Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 05-04-94 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Old Frederick County Courthouse Winchester, Virginia MAY 4, 1994 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) Meeting Minutes of April 6, 1994 ............................ A 2) Bimonthly Report & 1 st Quarter Building Activity Report ............. B 3) Committee Reports .................................... C 4) Citizen Comments ............... ..................... D 5) Discussion with Mr. E. Frank Smith regarding a request to relax the Subdivision Ordinance regulation pertaining to depth and width ratio requirements. (Mr. Miller) ......................................... E 6) Presentation by the Winchester -Frederick County Bicycle Advisory Committee regarding a proposal to include a regional bicycle plan in the County's Comprehensive Policy Plan. .................................................F 7) Discussion regarding a request from John Lewis, of Lewis & Associates, for a waiver from the minimum driveway spacing requirements for Sheetz, Inc. (Mr.Bise). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS 8) Conditional Use Permit #001-94 God's Glory Land, for a church retreat. This property is located on the northwest side of Route 704 (Back Creek Road), 3.3 miles southwest of Gore, in the Back Creek District. (Mr. Miller) ......................................... H 9) Rezoning application #003-94 of C. L. Robinson Inc., to rezone 16 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to B3 (Industrial Transition) for the district office of the Winchester Division of the Virginia Department of Transportation. This property is located on Route 50 West (Northwestern Pike) at the intersection of Route 803 (Roundhill Road) in the Back Creek District. (Mr. Tierney) ........................................ l MISCELLANEOUS 10) Other (no attachment) MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Court House in Winchester, Virginia on April 6, 1994. PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were: James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman; John R. Marker, Vice Chairman/Back Creek District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; Todd D. Shenk, Gainesboro District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Stonewall District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Robert A. Moms, Shawnee District; Terry Stone, Gainesboro District; Robert M. Sager, Board Liaison; and Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison. ABSENT: George L. Romine, Citizen at Large Planning Staff present were: Robert W. Watkins, Director/Secretary; W. Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator; and Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Director. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Golladay called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES - FEBRUARY 2. 1994 AND FEBRUARY 16, 1994 Upon motion made by Mrs. Copenhaver and seconded by Mr. Shenk, the minutes of February 2, 1994, were unanimously approved as presented. Mr. DeHaven and Mr. DiBenedetto had corrections to the spelling of their names in the minutes of February 16. Upon motion made by Mrs. Copenhaver and seconded by Mr. Shenk, the minutes of February 16, 1994, were unanimously approved with amendments BIMONTHLY REPORT Mr. Miller said the Hagers, who own the swimming pool/spa business on Route 50, west of Round Hill, desire to place a modular home model on a permanent foundation for display for sales. Mr. Miller said that this is an authorized use in the B2 District and the staff is requesting that a site plan be done. The Commission had no particular concerns or problems with the use and instructed the staff to proceed with administrative review and approval of the site plan. Chairman Golladay accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's information. INTRODUCTION OF MR TERRY STONE, REPRESENTING GAINESBORO DISTRICT Chairman Golladay introduced and welcomed Mr. Terry Stone, the newly appointed commissioner for the Gainesboro District. COMMITTEE REPORTS Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DR&RS) - 3/22/94 Mtg Mr. Thomas reported that the DR&RS discussed a rezoning on Senseny Road from B1 to B2 and they also discussed allowing electrical supply stores in B2 areas. He said that this request will be presented to the Commission this evening. Also discussed were use regulations in business and industrial zoning districts. Finally, conditional use permit survey results were reviewed and discussed. Sanitation Authority - 3/17/94 Mtg. Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the change -over to quarry water has been completed and all other water projects are progressing. Transportation Committee - 4/5/94 Mtg. Mr. Thomas reported that the Transportation Committee acted on and discussed the following topics: 1) recommended approval of additional funding for Route 642; 2) recommended that a study be conducted to lower the speed limit on Route 50 East to 35 mph from the entrance of Carpers Valley Golf Course to the Winchester City limits; 3) recommended that VDOT study the intersection area for Route 50 East, Prince Frederick Drive, and Pembridge 3 Heights once the Corp of Engineers facility opens to determine if traffic signalization is warranted; 4) discussed a proposal by VDOT to improve the Route 11 NorthlRoute 371I-81 Interchange area; 5) discussed a proposal to provide traffic signalization at the intersection of Route 522 south and the entrances to the Dominion Square Complex and Delco Plaza; and 6) VDOT informed the Committee that the improvements to Greenwood Road (Rt 656) would be delayed (except for the intersection realignment with Senseny Road) and that the improvements to Middle Road (Route 628) would begin earlier than anticipated. RESOLUTIONS OF APPRECIATION Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Light, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted resolutions honoring Beverly Sherwood, Manuel DeHaven, Ron Carper, and James Barnett for loyal, dedicated, and outstanding service to the Frederick County Planning Commission. (Resolutions attached at end of minutes.) DISCUSSION REGARDING A REQUEST FROM TACO BELL FOR A WAIVER FROM BUFFER REQUIREMENTS Action - Approved Mr. Watkins stated that the Planning Commission is being asked to grant a waiver of the provisions specified by Section 165-371)(5) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. He said that this section allows the Planning Commission to waive any or all of the requirements for zoning district buffers on a site plan if the proposed uses are allowed on the proposed parcel and the adjoining parcel. Mr. Watkins said that the required buffer is defined as a B -Category Buffer with full screening; a minimum distance of 50' is required, as well as an opaque screen with landscaping. Mr. Guy C. Tudor, P.E. & L.S. of Ingram -Tudor & Co., P.L.C., said that he was representing Burger Busters, a franchise of Taco Bell. Mr. Tudor said that Taco Bell is interested in developing a new restaurant on PIN #43-2-A, zoned M L He said that the adjoining parcel, PIN #43-3-D, located on the southwest side, is zoned B2. Mr. Tudor said that this waiver is requested as a fall back position by Taco Bell, as they are planning to rezone the property to B2 in the near future. There was no public comment. Upon motion made by Mr. Light and seconded by Mr. Marker, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously 4 agree to eliminate the distance buffer and opaque screen for the above mentioned parcel, if the zoning remains MI. The Planning Commission also requires Taco Bell to provide a landscaped easement that is ten (10) feet in width, with a minimum of three trees per ten (10) linear feet -- two-thirds of the trees within this landscaped easement should be evergreen and one-third deciduous, with all trees being a minimum of four feet in height when planted. DISCUSSION REGARDING A REQUEST FROM C_ E_ MADDOX. JR_, OF G_ W. CLIFFORD & ASSOCIATES, FOR A WAIVER FROM THE MINIMUM DRIVEWAY SPACING REQUIREMENTS Action - Approved Mr. Watkins said that the Planning Commission is being asked to grant a waiver under the provisions specified by Section 165-29B(1) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Watkins said that this section permits the Planning Commission to allow other means of motor vehicle access provided that left turns are restricted and one-way travel is ensured. He said that the spacing requirements for entrances on arterial highways with speeds greater than 35 miles per hour is 200'. Mr. Charles E. Maddox, Jr., of G. W. Clifford & Associates, said the First Virginia Bank is currently located on this property. He said the owner plans to develop a fast food restaurant and a convenience store with gasoline pumps. Mr. Maddox said that the proposed new entrance will connect to Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 N) and is less than 200' from the existing commercial entrance. Mr. Maddox said that a waiver of the spacing requirement (for a commercial entrance on an arterial highway) is needed. The Commission was concerned about the traffic problems in this area. It was noted that this particular area is being studied by VDOT for traffic improvements and this request would need to be reviewed by VDOT. Upon motion made by Mr. DeHaven and seconded by Mr. Morris, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby grant the waiver to the entrance spacing for the First Virginia Bank property and requests that the site plan come before the Commission for review. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Conditional Use Permit #001-94 of God's Glory Land for a church retreat_ This property, zoned RA (Rural Areas), is identified with Property Identification Numbers 37- 5 A-45, 37-A-46, 37 -A -46A, and 37 -A -46B, and fronts on the northwest side of Route 704 (Back Creek Road), 3.3 miles southwest of Gore, in the Back Creek District. Action - Tabled for 30 Days Mr. Miller said that this proposal is for a religious retreat consisting of four separate tracts of land, three of which already have residences. He said that each parcel can only be permittedt to contain one permanent residence. He said that seasonal residences for staff members may be permitted as accessory to the primary use. Mr. Thomas G. Adams said that his wife Rosalie Adams, Ms. Alice Fox, and himself were the principals of this CUP application. Mr. Adams introduced Mr. Barney Willis, his associate for the past 14 years, and Mr. Bruce Edens, of Greenway, Inc., the project consultant. Mr. Adams felt they could meet all the requirements stated by the review agencies and it was also their intent to consolidate the four parcels. Mr. Adams explained that year-round caretaking would consist of grounds maintenance and security, snow removal during winter, and during operational months there will be linen service, dining service, and spiritual service. The Commissioners felt it was necessary to establish criteria and to define "staff residency" versus "permanent residency" and to establish details of durations of stay for staff and guests. They felt it was also necessary to state the number of staff employed and guests, and how many months out of the year the facility would operate. The Commissioners also felt that the sewage treatment plant should only be allowed to service one parcel of land for this activity because doing otherwise would violate the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. In order to do this, the four parcels would need to be consolidated. (The staff noted that if the sewage treatment plant served multiple parcels, the plant would need to come under the Sanitation Authority's jurisdiction.) There was also concern that if the facility was not operational year-round, there would be large fluctuations in use of the sewage treatment plant. This would effect the operational efficiency of the plant, resulting in affluent being discharged into Back Creek. The Commissioners felt this needed to be addressed. Commissioners noted that the fire marshal requested a 15 % grade on the roads and that "David's Lane" may not meet that requirement. Commissioners also asked about the second entrance that was required by the fire marshal. Mr. Edens said that the alignment of David's Lane may have to change somewhat, but they felt they could meet the required 15 %. Mr. Edens also stated that they were planning to use the driveway to the northeast as the second entrance. Chairman Golladay stated for the record that he spoke with Mr. Renwyn T. Triplett, an adjoining property owner, and Mr. Triplett had no problems with the CUP as long D as it did not turn into permanent housing. Chairman Golladay called for other citizen comments, but no one came forward to speak. The Commissioners had no problems with the concept of the operation; but felt it could have an impact on public facilities in the area, depending on the number of people using and operating the retreat. They felt the applicants needed to clearly address the concerns of the Commission so that they could make a clear judgement and so that the adjoining property owners would know what to expect. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Wilson, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously table Conditional Use Permit #001-94 of God's Glory Land, c/o Thomas G. Adams, for 30 days for more information. Conditional Use Permit #002-94 of Boyer Landscaping, Inc., for the expansion of an existing landscaping business. This property, zoned RA, is identified with PIN #86-A- 159 and 86-A-160 and is located on Route 277 (Fairfax Pike), past the intersection of Route 277 and Route 636 (White Oak Road) in the Shawnee District_ Action - Recommendation of Approval Mr. Miller stated that the applicant received CUP approval for his existing landscaping business on September 9, 1992. He said that this application is requesting expansion of the business onto an adjoining lot to the east of the operating location. Mr. Miller said that the applicant has advised that he now owns parcels 159, 159D, and 160. Mr. Miller stated that VDOT comments for the original CUP required that a commercial entrance be installed for this property and use, however, the required entrance has not yet been installed. The staff felt it would not be unreasonable to require the applicant to complete the entrance requirements in a specified period of time. Mr. Lewis A. Boyer, 11, the owner and applicant, felt that the cost of installing the commercial entrance and the tar and chip parking was a heavy burden to place on his business at this time. Mr. Boyer said he was not opposed to installing the entrance, but would like to be given more time to do so. He said he was not aware, from his dealings with VDOT, that there was a deadline for completion of the commercial entrance. He said the existing entrance is 30' and the property has been bonded. Mr. Boyer proceeded to describe for the Commission the following improvements that he had made to the property: 1) 250+' of board fence screening on the east side of the property; 2) construction of two pole buildings for storage of equipment; 3) landscape screening as specified on the original site plan; 4) gravel 7 truck turn -around; 5) employee and company parking; 6) construction of a shade house/green house; 7) 17+ customer parking spaces; and 8) setbacks have all been met (He plans to consolidate his three parcels in the near future). Mr. Boyer requested that he be allowed to increase his sign size by one foot on each side, that he be allowed to increase his number of on- site employees from two to four, and off-site employees from three to eight. Chairman Golladay called for citizen comments and the following persons came forward to speak in favor of the Boyer CUP: Mr. Raymond Sandy, residing on Fairfax Pike, to the west of Mr. Boyer's property, spoke positively about the way Mr. Boyer has handled the appearance of his business so far. Mr. Sandy was impressed with the screening, storage buildings, and parking and felt Mr. Boyer had a good reputation in the community. Mr. Arthur H. Fulton, business property owner to the south of Mr. Boyer's property, said that Mr. Boyer has continued to improve the appearance of the property. He said that Mr. Boyer has improved the appearance of the house, planted grass, and cleaned up the rear of the property. Mr. Fulton felt that Mr. Lewis Boyer and his company were an asset to the community and area. Chairman Golladay emphasized to Mr. Boyer that the commercial entrance was a condition of his previous CUP #010-92 and that he was in violation of his permit. The Commission agreed to allow Mr. Boyer an extension on installing the commercial entrance and parking area, but emphasized that these items must be completed within six months of the final approval of this new CUP. Upon motion made by Mr. Shenk and seconded by Mr. Morris, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit #002-94 of Boyer Landscaping, Inc., for the expansion of the existing landscaping business with the following conditions: 1. Any change in use or expansion of this use shall require a new permit. 2. No more than one sign shall be allowed and it shall be limited to 15 square feet in size. 3. A revised site plan must be submitted and approved. Requirements of the site plan must be completed within six (6) months of the final approval date of this permit. 4. The commercial entrance must be completely installed and approved within six (6) months of the final approval of this permit. If allowed to continue in existence, internal lot lines must be honored with proper setback restrictions. N 6. All review agency comments must be addressed and requirements completed in conjunction with the completion date of the site plan requirements. Rezoning Application #001-94 of Negley Construction to rezone 2.5 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) to B2 (Business General) for uses allowed in the B2 District. This property is identified with PIN #43-A-52 and is located off of Route 11, on Welltown Road, in the Stonewall District. Action - Recommendation of Approval Mr. Light said he would abstain from discussion and vote on this rezoning due to a possible conflict of interest. Mr. Tierney said there would be little anticipated impact to the area as a result of the proposed rezoning. He said the County Impact Model indicates that the anticipated costs for the portion of the fire and rescue services not already funded by the county would be $1,331.09 for this site as presently zoned. He said the cost for the site under B2 zoning would be $1,376.76, which is an increase of roughly $45.00. objections. Mr. Harry Benham was present to represent the applicant. There were no citizen comments. Given the lack of anticipated impact of the rezoning, the Commission had no Upon motion made by Mr. Shenk and seconded by Mr. Thomas, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Rezoning Application #001-94 of Negley Construction to rezone 2.5 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) to B2 (Business General) for uses allowed in the B2 District. (Mr. Light abstained) (Mrs. Copenhaver left the meeting at this point.) Rezoning Application #002-94 of Thomas C. Glass to rezone 2.38 acres from BI (Neighborhood Business) to B2 (Business General) for uses allowed in the B2 District. This property is identified as PIN #55-A-194 and is located east of Winchester, at the 0 northwest corner of the intersection of Senseny Road and Greenwood Road, in the Shawnee District. Action - Motion for Approval Failed Mr. Tierney stated that the applicant is requesting a rezoning to B2 and has limited B2 uses by submitting proffers which eliminate the intensive uses permitted in B2. He said that the applicant has also proffered a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 3 1, 100 square feet which conforms to the current FAR limitations of B 1 zoning. Thomas C. Glass, the owner of Country Park Shopping Center, said that the Commission and Board changed the B1 Zoning in 1988 to allow him a larger building with certain restrictions. Mr. Glass said the BI zoning has not worked out. He explained that his building has been open for six years and has never been more than 50% full. He said that presently, he is only at 40% capacity. Mr. Glass said the Bl Zoning does not have enough appropriate uses to fill his building space. Mr. Glass felt that retailing has changed dramatically since 1988. He felt his building lent itself well to retail stores such as hardware, small furniture, paint and wall covering supplies, and plumbing and electrical supplies --all 132 uses in the ordinance. He mentioned that a convenience store with gas pumps is an allowed use in Bl, but he felt this use would not be desirable at his location. Some of the Cmmissioners preferred that the applicant state the specific uses he wanted rather than proffering out a long list of uses that would not be allowed. These commissioners felt that proffering out uses to get a rezoning could be detrimental in the long run because it does not address uses which might be added to the zoning category in the future. The Commissioners debated the definitions of "wholesale" and "retail" whether the entire B 1 Zoning category needed to be reworked. Mr. Morris said that he received two telephone calls from community residents who sympathized with Mr. Glass's dilemma and who felt other retail or small wholesale uses should be allowed there. Mr. Watkins said he also received a telephone call from an adjoining property owner. Mr. Watkins said the property owner was satisfied that the proffers would properly control the situation. Chairman Golladay called for public comment, but no one came forward. The Commission realized that Mr. Glass needed a broader base of allowable business uses, but they did not want to set a precedent that would cause problems in other areas of the county. They felt that allowing other specific uses in BI, rather than rezoning to B2, would be the desirable approach and would not set a precedent for more B2 rezonings. Other Commissioners were of the opinion that it would be detrimental to add more uses to B 1 Zoning and felt they should go along with the staff recommendation for approval to rezone to B2. 10 Mr. DeHaven moved to approve the rezoning. This motion was seconded by Mr. Shenk and the following vote took place: YES (TO APPROVE): DeHaven, Shenk, Golladay, Marker NO: Morris, Thomas, Wilson, Light, Stone The motion failed and no further motions made. An amendment to Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, Article III, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165-37, Buffer and Screening Requirements, and Article VI, RP (Residential Performance) District, Section 165-58 Intent, and Section 165-62, Gross Density_ The proposed amendments pertain to perimeter and interior residential separation buffers, permitted gross densities in the RP District, and multi- family housing percentages. Action - Approval Mr. Watkins said the proposed "sliding scale" and permitted multi -family dwelling percentages were discussed with and agreed upon by the Top of Virginia Builders Association. Mr. Watkins said that the staff provided a copy of the proposed amendments to the Commonwealth Attorney for review. He said that the Assistant Commonwealth Attorney, Mr. Jay Cook, had reviewed preliminary drafts of the amendments and did not see any problems with the proposed language. The Planning Commission felt that the proposed language would assist in the reduction of overall gross density for multi -family developments while still providing developers the opportunity to create marketable developments. Upon motion made by Mr. Wilson and seconded by Mr. Thomas, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of an amendment to Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, Article III, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165-37, Buffer and Screening Requirements, and Article VI, RP (Residential Performance) District, Section -165-58 Intent, and Section 165- 62, Gross Density, which pertain to perimeter and interior residential separation buffers, permitted gross densities in the RP District, and multi -family housing percentages. 11 OTHER Discussion on Recommendations from the CP&PS (Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee) Concerning Sewer to the Rural Community Centers_ No Action Mr. Tierney stated that the CP&PS has reviewed the results of the Alternate Wastewater Treatment Study for the rural community centers and discussed the possible implications of providing sewer service to the three centers that were evaluated. Mr. Tierney said the Committee expressed concern over the effect sewer availability would have on growth pressure within the centers and how much control the County could maintain over this pressure. He said it was the recommendation of the CP&PS that land use plans should be developed for the Centers. He said the Committee agreed that to attempt to choose an appropriate means of providing sewer, let alone try to scale and design a system, prior to having an understanding of the long range goal for the centers, would be inappropriate. The Planning Commission felt that the preparation of land use plans for the community centers was the proper approach and they advised the staff to work with the CP&PS to begin those studies. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Robert W. Watkins, Secretary James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman Resolution of appreciation Honoring Beverly J. Sherwood WHEREAS, Beverly J. Sherwood served on (lie Frederick County Planning Commission with dedication, professionalism, and insight from January 13, 1988 to December 31, 1993; and, WHEREAS, during her tenure, the Frederick County Planning Commission did make great strides towards huilding a hetter future for the people of Frederick County; and, WHEREAS, the members of the Frederick County Planning Commission and the staff of the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development wish Beverly J. Sherwood continued success in her term as Delegate to the .Mate Mouse of Delegates; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That on this 6th day of April 1994, the Frederick County Manning Commission does express its deep appreciation and gratitude to Beverly J. Sherwood for a Yoh well done! Resolution of Appreciation Honoring Manuel C. DeIH[aven WHEREAS, Manuel C. DeHaven served on the Frederick County Planning Commission with dedication, professionalism, and insight from January 10, 1972 to February 12, 1994; and, WHEREAS, during his tenure, the Frederick County Planning Commission did make great strides towards building a better future for the people of Frederick County; and, WHEREAS, the members of the Frederick County Planning Commission and the staff of the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development wish to encourage Manuel C. DeHaven to remain active in community affairs and to continue to provide his insight to the Commission; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That on this Pith day of April 1994, the Frederick County Planning Commission does express its deep appreciation and gratitude to Manuel C. DeHaven for a job well donel Resolution of Appreciation Honoring Ronald W. Carper WHEREAS, Ronald W. Carper served on the Frederick County Planning Commission with dedication, professionalism, and insight from January %, 1992 to March 16, 1994; and, WHEREAS, during his tenure, the Frederick County Planning Commission did make great strides towards hudding a Letter future for the people of Frederick County; and, WHERE,A,S, the members of the Frederick County Planning Commission and the staff of the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development wish to encourage Ronald W. Carper to remain active in community affairs and to continue to provide his insight to the Commission; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That on this 6th day of April 1994, the Frederick County Planning Commission does express its deep appreciation and gratitude to Ronald W. Carper for a joh well donel Resolution of Appreciation Honoring James W. Barnett WHEREAS, .Tames W. Barnett served on the Frederick County Planning Commission with dedication, professionalism, and insight from July 18, 1990 to December 31, 19931 and, WHEREAS, during his tenure, the Frederick County Planning Commission did make great strides towards huilding a better future for the people of Frederick County; and, WHEREAS, the members of the Frederick County Planning Commission and the staff of the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development wish to encourage .Tames W. Barnett to remain active in community affairs and to continue to provide his insight to the Commission; NOW, 'THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That on this 6th day of April 1994, the Frederick County Planning Commission does express its deep appreciation and gratitude to .Tames W. Barnett for a job well done! M E M O R A N D U M TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Robert W. Watkins, Secretary SUBJECT: Bimonthly Report DATE: April 21, 1994 (1) Rezonings Pending: (dates are submittal dates) God's Glory Land 3/08/94 Twin Lakes Negley Construction Thomas C. Glass C. L. Robinson 4/04/90 2/03/94 3/14/94 3/30/94 Shaw Ston Shaw BkCk RA B3 B1 RA to to to to B2/RP B2 B2 B3 (2) Rezonings Approved: dates are BOS meetin dates (5) Conditional Use Permits Approved: (dates are approval dates) None (6) Site Plans Pending: None submittal dates Wheatlands Wastewater Fac. 9/12/89 Opeq Trmt.facil (3) Rezonings Denied: (dates are BOS meeting dates None (4) Conditional Use Permits Pending: (dates are submittal dates) God's Glory Land 3/08/94 BkCk Church Retreat Boyer Landscaping 3/11/94 Shaw Expansion of Existing Business (5) Conditional Use Permits Approved: (dates are approval dates) None (6) Site Plans Pending: dates are submittal dates Wheatlands Wastewater Fac. 9/12/89 Opeq Trmt.facil Grace Brethren Church 6/08/90 Shaw Church Flex Tech 10/25/90 Ston Lgt. Industrial Lake Centre 05/15/91 Shaw Townhouses Red Star Express Lines 05/24/91 Ston Whse. Addition Freeton 04/27/92 Opeq Townhouses 84 Lumber 01/26/94 Ston Storage Addition Corrigated Container 02/22/94 BkCk Light Industrial Shenandoah B1dg.Supply 03/01/94 Gain Warehouse 2 Shenandoah Gas Co. 04/12/94 Hager's Spa & Pool Ctr. 04/15/94 Sheetz 04/20/94 Shaw Offices BkCk Model Home Ston Conven. Store & Gas Pumps (7) Site Plans Approved: (dates are approval dates) None (8) Subdivisions Pending: dates are submittal dates Briarwood Est. 01/04/94 Stonewall (9) Subdivisions Pending Final Admin. Approval: (P/C or BOS approval dates Abrams Point, Phase I 06/13/90 Shawnee Lake Centre 06/19/91 Shawnee Coventry Courts 12/04/91 Shawnee Freeton 05/20/92 Opequon Village at Sherando 06/16/93 Opequon Paul Negley 08/11/93 Stonewall Fredericktowne Est., Sec 8 & 9 10/06/93 Opequon Lake Holiday Sec. 1B 12/08/93 Gainesboro (10) PMDP Pending: (dates -are submittal dates). Lake Front Apartments 03/28/94 Shawnee (11) FMDP Pending Administrative Approval: (dates are BOS„approval dates Battlefield Partnership 04/08/92 Back Creek James R. Wilkins 111 04/14/93 Shawnee Woodside Estates 04/13/94 Opequon (12) FMDP Administ. Approved (dates are admin. approval dates) None (13) Board of Zoning Appeals Applications Pending:(submit. dates) Wendy Baruch & 4/20/94 BkCk 9.83' rear & 40' Francis Dicesare front --primary structure/5' rear & 50' front -accessory bldg. 3 (14) BZA Applications Approved: (approval datpcl None (15) BZA Applications Denied: None (16) PLANS RECD. FOR REVIEW FROM CITY OF WINCHESTER McDonalds Restaurant Rt.50/Rt. 37 onReport Januar —4 H Comparison of 1994' Accumul ative Plonthly 'Totals Z Zoning ng PROVED FOR ZONING 13 23 12 Total January 1993 Multi -family O ° 7 Ad 0 M H o o 14 6 A N td N N U 4i o 11 A y cd N N U O O 10 6 O U Cd 3 Cr td N C,, llob i l e homes 0 O U U' 0 0 2 0 0 - New Units U U M to n TOTAL PERMLTS AP- -4 H —4 H --, �, H --f d E0� 1-4M 0 E-- PROVED FOR ZONING 13 23 12 5 13 1. Multi -family 0 7 0 0 0 2. Single-family 6 4 3 27 25 11 dwellings 6 10 6 0 4 3. llob i l e homes 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 - New Units 0 2 0 0 2 1 - Replacements 0 1 0 0 0 4. Industrial 0 1 0 0 0 5. Commercial 0 0 0 0 0 6. Miscellaneous 7 2 6 5 7 "11MT.'l i - Comml-y 'Ibt,.l 200 — 150 — - ----- ---- - 100 — ------- ..._....-- 50 0 .1 H -4 H —4 H --, �, H --f d E0� 1-4M 0 E-- U U U U U +-1 U I 66 17 12 21 133 11 194 75 67 7 0 0 0 120 0 120 6 6 26 7 7 6 4 3 27 25 11 5 0 0 0 1 3 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 4 1 1 1 p 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 27 10 5 15 8 5 43 42 39 W 30 40 24 10 8 3 0 1 0 14 0 11 32 37 25 a� c: ;� �_ • . • 11 t..l. c1 i. -- — _. f ,-...- ,_ 2 1 r• r . Monthly Report a�3 nuary Comparison of - February— Accumulative Monthl Totals 1-2 Zoning 1g94 Tvtal Januar - Februar 1993 Total 1992 1-2 _ 1991 199 19 O ai H H H H O'-11 Cd N O O O p O O •r�-1 O U ted t - Cd 0 to ra ` � py,ri�.��. q U (d 41 � c v N +- U 07 O U U o U o U U O U TOTAL PERMITS AP- PROVED FOR ZONING 26 37 24 16 28 131 34 29 35 1. Ptulti-family 0 7 0 148 43 289 153 171 261 1 220 190 0 0 7 0 0 0 120 19 139 14 6 84 24 12 2. Single-family dwellings 12 15 10 1 11 49 13 1510 - 8 7 53 _ 54 40 67 93 66 3. Mobile (tomes 0 7 1 0, 4 12 1 3 - New Units 9 0 1 0 1 5 10 5 3 18 20 11 - Replacements 3 1 2 0 0 2 3 2 2 9 15 7 • 0 1 3 5 4 4. Industrial 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 2 0 5. Commercial 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6. Miscellaneous 14 7 13 15 13 - 62 20 0 1 0 1 0 7 20 1 32 11 25 18 12 86 80 109 72 80 69 hI:RMITS - ColmL-y 'Pohl 400 — 300 — --- ---- __ -- 200 - 100 1988 19 9 19 0 19 1— am"'°"N"m -County Total --_,, 1 92 1993 19 4 t1O1JTIII,Y UPORT Comparison, of tndi.viduj,1 Mrn,1 11y 'yoLals �,,,ninct February I'ot_al e ruar y rotal_ - 92 1/91 1/90; 1/88 o a ? E a p a iii o o n o o 0 . �i t0 vj R� U pI H H H W H (�l O U a E� J '' r'' fl Or E>E4 >+ >� >, H FC :C a ] C H rcRW, J J U to C4 to O U U to W to p U O U O U p U U U TOTAL PERMITS AP- PROVED FOR ZONING 13 14 12 11 15 65 17 17 14 15 32 95 78 104 91 124 127 1.. DUu11..i.-Camily 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 19 8 0 0 14 12 2. sh,g](�-Family dwellings 6 5 4 1 7 23 6 8 4 4 4 26 29 29 37 53 '42 3. Mobile homes 0 4 1 0 2 7 1 _ 3 0 0 2 6 3 2 8 12 8 tJew Units 0 4 1 0 0 5 0 1 0 0 2 _3__1 1 5 8 5 - Replacements 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 2 0 0 0 3 2 1 3 4 3 4. Industrial 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 1 0 5. Commercial 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 OE i 0 3 6 1 21 6. Miscellaneous 7 5 7 10 6 35 10 6 10 10 7 43 38 70 40 43 44 PERMPI's - CounL-y 'Total 200 150 100 — - ---- ---- -- 50 ----- -- J -_ 1 1988 1989 1990 1991 I 1992 County Total - Resdiential — — — 1993 1994 -Commercial & Industrial h1:ItMT'1'S - Conlily '1'oLa.l 400 300 200 100 P1pPPI'iILY RI F'OR'1' comparison oi: Jnfii.vi.du,(.l Pirn(I,Irl.y 'Tot_�ls :.on.incl MARCH 1994 Total MARCH 1993 Total _ 1/92 1/91 1/.90i 1/89 1/88 19 1 o a U Ga 7 o E t `a ► Q� 0 E4 0 H 0 0 0 0 COO r> I I 7 H E+ H H 0 U Or rC C7 (n W :L W a' O O U (7 O m it: W 0 J J _ � 0 ICTAL I'I'sl2htI I'I2CVL•'b FORZO ZONING NG 26 41 24 21 39 151 9 27 13 34 26 109 118 116 182 164 194 1.. tlu l t. i- rami, l y 0 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 24 0 24 0 1 34 12 0 2.. Single-family dwellings 13 25 10 5 17 70 1 15 2 3 9 30 48 34 51 66 103 3. Mobile domes 0 1 0 0 0 1 .1 2 0 0 2 5 5 13 11 9 3 PJcw Units 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 2 9 5 - Replacements 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 2 3 3 4 6 7 1 4. Industrial 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 4 2 0 5. Commercial 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 13 6. Miscellaneous 13 11 14 16 22 76 7 9 11 7 15 ::4:9 64 65 78 1 75 75 200 150 100 50 0 (•r.r(rri.'r's - County `total 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 � 1 -COUNTY TOTAL -RESIDENTIAL — — — — -COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL E. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT - ACTIVITY REPORT #55 (April 1-15) 1. Transportation Issues Bob Watkins participated in the meetings with Virginia Secretary of Transportation, Robert E. Martinez. The Planning Staff provided various types of support. Kris Tierney received official notice that the County's conversion request for Sherando Park has been approved. This will enable us to pursue getting Warrior Drive built along the edge of the park rather than through Fredericktowne Estates as originally planned. On Thursday, April 14, Kris Tierney met with Scott Marsh of G.W. Clifford & Associates, and Jim Doran to discuss the survey of acreage to be received from JASBO as part of the approved conversion to accommodate Warrior Drive. Scott will be preparing a plan showing the resulting boundary of the park to fulfill requirements of the Department of the Interior. Evan Wyatt compiled information and submitted an application for $500,000 in additional funding through the Revenue Sharing Program for the Route 642 realignment project. Evan Wyatt provided support information for the proposed new two-lane bridge over Cedar Creek on Route 621 (Cedar Creek Road). Evan Wyatt met with representatives of the Top of Virginia Builders Association to discuss the location and design criteria for new minor and major collector roads within the Eastern Road Plan 2. Battlefield Preservation and Historic Issues Evan Wyatt, Mark Lemasters, and Bob Watkins participated in the Battlefield Tour Network\WATS presentation to Transportation Secretary Martinez. 3. G.I.S./Mapping & Graphics The staff is continuing with map preparation for the ARC/INFO conversion process, 4. Plans Review Evan Wyatt reviewed the following plans: Lake Front Apartments Master Development Plan Shenandoah Building Supply Warehouse Addition Corrugated Container Addition Shenandoah Gas Company Office Addition Hager Spa and Pool - Model Home Sales Addition 5. Site Inspections Evan Wyatt conducted site inspections at the Southeastern Container addition and at the Stephens Ridge Townhouse Development. 6. Planning Department Personnel Jean Moore began work with the County as a Planner I. Jean fills a vacancy created with the departure of Ron Lilly. Jean will be working three days a week (Mon.- Wed.) until the end of May when she will begin full-time employment. 7. Other Bob Watkins gave a talk to the Board of Realtors on growth and planning issues in Frederick County. Bob Watkins attended the LFPDC Planners Network meeting. A variety of local planning issues were discussed. COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703 / 678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Request for Subdivision Ordinance Variance DATE: April 21, 1994 Mr. E. Frank Smith previously subdivided a portion of his land located along Marple Road (Route 654) into traditional lots of five acres or more. The lots labeled 169F and 169G on the attached plats were sold by Mr. Smith and the owners of these two lots desire to purchase additional land at the rear of these parcels and attach the additional acreage to their lots through boundary line adjustment. Permitting this would violate our ordinance which requires a maximum 4:1 depth to width ratio. Appeal of this requirement must be acted on by the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation from the Planning Commission. Lot 169F: This lot is 300 feet wide and would be allowed to be 1200 feet deep by the ordinance. Adding the proposed 4.774 acres to this parcel would make the lot 1600 feet in depth. Lot 169G: This lot is 250 feet wide and would be allowed to be 1000 feet deep by the ordinance. Adding the proposed 3.968 acres to this parcel would make the lot 1575 feet in depth. Both the proposed additions to these parcels and the original parcels are woodland. Only one residence would be allowed on each parcel in either configuration. Recommendation: Since the proposed addition to these lots is woodland located on a steep slope, staff recommends approval of this request. WWM/slk attachments 9 North Loudoun SH -M P.O. Rox 001 Winchcsler, VA 22601 Wincheslcr, VA 22004 Greenway, lnc. 1104 Baker Lane • Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 662-4185 • Fax (703) 722-9528 H. Bruce Edens, L.S„ President April 6, 1994 Mr. Wayne Miller, Subd. Admin. Frederick County Planning 9 North Loudoun St. Winchester, Va. 22601 RE: Boundary Line Adjustment Plat Dear Wayne: Please find the enclosed proposed sketch plat for a boundary line adjustment. We realize that this does not conform to the subdivision ordinance. However, on behalf of our client, E. Frank Smith, we would appreciate your consideration for a variance. Thank You, a La ry W. Miller Project Co ordinator SURVEYING — DESIGNING — PLANNING RESIDENTIAL . AGRICULTURAL • COMMERCIAL . INDUSTRIAL . CONSTRUCTION _/JEFFIZEY M. .ELEN M. WEST \hC 9\1•PU� \E"� / DB 643. PG 586 Z0r11:D QA �o o�Ed o p1 ilk " S 34 ' I Z 0 3" W �y323mi 57. 83' ,6 gyp.. `'bA /'\ \°) U4 2Es / " Ir a 5 � � • c < P. S° y R o 'j s� y R a y P R 6 Il - S (n 'P 6 F sp s a 6 p S'�q s. �''IfD G m S S m mT s m o o OD R 7 6' o � \ S� ♦\ i Q �y 5 F w R R rl \ S, v a G, 15 iIt S 8 S, s T \ S cp 6' o G c X �, S G o A 3 0 0 o S � S 'c i AREA TABULATION p mSl �� PAKCEL 1(o°)F 6.315 ACRES PROPOSED AUDITION 4.774 ACRES o b6 �0 00 ADJU5TED AREA 11.089 ACRES A �� � r • \'1 0 0 PARCEL 16%G 5.086 ACRES \ �y PROPOSED ADDITION 3.768 AGRE5 \ 00 L (0 ADJUSTED AREA 0J. 054 ACRES �0 1, / V Pr0V05ED BOUNDARY LINE AVJU5Tk.fENT„r!,Ab+*+M, O F THE LAND O F rrr' i.:�LTI,' �,f'�"e V E. FRA NK -7MI-TH ,rC v GA INE9BORO P15TIZICT - FREDERICI< COUNTY V I R G I N IA ��c�{ "*I SCALE: I ” = Z 00DATE : A P R I L 4, I 9+ U DPU i No. OJ'; t 6.'-B GREENWAY, INC. ii4 1970 Baker Lane, Winchester, Virginia 22603 703-662-4185 ll n H. Bruce Edens, L.S. -president `�'0 SLIT It a--i4 y� SURVEYING - DESIGNING - PLANNING fw44 a RESIDENTIAL - AGRICULTURAL • COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION SHEET I of I 4 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Plannina and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703//678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Planner II kn RE: Bicycle Plan For The City of Winchester And Frederick County DATE: April 20, 1994 The Frederick County Department of Parks and Recreation established an ad hoc committee to develop a bicycle plan for the City of Winchester and Frederick County. This committee, known as the Winchester -Frederick County Bicycle Advisory Committee, held its first meeting in April, 1993. Since the initial meeting, the committee has drafted a document entitled the Bicycle Plan For The City Of Winchester And Frederick County. This document evaluates the existing conditions throughout the community, states goals and objectives for the development of a future bicycle network, suggests standards for design and construction, and provides information for public safety and education. Enclosed is a copy of this document for your examination. One goal of this committee is to ensure that this document is endorsed and adopted as the official bicycle plan for Winchester -Frederick County. The committee has asked for an opportunity to present this document to the governing bodies of each locality. Mr. John P. Lewis, Chairman of the Winchester -Frederick County Bicycle Advisory Committee, will introduce this plan to the Planning Commission. Other representatives of the committee will be present to address comments and concerns. Once the governing bodies of Winchester and Frederick County are satisfied, the committee will work to have this plan included in the Comprehensive Plan for each locality. Staff asks that the Planning Commission review this document and provide a recommendation that will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. EAW enclosure 9 North 1.0LI(IOU11 StreCt P-0. 13r,K 001 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 1 f1 i1 11 1 11 MID ATLANTIC NETWORK, INC. I\( IFS?il `.IIZ(;!\1A_'b%-4 I'I0\'F-O;-(>(,_-'"14 FAX ',20 - April 14, 1994 Mr. Robert Watkins, Director Frederick County Planning Department 9 N. Loudoun Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Mr. Watkins: On behalf of the Winchester -Frederick County Bicycle Advisory Committee, I would like to request that our organization be placed on the agenda for the first Planning Commission meeting in May, 1994. The purpose of this request is to share with the commission an all-inclusive regional bicycle plan to be considered for inclusion in the county's comprehensive plan. Our committee will also be making a like presentation to the Winchester Planning Commission. I have enclosed a copy of the Bicycle Plan for your review, and once a meeting date has been confirmed, I will provide your office with copies for each Planning Commission member. If you should have any further questions or need additional information, please call me at 667-2224. If for some reason I am not available, please contact Jim Doran, and he will provide you with any needed information. S' ce y, John P. Lew , Chairman Winchester -Frederick County Bicycle Advisory Committee COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planninb and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703/678-0682 Me- o To: Frederick County Planning Commission From: Lanny Bise, Planner I Date: April 19, 9994 Re: Entrance Spacing Waiver Request for Sheetz, Inc. Mr. John Lewis, P.E., of Lewis and Associates, has requested that a waiver be granted by the Planning Commission under the provisions specified by Section 165-29B(1) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. This section permits the Planning Commission to allow other means of motor vehicle access provided that left turns are restricted and one-way travel is ensured. The property is owned by James R. Wilkins, is identified as 54-A-105, and currently has an abandoned house on it. The developer is Sheetz, Inc., who plans to develop a convenience store with gasoline pumps. This use will necessitate one commercial entrance on Berryville Pike (Route 7), which doesn't meet the 200 foot minimum spacing requirement for entrances on primary and arterial highways with speeds greater than 35 miles per hour. Mr. Lewis has provided the Planning Commission with a copy of the submitted site plan for this project. The proposed new commercial entrance on to Berryville Pike is 155 feet from the intersection of Regency Lakes Drive and Berryville Pike. However, the entrance is located in a position where left turn movements are not possible. Furthermore, there is a possibility that the speed limit may be reduced to 35 miles per hour in the near future, which would reduce the entrance spacing requirement to 150 feet. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission allow the new entrance to be located as indicated on the site plan. 1) North I_OUdOL111 Su -M P.O. 13o» 001 Winchester, VA ??601 W InChCSlCr, VA 22604 -1P R-�0-'?4 W a 1 S � T_ G_ Pi=g I N ER PE P 0� LEWIS & ASSOCIATES LAND DEVELOPMBNr CONSUL TANTS 24 East Piccadilly Street tel.: (703) 722-9377 Winchester, VA 22601 fax.: (703) 662.1861 19 APRIL 1994 Mr, Lanny Sise c/o County of Frederick 9 North Loudoun Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: ROUTE 7 SHEETZ STORE REQUEST FOR WAIVER Dear Lanny: It is my understanding that the Virginia Department of Transportation views favorably the reduction of the speed limit on Route 7 at the intersection of Regency Lakes Drive from 45 mph to 35 mph. However, this reduction cannot occur until the proposed Sheetz Store is in place and a signal light is installed. The proposed site layout functions well with an entrance on Route 7. The distance of this entrance to the intersection is less than 200 feet as required in Section 165-29-A(4) given the 45 mph speed limit, This entrance will be a "right turn outright turn in" only access. The proposed distance between this entrance and the intersection is 155 feet. Based on the provisions stated in Section 165-29-13(l), I request a waiver from the distance requirement in Section 165-29-A(4). If you have any questions, please call me., Sincer'elyr Sohn C. Loris, P.E., C.L.A. i! � W P/C Review Date: 4/06/94 P/C Review Date: 5/04/94 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #001-94 GOD'S GLORY LAND C/O THOMAS G. ADAMS LOCATION: Fronting on the northwest side of Route 704 (Back Creek Road, 3.3 miles southwest of Gore MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Back Creek PROPERTY ID NUMBER 37-A-45, 37-A-46, 37 -A -46A, and 37 -A -46B PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) Land use - Residential & Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas), Land use -- residential/agricultural PROPOSED USE: Church retreat --two lodges, three retreat cottages, one staff cottage, two bath houses, two pavilions, twelve one -room cabins, one pool, snack bar and game room, one chapel, one field house, one sewage treatment plant. REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation` No objections to a conditional use permit for this property. However, prior to operation, entrances will have to be constructed/ upgraded to meet minimum VDOT sight distance and design requirements. Prior to making any final comments, this office will require a complete set of site plans which detail entrance design, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Manual, 4th Edition for review. Any work performed on the State's right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. Fire Marshal: See attached letter to Thomas G. Adams from Doug Kiracofe, Fire Marshal, dated February 11, 1994. Inspections Department: Building shall comply with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and the BOCA National Building W Page 2 Code/1990. Other codes that apply are '_title 28 Code of Federal Regulation, Part 36 Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations and in commercial and Residential Facilities. Please check for ADA and sprinkler requirement (exception A-4, chapel). Locate ADA parking on site plan. (Plan for Use Group classification of buildings). Health Department: The regulations which are implemented by the VA Dept. of Health only supervise and regulate systems for individual single family dwellings with a flow of less than or equal to 1,000 gallons per day. Please contact Larry Simmons of the Dept. of Environmental Quality in reference to this project. see attachment from the Dept. of Environmental Quality. Planning De artment: This proposal is for a religious retreat that will cover four separate tracts of land, three of which already have a residence located on them. Each parcel can only be permitted to contain one permanent residence. Seasonal residences for staff members may be permitted as accessory to the primary use. Since the sketch plan indicates that the existing residences are for staff, residences for those other than staff will be limited to one per parcel. This is a very ambitious proposal and if allowed to develop, will take very careful planning to insure it's success and to insure that developed uses are properly serviced by the necessary infrastructure. It will be necessary to have the water system, sewer system and road system in place prior to public use for whatever facilities are installed. The roads will be constructed and maintained by the owner. Roads must be constructed to have the width and weight bearing capacity as requested by fire and rescue services. The entrance will need to be constructed to meet the requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). Also, the developer will need to meet the requirements of VDOT as spelled out in their comments on this proposal. The Planning Commission will need to make a determination if the sewage treatment plant being proposed in is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The appropriate restrictions will need to be placed on the facility to insure future compliance if necessary. The sewage treatment plant, if allowed, will need to be installed and operating before any public use is permitted on the property. The sewage treatment plant should only be allowed to service one parcel of land for this activity. To do otherwise would violate the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan specifically states that "When allowed, require that small community sewage systems in rural developments be dedicated to a public authority. Such systems should not be allowed in areas intended to remain rural into the Page 3 indefinite future, including areas west of Interstate 81." The four parcels could be consolidated through the lot consolidation process. Requiring the complex to be accommodated on one parcel would allow control over the sewage system so that it does not become a "public" system. All housing, other than one allowed permanent residence, would be temporary or seasonal staff housing that is accessory to the retreat activity. The water system will also need to be installed and operating to provide adequate fire protection prior to any public use. The water system will also need to meet the requirements of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) office of water programs for installation and operation. An engineered site plan must be submitted to the County and approved prior to any construction work on this development. A plan outlining the phasing or timing of the development must also be provided in conjunction with the site plan. The County would reserve the right to inspect and approve all aspects of the construction and operation before any facilities are placed into public use. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APRIL 6, 1994 PC MEETING: Approval with the following conditions: 1. That an engineered site plan be presented for approval prior to any construction or developmental activity taking place. This plan will be formally reviewed by the Planning Commission. 2. That final County approval be received for all phases of the construction and prior to the placement of any facilities into public use. 3. Non -staff housing will be restricted to one residence per parcel. 4. The use of the sewage treatment plant will be restricted to one specific parcel. 5. All applicable state agencies must review and approve all aspects of the proposal prior to placing any facility into public use. 6. All review agency comments must be complied with prior to public use of these facilities. 7. This use shall comply with all other requirements of the Rural Area Zoning District. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS OF 4/6/94: Unanimously tabled for 30 days. (Absent - G. Romine) Page 4 April 19, 1994, Addendum: The Commission heard this application on April 6, 1994, and tabled it for 30 days. A meeting was held on April 19, 1994, with Mr. Adams and Bruce Edens of Greenway, Inc., to discuss the concerns of the Planning Commission that surfaced at the April 6, 1994 meeting. At this meeting, Mr. Adams presented the attached document dated 4/18/94 and addressed to the Planning Commission. Mr. Adams also presented a copy of a letter from Austin Brockenbrough and Associates, of Chester, Virginia, that allegedly addresses the concerns that the Commission had with the wastewater treatment facility proposed for the retreat facility. A copy of this letter is also attached for your information. The concerns of the Commission that were discussed are as follows: 1. Whether the proposed wastewater or sewage treatment facility would be adequate and would work satisfactorily when the usage is low. 2. That there would only be one parcel of land served by the proposed sewage treatment facility and that only one permanent residence for persons other than staff would be allowed on the one parcel. 3. That the roads could be constructed so as to meet the grade requirement limitation that was surfaced by the Fire Marshal. The attached letter from the engineering firm that will be responsible for installing the sewage treatment facility has addressed the Commission's concerns to a point. It has not been determined if the Virginia DEQ, Office of Water Programs, will permit a pump and haul operation, if required. Mr. Adams made a commitment to consolidate the existing multiple parcels of land into one parcel that would be served by the package sewage treatment plant. There are currently three residences on the multiple parcel complex which are served by sub -surface septic systems. Mr. Adams advises that he desires to continue using these systems rather than hook these residences to the sewage treatment plant system unless there was a failure of the septic systems. The residence that is located adjacent to Back Creek Road (Route 704) is the original homestead and would be designated as the one allowable permanent residence on the parcel where someone other than staff would be allowed to reside. Any other residences on the property would be designated as quarters for staff only, even though they may be occupied on a full time basis. Page 5 Mr. Bruce Edens of Greenway, Inc., advised that new contours have been flown and more accurate information will be available on the site plan to insure that the roads have the proper grade and do not exceed the allowable slope. This may require relocation of some roads from the location depicted on the sketch plan but would not have a major impact on the development capability of the site. This issue will be addressed at the site plan stage in great detail. The site plan will also need to address the issue of a second and independent point of access required by fire and rescue. The applicant has stated that staff will not exceed 24 employees at any time. The maximum number of guests allowed would be 350 which is the design capacity of the waste water treatment facility proposed. The proposed maximum length of stay for guests at the retreat is 30 days. Staff believes a more realistic maximum length of stay should be 15 days. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR MAY 4, 1994 PC MEETING: Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. That an engineered site plan be presented for approval prior to any construction or developmental activity taking place. This plan will be formally reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to final approval. 2. That final Frederick County approval be received for all phases of the construction and prior to the placement of any facilities into public use. 3. Non -staff housing will be restricted to one residence per parcel. 4. The use of the waste water treatment plant will be restricted to one specific parcel of land and any modification or change in use will require County authorization. 5. All applicable state agencies must review and approve all aspects of the proposal prior to placing any facility into public use. 6. All review agency comments must be complied with prior to public use of these facilities. 7. This use shall comply with all other requirements of the Rural Area Zoning District. 8. The maximum number of guests allowed to use the facility at any one time is 350. 9. No guest at the retreat may stay longer than 15 days. Phone: " 869-1900 Mr. & Mrs. T. G. Adams ECHO VILLAGE MOTEL 3632 Valley Pike WINCHESTER, VA. 22602 3�/2 Miles South on U. S. I I March 24, 1994 Marjorie H. Copenhaver John R. Marker Representatives to Back Creek District Frederick County Planning Commission Dear Ms. Copenhaver and Mr. Marker: I have made application for a Conditional Use Permit for property in your District. is for this reason I am enclosing a statement which I believe you will find self— explanatory. I am sending a copy of this letter and statement to Mr. Golladay, Chairman, and other members. If you or they have any questions please call me at 869 -1900 -or my home 869-3100. I will appreciate any and all considerations you and they may give this matter. Yours very sincerely, T. G. Adams Statement Concerning God's Glory Land Thomas G. Adams, Rosalee F. Adams and Alice M. Fox own land, the former home property of Rosalee F. Adams and Alice M. Fox, located 3.3 miles south of Gore, Virginia and fronting on Route 701 in Back Creek District. Knowing it would have been the desire of their parents to see this property developed and used for Christian purposes they wish to fulfil this desire by the developing of God's Glory Land to provide facilities for churches, other Christian Organizations and individuals to use for spiritual refreshment, recreation, and encouragement during Conventions, Soul Winning Clinics, Bible Study, Seminars, Gospel Missions and other religious functions, and to provide gifted and called Men of God who have a message for today's Christian Generation, assist local churches in Spiritual growth, evangelism, and financial support for foreign mission fields, and will be willing to assist any group or church who may or may not have trained Counsellors. 4/18/94 FredericY Count`' Planning Commission RE: God's Glory Land THE THREE (3) HOUSES ALREADY ON THE PROPERTY MARKED FOR STAFF: We have no intention to use these houses for anyone other than those associated with the operating of the Retreat. In order to assure compatibility there would have to be the same Christian standards for all whether in Staff Quarters, Lodges, Cabins etc.... It would be difficult for us to enforce our standards if some one is living there and not on staff. The houses have their own Septic System and would not be using the Waste Water Treatment Plant. We have no problem with a condition to combine the four (4) parcels. THE SIZE OF THE STAFF: The size would vary from a minimum of four (4) to a maximum of twenty-four (24). There will be staff members living off the property and there will be part time help such as students and seasonal workers who work elsewhere at times. CARING FOR THE PROPERTY: The property will be cared for and secured by those regularly on staff among the numbers previously stated. THE NUMBER OF GUESTS USING THE RETREAT: The number would vary - during the first phase we estimate a maximum of one hundred (100) with a gradual increase during the following phases never exceeding a maximum of three hundred and fifty 13501. Page 2 HOW LONG WOULD GUESTS STAY: Normally guests would stay at a Retreat two (2) to ten (10) days. Some may wish to stay their entire vacation therefore, we believe a limit of thirty (30) days would be reasonable. We would definitely place a limitation on the stay. THE WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT: These facilities will be operated by those who meet the requirements and qualifications of the Department of Environmental Quality (State Water Control Board). The use of the plant will be for the Retreat only. THE ROADS: Entrance will meet the requirements of Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). Other roads will meet the requirements of fire and rescue services. Engineered site plan will show the location. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: We are willing to accept the conditions they previously stated and amendments that are beneficial to all concerned. ZONING AND ORDINANCES: It is our desire to abide by all zoning and ordinances to govern this project. Page 3 OTHER RETREATS AND THEIR OPERATION: Being a major contributor and this being the home place of Rosalee Adams and Alice Fox, we are much concerned about God's Glory Land, its future and what it will be offering. We have made a study of other Retreats and found there are twenty-seven (27) in the state of Virginia, five (5) in West Virginia, twenty-three (23) in Maryland, and sixty (60) in Pennsylvania. We have talked to Mr. Bob Baylor with Christian Camping International/USA - Colorado Springs, Colorado and never have they had a Retreat turn into a commune or compound. We have also talked with the representative For Retreat Planners in Greater Washington (Maryland, Virginia, Washington D.C., and Pennsylvania area) and they tell us the same. From our study on Christian Retreats, we have found the real protection against becoming a commune or compound is not allowing it to become a secretive or a membership organization. Guests will not be required to join God's Glory Land as members and will not be confined to the Retreat property. All County Officials (Elected and Appointed) and Law Enforcement Officers may visit the Retreat to observe or inspect. God's Glory Land, Inc. is to be used for a Christian Foundation through its governance according to the Articles of Incorporation and its Bylaws. All powers of the Corporation shall be exercised by and under the authority of a Board of Directors. AUSTIN BROCKENBROUGH AND ASSOCIATES ALEXANC*R B. SADLER, JR., P.E. GERALD W.AUGST,P.E WILUAM F. BELL, P.E. GERALD E KILGORE .,o.am Mr. Bruce Edens Greenway, Inc. 970 Baker Lane Winchester, VA 22603 Re: God's Glory Land Dear Mr. Edens: P.O. BOX 4800 • 4800 W. HUNDRED RD. CHESTER, Wl 23831 TELEPHONE. 804/748$746 FAX 8041748-7849 CONSULTING ENGINEERSt-SURIVE-Y NERS April 14, 1994 -Qaoc A CNAI.RLES D. FARMER. P.E_ AUSTIN BROCKENBROUGH, JR., P.E. 1899-1967 JAMES A. WHrrr. P.E., C.LS_ 1932-1993 This letter is in response to several questions that were raised during the Planning Commission meeting for the referenced project about the wastewater treatment facilities. The treatment plant will be a packaged extended aeration system. The flow for the ultimate number of people proposed for this facility (350 people) is 17,500 gallons per day. This is based on the daily water consumption rate from the Health Department of 50 gallons per day per camper. Due to the flow and the type of treatment necessary a Class III licensed operator will be required to operate the plant_ The treatment plant will operate most efficiently when the flow to the plant meets the design capacity. Due to the nature of the operation of this retreat, there will be times when there is low flow or even no flow. During low flow periods, the operator will have to chlorinate and continuously aerate the waste in order to meet the discharge limits. If there are times that there is no flow, the plant will serve as a storage tank and hold the flow until it can be treated when there is flow. Should problems arise with meeting the effluent standards during the winter because of very low flow for extended periods, a temporary pump and haul condition could be used to prevent violation of the discharge permit requirements. Please let me know if you need additional information regarding these responses. Yours truly, r 0. J. Ashley Williams JAW/dwp cc: T. G. Adams 9399/edens.jaw Thomas W. Owens Director Thomas G. Adams 3632 Valley Pike Winchester, VA 22602 Re: God's Gloryland, Inc. Conditional Use Permit Dear Mr. Adams, COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINI:; FIRE AND RESCUE DEPARTMEN 9 N. Loudoun Street, 2nd Flo, Winchester, Virginia 22n, February 11, 1994 Douglas A. Kiracui. Fire Marshal I have completed my review of the Conditional Use Permit Application for God's Gloryland located on Rt. 704 in Frederick County. Since the mid 1970s there has been a migration of people from cities and urban areas back to the woodlands and rural areas. Homes, recreational areas, and large camps have been built in increasing numbers in the "Urban Wildland Interface" areas of our state. The fire service has learned a hard lesson in dealing with fires in these areas, that being, the ineffectiveness of conventional firefighting techniques in the wildland environment. As a result of these lessons we approach new developments of this nature with a strong emphasis on fire prevention and building an infrastructure conducive to fighting wildland fires. For that reason, I am asking for the following conditions as contingencies for approval of this application: 1. A second and independent point of access is needed. This limits the chance of fire blocking access to the site and evacuation from the site. Two egress points also enable ingress by the fire dept. as evacuation of patrons is taking place. 2. Install a warning signal or siren of some type that can be an emergency signal for all patrons to assemble ac a determined point or evacuation. This would be used in accordance with the emergency response plan. (Item n3) DIRECTOR - (703) 665-56f5 FIRE MARSHAL - (703) 665-6350 FAQ - (703) h78 -06h2 Thomas G. Adams February 11, 1994 Page 2 3. Establish an emergency response plan for assembly or evacuation of patrons in the event of a fire, storm, or other emergency. This should be coordinated with the Fire and Rescue Dept. and the Gore Volunteer Fire Co. This plan must be thoroughly understood by all staff members. 4. All roads must have a minimum width of 20' with an all weather surface capable of supporting a 20 ton vehicle. The canopy clearance of these roads must be a minimum of 1316" at all times and -roads must be constructed with no more than a 15a grade. 5. All occupiable structures on the site must have addresses or numbers and a plan showing these numbers must be given to the Gore Volunteer Fire Company and the Fire and Rescue Dept. G. Provide a 20' all weather access to the existing pond on the southern corner of the property. At this location a dry hydrant should be installed to facilitate water supply for firefighting. 7_ All structures, including retreat cottages, staff cottages, pavilians, and bath houses must have a 30' perimeter of "green space" kept clear of combustibles at all times to give the fire dept. a defensible space. 8. Buildings cannot be constructed on poles with open foundations. This eliminates the potential for leaves and other fuels to accumulate beneath buildings.. 9. Any buildings in which patrons will be sleeping must be equipped with working smoke detectors at all times during occupancy. 10. At a location easily accessible by staff, fire fighting tools such as shovels, rakes, and axes must be stored. This should be coordinated with representatives of the Virginia Forestry Dept. along with some training in forest fire suppression. 11. There must be very strict rules and enforcement of the rules cn outside camp fires and bon fires. Staff of this facility must be aware of these rules as well as patrons utilizing the facility. Thomas G. Adams February 11, 1994 Page 3 By adhering to these conditions, the rural asthetics of this site can be maintained while making the site conducive to effective fire fighting operations. The Fire and Rescue Dept. will be a willing partner in pre- planning and training for your staff to ensure the highest level of life safety. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. / Sincerely,_ Douglas A./JTKiracofe Fire Marshal DAK:jlc cc: Frederick Co. Planning Dept. Fred Burlingame - Chief Forest Warden, Frederick Co. Steve Holiday - Chief, Gore Vol. Fire Company File Il,n o ' zz � =vi1 ru_ f .i�-cn _r ti;L- _'U, -:n- 3 GOD'S GLORYLAND al IRPO$E The purpose of this study Is to investigate the alternatives to provide water and wastewatEr for God's Gloryiand. The study provides a preliminary analysis of the water demands and requirements to be met based on the first phase and ultimate number of occupants of the retreat A preliminary analysis of the wastewater effluent limits and the required treatment to meet the limits is also included. The study provides a cost estimate for each recommended alternative. This study is being prepared for Mr. T. G. Adams to meet the requirements of the Condttkx* Use Permit for this project. $ITE DESCRIPTION God's Gloryiand is located in Frederick County on the west side of State Route 7o4 approximately 4 miles southwest from its intersection with State Route 50. The site contains approximately 68 acres of mostly wooded land. Back Creek meanders along Route 704, the front of the property. WATER SYSTEM EXISTING: There are currently two wells on the site both of which serve a single resident Information provided by the weAl driller note that one well is 320 feet deep and has a yield of approximately 4 gallons per minute. follows: PROPOSED: The water demand for the site development based on the "Waterworks Regulations' Is as Daily consumption rate for Resorts and Camps = 50 gpd 1 st phase development of 100 persons - 5,000 gpd The equivalent residentlal connections (ERC) = 5000/400 The equivalent residential connections (ERC) 12.5 Well yield (min) = 0.5 GPM x ERC Well yield (min) a 0.5 GPM x 12.5 Well yield (min) 6.3 GPM Storage Capacity = 200 GAL x ERC Storage Capacity - 200 x 12.5 Storage Capacity - 2,500 GAL Ultimate capacity @ 350 people - 17,504 GPD ERC = 17.500/400 ERC = 43.75 Weil Yield = 0.5 x 43.75 Well Yield = 21.8 GPM - <----------„---------------------------------------- -------- -- -= Storage Capacity = 200 GAL X ERC Storage Capacity = 8,750 GAL RECOMMENDATIONS: The requirements fur the 1 st phase of deveioprnerTt provide for a weli yield of 6.3 gallons per minute and a storage capacity of 2,500 galJons. The future needs of the project require a well production of 22 gallons per minute and a storage capacity of 8,750 gallons. The well driller estimated that a well located in the lower areas of the site could effectively yield greater than 20 gallons per minute. One good producing well could provide the capacfty for the ultimate capacity. It is recommended that a 10.000 gallon storage tank be Installed during the t st phase of development to provide for the future demand. A new wail has to be drilled to provide the required flow. This well may be adequate for the ultimate. FIRE PROTECTION Fire protection for the facilities is an essential part of the operation. The Fire Marshal, in his report required that a dry hydrant be Installed at the existing pond along Route 704. This would be an excellent way of providing fire protection at a fairly low cost. An alternative method Is to provide water storage through the domestic water system. This would require enlarging the 10,000 gallon storage tank to as much as 20 to 25,000 gallons. This afternative method will be costly to provide - WASTEWATER The wastewater treatment alternatives Include either subsurface absorption fields or a packaged treatment plant. Information gathered from the county sanitarian Indicate the existing soils are marginal. The majority of the site Is shale rock with shallow soil depths. There has been a permit issued for a septic system for two lots on this site. The county has also denied a permit for several other sites. It appears that a mass drainfield to serve this project may not be feasible since there is insufficient area of suitable sou. A packaged wastewater treatment plant will have to be constructed to serve the project. Back Creek is vary pristine and will require a high quality of discharge into the stream- The preliminary effluent limits that were estimated by the Department of Environmental Quality office In Bridgewater are more stringent that secondary treatment (15 to 25 mg/I BOD & S.S.). The ammonia limit should be between 1 and 3 mg/I. The proposed wastewater treatment plant should be an extended aeration plant sized for 10,000 gallons per day with components to meet the nitrification requirements. COST ESTIMATE The capital cost for the recommended systems are discussed below. These costs are very preliminary and will require additional review when the actual discharge limits are established and a well Is drilled. Well Water System: The cost Includes a well, pump house, associated waterlines and a 10,000 gallon storage tank. Estimated Cost: $50.000 to $60,000 ---- �ti;F. i��i1 f°1Ak S '34 13:30 FRCTI ''1ST I N-BROCKENBRCGUGH- Pr4GE . 005 Wastewater Treatment Plant: The cost includes a 10,000 gallon a day emended aeration plant with nbi kation. a discharge line and any laboratory equipment Estimated Cost: $150,000 to $175,000 .Sl.tLlll�CcG1 DCa�11nC � /�"y`� P/C riaccing -�, .0 bGs MGGL1r►y 4/r .2 APPLICATION FOR CQVDIT1Ow-k.L Usk: 241r.AIT FREDERXCX COUNTY, VIRGINIA 1. Amolicanz (The applicant if thea X own.►r otri ) .. . . Fore PIVTM ADDRESS: 3632 Valley Pike Winchescer, Va. 22o02 TELEPHONE b09-1900(ofc) 869-3100(h) 2. Pleases list all or partie:.-i in 1nt.arrsG ur the property: Thomas C. Adams Rosalie F. Adams Alice M. Fos 3. The property is located ac: (p1G�5c ylvee e:Xa�:L cllres�:C1J[ d(1e7 include the route number of your ro"" or stree=t) Prnnti2f, a 1 'i `1 mil ti �nrhW�r of ,ra 4. The property has a road tront.acye of 1544' raat ana a depth of 2300' resat and conal.'ts of 85.660 wcr,ra.. (Please be exact) in d68reeate 5. The property is owned by C. ui :', 4a evidenced by Quad from see revers rwcoraft" (previous owner) in aead book noon pays , as r=coraad in t41•• records of the Clerk or the Circuit Court, County uZ Frederick. 6. 14 -Digit PropCrty NL1. 37-:�-45 . -4o L 4u.%4ot Magisterial District Bdck Ci-cek Current Zoning Lt -A 7. Adjoining PropCrty: North - East U - A South 1� - a West pw. Jpnrid_ Ao r, R - 61 8. The typ= of u --i" i--. Witn tn," bafore coniplcz�ny) - }, �, �;.•� r - *9. It is proposed that the tollowing nuildinys will be constructed: ,? ..l.L].c f , , r 1 . i :t r f —2 1 r .., 2*bath houses `' pavillions. 12 ani r'otjn, c"b ri6, 1 uuol_ bar & 9LIffle roow 1 Cha Pul 1 field hL,u�e l c r 8 teepees or A-fr4me cubins 10. The following are all or tnc Ina IVIaual5, zirmz., pr corporations owning property aa44nc to both siaes, r.ALr Ana in front of (also across stre=c from) tnc propeArty wnaxr requested use will be conauct=u. (Continue on "cx it necessary.) Tnese people will bG n,-')tifiad by mail at t"A application: (R :A41 LJT CoMPLLJk; 14-DICIT UWJZL:lt,1 NAME * These units may be subject to revision when detailed site plans are prepared. 1403 llunrer5 Mill Rd. Aadress Vi e clli:iVa . 2 21 dO property 101 37-A-37 James C. Hayes, Et Al 1600 Pondview Dr. Addrasa Winc-11aster, Va. ^'001 Maurice W. Eckman Property IDO 37-A-47 _ Aadre55 Rt• 1 box 156 "^ India K. & Norman K. property Iow Jones - fit• 2 Box 78A Aadress Renwyn T. Triplett property IGt _ 1936 Hack Creek ltd. Address Cure Va. "_'''637 _- William A. Shores, Et U Property IDO 37_A_44 7509 Gary Rd Aadress Carolyn G. C/o holt Chappel Realty Property IDf , ;7 * These units may be subject to revision when detailed site plans are prepared. 12. Additional ccn&uicnt--., it any: I (we) , the unaarsigncd, do herCny respactfully maxe applicaclon and petition that governing body or Fr=azrlcK County, Virginia " allow the use described in this application. I una�rstnnd cndt tDAA sign issued to me when this application is suomir-taci must bas plac•&d at the front property line at least ;.evcn (7) days prior to tha first public hearing and maintained so as to be visible until aftmx the Board of Supervisors' public haariny. Your application ror a Conditional Use Permit authorizes any memba.r of the Fr.►auri.:Y County Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors or Planning and Development Department to inspect your property wnera =4 proPQa.ad use will be conaucted. /. 2 Signature of APPIicant /,__71 Signature or Own=r Owners' Mk?lling A-Lurc-s Owners' Telephone No. 3632 Val1Cv I'll.,2 I,:h'-sr or- V<<. _'"'bU_ 869-1900( Ore ) bb9-3100(h ) Rels •ti a 0130's 29M -.1,4MMM cog M"WIWORIM P W911WIN USE CODE: &ENZWAL DATE: /2B 58 59 47 1K -I 37 -CUP — # 001-94 God's Glory Land 65 m 45 22 23A 23 h 2 pts" � q4a 24 Q' o� m 25 n 26 37—A-45, 46, 46A, 46B 12 P/C review date: 5/04/94 REZONING APPLICATION #003-94 C. L. ROBINSON CORP. To Rezone 16.00 Acres From RA (Rural Areas) To B3 (Industrial Transition) LOCATION: On Route 50 West (Northwestern Pike) at the intersection with Route 803 (Round Hill Road), one-half mile west of Route 37 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Back Creek PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 53-A-71 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas), present use - vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) - Land use - Residential, agricultural, automobile salvage, and vacant PROPOSED USE: The district office of the Winchester Division of the Virginia Department of Transportation REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Trans„portation• No objection to the rezoning of this property. Any proposed entrances into the property must meet minimum VDOT design standards and sight distance requirements. Fire Marshal: Approval of this rezoning should have no significant impact on fire and rescue department resources. Round Hill Fire Dept., Elwood B. Patterson, President: How many employees will be on site? What types of fuel will be stored on property? Any hazardous materials stored on site and how much? Inspections Department: This department shall comment at the time of structural site plan review process. No comment required at this time. Page 2 C. L. Robinson Rezoning Health Department: A sewage disposal system construction permit has been issued for this parcel for 905 gpd, 26 full time and 17 on-site part time employees A well permit must be obtained from the Office of Water Programs in Lexington. County Engineer: We do not have any objection to the proposed rezoning to accommodate the construction of a Virginia Department of Transportation office complex and maintenance yard. We reserve the right to review the site plan and related stormwater management facilities. Location: The property is located west of the Urban Development Area in the southwest quadrant of the Route 50, Route 803 intersection. The property is within the Round Hill Community Center and is part of a 200 plus acre parcel owned by the C.L. Robinson Corporation, the bulk of which lies north of Route 50. This area does not meet the description of a typical B-3 location nor does B-3 zoning fit with the intended character of a Rural Community Center. The location does, however, seem a logical choice for the proposed VDOT headquarters. Site Suitability: The parcel has some significant topography, consisting of rolling terrain with a low area at the southwest corner near Route 803. A portion of the low area (roughly one half acre) was under water on Tuesday, April 19, when staff visited the site. This area may constitute a wetlands and will need to be taken into consideration at the site design stage. The drainfield site depicted on the plat is roughly in the center of the highest portion of the site, in what appears to be the most useable area of the parcel. This will limit, to some extent, the placement of structures on the site. Potential Impacts: An increase in traffic would be expected as a result of the proposed rezoning. The amount of traffic generated would be dependant upon the ultimate use of the property. The applicant has stated the intended use of the site would be a district office for VDOT, (see letter enclosed dated April 20, 1994). Despite this letter, the staff is still somewhat uncomfortable because no proffers have been submitted and, therefore, nothing would preclude other B-3 Page 3 C. L. Robinson Rezoning uses of the site. Even if VDOT goes through with their intended purchase, there is no guarantee that they will locate at this site or not abandon the site at some point in the future. Some impact on ground water and runoff from the site would be expected given the scale of the proposed use. Efforts would need to be taken to minimize the potential negative visual impacts of the proposed use. Some buffering would be required by the Zoning Ordinance. The general area presently contains two businesses which do not easily lend themselves to a pleasant appearance. The addition of numerous pieces of heavy equipment on this site, which are visible from the road or adjoining properties, would not improve the situation. The County's impact model indicates an unfunded expense to Fire and Rescue of $3,297, for the proposed rezoning. Conclusion: Staff feels that all the above comments could be addressed. However, though the site seems to be a reasonable location for the VDOT facilities, without proffers limiting the use of the property to such, there is no guarantee that some other B-3 use would not ultimately locate on the site. Many of these uses would be contradictory to stated policies of the Comprehensive Plan concerning areas outside the Urban Development Area. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 5[4/94 PC MEETING• Given the lack of assurances concerning future use of the property, staff recommends denial of the request. C. L. ROBINSON c'03R,=0RA71CN Post Office Box 2138 Winchester, Virginia 22601 703/662 - 3869 1.. c r April 20, 1994 Mr. Kris Tierney Frederick County Planning Dept, 9 N. Loudoun St. Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Mr. Tierney. APPLES I am aware of your concern that if the rezoning request of the C. L. Robinson Corporation property on Route 50 West is approved, and subseauently VDOT does not purchase the property, the County would have B-3 zoning in an inappropriate area. Let me assure you that C. L. Robinson Corporation does not wish to have B-3 zoning in that area unless it is reauired for the use that VDOT makes of it. If, for any reason, VOOT backs out of the agreed upon arrangement, C. L. Robinson has no desire to have the property designated B-3. We would request that it be returned to the current zoning category. If it is possible to make the oropoged zoning contingent upon VDOT's purchase of the property we would be agreeable to accepting those terms. I feel confident that VOOT is going to purchase the prooerty. We have had no indication to the contrary. However, to cover any possible situation that may arise we agree that the orooerty would revert to the current zoning by whatever procedure best accomplishes it. Thank you for the help you are giving us with this application. Yours sincerely. C. L. ROBINSON CORP RATION Delmer Robinson. Jr. Chairman of Board DRir/brs REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICX COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning ,staff: Zoning Amendment Number Cel -a¢ Submittal Deadline 11,4-14 PC Hearing Date Date Received Application Date BOS Hearing Date L'.-� -9 The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel numbers, tax map numbers, deed book pages and numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, 9 Court Square, Winchester. 1. Applicant: Name: C. L. Robinson Corporation Address- 560 N. Loudoun 5t. P.O. Box 2138 i inchester, Virginia 2160=1 Telephone: 703--66-2--3869 - 2. Owner: Name: Same as applicant Address: Telephone: 705-GGW-73869 In addition, the Code -of Vircrinia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned: 5 3. Zoning Change: Iti requested that the zoning of the property be changed from `,�. K to 13-3 4. Location: The property is located at (give exact directions): On U.S. Route 50 West of Winchester at intersection with Va. Route 803 - One-half raise west of Va. Route 37 5. Parcel Identification: 14 r -a Digit Tax Parcel Number: S. Magisterial District: 7. Property Dimensions: rezoned. Total Area: 16 53000040000710 Back Creek The dimensions of the property to be Acres The area of each portion to be rezoned to a different zoning district category should be noted: 16 Acres Rezoned to B-3 Acres Rezoned to Acres Rezoned to Acres Rezoned to Frontage: 1180' - Rt 50 Feet Depth: 6230' Max Feet S. Deed Reference: The ownership of the property is referenced by the following deed: Conveyed from: Deed Page: 460 Fred t1. Robinson et al Deed Book Number: 160 G 9. Proposed Use: It is proposed that the property will be put to the following uses. District offices Vinchester llivision Virginia Department of Transportation 10. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map f Survey or plat Deed to property Statement verifying taxes Sign receipt Agency Comments Fees Impact Analysis statement Proffer Statement 11. Signature: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby make application and petition the governing body to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia and do hereby certify that the application and accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. Applicant• C. L. Robinson Corporation Owner: Edward B. Robinson, President 12. Representation: If the application is being represented by someone other than the owner or application and if questions about the application should be directed to that representative, please list the following. Representative's Name: Representative's Phone Number: 7 ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS Owners of property adjoining the land will be notified of the public hearing. For the purposes of this application, adjoining property is any property abutting the requested property on the side or rear or any property directly across a road from the requested property. The applicant is required to obtain the fol- lowing information on each adjoining property including the 21 -digit tax parcel identification number which may be obtained from the office of the Commissioner of Revenue. Name Address and Property Identification 1 wr Address: _ e Property ID• 2 Address: e W1 2 Property ID: �. 3 G & G Auto Recycling Address: 183 Round Hill Road Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID: 52 -A -254A 4 Bishops Winchester Truck Address: 219 Round Fill road Salvage ��Jirchester, VA 22602 Property ID: 52-A-254 5 Stuart M. Perry, Inc. Address: 117 Limestone Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID: 52-A-256 6 W. R. Ashwood Address: 2255 Worthwestern Pike Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID: 52-A-252 7 Mrs. Elva J. Larrick Address: 2243 =+ort:",western Pike idinch-ster, VA 22602 Property ID: 52-�-�` 8 Address:101 Stonewall Drive Russell F. & Rena E. Hulver Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID : 53B-1-12 9Curtis Address: 100 Stonewall Drive & Elva Keller Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID: 53B-1-13 10 Address: Property ID: N C.L. ROBINSON CORPORATION ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS Name Address & Property Identification - Junior L. & Dorothy E. Link Address: 2177 NorthwesternPike Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID: 53-B-2--11 Stephen D. & Joyce Ann Mauck Address: 673 McDonald Road Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID: 53-3-2-1405 Walter M. Hamilton John V. & Pamela Stevens Melvin Lee Arnold William W. & Wanda Woyick Betty Etals Anderson Everett Dolphin Roy J. and Donna D. Black C.L. Robinson Corporation Address: 1059 Broad Street Winchester, VA 22601 Property ID: 53-B-2-16,17,18 Address: 324 Round Hill Road Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID: 52-A-242 Address: 239 Round Hill Road Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID: 52 -A -242A Address: Rt 6, Box 115A Centerville, VA 22020 Property ID: 52-A-243 Address: 139 Geronimo Trail Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID: 52-A-244 Address: 422 Round "Hill Road Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID: 5:jxhnajs 52-A-250 Address: 106 Arrowhead Trail Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID: M 52-A-51 Address: 560 N. Loudoun Street Winchester, VA 22601 Property ID: TjxhXt& 52-A-255 Environmental & Planning Impacts for C. L. Robinson Corporation February,1994 Introduction The Virginia Department of Transportation intends to construct district offices just west of the VA. Route 803 and U.S. Route 50 intersection. This development will require rezoning the 16 acre parcel VDOT will purchase. As outlined and required by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, several major planning issues have been evaluated in support of and in preparation to rezone the tract from present Agricultural Performance (RA) to Industrial Transition District (B-3). A site location map is attached. 1) Traffic Impacts This site lies on the south side of the U.S. Route 50 and north VA.rRoute 803 intersection. It is bounded by remaining land of C. L. Robinson on the west and two single family residences to the east. This development will impact traffic patterns in the area. If the site were developed as residential, the current zoning would allow 3 lots and generate 30 trips per day. The proposed industrial zoning would, of course, generate far more traffic. Using the ITE Trip Generation rate for General Light Industrial (Code 110) of 51.8 trips per weekday per acre of developed land, if fully developed as many 830 trips per day could be generated. It is assumed that VDOT has the capability to mitigate any and all such traffic impacts. 2. Sewa e Conve ante and Treatment Impacts Development flows will be treated by an on-site septic system approved by the local Health Department. This facility would be designed, constructed and approved in accordance with the Virginia Department of Health and Lord Fairfax Environmental Health Department requirements. A copy of the approved construction permit is attached to this study. It is estimated that the fully developed site could generate 20,000 gallons of waste water per month. Environmental & Planning Impacts C. L. Robinson Corporation February, 1994 I Water Supply mpacts The project will be served by a new well to be permitted by the Virginia Department of Health. The project will utilize the same amount of water as projected for wastewater use, or 20,000 gallons per month. 4. Utility Planning (General) It is possible that one of the sewage treatment options at Round Hill could serve this facility. The owner will be required to participate in a prorate share cost agreement with users in the area to finance the sewer extension if such an initiative is undertaken by the County. 5. Education Cost This project will generate no school children and therefore have no effect on educational cost in Frederick County. 6. Parks and Recreation Cost This project would result in no impact on Parks and Recreation budget. 7. Drainage Facility Impacts The development of industrial in lieu of agricultural will increase run off. It is recommended that either suitable green space be allowed to reduce run off amounts or that the increased run off peaks be reduced prior to discharge from the site. In view of the above, storm water detention calculations will be presented with final design which show no adverse impacts created by the imposition of this increase storm water on the existing downstream water course. Storm water detention structures will be designed to limit post - development flows to pre -development levels in accordance with state and county regulations. Also, at the time of site plan approval, suitable analysis of run off quality impacts will be performed, so as to mitigate a portion of the impact created by industrial development of the site. A VPDES stormwater discharge permit may be required for the proposed facility. A special plan for handling chemicals and salts used in road maintenance shall be devised to mitigate impacts on ground and surface water resources and on air quality. 2 Environmental & Planning Impacts C. L. Robinson Corporation February,1994 8. Emergencv Services Cost Sheriff protection above that which currently occurs in the area will not be required by this facility. Routine patrols of the U.S. Route 50 corridor and VA. Route 803 will suffice to cover this facility. 9. Solid Waste Cost Solid waste will be exported by contract hauler at no cost to the Frederick County. The present Frederick County Landfill has at least 20 years of available life at current rates of waste delivery. 10. Environmental Impacts There will be certain minor negative impacts due to the construction activity including run off of 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 properties and stream should be minimal and in accordance with local and state regulations. One hundred foot stream side buffer will be retained bordering the Swale which runs through the south corner of the site, and will provide ample protection to the streams. In addition, detention ponds will be provided to mitigate undesirable impacts. 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 site planning to minimize the adverse impacts on any residential structures and impacts on the traveling public. 11. Fiscal lm acts State use of this tract will remove 16 acres of taxable land from the Frederick County Land Records but will allow improved response to county road systems resulting in improved service to the citizens of Frederick County. 3 Environmental & Planning Impacts C. L. Robinson Corporation February, 1994 12. Historic Impacts This project will not involve the loss of historic resources based on a site walkover, a review of literature and with knowledge of studies and evaluations from adjacent areas of the county. AOzEdward B. Robinson C. L. Robinson Corporation 4 0. L. MIHOR RURAL 5U9DIV1510H w UFA POR flOH OF THE LAND OF ROB IR50H ICE £ COLI: S-TOIZAGE GOfZF. BACK GREEK 1215TZICT - FREDERICK CIO UHTY VIRGIN IA FE0;ZUAIZ ZZ, 19194 ro GOR E 5 I I= ctrl ROUND M 0 F HILL O S R ti WIN'CHE5T EK OOT E A. 50 STA TE 2 w NC 803 N w � _N VICINITY MAP SCALE 1"=t' P 2000' N OWNER 'S CE(ZTIF10ATE THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING DI'/1510H OF THE LAND OF C L ROBIHSOH ICE AND COLD STORAGE CORP I AS APPEAR5 ON THE ACCOMPANYING PLAT IS'N1iH THE FREE CONSENT AND IN ACCOKDAHCE WITH THE DESIRES OF THE UNDER_ SIGHED OWNERS, PROPRIETORS , AHD TRUSTEES, IF AH 0W HER DAT E OW NErL DATE STATE OF VIRGINIA COU HTY OF TO WIT 1, A H07ARY PUBLIC IH AHD FOR THE STATE OF VIRGINIA AND COUNTY OF ,DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT 71415 DAY PER50NALLY APPEARED BEFORE ME WH05E HAME(5) 15(ARE) SIGNED TO THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT DATED DAY OF 1') , AFORESAID GIVEN UNDER MY HAND THIS DAY OF ID MYCOMM1551ON EXPIRES to) - H O T A R Y P U B L I C SURVEY09'5 CERTIFICATE I uEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE LAND COATAINED IN THIS 5UBD1•JISIOH ;9 A PORTION OF THE LAND GOHVEYED 70 G L ROBIH50H IC'E AND COLD STORAGE CORP BY DEED DATED MAY 1, 1a)30 AND RECORDED IN THE FREDERICK COUNTY CLERICS OFFICE IH DEED SOCK IGO AT PAGE +GO HOTES I THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED R -A AND THE TAA MAP HO IS 53 ,4 7/ A P PRO VA l,S SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATOR DATE H BRUCE EDEHS L5 HEALTH DEPARTMENT DATE GREEN WAY , INC. 970 Riker Lane , WlnChrtler, Vlrglnln 22603 703-562-4185 H Bruce ErlenS,L S President SURVEYING — DESIGNING — PLANNING RESIDENTIAL 4GRICULTURAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION �G rbc F�EDENS i No. OG L:: U Y SHEET 1 of 3 KEY MA F ";GALE I"= 500 '+ M I NOR 7UIZAL SUB DI VISION OF A PORTION OF TAE LAND OF G. L. ROBIH50H WE? GOLD 5TORAG E CORP. BAC -K C-WGEI� Gi5TRICT- FiZE(77tRiGI<GVUHTi, ViRGiNiA SCALE I"- 500' '_ I DATE: FE61ZUA;Zy ZZ, 1))4 GREEN WAY , INC. �- %70 Baker Lane, Wmchesler, Virginia 22603 703-562-405 H Bruce Edens,L S President SURVEYING - DESIGNING - PLANNING RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL" CONSTRUCTION R. BRI ICE DENS > No. 000162-B SHEET 2 of 5 QO3gG a u ,.Fcc.r / Ogg O'k I, GK QC (0-L, S \ u Q7 ° 13 3Z s o <P- -37 v E0 G6 4 D9R/ O 0,4 -pq-A EAI ZEZOVEOFe f le,4 o g3 goz0 `V° � 9S v D y s S 67' 3 8 09 " E- 10 0) 109 a)4' �9 s Q o s 581'37' ZE5" E Ila r � Lft 16. 004 A C IZ E 5 7�1 OVERHEAD POWER k -INC � rvs- /l M 0 F,EID fJ0005 ESD' 0_ Z�J�i- �' TOEQa(nJ 0 O 0 \P ,r� , ` 6v PzLV 1-\ O0 a'EaQEy 7 6" J Q, �\TO /50—p0 r s 2 � Pt WELL 5 46' 54' 3 Z° W �,s HOu5 E \ 1-7 8. 8 5' S 41'09' 19"W oz' 7. 1)0' I ) 9 .9 0 curve Ho. Oi (D- 0 E OE LTA= 38'05'08" 44'S°)'0Z" RADIUS 600. 00' 686 ZO' AQG= 398-83 538 75' TANGENT - Z07 10' Z84 12' CHDRn = 567'Z3' 5B"W 584'41 ol" w 3�1 53' SZ5 0Z' MIH0R RURAL 5UBI71V1510N OF A PORTIOH CF THE LAND OF G. L.9061N50H IGEfGOLD STORAGE CORP SACK CREEK DISTRICT FREDERICK COUHTi, VIRGINIA SCALE I" = ZOO' I DATE: FEBRUARY ZZ. 1 74 GREENWAY , INC. 970 Biker Lane , Winchester, Virginia 22603 703-562-4185 H Bruce Eden -,,L S -President SURVEYING — DESIGNING — PLANNING RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION 509°2Z' S3"W 37 o7 SHEET 3 of 3 Qropide ae.l* In led 0 600 1000 TT. lee.�kn. of �e.1r.1. ay.m.nb .hover on IM wp pwp... ". N arc .141 � 277 � 4 1