Loading...
PC 10-06-93 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMNIISSION The Old Frederick County Courthouse Winchester, Virginia OCTOBER 6, 1993 mom 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) Meeting Minutes of August 16 and September 1, 1993 ............... A 2) Bimonthly Report ...................................... B 3) Committee Reports .................................... C 4) Citizen Comments ................................ .... D 5) Subdivision application #005-93 of Lake Holiday, Section 1B to subdivide 28 lots for single family detached homes. This property is located one mile southeast of Redland Road (Route 701) in the Gainesboro District. (Mr. Miller) ......................................... E 6) Subdivision application #008-93 of Fredericktowne Estates. Sections 8 & 9 to subdivide 36 lots for single family detached homes. This property is located east of Stephens City in the Opequon District. (Mr. Miller) ......................................... F Y5033JIJ PUBLIC HEARINGS 7) Conditional Use Permit #009-93 of Marshall A. Ritenour for a cottage occupation to operate a fencing contracting business. This property is located on the north side of Fairfax Pike (Route 277), east of Stephens City, in the Shawnee District. (Mr. Lilley) ......................................... G 8) Rezoning Application #003-93 of Woodside Estates_ to rezone 28± acres from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) for single family detached homes. This property is located west of and adjacent to Double Church Road (Route 641) in the Opequon District. (Mr. Tierney) ........................................H 9) An amendment to Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, Article VI, RP, Residential Performance District, Section 165-58, Intent and Section 165-62.1, Gross Density (Mr. Wyatt) ......................................... I 10) An amendment to the Development Review Fee Schedule for Conditional Use Permits and Variance and Appeal Applications, and to establish a fee schedule for Minor Site Plan Revisions. (Mr. Wyatt) .........................................J MISCELLANEOUS 11) Memo regarding informational brochures created by the Planning Staff describing procedures for obtaining a building permit, subdividing RA zoned land, rezoning land, applying for a variance or seeking an appeal, developing land in the suburban zoning districts and obtaining a conditional use permit. (Mr. Watkins) ........................................ K 12) 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 Monday, August 16, 1993. PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were: James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman; John R. Marker, Vice Chairman/Back Creek District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; Manuel C. DeHaven, Stonewall District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; Robert Morris, Shawnee District; Todd D. Shenk, Gainesboro District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; George L. Romine, Citizen at Large; and James Barnett, Winchester City Liaison. ABSENT: Ronald W. Carper, Gainesboro District; Beverly Sherwood, Board Liaison Planning Staff present were: 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. SUBDIVISIONS Subdivision Application #007-93 of Henkel Harris Industrial Park for subdivision of lots for industrial use. This property is identified as PIN #63-A-110 and is located on the south side of Shawnee Drive (Route 652) in the Shawnee District. Action - Approved Meir. Miller said that the proposed subdivision was in conformance with the approved master development plan. He stated that structures currently exist on Parcel 2 (Mobil Corp.), Parcel 6 (Acculyte), and Parcel 9 (the old Capital Records Plant). Parcels 1, 3, 5, 10 and 11 are for streets in the industrial park. Mr. Miller said that the developer is committed to providing a state -maintained street to service all parcels. The decision as to whether parcel 5 or F 3 will be the main entrance to the park has not yet been made. Mr. Scott Marsh of G. W. Clifford & Associates was present to represent this subdivision. A question was raised by the Commission as to why the streets were given parcel numbers. Mr. Marsh said that since a decision has not yet been made on which main entrance to use, the remaining proposed street could easily be dedicated as a portion of an adjoining parcel. Another area of concern was whether the remaining street would be used as ingress/egress for an adjoining lot and if so, was there enough distance between the two entrances onto Shawnee Drive to meet Code requirements (150'). Staff noted that there was more than adequate distance (277') between the two entrances to meet Code requirements. Upon motion made by Mr. Romine and seconded by Mr. Wilson, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve Subdivision Application #007-93 of Henkel -Harris for 11 lots (includes five road sections), zoned M2 (Industrial General). Discussion of Sou eastern Container Addition Site Plan, Zoned M 1 (Light Industrial) and located on the north side of West Brook Road in the Fort Collier Industrial Park. Mr. Miller said that Southeastern Container has submitted a site plan for a proposed 58,000 square foot addition to their existing facility. He said that the staff reviewed the site plan and some minor changes were required. The site plan has now been revised to address all review agency comments and is now ready to be administratively approved. Mr. Miller said that since this plan had not yet appeared on the Bimonthly Report, he was requesting permission from the Commission to proceed with administrative approval so that construction could continue on schedule. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Romine, the Commission unanimously agreed to allow the staff to proceed with administrative review and approval of the Southeastern Container Addition Site Plan. ADJOURNMENT p.m. 3 No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 7:15 Respectfully submitted, Robert W. Watkins, Secretary James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Court House in Winchester, Virginia on September 1, 1993. PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman; John R. Marker, Vice Chairman/Back Creek District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; Manuel C. DeHaven, Stonewall District; Ronald W. Carper, Gainesboro District; Robert Morris, Shawnee District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; Todd D. Shenk, Gainesboro District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; George L. Romine, Citizen at Large, and Beverly Sherwood, Board Liaison. ABSENT: James Barnett, Winchester City Liaison Planning -Staff "resent Were: Robert W. Miller, Zoning Administrator; Ronald A Deputy Planning Director ALL TO ORDER Watkins, Director/Secretary; W. Wayne . Lilley, Planner II; and Kris C. Tierney, Vice Chairman Marker called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES - JULY 21, 1993 Upon motion made by Mrs. Copenhaver and seconded by Mr. Light, the minutes of July 21, 1993 were unanimously approved as presented. MINUIES - AUGUST 4 1993 Upon motion made by Mr. Romine and seconded by Mrs. Copenhaver, the minutes of August 4, 1993 werd unanimously approved as presented. OAI CANCELLATION OF COMMISSION'S 9/15/93 MEETING Since there were no development proposals pending, the Commission agreed to cancel their September 15 meeting. BIMONTHLY AND MONTHLY REPORTS Vice Chairman Marker accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's information. COMMITTEE REPORTS Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CP&PS) Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the CP&PS continued their discussions on corridors. Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DR&RS) - 8/24/93 Mr. Thomas reported that the Subcommittee has an informal discussion item for Planning Commission later on the agenda concerning gross density in RP Districts. He said that along with density in RP Districts, the Subcommittee also discussed the definition of group homes, relating back to the 3anuzzi conditional use permit. Corridor Study Meeting - 8/23/93 Mr. Tierney reported that Mr. Bill Shendow, of the Chamber of Commerce, was present to discuss the Chamber's recent report on corridor appearance. There was discussion on pursuing a coordinated effort between the City and County in terms of regulations on corridors that pass through both jurisdictions. Economic Development Commission Mr. Romine reported that the EDC is reviewing committee work, particularly the work of the Visitation Committee. 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS Conditional Use Permit #009-93 of Marshal A. Ritenour for a cottage occupation to operate a fencing contracting business. This property is identified as PIN 86-A-167 and is located on the north side of Fairfax Pike (Route 277) 2 1/2 miles east of Stephens City in the Shawnee District. Action - Tabled for 30 Days Staff member, Ronald Lilley, stated that this use would qualify as a cottage occupation as long as it was carried on wholly within the residence/garage and was not carried on at this location by more than one person other than members of the family residing on the premises. Mr. Marshal A. Ritenour, the applicant, came forward to answer questions from the Commission. Mr. Ritenour asked if it would be possible for fencing materials to be stored outdoors if they were screened from view and if it would be possible to allow off-site employees to park their vehicles at the his residence. Mr. Ritenour said that his subcontractors have 2-3 vehicles at the most, in addition to his personal vehicles (5-6 at the most). He added that his son-in-law works in the office. Vice Chairman Marker called for anyone in the audience wishing to speak either in favor or opposition. Mr. Jerry Bowen, co -occupant of the adjoining Nessehodt (owner) property, came forward and said that he would not be opposed to the CUP if Mr. Ritenour would keep everything contained within the garage, but he felt this was impossible. Mr. Bowen said that there are two dual -wheel trucks and two flat-bed stake trucks on the premises, numerous employees are in and out consistently, assembly of fencing materials takes place outside, and the hours of operation varies from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. any day of the week. Mr. Bowen felt that his residential property would be devalued by Mr. Ritenour's operation. The Commissioners were concerned about the impact of the business on adjoining residential properties. They were concerned about Mr. Ritenour's ability to contain the business, since it was such a heavy operation to be classified as a cottage occupation and because of the narrow shape of the lot. They informed Mr. Ritenour that all equipment and materials must be stored inside or screened from view per requirements in the zoning ordinance. They also felt that the hours of operation would need modified. Mr. Thomas moved that the Commission table the application for 30 days to allow time for the Commissioners to visit the site. This motion was seconded by Mr. Light and approved by the Commission. (Mr. Golladay abstained) 4 BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby agree to table Conditional Use Permit #009-93 of Marshall A. Ritenour for 30 days (until October 6, 1993) in order to give the Commissioners time to visit the site. Rezoning Application #002-93 of the Unimin Corporation to rezone 211.5 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to EM (Extractive Manufacturing) for the operation of silica sand mining. This property is identified by PIN #38-A-14 and is located east of Back Creek Road (Route 704), southwest of Gore, in the Back Creek District. Action - Tabled for 60 Days Staff member, Kris Tierney, reported that the proposed rezoning would result in a total of approximately 950 acres of EM zoned land in the Gore area. He said that the application states that there will be no increase in mining operations as a result of the rezoning, however, the proposed zoning will allow for mining further into the existing sand deposits. Mr. Tierney said that mining operations are regulated by the Division of Mines, Minerals, and Energy (DMME) and the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). He said that these two agencies will oversee operations of the mine in terms of worker health and safety, stormwater management, reclamation, and blasting. He added that the DMME requires an Erosion and Sedimentation Plan and a Reclamation Plan as well as bonding to insure reclamation of the site. Mr. Douglas Swift, with Swift & Buchbauer, Attorneys at Law, was the local counsel for the applicant. Mr. Swift introduced Ms. Susan Armentrout, Senior Environmentalist; Andrew Bradley, Corporate Counsel for Unimin Corporation; and Charles Baldwin, Plant Manager. Ms. Armentrout presented a proffer statement from the Unimim Corporation stating that: 1) No active quarrying or direct placement of overburden materials shall occur within 500 feet of either the present location of Route 704 or any currently existing dwelling; and 2) No active quarrying or direct placement of overburden materials shall occur within 100 feet of the present location of Back Creek. The Commissioners had questions on the pit depth in relation to Back Creek. Mr. Baldwin said that they would not mine beneath the water table. Commissioners also had questions on Unimin's reclamation efforts and schedule. Using overhead slides, representatives of Unimin pointed out the areas of the site that have already been reclaimed. Chairman Golladay called for persons in the audience who wished to speak either in favor or opposition to the rezoning. The following persons came forward to speak in opposition: 5 Mr. John Eversole, resident of Gore along the Back Creek Road, was opposed to the rezoning for the following reasons: 1) he said that the county had just recently placed restrictions on subdividing to limit development in this area of the county and he felt that approval of this rezoning contradicted that intent; and 2) the expansion of the mining operation would lead to further degradation of the environment. Mr. Eversole said that if the rezoning was approved, the following items should be considered: 1) an environmental study needed to be done by the EPA; 2) no egress should be permitted to Rt. 704, south of Rt. 632; 3) no new wells should be permitted; 4) the amount of water used should be verified and no increase of water usage should be permitted; S) a definite schedule of reclamation should be set and followed. Mr. W. C. Jeunette, resident of Gore, said that his main concern was the impact of the mining operation on Back Creek and the residents of Gore. He felt it was Unimin's responsibility to clean up the mess that had been created along Back Creek over the past years before any additional land was rezoned. Mr. Jeunette also had concerns about noise, silt washing into Back Creek with every rain, dust pollution, and trash left by kids going on to the property. Mr. Clark Nail, resident of Gore, presented photographs of Back Creek. He said that the photographs vividly show sand and silt going into Back Creek. Mr. Nail said that sand runs into the creek with each rain and he felt that Unimin Corporation's operation was the source of the pollution and they should be responsible for cleaning it out. Mr. Nail said that the residents along Back Creek are worried about being flooded out because the creek bed is filled with sand and silt. Mr. Sherwood Bryant, resident of Gore, also felt there was a water pollution problem. He also had concerns about the location of the proposed silt pond. Mr. William Wolford, resident of Gore and owner of adjacent property, was concerned about the degradation of Back Creek. Mr. Wolford said that after it rains the creek is yellow. He said that there used to be fish in the creek, but not anymore. Mr. Wolford was concerned about flooding in the community of Gore. He felt that the various "muck ponds" on the property were dangerous because they were similar to quicksand and none of them were fenced. Mrs. Armentrout said that she realized there was a sediment control problem towards Back Creek and that she has discussed the situation with David Crouse of the DMME. Mrs. Armentrout said that they are taking steps to alleviate the problem and discussed their stormwater management plan. Mrs. Armentrout said that the overburden tops are sloped so they drain back into the quarry. The outslopes, however, will still be exposed to rainwater and will run towards Back Creek. That water will be treated before it enters Back Creek by means of a settling pond or dike equipped with a manual valve to control outflow. She said that the plan and construction of the dike will need to be approved and regulated by the DMME and the DEQ. Mrs. 2 Armentrout said that their plans for the dike have already been submitted and they are waiting for DMME approval. The Commissioners were concerned about the problems described by the residents of the community and felt it would be helpful if they collectively visited the site. It was also suggested that representatives of Unimin Corporation meet with the Gore community to discuss concerns. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Wilson, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously agree to table Rezoning Application #002-93 of the Unimin Corporation for 60 days so that the Commission can arrange to collectively meet at the site. An amendment to Chapter 144 of the Frederick County Code, Subdivision, Article VI, Plan Requirements and an amendment to Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, Article V, RA (Rural Areas) District, Section 165-54D(1), Rural Preservation Lots. Mr. Miller said that the staff has recently discovered some inconsistencies in the language of the minor rural subdivision and rural preservation lots in the subdivision and zoning ordinances. The Commission and staff discussed the changes proposed. There were no public comments. Upon motion made by Mr. Thomas and seconded by Mr. Light, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve the amendment to Chapter 144 by deletion of the following language: 144-39A(8) In the case of a lot being created under the provision for a one-time division (Section 144-31B of this chapter), a statement certifying that only one (1) such parcel of land has been or is being divided from the original parcel of land as it was recorded before February 13, 1974. Upon motion made by Mr. Shenk and seconded by Mr. Romine, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve the amendment to Chapter 165 by deletion of the following underlined language: i 165-54D(1) Rural Preservation Lots Within the RA (Rural Areas) District, lots as small as two (2) acres shall be permitted on tracts over twenty (20) acres in size, subject to the provisions of section 165-52B and the following... Discussion regarding revisions to development review fees for Variances/Appeals, Conditional Use Permits, and Minor Site Plans. Mr. Miller said that the staff and the DR&RS believes that some of the review fees need to be examined because they were far below the actual cost of processing. Mr. Miller presented the cost figures for processing various applications and the fees currently charged by Frederick County as compared to surrounding jurisdictions. The Commissioners were concerned about the substantial increase all at one time in the fees proposed and that the fees should have been increased progressively over the years. It was pointed out that it was not desirable for the citizens of Frederick County to subsidize a bill for someone who is seeking a conditional use permit. It was also pointed out that the increase would bring the fees more in line with what other jurisdictions charge. Upon motion made by Mr. Thomas and seconded by Mr. Light, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously direct the staff to advertise revisions to development review fees for the next available public hearing. Administrative Approval for VDO-Yazaki Site Plan Staff noted that a site plan was submitted by VDO-Yazaki for four small concrete pads, two 36' silos, and a chiller room to be added to their current facilities. Since the Planning Commission's September 15 meeting is being cancelled, the staff was asking permission to administratively approve the plan. Upon motion made by Mr. Romine and seconded by Mr. Light, the Planning Commission instructed the staff to proceed with administrative review and approval of the VDO- Yasaki Site Plan. (Mr. Golladay abstained) M Informal Discussion Regarding the Overall Gross Density in the Residential Performance (RP) Zoning District_ Mr. Thomas said that recently, the Commission has been faced with reviewing a number of proposals for small, adjacent parcels containing all multi -family units which results in extremely dense areas which significantly impacts infrastructure. Mr. Thomas said that the DR&RS is currently reviewing the issue of overall gross density in the RP District and trying to find ways to encourage "mixed-use" development. Mr. Thomas discussed initial steps that the DRRS believes could be taken to address the problem that involves the statement of intent and the language pertaining to gross density. The Commission was in agreement with the suggestions presented by the DR&RS, but felt that "home-building" groups needed to be involved in the discussions. Chairman Golladay instructed the staff to advertise the ordinance revisions for the next available public hearing. ADJOURNMENT p.m. No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 9:50 Respectfully submitted, Robert W. Watkins, Secretary James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman M E M O R A N D U M TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Robert W. Watkins, Secretary SUBJECT: Bimonthly Report DATE: September 24, 1993 (1) Rezonin s Pending: dates are submittal dates Twin Lakes 4/04/90 Shaw RA to B2/RP Unimin Corp. 8/09/93 BkCk RA to EM Woodside Estates 08/27/93 Opeq RA to RP (2) Rezonin s Approved: dates are BOS meetin dates None (3) Rezonin s Denied: dates are BOS meeting dates None (4) Conditional Use Permits Pending: dates are submittal. dates Marshall Ritenour 08/06/93 Shaw Cottage Occup. -Fencing Contracting (5) Conditional Use Permits A roved: dates are a roval 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. inCA' iistriai Lake Centre 05/15/91 Shaw Townhouses Red Star Express Lines 05/24/91 Ston Whse. Addition Freeton 04/27/92 Opeq Townhouses Salvation Army 12/03/92 Ston Ofc/Housing Mt. View Church Snappy Lube VDO L&L Builders 2 06/14/93 BkCk 08/30/93 BkCk 08/31/93 Ston 09/20/93 Ston Mobile Classroom Ofc Bldg. Mfg. Addition Commercial (7) Site Plans Approved: (dates are approval dates) Star Tannery Sand Mine 09/07/93 BkCk Quarry Dodson Bros Exter. 09/08/93 Shaw Pest Control Business (8) Subdivisions Pending: (dates are submittal dates) Lake Holiday Sec. 1B 08/25/93 Gainesboro Fredericktowne Est., Sec 8 & 9 08/30/93 Opequon (9) Subdivisions Pending Final Admin. Approval: (P/C or BOS approval dates Abrams Point, Phase 1 6/13/90 Shawnee Hampton Chase 02/27/91 Stonewall Lake Centre 06/19/91 Shawnee Fredericktowne Est. 10/16/91 Opequon (sections 5, 6 and 7) Coventry Courts 12/04/91 Shawnee Freeton 05/20/92 Opequon Village at Sherando 06/16/93 Opequon Paul Negley 08/11/93 Stonewall Henkel Harris 08/16/93 BackCreek (10) PMDP Pending: (dates are submittal dates) None (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 Greenwood Road Realty Partn. 08/11/93 Shawnee (12) FMDP Administ. Approved (dates are admin. approval dates) None 3 (13) Board of Zoning Appeals Applications Pending:(submit dates) Michael Prelip 9/22/93 Opeq 4.27' front -house Linda Shore 09/24/93 Shaw 2'5" side -existing house (14) BZA Applications Approved: (approval dates Snappy Lube 08/20/93 BkCk Zane & Betty Metz 08/26/93 Shaw Hilltop House, Inc. 08/27/93 Ston (15) BZA Applications Denied• None 175' entrance separation .9' side -existing house Buffer req. between B2 & RA (16) PLANS RECD. FOR REVIEW FROM CITY OF WINCHESTER None E. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT - ACTIVITY REPORT 140 (Aug 16-31) 1. AutoCad The Planning staff continues to enter zoning information on the county's tax maps, along with updating address information. 2. GIS Bob Watkins and Mark Lemasters attended eight days of training on GIS software and systems in Fairfax. Bob Watkins and Mark Lemasters met with Commissioner of Revenue Miller to discuss GIS applications on August 31. 3. Alternative Wastewater Treatment On Tuesday, August 17, the Technical Advisory Committee, overseeing the study of possible alternative waste water treatment methods for rural community centers, met and received a draft copy of the final report from the consultant. Kris Tierney will be forwarding comments from the committee members to the consultant for inclusion in the report. Lanny Bise will be assisting with Autocad maps for the report. It is hoped that the Planning Commission will be receiving the report in October. 4. Comprehensive Plan On Thursday, August 26, Kris Tierney and Lanny Bise held a meeting with representatives of numerous county departments and agencies, the Town of Stephens City, the Health Department, and VDOT to discuss the format for Comprehensive Plan meetings to be held in September. Two meetings have been scheduled, September 23 at Aylor Middle School and September 27 at Stonewall Elementary. Both meetings will run from 7:30 pm to 9:00 pm. 5. Stephens City Joint Planning Group Based on comments received at the July public meeting, the Stephens City Joint Planning Group devised several general development plans and discussed preferred scenarios as a committee. They also agreed to work towards more specific plans for the preferred scenarios. 6. Corridor Study On Monday, August 23, Bob Watkins, Kris Tierney, and Ron Lilley, along with members of the Planning Commission and Board, attended a Joint Work Session on corridors with members of the City Planning staff, Planning Commission, and Council. Several aspects of corridor appearance and general corridor planning were discussed, with general agreement for the City and County staffs to work towards coordinated corridor regulations. Bill Shendow summarized the Chambers recent report on Corridor appearance and Ron Lilley updated those present on the County's Corridor Studies. 7. Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) HRAB members prepared to accompany the slide show presentation of the Rural Landmarks Survey for whatever civic/social groups may be interested in having it presented. Received BOS approval of the historic plaque design and made further steps towards getting the plaque produced. Made additional arrangements for an informational meeting for owners of historic properties about the State and National Registers, to be held in September. 8. Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DR&RS) The Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee discussed: allowable gross density in the Residential Performance District; recently adopted state regulations for group homes; and design criteria for buffer and screening requirements. 9. Bicycle Advisory Committee Bicycle Advisory Committee continued work on bicycle plan for Frederick County and City of Winchester. 10. Plan Reviews and Site Inspections On Monday, August 30, Kris Tierney and Ed Strawsnyder visited the Unimin sand mine in Gore to tour the site and meet with the manager in reference to the pending rezoning. The rezoning will be considered by the Planning Commission at their September 1, meeting. Evan Wyatt conducted the following: Reviewed site plans for: Hilltop House Annex, located on Berryville Pike (Route 7) in the Stonewall District; Dodson Brothers Exterminating, located on Shawnee Drive (Route 652) in the Back Creek District; Snapp office addition, located on Valley Avenue (Route 11) in the Back Creek District. Approved site plans for: Southeast Container Addition, located on West Brooke Road in the Fort Collier Industrial Park; and First National Bank of Strasburg, located on Hyde Court off of Aylor Road (Route 647) in the Opequon District. Participated in a meeting sponsored by the Economic Development Commission for a potential industry that may locate in the Stonewall Industrial Park. Met with Tom Gilpin to discuss land division procedures for two potential industrial clients in the Stonewall Industrial Park. Met with Jim Petry of Jeni Company to discuss required bonding of improvements for the Freeton Townhouse Develorment located on Double Church Road in the Opequon District. 11. Customer Service The Planning Staff is working on developing brochures about the County's zoning and development policies. 1S5w- PC REVIEW: 10/06/93 SUBDIVISION APPLICATION #005-93 LAKE HOLIDAY ESTATES - SECTION 1B 28 LOTS LOCATION: One mile southeast of Redland Road (Route 701) at The Summit, adjacent to Lakeview Drive MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 18 -A -28A PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned R5 (Residential Recreational Community) land use - vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned R5 (Residential Recreational Community) land use - vacant and road right-of-way PROPOSED USE: 28 lots, single family detached REVIEW EVALUATION: Fire Marshal: The hydrant location shown does not meet requirements of Frederick Co. Chapter 10. Lots 13-18 are greater that 400' from hydrant. If existing hydrants on Lakeview Drive satisfy this requirement show same on site plan submittal. When building begins on Lot 24, developer must ensure that placement of driveway and/or parking area will not compromise access to fire hydrant. Street grade must not exceed 10% at any point. Inspections Dept • Building shall comply with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and Section 309, Use Group R, (Residential), of the BOCA National Building Code/1990. County Engineer: See attached letter to John Lewis, Lewis and Associates, dated May 3, 1993. Planning & Zoning: There is no approved master plan for this development. The internal streets are private streets and, to the best of our knowledge, none of the open space was ever dedicated for the sole use of the property owners. Staff concurs with the comments of the County Engineer. The state Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has approved the proposed subdivision for both the water and sewer. The sewer is approved based on the history of metered use of the system versus the design capacity. We were advised that the system has been running at about 50% of the design capacity over the last 4 months. This is as reported by the owner/operator of the system. This system has exceeded its design capacity on more than one occasion over the last year and a half. Approval by DEQ for the addition to the water system is based on known available capacity versus the number of hookups or houses being served. when 80% of the available capacity of the system is reached, plans must be presented to DEQ for upgrade or expansion of the system. DEQ approved this proposed subdivision requirement for expansion based on the fact that the application states that there are 325 homes hooked to the system. A review of County records clearly shows that there are 477 houses in this development. DEQ uses a figure of 400 gallons per day (GPD) for each residence and the system has the capability to provide 217,000 GPD. 325 houses would use 130,000 GPD and using the 400 GPD per household, that would be about 60% of the available capacity being used. If the total number of houses hooked to the system is 477, the use would be 190,800 GPD or 87.6% of the available capacity. It appears to staff that the use of this system is already well past the point where additional capacity should have been identified and plans submitted for upgrade. This information was provided to DEQ, Water Programs, and they advised that they would investigate the matter. The open space in this development is a major issue and staff believes it should be resolved. The applicant has submitted an accounting for the current open space, as determined by his engineer/ designer, asking for relief from the requirements of 165 - 77 E. of the zoning ordinance which requires 35% open space and no more than 50% of the space is allowed in environmental areas or steep slopes. We believe this accounting is flawed for several reasons with the major one being that it does not identify open space that meets the definition of the zoning ordinance. The ordinance identifies common open space as "land used for recreation, agriculture,resource protection or buffers and is freely accessible to the residents of the development and is protected to ensure that it remains in such uses". For example part of the total accounting is some 286 acres that belongs to the Independent Land Trust. This land is not accessible Lo the residents and may in fact be proposed for subdivision just as this application is doing because it is not dedicated open space. We have been questioned as to whether the golf course is open space and we say not because residents of the development do not have free access to this area. There is no protection for the existing open space to insure that it remains open space. Although the requirement for open space at the inception of this development is unknown, we believe a position that is reasonable and in the best interest of all concerned should be established and written so that future requests can be dealt with in a professional manner. Moreover, this tract of land proposed for subdivision may very well be required to be maintained as part of the open space. A case could probably be made that the answer to putting this development into the proper perspective would be to require a master plan be brought forward. Also, a strong case could probably be made that the application before you at this time should be master planned either individually or as a portion of the entire development. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OCTOBER 6 1993 PC MEETING: Due to the potential problems with water availability and the uncertainties surrounding the open space issues, staff recommends denial of this request. Mr. John Lewis Lewis and Associates 45 East Boscawen Street, Suite 100 Winchester, Virginia 22601-4725 COUNTY of FRE0ERICh Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., RE Qirector of Public Work.- 9 ork.9 North Loudoun St., 2nd Floo, 703/665-564 May 3, 1993 `^ �. RE: Subdivision Plan for Lake Holliday Estates, Section 2B Dear John: We have completed our review of the proposed subdivision plan for Section 2B in Lake Holliday Estates and offer the following comments: Design Calculations for Water and Sewer The design calculations for the proposed water and sewer system appear adequate. However, we will not grant our approval without written approval from the State Health Department. Before granting approval, we must receive confirmation from the Health Department that the existing central water and sewer systems will accommodate the proposed 28 lot subdivision without taxing the existing dwellings. The existing water system is dependent on deep wells which have incurred reduced capacity with time resulting in a very unreliable system. The Health Department will be responsible for determining the short and long term adequacy of both systems. Design Drawings Sheet 2 of 5 a) Provide drainage easements between lots 15 and 161 and 4 and 5. Specify a utility easement between lots 10 and 11. b) Because of the steep terrain associated with thy, subdivision, detailed site plans will be required for the following lots: 3 through 18. This requirement should be noted on the design plans. These detailed site plans shall include, but not be limited to, proposed site grading, building location plan, design floor elevations, driveway locations, and drainage pipe sizes and locations. Fax: 703/678-0682 - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22604 Mr. John Lewis Page Two May 3, 1993 Stability analyses may be required in areas where single family dwellings are positioned on steep slopes. C) Construction note number nine (9) refers to controlled fills. We concur with these recommendations and will require copies of all compaction reports to verify that the roads placed on controlled fills are constructed in accordance with the plans. Sheet 5 of 5 a) We concur with the proposed road section and will expect verification that the road construction complies with this design. b) Indicate minimum cover requirements for culverts crossing under roadways. General Provide a sediment and erosion control plan for the proposed subdivision development. This plan should be prepared in accordance with the latest edition of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. Please contact me if you should have any questions regarding the above comments. HES:rls cc: file Sincerely, V Harvey Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E. Director of Public Works 4. APPLICATION AND CHECKLIST SUBDIVISION FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA Date: �2 Application # /�? �- 9,3 Fee Paid Applicant/Agent: WIS Address:-d1w1 4., k ITS foo ,T ;141 'AS W t :{ Phone: 5VF'" ` Owners name: Phone: 22-� - W-7-ZlAfl Please list names of all owners, principals and /or majority stockholders: Contact Person: .�p}.��j L W� S Phone: 12`-� - ?_-2, Name of Subdivision: �p(,tnp-T�Tr3S �G-ftc j Ila, Number of Lots ? Total Acreage tc -j Property Location: T SU w� 1T GQmc� � ►`� -fty1J �� COG 1 L47 5CUTI-1 eo.ST ,OF Qoytr.& ? , I (Give State Rt.#, name, distance and direction from intersection) �ra�r;�terial Listrict �o.�►.��,'1.��� - Property Identification Number (PIN)) A ZQj E3 Property zoning and present use: R1; - 0 Adjoining property zoning and use: Has a Master Development Plan been submitted for this project? Yes No�_ If yes, has the final MDP been approved by the Board of Supervisors? Yes No What was the MDP title? Does the plat contain any changes from the approved MDP? Yes No If yes, specify what changes: Minimum Lot Size (smallest lot) dg, S F Number and types of housing units in this development: Number 2, Types S ;9 4,314f�^j6� C�)� PIN 7 LACE HOt AY ST�-TES INTI 'ITV QIf PANY _...�, ..... .,.:, P.U. &)x 103 Cross Juric:nUI1, Virgirll�l 22625 703-888-3226 March 30, 1993 Department of Health Office of water Programs 129 South Randolph Street Lexington, Virginia 24450 Attention: Harold T. Eberly Per our telephone conversation, Lake Holiday Estates Utility Company, Inc. will Provide water and sewer services to Seddon 2B (Don Bayliss Lots) in Lake Holiday Estates, Gainesboro District, Frederick County, Virginia. It is understood that Don Bayliss will install all approved lines and pumps required in this section for said services. Carl H. Sij=si President s LAKE HOLIDAY ESTATES UTILITY COMPANY IS A PUBLIC SERVICE UTILITY COMPANY APPROVIEO BY THE STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA AND HAS SEEN ISSUED CERTIFICATES NO. W-191 AND NO. S-63 AUTHORIZING IT TO FURNISH WATER AND SEWER SERVICE WITHIN ITS ALLOTED TERRITORY. • at\-r Per our telephone conversation, Lake Holiday Estates Utility Company, Inc. will Provide water and sewer services to Seddon 2B (Don Bayliss Lots) in Lake Holiday Estates, Gainesboro District, Frederick County, Virginia. It is understood that Don Bayliss will install all approved lines and pumps required in this section for said services. Carl H. Sij=si President s LAKE HOLIDAY ESTATES UTILITY COMPANY IS A PUBLIC SERVICE UTILITY COMPANY APPROVIEO BY THE STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA AND HAS SEEN ISSUED CERTIFICATES NO. W-191 AND NO. S-63 AUTHORIZING IT TO FURNISH WATER AND SEWER SERVICE WITHIN ITS ALLOTED TERRITORY. (D - COMMONWEALTH of VIRCjINIA ROBERT B. STROUBE, M.O. COMMISSIONER Mr. Donald L. Bayliss 455 Black Mountain Road Winchester, VA 22603 Dear Mr. Bayliss: Department of Health Office of Water Programs May 21, 1993 ENVIRONMENTAL ENG VEERING FIELD OFFICE 129 SOUTH RANDOI PH STREET LEXINGTON, VIRGINIA 2&AW2328 PHONE: (703)463.71 35 FAX (700)463.3892 SUBJECT: Frederick County Water - The Summit, y � The water portion of plans and specifications, as prepared by Lewis and Associates, Winchester, Virginia, for the water and sewerage facilities to serve Section 1B of The Summit, located in Frederick County, has been reviewed by this Department. The plans include Sheets 1 of 5 through 5 of 5 titled "Lake Holiday Estates, Section 1B, Frederick County, VA", and dated March, 1993. The specifications titled "Water and Sewerage System Report and Specifications, Section 1B, Lake Holiday Estates, Frederick County, VA" are dated March, 1993. In accordance with Part I, Article 3, Section 1.23 (VR 355-18-003.17) of the Commonwealth of Virginia Vaterwoxks Regulations, this letter is to advise that, subsequent to our review, the water portion of the above described plans and specifications is technically adequate and approved by this Division. One copy of the plans and specifications, with State Health Department stickers indicating approval, is enclosed. Any local permits must be obtained from the appropriate officials before construction begins. In accordance with Part I, Artible 3, Section 1.24 (VR 355-18-003.18), Issuance of the Construction Permit, Waterworks Construction Permit No. 202593 with an effective date of May 21, 1993 is enclosed. This permit is your authorization from the State Health Commissioner to construct these water line extensions in accordance with the above described approved plans and specifications. Any deviations from approved plans and specifications affecting capacity, hydraulic conditions, or the quality of the water to be delivered must be approved by this Division before any such changes are made. Revised plans and specifications shall be submitted to this Field Office in time to permit the review and approval before any construction work is begun that will be affected by such changes. Upon completion of this water line extension, the owner shall submit to this :r Field Office two copies of a statement signed by a registered professional engineer stating that the construction work has been completed in accordance with approved plans and specifications. Upon receipt of this statement, and the satisfactory bacteriological analyses required following disinfection, the water line extension may be placed into service. Mr. Donald Bayliss 2 May 21, 1993 SUBJECT: Frederick County ` Water - The Summit If we can be of assistance, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Bowling R. Hughes, Assistant District Engineer, at 703/463-7136. Sincerely, Ae-'f Ronald E. Conner, P.E. Engineering Field Director BRH/bt cc Lewis and Associates - Attn: J. Lewis V Lake Holiday Estates Utility Company - Attn: C. Simms Frederick County Health Department County of Frederick - Attn: J. Riley, County Administrator County of Frederick - Attn: J. Trenary, Building Official VDH - Richmond Central COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY J UN 2 1 1993 I. Mr. Donald L. Bayliss 455 Black Mountain Road Winchester, Virginia 22603 RE: The Summit, Section 1B Dear Mr. Bayliss: The Director has taken the following action relative to the above -referenced project: A. Conditionally approved the plans and specifications. B. Designated the proposed pumping facility as Reliability Class II. This action is in accordance with a memorandum from the Director, Office of Water Resources Management to the Director dated June 16, 1993, a copy of which is enclosed for your information. The conditions of approval are: (1) that either a portable electric generator or portable pump be provided so that Class II reliability requirements can be met for the wastewater pumping facility; and (2) that an 0&M Manual for the pump station be submitted to the VDH and DEQ for review and approval prior to placing this project into.operation. This document constitutes your Certificate to Construct as required by Section 2.04.04 of the VA Sewerage Regulations. Also enclosed is a letter report from the VA Department of Health conditionally approving this project. As the owner of these facilities you will be required to comply with the following sections of the VA Sewerage Regulations: Section 2.05 (State Required Upon Completion of Construction) and Section 2.06 (Issuance of the Certificate to Operate). Enclosed is an example of the type of statement which should be submitted in accordance with Section 2.05. Board approval does not relieve the owner of the responsibility J� of operating the facility in a consistent manner to meet the facility performance requirements or the responsibility for the Mr. Donald L. Bayliss Page 2 correction of design and/or operation deficiencies. Nor does this approval relieve the owner from meeting all other laws and regulations as may be applicable. If you have any questions, please contact the Office of Water Resources Management, P. O. Box 11143, Richmond, Virginia 23230, (804/257-5001). Sincerely, Larry G. Lawson, P. E. Director Office of Water Resources Management Enclosures cc: Mr. John Lewis, Lewis and Associates Mr. John Trenary, Frederick County Building Official SWCB - Construction Grants and VRO VDH - Office of Water Programs and Lexington :•r G mQAPMENT :•r 751044203 MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY - WATER DIVISION P. O. Box 11143 Richmond VA 23230 SUBJECT: PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR SEWAGE COLLECTION FACILITIES TO: Director FROM: Director, Office of Water Resources Management DATE: June 16, 1993 UL90 �. c& '. Project Name: The Summit, Section 1B project Owner: Mr. Donald L. Bayliss o ect Scone: Installation of gravity sewer`itne force main and pump station with a design average flow of MGD (see attached VDH letter). Receivina Plant Per ormance: The Lake Holiday Estates Utility Company WWTP (VA0027642) had unpermitted discharges (overflows) from its collection system during the month of March and failed to report these in a timely manner. This matter resulted from improper O&M. Previous Agency Action: The facility was issued an NOV for the above violation, and was referred to the Office of Enforcement because the facility had been under a Consent Order to address pump station problems. This Order was cancelled when the required ' actions were corrected. These viola- tions are attributed to improper O&M,. similar to what the original CSO was to correct. VA Department of Health, Action: By letter dated May 21, 1993 the VA Department of'Health conditionally approved the plans and specifications as noted in their letter report. Staff_Comments: None. T CO AT ONS: The staff recommends that the Director: A. Approve the plans and specifications with the following conditions: The Summit Page 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: (Continued) 1. That either a portable electric generator or portable pump be provided so that Class II reliability requirements can -be met for the wastewater pumping facility. 2. That an O&M Manual for the pump station be submitted to the VDH and DEQ for review and approval prior to placing this project into operation. H. Designate the proposed pumping facility as Reliability Class II. Approved: i- i i' -' 4 ,'-- /�� yil GV V Vi Date:` 12 i4 %ze co L� y PC REVIEW: 10/06/93 SUBDIVISION APPLICATION #008-93 FREDERICBTOWNE ESTATES SECTIONS 8 & 9 LOCATION: East of Stephens City, north of section 4, west of section 7 and east of section 3 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon PROPERTY ID NUMBER: part of 75-A-72, part of 75-A-67 and 75E-1-3- 51 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RP (Residential Performance) - land use, vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RP (Residential Performance) - land use, residential and vacant PROPOSED USE: 36 lots - single family detached houses REVIEW EVALUATION: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: See attached letter to G. W. Clifford & Associates from Robert Childress, VDOT, dated August 24, 1993. Inspections Dept.: Buildings shall comply with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building code and Section 309, Use Group R (Residential) of the BOCA National Building Code/1990. Shall have engineered site plan showing basement floor elevations in regards to stormwater easement at the time of building permit application on lots 156, 157, 160, 172, 173, 184, 186 and 187. Fire Marshal: Burning of land clearing debris requires permit from Fire Marshal's office. Burning of construction debris on site is not permitted. Each lot reui... teTnpnrarl street address signage when construction begins. Access for emergency vehicles must be maintained at all times during construction. Sanitation: Approved Parks & Recreation: Plan appears to meet open space requirements. County Engineer: See attached letter to G. W. Clifford & Associates from Harvey E. Strawsnyder, dated July 12, 1993. Soil & Water Conservation Dist.: Work has already taken place in the area. There are no E & S controls in place. Without calculations to support plan, proper stormwater management is not assured. Planning & Zoning: The proposed subdivision of sections 8 & 9 of Phase IV of this project is in conformance with the approved master development plan. The County Engineer has requested detailed site plans for lots, 156, 157, 160, 165, 166, 172, 173, 184, 186, 187 and 188. We support this requirement mainly because of the potential drainage problems in this area. It is also suggested that the drainage easements that intrude on the buildable areas of any lot, or vary in width, be better identified by putting the parameters of these facilities on the plats. This is specifically significant to lots 160, 172, 173 and 187. There has been some erosion and sedimentation control problems in the past and this has been alluded to by the County engineer and the Soil & Water Conservation technician. The developer needs to pay close attention to this area and insure proper E&S controls are established and maintained. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OCTOBER 6, 1993: Approval with the requirement that all review agency comments be adequately addressed. COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. O. BOX 278 COMMMISSSIONERIONER RAY L EDINBURG, 22824 August 24, 1993 Mr. P. Duane Brown, C.L.S. C/O G. W. Clifford & Associates 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Duane: WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN RESIDENT ENGINEER TELE (703) 984-4133 FAX (703) 984-9761 Ref: Fredericktowne Estates Sections VIII & IX Route 1058 Frederick County As requested we have reviewed the above referenced site plan dated June, 1993. Our recommendations may be found on the enclosed plans marked in red and as follows: 1. Grading/construction easements will need to be obtained along Fairfax Drive on the adjacent Costello, Keller and Nichols' properties and Lots No. 50 & 53 of the existing Fredericktowne Subdivision to complete the proposed grading. 2. The existing erosion control stone at the end of the 36"x22" C.M.P.A. under Route 1058 will need to be removed and replaced after the proposed grading is complete. 3. The proposed private entrances at approximate Station 19+00, Fairfax Drive, are to be constructed with a minimum 8" of 21-B Aggregate and paved to the backside of the radii with 2" of Type SM -2A Asphalt Concrete. 4. Standard CD -1 or 2 underdrains are to be provided at the locations noted. 5. A 2' flat bottom ditch as noted will be required along the north side of Fairfax Drive from Lot No. 186 to Lot No. 152 in Section VIII. To prevent possible flow impediment or erosion problems associated with private entrances, Lots No. 160, 172, 173 and 187 are to be accessed from Dickenson Court or Montgomery Circle. If not, the developer will be required to provide minimum 30" R.C.P. entrance culverts with Standard ES -1 flared end sections through this drainage area. 6. A note concerning Lot No. 187 is to be added as shown. 7. The streets which receive a prime and double seal surface treatment are to be paved at the application rate noted. TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY Mr. P. Duane Brown Ref: Fredericktowne Estates, Sections VIII & IX August 24, 1993 Page 112 8. In accordance with our recently published Pavement Design Guide for Subdivision Streets, those streets which are proposed to receive 1.5" of SM -2A Asphalt Concrete are to be increased to a minimum 2". Also, a prime coat at the application rate noted will be required. I have enclosed a copy of the guidelines for future reference. 9. Based on the trip generation model which was furnished to us with the site plan submittal of Sections I & 11 of the development several years ago, the pavement design of Fairfax Drive from Station 13+80.42 to Station 21+06.32 should be upgraded to a Class IV design or 8" of Type 21-B Aggregate, 300 #/s.y. of Type BM -2 Asphalt Concrete and 165 #/s.y. of Type SM -2A Asphalt Concrete. Also, when considering the trip generation provided and the cut through traffic due to the Warrior Road collector, the northern portion of Montgomery Circle should be redesigned to a Class III pavement design with a 22' surface width. Therefore, a pavement design of 8" Type 21-B Base Aggregate and 2" Type SM -2A Asphalt Concrete or 12" Type 21-B Base Aggregate and a prime and double seal surface should be provided on Montgomery Circle from Station 21+30.47 to 26+61.44. 10. It is the developer's responsibility to determine the size of the private entrance culverts for this project. Our minimum requirements are 30' in length by 15" in diameter or 17"x13". At this time we will require a listing of the private entrance culvert sizes for our files. Please revise and resubmit for further review. Should any changes be deemed necessary, please design them to meet or exceed the above recommendations. We would also appreciate you providing us with a revised/updated trip generation model which takes into consideration the Warrior Drive collector road and its impacts on this project. Should you have any questions, please let me know. Sincerely, William H. Bushman Trans. Resident Engineer 6R�-� /S. euku"', By: Robert B. Childress Hwy. Permits & Subd. Spec. Senior RBC/rf Enclosures xc: Mr. T. L. Jackson, Mr. S. A. Melnikoff, Mr. R. W. Watkins, Mr. H. E. Strawsnyder July 12, 1993 Mr. P. Duane Brown, C.L.S. Gilbert W. Clifford and Associates, Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Frederic:ktowne Estates, Section 8 and 9 Dear Duane: COUNTY of FREDERICK Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E. Director of Public Works 9 North Loudoun St., 2nd Floor T , - "3/665-5643 We have completed our review of the subject subdivision plans and offer the following comments: 1) The proposed stormwater management plan is approved as submitted. 2) The proposed erosion and sediment control plan is approved as submitted. We will expect the site work contractor to implement the erosion and sediment measures outlined in the submittal narrative. We suggest that you discuss these measures with the developer and his construction contractor. Because of past and present problems in the Fredericktowne Estates subdivision related to erosion and sediment, we plan to inspect the construction on frequent intervals. 3) Because of the proposed drainage easements and relatively small lots, we request that detailed site plans be prepared for the following lots: 156, 157, 160, 165, 166, 172, 173, 184, 186, 187 and 188. These detailed site plans shall include, but not be limited to, the following items: building layout, finished floor elevations, finished exterior grades (contours), driveway location, design of culvert under driveway, drainage and/or utility easements, pertinent structures, and elevation of 100 year storm flows relative to the finished floor level. Please revise the subdivision plans to reflect the above Fax: 703/678-0682 - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22604 Mr. P. Duane Brown, C.L.S. Page Two July 12, 1993 detailed site plan requirements and resubmit the revisions for our final review and approval. Sincerely, Harvey E. rawsnyder, Jr., P.E. Director of Public Works HES:rls cc: file j f r9 APPLICATION AND CHECKLIST SUBDIVISION 0pT. OF AANNING, FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA �jEVELOPMEST A Q' Date: 30 August 1993 Application #- �aM Fee Paid 50%D•0 d Applicant/Agent: Top of Virginia Development Corp./ G.W. Clifford Address: P.O. Box 2715 / 200 N Cameron Street Winchester, Va 22604 / Winchester Va 22601 Phone: (703) 667-2120 / (703) 667-2139 Owners name: Top of Virginia Development Corporation Address: P.O. Box 2715 Winchester, Va 22604 Phone: (703) 667-2120 Please list names of all owners, principals, and/or majority stockholders: David B. Hollidav Ron Shickle Contact person: P. Duane Brown Phone: (703) 667-2139 Name of Subdivision: Fredericktowne Estates - Sections 8 & 9 Number of Lots: 36 Total Acreage: 15.7698 Acres Property Location: East of Stephens City- north of Fredericktowne Estates - Section 4- west of Fredericktowne Estates -- Section 7 and east of Fredericktowne Subdivision -- Section 3. (Give State Rt.#, name, distance and direction from intersection) Magisterial District: Onecnion Property Identification Number (PIN): Part of 75-A-72 Part of 75-A-67 r Property zoning and present use: RP (Vacant) Adjoining property zoning and use: RP (Vacant and Residential ) Has a master Development Plan been submitted for this project? Yes X No If yes, has the final MDP been approved by the Board of Supervisors? Yes X No What was the MDP title? FREDERICKTOWNE ESTATES Does the plat contain any changes from the approved MDP? Yes No X If yes, specify what changes Minimum Lot Size (smallest lot): 10,270 sf Number and types of housing units in this development: Number: 36 Types: Single Family Detached Ste phen' IBM % Y Radio 1 �i o �M•\ t ( `�5 JJ1 �/f r`\ ••'•. . o •. / t[. I FaciNiy'.\\- /.: ton 8 _ G,e 1 ,il gy p, .,• _ / �.. ��aC /. �. �1 i ,/ "'•....__f-, � .`, � ..1e � � .\ � � I,' ,�� 631 INTE• V 78 r, VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1'=2000'x- APPROVED BY Frederick County Sanitation Authority Date Planr. ing Commission Date Subc vision Administrator Virgir fa Department of Transportation Date Date OWNER'S CERTIFICATE The above and foregoing subdivision of the land of Top of Vrginia Development Corporation, as appears in the accompanying plats, is with the consent and in accordance with the desires of the undersigned owners, proprietors, and trustees, if any. NOTARY PUBLIC i , a Notary Public in and for the state of Virginia at large, do certify that , whose name is signed to the foregoing Owner's Certificate, has acknowledged the same before me in my state. Given under my hand this day of 1993 My commission expires SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE ! hereby certify that the land contained in this subdivision is a portion of the land conveyed to Top of Virginia Development Corporation by deed dated January 21, 1992, said deed recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Frederick County Virginia in Deed Book 772 at Page 1423. P. Duane Brown, C.L.S. Final Plot LT11 Fredericktowne Estates Section 8 o� �f Opequon Magisterial District V P. DUANE Frederick County, Virginia uy,p� BROWN "-ft _#%A_ -y' DATE: 3 August 1993 Cover Sheet Sheet 1 of 7 N0. 1285 .p 04' gilbert w. Clifford & associates, inc. ENGINEERS — LAND PLANNERS — SURVEYORS FQLA IND 150—C aide Greenwich Drive Fredericksburg. Virginia 22401 200 North Cameron Street (703) 898-2115 Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 6672139 Curve Table CURVE RADIUS LENGTH TANGENT CHORD BEARING - DELTA 1 330.00' 99.47' 50.12' 99.10' N 55'38'27" W 17'16'15" 2 220.00' 30.22' 15.13' 30.19' N 29'39'32" E 07'52'12" 3 305.00' 102.83' 51.91 102.35' S 54'37'02' E 19'19'03" 4 355.00' 87.16' 43.80' 86.95' N 55'46'22' W 14'04'05" 5 35.00' 54.08' 34.11' 48.86' N 18'32'30" W 88'31'51" 6 195.00' 26.78' 13.41' 26.76' N 29'39'32" E 07'52'12" 7 25.00' 30.77' 17.68' 28.87' N 68'51'30" E 70'31'44" 8 50.00 48.87' 26.59' 46.95' N 76'07'18 E 56'00'08" 9 50.00' 42.44' 22.59' 41.18' N 23'48'17' E 48'37'54." 10 50.00' 42.44' 22.59' 41.18' N 24'49'37" W 48'37 54" 11 50.00' 42.44 22.59 41.18' N 73'27'31 W 48'37 54" 12 50.00' 42.44' 22.59' 41.18' S 57'54'35" W 48"37'54" 13 245.00' 33.65' 16.85' 33.63' S 29'39'32" W 07'5212" 14 35.00 54.98 35.00 49.50 1S 70'4-3'26" W 90700 OO" Area Summar Area in Lots 6.1675 Acres Area in R/W 0.9766 Acres Total Area Subdivided 7.1441 Acres No. of Lots 17 Average Lot Size 15,803 Sq. Ft. Open Space Easement Provided (This Section) 1.2231 Ac. Total Open Space Easement Required to Date 10.4351 Ac. Total Open Space Easement Provided to Date 9.9468 Ac. • Denotes iron rod to be set on property line 35' from right-of-way line. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FRONT = 35' SIDE = 10' REAR = 25' o� ALTSO� w P. DUANE �c 0�� spa N0. 1285 CoQ' L.4 Np 5J� All lots are single family detached - traditional. All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights-of-way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along all property I in es. Fredericktowne Estates - Section B DATE: 3 August 1993 CURVE TABLE I Sheet 2 of 7 gilbert w, clifford & associates, Inc. ENGINEERS - LAND PLANNERS - SURVEYORS 150-C 01de Greenwich Drive 200 North Cameron Street Fredericksburg, Virginia 224-01 Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 898-2115 (703) 667-2139 _--- 75.00' N64'16'34" W 211.52' Fairfax Drive — 50' R/W 75.00' 75.00' OI' 20' Drainage O� � - � I Easement � V Z 159 -o 158158 INoI 157 INAI 156 lV I 11, 250 Sq. Ft. M 11,250 Sq. Ft. r� 11,250 Sq. Ft. ;•� / 1 o I 0 11, 471 Sq.LO Ft. C14 �n t2 1 CN Z, I ► z + zL L I I / pry ti 75.00' 75.00' 75.00' 54.33' Future Development N 64'16'34" W I^, 279.33' 105 1 104 106 Section 4 • Denotes iron rod to be set on property line 35' from right—of—way line. Minimum Setback Requirements: Fron t — 35' Rear — 25' Side — 10' P. DUANE�' 0 BROWN N0. 1285 qtr FFG LAND SJ All lots are single family detached — traditional. All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights—of—way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along all property lines_ See Sheet 2 of 7 for Curve Table Fredericktov►wne Estates Section 8 DATE: 3 August 1993 SCALE: 1"=50' Sheet 3 of 7 gilbert w, Clifford & associates, inc. . ENGINEERS — LAND PLANNERS — SURVEYORS 150—C Olde Greenwich Drive 200 North Cameron Street Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401 Winchester. Virginia 22601 (703) 898-2115 (703) 667-2139 (See Sheet 7 or 7) � Q (Sae Sheet 4 of 7) V (Z1 172 a w 160 m_ 14 88.04' M �: 5 Q A N - _161.52' z 50.00' 75.00' N64'16'34" W 211.52' Fairfax Drive — 50' R/W 75.00' 75.00' OI' 20' Drainage O� � - � I Easement � V Z 159 -o 158158 INoI 157 INAI 156 lV I 11, 250 Sq. Ft. M 11,250 Sq. Ft. r� 11,250 Sq. Ft. ;•� / 1 o I 0 11, 471 Sq.LO Ft. C14 �n t2 1 CN Z, I ► z + zL L I I / pry ti 75.00' 75.00' 75.00' 54.33' Future Development N 64'16'34" W I^, 279.33' 105 1 104 106 Section 4 • Denotes iron rod to be set on property line 35' from right—of—way line. Minimum Setback Requirements: Fron t — 35' Rear — 25' Side — 10' P. DUANE�' 0 BROWN N0. 1285 qtr FFG LAND SJ All lots are single family detached — traditional. All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights—of—way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along all property lines_ See Sheet 2 of 7 for Curve Table Fredericktov►wne Estates Section 8 DATE: 3 August 1993 SCALE: 1"=50' Sheet 3 of 7 gilbert w, Clifford & associates, inc. . ENGINEERS — LAND PLANNERS — SURVEYORS 150—C Olde Greenwich Drive 200 North Cameron Street Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401 Winchester. Virginia 22601 (703) 898-2115 (703) 667-2139 y j (See Sheet 5 of 7) LU 163 h 1155 ` S 22- X-4 98• (89.40') ��� 'L61 V� I ; c'''• ( l 18, 396 162 Sq. Ft. !�, X. eJ W . ry�� V61 m /h QJ 13 s`sT 5 56 4 2 ��� `� 515 J'— � � az 25.2 CD 3 161 ` 12,554 Sq.Ft. �� o cv 0-- _ S 64'16'34" E ,•� (128.25•) 154.20' � 25.95') oe 2 o I E7 0 LU 160 15,417 Sq. R. N c .I aq,,� 5 A ' 4 / j'� • Denotes iron rod to be set F "`` ` 14' . - on propertyline 35' from alrfax Drive �ZS. 02 � right--of-way line. 50.00' 50' R/W N64'16'34"W-211.52'`o Minimum Setback Requirements: o _ O r; i•� Fron t — 35' N Rear , (See Sheet 3 of 1 Ex. Fairfax Side - 10 7) Cn *— All lots are single family detached — traditional. All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights—of—way and a 10' 0� ��jaTH QSee Sheet 2 of 7 for Curve Table I lnesy & Drainage Easement along all property - �'� P. DUANE � Fredericktowne Estates — Section 8 BROWN � ��`^•�- �>' DATE: 3 August 1993 SCALE: 1"=50' NO, 1285 Sheet 4 of 7 �F OA- gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS SURVEYORS �FQ Svc 150--C Olde Greenwich Drive 200 North Cameron Street EAN0 Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401 Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 898-2115 (703) 667-2139 All lots are single family detached - traditional. •' '� 1 All lots are subject to a 20' Slope &Drainage / h S • Denotes iron rod to be set ;ement along all rights-of-way and a 10' ``ti �, on property line 35' from -olity & Drainage Easement along all property —•�- v', right-of-way line. lines. // \ 'o. It-3va. 0 � �Q0/ \ u CIF /� �g ZD' DrainageEasement O A.C� uN L p,L,4 165 16,261 n �• o `°� 16, 261 Sq. Ft. 6. 10 N 89'29'20" E _ r 41 (125.00') 180.00' (55.00 9� 7I e 164 3 v) O < .3, 277 Sq. Ft. �a �0 1 G 4,Pa \ Drainage Easement Son. Sewer £sm't �\ rn >t 4h - Open Space Easement o ' 163 \�, �'n t /friss \� 20,250 Sq, Ft. >:S l \ 3 Qn K, tisT, 1 Q� R of V �J fid' 1 Minimum Setback Requirements: req- 5?•68 Front - 35" VOJ Rear - 25' 5$ rob' 26 7.43 Side - 10' �$'j l„ w 149 S 'S. 1�0 7 Section See Sheet 2 of 7 for Curve Table P. DUANE r Fredericktowne Estates /•� BROWN '�` Section 8 V `QfL/ N0. 1285 ATE= 3 August 1993 SCALE: 1",50' Sheet 5 of 7 gilbert w, Clifford do associates, inc, ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS - SURVEYORS LAND e��� 150—C Olde Greenwich Drive Fredericksburg, Vlrglnla 22401 200 North Cameron Street (703) 898-2115 Winchester, Vtrginla 22601 (703) 667-2139 All lots are single family detached - traditional. All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights-of-way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along all property lines. o G fit �^ -410- M6, r� Mo . e o �\ deo �O� y cVCV \ faeery\ Foss 2�' bf 1 ti Ion W I -� 28,007 Sq. Ft. i3 /' �20' Orolnage Easement v n1 ary f 00�4's h N a a I \ 165 a 4 I r 167/ f Lr)21,571 Sq. Ft. \ Y h IDrainage l �! Eosemen t L 1 00 — N 5624'22" W�f 163. $8' S 6'24'2 E ~� !/ w 25.00' 1684 Z Itll � I/ 11,931 Sq. Ft. I al (Q N W • Denotes iron rod to be set cpL 00 on property line 35' from n1 in \ right-of-way line. �7 J N 56'24'22" W '.�� 153.48' 44 to,Vti O Minimum Setback Requirements: N 169 q z Fron t – J5' Z (See Sheet 7 of 7) Rear — 25' Side - 10' +4-1 o ti�� �� See Sheet 2 of 7 for Curve Table f� F. DUANE Fredericktowne Estates — Section 8 "-as— BROWN ... �fo.r..,_l� DATE: 3 August 1993 SCALE: 1"=50' Sheet 6 of 7 � N0, 1285 ¢ gilbert w, Clifford & associates, inc. ENGINEERS - LAND PLANNERS - SURVEYORS �FQ SJ� 150-C Olde Greenwich Drive 200 North Cameron Street LAND Fredericksburg, Vlrglnla 22401 Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 898-2115 (703) 667-2139 All lots are single family detached — traditional. L 168 (See Sheet 6 of 7) 1t ots are subject to a 20' Slope &Drainage S 5624�� — J .ement along all rights-of-way and a 10' 22" Utility & Drainage Easement along all property Ines. Denotes iron rod to be set on property line 35' from right-of-way line. Minimum Setback Requirements. Front - 35' Rear — 25' Side — 10' 4•�' P. QUANE �Pc BROWNS N�,� , O. 1285 LAND 5l� ^ 169 11,150 Sq. Ft. td 5 z '22 h �, w 1109' E v NIS Z z 170 a 10,J68 Sq. Ft.Ln 01 a� q 2 ~4 ` 22"W � y W N 56 2. co X32. i0' 4 N zo ,ate NIS I 171 q Z 14M I 11,015 Sq. Ft. ` m L 13 N 64'16'34" W O � ` 123.04' I I 172 I I ^ 1.3,2J6 Sq. Ft. to i� Oralno4e Evs ent 14' CNz Sanftor�`FasemMf�� 8- Fairfax Fairfax Drive 50' R/W •o'� ��. _161.52' N 64'16'34" W 211.57' � (see Stieat 3 of 7) See Sheet 2 of 7 for Curve Table Frederlcktowne Estates — Section 8 DATE: 3 August 1993 SCALE: 1"=50' Sheet 7 of 7 gilbert w. Clifford & associates, inc. . ENGINEERS - LAND PLANNERS - SURVEYORS 50—C Olde Greenwich Drive 200 North Cameron Street redericksburg, Virginia 22401 Winchester, Virginia 22601 703) 898-2115 (703) 667-2139 (City iBM 7 i Radio \, o M +:�� iso' �� `, •: �:°r.c. ion ^� spree I r 'i , / IT .�� i i• • v 76 r •VIpNITYMAP �Z _,:1 i .• .' : �i _ o '�� scu 1•=2aoa'� APPROVED BY Frederick County Sanitation Authority Date Planning Commission Date Subdivision Administrator Date Virginia Department of Transportation Date OWNER'S CERTIFICATE The above and foregoing subdivision of the land of Top of Virginia Development Corporation, as appears in the accomponyling plats, is with the consent and in accordance with the desires of the undersigned owners, proprietors, and trustees, if any. NOTARY PUBLIC +• a Notary Public in and for the state of Virginia at large, do certify that whose name is signed to the foregoing Owner's Certificate, has acknowledged the some before me in my state. Given under my hand this day of 1993. My commission expires SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE i hereby certify that the land contained in this subdivision is a portion of the land conveyed to Top of Virginia Development Corporation by deeds dated January 21, 1992 and all of the land conveyed to Top of Virginia Development Corporation by deed dated February 7, 1992, said deeds recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia in Deed Book 772 at Page 1417, Deed Book 772 at Page 142J and Deed Book 791 at Page 921, respectively. P. Duane Brown, C.L.S. Finol Plat Fredericktowne Estates — Section 9 ��EI�LTN Orp e. Opequon Magisterial District P. DUANE �'..• Frederick Coun ty, Vrginia '*�-•-•�v....._Y N 1285 DATE: 5 August 1993 Cover Sheet Sheet 1 of 9 0, � gilbert w. Clifford & associates, inc. � ENGINEERS — LAND PLANNERS — SURVEYORS FQ J� 150—C Olde Greenwich Drive 200 North Cameron Street L4ND S Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401 Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 898-2115 (703) 667-2139 Curve Table CURVE RADIUS LENGTH TANGENT CHORD I BEARING DELTA 1 25.00' 36.29' 22.18' 33.18' S 18'27'39" E 83'09'46" 2 3 185.00' 83.28' 42.36 82.57' S 47'08'49" E 25'47'27" 4 125.00' 65.50' 33.52 64.76' S 49'15'50" E 30'01'29" 379.10' 55.72' 27.91 55.67' N 21'04'39" E 08'25'19" 5 185.00' 96.95' 49.61' 95.84' N 49'15'50" W 30'01'29" 6 125.00' 39.60' 19.97' 39.43' N 43'19'36" W 18'09'02" 7 8 25.00' 45.59' 32.27' 39.53' S 75'21'34" W 104'28'39" 9 155.00' 81.22' 41.57 80.30' N 49'15'50" W 30'01'29" 10 155.00' 88.27' 45.37' 87.08' N 50'33'55" W 32'37'41" 414.32' 64.05' 32.09 63.98' N 21'17'43' E 08'51'26" 11 354.10' 50.17' 25.13' 50.12' N 20'55'31" E 08'07'02" 12 t3 35.00' 54.98' 35.00' 49.50' " E 90'00'00" 14 35.00' 54.98' . " 90'00'00" 15 35.00' 54.98' 35.00' 49.50' 19 *163 " W 90'00'00" 16 439.32' 67.91' ' . . " E 08'51'26" 329.10' 44.61 22.34' 44.57' N" E j 817 18 389.32' 22.97' 11.49' 22.96 S W 03'22'48" 389.32' 37.22' 18.62' 37.20 2 2 W 5. 028'38" 35.00' 54.98' 35.00' 49.50 SW 90'00'00"19 • Denotes iron rod to be set on property line 35' from right-of-way line. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FRONT = 35' SIDE = 10' REAR = 25' LT$ 00 . R. DUANE BROWN N0, 1285 OL4NDSV Area Summary Area in Lots 6.6373 Acres Area in R/W 1.9884 Acres Total Area Subdivided 8.6257 Acres No. of Lots 19 Average Lot Size 15,217 Sq. Ft. Open Space Easement Provided (This Section) Total Open Space Easement Required to Date Total Open Space Easement Provided to Date 1.3180 Ac. 11.7290 Ac. 11.2648 Ac. All lots ore single family detached - traditional. All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights-of-way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along oil property lines. Fredericktowne Estates - Section 9 DATE: 5 August 1993 Curve Table Sheet 2 of 9 gilbert w, Clifford & associates, inc. ENGINEERS - LAND PLANNERS - SURVEYORS 150-C Olde Greemrich Drive Fredericksburg, Vlrginlo 22401 200 North Comerm Street (703) 898-2115 wlncheeter, Virginia 22601 (703) 667-2139 See Sheet 2 of 9 for Curve Table 189 188 q 0 N 18 0 187 n 10 U .a.Jrfax 60,�;�64.1.34 " W �66 y 184 12 (Se4 Sh�l 6 o f 9J SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FRONT= 35' SIDE = 10' REAR = 25' O���ALTN �jalr Off' P. DUANE� BROWN N0, 1285 F� Q- ND , � (See[74 of 9) b 04 J 176 �� —J a S 73_08'00" E o142.78• 169 Q I w 10 175 1 o I ^ I 10, 270 L4 C Sq. Fj ^+ N 170 z S 7308'00" E X8.13' 131.09' 0 10 I f 174 ! 15 10, 763 Sq. I � 171 S 6416 J 6— EZLAJ �� Q 17 3 13, 236 S Ft. ! I � C 1 172 r �y SeW ,t -.. l'I Tim ; y y 88 Eose &+t V —x`00, g 7' 4 34 5 5p • h,/#- 13 61.08' 179 of 9J rye' ti �C • Denotes iron rod to be set 159 on property line 35' from right—of—way line. All lots are single family detached — traditional. All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights—of—way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along all property lines. Fredericktowne Estates ti ,Section 9 DATE: 5 August 1993 SCALE: 1"=50' Sheet 3 of 9 gilbert w. clifford & associates, Inc. 150—C Olde CYsanrlch Orlve ENGINEERS — LAND PLANNERS -- SURVEYORS Fred-kksburg, Virginia 22401 200 North Cameron Street (703) 89&-2115 1A+d+eeter, Vlrglnk 22601 (703) 667-2139 Future Development S 0 • Denotes iron rod to be set on property line 35' from right—of—way line. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FRONT = 35' SIDE = 10' REAR = 25' 0 o� P. DUANE �P, A BROWN N0. 1285 LAND S�op 25, 0g , ¢ 18 •, � See Sheet 2 of 9 for Curve Table. I 19 9 11 16 \ \ 0 82 178 m 13, 116 Sq. Ft. S 73'08'00" E ` 166.15_ 0 177 LO I 12,02J Sq. Ft. 168 • _ S 73'08'00" E 154.47' �0 f ^ 176 11,147 Sq. Ft. I ^dry 169 3'08'00" W 142.78' 175 (See Sheet 3 of 9) 170 Wi 167 ib 0 V All lots are single family detached — traditional. All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights—of—way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along all property lines. Frederlcktorwne Estates — Section 9 DATE: 5 August 1993 I SCALE: 1"=50' I Sheet 4 of 9 gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. ENGINEERS — LAND PLANNERS — SURVEYORS 150—C Olde Greenwich Drive ree 200 North Cameron Street Frederidraburg, Virginia 22401 Winchester. Virginia St (703) 898-2115 (703) 667-2139 191 0+ 0 a o m \ 190 Co � N 0� U-)� r\ V q) O w,A Iq a 189 w 0� o m � � v � z • Denotes iron rod to be set on property line 35' from right—of—way line. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FRONT = 35' SIDE = 10' REAR = 25' 0 o� P. DUANE �P, A BROWN N0. 1285 LAND S�op 25, 0g , ¢ 18 •, � See Sheet 2 of 9 for Curve Table. I 19 9 11 16 \ \ 0 82 178 m 13, 116 Sq. Ft. S 73'08'00" E ` 166.15_ 0 177 LO I 12,02J Sq. Ft. 168 • _ S 73'08'00" E 154.47' �0 f ^ 176 11,147 Sq. Ft. I ^dry 169 3'08'00" W 142.78' 175 (See Sheet 3 of 9) 170 Wi 167 ib 0 V All lots are single family detached — traditional. All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights—of—way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along all property lines. Frederlcktorwne Estates — Section 9 DATE: 5 August 1993 I SCALE: 1"=50' I Sheet 4 of 9 gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. ENGINEERS — LAND PLANNERS — SURVEYORS 150—C Olde Greenwich Drive ree 200 North Cameron Street Frederidraburg, Virginia 22401 Winchester. Virginia St (703) 898-2115 (703) 667-2139 (See Spee See Sheet 2 of 9 for Curve Tobe • Denotes iron rod to be set on property line 35' from right-of-way line. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FRONT = 35' SIDE = 10' REAR = 25' r5o.yTKoP. DUANE BROWN N0. 1285 LAND 5 4 a zy Fazrfax (See Sheet ,/ 9) N 64'16'34' DTIV@ . W 600.97' 466.41 ' , 734.56' soR/w W N I�0 50' R/w 0 50'R/))r ilk C,) Ex. Fairfax D 61.08' Section 8 F 3 ►O � I" 179 159 14,149 Sq. Ft. ►o 0 LL1� J ►N 96.01, 75.0o' N 64'16'34" W S 64'16.34" �C- J-- 171.08' 7 , I 11.938 Sq Ft. (6ry1-0 � _ 34" w 129.50' 3 106 zap �t- i 59• Ft. 1) Section 4 f ^►h ►cV _ —Jx.50~ 5p 2O' !W N 64'16'34 " W Section 4 113 107 Ex. Montgomery Circle 50' RIW All lots are single family detached - traditional. All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights-of-way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along all property lines. Freuericktowne Estates , Section 9 DATE: 5 August 1993 SCALE: 1 "=50' Sheet 5 of 9 gilbert w. clifford & associates, Inc. 150-C Olde Greenwich Drive ENGINEERS - LAND PLANNERS - SURVEYORS Frr'*"barq, Virginia 22401 200 North Cameron Skreet (70.3) 898-2175 W7ncheeter. Wginla 22601 (703) 667-2139 See Sheet 2 of 9 for Curve Table. • N 64'16'34" W (See Sheet 9 of 9) Fairfax Drive ti 60' R/W (See Sheet 7 ) 600.97' 46 6.41 (70.26') 1510.26' (80.00' I EDrainage 12 asement O; �J ., . 185 112 184 I / C); n 22, 322 Sq' Ft. 3; 237 Sq. Ft, l Open Space Q Cr N/F C)Easement (0 in Castello, Keller LLJ N Q LLJI & Keller IOO I I co C) N, ���- I �► I I N� z L I (67.37') 147137' (80.00') rn (67,37') 64'16'34" E 237.37' 90 00' — — (170.005- U,tn 183 I 11, 17 845 Sq. Ft. Open Space Easement J N/F _ S 64'1634" E — Blair L11,11 (92.17') — _ 242.17' �j 1`,0'00)--♦— rn^ 18, 325 Sq. Ft. I ^ Irn (98.80') — N 64'16'34" W— — (150.00') — 248.80' 134.56' W M z 96 Al Denotes iron rod to be set on property line 35' from right-of-way line. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FRONT = 35' SIDE = 10' REAR = 25' rL-Til p� F16 DUANE 49 B� N yi N0, 1285 1-4ND 401 I I Sg 0 29 rr W Fred. Est. — Sec. 4 50.'20' Ex. Montgomery Circle 50' RIW All lots are single family detached - traditional. All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights-of-way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along all property lines. WP -Z3 rt7 a P-;0-1 L- f � ram Til.-. J- 4- — C-1 _ 1 • /11 L L �.Uit-llt .AkE,UVV11C 1.L:JCQGCb ^ Section J DATE: 5 August 1993 I SCALE: 1"=50' I Sheet 6 of 9 gilbert w. Clifford & associates, Inc. ENGINEERS - LAND PLANNERS - SURVEYORS 150—C aide Greenwich Drive Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401 (703) 898-2115 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 667-2139 NIF Bell N Nkhals gee Sheet 2 of 9 for Curve To6le, (See Sheet 8 of 9) 1 190 ,4S23:08'00" E 200.00' _ (150.00') J N/P Terry Open Space Easement S soo° W 00 189 LnI gee Sheet 2 of 9 for Curve To6le, (See Sheet 8 of 9) 1 190 ,4S23:08'00" E 200.00' _ (150.00') J 186 Z /c .--L°% 22,317 Sq. Ft. N 187 o� 00' r3 ,837 Sq. f ey Ft. , �' �i i t� 0 1 61,51 1 F'airf 1; 6 See t ) °x'°9e Eoseri�ent �19 . SJ"Y9 0/ gJ ax DI'1 See Sheet 6 of g J • Denotes iron rod to be set on property line 35' from right—of—way line. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FRONT = 35' SIDE = 10' REAR = 25' P. DUANE c� BROWN w'y N0. 12V5 LaND sv¢�� spy saq;tO •oa. R/�r 'Y sealer E-as��r All lots are single family detached — traditional All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights—of—way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along all property lines. Frederlektowne Estates — Section 9 DATE: 5 August 1993 SCALE: 1"=50' Sheet 7 of 9 gilbert w. Clifford & associates, inC. ENGINEERS - LAND PLANNERS - SURVEYORS iso -e Olds Greenwich Drive Fredericksburg, Vfrglnlo 22401 200 North Comeron Street (703) 898-2115 wnchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 667-2139 Open Space Easement 189 p ry 23,324 Sq. Ft. (118.31') S 73'08'DO" E-- (176.16') -- } 188 o I �Opp , ,� 20, 964 Sq. Ft. N �v. (93.54')-= z0 S 69'45'" ��` (93 12 E .54') se Easemt 01en LLI / 191.47 x(97 933) 29. 16'x_ (1 9 2'). �- 101:65' N aI .� LnI Open space / ^1 Easement i� �u 20' 01-0,07a9e Easement�- / $F 186 Z /c .--L°% 22,317 Sq. Ft. N 187 o� 00' r3 ,837 Sq. f ey Ft. , �' �i i t� 0 1 61,51 1 F'airf 1; 6 See t ) °x'°9e Eoseri�ent �19 . SJ"Y9 0/ gJ ax DI'1 See Sheet 6 of g J • Denotes iron rod to be set on property line 35' from right—of—way line. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FRONT = 35' SIDE = 10' REAR = 25' P. DUANE c� BROWN w'y N0. 12V5 LaND sv¢�� spy saq;tO •oa. R/�r 'Y sealer E-as��r All lots are single family detached — traditional All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights—of—way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along all property lines. Frederlektowne Estates — Section 9 DATE: 5 August 1993 SCALE: 1"=50' Sheet 7 of 9 gilbert w. Clifford & associates, inC. ENGINEERS - LAND PLANNERS - SURVEYORS iso -e Olds Greenwich Drive Fredericksburg, Vfrglnlo 22401 200 North Comeron Street (703) 898-2115 wnchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 667-2139 See Sheet 2 of 9 for Curve Table. Future Development S 73 08'00 200.00 r (1so.00') (50.00') o of to o 0 191 ui to ^ to n N 15, 000 Sq. Ft. 6 y (50.00')w g 73'08'00" E 200.00' o 0 190 ZN 15, 000 Sq. Ft. L4 � _— N 73-a8'—oa" W J (50.00') 200.00' (150.00') / 189 (Seo Sneer 7 of 9) HIM, S60- 25. 25 a�09, Denotes iron rod to be set on property line 35' from right—of—way line. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FRONT = 35' SIDE = 10' REAR = 25' Ofi�r o� P. MANE 7, BROW NO. 1285 F 4 � LAND SV r o 5 177 1N ,^ ZJ CN n� V O d 176 All lots are single family detached — traditional. All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights—of—way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along all property lines. Frederlcktowne Estates , Section 9 DATE: 5 August 1993 1 SCALE: 1"=50' 1 Sheet 8 of 9 gilbert w. clifford k associates, inc. ENGINEERS — LAND PLANNERS -- SURVEYORS 150-0 aide Greenwich Drive Fredaridnsbarg, Virginia 22401 (703) 696-2116 200 Horth Cameron street Winchester, Virginia 2260t (703) 667-2139 Lo t 5.2 �'4�� Fredericktowne Subdivision Section Three 9 Ov = 0 Lot 50 0 ' Fredericktowne Subdivision Section Three • Denotes iron rod to be set on property line 35' from right—of—way line. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FRONT = 35' SIDE _ ]0' REAR = 25' P. DUANEJ0 BROWN ' r' N0. 1285 LAND Sop Q - See Sheet 2 of 9 for Curve 7'oble � gas Z XA /y 1'lD� 64y63 4 eon 647- 00 47Coio Z0 s All lots are single family detached — traditional. All lots are subject to a 20' Slope & Drainage Easement along all rights—of—way and a 10' Utility & Drainage Easement along all property lines. rrederlcktowne Estates , Section 9 DATE: 5 August 1993 1 SCALE: 1-=50' 1 Sheet 9 of 9 I gilbert w. Clifford & associates, Inc. ENGINEERS — LAND PLANNERS — SURVEYORS 150—C Olds Greenwich Orive Frederkkvburg, Mrg nia 22401 200 North Cameron Street (703) 896-2115 Uneheater, Wginia 22601 (703) 667-2139 P/C Review Date: 9/01/93 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #009-93 MARSHALL A. RITENOUR Cottage Occupation Fencing contracting LOCATION: On the north side of Fairfax Pike (Route 277) 2-1/2 miles east of Stephens City. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER 86--A-167 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE• Zoned RA (Rural Areas) Land use - residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) Land use - residential and vacant PROPOSED USE: To operate a fencing contracting business out of the attached garage. REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Vir inia Department of Transportation: Location is adequate for an entrance. Fire Marshal: Access to all structures must be maintained at all times. Approval of this CUP should have no significant impact on Fire and Rescue resources. The applicant must be informed that burning of construction debris is not permitted on this site at any time. Inspections Department: Building shall comply with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and Section 303, Use Group B (Business) of the BOCA National Building 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 Facilities. Permit required shall be change of use on building or section of buildings used Page 2 or visited by the public. Health Department: Approval of proposal with no increased water flow. Planning Department: This use would qualify as a cottage occupation as long as it is carried on wholly within the residence/garage and is not carried on at this location by more than one person other than members of the family residing on the premises. The applicant has asked if it would be possible for any fencing materials to be stored outdoors if they are screened from view and if it would be possible to allow off-site employees to park their vehicles at the applicant's residence. Staff advised that these questions could be addressed by the Planning Commission. There are other residences on the properties immediately to the west of this property which could be somewhat impacted by this cottage occupation, so it is important to apply conditions that will insure against undue impacts to those properties. STAFFRECOMMENDATIONS FOR SEPTEMBER 1. 1993 PC MEETING: Approval, with the following conditions: 1. Hours of operation shall be restricted to between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 2. All cutting and assembly of materials shall be done within the completely enclosed building. 3. Storage of materials and parking for .off-site employees shall be limited as prescribed by the Frederick County Planning Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION OF SEPTEMBER -1, 1993: Tabled for 30 days to allow Commissioners to visit the site. Concerns were raised about such a business being able to operate within the necessary limits, including the proposed limits on the hours of operation. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OCTOBER 6, 1993: Approval, with the following (revised) conditions: 1. Hours of operation shall be restricted to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 2. All cutting and assembly of materials shall be done within the completely enclosed building. 3. Any materials stored outdoors shall be completely screened Page 3 from view with a solid fence. Outdoor storage shall be limited to 120 square feet. 4. Parking for off-site employees shall be limited to three vehicles, which must be kept behind the residence. /tel -J4 Submittal Deadline.l t P/C Meeting g BCS Meeting APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA I. Applicant (The applicant if the ,/ owner other) NAME:I�R.SNAGG A 7C�=rF. o�cR ADDRESS: /z��-_FA2RFAX ��KE GJ.vrrFPcsr� !/,� 2 21,43 TELEPHONE 2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties in interest of the property: �r1% c -y Alvo A01 cJ7rs7-AL .t ;?sn!Fyo"X - CYZL.3� 3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and include the route number of your road or street) /92 s A/• , 2'7% (2 -CA r" $E =,E CA RA C 8- wr rH AR^aye vtc 4. The property has a road frontage of _ 9/ feet and a depth of 70/ feet and consists of /, acres. (Please be exact) 5. The property is owned by Lei -5- z- as evidenced by deed fromrecorded - in deed book no. -T_ on (previous' owner)[ou;s (��4,;�/2L ✓2. page (- -� as recorded in the records of the Clerk of , the Circuit Court, County of Frederick. 6. 14 -Digit Property Identification Magisterial District S Current Zoning QA. !Zu 7. Adjoining Property: USE North _- East �••eE South TEs2ae',v�G West ZONING Q A Ccs-) •i? a (141 itJ_ / 1iy8) 113) I /4;p r S. The type of use proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept. before completing) C011 -A66 GY-GV�ATt o N — FENGt NG -r CflN (L�G� �t.rC� 9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be constructed: MtJ67 10. The following are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to both sides, rear and in front of (also across street from) the property where requested use will be conducted. (Continue -on back if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this application: (PLEASE LIST COMPLETE 14 -DIGIT NUMBER.) NAME /1/c. s'S�L?o�T fuDy �4Ni✓ Address 23o7C .7. 5-- F E'er Lv 22,:'-5-3o– GProperty Property ID# r Address -7-0 2- S - 7d. S Property ID# Fu1_To_�A-RrpuR cif., T ,e. Address /?T Z .l ox 12 S' C T ;Pvc.iL 49 G,34' Property ID# Address 121�'- f-7;2r4x 7z << jVW--7'7'j5 o Pro erty p ID# Address %�`' a �E ZS) �• L,Q,v= Property ID# A /G Address Property ID# 4 9 12. Additional comments, if any: �,Q ,,,,Ry yrE q�X � AS A:�R A,r 3sryrvEs;s l�PuL,D �� OFF -I GES !(�oRfc , /flarT I�oKK Ss 7lodE FR C�.s7'o.*+ .r 47- XVdre i��°ts,DEnJcE �CGds=cn1ALLy BKrG� �r.CkETT FtNCE .1X,rs4,j-r ?v TE �".+R.+cF. oR .Iy 11 -le -6 /T -Cur 3Mx2xj oR X7-xerra (!�'Pv.4.r d 1=,✓.r A;,aA-rc 01VF�v.•,Es Q�ro �o vE r,v ZZM44CE -Sry. !J � E �,Rx .�us-�,,,s�.�a�-Ea Our �gDKARES TFirJ T� i�i�.c4od 61,y rz,a r -.r (072 A so u,v r mF /YJ,o rERs.t c /rd1'T 9r �cAtso,J� Alos r ?=c, a ae Soa SyTE.0 . J'MTS-2Z. I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the governing body of Frederick County, Virginia to allow the use described in this application. I understand thatthe sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven (7) days prior to the first public hearing and maintained so as to be visible until after the Board of Supervisors' public hearing. Your application for a Conditional Use Permit authorizes any member of the Frederick County Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors or Planning and Development Department to inspect your property where the proposed use will be conducted. Signature of Applicant Signature of Owner Owners' Mailing Address Owners' Telephone No. C7o3) GGS-.t9o8 TO BE COMPLETED BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: USE CODE: RENEWAL DATE: ;e - ,V,4 1 z6 0/ P4 -de IdPC 4ee*NBt '.-+rwtt Srv�a kSaD Lir, �41..i�/Z CUP X009-93 PIN # 86-A-167 MARSHALL RITENOUR FREDERICK COUNTY LOCATION MAP P/C review date: 10/06/93 REZONING APPLICATION #003-93 WOODSIDE ESTATES To Rezone 28+ acres From RA (Rural Areas) To RP (Residential Performance) LOCATION: West and adjacent to Double Church Road (Rt. 641), approximately 0.25 miles south of the Intersection of Fairfax Pike (Route 277) and Double Church Road, behind Jamesway Shopping Center MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 86-A-20 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas), present use -vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: RP Residential performance and RA Rural areas zoning, and residential, agricultural and church uses. PROPOSED USE: Single family detached homes. REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation• No objection to the rezoning of this property. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trig Generation Manual Forth Edition for review. Any work performed on the Statefs right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Fire Marshal: Stephens City Fire and Rescue Co. has commented on this application. Based on 1992 statistics, fire and rescue responses to this subdivision will average 1 response per 10 households annually. Further related issues will be addressed on site plans. Stephens City Fire & Rescue Co.: Page 2 Woodside Rezoning S.C. F & R Co., acknowledges the proffer offer. Request this offer be evaluated by the Planning Dept. against the Impact Module currently in place and have the Planning Dept. respond back to me as soon as possible. Sanitation Authority: Water and sewer capacity are available to serve this site.. County Engineer: Stormwater management has been planned for the proposed development. We recommend that runoff coefficients, "C" valves at 0.35 and 0.5 be adopted for the pre and post development respectively. Also, the planned development should include improving the drainage ditches along Double Church Road (Route 64)1 to accommodate the on- site runoff Parks & Recreation: See attached note from James Doran dated 8/12/93. Town of Stephens City: Traffic impacts on Fairfax Pike (Route 277) and I-81 intersection will increase with the development of acreage already zoned RP Planning The parcel proposed to be rezoned is located within the Urban Development Area and has access to sewer and water and there is sufficient capacity to serve the proposed development. The application states that 84 single family dwellings would be constructed on lots of between ten and twelve thousand square feet. The Institute of Traffic Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, projects ten vehicle trips per day for single family dwellings, or 844 trips. This would be an increase of nearly fifty percent over the current 1,793 vehicle trips per day on Double Church Road (Route 641). There is no information provided on the resulting level of service at the intersection of Routes 641 and 277. An analysis of the impacts to the intersection should be preformed by a qualified traffic engineer. Though the application states that there would be 84 lots developed, the proffer statement says that a total of 66 lots would be created. This discrepancy needs to be addressed. The applicant has also proffered $2,500.00 per lot for schools to be paid "...at the time that each lot is sold and shall be payable out of the settlement proceeds concerning said lot.', Staff feels this would be difficult to enforce. It is customary for such payments to come due at the issuance of building permits. Page 3 Woodside Rezoning Y'P'q CS The impact model indicates that the per unit costs to the county would be $3,974.00 which is $1,474.00 over the amount proffered. The model also indicates a per unit impact on fire and rescue of $20.00 which is far exceeded by the $200.00 per unit proffered. (These numbers are based on 84 units being constructed, the costs per unit if 66 units are constructed is $3,850.00 and $23.00 respectively.) Location - The parcel adjoins the Meadows subdivision to the rear, and is roughly 500 feet to the south of the Jamesway Plaza. The property to the south and east is zoned RA and is relatively open with scattered residential uses. Site Suitability - The site is quite level, there appears to be no steep slopes. The existing pond is shown on the general development plan as being in the center of the open space. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 10/06/93 PC MEETING: Given the Impact Model indicates a negative financial impact to the County for schools which is not offset by the proffers, the staff recommends denial of the request. 2'�q'A�0'- -:;_I aA'e— (fop '9 , -/ — I ft ) WC9 VV, ro G l ,ass— -0 f -M JW e A CJ- 6 It, -'�- V REQUEST FOR REZONING COMt+]ZNTS a \ Frederick County Parks & Recreation Department ATTN: James Doran, Director P.O. Box 601, Winchester, Virginia 22601° (703 ) 665-5678 -0? The Frederick County Parks & Recreation Department is located on the second floor of the Frederick County Administration Building, 9 Court Square, Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form. Applicantts name, address and phone number: am Bo n to h ns Ci V 22 703 869-1800 A en : G.W. Clifford & Assog. 200 N. Cameron St. - Winchester Va22 0 1 A n:T m P i 7 67-21 39 Name of development and/or description of the request: Woodside Estates Location: West &,A iac-nt to Rte. 641 aprnroximately 0.2S mile- uth of the Intersection Qf Rt 1 277 & Rte. 641 behind Jamesway Shopoinsq Center. Parks & Recreation Department Comments: See Attached Parks S4nature and Date: TO PARKS - 8/12/93 THIS FORM TO THE AGENT.) NMICH TO APPLI NT It is our responsibility to complete this fozm s �,.,,,,r,�..,__ a�u uT.. �,uy Gl l.G lx aJ Possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also, please attach a copy of your application form, impact analysis, location map and all other pertinent information. WOODSIDE ESTATES Parks and Recreation Department Comments: Open Space to be provided has not been identified on plan. Residents from this development will use the regional parks as league and program participants. They will participate in classes and tournaments held at the parks. Families will picnic at the shelters, swim at the pools, play on the playgrounds and in the open space provided, paddleboat and fish in the lakes, and participate in an array of different non -structured activities. I would suggest that the impact model be used to determine the potential impact that this development may have on the county's park system. REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning Staff: Zoning Amendment Number Submittal Deadline PC Hearing Date Date Received "'e Application Date J7' BOS Hearing Date The fol l owing information shall be provided by the appli cant : 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: �,T_asbo. Inc. & Fred L Glaize, III Address: P.O_ Box 6 Stephens Civ VA 22655 Telephone: (703) 869-1800 2. Owner: Name: -Shirlgy Q. Ritenour Address: 528 D 1 h r h Road StenhenS City, Va 226 5 In addition, the Code of Virginia allows us to request full dis- closure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be re- zoned: Names L. Bowman Fred L. Glaiz._ III I c 3. Zoning Change: It is re f quested that the zoning aj be changed from RA to RP _ 4. Location: Thec property is located at (give exact direct'r ns): West & Adjacent to Rte 641 approximately 0 25 miles south of the Intersection of Rte 277 & Rte, 641 behind Jamesway Shopping -Center, 5. Parcel Identification: 21 Digit Tax Parcel Number: 86-A-20 6. Magisterial District: Opeauon 7. Property Dimensions: The dimensions of the property to be rezoned. Total Area: 28 Acres + The area of each portion to be rezoned to a different zoning d_i.stl.Luu cate o - g category should be noted: 28 Acres Rezoned to RP Frontage: 361 Feet Dept: 1000 ± Feet 8. Deed Reference: the following deed: Conveyed from: Deed Page: The ownership of the property is referenced by Deed Book Number: Evelyn Leml_ey 493 29 9. Proposed Use: It is proposed that the property will be put to the following uses. Single Family Detached 10 -Checklist: Check the following items that have with this application. Location map Survey or plat Deed to property Statement verifying taxes Sign receipt Agency Comments Fees Impact Analysis Statement Proffer Statement 11. Signature: n Vii.- incl,ud��d DECeC I (we), the undersigned, do hereby mak 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 materi als are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. Applicant: Owner: 12. Representation: If the application is being represented by someone other than the owner or application and if questions about the application and if questions about the application should be directed to that representative, please list the following. Representative's Name: Charles E. Maddox, Jr - P.E. Representative's Phone Number: 703 667-213 Owners of the Property adjoining the land will be notified of the public hearing. For the purpose of this application, adjoining property is any property abutting the requested property on the side or rear or any prop- erty directly across the road from the requested property. The applicant is required to obtain the following information on each adjoining property including the 21 -digit tax parcel identification number which may be ob- tained from the office of the Commissioner of Revenue. Name: Randall R. Ritenour Address: Rt. 1,Box 370-A Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 86 -A -20A Name: Valley Bible Church, Turstees Address: 5615 Ridgefield Ave Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 86 -A -20A Name: E.R. Neff Excavating, Inc. Address: P.O. Box 1027 Stephens City, Va 22655 f Property I.D.#: 86-A-75 Name: James L. Bowman Address: P.O. Box 6 Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 86-A-72 Name: Joel 0. & Lucita M. Stowe Address: 2725 Valley Ave. Winchester, Va 22601 Property I.D.#: 86-A-21 —a Name: Charles W_ Racey Address: 387 Ewings Lane Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85-A-140 Name: Anthony C. Dixon Address: 5598 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-22 Name: Claude C. Moran, Jr. Address: 130 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-23 Name: Mildred Hawthorne Address: 5576 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-24 Name: George R. Rotenberry Address: 231 Moore Dr., S.E. Vienna, Va 22180 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-25 Name: Alberto D. Pinto Address: 5560 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City,4Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-26 Mama: Beverley E. & Helen M. Teets Address: 138 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-27 Name: James T. & Jevvifer J. Alkire Address: 5544 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-28 Name: Betty G. Williams Address: 5536 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-29 Name: Calvin Reid Tomblin, Jr. Address: 5528 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-30 Name: Judith C. Curbow Address: 5520 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-31 Name: Shelby Frazier, c/o Shelby Knight Address: P.O. Box 703 Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-32 Name: David M. Lewis Address: 150 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-33 Name: David L. & Gail F. Shanholtz Address: 152'Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-34 Name: Eva M. Bly Address: 154 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-35 Name: Winter L. Smith Address: 5466 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-36 Name: Gary F. Allen Address: 5458 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-37 Name: Neil T. Allen Address: 5450 Meadowbrook Dr. Stephens City, Va 22655 Property I.D.#: 85B-1-38 3 AMENDMENT FREDERICK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE Approvals: Planning Commission Ortnh,-r (, 1993 Board of Supervisors AN ORDINANCE AIMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP #003-93 of WOODSIDE ESTATES WHEREAS, Rezoning application #003-93 of Woodside Estates was submitted to rezone 28 acres, located west and adjacent to Route 641, approximately 0.25 miles south of the intersection of Route 277 and Route 641, behind the Jamesway Shopping Center, and designated by PIN 86- A-20 in the Opequon Magisterial District, from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance); and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this application on October 6, 1993; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this application on , 1993; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, convenience, and in good zoning practice; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, That Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning Ordinance, is amended to revise the Zoning District Map to change 28 acres, designated as PIN #86-A-20, from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) as described by the application and plat submitted, subject to the following conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and property owner: a� July 28, 00 „F 5 PROFFERS � ► �C WOODSIDE ESTATES REZONING APPLICATION 1. Preliminary Matters. Pursuant to Section 15.1-491.1 et sea., of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and the provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance with respect to conditional zoning, the undersigned applicant hereby proffers that in the event the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall approve Rezoning Application 0 11 for the rezoning of 28.5 acres from RA zoning District to the RP Zoning District (the subject property) development of the subject property shall be done in conformity with the Frederick County Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances and in substantial conformity with the terms and conditions set forth herein, except to the extent that such terms and conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the Applicant and such be approved in accordance with Virginia law. In the event that such rezoning is not granted tY;.!en these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and of no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon the Applicant or their legal successors and assigns. 2. Generalized Development Plan. The development of the subject property and the submission of any Master Development Plan will provide for single family lots of 10,000 to 12,000 square feet with a total of 66 lots, 25t open space and curb and gutter as set forth preliminarily on the lot layout attached hereto marked Exhibit One and made a part hereof. 3. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development on Schools, The Applicant shall pay to the County's general fund the sum of Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500.00) for each. lot or parcel which is approved for development for single family residences. Payment of such sums shall be made at the time that each lot is sold and shall be payable out of the settlement proceeds concerning said lot. 4. Contribution to Fire and Rescue Services. The Applicant agrees that it shall donate the sum of Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) to the Stephens City Fire and Rescue Company for each lot approved, which money shall be paid at the time of the final platting of the approved lots. JASBO, INC. and FRED L. GLAIZF., III, Applicants F er, AGent -2- STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE, CITY OF WINCHESTER, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this �— day of (::)( 1 L., - , 1993, by Billy J. Tisinger, Agent or sbo, Inc. and Fred L. Glaize, III, Applicants. My commission expires, y otary Public -3- w 27.81 Acres Type: Cluster 100 to 12,000 sf Lots) t: 66 i open Space Required: 25% Other: Curb & Gutter Required ractlRt 64 Cluster Lot Layout County of Frederick, Virginia Scale: 1' . 200' gimes W. cfiff"d socimcs, inc. This resolution was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard G. Dick W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Charles W Orndoff, Sr. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage. Passed this day of , 1993. Beverly J. Sherwood James J. Longerbeam Robert M. Sager A Copy Attest John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator °6 �' 15A J> 47 ,636 1 14 Q D1 13 02 p3 D4 15 It 12 16 Rt. 277 18A esn Rt. iD66 N 0 1� � 18 i 140 o� Me 77 20A L : 20B 75 74 20 70 a� 72 21B 21 WAS 73 72B 7 2 A 22 J1 71A 81 332--343 78 'EZONING: -#003--93 Tax Map . Number: 8.6 --*A-20 Woodside Estates _(from RA to RP) COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Planner II RE: Amendments To Residential Performance (RP) Densities DATE: September 21, 1993 The Frederick County Planning Commission conducted an informal discussion regarding RP densities during the regular meeting of September 1, 1993. During that discussion, the Planning Commission expressed concern regarding the existing allowable gross densities for multifamily developments. The Planning Commission felt that the proposed amendments were a good start to the problems associated with densities for multifamily developments. The Planning Commission suggested that staff should advertise the proposed amendments for public meeting and also suggested that the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee continue to research overall gross densities. Included with this memorandum is a sample resolution and the proposed amendments. The amendments apply to the sections of the Residential Performance District pertaining to the statement of intent and gross density. The proposed amendment to the statement of intent requires a revision to the existing language. The proposed amendment to the section on gross density provides new language that is an addendum to that section. Staff asks that the Planning Commission review the proposed amendments and consider them during the regular meeting of October 6, 1993. Please contact our department if you have any questions or concerns regarding this agenda item. 9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 AMENDMENT Approvals: PLANNING CONEVIISSION October 6, 1993 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 165, ZONING W71EREAS, An ordinance to amend Chapter 165, Zoning, of the Frederick County Code, Article VI, RP, Residential Performance District, Section 165-58, .Intent, and Section 165-62.1, Gross Density, was referred to the Planning Commission on October 6, 1993; and, RTIEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this ordinance adoption on October 6, 1993; and, W ZER AS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this ordinance adoption on 1993; and WIEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the adoption of this ordinance to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, convenience, and in good zoning practice; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors as follows: That Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, Article VI, RP, Residential Performance District, Section 165-58, intent, and Section 165-62.1, Gross Density, is amended as described on the following attachment: AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 165 ARTICLE VI RP Residential Performance District 165-58 Intent C. It is the intent of this Article to allow a mixture of housing types on the land within an approved master development plan. Within this Article, the permitted multifamily development percentages are identified. Multifamily housing types are allowed only when they adjoin similar uses or are properly separated from different uses. The preliminary master development plan shall specify the amount and percentages of all proposed housing types. The preliminary master development plan requires specific approval of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. 165-62.1 Multifamily Housing A. The permitted gross density of lots that are ten (10) acres or less in size may include more than fifty percent (50%) multifamily housing types. B. The permitted gross density of lots that are more than ten (10) acres and less than fifty (50) acres in size shall be permitted to contain up to fifty percent (50%) multifamily housing types. C. The permitted gross density of lots that are over fifty (50) acres in size shall be permitted to contain up to forty percent (40%) multifamily housing types. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage. Passed this _ day of , 1993. A Copy Attest John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703 / 678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Application Fees DATE: September 22, 1993 This item has been advertised for public hearing At your regular meeting on September 1, 1993, staff presented a proposal to increase application fees for Conditional Use Permits, Board of Zoning Appeals variance and appeal applications and to establish a fee schedule for Minor Site Plans. The background information that was presented at that time is attached. Staff was instructed to bring this proposal to the Commission for public hearing. The agreed upon fee schedule is as follows: 1. Board of Zoning Appeals Applications (Variance or Appeal) -$250.00. 2. Conditional Use Permits - $500.00 3. Minor Site Plans - $500.00 WWM/slk attachment 9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 9-/ -Y3 A2 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of PIanning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703 / 678-0682 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Planning Commission Wayne Miller, Zoning IV,"/\ BZA, CUP and Site Plan Fees DATE: August 19, 1993 An average actual cost projection for Board of Zoning Appeals variance applications and conditional use permits are attached for your information. These costs were established using the actual cost of the activity and the per hour wage of employees. There are many hidden costs and costs that are difficult to quantify. We also need to address the fee for a minor site plan revision. VARIANCE APPLICATIONS AND APPEALS TO THE BZA: Current charge for a BZA application is $45.00. The average actual cost for a variance application is $249.36. Staff recommends a $250.00 charge for a variance application and an appeal to the BZA. Previous review fee schedules did not reflect a cost for an appeal. Appeals require basically the same action as a regular application. The Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) recommends the $250.00 fee for both a variance and an appeal. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Current charge for a CUP is $75.00. The average actual cost of a CUP application is $1031.00. Staff recommended a $500.00 fee for a CUP application and the DRRS also recommends raising this fee to $500.00. MINOR SITE PLAN REVISION: It has been suggested that Frederick County create a separate application fee for minor revisions to site plans. The current fee schedule requires all site plan applicants to pay a $1000.00 base fee plus additional cost for developed acreage. A property owner that needs to increase the size of his/her business by 400 square feet is charged the same fee as a property owner that constructs a 200,000 square foot warehouse. At their April meeting the DRRS suggested that a separate review fee was needed for a minor site plan revision and further requested that staff define a minor revision. Staff suggests the following: 9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchestcr, VA 22604 Page 2 Review Fee Memo August 19, 1993 MINOR SITE PLAN REVISION Any improvement to an existing developed site that comprises no more than 20% additional structural area.. In no case shall a minor revision to a site plan exceed 5, 000 square feet. The 20% expansion limit would allow a smaller business of 2,000 square feet to create an additional 400 square feet (20' X 20') of useable area. Staff believes that this type of addition would be minor. However, a 200,000 square foot warehouse could expand an additional 40,000 square feet under this language. Staff does not believe that this is a minor revision or addition. Therefore, staff has proposed a cut-off point of 5,000 square feet. The DRRS concurs with this position and recommends a fee of $500.00 for a minor site plan revision. SUMMARY: The above items are presented for discussion and a recommendation for possible public hearing. The DRRS and the staff recommend the following: Variance Application or Appeal: $250.00 Conditional Use Permit: $500.00 Minor Site Plan Revision: $500.00 WWM/slk attachment BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AVERAGE COST PROJECTION The following costs are considered average for the normal processing of t:Zree applications: Pay for BZA Members $150.00 Advertising (Mo. Avg) $153.71 Clerical Staff $228.36 Planning Staff $216.00 Total $748.07 With the total cost for three applications being $748.07, the cost per application would be $249.36. The following is a list of the necessary items that were figured into the cost information: Brief applicant on procedures Brief applicant on completion of application form Accept application and issue sign Collect fees Set up application Staff visitation to site Preparation of staff report and recommendations Prepare newspaper ad Fax ads to newspapers Prepare adjoiner notifications Mail adjoiner letters Prepare and coordinate agenda Run copies for agenda Assemble agendas Mail agendas Set up meeting room Take meeting minutes Staff person attends meetings Prepare minutes Send approval/denial letters Enter into data base There are many hidden costs - some of which are: Cost of vehicle for staff visit to site Postage for letters and agendas Filina and continuing filing space Phone calls inquiring about applications Variance Application Fees Various Jurisdictions Dollars 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 a 0 U E c� c� 0 cc Fee- 's of 3/1/93 0 U w 0 C: c� 0 A, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AVERAGE COST PROJECTION The following costs are considered processing of five applications: Pay for Commission Members Advertising (Mo. Avg.) Clerical Staff Planning Staff (50 Hrs.) Total average for the normal $2160.00 $326.88 $694.12 $1975.00 $5156.00 With the total cost for five applications being $5156.00, the cost per application would be $1031.00. The following is a list of the necessary items that were figured into the cost information: Brief applicant on procedures Brief applicant on completion of application forms Accept application and issue sign Collect fees Set up application Staff visitation to site Preparation of staff report and recommendations Prepare newspaper ad Fax ad to newspapers Prepare adjoiner notifications Mail adjoiner letters Prepare and coordinate agenda Run copies for agenda Assemble agendas Mail agendas Set up meeting room Take meeting minutes Staff Members attend meeting (3) Prepare minutes Prepare recommendation for Board of Supervisors Forward agenda material for BOS Agenda Send approval/denial letters Enter into data base There are many hidden costs - some of which are: Salary of BOS members Cost of vehicle for staff visit to site Postage for letters and agendas Filing and maintaining files Phone calls inquiring about applications Electricity for lights and air conditioning/heating Actual duplicating costs Conditional Use Permit Fees Various Jurisdictions 4 3 2 1 0 Dollars (Thousands) Fee >' of 3/1/93 �J' � P j +-- .......... ......:: ......... ... ......... ...... ...................... ............ ........ ..... . ......................... ......... .......:...:.:.:..::.:::..:.:..........................:.::.:..:..:.:.:.' _ : ....... ........... .. n ...................... . ... ........ ..... ... U :t .. t....1..:!:. '. :'.�::: .. . A U k O j 6 a1 M E (0 & :3 O Z3 ..._1 I a I 0 U- Q Fee >' of 3/1/93 �J' � P j +-- Z � U C0 U U U C0 O O O M E (0 & :3 O Z3 ..._1 < 0 U- Q Fee >' of 3/1/93 �J' � P j � U C0 0 a O �O _ tll = O ..._1 0 U E .cu U CL O 0 E U O 1 M t COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703/678-0682 To: ers �os From: Robert W. Watkins, Planning Director iwl Date: Wednesday, September 22, 1993 Subject: Informational Brochures Enclosed in your agenda is a series of informational brochures that the Planning Staff has put together. The brochures cover how to go about obtaining a building permit, how to subdivide RA land, the procedures involved in rezoning land, the procedures involved in applying for a variance or seeking an appeal, how to develop land in the suburban zoning districts and how to obtain a conditional use permit. These brochures have been created to aid the general public in understanding regulations enforced by Frederick County and the options they may have where these regulations are concerned. The Planning Staff welcomes any comments or suggestions you can offer regarding these brochures. sts4hat-yeti-make a eco=Mandatinn to thn R �. Please call this office if you have any questions. RWW/slk 9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 OCT- 4-93 MON ITS - 53 LEX I NI -Tufa FRO P . 02 "MMONDepartment � VSE#ALTH of VIRGINIA RoeaAT 8. STFI"E. M.O. �IC.�Jepa (I�I� en oil Health c� ENVIRONUEN7AI,ENOIN4€RIN¢FIELD QFFICg COMAAISSIoNEA Office of Water Programs - 1295puTHAANtlOIPMSTRBET V i �VfNr,TQN. VIRGINIA $4450.2328 PMO?NFt (703)443.7/70 October 4, 1893 SUBJECT: Frederick County Water - The Summit Mr. John Lewis Lewis and Au0ates 45 East Boscawen Street, Suite 100 Winchester, VA k601-4725 Dear Mr. Lewis: This office has reviewed the information you forwarded regarding the water and sewerage facilities for Section 1 B of the Summit. Based on our review, we have the following comments,- 1. The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Office of Water Programs (QWP), Virginia Department of Health, are separate agencies. The riview and approval of water projects are generally the sole responsibility of the 6WP while sewerage project review and approval are an interagency responsibility. The ..OWP makes appropriate recommendations on the technical adequacy of the sewerage project design to the DEQ, who takes final action on the project based on their assessment of the ability of the receiving facility to handle the additional low and meet effluent iifnitations. 2. Review of Summit water usage records for the period of March, 1992 thoubii August, 1993 indicates that, although water usage has exceeded eighty (80) percent of the rated capacity dvring the last four (4) months, sufficient capacity is available for the proposed twenty-eight (28) connections in Section 1B. f=uture connections to the Summit water system would, however, be dependent on actions taken by the lake Holiday Estates Utility Company to expand/upgrade source capacity in accordance with Part 11, Article 2, Section 2.19 (VR 355.18-005.08) of the Watiemarks: Ra4uladons. This section of the Regulations requires that the utility owner Initiate the: development of plans and specifications when water production reaches eighty (80) percent of the rated capacity for any three consecutiv6 month period. Mr. John Lewis 2 October 4, 19G3 SUBJECT: Frederick County Water - The Summit Hopefully, this adequately addresses the questions you raised, if not, do not hesitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, Harold T. Eberly District Engineer HTE/bt cc Lake Holiday. Estates Utility Company - Attn: C, Simms VDH - Richmond Central EVALUATION OF SUMMIT OPEN SPACE The staff has taken the position that the Summit Golf Course, having been taken over by a group of private investors and being no more accessible to residents of the Summit than to the general public, does not meet the County's definition of open space, and therefore should not be counted in the following calculations. Current R-5 regulations require 35% open space of which no more than 50% can be in steep slopes, lakes, ponds or wetlands. Based on information provided by the applicant and the plan labeled THE SUMMIT Preliminary Master Plan, the total acreage for the Summit is 1,986. Deducting the 220 acre golf course this total becomes 1,766. Information provided by the applicant also indicates a total of 2,657 lots, it is uncertain whether this total includes lots subdivided in 1990. The applicant indicates that there is 679.3 acres which is unplatted/open space, amounting to 38% of the 1,766 acres. The staff position is that unplatted acreage does not qualify as open space since there is no assurance that this acreage will remain open. An example of this would be the 17 acres which the applicant labels as "commercial" and includes in the total unplatted acreage. In actuality a portion of this 17 acres was subdivided in 1990 into twelve lots. The total open space which the applicant labels as "dedicated' is 322 acres or 18%. Of this 322 acres, 240 is made up by the Summit lake (Lake Holiday) leaving only 82 acres of actual land, a large percentage of which is made up of steep slopes. The staffs position is that, based on the information provided, the Summit falls far short of the open space requirements of the current R-5 regulations and the open space that is provided far exceeds the 50% permitted in steep slopes lakes, ponds or wetlands. The staff also has some concerns regarding the accuracy of the information provided. The acreage indicated as dedicated open space is not clearly shown on the plan, nor is documentation provided which indicates that the acreage is in fact dedicated as open space. Given the above information the question then arises, if the Summit does not meet current open space requirements should additional unplatted acreage be permitted to be subdivided? If so, what is the minimum open space that must be maintained, and what assurances are there that it will remain as open space? COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 /665-5651 Fax 703/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Director RE: Unimin Sand Mine Tour DATE: October 6, 1993 Final arrangements have been made to visit the Unimin Sand Mine in Gore at 3:00 p.m., on Thursday, October 14. We have reserved a van and will provide transportation to any of the Commissioners who desire it. If you prefer to drive, we will meet at the Unimin office located at the top of the hill from the main entrance. The tour begins at 3:00 p.m., so the van will leave promptly at 2:30 p.m. from the Courthouse parking lot. Please let me know by Wednesday whether or not you will be going and if you plan to ride in the van. KCT/slk 9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 October 2, 1993 30L) Watkins Planning Department 9 Court Square Winchester, Va.. 22611 Dear Bob, Dur home was buil in 1976-1977 on 495 ked Oak Hoad (old 522N now Rt. 771) 1.1 mile north cc Cross Junction in Frederick ;;ounty, Tirginia. At that time Soiriey's veil Drilling dug our weli with an excellant water supply. During January of 1993, we lost use of our water, needless to say, this was upsetting and quit an adjustment to maze. The old saying, riv--u don't miss the water 'till the well runs dry," is more than true. R & R Pum Speciaiist puled our well pump and what a discovery tney made. Previously our well of 140' contained 1U6- of water, now only 26' remained. The water nad dropped 8U' as shown on the pipe tnat was pulled. They added 2�' of pipe, ieaving 1, off bottom. In September of 1993, our water flow stopped aga,n. Yt �;resenL time there is some c_oL�dy water. Just enough tc; wash disnes by hand in a dish pan --no more water, sLiut pump off ana wait for more to accumulate or slush the toilet and same procedure. We are getting driaxing water from a neighbor and buying bottiea water. There bad always been enough water for ail normal nousedold.- use. in past years, during dry tines, T had watered 2-3 hours at a time, a productive garden and large yard witn lots of flowers. None of that this past summer, the garde:; dried up and some flowers were lost --not enough water for us and them. 'he nave obtained a well permit to get tg he present well du deeper for a clear constant flow of water. The driller will get to us in a .veek zo lU days. the a proxjmate cost for additional feet to be dug will be severs- thousand dollars. As a homeowner and Tax payer of Frederick county, this is certainly not an item that we had in budget. We are told by the Kerns Brothers of R & R Pump Specialist that the last two deep wells with extra horse power pumps (dug and installed last fall iri the Summit) will pull under - ®round water from 3 to 5 miles around the Summit area. We are located about one half mile from the entrance to the Summit. Curs is not an isolated case. Sooner or later this will affect ail 'homeowners and businesses in ab -extensive area of nortnern Frederick County and even ; nto an area of West T-; ,� , rJ�� „ � �_ a_n 1a, wes of the Summit. Upon asking people, living closer to the Summit t an we do, about their well and water supply, I found six (6) homeowners who had recently duo their well deeper (at great expense to them, not a budget item for them either); with one (1) homeowner who dug a completely new well (at even greater expense to him). Even with new or deeper dug wells, it is no guarantee our wells want go dry again when the Summit has both large pumps fully operational—or—as more building is done at the Summit, demand for water being greater, more wells dug with large pumps.. existing wells of homeowners outside the Summit will go dry again. When people sell property, homes are built, wells dug, no one is telling this problem of water, they find this out the herd way. Sadie for the buyer of existing homes with a well, buyer finds this problem out later, at much additlnal expense to tnei; Questions: Can building be sowed down or stopped In develop- ments like the Summit? Can compensation to homeowners ror redigging or digging wells be required of Mese developers? Are there local and/or state regulations to help in cases like tris? if so, are they enforced? iz not, can some be put in place to help or protect homeowners now and in the future? There are over 400 homes in the Summit with more being built every year. Can a water treatment plant be built there using water from hake Holiday, thereby relinguishi,ng some of tae ground water to homeowners outside the Summit? Sincerely, / IIL Jaauwana & .inden Bonrer PRESIDENT: Tom Dick VICE PRESIDENTS. Ted Kiracafe (Builder), Janice Truax (Associate) SECRETARY: Richard Wilkins TREASURER: Donne Dawson The Top y.� DIRECTORS - ONE YEAR TERM of Virginia - Ronnie Ward, Kit Malden, Gary Dove and Dennis Bassett ` r DIRECTORS - TWO YEAR TERM Building Association Jim Vickers, Richard Ruckman, Kevin Kenny and Larry Ambrogi ! NATIONAL DIRECTORS: Monte Harris and Dick Helm P.O. BOX 744 WINCHESTER, VA 22601,'^. -�_� ,�.•' ` VA STATE DIRECTORS: Robert Scully, Randy Perry and Steve Slaughter ROOM 6.20 E. PICCADILLY ST. (703) 665-4365 ;t-" . } ti �rj _ r. L ~` EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT: Russell R. Reid Mr. Jim Golladay September 28, 1993 Frederick County Planning Commission P.O. Box 159 Stephens City, Va. 22655 Re: Proposed Zoning Ordinance Revisions - Frederick County Code, Zoning, Article VI, RP, Residential Performance District, Section 165-58, Intent and Section 165-62.1, Gross Density. Dear Jim: Thank you for the opportunity for the Top of Virginia Building Association to comment on proposed changes to the above Zoning Ordinance sections. We agree with the general feeling that all projects should be considered for mixed-use development and we have no problem with mandatory limitations an single use multi -family development of large tracts of land. While we agree in concept, we: -believe that your subcommittee (DRRS) has selected too small a tract area as the threshold level for imposing such regulations. We believe the maximum lot size eligible for single use multi -family development (165-62.1-A) should be 20 acres, not the 10 acres proposed. Our reasoning involves the dimensional requirements of residential buffers between uses. Present residential buffers require too much land proportionally be dedicated to passive open space in order to buffer single family uses from multi-famil.y uses. On smaller tracts, this results in a poor, ineffective use of open space and limits design creativity. Another problem identified involves property owners' associations. It has been developers' experience that it is impractical for a single property owners' association to serve multi -family and single family owners. A 10 acre mixed use project would require two associations, one of about 40 townhouse owners and the other with 15 single family uses. A single association of at least 80 townhouse owners or at least 30 single family uses makes much more sense in our view. As a related suggestion for change to the ordinance, we recommend consideration of a 50% reduction in the required residential buffers between the multi -family and single family uses internal to a master planned area. n.tun. ,,,610- ��a►to 4 �"GIN1A A potential homeowner, buying in a master planned community, will know from the "Master Plan" how his home relates to other land uses including existing or proposed multi—family uses within the development. This is a different condition to where a new project master plan is submitted that calls for new multi—family uses next to off parcel existing or planned single family uses. It occurs to us that the 4001, 200' or even 100' buffer with full screening and landscaping is excessive for buffers internal to a master plan. The beneficial use and distribution of the required open space could be improved if the designer is allowed the additional flexibility of less passive buffers. We believe you should study allowing a 50% reduction in such internal buffers. Thank you for this opportunity to comment prior to your decision. Sincerely, Developers Committee Top of Va. Building Asso. Bruce Edens Chuck Maddox Kit Molden Ron Ward Jcc: Bob Watkins APPROVED MULTI -FAMILY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS SUBDIVISION ACRES # OF UNITS DENSITY Freeton 2.49 18 Townhouse 7.2 Lake Center 3.4 23 Townhouse 6.8 Fox Ridge 3.94 28 Townhouse 7.1 Country Club Pines 5.62 57 Apartment 10.1 Tudor Square 9.63 91 Townhouse 9.4 Village at Sherando 9.9 94 Townhouse 9.5 Georgetowne Court 12.92 83 Townhouse 6.4 Battleview 18.38 80 Duplex 4.4 Wilkins 18.68 86 Townhouse/ 76 Apartment 8.7 Dominion Knolls 20.27 180 Townhouse 8.9 Brookland Heights 30.93 253 Townhouse 8.2 Hillsdale 32.32 247 Townhouse 7.6 Huntington Meadows 33 284 Townhouse 8.6 Preston Place 42 117 Townhouse/ 120 Apartment 5.6