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 55-A-176, 55 -A -176B PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Vacant The applicant has applied to have the property rezoned from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance). The Board of Supervisors is scheduled to hear the rezoning request at their April 12, 1995 meeting. Approval of this preliminary master development plan will be contingent upon receiving the rezoning approval. ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: RA (Rural Areas) and RP (Residential Performance) Land Use: vacant and developed PROPOSED USE: 22 -Single family detached homes REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dent. of Transportation• see attached comments dated January 23, 1995. Sanitation Authority: No Comment -approved. County Engineer: See attached comments dated March 27, 1995. Inspections Dept.: Building shall comply with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and Section 310 Use Group R (Residential) of the BOCA National Building Code/1993. Note: Lots located on steep slope area shall require Engineer site and foundation plan at the time of building permit application. Page 2 Valley Mill Estates Master Development Plan #001-95 Fire Marshal: Plans approved. Parks & Recreation Dept: Residents from this development will use the regional parks as league and program participants. They will participate in classes and tournaments held at the parks. Families will picnic at the shelters, swim at the pools, play on the playgrounds and in the open space provided, paddleboat and fish in the lakes, and participate in the array of different non -structured activities. I would suggest that the impact model be used to determine the potential impact that this development may have on the county's park system. Planning & Zoning: History The two parcels that comprise the proposed Valley Mill Estates Preliminary Master Development Plan were originally zoned RA, Rural Areas District. An application was filed by the Cameron Group for the purpose of rezoning 19.35 acres of these parcels from RA to RP, Residential Performance District. The Board of supervisors is scheduled to hear the proposed rezoning at their meeting on April 12, 1995. The proposed rezoning included proffers which offered $3,142.00 per building lot which would be payable when the building permit was issued. The applicant also proffered an additional $28.00 per lot to be paid directly to the Greenwood Fire Company at the time of the approval of the subdivision. This money was offered to offset the costs associated with public school, regional parks, and emergency services. An additional proffer stated that the rezoned property may not be subdivided into more than 22 lots. Preliminary Master Development Plan Comments The preliminary master development plan calls for the development of 21 single family detached traditional houses on a 16 acre portion of the 21.15 acre site. This 16 acre portion is included in the Residential Performance (RP) Zoning District, permitting the development. One additional house will be developed on a 1.2 acre portion of the site, fronting directly on Valley Mill Road. The remaining 3.95 acres will be conveyed to an adjoining parcel, PIN 55 -A -176A. The applicant has indicated that the 3.95 acres shall act as a buffer between the proposed subdivision and the parcel located to the south, identified as PIN 55 -A -176A. This development would create an overall gross density of approximately 1.375 dwelling units per acre which complies with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and meets the Page 3 Valley Mill Estates Master Development Plan #001-95 intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The MDP indicates that the minimum lot size within the proposed development is 18,000 square feet; therefore, common open space and recreational facilities are not required. Technical Plan Requirements The preliminary master development plan incorporates development on two adjoining parcels, identified by Property Identification Numbers 55-A-176 and 55 -A -176B, consisting of 16.47 and 4.68 acres, respectively. The MDP indicates that the parcel will be subdivided into 23 lots, which would involve the development of 22 residential dwellings. During the rezoning of the site, the applicant proffered that the property would be subdivided into no more than _22 lots. The proposed MDP contradicts the rezoning proffer statement. This contradiction will be addressed during the land subdivision stage. The site consists entirely of woodlands and 68.41 percent of steep slopes. The proposed development will disturb 24.2 percent of the woodlands, and 14.9 percent of the steep slopes. The proposed disturbance complies with the Zoning Ordinance disturbance requirement of no more than 25 percent of the woodlands and steep slopes. All symbols that are used in the MDP should be included in the legend. Site Layout The MDP application indicates that construction for this project will be done in one phase. This should be noted on the submitted preliminary MDP. The proposed development will have minimum lot sizes of 18,000 square feet. Access to the proposed development will be via the extension of Mill Race Drive from the Mill Race Estates subdivision, and the creation of a new road traversing the property in a north - south manner. An appropriate stormwater management plan should also be included on the master development plan. As necessary, on- site stormwater management facilities should be designated and supported by stormwater calculations. Residential separation buffers, zoning district buffering, and road efficiency buffers are not required for this site. Page 4 Valley Mill Estates Master Development Plan #001-95 Deeds of Dedication Section 144-32 of the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance requires the creation of a property owners association for the continuous maintenance and management of all common open areas, easements, storm water management facilities, and dedicated facilities associated within an approved subdivision. Staff believes that it is important to understand this requirement at this phase of the planning process. Subdivisions that do not have common open space or recreation facilities still contain drainage easements and storm water management facilities that require maintenance. Maintenance must be provided by the residents of the proposed subdivision; not by Frederick County. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval, contingent upon the rezoning of the property to RP, and provided the applicant has adequately addressed all review agency comments, Planning staff comments, as well as all comments and concerns of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. COMMONWEALTH of 17IRCjINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE DAVID R. GEHR PO BOX 278 WILLIAM H- BUSHMAN, P.E. COMMISSIONER EDINBURG, 22824-0278 RESIDENT ENGINEER TELE(703)984-5600 FAX(703)984-5607 VDOT COMMENTS ON VALLEY MILL ESTATES MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN January 23, 1995 We have no overall objections to this property's master development plan. However, the traffic generated by this project through the existing Mill Race Estates Subdivision may warrant improvements to the Route 659/1270 intersection. The designer indicated in Section 3, Traffic Impacts of the "Environmental & Planning Impacts" statement submitted with the property's rezoning application that "a detailed trip generation study will be necessary at the master planning stage to determine if improvements to the entrance at VA Route 659 are necessary". We reserve the right to make additional comments on this master development plan once this detailed trip study is available. Also, Julee Street (Route 1272) in the Mill Race Subdivision was designed and constructed to the projects property line so the street could be extended into the adjoining Wierman Tract in the future. At present Julee Street is a "stub" street with no cul-de-sac or other suitable means to turn our maintenance vehicles or county school buses around in. If the County does not require the extension of Julee Street into the Wierman Tract, we strongly suggest the developer be required to construct a cul-de-sac. A temporary cul-de-sac should be provided at the end of the street which adjoins the W. Schuller property. Prior to development, this office will require a complete set of construction site plans and drainage calculations for review. Any work performed on VDOT right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. xc: Mr. Steve A. Melnikoff w/ copy of M.D. Plan TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY COUNTY of FREDERICK Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E. Director of Public Works 9 North Loudoun St., 2nd Floor 703/665-5643 March 27, 1995 Mr. Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E. Gilbert W. Clifford and Associates, Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Valley Mill Estates Master Plan Frederick County, Virginia Dear Chuck: We have reviewed the preliminary master plan for Valley Mill Estates and offer the following -comments for consideration during the subdivision design: 1) A majority of the subdivision site has been classified as steep slopes. A portion of these steep slopes will be developed as single family lots. In order to avoid future construction problems, we recommend that the lots located on steep terrain or major drainage ways be designed with individual site plans including finished floor elevations, drainage features, finished contours, etc. 2) An off-site drainage easement may be required to convey additional runoff into the Mill Race subdivision. In particular, it appears that lots 80, 90 and 91 will receive additional runoff resulting from the development of Valley Mill Estates. 3) The proposed site development includes the provision for a stormwater management facility. This facility should be located in such a manner to maximize the effectiveness in controlling runoff from the site. It should also be designed to accommodate storm flows (developed) from Mill Race Estates. We recommend that a "C" value of 0.35 be adopted for the undeveloped shale overburden (grass covered). The stormwater management facility could be designed as a sedimentation basin during the site development. In this case, we recommend that a "C" value of 0.6 be adopted to Fax: 703/678-0682 - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia 212604 Valley Mill Estates Page 2 March 27, 1995 simulate the denuded shale overburden. 4) The extension of Mill Race Drive will require fills up to 20 feet in depth. This fill could influence several of the building lots. Consequently, consideration should be given to a controlled fill which will accommodate future housing structures. Also, the use of extended culverts may enhance the site development adjacent to this road fill. The above comments are provided for consideration during the subdivision design. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding the content of these comments. Sincerely, r"I )�'735 ji Harve Strawsnydie Jr., P.E. Direc o of Public Works HES:rls cc: Eric Lawrence V file VO,Hey MM Estates MDP #001-95 Pi n; 55-A-176 176B APPLICATION MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN - Frederick County = Virginia _ Date: November 21 1994 Application # O OWNERS NAME: The Cameron Group - c o Mr. n4chard 1-1. Pifer 31 S. Braddock Street Winchester Vir inia 22601 Mr. Richard I (Please list e names of a owners or parties APPLICANT/AGENT: Gilbert W. Clifford & AssociatesInc. C/o Stephen M. Gyurisin , Address: 200 N. Cameron Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 interest) Daytime Phone Number 703-667-2139 Fax: 703-665-0493 DESIGNER/DESIGN COMPANY: Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. Address:_ 200 N. Cameron Street Winchester Vir inia 22601 Phone Number 703-667--2139 - Fax: 703-665-0493 Contact Name Ste hen M. Gvurisin Current Owners Gerald L. & Frances F. Racey Georgia Weirman Estate 7 E'. PRELIMINARY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN CHECKLIST The followinq checklist is intended to assist the applicant in i.^,suring 4-1- at all required information is provided or is available to allow review by the County. This form must be completed by the applicant and submitted with the preliminary master development plan. All required items must be. provided on the PMDP. Background Information: 1. Development's name: Valley Mill Estates 2. Location of property: Valley Mill Road (Rt. 659) 3. Total area of property: 16 Acres 4. Property ID # (14 Digit) 55-A-176 5. Property zoning and present use RA (Rezoning to RP & Vacant 6. Adjoining property zoning and present use: RA & RP (Vacant & Developed) 7. Proposed Uses: Single Family Homes 8. Magisterial District: Stonewall 9. Is this an original or amended Master Development Plan? Original X Amended 8 General Information: 1. Have the following items been included? North arrow YesX No Scale Legend Yes. X Na Boundary Survey Yeses_ Yeses_ No No Total Area Topography Yeses_ No Project Title Yes_y No Preparation and Revision Date Yes_X Yes_ X No No Applicant's signed YesNo Consent Statement —� 2. Number of phases proposed? One 1 3. Are the proposed phases shown on the Master Development Plan? Yes No N/A 4. Are the uses of adjoining properties clearly designated? Yeses_ No 5. Is an inset map provided showing the location of the project and all public roads within 2,000 feet. Yes X No 6. Are all land uses clearly shown? Yes X No 7. Are environmental features clearly shown? Yes X No 8. Describe the following environmental features: Total Area % Disturbed Acres in (Acres) by development Open Space Floodplains 0 0 Lakes and ponds 0 0 Natural retention ---� areas 0 0 Steep slopes (15% or more) 7.25 1.8 Woodlands 16 9 9. Are the following shown on the master development plan? Street layout Yes X No Entrances YesX No Parking areas Yes X No Utilities (mains) Yes--x—No, 10. Has a conceptual stormwater management plan been provided? YesX_No 11. Have all historical structures been identified? Yes�X No Residential Uses If the Master Development Plan includes any land zoned RP, (Residential Performance) or any residential uses, the following items should be completed. 1. What numbers and types of housing are proposed? �Jngle Family h d - 22 Lots 2. Is a schedule provided describing each of the following in each phase: Open space acreage Yes X No Acreage in each housing type Yes_.L_No Acreage in streets and right of ways Yes X No Total acreage Yes X No Number of dwellings of each type Yes X No 3. What percentage of the total site is to be placed in common open space? p7. 10 4. Are recreational facilities required? Yes No X 5. What types of recreational facilities are proposed?NZA 6. Are separation buffers required? Yes No X 7. Are road efficiency buffers required? Yes No X 8. Are landscaping or landscaped screens required? Yes -No- X 9. Are required buffers, screens, and landscaping described by the plan with profiles or examples? Yes No N/A 11 gilbert w. cli f ford & associates, inc. 200 North Cameron Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-2139 • Fax: 703-665-0493 Valley Mill Estates Adioining Property Owners 55-A-180 Wilkins Dev. Corp. 7 S. Loudoun Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 55-A-176 Georgia Wierman Estate c/o Richard Bald 3727 Sweetbriar Pasadena, Texas 77505 55-A-175 Mary B. Killough 1081 Valley Mill Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 55 -A -175A Mark R. Ritchie 1071 Valley Mill Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 55 -A -176A Gerald L. & Frances F. Racey 176B 985 Valley Mill_ Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 55-A-177 Kenneth Schuller 915 Valley Mill Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 55-A-178 Minnie Schuller Estate 178A c/o Kenneth Schuller 915 Valley Mill Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 55-A-179 William H. Schuller, Jr. 140 Denny Lane Winchester, Virginia 22603 i' r". Valley Mill Estates Adjoining Property Owners Page 2 55-A-181 Eastern Frederick T1 l T -^-" r.%J. Dox LU7/ Winchester, Virginia 22604 55 -A -175E Mill Race Homeowners Association 817 Dutton Place Winchester, Virginia 22601 55G-3-94 Keith R. Koontz 123 Julie Street Winchester, Virginia 22602 55G-3-90 Charles E. Barr 107 Evette Place Winchester, Virginia 22601 55G-3-91 John E. & Jane McAllister 93 233 Burnt Factory Road Stephenson, Virginia 22656 55G-3-92 Robert L. & Joan C. Padgett 103 Evette Place Winchester, Virginia 22602 55G-3-80 Steven A. Dickey Rt. 1, Box 2160 Berryville, Virginia 22611 55G-3-79 Louis D. & Nancy P. Lepore 222 Mill Race Drive Winchester, Virginia 22602 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 FAX 703/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Planner H �) RE: Informal Discussion Regarding Proposed RP, Residential Performance Amendments DATE: March 24, 1995 The Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) considered a request by Mr. Bruce Welch to allow veterinary offices, clinics, or hospitals in the RP District with a conditional use permit. The DRRS felt that this use was conducive to the RP District, provided that the boarding of animals was limited only to those that were receiving medical or surgical attention. The essence of the discussion then focused on whether performance standards were warranted for this use, or whether conditions should be created on a case by case basis. Issues that were discussed by the DRRS included indoor and outdoor kennels, buffers and screening, outdoor lighting, the type and size of permitted business signs, and the potential need for an outdoor exercising area for therapeutic or diagnostic use. Staff would like an opportunity to discuss this issue with the full Planning Commission. Staff is interested in any comments or concerns that the commission may have regarding this use. Staff asks that the Planning Commission provide direction for the completion of this item. 107 North Kent Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 FAX 703/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Robert W. Watkins, Planning Director SUBJECT: Informal Discussion with Raymond L. Fish, D.V.M. DATE: March 22, 1995 Mr. Raymond L. Fish, D.V.M. will be present at the Commission's April 5, 1995 meeting for an informal discussion regarding the county ordinance as it relates to family lot subdivisions. His letter requesting the informal discussion is attached. RWW/rsa Attachment 107 North Kent Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 Phone: (703) 665-3030; Surrounding States: (800) 238-8882 RAYMOND L. FISH, DVM "d.)A f7 Mr. Robert Watkins 3/13/95 Frederick County Planning Commission �:�� P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22604 Dear Mr. Watkins, Pursuant to our telephone conversation of last week, I am writing to request an audience with the Frederick County Planning Commission. I wish to discuss, in informal session, the present wording of the county ordinance as relates to family lot subdivision. This concerns the property where I live on Apple Pie Ridge Rd. The first two weeks of April would be a good time for me. I hope this can fit into your schedule. Sincerely / Ray and L. Fish, D. V. M. KINGDOM FARM . P.O. BOX 147 • CLEARBROOK, VIRGINIA 22624 . I-81 at Exit 83 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 FAX 703/678-0682 TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Directa �� RE: Recommendation of the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee Concerning the Request of Linwood Ritter for a Sewer Extension. DATE: March 14, 1995 Attached is information pertaining to the request of Mr. Linwood Ritter for authorization to extend sewer to his MH -1 (Mobile Home) property located on Route 636. Commission members will recall an informal discussion was held with Mr. Ritter in November at which time the Commission passed the request to the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee (CPPC) for a recommendation. The Committee discusser) the request at their meeting of December 12. The Committee recommended against permitting the extension. In order to permit the request, either the Sewer and Water Service Area or the Urban Development Area would have to be extended to encompass the Ritter property. The Committee felt that to do so would set a precedent that would open the door to numerous requests for similarly situated properties to request sewer extensions. This recommendation came before the Commission at your December, 1994 meeting at which time, Mr. Ritter came forward and requested that the discussion be tabled until such time as he could supply information regarding his request to the County. This information was received in February and discussed at the CPPC meeting that same month. At that time, the Committee requested that the staff contact the Department of Environmental Quality for some additional information on Mr. Ritter's treatment facility. The CPPC again discussed the matter at their March meeting at which time it was the consensus of the Committee that their recommendation should remain the same. The Committee feels it would not be appropriate to extend either the Sewer and Water Service Area or the Urban Development Area at this time. Please let me know if there are any questions concerning this matter. 107 North Kent Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 FAX 703/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, Planner I z` U RE: Informal Discussion Regarding Guidelines for New Commercial Construction in the Historic Area Overlay DATE: March 22, 1995 Attached is the draft Guidelines for New Commercial Construction in the Historic Area Overlay Zone as recommended by the Historic Resources Advisory Board at their meeting of March 21, 1995. In May of 1994, a proposal to rezone land adjacent to the historic Star Fort prompted the HRAB to evaluate the need for new commercial construction guidelines for historic areas. As a result of this initial proposal, the HRAB has drafted guidelines which could ultimately preserve the integrity of historic areas throughout Frederick County. The draft guidelines are essentially that: guidelines. The language used is designed to assist the new commercial construction designer in understanding the goals for historic areas. Terminology that is exercised merely recommends and encourages compliance with the design criteria. A statement has been included in the guidelines that enables the HRAB to use its' discretion in determining whether the development proposal meets the spirit of the design criteria. These guidelines are being introduced to you as an informal discussion item. If the Planning Commission feels that the guidelines are appropriate, then we can advertise them for a public hearing. The HRAB feels that these guidelines should be incorporated into the Historic Area Overlay section of the Zoning Ordinance. Please let me know if there are any questions regarding this item. 107 North Kent Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 Summary of Guidelines The Historic Resources Advisory Board has developed these guidelines in an effort to insure that new commercial construction within an area designated as a Historic Area Overlay is compatible with the character of the historic area. Additionally, the HRAB anticipates that the guidelines will be compatible with economic growth while minimizing the erosion of the historic area's character. The guidelines are based on the traditional character present in the County's historic areas. Traditionally, historic County buildings do not exceed 2 stories and buildings were most often constructed of wood and stucco. These historic design characteristics are encouraged by the guidelines so that new commercial construction will be consistent with existing structures. In an effort to minimize the effect that 20th century conveniences have on the historic area, the guidelines encourage site designs which de-emphasize features such as parking facilities, HVAC equipment, and solid waste management equipment. By exercising building designs, site layouts, and landscaping techniques, the impacts associated with modern day conveniences may be reduced. Guidelines for New Commercial Construction in the Historic Area Overlay The following guidelines are hereby adopted by the Frederick County Historic Resources Advisory Board ("HRAB") to assist its consideration of applications for new commercial construction in Historic Area Overlay ("HA") zones under the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. These guidelines should not be viewed as a means of dictating a specific design response to a given design problem, nor should they be seen as prohibiting any particular approach. New and untried approaches to common design problems associated with historic sites and structures should not be rejected merely because of originality. Each application will be considered on a case-by-case basis, within the framework set out here. For purposes of these guidelines, the term "designated site" shall mean that site, structure, or other feature, which has been designated as a historic resource by the Board of Supervisors, in its application of a HA zone on any property or properties within the County. "Commercial construction" includes, for example, all non-residential construction such as retail stores, office buildings, automobile service stations, restaurants of all types, churches and non-profit organization facilities. These design elements are based on the Rural Landmarks Survey Report, Frederick County, Virginia, Phases 1-171, 1988-1992. This survey documented buildings in Frederick County that are at least 50 years old and have retained their architectural integrity. This standard is used by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources and the U.S. Department of Interior to determine whether or not a structure is considered to be "contributing" to the historic character of a community. The term "contributing buildings", as used here, refers to those buildings that have been identified in the Rural Landmarks Survey Report and may contribute to designs for new commercial construction. All surveys were prepared according to the standards established by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. All applications for new construction must comply with the requirements of applicable zoning regulations prior to consideration by the HRAB. Purpose and Intent Statement of Purpose: The purpose of these Design Criteria is to insure that new commercial construction located within the Historic Area Overlay (HA) are compatible with the character of the historic area. The purpose is also to establish a common commercial identity among these new buildings through shared design principles. Guidelines for New Commercial Construction in the Historic Area Overlay March 22, 1995 Page 1 Statement of Intent: It is the intent of these Criteria to : 1. Accommodate and encourage economic growth that will both maximize direct county revenues and minimize the indirect costs of eroding the historic character of the HA; 2. Protect private property values and related public investment from the detrimental impacts of carelessly planned new construction; 3. Encourage creative designs while discouraging uniform trademark architecture that if built in the HA would create strip developments incompatible with existing structures; 4. Maintain the image of the HA as seen from its most traveled roads to benefit residents, attract tourists, and interest potential employers; Encourage new commercial developments to produce contemporary architecture compatible with the traditional building forms of the HA; 6. Provide for an appropriate and attractive yet diverse mix of new construction that relate to one another in a coherent way by guiding them toward shared design principles without imposing any specific architectural style. Architectural Style and Form Criteria These criteria shall be followed to the greatest extent possible, as determined by the Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB), given the physical nature of a specific site and its intended use. Although achieving compliance with all these criteria is desired, the HRAB may use its discretion in determining an application's degree of compliance, as long as a proposed design is consistent with the purpose and intent of these criteria. Building Design New construction should not create an appearance with no historical basis. New commercial construction should represent the era in which it is built, yet be designed in a manner that complements the existing HA character. No single architectural style is mandated. However, historic design elements of contributing buildings found in Frederick County should be the basis for proposed designs. Direct copying of buildings is discouraged as are standardized building Guidelines for New Commercial Construction in the Historic Area Overlay March 22, 1995 Page 2 designs found throughout areas outside of Frederick County. 2. Introduction of design concepts foreign to Frederick County is inconsistent with the County's architectural character. 3. New commercial building designs should have roof designs that are characteristic of Frederick County. Duplication of the traditional roof shapes, pitches, and materials on new construction is one way of making the new structures more visually compatible. Steeply pitched roofs are generally found in contributing buildings. 4. Side and rear walls which face open areas should be designed with as much attention to detail as the primary facade. 5. New commercial construction should maintain a scale which is compatible with adjacent buildings and other existing structures in the HA. 6. The Board is conscious of 20th century infrastructure requirements, but such items as electrical meters and transformers, HVAC equipment and solid waste management equipment should be visually and acoustically screened from public view. Building Siting 1. Buildings should be designed and sited to reduce the need for topographic modifications to the site. If buildings must be sited in areas of significant slope, they should make use of multiple stories and multi-level access to retain the natural topography of the site. 2. All new construction should attempt to protect and preserve significant archaeological resources. 3. The front of a building should face the main thoroughfare in the HA. Building elevations facing other public right of way should include the principal design features and materials used on the front of the building, so not to look like the back of the building. Guidelines for New Commercial Construction in the Historic Area Overlay March 22, 1995 Page 3 Height No structure should be so located or of such height, as to unreasonably affect protected viewsheds around designated sites. Traditionally, the height of buildings in HA is no more than two stories (approximately 25 feet). New commercial constriction should be Consistent with ibis pn.ttelii. Parking Location Maintain the integrity of the area's historic resources by minimizing the dominance of the automobile. Parking facilities should be placed in locations which de-emphasize their use, and emphasizes the main structure. This may be accomplished by exercising site layout options and landscaping techniques which attempt to camouflage the parking facilities. Building Materials 1. The predominant building materials for commercial buildings in historic areas are wood and stucco. Brick and stone were also common building materials to a lesser extent. The same material was typically applied to all sides of all stories of a building. Horizontal wood siding, stucco, red clay brick, or limestone should be encouraged for cladding on new commercial buildings. 2. Historic roofing materials, such as standing seam metal and slate, which are present in historic areas are encouraged. These materials continue to be widely available today. 3. Building colors should compliment the colors existing in the historic areas. Landscaping The use of appropriate landscaping (plant materials) native to or traditionally used in Frederick County will blend new construction with the surrounding historical area landscapes. The use of species that are winter hardy and drought tolerant is encouraged. 2. An effort should be made to screen the rear areas of a developed site from the adjacent properties so far as it may reasonably be possible to do so. The use of screening materials, such as fencing, or vegetation plantings are encouraged. 3. Lighting should be of such construction, materials, height, and brightness, as not to adversely effect the designated site. 4. Maintenance of the landscaping should be considered when choosing the type of landscaping and screening to be used. The use of an attractive landscaping plan, accented by hardy plants, will create a pleasing commercial environment. Guidelines for New Commercial Construction in the Historic Area Overlay March 22, 1995 Page 4